Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate)
Quote | Reply
i wrote earlier this month about training during the winter months, and the theme of the article was long, slow and easy.

you were nice enough to comment, but i don't know that your comment saw much light because it was placed at the end of the article, and not here on the forum. i thought it fair to engage you on this point, and to do so in front of slowtwitchers, so that they might benefit from whatever good comes from the discussion.

you said, in reply to the idea of slow early, fast late: "Get fast, then go long... because if you go long before you are fast then what speed are you going long at?" and... "go ahead... go long in slow in winter... then spend the rest of the season wondering why you haven't improved much from the prior season."

i replied to this, and to my reply that the athletes of yesteryear got very fast by going slow early and fast late, you wrote that the athletes in those days were: "far from clean." the athletes in the era to which i referred in the article are pauli kiuru, dave scott, wolfgang dittrich, greg welch, mark allen, thomas hellreigel, jurgen zack, paula newby fraser, erin baker, ray browning, scott tinley, rob barel, paul huddle, jeff devlin, kenny glah, cristian bustos, and a bunch of others i could name, but, you get the point. i suppose athletes of today can claim that the athletes back then were fast because many or most took drugs. i think it's just as fair for the athletes back then to claim that many or most of you are taking drugs. since neither their era nor yours has any evidence at which to point, why don't we call a truce, absent that hard evidence, and move on to the real issue -- which is, how do we best get fast and stay injury free?

you also point out, quite rightly, that it's better to look at 10th place rather than 1st place, because the sport's talent is deeper now than then. i think it's also fair to state that the sport is at least double or treble the size now than it was 15 and 20 years ago. nevertheless it's fair to consider your point, so, let's look at the 10th place finisher at kona during that span 15 to 20 ironmans ago:

1989 Wolfgang Dittrich: 8:39:56 Amy Aikman: 9:52:51
1990 Jeff Devlin: 8:57:29 Irma Zwarkruis: 10:17:21
1991 Stefan Kolm: 8:53:06 Wendy Ingraham: 9:54:35
1992 Ray Browning: 8:40:34 Juliana Nievergelt: 9:52:36
1993 Olaf Sabatschus: 8:34:08 Katinka Wiltenburg: 9:38:39

Average - Men: 8:45 Women: 9:55

the past 5 years

2004 Raynard Tissink: 9:04:51 Nicole Leder: 10:13:46
2005 Stephan Vuckovic: 8:29:35 Melissa Ashton: 9:32:20
2006 Patrick Vernay: 8:28:13 Natascha Badmann: 9:38:52
2007 Patrick Vernay: 8:35:10 Erika Csomor: 9:39:47
2008 Eduardo Sturla: 8:36:53 Dede Griesbauer: 9:39:53

Average - Men: 8:39 Women: 9:45

so, yes, you're right, at the bottom end, the 10th place man in kona was 6 minutes slower 15-20 years ago than he was over the past 5 years. and the 10th woman was, predictably, even faster (10 minutes faster) because the growth of the sport has been very much biased in favor of additional women (the sport has gone from 15% women to 35% or so women over the past generation) there are probably 5 times more female triathletes now than there were 15 years ago. probably that's understating it.

i think the difference in depth is not that great, and is more than explained by the much larger numbers of triathletes worldwide, and especially by the feeder program into ironman racing that is the olympic/itu circuit.

with that as the backdrop, here is why i think its far sounder to spend these early-season, pre-season days taking it slow and easy:

SOFT AND CONNECTIVE TISSUE

training gets progressively ballistic as you move from water to land, and from the bike to the run. maybe there's a successful running program out there that favors your approach of start out fast and hard, then add miles. i just don't know of one. likewise cycling programs. nobody i know who's successful starts with speed and intensity, because training is progressive, and one trains to be able to train at a greater intensity, with greater stress. somewhat on the bike and especially on the run, training at a high intensity without base miles, well, choose your injury: blown calves; blown plantar fascia; blown hip flexors, avulsion fracture of the hamstring; blown IT band; and that's the short list.

YOU'RE FAT

take everything above and multiply it, because many or most people enter the season weighing more than they do during the season. maybe 5lb. maybe 20lb. those injuries described above are that much more likely to happen if you've got the extra weight coming down on green, pre-season connective tissue.

FAT BURNING

starting slow doesn't mean when you add speed later that you decrease miles. it just means that you add speed. to the degree that fat metabolism is trainable, best pompt the body to learn efficient fuel use early and often. i might also add that mark allen claimed fuel uptake (intestinal tract => bloodstream) was trainable, and that he took himself from circa 300 cal/hr to upwards of double that over the course of his racing career. i don't know that academia has embraced this (but then what would the study look like that would demonstrate this to academia?).

CLEAR PATHWAY TO SPEED

there is no shortage of evidence that speed doesn't disappear if you pass through an early season period of low velocity and low intensity running and cycling. indeed, dave bedford, gerry lindgren and others demonstrated that very little speedwork was required to be a world class runner. most runners throttle back significantly for weeks or months at a time. likewise cyclists.

but i will concede you this: i think it might be different in swimming. this is the one activity where proper technique is not intuitive technique. minor muscles employed in obscure motions are necessary to achieve an optimal stroke. you come from a swim background, and you know far more about this than i do. but i can tell you from my own experience that i cannot start swimming long, slow yards in the early season, or after a layoff, because i don't have musculature allowing me to swim very far with proper technique. so i treat swimming differently than i treat running or cycling, because i consider it a premium to swim with proper technique at all times.

accordingly, i wonder whether you might be leveraging your swim experience over to activities that historically do not obey (or necessarily obey) the sorts of protocols you might be used to as a former national caliber swimmer. swimming, running and cycling have all grown up with their own cultures and the coaches that teach these disciplines approach each with various time-proven recipes for end-season success. are you honoring these cultures? or do you think you have nothing to learn from them?

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dev,

Just a friendly reminder... you're using Slowman's login.

-

The Triathlon Squad

Like us on Facebook!!!
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman, I think the slow and long first and then fast and shorter later discussion is a bit of a red herring for athletes with multiple years of base. It's not like last year's base just evaporated overnite that need to be rebuilt with 30-40 hours per week of Zone 1 :-)

Keep in mind that last year's (and perhaps the past decade of) long training is the base for this year's fast training. So for example, if I go fast and hard in the winter, I am leveraging last summer's Ironman build.

Tom Evans mentions that his winter is his short course season...he's indoors on the bike and doing all his hard stuff outdoors on XC skis...after that he'll flip to a run focus and then when the weather gets good big bike miles in lead ups to Ironman that happen to occur in the summer/fall. So last summer's big stuff is base for this winter's intensity and this winter's intensity is raising his V02 for next summer's Ironman. I might be misquoting the exact details of his approach, but you get the picture.

I do concurr that it is fairly pointless to do a lot of run speedwork months out from a race...better to spend more of the time at maximum aerobic speed (whatever you want to define that as)....but for bike and swim, not sure that countless trainer hours spinning in zone 1 makes a lot of sense and for swim, you have already explained the reason why you don't want to constantly go easy.

WRT to yesterday's athletes all being on dope and today's ones being clean, there are clean and dirty guys in each era...it is unfair to paint an entire generation with the trangressions of a few (or many)
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Paulo Sousa] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Paulo, funny thing is that on many fronts I disagree with slowman on this topic (see post above..at least related to bike and swim) :-)
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dan,

A couple points:
  • The common response to playing the Mark Allen card is that, by the time he switched to his LSD program, he'd already had years of short course success under his belt (read: HARD and FAST). IOW, before he went long and slow, he'd already built his "fast". (Easy enough to advocate long and slow when your slow is still sub-7' miles on the run and maybe 22-23mph on the bike.) I can't comment on the others as I don't know their athletic histories as well, but I would be surprised if many of them weren't also quite speedy when they started a volume-based approach.
  • I can't recall any of the "build fast then far" advocates out there ever saying the long and slow won't work -- it's just that you need to do LOTS of it. Among the bulk of AG'ers, who choose other priorities over training (because, yes, it is a personal choice, after all), there simply isn't enough time in the week to train enough in the traditional base approach to provide the physiological stress that will produce the desired adaptations. If folks have got 15-25 hours/week to ride, then, yes, an LSD approach will likely allow them to build a tremendous fitness base over time. However, if they've only got 6-8 hours, then they need to look at other ways to ratchet up that physiological stress, which means intensity.
cramer
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For clarification, it appears that this debate is centered around Iron distance races, true?

Lar Dog
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Since it's not either or (long & slow vs short & fast), I ask you to figure out why you are more wrong then right & let us know your answer.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Last edited by: desert dude: Jan 26, 09 18:25
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Paulo Sousa] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dev,

Just a friendly reminder... you're using Slowman's login.

That my friend has to be the post of the month. I just spewed a nice Merlot all over the desk and part of my lap-top in our home office!

I am going to have to do a bit of a clean up before I make a serious response to this!!


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Last edited by: Fleck: Jan 26, 09 17:19
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think both approaches miss the real key for training... FUN. For most of us triathlon is a hobby. I love going out for long rides because I love to be on the bike. But some days I just want to go out and hammer not because it will make me faster in a race 6 months from now but because it is a ton of fun. Yes a training plan needs structure. But more importantly it needs variety. Training plans ought not to lean too far to either extreme for too long less the athlete lose even a little bit of interest. I have a rule whenever I'm training that if I'm not having fun I bag the day. Luckily i think suffering is fun and I enjoy all three disciplines so even though I really suck compared to a lot of other people on race day i know that I'm still having a blast. In the long term I think this leads to a more successful training strategy than deciding to adopt Long & Slow or Intensity.
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interesting points, I'm surprised this thread isn't getting more replies-

The problem is that the reasons behind going long with less intensity aren't the whole truth. For example, two ways to increase VO2- long days, low intensity (a.k.a.- "climb-the-wall-German-intensity-for-a-120mi-ride), or short days with supramax efforts of short duration (let's call the cutoff at 30s or less), with limited recovery, repeat, repeat, repeat. Science backs both.

Rather than the "soft and connective tissue" ballistic from swim->bike->run increasing, did you mean a cumulative-injury cycle? If so, yes, absolutely, there is a need to address it with soft/connective tissue, but I would argue there is just as much chance from swimming as there is from biking to running. Injury is about inadequate tissue repair, altered NM conductivity, abnormal/altered movement patters, scar tissue buildup, etc, which creates a cyclic downward spiral until the breaking point/debilitating injury. The majority of time, the signs/symptoms are there long before we actually hear the pop or feel the pull.

Fat on the body? Sure, extra weight has something to do with it, but it's still not a valid reason to go long and slow. Funny how the body adapts to all imposed demands...you give it 5 or 20lbs to carry around, it will adapt to it and adjust accordingly. True, it's more N coming down on that knee joint, but if the duration fits the intensity, and the recovery is correct, it's not a significant factor.

Fat burning? adaptation again, which doesn't take as long as people think. Other than protein, I don't think anyone would be able to argue there is a difference between a 2 hour ride substrate usage and a 5 hour ride substrate usage. The 'taint might be able to argue, but your mitochondira won't. This also falls in with the notion of a continuum for energy usage.

Quote:
starting slow doesn't mean when you add speed later that you decrease miles. it just means that you add speed

No, this just means that the athlete will get frustrated when they go out for that 100mi ride that took them 6 hours to complete, and they're upset when they blow their load at the 40mi point because they can't hold they're (wrongly) envisioned "21mph avg" for that same route and finish in less that 5hr...then they blame nutrition, bike, wind, wheels, etc. All this because the glass ceiling they spent the past 4 months creating is smacking them in the grill.

I think the point that is missed with all of this is what I mentioned earlier- you can build that "foundation" portion (we'll call it VO2) in one of two ways- lots (and I mean lots) of volume, upwards of 30hrs/week, or significantly less volume (around 10hrs) with intensity repetitions. Then, adjust fire as the "specific" phase approaches.

But, lilke I said, good pints to discuss.

http://www.reathcon.com
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Rob] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
good pints to discuss

whoops...one too many pints of the Rare Vos tonight...I meant "points" (hic)

Speaking of which, in case someone is looking for the ultimate brew, I highly recommend it...

http://www.ommegang.com/index.php

It will rank up there in the top5 for all you beer-snobs out there.

http://www.reathcon.com
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Soft and Connective Tissue. No argument here. But, it seems to be more of a running issue than bike or swim. So, in that sense, the argument can be made that long slow and easy is in order for the run. For running how slow was slow and how easy was easy? Lydiard had some 'fast' work early on. And, his slow and easy was pretty much the best aerobic pace that you could muster...like Dev talks about. Soft and connective tissue seems to be less of an issue for the swim and bike.

You're Fat. No argument here either. I've heard numerous comments at races about the people competing being 'fat.' You are talking about a few extra pounds here, but a lot of people coming into the sport are coming in seriously overweight. So, slow and easy may be all that they can do.

Fat Burning. I'll leave this one to those better qualified to debate.

Clear Pathway to Speed. Very little argument here with respect to running. But again, even one of the biggest proponents of volume for running had some speed work year round, but the slow and easy was not as slow and easy as people generally think.

It may be different in swimming? I think that it is. The longest swim event is 15-20 minutes. The marathon is 2-3 hours. The cycling classics are 5 hours. So, yes, swim training can and should be different. Triathletes as a rule DO NOT swim fast enough. My wife, a swim coach, has done numerous private swim lessons for triathletes with basically good form who are slow. They are slow because their warm-up and main set is the same speed. But, I think that there are some things from swimming that could be successfully applied to cycling or running like some type of quality in the majority of workouts or some type of 'fast' training in each workout. It doesn't have to be a lot, but some maybe.

Why doesn't it work the way you've written? It can if the athlete in question has a lot of time to do the volume or a lot of patience to build up years of base. But, the typical athlete has neither the time nor the patience. So instead of building a base through days, months, years of training, they do a couple of sprint tris in year #1 and then sign up for an Ironman to be raced in year #2. If they are working with a coach who might be of the 'fast' before 'long' school of thought, they develop their fitness by going fast during the week since they have limited time and then long on the weekends. Or after an initial period of general conditioning, they go faster earlier in the season and then slow down to race specific efforts as the IM approaches. If they are working on their own, they probably just go slow and long and never really get faster until they realize that they need some speed work.

Cycling says you need to spin 100rpm. ST says that you should probably spin 100rpm. But, a look at the top IM athletes and they are riding about 80rpm and riding steep at that. That's contrary to cycling lore. So, in some respects, breaking from single sport tradition might not be a bad thing. There is definitely something to be learned from history, but I don't think that you should ever stop learning and by doing the same over and over, it seems that you've ceased learning. You being directed at people in general, not 'you' slowman.


Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
with that as the backdrop, here is why i think its far sounder to spend these early-season, pre-season days taking it slow and easy:
First of all i go into this with more than a small amount of doubt cast upon your claims. The top of which these are... you have no history of coaching successful athletes and you open this up with "i think" thus even admitting to yourself that these are beliefs of yours and not truisms.

In Reply To:
SOFT AND CONNECTIVE TISSUE

training gets progressively ballistic as you move from water to land, and from the bike to the run. maybe there's a successful running program out there that favors your approach of start out fast and hard, then add miles. i just don't know of one. likewise cycling programs. nobody i know who's successful starts with speed and intensity, because training is progressive, and one trains to be able to train at a greater intensity, with greater stress. somewhat on the bike and especially on the run, training at a high intensity without base miles, well, choose your injury: blown calves; blown plantar fascia; blown hip flexors, avulsion fracture of the hamstring; blown IT band; and that's the short list.
makes sense... for someone that might have taken three months off or is new to the sport. the point being... there is no off season and you never allow yourself to fall to far out of fitness.


In Reply To:
YOU'RE FAT
take everything above and multiply it, because many or most people enter the season weighing more than they do during the season. maybe 5lb. maybe 20lb. those injuries described above are that much more likely to happen if you've got the extra weight coming down on green, pre-season connective tissue.
reference the above again... if this is your profession than you never really let yourself go. BTW... i heard SQW was over on maui doing 2 minute sprints and that he's 10 lbs over his bejing weight.

In Reply To:
FAT BURNING
not even going to touch this.

In Reply To:
CLEAR PATHWAY TO SPEED

there is no shortage of evidence that speed doesn't disappear if you pass through an early season period of low velocity and low intensity running and cycling. indeed, dave bedford, gerry lindgren and others demonstrated that very little speedwork was required to be a world class runner. most runners throttle back significantly for weeks or months at a time. likewise cyclists.
okay... but if you are on your way up... you dont get better by doing the things you've always done... you have to stress the system beyond which it is familiar with

In Reply To:
accordingly, i wonder whether you might be leveraging your swim experience over to activities that historically do not obey (or necessarily obey) the sorts of protocols you might be used to as a former national caliber swimmer.
unlikely. as a coach i approach each individual as a unit... then because all units are mammals and respond to aerobic stress in a very well known manner I give them all the same dose. okay... kidding aside. every athlete of mine has their program specifically addressed to what they can and cannot do. Someone with no run background will not see an ounce of speed (not even strides) until I am sure their durability will allow for it. Bike (and i think this is where we mostly are going at it) is a zero gravity game. All of my athletes right now are getting hit with VO2 work or lots of threshold work. Long and slow? Fortget it. Myself. VO2 and threshold.

In Reply To:
swimming, running and cycling have all grown up with their own cultures and the coaches that teach these disciplines approach each with various time-proven recipes for end-season success. are you honoring these cultures?
it would seem that the word "tradition" (and in this case your use of the word culture) clouds the minds of men not allowing them to think beyond the boundaries of what has been done. my approach... blend what we know has been shown to improve human kinetics in a lab with what we know makes people fast in the field. put that together and you get a winning combo. Sit on your haunches and do what culture or tradition tells you to do and you wont get anywhere. Innovate or vegitate. Your choice.

In Reply To:
or do you think you have nothing to learn from them?
learn from them... and take the parts that make sense and use those. Riding 120 miles in Feb at a really slow pace. I'm not learning anything there.

Please excuse me as I have a set of VO2 max reps I have to attend to before the sun sets. I'll see in you in mazatlan and oklahoma city and hopefully more ITUs after that... then I'll see you in Canada with an FTP that's 20 watts higher than last year and a t-pace possibly a whole minute faster.

Not only that... you can watch my athletes do like they did last year... 100% improvement across the board.

Please... let's keep this discussion rolling.

but rather than "I thinks" let's go with "I knows"

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [desert dude] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i don't know if it's a sentence structure issue, or if it's just a breakdown in execution, but i have no idea what your post means, or says, or is asking.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Rob] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
The problem is that the reasons behind going long with less intensity aren't the whole truth. For example, two ways to increase VO2- long days, low intensity (a.k.a.- "climb-the-wall-German-intensity-for-a-120mi-ride), or short days with supramax efforts of short duration (let's call the cutoff at 30s or less), with limited recovery, repeat, repeat, repeat. Science backs both.
can you find me an abstract showing that looooooooooooooooooooong and easy is as effective at raising one's pVO2 as specific training for raising pVO2.

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [MarkyV] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Someone with no run background will not see an ounce of speed (not even strides) until I am sure their durability will allow for it"

OK, how do you know when the athlete has adapted and can handle speed work? I'm not picking at your point, more picking your brain.


---------------------------------------------------

Brawndo's got what plants crave. Brawndo's got electrolytes. And that's what plants crave. They crave electrolytes. Which is what Brawndo has. And that's why plants crave Brawndo. Not water, like from the toilet.
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Rob] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"Rather than the "soft and connective tissue" ballistic from swim->bike->run increasing, did you mean a cumulative-injury cycle?"

i don't remember precisely how i originally phrased it, let me rephrase it this way: running is more ballistic, more stressful, more damage-inducing, on connective tissue than either swimming or cycling. all things equal, you're more likely to hurt yourself, hurt yourself more badly, and hurt yourself for a longer period of time, running than while cycling or swimming.

running, let us say, 10 x 400m on a track, in 62sec, with 1min rest, is a workout that i could do and did when i was a teenager. but today i couldn't even think of it, not could anyone my age, and that's largely because of the shape our connective tissue is in today. but even as a teenager, running that fast, at that stress level, requires a requisite amount of muscular strength, flexibility, and tough, fit connective tissue. a workout a couple of weeks prior to that 10x400m might be 4 x 800m in 2:15 with a 400m jog. and a couple of weeks prior to that might be 10mi of a straight run, with 6mi of farlek in there, 3min on, 5min off. and prior to that is something slower still, and a month prior to that you're doing long, slow distance.

"
Injury is about inadequate tissue repair, altered NM conductivity, abnormal/altered movement patters, scar tissue buildup, etc, which creates a cyclic downward spiral until the breaking point/debilitating injury."

that's one way to get injured. another way is to simply apply too much stress to an underdeveloped tendon or muscle. for the purposes of this issue, i think it's probably the most likely way. and all good running coaches know this. were running not a part of triathlon, i'd be less interested in the issue, because the downside to starting out your season hell bent for leather would be less traumatic for those who fall afoul of a well-planned campaign.

"
But, lilke I said, good pints to discuss."

most runners i know would hoist one to your last statement.


Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [fatbastardtris] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
...how about making it really simple for real world age groupers....when you have limited time you go hard, when you have more time you go long...if tired, go easy and short...the above applies for swim and bike...for runnning, go at maximum aerobic speed for months on end and then before you A race for a few weeks ramp up the intensity to race speed in small bursts (but not race duration)....anything else we need to know?
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Hamner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
it's a subjective thing...

generally i look to the verbal feedback clues the athletes give... when they've done a hilly run or long(er) run and they don't complain about soreness as much, that's a start.

run form also needs to be taken into consideration

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [MarkyV] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
is as effective

Calm down, highspeed, did I say it was as "effective"? I just said it was a way in which to increase VO2...

But going down the "effective" path has to do with the previously trained state of the runner, and both of us know that to get any adaptation to the well-trained athlete means loading the bar.

http://www.reathcon.com
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I made it easier to read.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
running, let us say, 10 x 400m on a track, in 62sec, with 1min rest, is a workout that i could do and did when i was a teenager. but today i couldn't even think of it, not could anyone my age, and that's largely because of the shape our connective tissue is in today. but even as a teenager, running that fast, at that stress level, requires a requisite amount of muscular strength, flexibility, and tough, fit connective tissue. a workout a couple of weeks prior to that 10x400m might be 4 x 800m in 2:15 with a 400m jog. and a couple of weeks prior to that might be 10mi of a straight run, with 6mi of farlek in there, 3min on, 5min off. and prior to that is something slower still, and a month prior to that you're doing long, slow distance.
OK- but now you're getting to a different debate? Maybe it should go back to the "old school v. new school?" Besides, what you did back in the day is buoyed by some raging hormones that do more than what we remember to aid with recovery.

http://www.reathcon.com
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
i don't know if it's a sentence structure issue, or if it's just a breakdown in execution, but i have no idea what your post means, or says, or is asking.

Dan, apparently you claim that it's an either/or issue. I believe there are a number of us who believe it depends on the individual. I started with long & slow (years 1 - 4) and then moved to short & fast (years 5 - 7). But I also subscribe to the following principle:

1. Consistency
2. Volume
3. and then Intensity

Think of the above in a relative sense, not an absolute sense.

Thanks, Chris
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [lakerfan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Moving from the general to the specific. That's what I subscribe to.

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App
Quote Reply
Re: MarkyV: calling you out (for a friendly debate) [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Doesn't it usually come down to something like:
  • LSD works, example: Mark Allen or Germans in San Diego putting down slow 15 mph, but 500 mile weeks in Jan/Feb.
  • LSD doens't work, example: Joe age grouper simulating 15 mph German rides, but only getting in 50 mile weeks in Jan/Feb.

As an aside, someone posted a training article/plan the other day. 16 pages long. One line really grabbed my attention: "When my athletes are running 50 miles per week, I _then_ put together a training plan for them".
Quote Reply

Prev Next