Evaluate the effectiveness of different aerobic training methods for developing a marathon runner's conditioning program based on the FITT principle. (10 marks)
--- 24 WORK AREA LINES (style=lined) ---
Show Answers Only
Sample Answer
Long Slow Distance (LSD) training:
- Frequency: 1-2 sessions per week
- Intensity: Low-moderate (60-70% MHR)
- Time: 90-180 minutes
- Type: Continuous running at conversational pace
- Effectiveness:
- Highly effective for developing basic aerobic endurance, capillarization, and fat metabolism.
- Builds mitochondrial density and enhances the ability to sustain prolonged efforts.
- May not adequately develop lactate threshold or running economy needed for optimal marathon performance if used exclusively.
Tempo/Threshold training:
- Frequency: 1-2 sessions per week
- Intensity: Moderate-high (75-85% MHR, at or just below lactate threshold)
- Time: 20-60 minutes of continuous effort or 3-5 x 5-15 minute intervals
- Type: Sustained running at a challenging but manageable pace
- Effectiveness:
- Highly effective for improving lactate threshold, which is critical for marathon performance.
- Develops the ability to clear lactate at race pace, enhancing sustainable pace.
- Research shows strong correlation between lactate threshold and marathon performance.
Interval training:
- Frequency: 1 session per week
- Intensity: High (85-95% MHR)
- Time: 3-5 x 3-5 minutes with equal recovery
- Type: Structured repeats at faster than marathon pace
- Effectiveness:
- Moderately effective for marathon training as it develops VO2 max and running economy.
- Less specific to marathon demands than tempo training but valuable for improving overall aerobic capacity and efficiency.
- Should be used sparingly in marathon programs to avoid excessive fatigue.
Integrated program approach:
- The most effective marathon training programs incorporate all three methods in appropriate proportions, with approximately 70-80% of training volume at low intensity (LSD) and 20-30% at moderate-high intensity (tempo and intervals).
- Periodisation is crucial, with greater emphasis on volume (LSD) in early phases and increasing intensity (tempo and intervals) as race date approaches.
- Individual response should determine the precise balance of methods, with more experienced runners typically benefiting from higher proportions of quality work.
Conclusion:
- No single aerobic training method is sufficient for optimal marathon preparation
- LSD and tempo training should form the foundation of a marathon program
- Strategic integration of methods based on the FITT principle offers the most effective approach to marathon training
- Individual factors including experience, injury history, and physiological profile must influence the specific application of the FITT principle for each runner
Show Worked Solution
Sample Answer
Long Slow Distance (LSD) training:
- Frequency: 1-2 sessions per week
- Intensity: Low-moderate (60-70% MHR)
- Time: 90-180 minutes
- Type: Continuous running at conversational pace
- Effectiveness:
- Highly effective for developing basic aerobic endurance, capillarization, and fat metabolism.
- Builds mitochondrial density and enhances the ability to sustain prolonged efforts.
- May not adequately develop lactate threshold or running economy needed for optimal marathon performance if used exclusively.
Tempo/Threshold training:
- Frequency: 1-2 sessions per week
- Intensity: Moderate-high (75-85% MHR, at or just below lactate threshold)
- Time: 20-60 minutes of continuous effort or 3-5 x 5-15 minute intervals
- Type: Sustained running at a challenging but manageable pace
- Effectiveness:
- Highly effective for improving lactate threshold, which is critical for marathon performance.
- Develops the ability to clear lactate at race pace, enhancing sustainable pace.
- Research shows strong correlation between lactate threshold and marathon performance.
Interval training:
- Frequency: 1 session per week
- Intensity: High (85-95% MHR)
- Time: 3-5 x 3-5 minutes with equal recovery
- Type: Structured repeats at faster than marathon pace
- Effectiveness:
- Moderately effective for marathon training as it develops VO2 max and running economy.
- Less specific to marathon demands than tempo training but valuable for improving overall aerobic capacity and efficiency.
- Should be used sparingly in marathon programs to avoid excessive fatigue.
Integrated program approach:
- The most effective marathon training programs incorporate all three methods in appropriate proportions, with approximately 70-80% of training volume at low intensity (LSD) and 20-30% at moderate-high intensity (tempo and intervals).
- Periodisation is crucial, with greater emphasis on volume (LSD) in early phases and increasing intensity (tempo and intervals) as race date approaches.
- Individual response should determine the precise balance of methods, with more experienced runners typically benefiting from higher proportions of quality work.
Conclusion:
- No single aerobic training method is sufficient for optimal marathon preparation
- LSD and tempo training should form the foundation of a marathon program
- Strategic integration of methods based on the FITT principle offers the most effective approach to marathon training
- Individual factors including experience, injury history, and physiological profile must influence the specific application of the FITT principle for each runner