3 ms·

You also have to be precise about what you mean by "elite". Definitely "most runners" don't fit that category, so saying "you simply won't be able to go as fast

You also have to be precise about what you mean by "elite". Definitely "most runners" don't fit that category, so saying "you simply won't be able to go as fast" is probably overgeneralizing. https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/2016/jan/19/high-carb-or-high-fat-the-running-diet-debate https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/the-running-blog/20... “If you’re going to run a marathon under two hours and 10 minutes, then yes, you probably need lots of carbohydrate to be able to perform to such an intense level of activity, but once you’re slower than two and a half hours, I’m not really convinced you do.” Adaptation periods are probably 6 weeks, possibly longer to fully adapt, though adaptation appears progressive. And training low-carb can have benefits even if racing carb-loaded.

bitexploder 8y ago
My understanding, barring real genetic outliers, is that the human body just can't go as fast in a fat adapted state. I would say "any runner". Meaning anyone with a few months of real training under their belt is going to run sub marathon efforts slower. The article you linked pointed that out. This isn't just for elites, but everyone. Most recreational/non-professional runners run sub marathon races. This implies some important things about how you train and eat. 1.) When doing max effort running, to push your body to it's limit you need some carbs. 2.) To run your fastest race you need some carbs. You can still train and do well without them, of course. I think for most runners it's fine and the difference doesn't amount to much in practical sense.