To some, resistance training is the Rodney Dangerfield of the
running community; it gets no respect. To others, it’s like Tom Cruise;
runners think it might be useful, but it just doesn’t make any sense to
them. And then, there are those to whom resistance training is like
Abraham Lincoln; it’s freed them from being slaves to ineffective
programming.
As a performance enhancement specialist who has a
lot of “Abe” endurance athletes under my tutelage, I’d like to take
this opportunity to bring the Rodney and Tom runners in the crowd up to
speed. With that in mind, let’s look at the five most prominent myths
present in the running community with respect to resistance training.
Now,
I know what you’re thinking: this Cressey guy is just another meathead
who doesn’t run telling me what to do. We’ve had lots of pigheaded guys
like this over the years, and none of them understood us. They were all
like this guy.
Myth #1: Runners don’t need to resistance train.
I
figured I’d start with the most obvious of the bunch. I had been under
the impression that – now that we’ve done a ton of resistance training
research over the past 20 years – that this wasn’t still a myth at all.
Then, just last month, one of my marathoner clients brought in a copy
of a popular running magazine; it included a “debate” that featured two
experts arguing over whether or not runners needed to lift weights.
Huh?
This
is what some people within the running community have taken from over
two decades of dedicated resistance training research from some of the
most brilliant scientists in the world? I thought back to the hundreds
of hours I’d spent working in the human performance laboratory at the
University of Connecticut as I worked for my master’s degree; time and
time again, our research had proven unequivocally that resistance
training was important for making and keeping people healthy, strong,
fast, and lean. Had all our efforts been in vain? At that moment, if
someone had told me that the Easter Bunny isn’t real, I might have lost
it altogether.
Just to recap: we know resistance training is good for general health, as it:
1. Enhances endocrine and immune function (which are compromised by endurance training)
2. Maintains muscle mass (also negatively affected by endurance training)
3.
Improves functional capacity in spite of aging by maintaining maximal
strength and power (both of which decrease with prolonged endurance
training)
4. Builds bone density (something many runners lack due to
poor dietary practices, but desperately need in light of the high risk
of stress fractures)
5. Enables us to more rapidly correct muscle
imbalances, as evidenced by the fact that resistance training is the
cornerstone of any good physical therapy program (and I’ve never met a
runner without imbalances)
So, I think that the answer is
somewhat clear. It’s quite obvious that runners are a superhuman race
that is not subject to the normal laws of physiology like the rest of
us.
In case you’re not picking up on my sarcasm, please go
splash some cold water on your face and knock back a bit of Gatorade to
get some glucose to your brain. Then, reread those five points from
above (which are just the tip of the iceberg, for the record). Ask
yourself:
1. Do I have an endocrine system?
2. Do I have an immune system?
3. Will I get old? Do I do things that require strength and power?
4. Do I have bones?
5. Do I have muscle imbalances?
If
you answered “no” to any of these questions, I would seriously
recommend that you consult a psychologist instead of a running coach,
as you’re obviously dealing with a serious case of denial.
Runners
are just like the rest of us. You may wear shorter shorts, but you
still put them on one leg at a time. You need resistance training.
And, if the general health benefits aren’t enough, consider these research findings:
-A
University of Alabama meta-analysis of the endurance training
scientific literature revealed that 10 weeks of resistance training in
trained distance runners improves running economy by 8-10% (1). For the
mathematicians in the crowd, that’s about 20-24 minutes off a four-hour
marathon – and likely more if you’re not a well-trained endurance
athlete in the first place.
-French researchers found that the
addition of two weight-training sessions per week for 14 weeks
significantly increased maximal strength and running economy while
maintaining peak power in triathletes. Meanwhile, the control group –
which only did endurance training – gained no maximal strength or
running economy, and their peak power actually decreased (who do you
think would win that all-out sprint at the finish line?). And,
interestingly, the combined endurance with resistance training group
saw greater increases in VO2max over the course of the intervention (2).
-Scientists
at the Research Institute for Olympic Sports at the University of
Jyvaskyla in Finland found that replacing 32% of regular endurance
training volume with explosive resistance training for nine weeks
improved 5km times, running economy, VO2max, maximal 20m speed, and
performance on a 5-jump test. With the exception of VO2max, none of
these measures improved in the control group that just did endurance
training (3). How do you think they felt knowing that a good 1/3 of
their entire training volume was largely unnecessary, and would have
been better spent on other initiatives?
-University of Illinois
researchers found that addition of three resistance training sessions
for ten weeks improved short-term endurance performance by 11% and 13%
during cycling and running, respectively. Additionally, the researchers
noted that “long-term cycling to exhaustion at 80% VO2max increased
from 71 to 85 min after the addition of strength training” (4)
The
take-home message is that running is more than just VO2max, anaerobic
threshold, and a good pair of sneakers; it’s also about localized
muscular endurance and nervous system efficiency. And, you can’t have
strength endurance unless you’ve got strength. Build a solid foundation
and you’ll be a complete runner.
Myth #2: Machines are just as good as free weights.
Next
time you’re running, I want you to ask yourself how many times you’ve
been seated and moving in a fixed plane of motion while you run. If the
answer isn’t a resounding “NEVER,” then you probably ought to get your
head examined.
Resistance training isn’t just about “feeling the
burn” in your muscles; it’s about grooving connections between the
muscles and the nervous system that tells them what to do. When you
plop down on a machine and work through a fixed line of motion, you’re
allowing your nervous system to get lazy, so to speak; it doesn’t have
to recruit any stabilizing muscles to ensure that you move efficiently.
Machines turn you into a “motor moron” and ingrain muscle imbalances
that can negatively affect your running efficiency and lead to injury.
Let’s take a look at an example to illustrate my point.
When you
do a dumbbell lunge, your body has to generate force in single-leg
stance – and in order to generate force optimally, you need to have
what is called “frontal plane stability.” With the lunge, this refers
predominantly to the ability of the adductors (inner thigh muscles) and
abductors (outer thigh/butt muscles) to co-contract, working together
stabilize your thigh so that you don’t tip over. By doing a lung
correctly, we can teach these muscles to balance each other out
properly, and in doing so, improve running efficiency and prevent
problems such as lateral knee pain, anterior hip pain, and lower back
pain (just to name a few).
A look at the status quo, however,
shows that most women will try to train their adductors and abductors
with those inner and outer thigh machines that you’d only expect to see
on a trip to the obstetrician. Unfortunately, the adductors and
abductors NEVER work in isolation like this, and they never work in a
fixed line of motion. The adductors and abductors don’t just move the
thighs in and out; they also have subtle effects on rotation of the
femur, so when we’re “stuck” into one plane of motion, we promote
dysfunction.
Factor in that the lunge also trains the
hamstrings, glutes, quadriceps, and core stabilizers extensively at the
same time, and you’ll realize that it isn’t only safer than these
machines; it’s also offers more bang for your buck. Why do five
different exercises when you can get even better results with just one?
Myth #3: Yoga and Pilates “count” as resistance training.
This
was another great information tidbit a client brought in after a
conversation with an endurance training coach who is actually quite
popular locally. I have to say that I was really surprised when I heard:
“He
said that we need to resistance train, but it didn’t matter if we used
free weights, used machines, or took yoga or Pilates classes.”
After I finished choking on the gum I was chewing, I explained the concept of progressive overload to my client.
When
we resistance train, it’s important that we – over time – gradually
increase the load that is imposed on our system; otherwise, our body
doesn’t really have any reason to adapt in a manner that will be
favorable to use getting stronger, faster, or leaner.
Now, how
do we make a class that is body weight-only harder? I’ve never seen
anyone wear a weighted vest to yoga class, so – as Mike Boyle has
pointed out – gaining weight is your only option. After all, the most
overweight people always sweat the most during yoga, right?
Obviously,
I’m being facetious – but I’m proud to say that it’s with good reason
(although I’ll probably never date a yoga or Pilates instructor after
this article). When you lift with free weights, you always have the
option to provide progressive overload to your system; there is no
“ceiling” effect when you get proficient handling your body weight.
Myth #4: Super-slow training is valuable.
About
a year ago, I had a phone conversation with a noted triathlete coach
who had previously worked with one of my clients, Jon (who completed
his first Ironman this past July). When I took over Jon’s training, he
was a mediocre endurance athlete with a VO2max of 50.6 ml/kg/min., with
anaerobic threshold occurring at 60% of VO2max (laboratory test). After
six months of training with me, Jon’s VO2max had improved to 73.1
ml/kg/min, and his anaerobic threshold didn’t occur until an impressive
80% (anaerobic threshold is now generally believed to be the best
predictor of endurance performance; the higher the percentage, the
better). It’s also important to note that during this time, Jon’s max
heart rate remained constant; normally, it decreases when an endurance
athlete does a lot of longer duration steady-state training. When this
coach got wind of the results, he just had to know how the heck we had
gotten such staggering results. My response was essentially:
“We
got him to go faster instead of longer, incorporating more threshold
runs and sprint work. And, probably more importantly, I told him he had
to stop lifting like a sissy. He got a lot stronger and more explosive
on compound free-weight movements, and it clearly made a big
difference.”
His response: “Wait, you mean you don’t use
super-slow training? Free weights are dangerous! Endurance athletes
aren’t conditioned to handle high-speeds and heavy lifting!”
I
had to cover the mouthpiece on the phone because I was laughing out
loud. For the next ten minutes, I explained to this coach that the last
time I checked, the most successful endurance athletes I’ve known are
the ones who go the fastest for a set distance – not the ones who can
run the longest. Anybody can go forever; just look at the people who
jog at a snail’s pace for years and years and never look or perform any
differently. Jon got out of his comfort zone by moving faster,
desensitizing himself to zones above his normal race pace, and –
perhaps most importantly – by taking his training serious with heavy
and explosive resistance training. Super-slow training has no place in
this picture.
In layman’s terms, if you train an athlete
slowly, that athlete will be slow in competition; specificity of
training is more important than we think. If you want to run a
marathon, you don’t do all your training on a cycle, do you? Of course
not! It wouldn’t be specific for you!
In scientific jargon,
super-slow training doesn’t work due to a phenomenon called
“asynchronous recruitment.” We all have slow twitch and fast twitch
muscle fibers, and it’s to our advantage to activate as many of them as
possible when we resistance train in order to truly reap the benefits
that our nervous system and muscles can offer. As you may already know,
slow twitch fibers are always recruited first; your body won’t also
call upon the fast twitch fibers in your muscles unless it really needs
help with a challenging task – like the last few reps on a set of five
squats. Once we’re a bit experienced with resistance training, in order
to recruit fast twitch fibers (which can actually be converted to slow
twitch fibers to enhance endurance performance), we need to train with
at least 70% of our maximal strength on a particular exercise in order
to build strength with classic “repetition work.” The more experienced
one gets, the higher this percentage goes; really experienced lifters
won’t get stronger below 85-90%, in fact.
With super-slow, we’re
stuck with a protocol that forces us to use less weights because we
have to do a lot of reps – and at a very slow tempo. This load falls
short of the crucial 70% mark – and definitely far short of the 85-90%
mark. And, believe it or not, we don’t even getting all our slow twitch
fibers contributing! Instead, through asynchronous recruitment, certain
fibers simply “turn on” and “turn off” during the set; the weight is so
light that they can actually take breaks while their “helpers” pick up
the slack in the meantime. I’m not making this stuff up!
Don’t
forget that super-slow is traditionally performed on machines, too, and
we already know that machines are about as useful to an athlete as a
Derek Jeter Fan Club membership would be for a Red Sox fan.
Myth #5: Runners should avoid heavy weights and dynamic lifts.
Once
we get endurance athletes lifting weights, we always have to deal with
the contention that because they’re endurance athletes, they should
only do higher-rep sets because they just need to train muscular
endurance. Originally, that works fine, as you’re really just learning
the exercises and conditioning the tissues for what is ahead.
Unfortunately, as the athlete gets more experienced with resistance
training, it becomes readily apparent that not all reps are created
equal.
There are three ways that we can develop tension in our muscles (basically the goal of any resistance training exercise):
1.
The Repetition Method – This is the classic approach most gym-goers
use. Do a bunch of reps, and as you fatigue, the muscle tension
accumulates; the last few reps are what make the big difference.
2.
The Maximal Effort Method – This is an approach where the load utilized
is heavier, so the tension is “automatically” applied to the muscles.
You just have to work against it. This method – which uses rep ranges
of 1-6 – is great for building muscular strength and teaching your
nervous system to recruit more muscle fibers.
3. The Dynamic
Effort Method – This approach uses non-maximal loads, but the focus is
on lifting the weight as fast as possible. Jump squats are a good
example of dynamic effort training, which teaches the nervous system to
recruit muscles faster. Additionally, some dynamic effort training can
teach your tendons to store more elastic energy (like plyometrics). If
your tendons work more efficiently, your running style is more relaxed,
reflexive, and “springy,” as you don’t have to “muscle” every stride.
With
all this said, it should become clear that you can’t pursue the maximal
or dynamic effort methods with sets of 12-15; you have to use different
rep ranges and loading parameters if you want a truly effective
resistance training program.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Won’t I gain body fat if I cut back my running volume and replace it with resistance training?
A:
No! Contrary to popular belief, resistance training is extremely
valuable for burning fat – primarily due to something known as “Excess
Post-Exercise Oxygen Consumption” (EPOC). This is just a fancy way of
saying that after any exercise session, our metabolisms are elevated
significantly. Research has shown that EPOC directly related to how
intense our exercise sessions are; the more intense the effort, the
more metabolic “debt” we accumulate. For this reason, activities like
sprinting and weight-training – both of which are much more intense
than steady-state jogging – have a ton of merit in “battling the
bulge.” Amazingly, a single bout of resistance training can elevate the
metabolism for more than 48 hours – and favorably affect endocrine and
immune status in a manner that is conducive to fat loss. If you want to
be lean, you have to lift weights!
Additionally, you rarely see
ultra-endurance athletes with very low body fat percentages – and it’s
largely because all the mileage they do leads to higher levels of
cortisol and lower levels of testosterone in the body. This endocrine
fluctuation leads to a loss of muscle mass (which burns a lot of
calories) and an increased tendency to store body fat. Fortunately,
resistance training has been shown to have favorable effect on
testosterone levels chronically (good for men and women…trust me). By
keeping your hormonal status in check by including some resistance
training, runners can get faster and leaner!
Q: I have limited time to train; wouldn’t I be better off just running if time is limited?
A:
Obviously, this would depend on how you define “limited” – but it’s
been my experience that runners can always “make” time to run, but will
only “try to find” time to resistance-train. Generally speaking, you
can bang out a run here and there without much time preparation, so
it’s best to schedule your 2-3 resistance training sessions ahead of
time. Additionally, in some cases, you can incorporate some body weight
resistance training exercises as part of your warm-up – but this
certainly won’t cover all your needs.
Also, don’t forget the
study I cited earlier about the group of endurance athletes who saw
appreciable gains in performance by replacing 32% of their running
volume with resistance training. If you run six days a week, try moving
to four runs and two lifting sessions – and watch your times improve
dramatically.
Anyway, my feeling is that from a body
composition, health, and performance standpoint, you need to make time
for two lifting sessions per week regardless of how much you run.
Q: Won’t resistance training will interfere with my running?
A:
Great question – and the answer is no, provided you schedule your
running sessions appropriately. Ideally, you would lift on days that
you don’t run, or pair your lifts up with your tempo (sprint) sessions
in order to “consolidate” your most intense training and allow for
better recovery.
There is some research to show that running
efficiency is impaired slightly for up to eight hours post-exercise,
but you should be fine if you lift and run on separate days. I always
prefer that my athletes lift before they run, though; you always want
to do your speed and power work before you move on to endurance
training.
Q: Won’t resistance training make my muscles bigger? I don’t want all that weight holding me down!
A:
Endurance training by its very nature is not conducive to muscle growth
(especially in a female population with lower testosterone levels). The
sheer volume of exercise makes it difficult to get in enough calories
to support muscle mass gains, so the effects of resistance training are
largely confined to muscle density (tone), strength, and overall
efficiency rather than actual increases in muscle size. If it was so
easy to get “bulky,” there would be a lot more bulky people walking
around!
Closing Thoughts
All this information
won’t be of any use if it isn’t put into action, so now is the time to
either modify how you’re lifting, or start lifting in the first place.
At the very least, you need to complement your endurance training with
two resistance-training sessions per week – and preferably three.
Just
as running is more fun with a partner, so is lifting, so find a few
buddies to hit the gym with you. In our facility, time and time again,
we’ve seen athletes make much better progress when they’re training in
small groups and pushing each other to get better. Plus, for those of
you who might be a bit intimidated at the thought of joining a gym,
some training partners can do a lot to ease your worries.
At
your fingertips, you have an opportunity to dramatically improve
performance, overall health, and the way your body looks and feels.
There’s no time like the present to turn that opportunity into a
reality.
This article was originally featured at http://www.performbetter.com
Eric Cressey
www.EricCressey.com
Do you have similar questions? Direct them here.
Have endurance athletes under your coaching umbrella? Be the go-to coach.
References
1. Jung AP. The impact of resistance training on distance running performance. Sports Med. 2003;33(7):539-52.
2.
Millet, GP, Jaouen, B, Borrani, F, Candau, R. Effects of concurrent
endurance and strength training on running economy and .VO(2) kinetics.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002 Aug;34(8):1351-9.
3. Paavolainen, L,
Hakkinen, K, Hamalainen, I, Nummela, A, Ruski, H. Explosive-strength
training improves 5-km running time by improving running economy and
muscle power. J Appl Physiol. 1999 May;86(5):1527-33.
4. Hickson, R.
C., B. A. Dvorak, E. M. Gorostiaga, T. T. Kurowski, and C. Foster.
Potential for strength and endurance training to amplify endurance
performance. J. Appl. Physiol. 65: 2285-2290, 1988.







