Well this time last week I was asking myself some serious questions as I was about 28k into the Masters marathon and running into a headwind that made me question myself and why I do what I do. My friend Jeff was cycling alongside me but he could see I was in a dark place. As I mentioned in my race report I told myself to hang on for the 32k turn around and the tail wind that was waiting for me.

A week later and I’m still buzzing from the World Masters but at that 28k point it could have turned out so different. I could have given in to my inner demons demanding that I stop or walk or just slow. Their reasoning was sound, I was fatigued with the head wind, slowing pace and I still had 14k to go. It’s at these times in a marathon you have to ‘man up’ (or ‘woman up’ if such a term exists?) , embrace the pain and push on. The rewards are so worth it. Last week I staggered to 32k but as soon as I turned I was a totally different runner. I was caressed home by the tail wind but more importantly my whole mindset had changed. The 10k to go was now no longer a problem but an opportunity to chase down some runners ahead of me, all thoughts of not finishing had evaporated with the head wind, hell, I was going to enjoy the last 10k. (as much as anybody can enjoy the last 10k of a marathon )

No one races a marathon without having at one point (or many points) to argue with your ‘central governor’ which demands they slow or stop. The logic for this is sound but running marathons is not about logic. As Noakes and many coaches preach the human body can run 32k, and is probably designed to run around this distance. The extra 10k is where training and the power of the mind is called upon and if either is lacking you will be found out. No one can finish a marathon and say ‘that was easy and I didn’t really train for it‘, doesn’t happen. They may get to 32k feeling good but trust me the ‘pain train’ is coming if they are not prepared at that point and there is no hiding from it.

The article below from Amby Burfoot from Runners World (2012) is on Noakes and his ‘central governor’ theory. I said in a post before the Masters that although I could not over ride my ‘central governor’ I believed that with experience you can get some leeway and this is enough to allow you to finish strong because your mind knows from experience what to expect. Of course this was marathon number 41 for me so experience has come over a long period of time. It was at the 28k mark last week when my central governor was telling me enough is enough and with his  ( or hers, now there’s a theory?) friend ‘fatigue’ was conspiring to protect me by forcing me to slow. This time I was able to persuade ‘myself‘ to get to 32k and reevaluate the situation with a tail wind and a boost you receive when the kilometres to go enters the single figure range. It was enough this time and I finished strong but if I had been faced with a head wind for the last 10k or some serious hills I’m not so sure my central governor would have been so forgiving.  As I said in my race report I felt this time I was so close to paying the piper and when I do that will be a very interesting end result and blog post…. let’s hope I’m not faced with that prospect anytime soon.

For the last 40+ years, South African Tim Noakes, M.D., has been among the most iconoclastic of sports scientists. In the 1970s, he and colleagues proved that a veteran marathoner could die from heart disease, refuting the “Bassler hypothesis.” They did this with hard evidence: images of the unlucky marathoner’s heart.

In the 1980s, while everyone else was hyperventilating over dehydration, Noakes practically invented exercise hyponatremia, i.e., “overdrinking,” among endurance athletes. The evidence? Studies of how much runners drank during marathons, particularly their pre-event and post-event weight, and how this affected their plasma sodium levels. Too much drinking lowers sodium levels, and if it goes too far, this can become a life-threatening condition.
For the last decade-plus, Noakes, author of the justly-famous Lore of Running and the soon-to-be-published Waterlogged, has focused his attention on a concept he calls the “central governor.” In Noakes view, the central governor, i.e., the brain, is what limits endurance performance.

Take for example the sub-2-hour marathon. We all know that no current marathoner can achieve that mark. But why? For most of the last century, exercise physiologists have given a host of reasons: insufficient leg muscle endurance, too much lactic acid, insufficient vo2 max, insufficient glycogen supply, too much dehydration, and the like. These are all very nice things, because each can be measured.

Noakes believes all these explanations are wrong. He says no one can run a sub-2-hour marathon because, in effect, the brain won’t let us. The marathoner hasn’t been born yet with a sub-2-hour brain, and the body to back it up.

But now Noakes has a problem. When it came to his heart and hyponatremia findings, he had solid evidence to support his position. But where’s the evidence for a central-governor impact on endurance performance? And if a central governor does exist, how do you measure it?

“The Noakes paper has an interesting concept for a role of the brain in fatigue and athletic performance,” notes Henriette van Praag, Ph.D., a reviewer of the paper and an neuroscience investigator at the National Institutes of Health. “It lacks a clear structural/physiological basis within the central nervous system. Thus, empirical evidence for the existence of a ‘governor’ remains to be established.”

In a wonderful new paper in Frontiers in Physiology, Noakes makes little to no attempt to pin down the central governor with a measuring stick, such as the IQ scores often used for intelligence. He does seem to like something called the TEA (the Task Effort and Awareness scale), which he sees as a counterpart to Gunnar Borg’s RPE (Relative Perceived Exertion scale).

But Noakes tells the central-governor story in a narrative form that’s almost, well … almost readable. I’m not saying the paper is easy-going, certainly not for the faint-of-heart. And I’m sure there are vast parts of it that I don’t understand—it appears to have about 150 references, many of them from the last year or two of research.

Still, the quotes from great athletes are always entertaining. Roger Bannister says: “The great barrier is the mental hurdle.” Former marathon world record holder Derek Clayton says: “The difference between my world record and many world class runners is mental fortitude. I ran believing in mind over matter.”

Apparently Noakes does as well. In the provocative last section of his paper, he writes that the “illusionary” symptoms of fatigue are what separates the marathon winner from the runners-up. The first time I read this section, I couldn’t help but think about the people with illusionary thoughts who are often locked up in mental wards. Of course, Noakes isn’t saying that fast runners are crazy. Only that their thoughts are illusionary in the sense that they “are entirely self-generated by each athlete’s brain and so are unique to each individual.”

Noakes closes by quoting Vince Lombardi, who said, “Fatigue makes cowards of us all.” Noakes believes, however, that Lombardi got things backwards. Noakes writes: “My unproven hypothesis is that in the case of a close finish, physiology does not determine who wins. Rather somewhere in the final section of the race, the brains of the second, and lower placed finishers, accept their respective finishing positions and no longer challenge for a higher finish.” The winner’s brain simply doesn’t give in.

In other words, according to Noakes, cowardice produces fatigue.