To run well, you need to run a lot. This is a fact that I'm also curious about—how to run while using the least amount of energy. Many people are particularly interested in how to achieve a sub-3 hour marathon. If you try on the Alpha Fly shoes, you'll understand. Hello, I'm Andrew S. from Marathon. Today, we have two experts who specialize in analyzing breathing, which is arguably the most important factor in determining running levels, along with running economy. Nice to meet you both. 

First, could you please introduce yourselves? I am Kim Jin-mo, the CEO of Newma. Our company, Newma, is developing next-generation breathing analysis devices. For the past 30 years, breathing analysis has been the standard in assessing athletic performance, but we are working to make this technology much more accessible.

We are now preparing for commercialization. Hello, I am Kim Hyun-ji, a doctoral student in the Department of Physical Education and Sports Engineering at Seoul National University. It's nice to meet you. Also, the person at the end, yes, I am Coach Bae Seong-hoon, the head coach of Andrew Lace. Today's topic is quite heavy and difficult, but I believe it is essential information to know. Especially for runners, and not just runners, but also athletes who require endurance for long periods of exercise and many recreational sports participants, this information is crucial. So today, we have two experts here, and you really need to share everything with us. Yes, understood. It would be good to briefly introduce the three main elements of running, often referred to as VO2 max, running economy, and lactate threshold. Explaining them metaphorically would be helpful.

I think it will resonate the most. When we talk about brute max, it is similar to engine displacement in a car. For sports, engine displacement is extremely important for generating instant power. And even the concept of running economy is often discussed among the general public these days. If we compare it to a car, it is closer to the idea of fuel efficiency. However, sports cars are not known for their good fuel efficiency. Therefore, when we run, we need to consider not only brute max but also running economy. Lastly, regarding the anaerobic threshold, no matter how much a person wants to improve their fuel efficiency, their body may not be able to support it. This means that, ultimately, a limit is established as substances called assets accumulate internally. Thus, we must also examine the anaerobic threshold to understand its impact on the individual.

We can diagnose to some extent, so we are looking at these three indicators: T-max, running economy, and lactate threshold. If T-max is high, it is natural that the probability of performing well is higher, but there are many people with low T-max who also perform well. Yes, I have seen a few examples. The reason for this, as mentioned earlier, is that various factors can be at play; some may have good running economies, for instance. Yes, that's correct. In a study conducted over a period of 12 years prior to 2003, they tracked a marathon runner who set a world record in that year. They observed how that person's indicators changed over those 12 years. Paula Radcliffe, a groundbreaking figure in women's marathon running, was tracked, and it was found that her T-max did not increase at all over the 12 years.

However, what has constantly risen is that the running economy continues to improve. The figures are such that the running economy is continuously improving, and it has reached its peak in 2003 when a world record was set, which has been maintained for 16 years. Now, what is running economy? Earlier, Max mentioned it was the person's maximum capacity. In that case, it measures how much energy a person consumes at a specific speed and under certain conditions, which is about the amount of oxygen intake. So, think of it in terms of oxygen intake at maximum speed. It measures how economically the body can run. However, from my experience as a coach and having worked with athletes for a long time, there are many ambiguous aspects. For instance, the posture might look good, but I wonder if the economy is good. It's challenging to make that judgment.

Is there a part that you mentioned? As you said, there are many factors that can come into play. There is a lot of research related to running form and running economy, and it has been very popular. The question is, how can we enhance running economy the most? Especially for beginners or those who are just starting their training, there can be a dramatic improvement. Simply focusing on form, thinking, Oh, now I'm looking at my running economy, is one approach. However, it is commonly known that athletes maintain a cadence of around 180 to 190. The ideal cadence is often cited as 180. There was a review that summarized about 56 studies on this topic. In that review, it was found that cadence has a much greater impact on running economy than other forms.

It's a significant factor, so I'm curious: if we consider 180 to 190, it seems like a very fast rotation would naturally be lighter and better. However, since people are all different—heights vary, and calf and foot sizes differ—can this be applied to everyone? Were there any limitations in that research? 

That's right. The subjects naturally vary by race, gender, and age, which is one of the challenging aspects of sports research. Ultimately, since each person is different, finding a way to extract something general from that is crucial. So, we accumulate various studies to identify commonalities. As you mentioned, if someone is too short or has very short legs, then naturally...

이상적인 케이던스는 조금씩 달라질 수 있는데, 너무 낮고 흔히 무겁게 뛴다고 하잖아요. 무겁게 뛴다면 올리는 방향을 고민해 볼 수 있도록 제한을 많이 하고 있습니다. 호흡이 가장 안정된 상태를 유지하는 것에 초점을 맞추는 것이 좋을 것 같아요. 그러니까 러닝 이코노미라도 한다면, 어떻게 측정하는 거야? 뭐, 어떻게 계산하는 거야? 이렇게 하면 너무 어렵잖아요. 그런데 저희가 실제 데이터를 측정해 보면, 호흡이 고르고 안정된 사람의 이코노미가 가장 좋습니다. 그러니까 두 명이 같이 뛰는데, 한 명은 헐떡이고, 한 명은 수다쟁이처럼 이렇게 호흡이 안정돼서 얘기를 할 수 있잖아요. 그렇게 수다쟁이가 훨씬 이코노미가 좋아요. 내가 이코노미를 개선하면서 뛰고 싶다라고 했을 때, 가장 깊게 생각해야 되는 것은 내가 어떤...

When considering how to run with the right stride and posture to stabilize my breathing, it seems that a change in the direction of calculating economy could occur. When breathing is stabilized, there are many studies connecting cadence and breathing frequency. Naturally, when landing, a person's breathing must follow suit. For example, there is a frequency where one might inhale a few times and then exhale a few times. Earlier, you mentioned the difference between people with unstable and stable breathing. Research shows that beginners tend to have a one-to-one ratio, meaning they are gasping quite a bit. However, elite marathon runners maintain a 2:1 or 2:2 ratio consistently from start to finish. If we say it's a 2:1 ratio, does that mean inhaling twice and exhaling once?

That's right. So, at a 2:2 ratio, it’s about 2:1, and when it’s 1:1, it becomes very fast. In that case, the amount is too small, so a proper amount needs to be continuously ventilated. If it drops below that, it’s too fast, and the amount is too little. I think a 2:1 ratio would be the best. What was really interesting was that I had been doing some training methods on my own while vlogging on YouTube. Since I’m an athlete, I felt very comfortable talking at a certain pace. However, I received comments that were not about the training methods but rather asking how I could keep talking while running like that. But when I thought about it for a moment, I realized that I was probably using a 2:2 breathing technique while I was speaking. I wonder how the numbers will change later compared to the current figures.

It's really hard to confirm whether things have improved, but I think it's very important to quantify these aspects and show them properly in the future. It seems that there is no luck involved at all. I don't think there is any movement for improving economy. To run well, you need to run a lot. And regarding running, the most important thing is the pace; you mentioned that this is crucial. I hadn't been able to articulate that before. I also think that just running a lot is essential. This is something that should be a basic default, but I feel like I've been looking for it in other places. The shoes can also play a very significant role in improving economy, right? That's true. However, my colleague has done quite a bit of research related to running. It would be great if you could share some insights about the running shoes you actually worked with. In my opinion, running...

One of the reasons why the economy has become famous, even in the realm of running shoes, is that as shoe technology has improved, everyone has connected the quality of these shoes to running. It seems that Nike was the starting point for this trend. Nike has actually executed very aggressive and effective marketing. Starting in 2017, they launched the Sub 2 project, aiming to have a very famous marathon runner complete a marathon in under two hours. In this project, it wasn't just about researching shoes; they also set up various devices to minimize wind resistance, including surrounding the runner with other people. However, through this marketing, what Nike ultimately wanted to convey was that when everything is the same—people and speed—then the shoes make the difference.

When the conditions are the same and we wear our shoes, marketing claims that running economy decreases by 4%. This was an impressive marketing strategy, and since then, there have been numerous studies examining how running economy improves with various types of shoes or whether it suffers a slight decline. I was also curious about how the form changes when running in the Alpha Fly and whether those natural changes in form contributed to improvements in running economy. In fact, we compared very thin minimalist shoes, which everyone knows about, with well-cushioned regular shoes, like the Alpha Fly, to see how they performed during running.

The difference in degree was such that when I tried it, it didn't reach 4. However, the most noticeable change there was what is commonly referred to as the forefoot technique. In fact, landing is one of the most controversial topics, but I was curious about the change in landing when wearing shoes. When I wore Nike's Alpha Fly, I found that even those who used to run with a rear-foot strike tended to show a more forefoot strike pattern compared to other minimalist shoes or those with more cushioning. So, the 4% improvement is something I'm curious about; in actual marathon records, how much does this translate to? I'm curious about that. The 4% improvement is actually quite minimal. There have been studies that calculated this, showing that the improvement through the shoes is 4%.

If you improve your marathon record by about 3 to 4 minutes, that’s significant for elite runners. However, this estimation is based on elite runners maintaining the same pace from start to finish. Amateur runners find it challenging to keep a consistent performance throughout the race, so they might see a smaller improvement, perhaps around 1 to 2 minutes, but it’s still worth aiming for. Now, for those currently running around 3 hours and 1 to 2 minutes, you could consider using the Nike Vaporfly for a sub-3 hour marathon. If you try on the Alphafly, you might have some high expectations. For example, Paula Radcliffe, whom I mentioned earlier, trained for over ten years and only improved her running economy by a little over 10%. This shows how challenging it is to shave off a few minutes at such a high level, as breaking world records is incredibly difficult.

As the decision is made, it turns out that such athletes cannot increase their performance by 4% just by changing a pair of shoes. When wondering why this person isn't affected, it's important to understand that there is a more complex human relationship at play. Economy is a very interesting and engaging topic, and especially for long-distance events, it seems to be one of the most significant indicators that has a substantial impact. 

What kind of training can improve economy? The representative example would be LSD, which stands for Long Slow Distance. Additionally, consistently jogging can also help improve economy. It seems to be a cycle: initially, you raise the economy, then increase your anaerobic threshold, and afterward, boost your VO2 max, but ultimately, the training should aim to enhance the economy again. However, it's like building a tower; if you only focus on one aspect and extend it too much, it can become problematic.

It seems like we need to build up gradually, adding a little bit at a time, creating conditions, and then stacking it all up again. Overall, it feels like it builds up quite solidly. When we look at the data, ultimately, a very good runner is one who has a well-balanced approach. Over time, there are various ways to grow, such as interval training and long, slow distance runs (LSD). In the end, you shouldn't focus on just one method. If you understand your goals, it will be easier to determine the appropriate intensity and duration. I think that's the best advice you've given. In our country, especially being sensitive to trends, if something is said to be good, everyone tends to do it. For example, if endurance running is said to be good, then everyone just keeps doing endurance runs. That's not the case; running is a very complex sport, so there's a need to diversify our training. Yes, these days, following the trends, combat sports are also in vogue. So now it's about that too.

While fighting only for a week, it can be seen that improving records is practically difficult. If you only fight, you might lose weight quite quickly, but the lower threshold will probably only be reached in Zone 2, and it seems that it will end there. That's good, but as far as I know about Oat Max, Hwang Young-jo, who is in his early 80s, might say to his friend next to him, You're better than me by 5, right? If he says something like that, it could actually be true.

달리기 실력을 바꿀 수 있는 한 가지! 러닝 이코노미 (Running Economy)

달리기 실력을 바꿀 수 있는 한 가지! 러닝 이코노미 (Running Economy)

스크립트