Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [needmoreair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I agree with the idea of reducing intensity (or more specifically total training load) but that has nothing to do with your assertion that high intensity erodes aerobic development. Even tabata intervals have been shown to improve aerobic development. When you describe training adjustments, I'm on board with you. I think it's the term erode that people (certainly me) take issue with. Besides, what you describe in your posts doesn't fit 'old school base' if you are including any intensity at all.


I have deceptive speed.........I'm slower than I look!
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Francois wrote:
You really need more air. It'd help your brain.

It's funny, you know? The idea that I'm not getting enough air and am some how stunted intellectually due to that. But we all know that it isn't the getting air that's the problem (assuming we're healthy and not at some outrageous altitude or underwater or something), it's the utilization of oxygen in the body.
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [Skoalz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Skoalz wrote:
I agree with the idea of reducing intensity (or more specifically total training load) but that has nothing to do with your assertion that high intensity erodes aerobic development. Even tabata intervals have been shown to improve aerobic development. When you describe training adjustments, I'm on board with you. I think it's the term erode that people (certainly me) take issue with. Besides, what you describe in your posts doesn't fit 'old school base' if you are including any intensity at all.

I'm not subscribing to "old school base". I've said it's outdated and not a good idea.

Do you people not read?

Again, I posit the question; if it has nothing to do with eroding aerobic development, why not do it all the time?

Per your example, why not do them all the time? Why not increase the duration of the effort for even more effect? What's the harm?

Why not maintain the same percentage of intensity year round? Why not have a focus purely on intensity?
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [Francois] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Francois wrote:
Clearly you're too smart for me.


I agree.
Last edited by: needmoreair: Nov 9, 13 21:36
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [needmoreair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
See *** for my responses to help clear the air.

I'm going to throw this out one more time in a last attempt to help you understand.

You said base was b.s. ***I did, bc everything adds to your base. The traditional concept of doing 1000 miles easy before intervals & that sort of shit went out the window years ago.

You said everything adds to base. ***It does.

I said it doesn't. If it did, you would build and build and build and you can't. YOU even gave an example of peaking, resting, and building back up. You proved my point. ****By resting I meant 4d maybe a week maybe 10d at most during the begininng of the training season to the last race excluding taper. Those breaks are more for mental vs physical, which I made clear somewhere. Not returning to a period of pure aerobic training. Again specificity or training is what I'm arguing.

You said racing and high intensity doesn't erode your aerobic fitness, yet again, YOU talk about a break and rebuilding. ****See above.

I say it does because, gasp, after a peak you return to BASE to rebuild aerobic fitness. ****Gasp, you return to base training to add to not rebuild. But you can also add to it with SST or vo2. You manipulate the training load with in the training cycle to rest and stress. Day 1 could be hard day 2 could be easy.

So that's the issue and you agree with it in everything except name. ***If you say so, you're the man I'm just the coach.

You can't continue on at a high-intensity. You must, must, MUST return to shore up that aerobic fitness that you've eroded with that high intensity work. ****Here is where you're wrong. You don't have to return to shore it up. But you can return to it to have a period of lower stress training when you are not racing or need to recover. it's not to shore up anything. Again everything you do adds to your fitness and that's what base is. You read Friel didn't you?

That's "going to the well". That's "digging too deep". That's "burning your matches". ****No burning your matches specifically has been referenced as going well above your CP in a race in multiple papers/books. As for digging to deep or going to the well that can be a system of long term over training which demands more rest and less training not shoring up.

You want to go to the well, dig deeper, or burn more matches? Then you beef up that base with lower-intensity work so you can do more. You want to dig yourself into a massive hole (for some reason you think this is difficult. With 17 years of experience I'd have to question the athlete's you work with if you think it's so rare), then you keep up the intensity and neglect that base. ***** It's clear you don't understand base,periodization, manipulating training variables, how to structure a training season(s), peak etc. But question my athletes if you desire. PM me and I'll give you email addresses if you want to chat with them. Maybe it's so rare in them though bc I can design a well thought out and planned training season(s).

You want long-term improvement, then you hit that aerobic work for long periods of the year and you shift the percentages of intensity and volume to manipulate adaptations and reach peak fitness. ****No shit the second part is what i've been saying. Not a return to just base though. That's not what I agree about.
***You've been saying that the intensity erodes base. It does not. You don't need to do X months of aerobic only cycling to enhance your base, you can do that with a variety of training intensities.

Are there other issues you want to discuss?

Dude seriously, PM me if you want to chat with them. Otherwise I'm going to say we agree to disagree an have different methodologies.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [needmoreair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Again, I posit the question; if it has nothing to do with eroding aerobic development, why not do it all the time?

I answered that for you. Post 43 I believe.

Quote:
Why not maintain the same percentage of intensity year round? Why not have a focus purely on intensity?
According to you it will erode your base. If you do enough intervals, and again according to you, you might erode your fitness to nothing. I'd rather play xbox if that's the end result. But of course people might break down, so you have to have some easy days in between the hard days. That's one reason why you don't focus purely on intensity.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [needmoreair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And you acuse others of getting caught up in semantics?

I've not seen a single post on this thread that promotes not varying load or intensity. Even you are saying to maintain some intensity during 'base'. Duh.

It might help you to peruse this thread again before accusing others of not reading.

Take a minute to go read Tabata's orignal study with cyclists. If you have spare time read anything by Bompa. There are endless studies that demonstrate increased aerobic development through intense intervals. How you equate the idea of needing to back off or vary routine with aerobic development erosion is bizarre. Could you please reference a single study that shows deterioration of aerobic development through intensity?


I have deceptive speed.........I'm slower than I look!
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [soulfresca] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
but here is an opinion piece on "reverse periodization."

There is no reverse periodization. It's periodization. Period. That is it. No reverse no forward, no sideways no standard, just periodization. Periodization is training from least to most specific. That's it. There is nothing reverse about it.

I wonder if I'm still banned from making comments and publishing research that contradicts him on his blog? I may have to visit that tomorrow for some fun.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The article title is a bit deceptive. But, yeah I agree with what you're saying.

For the OP-- This was posted earlier, and is pretty interesting. http://biketechreview.com/...ase-a-new-definition
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I wonder if I'm still banned from making comments and publishing research that contradicts him on his blog? I may have to visit that tomorrow for some fun.


lol reminds me of this story: http://www.thebeaverton.com/...heckling-gravity.htm
Last edited by: soulfresca: Nov 9, 13 22:30
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
desert dude wrote:
Quote:
but here is an opinion piece on "reverse periodization."


There is no reverse periodization. It's periodization. Period. That is it. No reverse no forward, no sideways no standard, just periodization. Periodization is training from least to most specific. That's it. There is nothing reverse about it.

I wonder if I'm still banned from making comments and publishing research that contradicts him on his blog? I may have to visit that tomorrow for some fun.

Sorry this caught my eye

Just to clarify,are you banned from his blog? Or are you banned from challenging his training/principles etc on here?

Maurice
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [espejo09] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply

Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [Skoalz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow! Dude you're irrelevant! ;)
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
desert dude wrote:
See *** for my responses to help clear the air.

I'm going to throw this out one more time in a last attempt to help you understand.

You said base was b.s. ***I did, bc everything adds to your base. The traditional concept of doing 1000 miles easy before intervals & that sort of shit went out the window years ago.

You said everything adds to base. ***It does. Again, why not do VO2 max intervals year-round or race efforts year round?

I said it doesn't. If it did, you would build and build and build and you can't. YOU even gave an example of peaking, resting, and building back up. You proved my point. ****By resting I meant 4d maybe a week maybe 10d at most during the begininng of the training season to the last race excluding taper. Those breaks are more for mental vs physical, which I made clear somewhere. Not returning to a period of pure aerobic training. Again specificity or training is what I'm arguing.

You said racing and high intensity doesn't erode your aerobic fitness, yet again, YOU talk about a break and rebuilding. ****See above.

I say it does because, gasp, after a peak you return to BASE to rebuild aerobic fitness. ****Gasp, you return to base training to add to not rebuild. But you can also add to it with SST or vo2. You manipulate the training load with in the training cycle to rest and stress. Day 1 could be hard day 2 could be easy. The proportion of intensity changes. You do not carry on with the same percentages of intensity.

So that's the issue and you agree with it in everything except name. ***If you say so, you're the man I'm just the coach. "A coach". Careful with those qualifiers.

You can't continue on at a high-intensity. You must, must, MUST return to shore up that aerobic fitness that you've eroded with that high intensity work. ****Here is where you're wrong. You don't have to return to shore it up. But you can return to it to have a period of lower stress training when you are not racing or need to recover. it's not to shore up anything. Again everything you do adds to your fitness and that's what base is. You read Friel didn't you? Again, why are you reducing intensity, then? Why the need to recover if it's all base? Why vary the percentages?

That's "going to the well". That's "digging too deep". That's "burning your matches". ****No burning your matches specifically has been referenced as going well above your CP in a race in multiple papers/books. As for digging to deep or going to the well that can be a system of long term over training which demands more rest and less training not shoring up. And too many of those race efforts over time erodes that aerobic foundation. That's why you can't do high-intensity work all the time.

You want to go to the well, dig deeper, or burn more matches? Then you beef up that base with lower-intensity work so you can do more. You want to dig yourself into a massive hole (for some reason you think this is difficult. With 17 years of experience I'd have to question the athlete's you work with if you think it's so rare), then you keep up the intensity and neglect that base. ***** It's clear you don't understand base,periodization, manipulating training variables, how to structure a training season(s), peak etc. But question my athletes if you desire. PM me and I'll give you email addresses if you want to chat with them. Maybe it's so rare in them though bc I can design a well thought out and planned training season(s). Now you're just being pedantic.

You want long-term improvement, then you hit that aerobic work for long periods of the year and you shift the percentages of intensity and volume to manipulate adaptations and reach peak fitness. ****No shit the second part is what i've been saying. Not a return to just base though. That's not what I agree about.
***You've been saying that the intensity erodes base. It does not. You don't need to do X months of aerobic only cycling to enhance your base, you can do that with a variety of training intensities. And the proportion of those intensities changes according to the time of year.

Are there other issues you want to discuss? No, because you're not saying anything worthwhile..

Dude seriously, PM me if you want to chat with them. Otherwise I'm going to say we agree to disagree an have different methodologies. Except we really don't. You're just hung up on semantics and have an ego you're hellbent on protecting. Just like me.



The blue highlights are things I've already said. The red are things you apparently think I've said that I haven't. The green are my additional comments.
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [Skoalz] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Skoalz wrote:
And you acuse others of getting caught up in semantics?

I've not seen a single post on this thread that promotes not varying load or intensity. Even you are saying to maintain some intensity during 'base'. Duh.

It might help you to peruse this thread again before accusing others of not reading.

Take a minute to go read Tabata's orignal study with cyclists. If you have spare time read anything by Bompa. There are endless studies that demonstrate increased aerobic development through intense intervals. How you equate the idea of needing to back off or vary routine with aerobic development erosion is bizarre. Could you please reference a single study that shows deterioration of aerobic development through intensity?

You're still not reading, bud.

Yes, I've promoted a level of intensity all along. The point is that that level of intensity and the percentage of intensity relative to training load varies throughout the year. You cannot maintain a high level of intensity/racing year-round.

Again, if everything simply adds to increased aerobic development, why not just to intervals for EVERY RIDE or run?

Some of you keep dodging that question like it's a leper. Answer it, eh?
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [needmoreair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You acknowledge that "You cannot maintain a high level of intensity/racing year-round". But that does not mean that high intensity erodes your base. That is where you miss the boat. If done correctly they add to your base by increasing mitochondria and improving your ability to utilize glucose to name two things.

--------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by: bhc: Nov 10, 13 6:38
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
desert dude wrote:
Quote:
but here is an opinion piece on "reverse periodization."

There is no reverse periodization. It's periodization. Period. That is it. No reverse no forward, no sideways no standard, just periodization. Periodization is training from least to most specific. That's it. There is nothing reverse about it.
.

Did you read the blog? Because that was pretty much exactly what Friel said.

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
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [bhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Actually what he wrote was that If you can't get out for significant bike volume (12+ hours) I'd focus more on working FTP from the underside with tempo, sweet spot, and threshold work: ~80-100% of FTP, especially in the range of 85-90% as that work is repeatable over multiple days throughout multiple weeks if your volume isn't too high

Suggesting that you just can't tolerate some VO2max work, or anaerobic capacity work without some decent amount of base. So, it's actually even stronger than saying that high intensity erodes your base. You can bury yourself with LT work just as well as with VO2max work if you aren't careful. I'd refer him to Skiba's book and the comments
on polarized training, along with the references on the topic, but he thinks I'm an idiot ;-)
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [needmoreair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
needmoreair wrote:

Yes, I've promoted a level of intensity all along. The point is that that level of intensity and the percentage of intensity relative to training load varies throughout the year. You cannot maintain a high level of intensity/racing year-round.

Again, if everything simply adds to increased aerobic development, why not just to intervals for EVERY RIDE or run?

I was also under the assumption that while intense activities (e.g. VO2max intervals), per se, contribute to aerobic adaptation and do not do things such as "eroding the base", it's the issues of dosage and response that make prolonged training blocks of intense activities a) give diminishing returns in terms of adaptation and b) start to stress the endocrine system in such as way that the body is constantly stressed (as marked by raised cortisoid levels)

For the more knowledgeable people here, is the above a) remotely correct, and b) does it have to do with how the endocrine system handles the training stimuli? It'd be great if someone could point to a few pub-med review on this.
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Just to clarify,are you banned from his blog?

I was more or less banned from his blog. He wrote some stuff on power and I posted comments. The first few showed up, then some more wit research links, those got pulled bc they contraindicated what he said. Then my posts stopped getting approved.

Someone asked if I read the article, no I did not.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [echappist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
http://jp.physoc.org/...t/575/3/901.abstract

--------------------------------------------------------
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [bhc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
thanks for that. and i didn't even need to go into my university's VPN to read it.

i guess i wasn't as clear in my original question. I'm more interested in the endocrine effects after prolonged period of training (or any sort), and if there are any that looks at how it may induce over-reaching or perhaps over-reaching induces it, or perhaps they are two faces of the same coin?
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [echappist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [needmoreair] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
dude seriously the use of green is giving me migraines and I can barely see it on my screen.

Why not do vo2 or what ever intervals year round you ask? You do most of the year in a well designed program. The rest for a rest period after racing season ends is to let people be normal people, to give them some mental downtime, let them heal aches & pains etc.

You argue specificity of training but you also say you need to shore up aerobic fitness and that intervals and racing erodes that. It does not.

I've been saying the %'s change as the season progresses. You started your posting on this thread saying you need to return to base training after peaking. Not that you change the %'s. You are the one that implied you cut out intervals and do only aerobic work to build a bigger bottom of the pyramid. Now you are saying that the %'s change. Can you see why people are confused with where you stand on this issue?

I'm reducing intensity bc of how the season is structured, the time of year, the racing left. I'm allowing people to catch up on life, do sponsor stuff, you know all the little things that need to be managed when you are managing athletes. See the above paragraph where I list other reasons. I'm not, I repeat not doing it to re-establish base or build it back bc intervals and racing eroded it as you stated often in this thread.

You clearly do not understand physiology bc you state yet again that race efforts erodes aerobic foundation. Take that to it's end conclusion. I do 4mo of base work then enter the race season. I'm doing intervals 2x week racing 2-3d week. How long before I do this will I have eroded my aerobic foundation? 2mo, 4mo, 12mo? If all those efforts detract from fitness why would I do them when I could just ride around and keep increasing fitness? Please explain that to me and it would probably help me if you can point out scientific papersbooks/etc to back this belief up. I am clearly not grasping this point, in fact I'm having a very, very hard time understanding this statement of yours bc it contradicts human physiology. I'm going to need some proof sources to grasp that erosion of base by intervals and racing I think.

Maybe I am being pendantic, maybe I prefer precision when discussing these things. You accused me of semantics earlier and I will give you an example of why we use specific language for specific things. You and I go on a 5 hour ride, we end up at your neighbors bonked, running on fumes, cross eyed. They have a cooler filled with various sodas. You ask for a soda and I ask for a Pepsi. You get a diet caffeine free coke and I get a Pepsi. You enjoy your 1 calorie while I enjoy my 120. Semantics. That's why we use specific language when discussing specific things.

So yes I am hung up semantics. Because if you are talking about doing SST efforts and I'm talking about doing vo2 efforts and we are calling the same % of FTP by different things then we are having 2 conversations at once.

I'm very pro specificity, I've very pro intervals. I'm very anti intervals and race efforts erode aerobic fitness. This last bit combined with some of your reasoning for it and rational to do specific things in training bc of this, is the point of contention. You stated this in post 16 or 17 and that is what I primarily took issue with not the bottom part of one of those posts where you talk about specificity.

I said base is BS bc everything you do adds to your fitness. It all adds to your CTL. Intervals, SST, JRA. Today's intervals are tomorrow's base just like tomorrows long steady L2 ride is the futures base.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Quote Reply
Re: enought ftp talk...lets talk base [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Im finding this whole thread pretty interesting. reading the varying trainging theories is pretty cool. Lots to be learned. thanks
Quote Reply

Prev Next