Physical and training characteristics of top-class marathon runners

Abstract

This study compares the physical and training characteristics of top-class marathon runners (TC), i.e., runners having a personal best of less than 2 h 11 min for males and 2 h 32 min for females, respectively, versus high-level (HL) (< 2 h 16 min and < 2 h 38 min).
Twenty marathon runners (five TC and HL in each gender) ran 10 km at their best marathon performance velocity (vMarathon) on a level road. This velocity was the target velocity for the Olympic trials they performed 8 wk later. After a rest of 6 min, they ran an all-out 1000-m run to determine the peak oxygen consumption on flat road (.VO(2peak)).
Marathon performance time (MPT) was inversely correlated with .VO(2peak). (r = -0.73, P < 0.01) and predicted 59% of the variance of MPT. Moreover, TC male marathon runners were less economical because their energy cost of running (Cr) at marathon velocity was significantly higher than that of their counterparts (212 +/- 17 vs 195 +/- 14 mL.km(-1).kg(-1), P = 0.03). For females, no difference was observed for the energetic characteristics between TC and HL marathon runners. However, the velocity reached during the 1000-m run performed after the 10-km run at vMarathon was highly correlated with MPT (r = -0.85, P < 0.001). Concerning training differences, independent of the gender, TC marathon runners trained for more total kilometers per week and at a higher velocity (velocity over 3000 m and 10,000 m).
The high energy output seems to be the discriminating factor for top-class male marathon runners who trained at higher relative intensities.

Full text

Physical and training characteristics of
top-class marathon runners
VE
´RONIQUE L. BILLAT, ALEXANDRE DEMARLE, JEAN SLAWINSKI, MARIO PAIVA, and
JEAN-PIERRE KORALSZTEIN
Faculty of Sport Science, University of Lille 2, Lille, FRANCE; Faculty of Sport Science, University of Porto, Porto,
PORTUGAL; and Sport Medicine Center C.C.A.S., Paris, FRANCE
ABSTRACT
BILLAT, V. L., A. DEMARLE, J. SLAWINSKI, M. PAIVA, and J.-P. KORALSZTEIN. Physical and training characteristics of
top-class marathon runners. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc., Vol. 33, No. 12, 2001, pp. 2089–2097. Purpose: This study compares the physical
and training characteristics of top-class marathon runners (TC), i.e., runners having a personal best of less than2h11minformales
and2h32minforfemales, respectively, versus high-level (HL) (⬍2 h 16 min and ⬍2 h 38 min). Methods: Twenty marathon runners
(five TC and HL in each gender) ran 10 km at their best marathon performance velocity (vMarathon) on a level road. This velocity
was the target velocity for the Olympic trials they performed 8 wk later. After a rest of 6 min, they ran an all-out 1000-m run to
determine the peak oxygen consumption on flat road (V
˙O
2peak
). Results: Marathon performance time (MPT) was inversely correlated
with V
˙O
2peak
(r ⫽⫺0.73, P⬍0.01) and predicted 59% of the variance of MPT. Moreover, TC male marathon runners were less
economical because their energy cost of running (Cr) at marathon velocity was significantly higher than that of their counterparts (212
⫾17 vs 195 ⫾14 mL·km
⫺1
·kg
⫺1
,P⫽0.03). For females, no difference was observed for the energetic characteristics between TC
and HL marathon runners. However, the velocity reached during the 1000-m run performed after the 10-km run at vMarathon was
highly correlated with MPT (r ⫽⫺0.85, P⬍0.001). Concerning training differences, independent of the gender, TC marathon runners
trained for more total kilometers per week and at a higher velocity (velocity over 3000 m and 10,000 m). Conclusion: The high energy
output seems to be the discriminating factor for top-class male marathon runners who trained at higher relative intensities. Key Words:
MARATHON, OXYGEN CONSUMPTION, TRAINING, GENDER
In a previous study, di Prampero (11) showed that the
marathon running speed (vMarathon in m·min
⫺1
) could
be predicted i) from the energy cost of running (Cr)
measured by the oxygen cost of running (mL·kg
⫺1
·km
⫺1
),
ii) from the subject’s maximal oxygen consumption
(V
˙O
2max
in mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
), and iii) from the maximal
fraction that can be sustained throughout the race (FR in
percent) according to equation 1:
vMarathon ⫽FRV
˙O2max *Cr
–1 (1)
Joyner (18) has estimated that the fastest time for the
marathon predicted by this model is1h57min58s(vs2h
5 min 42 s in the year 2000). This was calculated for a
hypothetical subject who had a V
˙O
2max
of 84
mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
, a lactate threshold (i.e., the first increase in
blood lactate above baseline, according to Farrel et al. (12))
at 85% V
˙O
2max
and a low energy cost of running (204
mL·kg
⫺1
·km
⫺1
). Joyner estimated that the marathon veloc-
ity could be slightly above the lactate threshold velocity at
90% of V
˙O
2max
. For this estimation, he took into account the
2–3% increase in V
˙O
2
that would occur between 10 min to
2 h and the 7–8% increase in Cr because of the wind
resistance over ground compared with treadmill running.
However, we do not know if all these three factors that
contribute to marathon performance are exclusive indepen-
dent variables. For example, do physiological characteristics
associated with a high V
˙O
2max
tend to coexpress with char-
acteristics tending to reduce running economy? Indeed, La-
cour et al. (20) showed that athletes who exhibited the
highest velocity associated with V
˙O
2max
(the ratio of
V
˙O
2max
/Cr) were those who had a high V
˙O
2max
but a middle
value of Cr. However, no study has measured FR and Cr in
real conditions: on the road and at the marathon velocity.
Furthermore, in treadmill-based studies, FR has been cal-
culated on the basis of V
˙O
2max
tests performed during
inclined, not flat, treadmill running (33).
At the end of spring 2000, when the Olympic trials for
Sydney were finished, 277 male and 225 female marathon
runners performed a marathon in less than2h16minand
2 h 39 min, respectively. Among these high-level runners,
only 35% (98 males and 72 females) had satisfied the
Olympic minima set by European countries such as France
(2 h 11 min for males and2h32minforfemales). No study
has examined what physiological and training factors dif-
ferentiate high-level (HL) from top-class (TC) marathon
runners.
Top-class male marathon runners tend to also have high-
level personal best during middle distance (runs ⬍3min
40 s over 1500 m, ⬍7 min 40 s over 3000 m, and ⬍13 min
40 s over 5 km). We hypothesize that they have a high
V
˙O
2max
and that they trained at relatively faster velocities
than their high-level counterparts, especially at velocities
0195-9131/01/3312-2089/$3.00/0
MEDICINE & SCIENCE IN SPORTS & EXERCISE
®
Copyright © 2001 by the American College of Sports Medicine
Submitted for publication October 2000.
Accepted for publication March 2001.
2089

close to their velocity over 3000–10,000 m, eliciting
V
˙O
2max
(5). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to
compare the energetic and training factors that contribute to
the marathon performance (time) of top-class (2 h 6 min 34 s
to2h11min59sformales and2h25minto2h30min
59 s for females) versus high-level marathon runners (2 h 12
minto2h16minformales and2h31minto2h38min
for females).
METHODS
Subjects
The subjects belong to the national teams of two Euro-
pean countries: Portugal (N⫽11) and France (N⫽9). The
experiments were performed 8 wk before the Olympic trials.
The two groups included 10 top-class and 10 high-level
runners, with five males and five females in each group for
each level. There were four Portuguese and one French
among the TC males and three Portuguese and two French
among the TC females. For the high-level group there were
three Portuguese and two French and one Portuguese and
four French for the males and females, respectively.
The division between the two levels of performance (i.e.,
the personal best for the marathon) was the Olympic minima
set by France (2 h 12 min for men and2h31minfor
women). This corresponds to ⫹5% of the world best per-
formance for men and ⫹7% for females (or the 100th
performance in 1999). They train at least 10–14 times·wk
⫺1
(140–200 km). Before participation in this study, all sub-
jects provided voluntary written informed consent and ap-
proval received by ethics committee in accordance with the
guidelines of the University of Lille.
Experimental Design
All experiments were carried out on a wind-still, level
road, between 10:00 h and 16:00 h according to each sub-
ject’s preference, at a temperature of 8°C in France and
15°C in Portugal.
Runners were asked to maintain the same habits as before
a marathon and were therefore not instructed to refrain from
caffeinated foods or beverages before running.
Runners followed a pacing cyclist traveling at the re-
quired velocity. The pace was checked every 200 m during
the first kilometer and then every 500 m. Visual marks were
set at 100-m intervals along the road for the first kilometer
and then every 500 m.
After a warm-up race, subjects ran 10 km on a level road
at their target marathon velocity for the upcoming Olympics
trials race (Table 1). Six minutes after the 10-km run at
marathon velocity (vMarathon), the subject had to run as
fast as possible over 1000 m to determine V
˙O
2peak
(2). The
average velocity over 1000 m was termed v1000m and was
expressed as a percentage of the marathon velocity.
Data Collection Procedures
Blood lactate samples were collected 1) after the warm-
up, 2) at the third kilometer of the 10-km vMarathon run
(when the runners stopped for 15 s), 3) 1 and 5 min after
completion of the 10-km run at vMarathon run, and 4) 1 and
3 min after completion of the maximal 1000-m run. The
highest of these postrun blood lactate values was taken as
the maximal blood lactate for 10 km at vMarathon and
v1000m. The capillary blood sample was obtained from the
fingertip and immediately analyzed for lactate concentration
(YSI 27 analyzer, Yellow Springs Instruments, Yellow
Springs, OH).
Measurement of V
˙O
2
was performed throughout each test
using a telemetric system weighing 0.7 kg, which was worn
on the back and abdomen (K4 b
2
, COSMED, Rome, Italy).
Expired gases were measured, breath by breath, and aver-
aged every 5 s. The response times of the oxygen and carbon
dioxide analyzers take less than 120 ms to reach 90% of the
flow sample. The ventilation range of the flowmeter is 0 to
300 L·min
⫺1
. The time delay of the gas analyzer (time
necessary for the gas to transit through the sampling line
before being analyzed) is about 500 ms. This time delay is
automatically measured and is considered in the calculations
when a delay calibration procedure is performed according
to the manufacturer’s specifications. The algorithms used in
the K4 b
2
have been developed according to Beaver et al.
and Wasserman et al. (3,32). Before each test, the O
2
anal-
ysis system was calibrated using ambient air, whose partial
TABLE 1. Physiological responses during the 10-km run at vMarathon among top-class and high-level male and female runners.
Factors
Males PTC vs HL
among Males
Females PTC vs HL
among Females
P
between
GendersTC HL TC HL
V
˙O
2
@3km(mL䡠min
–1
)70.1 ⫾7.9 64.6 ⫾3.9 0.17 58.5 ⫾3.9 56.8 ⫾4.5 0.60 0.03
V
˙O
2
@10km(mL䡠min
–1
)71.4 ⫾7.2 63.7 ⫾5.7 0.09 55.8 ⫾4.7 57.1 ⫾6.5 0.83 0.03
HR@3km(beats䡠min
–1
)161 ⫾3 170 ⫾6 0.01 159 ⫾9 166 ⫾3 0.09 0.09
HR @ 10 km (beats䡠min
–1
)167 ⫾5 176 ⫾7 0.04 165 ⫾12 171 ⫾4 0.60 0.17
Lactate @ start (mmol䡠L
–1
)2.4 ⫾1.0 1.9 ⫾0.7 0.67 1.5 ⫾0.3 1.9 ⫾0.6 0.34 0.45
Lactate@3km(mmol䡠L
–1
)7.7 ⫾6.7 4.6 ⫾1.0 0.01 3.7 ⫾1.5 4.4 ⫾2.0 0.46 0.01
Lactate @ 10 km (mmol䡠L
–1
)10.0 ⫾3.0 7.2 ⫾1.2 0.17 8.7 ⫾4.1 8.0 ⫾3.3 0.60 0.91
RER@3km 0.92 ⫾0.01 0.98 ⫾0.08 0.11 0.94 ⫾0.01 0.95 ⫾0.05 0.75 0.86
RER @ 10 km 0.94 ⫾0.01 1.00 ⫾0.08 0.11 0.97 ⫾0.07 0.95 ⫾0.08 0.59 0.91
␶
@ v1000 (s) 11 ⫾714⫾6 0.12 12 ⫾616⫾7 0.15 0.13
⌬V
˙O
2
6–3min @ vMarathon
(mL䡠min
–1
)
125 ⫾250 100 ⫾173 0.99 30 ⫾10 100 ⫾20 0.08 0.42
V
˙O
2
, HR, Lactate, RER@3kmareV
˙O
2
, heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and rate of expiratory ratio at the third kilometer during the 10-km run at vMarathon; V
˙O
2
, HR, Lactate,
RER@10kmareV
˙O
2
, heart rate, blood lactate concentration, and rate of expiratory ratio at the tenth kilometer during the 10-km run at vMarathon; ⌬V
˙O
2
6–3 min @ vMarathon is
the difference (in mL䡠min
–1
) of rate of oxygen uptake between the sixth and the third minutes during the 10-km run at vMarathon;
␶
@ v1000 is the time constant (in seconds) of
oxygen kinetics during the all-out 1000-m run after the 10-km run at vMarathon.
2090
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org

O
2
composition was assumed to be 20.9% and a gas of
known CO
2
concentration (5%) (K4 b
2
instruction manual).
The calibration of the turbine flowmeter of the K4 b
2
was
performed with a 3-L syringe (Quinton Instruments, Seattle,
WA). In the 1000-m exhaustive run, V
˙O
2peak
was defined as
the highest V
˙O
2
obtained in two successive 15-s interval
runs.
Data Analyses
Training log analysis. The final 12 wk of specific
training before the marathon trials was analyzed from the
training log of the trainer. In addition, the runner was asked
to describe his or her typical week. Training sessions were
classified according to their velocity: less than vMarathon,
equal to vMarathon, equal to v1/2-marathon (21.1 km),
v10,000m, and v3000m. The total distance and number of
sessions run per week were also computed.
Oxygen kinetics parameters. The V
˙O
2
kinetics dur-
ing the all-out 1000-m run was best described by a mono
exponential function according to the following equation:
V
˙O2(t) ⫽V
˙O2baseline ⫹A*(1–e–(t/
␶
))(2)
where V
˙O
2
(t) is the oxygen uptake at time (t), the V
˙O
2
baseline is the oxygen uptake at the end of the warm-up, A
is the amplitude of the oxygen uptake, and
␶
is the time
constant.
Statistical Analysis
The nonparametric Mann-Whitney test was used to
compare top-class and high-level groups of performance
within each gender (four groups of five subjects only).
After having checked the equality of variance, an inde-
pendent t-test was used to compare physiological char-
acteristics and training logs between genders, since the
sample was sufficient (two groups of 10 subjects). Cor-
relation between energetic parameters and marathon per-
formance time for each of the groups were determined
using the Pearson product moment correlation coeffi-
cient, and their relationships with performance were eval-
uated using a stepwise regression (Fto enter ⫽4).
Results are presented as mean ⫾standard deviation (SD).
Statistical significance was set at P⬍0.05.
RESULTS
Velocity was very constant, since the coefficient of vari-
ation was less than 2% from the first to the tenth kilometer.
All the runners started faster during the first half kilometer
as in a race (⫹5⫾2% of vMarathon).
Factors that Discriminate Top-Class from
High-Level Marathon Performance in Male and
Female Runners
Males. Top-class (TC) male marathon runners had a
significantly higher V
˙O
2max
than their high-level (HL)
counterparts (79.6 ⫾6.2 vs 67.1 ⫾8.1 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
,
P⫽0.04) (Table 1). Moreover, TC male marathon run-
ners were less economical, since their Cr at marathon
velocity was significantly higher than those of their HL
counterparts (210 ⫾12 vs 195 ⫾4mL·kg
⫺1
·km
⫺1
,P⫽
0.009). Energy cost of running was, therefore, not sig-
nificantly correlated with marathon performance time
(MPT) (r ⫽⫺0.44, P⫽0.21) (Fig. 1). For males, the
factor that discriminated MPT during a marathon was
V
˙O
2peak
(r ⫽⫺0.77, P⫽0.007) (Fig. 2). V
˙O
2peak
deter-
mined 59% of the variance and was the only factor that
entered into the stepwise regression predicting MPT (Ta-
bles 2 and 3).
For males, the velocity in the all-out run over 1000 m
after the 10-km run at vMarathon was not a predictor for
performance (r ⫽⫺0.57, P⫽0.11).
Females. In females, neither V
˙O
2peak
nor Cr nor
FRV
˙O
2peak
were correlated with marathon performance
time, and none of these factors entered into the stepwise
regression (Tables 2 and 3).
FIGURE 1—Scatter plot depicting relation-
ship between MPT in minutes and energy
cost of running (mL·kg
ⴚ1
·min
ⴚ1
) measured
in a 10-km run at the velocity of the mara-
thon; r ⴝⴚ0.44, Pⴝ0.21.
CHARACTERISTICS OF TOP-CLASS MARATHON RUNNERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise姞
2091

However, for females the velocity for the all-out 1000-m
run was highly correlated with the mean performance time
(r ⫽⫺0.85, P⬍0.001) and entered in the stepwise regres-
sion predicting MPT (Tables 2 and 3). The fastest female
marathon runners were those who were still able to run fast
during the 1000-m run 6 min after the 10-km run at
vMarathon.
To take into account the fact that the oxygen consumption
does not increase proportionally to the body mass, we com-
puted the energy cost of running with an exponent less than
1 (4). It is interesting to note that there was no significant
difference in Cr, even when this was expressed in kg
⫺0.75
of
body mass (568 ⫾35 vs 539 ⫾52 mL·kg
⫺0.75
·km
⫺1
, for
males and females, respectively; P⫽0.2). Moreover, males
and females had the same ability to use a high fraction of
V
˙O
2peak
(FRV
˙O
2peak
being around 90%) (Table 2).
Surprisingly, V
˙O
2peak
was not correlated with the velocity
over 1000 m either for males (r ⫽0.38, P⫽0.31) or for
females (r ⫽0.19, P⫽0.59), which can explain why
independently v1000m is correlated with marathon perfor-
mance for females and V
˙O
2peak
is correlated with marathon
performance for males.
Relationship among the Three Physiological
Factors for Marathon Performance.
For males, there was a correlation between V
˙O
2peak
and Cr
(r ⫽0.65, P⫽0.04). This was also true for all 20 runners of
both genders; in addition, the energy cost of running was
correlated with the marathon performance time (r ⫽0.44, P⫽
0.05). This means that the runners who had the highest V
˙O
2peak
were also those who had the highest energy cost of running at
the marathon velocity, i.e., who were the less economical. For
males, V
˙O
2peak
was inversely related to FR (in percent
V
˙O
2peak
) over the marathon (r ⫽⫺0.65, P⫽0.05).
In summary, it seems that for TC males who run a marathon
at 19.5 ⫾0.3 km·h
⫺1
versus 19.0 ⫾0.1 km·h
⫺1
for their
high-level counterparts, the rate of oxygen consumption is
more determinant for performance than economy or endurance
(FRV
˙O
2peak
). For females running at 17.0 ⫾0.3 (TC) versus
16.2 ⫾0.3 km·h
⫺1
(HL), different combinations of FRV
˙O
2peak
and Cr seem to be possible, but the ability to run fast during an
all-out run over 1000 m after a 10-km run at vMarathon was
related to marathon performance time.
Cardiorespiratory and Metabolic Responses
during the 10-km Run at vMarathon and v1000m
V
˙O
2
measured during the last 3 min of the 10-km run at
vMarathon was not significantly different from that regis-
tered between the sixth and the ninth minutes. Cardiovas-
cular and metabolic responses (blood lactate and respiratory
exchange ratio (RER)) in the 10-km run were not signifi-
cantly different between gender or performance groups,
except for heart rate, which was significantly lower in the
top-class versus high-level group (Table 1). Moreover, there
was no increase in V
˙O
2
between the third and the sixth
minutes of the run at vMarathon; ⌬V
˙O
2
6–3 min, an indirect
measurement of the slow component of V
˙O
2
kinetics (32),
was less than 150 mL·min
⫺1
(Table 1). However, the run-
ners accumulated lactate throughout the 10-km run and had
a rather high RER, especially the HL runners (Table 1),
since two of them were above 1.
For all runners, the level of V
˙O
2
had already leveled off
during the all-out 1000-m run, meaning that it takes at
maximum 3 ⫻
␶
(i.e., 120 s) to reach a steady state of V
˙O
2
.
For the nine Portuguese male runners who had previously
performed an incremental test on the inclined treadmill
(10%, Paiva, M., personal communication), we observed
that V
˙O
2peak
measured over the 1000-m run was signifi-
cantly lower than on the treadmill (78.7 ⫾7.0 vs 71.7 ⫾11
mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
,t⫽2.46, P⫽0.03). Inclined treadmill
TABLE 2. Physiological factors for marathon performance time among top-class and high-level male and female runners.
Factors
Males PTC vs HL
among Males
Females PTC vs HL
among Females
P
between
GendersTC HL TC HL
Age (yr) 33.4 ⫾2.0 30.3 ⫾2.2 0.14 32.8 ⫾2.2 38.2 ⫾7.3 0.14 0.0004
Weight (kg) 60.2 ⫾2.9 59.3 ⫾2.5 0.53 50.2 ⫾3.6 49.2 ⫾4.3 0.67 0.0001
Height (cm) 172 ⫾2 172 ⫾2 0.75 164 ⫾6 161 ⫾5 0.29 0.0005
MPT (min) 129 ⫾2 133 ⫾1 0.008 149 ⫾3 156 ⫾3 0.02 0.0001
vMarathon (km䡠h
–1
)19.5 ⫾0.3 19.0 ⫾0.1 0.008 17.0 ⫾0.3 16.2 ⫾0.3 0.02 0.0001
vMarathon % v3000m 85.7 ⫾0.9 86.4 ⫾1.5 0.46 86.0 ⫾3.8 84.0 ⫾2.4 0.17 0.37
v1000m (km䡠h
–1
)22.0 ⫾0.8 21.8 ⫾0.2 0.62 20.0 ⫾0.9 18.5 ⫾0.9 0.03 0.0001
v3000m (km䡠h
–1
)22.8 ⫾0.6 22.0 ⫾0.5 0.04 19.7 ⫾0.9 19.3 ⫾0.3 0.40 0.0001
V
˙O
2peak
(mL䡠kg
–1
䡠min
–1
)79.6 ⫾6.2 67.1 ⫾8.1 0.04 61.2 ⫾4.8 62.6 ⫾5.0 0.46 0.009
FRV
˙O
2max
(%) 89.8 ⫾6.7 95.7 ⫾8.7 0.17 91.2 ⫾3.7 91.1 ⫾5.5 0.92 0.19
Cr (mL䡠kg
–1
䡠km
–1
)210 ⫾12 195 ⫾4 0.009 196 ⫾17 212 ⫾24 0.40 0.98
MPT, marathon performance time.
FIGURE 2—Scatter plot depicting relationship between MPT in min-
utes and V
˙O
2peak
measured in an exhaustive 1000-m run on flat road
(mL·kg
ⴚ1
·min
ⴚ1
); r ⴝⴚ0.77, Pⴝ0.007.
2092
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org

V
˙O
2max
and the V
˙O
2peak
value measured on a level road
over 1000 m are significantly correlated (r ⫽0.81, P⫽
0.005). Therefore, the V
˙O
2peak
obtained during the all-out
1000-m run was the maximal value that the runner could
reach on a flat road, since we measured fast oxygen kinetics
over the 1000 m (as for vMarathon) (between 20 and 40 s).
The RER (1.10 ⫾0.05) and blood lactate (10.8 ⫾2.1
mmol·L
⫺1
) measured at the end of the all-out 1000 m were
in accordance with criteria assessing the attainment of
V
˙O
2peak
(2) and the average velocity was nonsignificantly
different from their personal best at 3000 m (P⫽0.3).
Training Differences among Performance Level
and Gender
Training volume. For males, the total distance run per
week was significantly higher for top-class runners (206 ⫾
26 km vs 168 ⫾20 km, P⫽0.03) (Table 4). The total
distance run per week was not significantly different for
females between performance levels (166 ⫾11 vs 150 ⫾17
km for TC and HL, respectively, P⫽0.1). Top-class male
marathon runners trained 13.0 ⫾0.7 versus 11.5 ⫾1.7
sessions·wk
⫺1
for the male HL (P⫽0.09) and top-class
female marathon runners trained 12.2 ⫾0.4 sessions·wk
⫺1
versus 10.4 ⫾1.7 sessions·wk
⫺1
for their HL counterparts
(P⫽0.04).
Training intensity. For males, total weekly distance
run (206 ⫾26 km vs 168 ⫾20 km, P⫽0.03) and the
distance run at high intensity (v3000m or v10,000m) (20.4
⫾1.7 km vs 17.8 ⫾1.8 km, P⫽0.05) were significantly
higher for top-class male marathon runners compared with
their high-level counterparts (Table 4). However, both
groups performed 2 ⫾0 sessions·wk
⫺1
at v3000m or
v10,000m. The general training load distribution reported
by HL runners was identical to TC: 18% of total distance
run at velocities greater than vMarathon, 4% of distance run
at vMarathon, and 78% of total weekly distance less than
vMarathon. Only distance per training session was different.
Within the training volume performed at velocities greater
than or equal to v10,000m, training intensity was further
divided into intensities above or below v3000m. Top-class
male marathon runners run 40% of this distance at v3000m
(8.2 ⫾2.0 km) versus 41.5% (7.4 ⫾1.3 km) for their
high-level counterparts. For men, there was no correlation
between training characteristics reported in Table 4 and
marathon performance time.
For females, TC runners did not run a greater distance per
week at high velocities (ⱖv10,000m) (Table 4) but trained
more sessions at these velocities (2 ⫾0 sessions·wk
⫺1
vs
1.2 ⫾0.5 sessions·wk
⫺1
,P⫽0.04). Top-class females ran
a longer distance at their v3000m than their high-level
counterparts. Therefore, of the 14.8 km run at greater than
v10,000m, TC females run ~50% (7 ⫾1.4 km) at v3000m,
compared with 28% (3.9 ⫾1.3 km) for the HL females.
Therefore, top-class females ran faster than their HL coun-
terparts (more sessions at v3000m) in more sessions per
week. Performance was correlated for females with the
distance run at v3000m ⫹v10,000m (r ⫽⫺0.79, P⫽
0.004) and the number of sessions run per week (r ⫽⫺0.75,
P⫽0.01).
During this period of 12 wk of specific training before the
trials, it is worth noting that, independent of the marathon
performance time or gender, very few runners train at the
specific marathon velocity (Table 4).
There is a greater difference in training between genders
in top-class compared with high-level runners. Indeed, top-
class male marathon runners ran more kilometers per week
at v3000m or v10,000m (U ⫽7.5, P⫽0.03) and at the
marathon velocity compared with the TC females (U ⫽3.0,
P⫽0.03). Moreover, TC males ran more kilometers per
week than TC females (206 ⫾26 km vs 166 ⫾11 km, U ⫽
0.05, P⫽0.01) in a nonsignificantly greater number of
sessions (13.0 ⫾0.7 sessions·wk
⫺1
vs 12.2 sessions·wk
⫺1
⫾0.4, U ⫽4.5, P⫽0.06).
In high-level marathon runners, males did not cover a
greater distance per week compared with females (U ⫽0.5,
P⫽0.1) and did not practice for more sessions per week (U
⫽6, P⫽0.3). However, they performed more sessions per
week at v3000m or v10,000m (2.0 ⫾0vs1.4⫾0, U ⫽5,
P⫽0.04) and covered significantly greater distances at
these velocities (17.8 ⫾1.8 km vs 12.4 ⫾2.3 km, U ⫽5,
P⫽0.04). In these weekly kilometers run at v3000m or
v10,000m, males ran almost twice (180%) the number of
kilometers than females at v3000m.
DISCUSSION
We have, first, to underline that we have focused this
investigation on national and internationally elite runners
which are, by definition, few in number. The small sample
sizes (N⫽5 for each gender and group of performance)
have the effect of tending to overestimate the size of pop-
ulation differences, since the only group differences that are
detected are the large ones.
TABLE 3. Stepwise regression for marathon time performance factors in top-class vs high-level runners, male and female.
All the Runners Males Females
Partial
Correlation
Coefficient F to Enter
Partial
Correlation
Coefficient F to Enter
Partial
Correlation
Coefficient F to Enter
V
˙O
2peak
(mL䡠kg
–1
䡠min
–1
)–0.62 10.7 –0.77 9.87 0.31 0.84
v1000m (km䡠h
–1
)–0.93 116.7 –0.57 3.33 –0.85 20.3
FRV
˙O
2peak
(%) –0.17 0.5 0.53 2.77 –0.39 1.42
Cr (mL䡠kg
–1
䡠km
–1
)0.12 0.23 –0.41 1.38 0.40 1.56
MPT ⫽278.4–6.63 v1000 MPT ⫽145.2–0.19 V
˙O
2max
MPT ⫽216.67–3.33 v1000
MPT, marathon performance time (in minutes).
CHARACTERISTICS OF TOP-CLASS MARATHON RUNNERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise姞
2093

This study suggests that top-class male runners (⬍2h12
min) have a higher V
˙O
2peak
than their high-level counter-
parts (⬎2 h 12 min, ⬍2 h 16 min) with a significantly
higher energy cost of running. Indeed, in this group of elite
runners, those athletes who had the highest V
˙O
2peak
were
also those who had the higher energy cost of running. This
finding has not previously been reported in the literature.
However, comparison of V
˙O
2peak
obtained during flat, level
road running with inclined treadmill V
˙O
2max
testing may be
important in this context. Moreover, V
˙O
2peak
was highly
correlated with performance in males. For females, neither
V
˙O
2peak
nor Cr or FRV
˙O
2
peak were significantly different
between the TC and HL runners. It appears that for females,
different combinations of V
˙O
2max
, FRV
˙O
2max
, and energy
cost of running (within certain minimum constraints) can be
utilized to achieve world class performance. However, it
should be underlined that in the present study, the best
females had a performance time equal to 102.0% of the best
world performance, compared with 100.8% for the best
male. It is conceivable that this difference in relative per-
formance level has influenced the comparison.
The energetic factors for top-class performance
in the marathon. In males, the top-class male marathon
runners had a V
˙O
2peak
almost equal to 80 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
.
Hagan et al. (15) reported a V
˙O
2max
of 88.8 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
in a marathon runner performing the marathon in2h19min.
This was a rather high V
˙O
2max
value for such marathon
performance time, even if the runner had a low FR and was
not economical (high Cr). Moreover, these authors mea-
sured V
˙O
2max
during level treadmill running. In our subjects
who had previously performed an inclined treadmill V
˙O
2max
test (N⫽9), the V
˙O
2peak
measured during the post-10 km
flat 1000-m test was ~10% lower (Paiva, M., personal
communication). In previous studies, where elite athletes
have been defined as athletes with personal records below
2 h 30 min, V
˙O
2max
was reported to be between 71
mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
(N⫽10; average MPT,2h23min) (8) and
74.2 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
(N⫽5; average MPT,2h16min)
(31) or 74.1 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
(N⫽8; average MPT,2h15
min) (27) and 79.0 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
(N⫽13; average MPT,
2 h 13 min) (10). However, all these studies measured
V
˙O
2max
on an inclined treadmill under rested conditions.
Our results raise questions about how V
˙O
2peak
in runners
should be measured if the goal is to reflect flat course
running capacity.
The new finding in this study is that V
˙O
2peak
discrimi-
nates top-class male (2 h 9 min 20 s ⫾2 min 0 s), from
high-level male marathoners (2 h 11 min 54 s ⫾42 s).
Moreover, when we consider males within the same group
(2h6minto2h16min), performance (time over the
marathon) is correlated with V
˙O
2peak
. This is in opposition
to the results of Costill (6), who reported that V
˙O
2peak
was
not correlated with performance in a group of marathon
runners with a performance time below2h30min(r⫽
0.01). Costill et al. (9) also reported a relatively low V
˙O
2max
in some top-class marathon runners such as the famous
world best performance of Derick Clayton in 1969, who had
a personal best of2h8min33sdespite a V
˙O
2max
of only
69.7 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
. Similarly, Sjo¨din and Jacobs (29)
reported a V
˙O
2max
value of 67 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
in a runner
performing the marathon in2h10min. This is the reason
why, in the 1980s, numerous studies focused on the frac-
tional utilization of V
˙O
2max
during the marathon and on the
energy cost of running. In this present study, we found no
relationship between the energy cost of running or FR and
performance in either males or females. However, for males,
even if the RER was not significantly different between TC
and HL (0.94 ⫾0.01 vs 1.00 ⫾0.08, P⫽0.1, probably
because of the small sample sizes), this difference would be
relevant to performance in a 2-h race, where the glycogen
utilization rate becomes crucial. However, we obliged the
runners to run at a constant velocity, and it is uncertain if it
was a real advantage, since they could not have any recov-
ery. Moreover, it has even been reported that the K4 b
2
apparatus (700 g), which is worn on the back, is negligible
for Cr (14); this could have increased the constraint of the
TABLE 4. Training log among top-class and high-level male and female runners.
a
Training Factors
Males PTC vs HL
among Males
Females PTC vs HL
among Females
P
between
GendersTC HL TC HL
Total weekly distance (km) 206 ⫾26 168 ⫾20 0.03 166 ⫾11 150 ⫾17 0.10 0.01
Number of sessions per week (N) 13.0 ⫾0.7 11.5 ⫾1.7 0.09 12.2 ⫾0.4 10.4 ⫾1.7 0.04 0.11
Duration of long training session
(min)
125 ⫾11 116 ⫾27 0.90 113 ⫾25 89 ⫾22 0.15 0.07
Weekly distance run at vMarathon
(km)
8.0 ⫾0 7.0 ⫾4.2 0.99 12.0 ⫾3.0 9.0 ⫾1.4 0.24 0.07
(N⫽3) (N⫽2) (N⫽3) (N⫽2)
Weekly distance run @
v1/2 Marathon (km)
18.0 ⫾0 12.5 ⫾3.5 0.22 11.3 ⫾2.5 8.2 ⫾1.7 0.04 0.04
(N⫽1) (N⫽2) (N⫽4)
Weekly distance run @
v10,000m (km)
12.2 ⫾1.8 10.4 ⫾0.9 0.06 7.8 ⫾1.8 8.5 ⫾3.0 0.71 0.003
(N⫽4)
Weekly distance run @
v3000m (km)
8.2 ⫾2.0 7.4 ⫾1.3 0.34 7.0 ⫾1.4 3.9 ⫾1.3 0.03 0.04
Weekly sessions run @
v3000m ⫹v10,000m (N)
2.0 ⫾0 2.0 ⫾0 0.99 2.0 ⫾0 1.2 ⫾0.5 0.05 0.06
Weekly sessions run @
v3000m (N)
1.0 ⫾0 1.0 ⫾0 0.99 1.0 ⫾0 0.6 ⫾0.5 0.13 0.10
a
When the number is not specified, that means that all the five runners did that type of training.
2094
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org

test, since our subjects were lighter and/or ran faster than in
Hausswirth et al.’s study (16).
Among the 10 males studied here, V
˙O
2peak
explained
59% of the variance in MPT, whereas no other factors
entered a stepwise linear regression. Previous studies had
shown that the percentage variation in performance time
attributed to V
˙O
2max
(expressed relative to body mass) was
calculated to be 74% and 67% for the marathon (7,13).
Hagan et al. (15) reported that for a group of experienced
marathon runners (2 h 19 min to3h50min), 73% of the
marathon performance time could be explained by V
˙O
2peak
,
total number of workouts, and average training speed 9 wk
before the race. Sjo¨din and Svedenhag (30) reported the
importance of a high V
˙O
2max
for a high-level performance
in a marathon as demonstrated by the significantly different
values of V
˙O
2max
in marathon runners with different levels
of performance and by the correlation of 0.78 (P⫽0.001)
between V
˙O
2max
and marathon race pace. However, the
mean personal best of the so-called elite marathon runners
was2h21min(2h18minto2h30min) with a V
˙O
2max
equal to 71.8 ⫾1.2 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
(62.9 to 77.9). This is
far below the level of our subjects (9 min for our top-class
group and 5 min for our high-level group). Other studies,
such as those by Saltin and colleagues (28) involving elite
Kenyan and Swedish distance runners, have come to con-
clusions quite different from ours. Indeed, differences in
V
˙O
2max
were small or nonexistent between world class
Kenyans and slower Scandinavians, but differences in run-
ning economy and energy metabolism at high intensities
were different, with the world class Kenyans having more
favorable running economy and lower lactate and ammonia
accumulation at high intensities. However, the runners in-
vestigated by Saltin and colleagues were 5- and 10-km
specialists, not marathon runners. It may be that a high
V
˙O
2max
is more obligatory (and therefore less variable) for
high-level performance over these shorter distances.
There have been very few studies published on elite
female marathon runners, probably because this distance
was only made Olympic in 1984 (vs 1896 for males).
Comparing males and females at the same moderate abso-
lute performance level (3 h 20 min), Helgerud et al. (17)
found that females had the same V
˙O
2max
, a higher FR, but
poorer Cr than males. However, the authors use allometric
scaling of body weight to compare Cr. At the same high
relative level of performance (Olympics minima), we found
that females had the same Cr as males. To our knowledge,
no previous study has compared Cr in males and females at
high level of marathon performance.
Wilmore and Brown (34) reported a V
˙O
2max
of 71
mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
in the best holder with a marathon perfor-
mance time of2h49min40s.This performance was lower
than that of our high-level group even if the V
˙O
2max
value
is higher. However, these data were obtained on an inclined
treadmill. Davies and Thompson (10) found an average
V
˙O
2max
of 58 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
in nine female marathon
runners with a rather slow average best time of3h9min.
Since these studies, female performance has improved
(much more than that of the males, i.e., 12% vs 2%). In a
more recent study including elite marathon runners, Pate et
al. (26) found a mean V
˙O
2max
of 66.4 mL·kg
⫺1
·min
⫺1
for
performances ranging from2h28min54sto2h39min
21 s. These data are in agreement with both our performance
data and our V
˙O
2max
values. However, in our study, V
˙O
2max
did not discriminate the performance for females and was
not correlated with performance (r ⫽0.31, P⫽0.40). A
combination of FR, Cr, and V
˙O
2peak
could not predict the
marathon performance in a multiple regression set by step-
wise regression.
Surprisingly, whereas V
˙O
2peak
was not a good predictor
of performance, v1000m measured after a 10-km run at
vMarathon was an excellent predictor of performance. The
ability to run fast for a short period of time (or distance) has
already been reported as being determinant for performance
during long-distance running. Noakes et al. (23) and Kolbe
et al. (19) reported that for good male runners, peak tread-
mill running velocity during a progressive test to V
˙O
2
peak
was a better predictor of running performance (time over the
distance) over 10 to 90 km or during a half-marathon (r ⫽
⫺0.93 to r ⫽⫺0.83) than V
˙O
2max
. The fact that the velocity
over 1000 m (run after 10 km at vMarathon) is highly
correlated with MPT could be because the top-class mara-
thon runners are still able to maintain the recoil character-
istics of the muscles for a stretch load even in a fatigued
condition, as after 10 km run at vMarathon (21). Fatigue can
be peripheral, relating to a failure of sarcolemma and sar-
coplasmic reticulum in excitation and contraction processes
but also of central origin (1). Indeed, an important factor in
endurance athlete performance is no doubt the neuromus-
cular system’s ability to work in fatigued conditions (24).
However, because of a possible type I error, the findings of
this study probably do not support a real gender difference
at the same relative (and not absolute) performance level,
between the relationship between the v1000 and MPT.
Neither the energy cost of running nor the fractional
utilization of V
˙O
2max
predicted marathon performance in
the male or female athletes studied here. In the present
study, we measured Cr under conditions highly specific to
the marathon road pace. Previous studies have found both a
relationship (12) and no relationship (13) between Cr and
marathon time.
Training characteristics. Training characteristics
showed that top-class male runners run more total weekly
kilometers than their high-level counterparts, more than 200
km
⫺1
·wk
⫺1
, as well as more kilometers at or above
v10,000m (more than 20 km·wk
⫺1
). However, the relative
distribution of running intensity between HL and TC males
was actually identical. This high-velocity training elicits
high levels of force and brief contact time that in part can
replace the strength training in accordance with the training
of the best world marathon runners (22).
Regular training at velocities well above vMarathon
seems to characterize top-class marathoners. Portuguese
marathoner Carlos Lopes (2 h 7 min 11 s in 1985) performed
two speed workouts per week, 15 ⫻400 m at v3000m and
6⫻2000 m at v10,000m, almost all of the year with a high
weekly total distance (200 to 240 km) (25). One of the TC
CHARACTERISTICS OF TOP-CLASS MARATHON RUNNERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise姞
2095

athletes in the present study (2 h 6 min 34 s in London, April
2000) also has personal bests of 3 min 38 s for 1500 m, 7
min 38 s for 3000 m, and 13 min 2 s for 5000 m. These good
middle-distance performances by a marathon specialist are
maintained with regular training at velocities well above
vMarathon.
Top-class female marathon runners trained many kilome-
ters with two or three sessions a week at a high velocity (90
to 110% vV
˙O
2max
, i.e. v10,000m to v1500m). This training
is in accordance with the training by of one of the greatest
female marathon runners, the Norwegian Greta Waitz, who
ran the 42,195 m in2h25min29s(in1983 at London). She
trained twice a day (except on Sunday) and ran ~15
km·wk
⫺1
at or above competition 10-km velocity (22). In
that present study, TC females ran a greater distance at the
velocity v3000m than their high-level counterparts, who
prefer training at their v10,000m.
At the same relative level of performance, males and
females report similar training intensity distribution. Both
males and females ran few training sessions at marathon or
half-marathon pace (close to the lactate threshold velocity).
The training performed at vMarathon was often reserved for
the end of the long-distance weekly training (the last 5 to 10
km of the 30-km run). Training at specific race pace
(vMarathon for these athletes), which has been suggested to
improve running economy (33), does not seem to be the
strategy of top-class marathoners. The fact that these elite
marathoners perform the majority of their training at veloc-
ities well above or below vMarathon does contrast with
common wisdom that large values of training be performed
at the lactate threshold intensity. This finding is, however,
consistent with observations made from several different
endurance sports, especially rowing and cross-country ski-
ing. This pattern of training load distribution primarily
above and below the lactate threshold intensity has been
termed “polarized training”(15). Many questions are unan-
swered, but this training approach may induce important
training adaptations at both central and peripheral levels
while minimizing the risk of overtraining, which appears to
be greatly increased when daily training loads become too
monotonic, on the basis of work by Foster and others (14).
Training distance and, in particular, the average weekly
distance over the preceding 2 to 3 months has been shown
to be crucial for marathon success (15,29). In the present
study, we observed, in addition to the weekly distance, that
training intensity also differentiates high-level and top-class
marathon runners.
CONCLUSION
The present study showed that the maximal oxygen con-
sumption for males and the velocity run on a 1000-m run
after 10 km at vMarathon in females differentiated top-class
from high-level runners. TC male marathon runners trained
more total kilometers per week and at a higher velocity
(velocity over 3000 m and 10,000 m). Among females
runners, TC trained more kilometers per week at v3000m
than HL.
Neither running economy nor fractional utilization of
V
˙O
2max
at vMarathon was significantly different between
top-class and high-level marathon runners. Among females,
only post-10 km v1000m discriminated TC from HL. There-
fore, high peak oxygen consumption and the ability to run
fast in a 1000-m run after 10 km at vMarathon seems to be
the discriminating factors for international top-class mara-
thoners when compared with runners at a slightly lower
level.
Address for correspondence: Ve´ ronique L. Billat, Ph.D., Centre
de Me´ decine du Sport C.C.A.S., 2 Avenue Richerand, F-75010
Paris, France; E-mail: veronique.billat@wanadoo.fr.
REFERENCES
1. ASMUSSEN, E. Muscle fatigue. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 11:313–321,
1979.
2. ASTRAND, P. O., and B. SALTIN. Oxygen uptake during the first minute
of heavy muscular exercise. J. Appl. Physiol. 16:971–976, 1961.
3. BEAVER, W. L., K. WASSERMAN, and B. J. WHIPP. On line computer
analysis and breath by breath graphical display of exercise func-
tion tests. J. Appl. Physiol. 38:1132–1139, 1973.
4. BERGH, U., B. SJODIN,A.FORSBERG, and J. SVEDENHAG. The rela-
tionship between body mass and oxygen uptake during running in
humans. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 23:205–211, 1991.
5. BILLAT, V., J. SLAWINSKI,V.BOCQUET, et al. Intermittent runs at
vVO
2
max enables subjects to remain at VO
2
max for a longer time
than submaximal runs. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 81:188–196, 2000.
6. COSTILL, D. L. Physiological approach of marathon running. JAMA
221:1024–1029, 1972.
7. COSTILL, D. L. The relation between selected physiological vari-
ables and distance running performance. J. Sports Med. Phys.
Fitness 7:61–66, 1976.
8. COSTILL, D. L., and E. L. FOX. Energetics of marathon running.
Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1:81–86, 1969.
9. COSTILL, D. L., G. BRANAM,D.EDDY, and K. SPARKS. Determinants of
marathon running success. Int. Z. Angew. Physiol. 29:249–254, 1971.
10. DAVIES, C. T. M., and M. W. THOMPSON. Aerobic performance of
female marathon and male ultramarathon athletes. Eur. J. Appl.
Physiol. 41:233–245, 1979.
11. DI PRAMPERO, P. E. The energy cost of human locomotion on land
and in water. Int. J. Sports Med. 7:55–72, 1986.
12. FARREL, P. E., J. H. WILMORE,E.F.COYLE,J.E.BILLING, and D. L.
COSTILL. Plasma lactate accumulation and distance running per-
formance. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 11:338–344, 1979.
13. FOSTER, C., J. T. DANIELS, and R. A. YARBROUGH. Physiological and
training correlates of marathon running performance. Aust.
J. Sports Med. 9:58–61, 1977.
14. FOSTER, C. Monitoring training in athletes with reference to over-
training syndrome. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 30:1164–1168, 1998.
15. HAGAN, R. D., M. G. SMITH, and L. R. GETTMAN. Marathon per-
formance in relation to maximal aerobic power and training indi-
ces. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 13:185–189, 1981.
16. HAUSSWIRTH, C., A. X., BIGARD, and J. M. LECHEVALIER. The
Cosmed K4 telemetry system as an accurate device for oxygen
uptake measurements during exercise. Int. J. Sports Med. 18:449–
453, 1997.
17. HELGERUD, J., F. INGJER, and S. B. STROøMME. Sex differences in
performance-matched marathon runners. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol.
61:433–439, 1990.
18. JOYNER, M. J. Modeling optimal marathon performance on the
basis of physiological factors. J. Appl. Physiol. 70:683–687, 1991.
19. KOLBE, T., S. C. DENNIS,E.SELLEY,T.D.NOAKES, and M. I.
LAMBERT. The relationship between critical power and running
performance. J. Sports Sci. 13:265–269, 1995.
2096
Official Journal of the American College of Sports Medicine http://www.acsm-msse.org

20. LACOUR, J. R. Influence of body dimensions, sex and training on
the energy cost of running. In: Human Muscular Function,P.
Marconnet, B. Saltin, P. Komi, and J. Poortmans (Eds.). Basel:
Karger, 1996, pp. 32–43.
21. NICOL, C., P. V. KOMI, and P. MARCONNET. Fatigue effects of
marathon running on neuromuscular performance. Scand. J. Med.
Sci. Sports. 1:18–24, 1991.
22. NOAKES,T.D.Lore of Running. Champaign, IL: Leisure Press,
1991, pp. 262–361.
23. NOAKES,T.D,K.H.MYBURGH, and R. SCHALL. Peak treadmill
running velocity during the VO
2 max
test predicts running perfor-
mance. J. Sports Sci. 8:35–45, 1990.
24. PAAVOLAINEN, L., K. HAKKINEN,L.HAMALAINEN,A.NUMELA, and
H. RUSKO. Explosive-strength training improves 5-km running
time by improving running economy and muscle power. J. Appl.
Physiol. 86:1527–1533, 1999.
25. PAIVA,M.Middle- and Long- Distance Portuguese School, Myth
or Reality? (Escola Portuguesa de Meio Fundo e Fundo, Mito ou
Realidade?). Porto, Portugal: Faculdade de Ciencias do desporto
e de educac¸ao fisica universidade do Porto Publisher, 1996, pp.
94–96.
26. PATE, R. R., P. B. SPARLING,G.E.WILSON,K.J.CURETON, and B. J.
MILLER. Cardiorespiratory and metabolic responses to submaximal
and maximal exercise in elite women distance runners. Int.
J. Sports Med. 8:91–95, 1987.
27. POLLOCK, M. L. Submaximal and maximal working capacity of
elite distance runners: part I. Cardiorespiratory aspects. Ann. N. Y.
Acad. Sci. 301:310–322, 1977.
28. SALTIN, B., H. LARSEN,N.TERRADOS, et al. Aerobic exercise
capacity at sea level and at altitude in Kenyan boys, junior and
senior runners compared with Scandinavian runners. Scand.
J. Med. Sci. Sports 1:18–24, 1991.
29. SJ¨
ODIN, B., and I. JACOBS. Onset of blood lactate accumulation and
marathon running performance. Int. J. Sports Med. 2:23–26, 1981.
30. SJ¨
ODIN, B., and J. SVEDENHAG. Applied physiology of marathon
running. Sports Med. 2:83–99, 1985.
31. SVEDENHAG, J., and B. SJODIN. Maximal and submaximal oxygen
uptakes and blood lactate levels in elite male middle- and long-
distance runners. Int. J. Sports Med. 5:255–261, 1984.
32. WASSERMAN, K., J. E. HANSEN,D.Y.SUE,B.J.WHIPP, and R.
CASABURI.Principles of Exercise Testing and Interpretation. Phil-
adelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1994, pp. 53–78.
33. WILKINSON, D. M. Training for middle and long-distance running.
In: Improving Sports Performance in Middle and Long-Distance
Running, J. L. Fallowfield and D. M. Wilkinson (Eds.). Chiches-
ter, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 1999, pp. 69–98.
34. WILMORE, J. H., and C. H. BROWN. Physiological profiles of
women distance runners. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 6:178–181,
1974.
CHARACTERISTICS OF TOP-CLASS MARATHON RUNNERS Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise姞
2097