You’ll know from experience with different coaches that different philosophies exist to whether recover between high intensity bouts should be passive or active with most advocating active. Active recovery also varies in that it may be anything from light movement to structured exercise at higher intensities. So what is the rational?

Results from the scientific literature demonstrate that performance may be negatively affected by elevated blood lactate concentrations. However, this is not conclusive. The rational behind this impaired performance association lies in the inhibitory effect of lactate on glycolysis, which is the primary energy source pathway during repeated bouts of high intensity work (>30 sec). Increased lactate also serves to decrease muscle PH, which is believed to interfere with contractile proteins thereby inhibiting muscle contraction. So assuming that one believes in the relationship between elevated blood lactate and impaired performance, does enhanced removal of blood lactate lead to faster recovery and improved performance?

The literature yields conflicting results as to whether or not improved performance results from active measures to decrease blood lactate. The literature overwhelmingly supports that active recovery facilitates enhanced lactate removal although this has not been clearly linked to improved performance. The protocol employed in these numerous studies are diverse and few have really addressed the outcome in short recovery periods. Studies support that lactate removal occurs more rapidly with activity recovery. Hermansen and Stenvold (1972) reported that the largest decreases in blood lactate occurred around 60-65% VO2 max. Additional investigations support this notion but report a wider window of intensity for optimal removal (25%-65% VO2 max).

Interestingly, much of this information has been generated following longer bouts of exercise (>20 mins) and few investigators have addressed the question using a short exercise-short recovery model. ATP repletion following exhaustive exercise is approximated to be 98-99% complete in 3 minutes. Therefore, one would assume that what occurs during those three minutes affects the repletion and consequent performnace. Recent data from our lab reported no significant reductions in blood lactate with active or passive recovery following six -15 second all out cycle sprints with 3 minute recovery between each spring. During the 3 minute recovery, our subjects cycled lightly for 3 minutes or sat passively. Interestingly, even though blood lactate concentration did not differ significantly, power output was significantly higher during bouts 5 & 6 with the active recovery and subjects reported much less discomfort with active recovery. Recent data from Corder et al. (2000) yield somewhat different results, however. In their investigation subjects performed three workouts, consisting of six sets of 10 rep squats at 85%. Each set had a 4 minute recovery and recovery was either light pedaling (25% onset of blood lactate accumulation, OBLA) or medium pedaling (50% OBLA), or passive sitting. They report significant differences in blood lactate with 25% OBLA yielding lower blood lactate than either passive sitting or 50% OBLA. 25% OBLA also resulted in significantly increased total number of repetitions to exhaustion following the protocol.

What is interesting here is that 50% OBLA did not yield different results from passive sitting. Regardless, it seems apparent that a degree of light exercise results in decreased blood lactate concentration. One may extrapolate that this may lead to improved performance but again, this has not been conclusively demonstrated. So what implications does this have for longer duration exercise and lactate removal? For the most part resting lactates are closely restored within about 20 minutes of cessation of exercise so a light cool down is effective. Note, lactate levels accumulated during exercise play no role is post exercise muscle soreness. Therefore, for longer duration workouts that are limited to one per day, high lactate accumulation during an exercise bout does not appear to be an inhibitory factor.

Thus, it appears that the role of lactate and recovery is more crucial during short term, short recovery exercise and it is definitely good practice to include active recovery and cool down. However, the relationship between active recovery, lactate removal and improved performance still needs to be clarified. Like most measures in physiology, there is most likely good inter-individual variation. The use of perceived exertion might be a useful, and simple, tool to determine the intensity of recovery periods during workouts.

As a footnote, even though the effects of lactate removal on performance are unclear, experience in our lab shows much greater feelings of nausea, dizziness and overall discomfort when athletes do not actively recover. This alone is probably ample reason to advocate the active recovery. Our study used a cycle ergometer and to our knowledge this question has not been specifically answered using a rowing ergometer protocol.

Back to Training Articles