Since you run a fine half marathon, your IM and ultra problems are much more likely to be due to training, nutrition and or pacing rather than anything remotely related to insufficient slowtwitch fibers in your muscles. As many have noted your bike training program probably holds the greatest potential for improvement. IIRC you had the fastest IM marathon in your age group at IMLT but were hamstrung by your bike.

Hugh

---

Genetics load the gun, lifestyle pulls the trigger.

It's the same just different. Training is training, short, long in between. The underlying principles that form the foundation of it don't change just bc the distance does.

The what is the same how you apply the what may/is/could be different.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

he simply didn't believe that there was anyone out there who did not respond *at all* to exercise training, and in part because he didn't see such knowledge as "actionable intelligence."

It might be useful for setting expectations, or determining why someone's training plan doesn't work... ie they don't need a new plan, they are just SOL.

I certainly can't say I don't respond to exercise, because the couple times I've come "off the couch" I've gotten massive gains in a few months. The problem is that I get very little improvement after that. I seem to be stuck at a tolerating only a low level of training stress too. Even though I'm old this was also true when I was 30. And I've never been able to recover sufficiently to perform well on consecutive days. I need ~48 hours between hard efforts. At stage races I get slower every day.

Any ideas? Just the way it is?

I've had the exact same experience. I've read that part of the genetic component to endurance ability is the ability to tolerate high training loads, so it would appear that you and i just did not get that part of the puzzle to the degree that the really fast guys got it:)

I'm sure Coggan and/or others more knowledgeable will chime in, but this is my sense of it.

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

off topic , slightly. The genetics have to support high training loads both physically and also mentally without getting injured. So its not only muscle physiology to train, adapt, and recover enough to do it again. Its also the genetics/environment to support the athlete mentally and the genetics/training program that doesn't injure the athlete. As I think about all that has to go right, it's not surprising that elite athletes are rare.

---

Brian
“Eat and Drink, spin the legs and you’re going to effin push (today).” A Howe

I was just talking to someone the other day about how important the mental aspect is. I would LOVE to skip training days, but I know once I start down that road, .....

.

---

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

This just seems like a reiteration of the obvious. Species need diversity for survival and that diversity includes physiological response to physical stimuli(or a lack thereof). There are situations where it would behoove a species to NOT respond to physical activity. So that, for whatever reason the world may throw at them, it would actually be an advantage to be less physical. Perhaps the predators are WAY more wicked than you are, then you would be better off staying home and 'chillin'. So we have diversity in humans...in an athletic sense...you want athletic genes. And theres more than 1 athletic gene. whats new?

---

"WHEW...I really regret that workout!"..............Noone

Definitely:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

I like your point. I'll skip the stuff no one cares about (team sports bkgd) and just say I hit the pins for YEARS till I found out what a "hard gainer" is.

3-4 years of tri & now through trial & error I've learned that the Mark Allen allegory of running in zone 2 till I can do 5:40/mi with a low heart rate isn't gonna happen.

8 wks of hills and HIIT on the run led to a half-mary PB 3:15 faster than 18mo ago on the same course. I'm not fast, time was 1:34:41, but it's a leap, and in my head I was afraid to go 7:41/mi for an OHM.

I bore you with this to emphasize that I think I'm just scratching the surface of the training impetus to which I respond best.

& N.B. your post also makes me wonder again why Sagan won't be a GC contender?

---

_____________________________________
What are you people, on dope?

—Mr. Hand

Corrent. Dave, if Bradley Wiggins can win the 4000m pursuit AND 5 hour long Tour de France stages and everything else in between, that should be a clear enough indication that a person who does fine at 10K due to an abundance of ST fiber should do well at the long stuff. There are certainly other factors at play such as training methods, bike position, physiology around absorption of calories (some people can just eat a lot more than other and absorb those calories....maybe we need a genetic study on that). etc etc. Your slow IM bike times relative to your IM run times have nothing to do with lacking slow twitch muscle fiber.

I've had the exact same experience. I've read that part of the genetic component to endurance ability is the ability to tolerate high training loads, so it would appear that you and i just did not get that part of the puzzle to the degree that the really fast guys got it:)

I wish I *could* train a lot and keep improving. It's real easy for me to get overtrained unfortunately. Best shape I've gotten in was after doing 3-5 hr rides at always <FTP for a couple months. ~12hrs/week. I'd never done that before because I like to go hard. In the spring I cut back on mileage and increased intensity, did well in a couple races, and that was it. I mean, I need to do *some* intensity if I'm going to race, but that seems to easily push me over the edge. Anyway, I tried staying under FTP for a several months again and it didn't work the second time. Maybe I should focus on intensity with very low volume, like a few hours a week?

Ya, sounds like that might work. The best years i've ever had i only averaged about 10-12 hr/wk training, and that is SBR total vs sounds like you are mainly a cyclist. When I was a "pure swimmer", my best yrs were averaging around 8-9 hr/wk and, TBH, I really think i was in my very best shape of my entire life then, as "just a swimmer", based on the way i felt, i.e. I just had this HUGE feeling of power in the water which i have never ever recaptured since those years. I think possibly when we reach a personal peak in anything for the very first time, the feeling may be unique and never the same again, even if we go just as fast again, b/c the first time you have a certain huge feeling might be unique and perhaps can not happen again. However, i still have hopes of regaining that feeling:)

Not to disparage the power meter, pace clock, or watch, but in many respects training is all about how we FEEL. If we feel good when going hard, we can enjoy the process. OTOH, if it is truly a "suffer-fest" I don't really see how anyone is going to keep that sort of thing up over the years. All of my best swims, bikes, and runs have felt really good, but of course prob some of the SBRs I did when i didn't feel all that great contributed to the really good ones, but OTOH i know i've done lots of workouts when i was tired and just ended up going slower and slower rather than faster. So, in the end, IF a person is very conscientious and motivated to start with, an argument can be made that he/she should train strictly on feel. Still train 7 days per week but just bag any workout if you don't feel good after 20-30 min. This would actually take a lot of discipline:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

No money in training by feel. No power meter sales, no heart rate monitor sales, no training plans to sell, no software to sell, no apps to sell, no GPS to sell, no Garmins to sell. It will never catch on.

Ah, of course, how could I have been so silly to think this idea to be of any importance...:)

---

"Anyone can be who they want to be IF they have the HUNGER and the DRIVE."

Gadgets can help train feel, especially for those who don't have it naturally. Not everyone is able to work on feel as an intuitive approach. Same as drinking to thirst, some just ignore it or don't feel the same drive to drink.

People who lack feel are drawn to the use of gadgets.

Stupid people who drink more than thirst dictates end up wasting time stopping to piss or needing to piss themselves like an incontinent old tart.

Everyone has the same thirst response, or the same drive to eat or the same feel for their effort level? Maybe put down the bottle of cheap booze and think before you call yourself a useless tart...