Strength training to lighten the load

overall functional strength is the way to go for a myriad of activities. I bet those squats really help on the trail.

I might consider doing the 5 minutes of easy jump rope first, and then do some stretching, with a little more stretching post workout. When I coached baseball, we had our guys do a 5 minute warmup run and then stretch…our trainers told us that stretching was much more effective with a shor warmup first.

Anyway, great workout.

I always recommend mountainathlete's videos to people interested in core strength.
http://www.youtube.com/user/mountainathlete

I do the mountain athlete stuff that only requires a yoga mat: Plank pushups, Jane Fondas, supermans. Other than that, rock climbing twice a week. Rock climbing is good for core and upper body strength and way more fun than lifting weights.

I think it depends on your goals. If your sole purpose is long-distance thru-hiking like Skurka, then strength training may be wasted, especially since you are likely to lose any strength you have gained while completing your hike. However, for me, I don't so such long hikes. The strength gains from weight training work very well for the myriad weekend hikes and several 5-7 day hikes I do each year. And the crossover application to the many other activities I do are almost endless. The one thing that weight training doesn't seem to work well for is the stresses on thigh muscles from downhill hiking. You really need to walk downhill to fully develop those muscles, unless you have access to a downhill slanting treadmill or stair-climber.

>" unless you have access to a downhill slanting treadmill or stair-climber."

Or, as I call them, "stairs". Just stairs. No gym membership, no $2000 equipment, nothing to plug in the wall or take up space in your house. Just stairs – up AND DOWN – at home, at the office, a hotel while traveling.

>"Backyard home improvement is also great strength/cross training."

I've long figured that I could spend $1000 on a gym membership and $2000 on a snowblower or do neither (and hand-shovel 250 feet of driveway) to the same effect.

Thanks Rob. I actually gave a lot of thought and planning into this routine. I am a grad student, and get a student discount at a gym close to my house. I generally hate gyms, but put up with going specifically to build myself a solid workout regiment. After tinkering around and experimenting with a few "rough drafts" I found something that really gives me an all around good work out for my goals. Glad I put up with going to the gym so I didn't rush into things and buy say, a whole kettlebell set or set of weights. Using bodyweight work was a big improvement both functionally and pragmatically, such as the hindu squats and slow push ups. I also learned a lesson by moving up to too much weight, with 30kg two handed swings and 20kg one arm lifts. I can do the weight, but didn't have as good results, as my reps were lower. I forgot to add that I plan on adding pull-ups into my routine, once a week or so, at a park near my house that has a pull-up bar.

I will think about stretching after a warm up, didn't know about that.

I was out on an overnight trip last weekend and did about 10km the first day and 15km the second day, and it was easy, even with my slightly heavier winter load. On my section hike last summer that was 5 days, I did around 20km a day, and I never had any serious issues with fatigue, and don't recall being that stiff or sore. All around very pleasant trip, and had a lot to do with both going UL and also being in good shape. Well, "good" is subjective of course, I am sure that there are plenty of people on here in better shape than I am. After going UL a few years ago and getting a bit more involved and dedicated to working out shortly after, life in general has been vastly improved. Makes me want to get out into the woods even more–I feel like I can accomplish so much more out there now than ever before as an outdoor enthusiast.

Another important aspect of all this has been diet. I have also taken much more of an active role in attempting to eat healthy. I have a complicated diet as a result, not really summed up in a word or phrase. I am an occasional meat eater (2-3 times week) and avoid red meat in favor of seafood (no farmed fish!) and chicken. I only eat red meat once or twice a month. I eat two eggs nearly every day, however, and eat lots of nuts and beans. I also try and favor protein and fat servings over carbs, and many of the carbs I do eat are whole grain. When I am backpacking, most bets are off–I eat mostly anything I want to eat, which is usually lots of chocolate, sausages/salami, super-carby food like pasta and potato/corn chips, etc. But I will always take a lot of nuts, usually both almonds and cashews.

When I started building my workout regiment I would eat a protein or granola bar with lots of nuts. This was not only expensive, but didn't recharge me as much as I wanted. So then I tried my homemade protein drink noted above, and it made a significant difference–more energy and also did not feel as fatigued after workouts.

David, you bring up a good point about costs. My two kettlebells cost about 150USD total, and my jumprope is the same 10 dollar jumprope I have had since I was a boxer about a decade ago. My homemade oat milk/hemp seed protein shake costs me about 1.50 USD each. Keep in mind that I live in Sweden and things cost slightly more here (in exchange for nearly free health care and free tuition at university, and other things too).

You don't need to spend much money to get in good shape.

nm

And in this case I'm just not really sure where to start.

I have a doctorate in physical therapy, I am a board-certified orthopedic clinical specialist and I am a fellow in the American academy of orthopaedic manual physical therapists.

First of all, kudos to all of you who strength train, whether in the gym or in your backyard or in your staircases. It's always a good thing, particularly for bone health and overall metabolism. It makes you a fitter person overall, and THAT is how it helps your hiking.

To the folks who spoke of fast vs slow twitch, you're close but not quite. While you are right that a muscle contraction is an all or nothing proposition (to degrees, of course), the fact is that with training you absolutely can change the ratio of fast to slow twitch or vice versa. You can also change through atrophy or laziness… Fast twitch is explosion, plyometric, jumping kinds of muscle fibers; slow twitch are what we use to hike. Pretty much all the time. So unless you are one of those speed hikers, no worries about your fast twitch fibers. If you run or play soccer or something similar, though, then you should focus on them. But that's a different bout of blathering.

Major point here: You do not built endurance with strength training. You build endurance with endurance training and muscle force with "strength" training. If you lift for increased power production, you will not improve endurance (this is why sprinters are not marathon runners, and huge lineman do not run the ball in for touchdowns). Look at the different builds of cyclists in the Tour de France: the climbers are all lithe and skinny…that is endurance training; the sprinters have huge legs…that is power. The two are not the same and the muscles are not at all trained the same. While improving a muscle's force production will make stepping up a 15 inch boulder with a 15 pound pack easier…it will NOT change how many times you can step up that step. That's where endurance training (like Dave's comment about climbing stairs) comes in.
So a well-balanced "cross training" routine would include both lifting heavy weights just a few times (to fatigue) as well as doing light stuff many many times (to fatigue). To really improve a muscle's force production you actually need to lift enough weight to be tired after 8-10 reps…and to not be able to actually finish that last one. Then do another set. This kind of training will do nothing for endurance.

One of the biggest misconceptions is the need for cross training. Honestly, you don't need it. It's nice, it certainly CAN be helpful if you are generally not very fit, but, the fact is specificity of training rules the day. If you want to run fast, run fast. If you want to power up a steep ascent, power up steep ascents. And if you want to hike for 30 miles/day, then you need to hike 30 miles a day. The other stuff can make minor differences, but in the grander scheme of things not all that much.

I will quantify that by again saying that if you aren't in very good shape, then ANY training will be beneficial.

As for stretching, another misconception. You do not need to do it. It actually doesn't help you. Stretch before, after, during, don't stretch…no difference. It does not change overall muscle length, it does not alter the length of your muscle cells, and against what you may believe and everyone has told you, it does NOT NOT NOT prevent injury. A recent study found that your risk of injury increased only if you changed your routine, not whether you stretched or not. So…if you like to stretch first, great! Have at it. If you don't stretch at all, stop beating yourself up about it. You're fine.

Whew. I'm tired now. Time to go work some slow twitch fibers….

"Major point here: You do not built endurance with strength training. You build endurance with endurance training and muscle force with "strength" training. If you lift for increased power production, you will not improve endurance (this is why sprinters are not marathon runners, and huge lineman do not run the ball in for touchdowns). Look at the different builds of cyclists in the Tour de France: the climbers are all lithe and skinny…that is endurance training; the sprinters have huge legs…that is power. The two are not the same and the muscles are not at all trained the same. While improving a muscle's force production will make stepping up a 15 inch boulder with a 15 pound pack easier…it will NOT change how many times you can step up that step. That's where endurance training (like Dave's comment about climbing stairs) comes in…….

but, the fact is specificity of training rules the day. If you want to run fast, run fast. If you want to power up a steep ascent, power up steep ascents. And if you want to hike for 30 miles/day, then you need to hike 30 miles a day. The other stuff can make minor differences, but in the grander scheme of things not all that much."

This is the post I was waiting for, because it provides an expert's rationale for how I have always gone about training, both for backpacking and, in the past, running and climbing, with pretty decent results. That said, I've come around recently to the idea that developing core strength is helpful for darn near any activity. My 2 cents.

Thanks, Jennifer for another incisive post.

nm

"The other stuff can make minor differences, but in the grander scheme of things not all that much."

True, but it does make a difference, though usually small as you point out.

For instance,
Effect of high-intensity resistance training on performance of competitive distance runners.

In a recent study competitive road cyclists experienced substantial gains in sprint and endurance performance when sessions of high-intensity interval training were added to their usual training in the competitive phase of a season. The current study reports the effect of this type of training on performance of 20 distance runners randomized to an experimental or control group for 5 to 7 weeks of training. The experimental group replaced part of their usual competitive-phase training with 10 x 30-minute sessions consisting of 3 sets of explosive single-leg jumps (20 for each leg) alternating with 3 sets of resisted treadmill sprints (5 x 30-second efforts alternating with 30-second recovery). Before and after the training period all runners completed an incremental treadmill test for assessment of lactate threshold and maximum running speed, 2 treadmill runs to exhaustion for prediction of 800- and 1500-m times, and a 5-km outdoor time trial. Relative to the control group, the mean changes (+/-90% confidence limits) in the experimental group were: maximum running speed, 1.8% (+/- 1.1%); lactate-threshold speed, 3.5% (+/-3.4%); predicted 800-m speed, 3.6% (+/- 1.8%); predicted 1500-m speed, 3.7% (+/- 3.0%); and 5-km time-trial speed, 1.2% (+/- 1.1%). We conclude that high-intensity resistance training in the competitive phase is likely to produce beneficial gains in performance for most distance runners.

Endurance cyclist see improvements in performance when they incorporate HIIT training into their program. Plus, as I mentioned before, I assume many of us (ME anyway) are not aiming to be specialists that can do only one activity well. So for those who want to do lots of things well, rather than becoming the next Skurka, I say go for it. As Jennifer points out, it makes you a better rounded person, health wise, bone wise, metabolic wise, and as you get into your twilight years strength becomes much more important just doing everyday things. Since there are cross-over benefits from strength training, and it takes less time than endurance training (for those that don't have the time to walk 30 miles per day), I see it as a win-win. But I am biased…I am not really made for endurance sports. I have a preponderance of fast-twitch muscle, and though I can shift the balance of this somewhat through training, I will never be a competitive endurance athlete. So work to you own strengths as well as what your goals are.

And stretch!! Not as a warm-up or cool down or to prevent immediate injury, but the other thing that becomes more important as we age is basic flexibility. So to be a well-rounded athlete, make sure you stretch sometime in your day to ensure you can cut your own toenails when you get older!!

"Tom, is this incisive enough for you? Ha!"

Very incisive, lots of impressive test results, but I'll stick with specificity of training. Here's one example of why: From Kenyan distance runner and former NY Marathon women's winner Tegla Loroupe:

'We don't have any special strength-training equipment in Kenya,' says Tegla, 'so we Kenyan runners simply use our own body weight to supply the resistance as we run up hills. The toughness of our hill workouts is the key reason for our success.' I have found exactly this approach to be true in my own humble efforts.

Here's a link to the complete article about how she, and many other Kenyan runners, train, if you're interested:

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/marathon-training-a-training-programme-used-by-kenyan-distance-runners-354

In the interest of fairness, here is an article that supports your position, but also
says that hill running will accomplish pretty much the same effects with an added improvement in cardio vascular function and less chance of injury.

http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/weights.shtml

As a former hill running fanatic, I'll go with that recommendation. But I am unabashedly biased.

Edit: Just for the heck of it, here's one from Pubmedthat shows no benefit from an 8 week strength training program for recreational marathoners. But, to be truthful, there are also studies supporting the benefits of strength training, all of which makes me suspicious of studies. ;0)

I guess it's a case of there being many paths to achieve the desired result, so pick your poison and go for it. the main thing is to go for it. :)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20885197

nm

Boy just when I thought that I had completely over thought my previous training…..

I'm also in the camp that the best training to hike thirty mile days is thirty plus mile days. Prior to my thru hike that was exactly my focus but in addition I focused on overall fitness. That involved high rep weight training but a bigger focus was very intense treadmill and elliptical workouts. (Slightly related, I ran my first marathon by only doing one long run a week, a running trainer told me it was stupid but it worked!)

There is one area that I do disagree with some posters. Heavy upper body weight training is a waste for thru hiking training. All of that precious muscle mass will be lost. So fast twitch, slow twitch, who knows, it's all just walking.

Ps, keep it up piper!!!!!!

"(Slightly related, I ran my first marathon by only doing one long run a week, a running trainer told me it was stupid but it worked!)"

You're in good company, Greg. I used to train with a guy who ran 2:35 for the marathon on 35 miles/week, with one long run and the rest devoted to short fast runs. It can be done.

"There is one area that I do disagree with some posters. Heavy upper body weight training is a waste for thru hiking training. All of that precious muscle mass will be lost. So fast twitch, slow twitch, who knows, it's all just walking."

I disagree, having hiked many times with women in particular that needed help putting their packs on. So for this, at least, you need a minimum of 'one max' strength at least equal to your pack weight. I also have found that I excel on steep uphill and downhill hikes where I can use my arms/chest/back to brace (downhill) and pull (uphill). Sometimes I even swing from overhead tree branches when on a steep downhill-merely because I can ;) I guess I just have that gorilla factor from decades of rock climbing…upper body strength also allows me to make maximum use of my poles, and really power through uphill cross-country skiing sections.

I hope I never need to walk a 30 mile plus day. In our terrain that would be inconceivable, and in lesser terrain I think I would find it incredibly boring, much like I find distance running and cycling! But, yes, if long distance hiking is your thing, then you need to do lots of long distance hiking to be fit for it. But just because genetically gifted Kenyans train with nothing but running to win distance races, it does not mean that power training will lead to no improvements, merely that they don't need that extra couple of percentages to win races.

As for growing new myocytes, recent research has shown that it is possible, but not to a great extent. But you CAN increase the number of mitochondria in a specific muscle fibre by good training principles.

Thanks to Dave and Lynn for adding some research and evidence to the discussion. You saved me from pulling similar info from my own files. I have been blessed to have some success as a distance runner and as a coach of runners from the HS level to some elite national and WC athletes. People need to not confuse top runners with the back of the pack marathoners or even some good local runners. Many are incredibly strong in terms of strength to weight ratios. Years ago we were doing a clinic and someone asked Frank Shorter how strong marathoners needed to be. His reply was that they should be able to lift at least their own body weight over their heads! Many of the best distance runners are quite strong.

My running group used to have contests after workouts to see who could walk the farthest on our hands and also to see who could do the most handstand pushups.

As to the discussion about the differences between fast and slow twitch muscle fibers, training and performance, please be aware that much of what shows up in all variety of fitness magazines and even from the mouth of some trainers at fitness centers is all too often simplistic and misleading. There is great complexity in the relationship between different fiber types and the manner in which athletes recruit and use muscle fibers of all types.

The bottom line as demonstrated by Piper's experience: Get fit, get strong, and you will live and move with greater ease!

"Or, as I call them, "stairs". Just stairs. No gym membership, no $2000 equipment, nothing to plug in the wall or take up space in your house. Just stairs – up AND DOWN – at home, at the office, a hotel while traveling."

For sure. Fortunately I work in a 10 story building AND live close to a 300m hill. However, it is really hard to 'train' for a 1500m steep descent without actually doing a 1500m descent, non-stop. Ascents are not as hard to simulate in a gym. This really struck home for me when our gym organised an overnight hike, the ascent was 400m, and everyone was OK after that. Next day was back down the same (steep) 400m, and soooo many of the folks not used to hiking suffered bad DOMS from that. Their muscles simply were not used to that kind of eccentric exercise.

Dave…hmmm…the battle over muscle physiology. What great fun! But I have to say you seem to have only a cursory understanding here.

First of all, define "strength…”
You can't, because it doesn’t actually mean anything; there is no definition for it clinically or experimentally. We use the terms "muscle performance" or "force generating capacity" because "strength" has no real meaning. The amount of force a muscle can generate depends on so many things, including available metabolites, readiness of the neuromuscular junction, the length-tension relationship of the muscle fibers, etc etc.

"And intervals. God I hate intervals. But I do them for their effect on my cardiovascular system and less for endurance"

You seem to have some more definitions a-kilter…
Your cardiovascular system IS endurance – otherwise, what is muscle endurance?
The muscle can only contract as long as it has oxygen and Ca2+ and ATPase etc available. This comes from an efficient cardiovascular system to deliver these to the oxidative muscle fibers, as well as to flush out waste products. Without that your muscle functions anaerobically – which we’ve all experienced doesn’t really last very long at all.

You can be as powerful as possible, but without the ability to quickly and efficiently move metabolites and wastes from the working muscle then it will no longer contract. “Endurance training” does exactly this: it trains the muscle to be able to move products through quickly and efficiently – the one who can do it the best will last the longest in physical exertion.

"…does not mean fatiguing the muscle until it can't contract. Can you imagine hiking that way? Hiking until you pass out due to fatigue"

We are talking TRAINING, not the actual hiking. In order to improve the force generating capacity of the muscle you HAVE to challenge it to fatigue. If you choose to increase the level of mitochondria in order to improve the length of time you can contract a muscle, you challenge it to fatigue. If you want to increase the cross sectional area of a muscle then you need to hypertrophy the fibers…by, you guessed it, challenging it to fatigue. It’s called Wolff’s Law: your body adapts directly to loads placed on it.

"a stronger muscle does not work as hard as a weaker muscle to produce the same force, providing a lot of stored energy in reserve should it be required. Strength training simply improves the muscle's ability and capacity to do more work"

Not quite. First of all, what is a "stronger" muscle? One with greater cross sectional area? One with a better length-tension relationship? You are looking at this from a strict physics perspective rather than one that involves oxidation and ATPase and Ca2++ that is involved in repeated muscle contraction. The muscle doesn’t really store much energy in reserve as you would expect…it has to use it efficiently (thus, you TRAIN it to do so). And I’m also not really sure where you get the idea that a “stronger” muscle doesn’t work as hard.

Here is the salient part of a paper that compared marathon outcomes between recreational runners to participated in a strength training program and those who did not (I thought that applied to us a bit better than the elite athlete studies)

“No significant differences between the groups and no significant interaction (time × intervention) were found for VO2 (absolute and relative to VO2peak) at defined marathon running velocities (2.4 and 2.8 m·s⁻¹) and submaximal blood lactate thresholds (2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 mmol·L⁻¹). Stride length and stride frequency also remained unchanged. The results suggest no benefits of an 8-week concurrent strength training for running economy and coordination of recreational marathon runners despite a clear improvement in leg strength, maybe because of an insufficient sample size or a short intervention period. (Ferrauti A, Bergermann M, Fernandez-Fernandez J. Effects of a concurrent strength and endurance training on running performance and running economy in recreational marathon runners. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Oct;24(10):2770-8. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181d64e9c)

So…IN CONCLUSION…..
All the force generating capacity in the world is meaningless if you don't have endurance. Why can't sprinters compete with marathoners? Why can't a marathoner run a 100m dash in <10 seconds? Because the sprinter has no endurance (but has power), and the marathoner has endurance but no power. What do we see here? Specificity of training!

You can be whatever you want to be! As long as you train intensely enough…..

"The mechanical properties of slow and fast muscles do adapt to programs of regular exercise. Endurance exercise training has been shown to increase the Vo of the slow soleus by 20%. This increase could have been caused by either a small increase in all, or most, of the fibers, or to a conversion of a few fibers from slow to fast. Recently, the increase was shown to be caused by the former, as the individual slow Type I fibers of the soleus showed a 20% increase in Vo, but there was little or no change in the percentage of fast fibers. The increased Vo was correlated with, and likely caused by, an increased fiber ATPase. We hypothesize that the increased ATPase and cross-bridge cycling speed might be attributable to an increased expression of fast MLCs in the slow Type I fibers (Fig. 14.10). This hypothesis is based on the fact that light chains have been shown to be involved in the power stroke, and removal of light chains depresses force and velocity. Regular endurance exercise training had no effect on fiber size, but with prolonged durations of daily training it depressed Po and peak power. When the training is maintained over prolonged periods, it may even induce atrophy of the slow Type I and fast Type IIa fibers."

Fitts RH, Widrick JJ. Muscle mechanics: adaptations with exercise-training. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 1996;24:427-73.

"And intervals. God I hate intervals. But I do them for their effect on my cardiovascular system and less for endurance."

We used to use them as phase 3 of a training cycle, after 10-12 weeks of distance running and 3 weeks of hill workouts. After that it was taper down for 10-14 days and step up to the line. Myself, I liked them. There was something very primeval about a pack of guys on about the 15th-16th 400m, with 4-5 to go, when the chatter had died down and everybody was reaching deep down inside, that took me back 10,000 years or so. Hard to describe, but I loved it.

Maybe no sub 10 for 100m, but you haven't lived until you run sub 47 in a 400m race against other marathoners and you come in last!! When Ibrahim Hussein was running world class 10k times in college he used to run the 4x400m and break even with the sprinters. Is there a difference in top end speed? Yes, but not near what people think. At any rate, the constant back and forth between the physiologists and coaches will continue to be with us. Thanks for your perspective. Dave may not know all the relevant terminology, but I know what he meant! And your take wasn't boring.

nm

Jennifer, I appreciate your expertise and clarification of your posts.

However, I wanted to respond on a few things to (I guess) clarify as best that I can one last time given you asked me to define strength.

Strength is defined as the potential tension a muscle is capable of applying in a single maximum contraction. Training for strength causes several physiological changes in muscle tissue. Of these, the two most important are improved nervous control of muscle and increase muscle size.

To compensate for the wide variety of possible load conditions (playing the piano does not require the same output as lifting weights), the CNS stimulates exactly the amount if fibers necessary to perform the job. If a muscle is just strong enough to cover the load, essentially all its fibers must contract and as soon as these tire, the muscle fails and cannot work again until there has been sufficient recovery.

However….if the muscle’s level of strength surpasses the job’s requirements, the CNS will only stimulate a portion of the muscle’s fibers, leaving those remaining in reserve, ready to take over when the initial bunch tires and ultimately fail.

It is this sort of alternation that increases your muscular endurance. Strength training specifically increases the muscle’s capacity to stimulate muscle fibers and hence endurance.

So lets look at your analogy. On one side we have a sprinter, who does explosive, high force movements and can exert himself maximally for only a short period of time. Lets now add some endurance training to his regimen. He adds 20% of his training time to running ½ marathons. After two months, he is now a slower sprinter, weaker, and physically smaller (more on that in a minute).

On the other side we have a high level marathoner. This person trains solely for endurance (as you prescribe). He does high levels of repetitive activity for his legs, increasing the number of mitochondria per muscle cell, substantially increasing his endurance. Lets now add some strength training to his regimen. He adds 20% of his training time to strength training with weight loads in the 65 to 90% of one repetition range. After two months, he can run farther, longer, and faster. Why?

Regarding training to fatigue / failure when strength training. This really is not necessary and will be detrimental in the long run. Powerlifters never train to fatigue and they are the strongest individuals on the planet. Olympic lifters also don’t train to fatigue and they are unbelievably strong. You only have to train within a range of load to get stronger and push for continual progression of load over time. Overload is key; not pushing the muscle to fatigue as it drowns in lactic acid after burning through glycogen, ATP, and CP. Consider that sprinters on the track don't train by running to fatigue where they fall down in a heap of vibrating mass (would be funny to see, however). They train at high intensity but it is something less than all out fatigue.

You mention the cross section of a muscle – yes, that is a byproduct of strength. Clearly increased fiber size does affect the physical appearance of the muscle but the degree to which it contributes is largely determined by diet.

Yup – made a boo boo on the cardio comment but I was really referring to metabolic conditioning and trying to see some 'abs' before summer rather than training to increase my endurance….I squat and deadlift for that (hee, hee). And yes, training for overall endurance does tap into the cardiovascular system. But you can actually have a muscle with high endurance without affecting your cardiovascular system. Consider a muscle with predominently slow twitch musculature. That muscle will be very enduring even though you are a 'couch potato'. The calf muscle comes to mind.

Anyhoo, I am done here. Need to go train.

Go Piper!