You're incoherent at this point.

You have nothing to say that's of any use to what's being discussed. You've gone the way of Francois. Hopefully you'll retreat to the sidelines with him soon enough.

Hey heath -

When you called it moving the goal posts - you totally nailed it.

We started with this:


And now we are here:


needmoreair - No one is contending (that I can see), you can simply taper and then simple smack things around from there. The argument is your contention of what base training should be for triathlon, and based on your original post above - for your typical triathlete, you are incorrect.

Crickets.


I was asking why an athlete peaks; how does one elicit a peak and how does that differ from a progressive overload that leads to continual improvement?

Shane

You are describing what happens with a reduction in volume coupled with an increase in racing and HIIT. Perhaps if you take a peak at your training log you will see this. But your assertion that the stimulus of interval training reduces the aerobic component does not hold water. You've been able to provide zero examples except your own experience when others on here have provided multiple links to disprove that assertion.

Recharging is recovery. You can call it what you want, but that's what it is.

---

---

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

The argument you're trying to make keep shifting and hasn't been well articulated from the start. So you'll have to forgive me (and every other person on this forum) for not being able to understand what the point of your argument is.

I'll respond with a few succinct points -

1. Intensity does not erode aerobic fitness, though a shift away from volume to exclusively high intensity training will. That's the result of lack of volume. Not some kind of bizarre physiological adaptation where training makes you less fit.

2. If you do not taper/peak an athlete, you could continue to build on that fitness indefinitely - as long as you're varying the stimulus (intensity, duration).

3. L1/L2 exclusive training in base/build/peak friel-esque models is bs. That's DD's point. A marathon runner is going to be doing v02 work early in the season and subthreshold work as the race approaches. A 1500/5k runner will be doing the opposite. General to specific. Those Kenyans that threw down at the major marathon's this fall? They're not going back and running all easy miles now. There's a recovery period then they're back to working on the systems that were neglected during the marathon build - hills, v02, leg speed, etc, etc - not just easy running.

---

___________________
Twitter | Kancman | Blog

No, what everyone but you is saying that everything adds to the aerobic component. You are saying, and have said multiple times, that interval training reduces the aerobic component.

---

---

Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook

The person I responded to wrote this:

I took the above to mean that he was doing that in a week for multiple weeks. I said that was far too much.

I couldn't do that much workload for a sustained period of time and I'd venture that I have far more experience on a bike than that person.

Now if I took that incorrectly and those three workouts are something he's doing in a rotation with maybe just one or two a week, then fair play. But if that is a weekly workload then I stick by what I said about that being far too much and not being sustainable and him likely being dead by race time.

Would you disagree?

No, I most emphatically have not.

You're failing to read and understand as well.

You still haven't copied and pasted what I asked. You can't because you're wrong and I didn't say what you're asserting I said.

I answered your question. Go back and reread. I think I answered it in multiple posts.

Seriously, try reading. It'll help.

 
This thread.....

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

Obviously after a peak an athlete needs to recover. But I'm not seeing what that has to do with "base training? That's called managing training load and stress on the body.

It seems like you're making a few assumptions that need to be clarified:

1. Intensity is not proportional to overall training load. Intensity can go up while training load decreases and vice versa.
2. Peaking does not mean increasing the amount of intensity. In some cases it does, but peaking for an ironman should mean a decrease in intensity with volume significantly increasing.
3. Progressive training load, with properly managed recovery will continue to increase fitness. Even during and after a peak. Your body needs that continued stress with the following supercompensation in order to get stronger.
4. Base is a made up concept. It doesn't correlate to specific physiological systems. What matters is the specific adaptations that are being targetted and managing training load.
5. If a person needs a significant recovery period in the "off-season" in order to recharge and focus on low intensity training, then their training load wasn't properly managed during the racing season.
6. If certain adaptations are lost during peak training, either a) the training done wasn't appropriate or b) the adapations weren't as important for the goal race. (i.e. VO2 max when training for long course)

---

-Andrew

The argument I'm making is that base training is not bullshit and that when you are at peak fitness, you are not adding to a base and you are not engaged in base training.

1. So you say. I don't agree.
2. I've already said that.
3. No one is talking about base being solely L1/L2. That has nothing to do with anything. I've addressed general-specific a number of times.

Ok.


There comes a point where one needs to stopping banging one's head against the wall; I'm pretty sure we are at that point.

I would suggest that if your communications skills and understanding of physiology were at the level you believe they are, you wouldn't feel to need to insist everyone else is either incorrect or misunderstanding you.

Shane

The point about the peak being it is not simply part of a base that can be added to. That's the entirety of that point.

^^This. There's no reason to make up new terminology. Training is training. Recovery is recovery, and part of every training block--that's just common sense and not at question. For me, base has lots of tempo and sweet spot. I'm not a believer in spending hours at LSD, which many misconceive as base. But I'm also not going to do vo2 max and sprint work in the winter because 1) I don't enjoy it, and 2) those efforts put a big hurt on my body and ability to do loads of volume at what's a good intensity for me.

I have no idea where this idea that race intensity erodes base, and requires a return to it, came from. If all someone does is race crits and never gets in a long ride, then sure, you're going to lose some of the endurance required to do a four-hour road race. More common sense. But racing a crit in itself is not the cause of a decline in "base" fitness, not training properly is.

Heath, when do you want to go to reading class with me, Brian, Shane, Trispoke, riltri and everyone else but Jason in this thread? I heard they have great reading teachers in TN.

You guys can go to reading class during the "recharge" or recovery period from this post.

We know that reading comprehension and following an argument is hard for you, so I will spell out some of the stuff that you keep repeating that is incorrect

You: post #176:

You: post #186:

Quote:

When you're in a peak/race phase, you are not doing base-training and you are not "contributing to base". You are not improving, you are maintaining and trying to prevent regressing for as long as your priority race sessions last. There is nothing building on anything, here.

You contend that there is 'nothing' is gained during peak/race. Instead, you argue that it is all about maintaining and preventing a regression.

Shane: post #191

Quote:

So are you saying that if I do a race that the stress of the event does not result in any fitness gains?

You: post #201

Quote:

No, of course not on both questions.

So which is it? Do I achieve fitness gains during peak/race or do I maintain or prevent regression? It can't be both.

Shane: post #207

Quote:

But you said that intensity eroded endurance and have also stated that one cannot gain fitness while racing?

You: post #210

Quote:

Please copy and paste where I said that.

You: post #234

Quote:

You still haven't copied and pasted what I asked. You can't because you're wrong and I didn't say what you're asserting I said.

And you wonder why no one can follow your argument? You can't even keep up with what you said.

So which is it? If I am training at my peak/race phase am I adding to my fitness? I (and others) would argue yes. I certainly know that during my peak week(s) those workouts were tough and made me a stronger athlete. I know the race made me a stronger athlete. All that contributes to my aerobic base as an athlete.