So with Threshold Training we are building our resistance to fatigue by improving our ability to produce lactate more efficiently.
So while aimless and endless laps were and still are pretty silly for most field sport, there were elements that were somewhat useful. The problem with a lot of field sport training is coaches would bring players too quickly over the lactate Threshold and not give them enough time to recover. As I have mention many times before and still see at the highest levels, this often manifests itself in teams being slow starters (lack of sharpness and residual fatigue) but coming strong mid way through 2nd halves. I have even heard head coaches and fitness coaches alike being congratulated on the teams fitness because “ they finished strongly”. Finishing strong is not the only sign of a well conditioned team. In fact for me if that’s the only string to the bow then it’s a negative and a sign of a poorly conditioned team.
And not everything we do has to be short to medium intervals or HIIT. It just needs to be controlled and given the usual sensible treatment of layering up and suitable recovery times.
Threshold Training is athlete relevant, but I also think sport relevant. For a distance runner it might be 20/30/40 min runs. However for field sport I start with 3 sets of 5 mins with 3 min breaks.
One thing I noticed about the explosive approach as opposed to the bike approach is within the 3 mins rest I was recovered quicker, looking at my watch and wanting to go again with the explosive method. Is this physiological or psychological? Is my dislike of the bike a factor? Or am I hitting my Threshold hard enough with the explosive method? My heart rate levels are the same. So I probably do need to go deeper on measuring. However this study ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4831896/ )
amongst others indicate HR is a good barometer and correlation of Lactate Threshold.
To be continued......