starting strength gym
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Aerobic and Anaerobic respiration and metabolism

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2023
    Posts
    37

    Default Aerobic and Anaerobic respiration and metabolism

    • starting strength seminar december 2024
    • starting strength seminar february 2025
    • starting strength seminar april 2025
    Practice involves the sport that one is directly engaged with. It involves developing the skills, acquiring the knowledge, running the drills, studying the opponent, all of it occurring on the Field, the Court, The Mat, The Ring, etc. On the other hand, training involves developing athletic skills outside of the sport, but can directly impact our performance in the sport. Hence why we strength train.

    I was thinking about Mike Tyson recently. He talked how he would frequently run five miles every day of his training camps. Fighters often follow this regiment, to even more extremes oftentimes. The claim is that long distance steady state cardio helps build an athletes endurance. I am wondering how this works on the cellular level.

    Aerobic Metabolism occurs in the presence of oxygen to convert fuel (carbs, fats, proteins) into energy (ATP, which is produced by Mitochondria) and yields the waste of pyruvic acid. Aerobic metabolism is limited by the available oxygen, or also the oxygen needs of the muscles at the present time. When the aerobic metabolism cannot meet the needs of the cells, like in an all out sprint, then the Anaerobic metabolism is activated and transfers phosphates from phosphorylated intermediates into ATP. It is often said that anaerobic respiration starts during a lack of o2; however it is more accurate to say that aerobic respiration stops during a lack of o2 because Glycolysis (the process in which glucose and other sugars are broken down and release energy in the form of ATP) is the first step in cellular respiration and it occurs regardless of the presence of o2. Anaerobic metabolism and Aerobic metabolism occur together regularly and together net 38 ATP. Anaerobic on its own nets 2 ATP, making it highly inefficient. We feel this inefficiency when we sprint on an aerodyne bike. The second step of cellular respiration involves the Krebs Cycle, which is complex and too long to talk about here, and a little beyond my understanding (which may in fact be the lynchpin of my misunderstanding in this).

    When I see MMA fighters or grapplers, whom I deal with regularly, engage in monkish running programs the thought is that it aids in athletic performance by helping with training the Aerobic metabolism. I wonder to what extent this helps in their sport (but don't be fooled this isn't my question) because I regularly note athletes who can run at a pace of a 6 or 7 minute mile for five miles plus go into an intense sparring session or a high heart rate session, or during competition, become gassed in sometimes as short as 1 round. I do believe that the effect that long distance running (steady state cardio) is negligible in an athletes performance in specific sports. I think the time that is spent running could be much better used in practice, skill acquisition, study, strength training, drilling, and anaerobic training (sprinting, aerodyne bike, high heart rate sessions, etc). In other words, the stimulus of long distance running and its adaptations are so vastly different from a grappling match, a Football game, an MMA fight, a basketball game, that the benefit gained from it is unremarkable, and that an athlete playing these sports would better develop their capabilities while practicing and preparing in that sport. However, if you play a sport that does involve long distance running, like soccer, I can see a lot of transition with this. But the stress of a Judo, Boxing, Wrestling match, or a Football, Basketball or Hockey game is a much different stress, and the more time one spends preparing in that stressor is time spent well. If you play these kinds of sports I actually think long distance running (lets say, regularly running 5 miles a day, like Tyson did) is actually a negative during training camp because it takes away both time and energy in an athlete to perform during practice, which means everything in performance on competition day.

    My question involves the trainability and the responsiveness of the aerobic and anaerobic systems. First, I am willing to believe that the anecdote I mentioned previously about my athletes gassing out in round one is a response from the taxed anaerobic system. It is such an inefficient system that when triggered an athlete is going to respond negatively to it. But I think that these consequences could be mitigated and trained if we approach anaerobic training in the same sense that athletes are compelled to with running. I love the aerodyne bike, its benefits are manifold. But I have one reservation about my posited approach. When I look at aerobic training I think that it is best used when centralized in a specific sport, and this is the reason I am against long distance running programs for athletes in specific sports. When people talk about "endurance training" I take it to mean they are referring to aerobic training (at the cellular level). If you are training for a Freestyle Wrestling match and you go and play basketball for your entire training camp you will lose the match, for dozens of reasons, but chiefly the body has not experienced the proper adaptation. An extreme example yes, but I think it explains the relationship of stress adaptation between long distance running and these sports. I look at running as a sport in itself, and I would not waste time practicing another sport while I have the Super Bowl coming up in a few weeks. The way I am seeing it, aerobic can be much more sport specific, and if this is true (a big IF) then what does that say about anaerobic. Are anaerobics better trained sport specific or would workouts on the aerodyne bike, or hill sprints, or swim sprints, transition nicely during these events in specific competition? Mind you this kind of training is being done on a regular training camp, so the proper strength and endurance adaptations are oriented leading up to the event.

    In short, How does anaerobic training respond in coordination with performance, and is it better actualized with a sport specific approach?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    54,775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigNaz42 View Post
    When I see MMA fighters or grapplers, whom I deal with regularly, engage in monkish running programs the thought is that it aids in athletic performance by helping with training the Aerobic metabolism. I wonder to what extent this helps in their sport (but don't be fooled this isn't my question) because I regularly note athletes who can run at a pace of a 6 or 7 minute mile for five miles plus go into an intense sparring session or a high heart rate session, or during competition, become gassed in sometimes as short as 1 round. I do believe that the effect that long distance running (steady state cardio) is negligible in an athletes performance in specific sports. I think the time that is spent running could be much better used in practice, skill acquisition, study, strength training, drilling, and anaerobic training (sprinting, aerodyne bike, high heart rate sessions, etc). In other words, the stimulus of long distance running and its adaptations are so vastly different from a grappling match, a Football game, an MMA fight, a basketball game, that the benefit gained from it is unremarkable, and that an athlete playing these sports would better develop their capabilities while practicing and preparing in that sport. However, if you play a sport that does involve long distance running, like soccer, I can see a lot of transition with this. But the stress of a Judo, Boxing, Wrestling match, or a Football, Basketball or Hockey game is a much different stress, and the more time one spends preparing in that stressor is time spent well. If you play these kinds of sports I actually think long distance running (lets say, regularly running 5 miles a day, like Tyson did) is actually a negative during training camp because it takes away both time and energy in an athlete to perform during practice, which means everything in performance on competition day.
    This is a pretty good paragraph. Let's look closer:

    by helping with training the Aerobic metabolism. I wonder to what extent this helps in their sport (but don't be fooled this isn't my question) because I regularly note athletes who can run at a pace of a 6 or 7 minute mile for five miles plus go into an intense sparring session or a high heart rate session, or during competition, become gassed in sometimes as short as 1 round.

    A boxing round is a series of anaerobic bursts, despite the fact that boxing coaches somehow cannot see this. "Road work" is for the coach's satisfaction, not the athlete's performance. Pushing a weighted sled is a much better idea.

    I do believe that the effect that long distance running (steady state cardio) is negligible in an athletes performance in specific sports. I think the time that is spent running could be much better used in practice, skill acquisition, study, strength training, drilling, and anaerobic training (sprinting, aerodyne bike, high heart rate sessions, etc)

    How many very good boxers are gassed by the 11th round? They cannot see the problem, I suppose.

    In other words, the stimulus of long distance running and its adaptations are so vastly different from a grappling match, a Football game, an MMA fight, a basketball game, that the benefit gained from it is unremarkable, and that an athlete playing these sports would better develop their capabilities while practicing and preparing in that sport.

    True, and this could be aided by the judicious application of the sled or other anaerobic work, remembering that recovery MUST occur.

    However, if you play a sport that does involve long distance running, like soccer, I can see a lot of transition with this.

    Soccer does not involve long distance running, since it is conducted in short anaerobic bursts like most sports. And soccer practice 4 days/week provides all the conditioning specificity that could be obtained for soccer. Recovery could be enhanced by the rather novel approach to recovery available through good diet and sleep.

    But the stress of a Judo, Boxing, Wrestling match, or a Football, Basketball or Hockey game is a much different stress, and the more time one spends preparing in that stressor is time spent well. If you play these kinds of sports I actually think long distance running (lets say, regularly running 5 miles a day, like Tyson did) is actually a negative during training camp because it takes away both time and energy in an athlete to perform during practice, which means everything in performance on competition day.

    It is so often the case that the best athletes in a sport are the best because of other factors besides their idiotic approach to training and conditioning. Tyson was born big, strong, and very fucking mean, and that will get you a long way. So will a 495 x 10 squat. Someday this will be demonstrated, but it will be a while because of the ascendancy of "Functional Training."

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2021
    Posts
    903

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    It is so often the case that the best athletes in a sport are the best because of other factors besides their idiotic approach to training and conditioning. Tyson was born big, strong, and very fucking mean, and that will get you a long way. So will a 495 x 10 squat. Someday this will be demonstrated, but it will be a while because of the ascendancy of "Functional Training."
    Being able to squat 495 x 10 can filter for the genetic freaks born big, strong, and mean.

    For the less gifted, however, the process of building up to a decent squat produces size, strength, and meanness. Generally speaking, this is definitely more useful, and certainly far more available.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2023
    Posts
    37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    This is a pretty good paragraph. Let's look closer:

    by helping with training the Aerobic metabolism. I wonder to what extent this helps in their sport (but don't be fooled this isn't my question) because I regularly note athletes who can run at a pace of a 6 or 7 minute mile for five miles plus go into an intense sparring session or a high heart rate session, or during competition, become gassed in sometimes as short as 1 round.

    A boxing round is a series of anaerobic bursts, despite the fact that boxing coaches somehow cannot see this. "Road work" is for the coach's satisfaction, not the athlete's performance. Pushing a weighted sled is a much better idea.

    I do believe that the effect that long distance running (steady state cardio) is negligible in an athletes performance in specific sports. I think the time that is spent running could be much better used in practice, skill acquisition, study, strength training, drilling, and anaerobic training (sprinting, aerodyne bike, high heart rate sessions, etc)

    How many very good boxers are gassed by the 11th round? They cannot see the problem, I suppose.

    In other words, the stimulus of long distance running and its adaptations are so vastly different from a grappling match, a Football game, an MMA fight, a basketball game, that the benefit gained from it is unremarkable, and that an athlete playing these sports would better develop their capabilities while practicing and preparing in that sport.

    True, and this could be aided by the judicious application of the sled or other anaerobic work, remembering that recovery MUST occur.

    However, if you play a sport that does involve long distance running, like soccer, I can see a lot of transition with this.

    Soccer does not involve long distance running, since it is conducted in short anaerobic bursts like most sports. And soccer practice 4 days/week provides all the conditioning specificity that could be obtained for soccer. Recovery could be enhanced by the rather novel approach to recovery available through good diet and sleep.

    But the stress of a Judo, Boxing, Wrestling match, or a Football, Basketball or Hockey game is a much different stress, and the more time one spends preparing in that stressor is time spent well. If you play these kinds of sports I actually think long distance running (lets say, regularly running 5 miles a day, like Tyson did) is actually a negative during training camp because it takes away both time and energy in an athlete to perform during practice, which means everything in performance on competition day.

    It is so often the case that the best athletes in a sport are the best because of other factors besides their idiotic approach to training and conditioning. Tyson was born big, strong, and very fucking mean, and that will get you a long way. So will a 495 x 10 squat. Someday this will be demonstrated, but it will be a while because of the ascendancy of "Functional Training."
    So Rip, what is the trainability of the anaerobic system compared to aerobic? When we "Practice" this is essentially adapting our "endurance" for the sport or event to be performed. How does the anaerobic system respond with things like sprints, prowler and aerodyne bike work, and if it is trainable how traceable are its effects, and also its ability to transition to the performance of the event.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    54,775

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BigNaz42 View Post
    So Rip, what is the trainability of the anaerobic system compared to aerobic? When we "Practice" this is essentially adapting our "endurance" for the sport or event to be performed. How does the anaerobic system respond with things like sprints, prowler and aerodyne bike work, and if it is trainable how traceable are its effects, and also its ability to transition to the performance of the event.
    Both systems adapt to the imposed stress. Maybe I don't understand your question.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    231

    Default

    Remembering my amateur boxing days, running was a way for a lot of bad coaches to pretend they were doing something useful for their trainees. The most productive conditioning I found was shadow boxing, far harder than bags or pads (try punching the air for 30 seconds hard and fast whilst skipping around) as well as actually drilling correct foot work. It’s the punches that miss that tire you. And I realised that being a boxer isn’t much help if a 400lb bench presser gets you in a headlock.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Ozarks
    Posts
    1,362

    Default

    I cannot seem to impress this upon people. Defensive tactics, combat sports, gunfights... there is the additional layer of an intense adrenal response up front, and no amount of metabolic conditioning can fully prepare you for that. You either have enough gun fights under your belt where this response is minimized through desensitizing the stimulus, or you learn to cope with it, intentionally recover your respiratory rhythm, and still only get about 20-30 seconds of maximum effort. Usually a mix of the two, and sometimes your adrenaline can still spike despite your best efforts.

    I played soccer in highschool, and by my senior year was one of the only student athletes who could play a full 90 minute game as long as I kept my carbohydrate intake up in the early/mid game. I also try to run track, and was terrible at long distance but passable in the sprints. I always messed up the effort and pacing on anything longer than the 200m. My coach always enrolled me in the 400m for some reason.

    It makes me wonder what trick of the human psyche keeps athletes from trying the strength and skills conditioning approach.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2023
    Posts
    696

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe View Post
    Both systems adapt to the imposed stress. Maybe I don't understand your question.
    I am guessing what he means is what is the actual, trainable parameter (which is less straightforward then strength).

    The anaerobic and aerobic energy systems are, well, energy systems, and so they can be trained by increasing the amount of energy the system produces.

    There's a few way to do this that all more or less work equally well, depending on the trainee and how they're executed. The energy systems are separated by timescales: the CK system is exertions of a few seconds, the anaerobic system is exertions of around a minute, and the aerobic system is exertions of anything longer. The compounding factor is once an energy system runs out, the "subsidiary" energy system is responsible for recovering the "higher" energy system. So when the CK system is exhausted, it is "replenished" by anaerobic metabolism, and both of those are replenished by aerobic metabolism.

    (Sometimes people will talk about "power" training ranges of <1 second. These are not a separate energy system but a distinct subset of motor units).

    Training the aerobic system directly is rather straightforward: go longer, faster, or faster, longer. Both of those require aerobic metabolism adaptations. The highest "ceiling" on this is endurance training. You will eventually hit "floors" on your time for a distance based on strength and size, then you add time, and push the floor down again. Getting your mile time down is a good compromise.

    The anaerobic system is somewhat more tricky since you have to exert yourself longer than a few seconds, but shorter than a minute or two. The good news is most sport activities (including strength training!) fall into this category. The anaerobic system is responsible for replenishing the CK system between reps of a set, so an adaptation to force production will include an adaptation for anaerobic capacity.

    A more systematic way involves quick exertions with the same training parameters as aerobic training. For example, increasing the distance you sprint in a given time, or decreasing the time it takes you to sprint a given distance. The problem with these is they risk bumping into the upper and lower bounds: increase your sprint distance long enough, it becomes a run, and you can only decrease your sprint time so far before it becomes strength capped.

    Because it's intermediate between the other two systems, a classic training method emerges: perform a maximal anaerobic effort (for example, a prowler push), then give yourself an interval to recover, then do it again. The training variable is the interval between efforts. Because the capacity of the aerobic system to replenish the anaerobic system is more or less the same, decreasing the interval forces the anaerobic system to become more efficient to produce identical amounts of energy at lower amounts of fuel.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,508

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Quote Originally Posted by BigNaz42 View Post
    ...I was thinking about Mike Tyson recently. He talked how he would frequently run five miles every day of his training camps. Fighters often follow this regiment, to even more extremes oftentimes. The claim is that long distance steady state cardio helps build an athletes endurance. I am wondering how this works on the cellular level....
    One of the few boxers Mike Tyson was too afraid to fight never did any cardio of any type and could still dance around throwing big shots in the 10th round.
    Eric Esch's cardio was all fighting or fighting drills.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •