Altitude

[radmanzulu]

Quote:
14. Effect of Altitude

An approximate formula for the rate of change of air-pressure p with altitude is:

(14.1) p = p0 exp(-z/7000)
where p0 is the sea-level pressure (approx 1000mb) and z is the altitude above sea-level in metres. This formula corresponds to a pressure decrease of 1% for every 70m increase altitude.
Self-calibrating ergs such as the Concept and RowPerfect would compensate for this by calculating a reduced drag factor (section 7), so still give an accurate measurement of the work done.

This means that, for a given lung-volume and breathing rate, the amount of Oxygen taken into the bloodstream would also decrease by 1% for every 70m. If oxygen uptake through the lungs is the limiting factor in aerobic power output, then you would expect your erg power scores to fall off at the same rate (or split times to increase by 1% for every 210 m due to the cube relationship between power and speed, Eq. 4.5). E.g., in Denver (altitude 1500m), the air pressure is only 80% of the sea level value, so anyone moving up from sea level and trying a long-distance erg would probably find their power reduced by 20% (or times increased by approximately 7%).

Similarly, someone moving in the opposite direction (1500m down to sea level) would find 25% more oxygen in each lungful of air.
End of quote.

Bob S.[/quote]

This is somewhat simplistic since the body responds to altitude by a number of adaptive responses that increase the oxygen carrying capacity of blood and increasing the extraction of oxygen from blood. The following website explains some of the responses:
http://www.humankinetics.com/products/s ... pt_id=3132

The net effect is that athletic performance is impaired at altitude but less than may be expected by just calculating the amount of oxygen in a given volume of air. Athletes who train, and adapt, at altitude can expect to see benefits when competing at sea level over athletes who train at sea level.

[FB1]

http://www.go2altitude.com/events/SUMMA ... titute.pdf

Some more altitude opinion.

[johnlvs2run]

Dean Smith moved to 5960 feet elevation recently, so it will be a good chance for us to see the effects of altitude on his times.

So far his results show what I have stated before, that altitude is hard on those with comparatively less endurance, and that there is not that much difference between the altitude and sea level times of endurance trained athletes.

Since turning 80, Dean has so far bettered the 80+ records for the 500m, 1k and 2k as a lightweight, but fallen short of the 5k. It will be interesting to see if this is a trend that continues. Or it might be a motivation to improve the longer distance times as well as the short onesl.

On the other hand Dean has done the 21097 in 1:36:23.5, which is 2 1/2 minutes faster than he did at sea level a year ago. Personally I am confident that Dean can and will better all of his previous sea level times while at altitude.

[tgeldean]

Radmanzulu said: "Athletes who train, and adapt, at altitude can expect to see benefits when competing at sea level over athletes who train at sea level."

Having lived and trained near Boulder, CO (~5200') for the last 11 years, and reading a decent amount about the subject, I don't know if this is really true. The current research seems to show that the real benefits occur when living high and training low.

For an endurance athlete, there are certainly benefits to be had from living at altitude - primarily the increased red blood cell production. But the negative aspect is that one is simply not able to train as fast at a given effort level. So I may have a great deal of endurance, but this may not efficiently translate to faster speeds, as I haven't spent as much time specifically training at race pace or faster. For the vast majority of my rowing (or running), I would be able to go faster at sea level, so I'm not gaining those muscular benefits up here.

If all things are equal, my adaptation to this altitude would certainly give me an advantage if a competition were held here. My times will certainly drop when I go to sea level, but by living and training here, I'm not likely to be gaining any advantage over a sea level athlete in a competition held at sea level.

The live high/train low idea is accomplished in a number of ways. 1) Athletes can literally live/sleep most of the time at a high altitude (probably 8000'+) and perform most of their quality training at a low altitude. A number of runners live in Mammoth, CA, and travel to sea level for much of their training. But there are a limited number of places one can do this, so 2) Some athletes live at sea level, but spend a portion of their lives living/sleeping in an altitude tent/chamber/room. They can then train as normal in their sea level environment. And of course, 3) Athletes can blood dope, or take EPO (or the latest and greatest similar blood boosting method/drug) to similarly boost one's red blood cells and train at whatever sea level locale they want to.

So while I'm curious to know how much faster I'll row when I get to sea level, it's a curiousity based on not knowing a "conversion factor," not what advantage I'm gaining from living here.

I'll try to report back after an upcoming trip to Illinois in September when I'll probably row some time trials at a variety of distances.

[johnlvs2run]

If you spend more time specifically training at race pace or faster at sea level, then that's a difference in your training, not of the altitude.

The U.S. runners probably seek out the lower altitudes for training, simply because of it being easier for them to do, not because it has any particular advantages. If it did then they would be competing on a par with the others but they aren't.

When the best runners in the world, the Ethiopians, Kenyans etc, go to other training centers around the world, they seek out similar high altitudes to the ones where they live.

[johnlvs2run]

Certainly it is not possible to maintain the same speeds over distance at altitude.

However the pressure and humidity of the air is much less at altitude, making it much easier to breathe and recover, so you can recover more quickly between days and in between sessions.

It is not matter of altitude being faster, except in cases like cycling and short distances where it is, but of altitude times being closer to sea level times than many people in the U.S. would expect.

[tgeldean]

John-

As a competitive runner who follows the training, racing, and doping scenes of the sport, I have some knowledge and experience with this issue as it refers to running and training in general. My initial interest in this post was/is about altitude/sea level "conversions" for rowing.

But to address some of your points (looking primarily from the running side of things, but there is certainly plenty of crossover):

- Altitude will always significantly affect one's ability to train/race at altitude. Yes, there are physiological adjustments that are made, but at equal fitness levels, one will still not train/race as fast at altitude for distances greater than 800m - EVER. The 800m distance is considered the "break even" point where the speed benefits (sprinting, throwing, kicking a ball) equal the breathing detriments.

- One can modify their training to increase their training at faster "sea level-like" paces, but it is still not the same bang for the buck. To illustrate:

When I'm training specifically for a sea level 5000m on the track, a common workout I'll do is 5 x 1000m with 2:00 rest. If I can do that workout at altitude in 3:00 per rep, I would typically be able to do the same workout at sea level in 2:55 per rep. I'm certainly training my cardiovascular (CV) system similarly at either altitude because the CV effort remains the same. But I'm getting a greater benefit at sea level, because I get the muscular/nervous system benefits of the faster pace. Now, a common strategy would be to run shorter reps - such as 6 x 800m, so that the pace would be closer to what one could handle for that 5 x 1000m sea level workout. But...then the distances/benefits have changed (and again, I could run faster for the 6 x 800m at sea level).

- You said: "The U.S. runners probably seek out the lower altitudes for training, simply because of it being easier for them to do, not because it has any particular advantages. If it did then they would be competing on a par with the others but they aren't."

The perception that top US runners are simply looking for the easy way out is ill informed. If you compare US runners to most any country (outside of Kenya & Ethiopia), US runners stack up very well - both in top runners' performances and depth of performers. There are a myriad of reasons that these 2 African nations are currently at the top, but it isn't simply because they are trying harder or training at altitude.

One of the best training groups in the US is currently the Hansons Brooks group, based at whatever altitude Michigan has to offer. But another group that has been successful is Team Running USA (Meb Keflizhigi - Olympic Silver Medal in the 2004 marathon & Deena Kastor - Bronze Medal in the women's race) that bases itself in Mammoth, CA. They practice the "live high/train low" lifestyle, living at a high altitude, and performing much of their quality workouts at or near sea level.

Plus, you need to understand that training at sea level or altitude isn't any harder or easier for a properly acclimated runner. The effort remains basically the same - you just simply run faster (sea level) or slower (altitude) for that effort. So living and training at sea level isn't taking the easy way out for distance runners. I've lived/trained/raced around all levels of distance runners at both sea level and altitude, and know what I'm talking about.

- As for Kenyan & Ethiopians seeking out similar high altitudes for their "on the road" training centers, that does happen. But, then again, explain why they'll spend big chunks of time in such high altitudes as London, Pennsylania, Eugene, etc. Many athletes who hail from high altitudes will move to low altitude locales when their training shifts to higher quality (faster) track/road work. Why...because they can run faster there - and the recovery can also be better/easier (more on that next).

- You said "However the pressure and humidity of the air is much less at altitude, making it much easier to breathe and recover, so you can recover more quickly between days and in between sessions."

There's a couple of different ways of looking at this. 1) As I've repeatedly mentioned, one cannot train as fast at altitude, compared to the same effort at sea level. Therefore, this slower training will not necessarily beat somebody up as much. So, it's possible that the wear & tear of training is a little less at higher altitudes. 2) On the other hand, there are many people who feel it is more difficult to recover at higher altitudes, and feel that it is easier to "get buried" (overtrained) as well. There's not a lot of scientific study in this area, but there is a lot of anecdotal discussions out here in Boulder. One of the best US distance runners of the past several years, Adam Goucher, recently moved from Colorado (where he was born and spent his entire life) to sea level Oregon and has revitalized his career after countless years of injuries and frustration.

- You said "It is not matter of altitude being faster, except in cases like cycling and short distances where it is, but of altitude times being closer to sea level times than many people in the U.S. would expect."

I'm not sure what "people in the U.S. would expect." The bottom line is that at distances greater than 800m, the same athlete will run faster at sea level than at altitude. A common conversion percentage is 3%, but that's up for debate. For my level, I've found that I can run faster at sea level by the following amounts:

- 1500m/Mile: 5-6 seconds
- 5000m: 25 seconds (8 seconds/mile)
- 10,000m: 1 minute (10 seconds/mile)
- Marathon: 5-7 minutes (12-15 seconds/mile)

These aren't uncommon conversions, and you'll notice that the conversion factor will often increase as the distance increases.

Of course, you did touch on one point that I'll agree with. We have a much drier climate here (not always the case at higher altitudes) so we can have some difficulties due to the higher humidities found at numerous sea level locales.

But I don't really have much to say about this topic...

[johnlvs2run]

The perception that top US runners are simply looking for the easy way out is ill informed. If you compare US runners to most any country (outside of Kenya & Ethiopia), US runners stack up very well - both in top runners' performances and depth of performers. There are a myriad of reasons that these 2 African nations are currently at the top, but it isn't simply because they are trying harder or training at altitude.

Why don't you just come out and say what the reasons are then.

[tgeldean]

First off, the Kenyans and Ethiopians deserve the credit for being the best in the world. They've developed incredible depth and talent that is unprecedented. So, I feel it's more a matter of what THESE countries are doing right:

- Focus. It's hard to come up with any other sports where these 2 countries have any comparable international presence. Little or no athletes even competing in foreign leagues in any major sports (soccer, football, basketball, or baseball), or even other endurance sports like cycling, nordic skiing, etc.

- Size. The majority of the best distance runners in the world are tiny. Not that all Kenyan & Ethiopian distance runners were born at altitude, but higher altitude does lead to lower birth weights. On top of that, these African countries have a slightly different culture, and a major difference is a diet which typically doesn't lend itself to excess. The majority of the world records in distance events are held by relatively tiny runners, and the winners in the Olympics and World Championships are no different.

- Lack of distractions from the start. Many Kenyan & Ethiopian kids will NOT be exposed/distracted to video games, computers (message boards ), shopping malls, TV, blah blah blah. It may be a simpler existance, but it works.

- Money. The money a good Kenyan or Ethiopian runner can win on the roads or track goes exponentially further than in the US or many other Western nations. This provides both more motivation, and more importantly, more ability to stay in the support without having to work a "real job."

There's certainly many other differences that allow these countries to excel (success begetting success, better talent spotting/development, perhaps even the relative lack of what we'd consider quality tracks and roads - dirt being more gentle than all weather tracks or paved roads).

But again, don't tear down US runners by comparing them to the best distance runners the world has ever seen. Follow the sport of distance running a little more closely, and you'll see that the US has been performing quite well for a number of years.

[johnlvs2run]

It seems to me that we agree on just about everything about altitude, except for the training low thing. I will stand by that the best runners in the world prefer training at altitude. When Bekele and the others go to training camp, it is to another high altitude location, or even higher than where they are from. You mentioned Eugene. Hmmm they have an African contengent there? I've never heard of them if they do.

However take a look at Albuquerque, and other places like Flagstaff. There are many Africans who train in Colorado and New Mexico by their choices.

As to Americans, you yourself brought up the live high train low thing, and because, you said that training low is "easier" i.e. more muscular or whatever. You don't use your muscles at altitude? Anyway you have already agreed that Americans are looking for the easy way out, so it is hard to disagree, when both of us have said the same thing. The exception in this case is Bob Kennedy. He trained at altitude, with Komen and the other Kenyans. Bingo, 12:58 for the 5k two times.

Why aren't the other Americans doing this too? Because, they want to take the easy way out, live high train low, to be "faster" etc.

Meanwhile the U.S. men's 10k is almost one FULL minute slower than Bekele's world record, and the U.S. record is held by an African. The U.S. women's record is MORE than one full minute off Wang Junxia's world record time. There are many countries ahead of the U.S. in distance running. I am not disparaging U.S. runners, not at all. Just take a look at results, that's all. Yes the U.S. runners do very well. Many other countries do much better.

Anyway I think we agree on most of the points and that's good enough.

[Rockin Roland]

However the pressure and humidity of the air is much less at altitude, making it much easier to breathe and recover, so you can recover more quickly between days and in between sessions.

No! You Dummy!!!

It's the other way around.

The air is thinner at altitude making it harder to breathe and recover.

Why do you think so many mountain climbers carry oxygen on Mt Everest?

Why do you think mountain climbers get altitude sickness and have to retreat to a lower camp to recover?

At sea level the air is dense, not unlike the matter in between your ears.

[tgeldean]

I still think we disagree on some major points, though, and I think you know just enough about running and altitude to be dangerous.

More knowledge:

- Yes, many top distance runners live and train at altitude. But almost ALL of them travel to lower altitudes for their fastest work. Crap, if Bekele came to the Boulder area, he'd be dropping 2500-3000' of altitude. Before a stint of racing at sea level (track in Europe, roads in the US, etc.), they'll drop down so that they can perform their track work at faster speeds. This is NOT taking the easy way out. I don't know where you get this idea. It's like getting in better shape - you hurt just the same, you're just able to run faster. If you follow the collegiate XC scene, you'll know that one of the best teams in the country is the University of Colorado, coached by Mark Wetmore. He will repeatedly talk about his runners being at a disadvantage when it comes to nationals, in the sense that they're not as comfortable with the faster pace - especially early on in the race. If training at high altitudes were so ideal, they would be spending most of their time on mountain roads and trails above 12,000'. It's living at high altitude that creates the benefits, NOT training (unless you're training for a high altitude event).

- I NEVER said that Americans are looking for the easy way out. "Live High/Train Low" is not the easy way out. It's the optimal way to take advantage of altitude and maximize race specific fitness. You try to make me look stupid by sarcastically saying "You don't use your muscles at altitude?" Again, I never said that. What I said is that there are muscular/nervous system benefits to training at lower altitudes, when at the same (READ: SAME, not EASIER!) effort level, one can simply run faster. This is not merely my anecdotal experience or that of the hordes of sub-elite & elite runners I have contact with in Boulder and elsewhere. It's reality backed up by science. I previously mentioned the 2 premier runners in the US practicing this system - Deena Kastor & Meb Keflizighi with Team USA Running. You mentioned the American Records in the 10K - these 2 runners are the proud holders of these records, and at the most recent Olympic Marathon, they were the 2 runners that made the US the ONLY country to win a men's AND women's medal in the marathon. Kastor won the London Marathon in a sub 2:20 American Record, and beat a fantastic field. With Radcliffe out (injuries & now pregnancy), Kastor is arguably the best marathoner in the world. She f..king works hard. She may be (well) over a minute behind Wang Junxia's 29:31 WR @ 10K, but nobody else is closer than 30 seconds. Plus, Wang's records are just a little (sarcasm alert) suspect to most everyone in the sport. If you buy the story that all she was doing was consuming worms and turtle soup and working hard, you probably assume that Lasse Viren's derived from hard work and reindeer milk. And Keflizighi's American Record is a long ways from Bekele's record as well (:56), but how many other men run under 27:00? The American Record stacks up quite well compared to many other countries' national records. And like Wang, I question how clean Bekele or many of the top runners are. It's not just how much the 10K & 5K world records and overall performances have dropped in the past 15+ years. It's often how the races are run and won. If you've watched some of the recent championship races, Bekele has run sub 13 5000m times - for the 2nd half of his 10,000m championship wins. Even the Ethiopian women have won in mostly the same manner. I've spoken with former 2:09 marathoner, Benji Durden, about this one. He says that first off, he doesn't accept some of the top times turned in. But more importantly, he doesn't accept how in 5000m & 10,000m races the top Ethiopians can sprint the final 400m in 53 (men) or sub 60 (women) AND NOT EVEN BE BREATHING HARD! But I could go on all day about drugs in sport - that's a topic for another day.

- I can't believe you brought up Bob Kennedy to defend your point! He's the perfect example AGAINST your argument! Here's a quote from him: "I went where I thought the best situation for me was at the time. And that was Kim McDonald’s group of Kenyans in [Melbourne] Australia, Palo Alto and Teddington [outside of London]." Kennedy NEVER trained at altitude during the prime of his career. It was long after his 12:58 American Record at 5000m, long after his best at 10K, long after his best World XC performance, that he travelled to Boulder for a couple of stints of altitude. Kim McDonald (RIP) had his guys training at the above listed training sites - please tell me which one of those is high altitude. When Kennedy travelled to Boulder, he was gearing up for the marathon and was training with Dieter Hogan (Uta Pippig's coach & partner). The marathon doesn't require quite the same speed obviously, so it's not as necessary to be doing fast track work for preparation. That being said, his marathon training did not pan out. But to repeat, his 12:58s had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with altitude training, as they occurred over 8 years BEFORE he ever trained at altitude. Nice revisionist history.

Seriously - do some research/online searching for "live high train low." The science is there, and it just makes sense.

[atahualpa]

This is a really interesting thread. I'm still a little skeptical that training at altitude, for someone born at sea-level, would provide any longterm benefits. If the science is there, I'll take your word for it. From what I recall from some of my physical anthropology courses (I'm an archaeologist, so not exactly my specialty) is that people born at high altitudes undergo physiological adaptations as they develop from babies through puberty. Andeans, for instance, who are born at altitude will develop much greater lung capacity and larger hearts, a kind of barrell-chested appearence. This doesn't happen to children born at sea level of Andean parents, they have similar lung/heart sizes as other sea level born kids. I have friends born in Lima, Peru (sea level) whose parents migrated from the highlands. They are just as prone to hypoxia (altitude sickness) as I am and I was born in Chicago.

But there are also biological adaptations to altitude that have occurred through evolution among populations that live at high altitude. These adaptations are inherited. For example, Andeans have much higher levels of hemoglobin which carries oxygen than populations at sea level. Tibetans process nitric oxide differently than lowlanders, allowing the blood vessels to expand, carrying more blood/oxygen to the brain. There are very likely to be similar or different adaptations to altitude in Ethiopians and Kenyans born of high altitude populations. My point is, if you weren't born there and don't have those genetically inherited adaptations to it, there's only so much that training at altitude will get you as an adult. My guess is, that if athletes who live at altitude, moved back to sea level, they would find that their performance would gradually decline (all things being equal.)

I did a quick search and found this article regarding Ethiopian altitude adaptation: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/99/26/17215
It turns out they do have an adaptation to altitude different than Tibetans or Andeans, but the researchers are unsure of the mechanics.

[dennish]

Tim, Excellent stuff. How goes the training? I just got back from Masters Naionals in Seattle. Hard to say about performances as I rowed in larger boats so no way to individualize results. Catch me up on where you're at with the training. dennis

[johnlvs2run]

Tgeldean,

I took your word for it that you knew something about distance running, but by your assertions you have proven yourself to be wrong.

1) Bekele does not live at 8000 feet altitude.

2) The Kenyans and Ethiopians often go to HIGHER altitude to train, than where they are living.

3) Bob Kennedy is from Indiana, i.e. LOW altitude.

4) Bob Kennedy never lived at altitude. He only trained at altitude. So much for your theory.

5) The U of C at Boulder is at 5000 feet altitude, which is where their runners train - NOT at sea level - and both women and men have won the cross country nationals. They probably would not have won had they trained at sea level. Anyway last time neither of them won.

6) Deena Kastor became competitive when she moved to Alamosa, Colorado to train. You didn't know this? Alamosa is at 7544 feet elevation.

7) Keflizighi is from a SEA LEVEL country in Africa. He didn't live at altitude. He has the American record for the 10000 meters, but wouldn't even make the international team from his birth country, if he was still there.

8) Radcliffe has used an altitude tent, and is widely suspected of using illegal drugs. Kastor is buddies with Radcliffe. Both are very suspicious.

9) Wang Junxia is World Champion in the marathon, Olympic Gold medalist, and ran 3:51 for the 1500 meters. That's a tough combination to beat. What are Radcliffe and Kastor's 1500 meter times?

You are really suggesting that Kastor is better than Wang Junxia?????

like Wang, I question how clean Bekele or many of the top runners are.

Another example, of Americans taking the easy way out.

Ethiopians can sprint the final 400m in 53 (men) or sub 60 (women) AND NOT EVEN BE BREATHING HARD!

Let's just blame those poor ol' Africans and Chinese for being too dang good, that they don't even breathe hard. After all it must be YOU who knows the best way to train and not them.

With all those "scientific" reports and all.