No. What they are is a magic formula for needing a wheelchair at the finish line, if you make it there at all.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com

Minimum training obviously can work as I have seen pros go 8:20 on 8 hours a week with a short ramp to 12 and maybe 16 hours, but I don't put to much stock into anything Ben Greenfield says. In this piece in the running section:

"For example, if I am running more than once per week, one of my key Ironman training sessions is 12x200m repeats – literally in the cul-de-sac outside my house. Including full recovery between repeats, this workout takes a maximum of 30 minutes, but if it’s performed at maximum intensity, you’ll feel as though you’ve run 2 hours by the time you finish."

Yeah I am sure it takes 30 minutes max to do the workout. Nobody does 12x200m repeats, whjch as prescribed probably need a minimum of 90 seconds rest, and you aren't going to go into explosive 200m repeats cold and you are certainly going to warm down. IMHO, in order to make the program work it is key to come from a swim background.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

I did a full in my first season and was only training 6 - 8 hours a week, no runs longer than 14kms, rides typically 50/60km, I have a bit of a swim background so that was OK. Had no idea about the training really, was just winging it, it was a long, slow, shit day out, I bimbled home in 11.54 and felt zero sense of achievement. I suppose it depends what your goals are, just to finish?

im not sure why the article is calling it "minimalist" training, sounds more like high intensity training, doing 2x20 minute bike at one hour all out pace or going to the track and doing 3 to 5 mile repeats at 5k to 10k pace is a shorter workout, but that doesnt make it "minimalist", if those are the majority of your workouts and you never go over an hour, it can work if you have been doing endurance sports for at least 3 to 5 years maybe and have put in long hours during the previous years, i dont think it would work for someone just starting out, the article also is saying to do this because it is somehow better for your heart, is it though? i dont know

I do think this could work.

I consider myself near-average or below-average for AGer triathlon talent, and I can definitely finish a HIM well above the 50% AG mark with 7 hours per week of training, and I'm pretty sure I could hit the 50%AG mark with 4 hours per week of training, possibly 3. IM is longer and tougher, but I don't doubt that I could likely beat 50% of my AG at least before the cutoff with 9 hours of training per week. The caveat is that I've been racing triathlons fairly seriously for 10+ years now and all that prior training and experience does count.

If I was an off-the-couch, or even noob to the sport without a strong background in at least one of the 3 sports, trying to RACE an IM (not just finish easily) in under 9hrs/wk of training? Good luck with that - even if you finish, it will NOT be a race, and will definitely be a survival struggle just to finish.

However, I do agree in general with the article's author in that provided you have the requisite talent and background, you can get the big bulk of your potential performance even at IM level, in <10 hrs per week of good, targeted training. Also note that even if you can capture 95% of your potential with such a training regimen (which is probably the upper limits of best outcome with it), that missing 5% can make the entire difference between finishing the race as just a FOMOP AG racer, versus winning your entire AG outright.

Depends on your goal. Just to finish, easy. To be competitive, for most, nope.

---

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep

Hmm...maybe if you already have a deep LSD/Endurance background. After doing it for so long, you probably don't need to do as many 20 mile runs, etc.

---

"The person on top of the mountain didn't fall there." - unkown

also rule 5

Be very careful if you decide to do this. I think for most people it would be a recipe for injury and poss I'll health.
Depending on your background, it might work ok for a one off race but the consequences on long term health of this sort of regime are IMO dangerous. The stress on your body of all hit type sessions with little else is asking for trouble. I have seen some people be successful training for the odd race like this. I am yet to see a long healthy career of anyone doing this.

It depends on your definition of "work".
I think Jordan Rapper once said "less is not more. Sometimes less is adequate".
I find if I don't do enough running volume my legs get very sore at 13 miles and then it becomes a walk. You can still finish while walking but this type of plan can work for the naturally gifted but it's still not "optimal".

Also anything to do with Ben Greenfield tends to be over blown claims for miracle products.

I stopped reading when i saw "Written by Ben Greenfield"

If a 2 hour run leaves you beat up for 2 weeks, maybe you should look into training more than 6 hours a week, you know?

Good luck to anyone that does this, but I'm sure you'll enjoy all the time on the elliptical and playing basketball in place of your run days.

High intensity training is the most effective training.......
So eliminate everything else and just do that!!!

Of course "high intensity" for an Ironman is probably at least 45 minutes of hard efforts.

Now .... you will probably need to train to do the high intensity training in the first place.

So ..... maybe just high intensity and a couple of easy workouts each week in each sport.

Except......you need to be able to do the high intensity training while tired.

So...... maybe just long high intensity, and a few easy workouts and one long workout in each sport each week.

heading into my 8th ironman in a few weeks.

my build started may 8th and i've averaged under 10 hours a week since:
may 8th: 7hrs
may 15th: 9:45
may 22nd: 11
may 19th: 5
june 5th: 10:15
june 12th: 9:30
june 19th: 7:15
june 26th: 8:30
july 3rd: 11
july 10th: 8
this week: 11

i'm now 4 weeks away: this upcoming week i'm going to ramp up my run volume and try to tick off at 15 hour week, go back down to 11, then have 2 taper weeks.

we're talking about a 14 week training plan, averaging under 10 hours a week. no idea how it'll go, it's all i had time for this year.

realistically, i'll swim 10 min worse than my PR, i have a feeling i'll PR the bike, then i plan on taking it easy on the marathon. likely walk a good portion of it. i have IMLou 8 weeks after, not to mention i'll be in iceland for a week and i don't want to be hobbling around. ha ha.

john

Maybe I am wrong.

Here is what I think Ben Greenfield himself did:
1) Trained normally for an Ironman for several years (and went mid 9:00 hrs) on an easy course.
2) Started a business selling fringe health and fitness BS.
3) Followed his own "super special training regimen" (and went much slower, but still finished).


So......
You to can do what Ben Greenfield did.

On the other hand- no one is forcing you to do an Ironman in the first place.

Why not try to do it well?

On the other hand..
Don't want to train for an Ironman?
Then don't.

Where's the like button.

That's what I don't get. If you don't want to train for an Ironman, why do it in the first place? What's the point if you're looking to get in the absolute minimum and then limp to the finish?

Yup exactly.

I just did a full on 8 hours a week. This was my low-year for training (part of a trade with my wife to not do too much every year). The race was yesterday, and it was tough. The second half of the marathon was unsurprisingly tough on the legs. The swim was slow as well. Basically, there is no hiding. If you want to do well you have to swim 3+ times per week, and I was swimming once. You need several long rides, I managed 1, etc....

So, if your intention is like mine: race for fun this year on minimal training, but understand you will be slow, then go for it. If not, you need a lot more hours per week than I managed.

Main positive: I learned a lot of lessons, both in training (I found i train well really early) and in the race (nutrition, pacing, etc.)

I'm very confident that people can perform well on 8 hours per week. I'm also very confident that these people are high responsers to exercise and would perform a lot better on twice or three times that volume.

I also dont understand, like stated earlier, why one would like to race a race where fatigue resistance and energy intake is major factors if one does not want to train these factors. Just do sprints and olys!

---

Endurance coach | Physiotherapist (primary care) | Bikefitter | Swede

It’s worked for me. I keep doing it, and I keep getting faster in the process. I do race a lot, and I think that I get fitness from that, but by keeping the hours low, I think I keep my overall stress low. I’ve had five sub nine Ironman races with a pr of 8:37 on nothing more than 17 hours during my biggest week leading in, and probably 12.5-14 hours average.

---

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Training/Racing Log - http://www.earthdaykid.com/blog --- Old Training/Racing Log - http://colinlaughery.blogspot.com

Pretty simple answer (my personal opinion and experience): I have not done long-course races for a few years due to various reasons, mainly family live, but wanted to enjoy the fun, thrill, spirit and experience of a long-course triathlon while balancing training activities well with family and job life. 8~10 hours in avg. in the 6 months build-up was my limit to race in Roth two weeks ago. And I worked well for me (agreeing only with "do short swims" and "no early season long bike" but nothing else though). I had a good, enjoyable, fast race, I recovered quickly and believe now that long-course distances do definitively not require 15~20 hours.

Could I have done better with more training? Most likely, yes. But my goal was to achieve the best with that limited available time and I feel like I achieved that. Sweet for me! So, why should I do only sprints and olys?

I believe that one can race closer to ones potential at short course tri vs long course tri at a lower volume program, since two critical aspects of long course is fatigue resistance and energy intake, both of which are trainable and requires a higher volume program.

It's great that you had a good race tho

---

Endurance coach | Physiotherapist (primary care) | Bikefitter | Swede

Well, while I agree with your statement from a pragmatic point of view, I question if coming closer to ones potential must/should/can be the main driver for doing triathlon or any other activity. At least not for me ;-) I prefer a top100 overall finish in Roth this year compared to an Olympic distance age group podium at national championships last year (both at same training volume). Much more satisfying. Not just the race experience, but also if I compare my few long bike rides through nice, varied countryside compared to short, hard, exhausting rides or runs when training for Olympic distance races...

Nothing wrong about your and other statements. Just not a reason for not doing long distance races... ;-)

Step 1. Collect endurance underpants.
Step 2...
Step 3. PROFIT

---

----------------------------------------------------------
Zen and the Art of Triathlon. Strava Workout Log
Interviews with Chris McCormack, Helle Frederikson, Angela Naeth, and many more.
http://www.zentriathlon.com