Need to get is a few miles tomorrow.

Hey Gang, it's been awhile. I came down with a nice bit of insomnia after a period of high intensity intervals combined with yard work (which I can't avoid). It was the intervals mainly as the same thing happened last January after a period of intervals. For some reason, a focus on these intervals just reeks havoc on my adrenals and sends me into insomnia. Both times, it lasted about 3-4 weeks, after which I'm able to get back on track. Very unpleasant being that exhausted. I tried to run some days very easy, but if i went too long I'd have pretty much a sleepless night. So, I backed off, and ran very short and very little.

Lesson learned. No more experimenting because of articles and studies that I've read. I know what works--MAF with a little tempo work when it's time. I never had to touch intervals back when I was running my best, and for me they're just not any good. They might have been good for the people in the studies, but for me in this hot weather combined with yard work, they fry me and my adrenals well.

I've been sleeping well the past few weeks and I'm just starting up with a new schedule now, all MAF and below. Starting with just 50 minutes as the top amount of duration and going to build slowly.

Yesterday I ran 40 minutes MAF -25. Today, I ran at MAF-20 for a quarter mile, then at MAF for a quarter mile. Doing this 4 times.

Back to it. Wish me luck!

Jimmy, what were the interval types and per week? They are a powerful tool but as you found, very tricky to get right.

After about a 20 minute warm-up, I'd run 4x .5 mile (@ 90-95% MHR) with .25 mile rest in between (@70% MHR and below). About 16 minutes total of hard running.  Twice a week. Total volume wasn't very high. I was progressing in speed at the same HR. Like I said, I live in where it's hot, and I can't avoid the yardwork, which sometimes lasts 2-4 hours. The one common factor between the bouts of insomnia are the intervals.

In the past, I would build a substantial amount of volume of MAF miles, improving in speed at the same HR at both MAF HR and anaerobic threshold HR, with no speed work. Then I'd add in no more than one run a week at marathon pace, or a brief run at anaerobic threshold (about 88% MHR). Either due to an experimental nature, or perhaps impatience, I've been experimenting with things the last few years, trying to get back to form in a way that could reduce the amount of running I would have to do. The heat here is a huge factor on total stress or load. Back in  Rhode Island, I rarely ran in 80º, and only in summer, which was more of an off-time for me. Most of the time I ran in the low 70's, high 60's in summer. The rest of the year was well below those temperatures. Here in Georgia, I'm running in 80+ degrees for the majority of the year. My Irish New England body only acclimates so far. So, I thought intervals might be a way to circumvent spending too much time running in heat. Unfortunately, I seem to reach a point where the adrenals get overtaxed and I go into the early stages of overtraining. My sympathetic nervous system has a hard time shutting off and insomnia kicks in. Researching intervals more, it seems that I'm not the only one this has happened to, and insomnia is on the list for symptoms of overtraining.

Sleeping well now. Going back to what I know works, and I'll just have to be patient. 

Goal run 10.

Walked 3.5.  Happy to have made it out the door.

3.5 miles walk. HRM reading 65 /75.  I wish!

Awesome reply. Thanks.

 

I've actually I've tried that hack before. I'm not sure if, metabolically, it is still too anaerobic for someone coming back, even though the HR doesn't get past MAF. I imagine fast twitch fibers are getting used, and sugar is getting burned. Probably not enough to cause the adrenal ambulance to show up and try to get me to sleep.

 

If one's MAF is correct, there will be some engagement of the kind of fast twitch that can become more aerobic and fat-burning. The MAF is right at the point that those are beginning to kick in (the deflection point on the fat/sugar graph). Long runs at MAF will most definitely give those fibers some work. It's probably why my speed at AT improves as my MAF speed does, with no speed work at all.

 

I don't have a bike, only a stationary. I stay in on the TM during summer. Now that it's getting cool, I want to get out to the parks (Piedmont) and trails around here.

 

Thanks again, Tech. 

 

The simple answer as far as stress goes is this: if you are below the aerobic (and ventilatory) threshold, you are reducing or even eliminating oxidative stress, period. Burning sugar through glycolysis is a fast and seemingly powerful fix, but it comes at a heavy cost because it creates oxidative byproducts (metabolic "pollution") whereas burning fat burns "clean" and efficiently. Think of glycolitic as burning oil, whereas burning fat is like solar. Now with alactic striders as I have described, you are ALSO avoiding oxidative stress as you are using stored ATP in the creatine-phosphate system (which can eventually be regenerated aerobically avoiding glycolyisis). So once again, you are accessing stored energy reserves, in this case to operate the FT fibers. No oxidative stress or byproducts like lactate, even though you are getting full muscle recruitment for short periods.

Bottom line: Maff training is training without breathing hard, whether through slowing to below aerobic threshold (lower INTENSITY), OR by reducing the DURATION of the more intense activity. It is when you push both the intensity AND duration that you really begin to pile on the stress, and concomitant injury and illness risk.

So optimal training is working on either duration or on intensity for long periods before you try to mix the two in order to peak for races. Stephen Seiler coined the term "polarized training" to convey this concept, which he discovered by looking at the year-long training of top endurance athletes. They avoided the "black hole" of glycolytic (zone 2-4) training much more than the less successful athletes. If there is one thing that I see in lower-level recreational runners, it is that they dwell almost entirely in this black hole, and wonder why they don't improve, while fighting injuries and illness at seemingly low levels of mileage and quality.

I adopted this polarized model for my rock climbing training, and have the best injury rate (none) that I know of for climbers climbing at the expert level (5.13+) for over a quarter of a century. In my running I had many more struggles, as I was constantly drifting into glycolytic training, without even realizing it (7:30 miles were still "aerobic", because I could still talk, right?) or understanding the risks that Phil so clearly outlines.

Looking at your interval training program, you were well above your aerobic and ventilatory threshold for at least an hour a week. If all of your other stressors had been reduced or eliminated, perhaps you could have improved, for a shorter term. This is how I train when I am competing at track distances (800-5000m), and I can assure you that it is far more risky and stressful than even high-mileage pure aerobic training. But for the longer term, keeping away from hyperventilatory training is essential and quite possible. My advice is to get your health stabilized, and gently introduce alactic running into your runs a few times a week. It will help install the building blocks for faster running if and when you decide to race or try more stressful glycolytic training. I find that it during foundational training, helps keep my legs energized, and certainly makes the training much more fun!

Another excellent post. Thank you. I've learned my lesson. I feel I've exhausted all my experiments, and have returned home to Dr. Phil and the wisdom of the method. I've been sleeping very well. I've been slowly building volume again, all at or under MAF. Cold weather is here, which will take some stress off as well. Thanks again. 

The simple answer as far as stress goes is this: if you are below the aerobic (and ventilatory) threshold, you are reducing or even eliminating oxidative stress, period. Burning sugar through glycolysis is a fast and seemingly powerful fix, but it comes at a heavy cost because it creates oxidative byproducts (metabolic "pollution") whereas burning fat burns "clean" and efficiently. Think of glycolitic as burning oil, whereas burning fat is like solar. Now with alactic striders as I have described, you are ALSO avoiding oxidative stress as you are using stored ATP in the creatine-phosphate system (which can eventually be regenerated aerobically avoiding glycolyisis). So once again, you are accessing stored energy reserves, in this case to operate the FT fibers. No oxidative stress or byproducts like lactate, even though you are getting full muscle recruitment for short periods.

 

Bottom line: Maff training is training without breathing hard, whether through slowing to below aerobic threshold (lower INTENSITY), OR by reducing the DURATION of the more intense activity. It is when you push both the intensity AND duration that you really begin to pile on the stress, and concomitant injury and illness risk.

 

So optimal training is working on either duration or on intensity for long periods before you try to mix the two in order to peak for races. Stephen Seiler coined the term "polarized training" to convey this concept, which he discovered by looking at the year-long training of top endurance athletes. They avoided the "black hole" of glycolytic (zone 2-4) training much more than the less successful athletes. If there is one thing that I see in lower-level recreational runners, it is that they dwell almost entirely in this black hole, and wonder why they don't improve, while fighting injuries and illness at seemingly low levels of mileage and quality.

 

I adopted this polarized model for my rock climbing training, and have the best injury rate (none) that I know of for climbers climbing at the expert level (5.13+) for over a quarter of a century. In my running I had many more struggles, as I was constantly drifting into glycolytic training, without even realizing it (7:30 miles were still "aerobic", because I could still talk, right?) or understanding the risks that Phil so clearly outlines.

 

Looking at your interval training program, you were well above your aerobic and ventilatory threshold for at least an hour a week. If all of your other stressors had been reduced or eliminated, perhaps you could have improved, for a shorter term. This is how I train when I am competing at track distances (800-5000m), and I can assure you that it is far more risky and stressful than even high-mileage pure aerobic training. But for the longer term, keeping away from hyperventilatory training is essential and quite possible. My advice is to get your health stabilized, and gently introduce alactic running into your runs a few times a week. It will help install the building blocks for faster running if and when you decide to race or try more stressful glycolytic training. I find that it during foundational training, helps keep my legs energized, and certainly makes the training much more fun!