I didn't know that... Congrats!

---

-
"Yeah, no one likes a smartass, but we all like stars" - Thom Yorke


smartasscoach.tri-oeiras.com

Francois, do you know what primary paper is being described here? For the life of me I can't find it

"The classic Billat strategem for hoisting vVO2max, as well as lactate threshold and efficiency of movement (economy), was a workout consisting of five three-minute intervals at vVO2max, with three-minute 'float' recoveries after the intervals. The diminutive genius from the University of Lille was able to show experimentally that this simple workout, carried out on a weekly basis, could upgrade vVO2max and lactate threshold by 3% and economy by 6% in as short a time as nine weeks (1). " (http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0896.htm)

---

_______________________________________________

forgot which ones...our stuff from France arrive in 2 weeks...I'll let you know as I have these papers.

Thanks - I found one which describes the 30/30 program, but in relation to time spent at VO2max, not reporting the effects of actually doing the training for a number of weeks. Another paper ("Interval training at VO2max: effects on aerobic performance and overtraining markers.") showed no improvement in LT or VO2max but did not use the 30/30 program.

---

_______________________________________________

Hey, JHC. Now you have done it! You have given away the secret link to Peak Performance Online.

You will put hundreds of "triathlon coaches" out of business, as their clients will discover the absolute simplicity of endurance training - train, hard, Train often and repeat - without a heart rate monitor in site!

Just kidding. Actually it is all there. I would highly reccomend anyone training for everything from a 5K running race through to an Ironman Traithlon spend a ferw hours reading the articles on PP Online. It should be required reading!

Fleck

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I like that site too, but I wish they'd be better in actually providing references for studies they claim to cite.

---

_______________________________________________

The easiest way to determine this pace is to do a 6 minute timetrial and note the distance covered.

Actually, that was another question I had about Francois' article.

Since one of the attributes we're trying to improve is tlimVO2max, simply running a 6 minute tt seems like an imperfect protocol, to say the least. What if your tlimVO2 max is 4 minutes, or 7.5 minutes?

While I am usually all for keeping this stuff as simple as possible, it seems to me much better to do the more detailed 2-day test to determine both vVO2max and tlimVO2max.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

Imperfect it may be but still a good proxy.

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0896.htm

Well, that would explain my inability to find one, but then where did the claim from PP Online come from?

"The diminutive genius from the University of Lille was able to show experimentally that this simple workout, carried out on a weekly basis, could upgrade vVO2max and lactate threshold by 3% and economy by 6% in as short a time as nine weeks"


edit: I think I answered my own question. The 1999 paper "Interval training at V·O2max: effects on aerobic performance and overtraining markers" is probably the one in question. Except that all lactate mesaures were unchanged and the interval in question was 3 min on/3min off.

---

_______________________________________________

I think it's called criative writing. With a sentence that starts with "The diminutive genius from the University of Lille" you should be suspicious ;-)

---

-
"Yeah, no one likes a smartass, but we all like stars" - Thom Yorke


smartasscoach.tri-oeiras.com

<<Was wondering about indoor trainer machines though. Seems the type that Troy Jacobson sells do have "progressive resistance" but I don't know how it compares to a computrainer . I primarily use rollers with fan resistance too. Anyway thanks for the info... >>

GT, I should also stipulate that the progressive resistance should have a road-like feel, meaning that as you increase cadence within a gear or from one gear to the next, the increase in workload should be similar to what you experience on the road.

I am not familiar with the current device TJ is promoting, but know that previously TJ promoted Cyclops fluid trainers, a device that I find to be useless with its wildly disproportionate "progressive resistance" and unwieldy general feel. I will not coach an athlete that has such a device as I know from experience that they will be largely unable to execute the workouts and thus benefit from my program.

Computrainer, besides offering a very realistic road feel, provides great data feedback in allowing you to measure your fitness, observe pedal stroke, ride hills, etc.

To summarize, a big part of my Inverted Pyramid approach relies on:
1. having a viable trainer such as a computrainer

2. using the trainer wisely with concise 2-3 weekly 1hr focused sessions which if done properly can build fitness uninterruptedly for many, many months. See my article Indoor Bike Sanity. http://www.triathloncoach.com/articles/sanity.html

One of the primary benefits of my approach is that fitness is continually enhanced without much increase in training time---a key limiter for many athletes---especially in the cold and dark winter months where marathon indoor sessions become distinctly unappealing.

{I will not coach an athlete that has such a device as I know from experience that they will be largely unable to execute the workouts and thus benefit from my program.} reply

you coached me and i had a cyclops fluid trainer. maybe the rules have changed in the last 4 years.

justin

I have for years experimented with all sorts of ways to be fast without having to spend large amounts of time cycling and running. After another mediocre season I finally gave in and started piling on the miles (most running) last winter. After two months, I ran a 90 second PR at half marathon and NEVER ran faster than 65-80 percent max heart rate during training.

After a full summer of running and cycling at 65-70 percent max heart rate I can now ride a power output that previously required 168 bpm, but now requires only a 148 bpm effort. All from long distance training.

At some point pure volume alone may not bring any further results, but I suspect that most people never come close to that point.

Look no farther than Paul Tergat and Bill Rogers who both ran 140-160 miles per week before their best marathons to see that volume is king if you want to maximize potential.

Other methods may be more time-effective, but nothing beats pure volume.

Chad

Look no farther than Paul Tergat and Bill Rogers who both ran 140-160 miles per week before their best marathons to see that volume is king if you want to maximize potential.

Whose potential? Paul Tergat's?

Are you saying that every runner should run 150 miles per week to achieve their own potential? Cause if you are, you're crazy.

High volume doubltlessly works for some people. Other's simply can't do it, and not simply because of time constraints.

---

"People think it must be fun to be a super genius, but they don't realize how hard it is to put up with all the idiots in the world."

A friend sent me this article and it pretty much sums up why we haven't had any great American distance runners in 20 years.

http://www.letsrun.com/jkspeaks.html

It is not that different than Arthur Lydiard has been saying for decades and his Olympic athletes, even the 1500 meter guys, ran 130 miles a week.

Kellogg believes you have to start building to high mileage slowly and intelligently as a teenager. Human biomechanics varies between individuals, but biology is biology and you can't reach your ultimate aerobic potential until you have wrung out every last bit of it from lots and lots of aerobic training.

Chad

P.S. It's never to late to start to build volume. I didn't start until I was 33 and I run faster than I did in college.

P.P.S. Lance's Nike commercial says he became fast from being on "his bike for seven hours a day." Again another example of lots of aerobic training making someone incredibly fast.

Two medals in the Olympic Marathons, that's not bad. And I don't think Deena Kastor was born in Eritreia, do you? :-)

---

-
"Yeah, no one likes a smartass, but we all like stars" - Thom Yorke


smartasscoach.tri-oeiras.com

True enough, and having run Winter Nationals the same year as she did, I can say that she is incredible to watch. But in the post race interview for a local Houston paper she mentioned how she had been happy with her 100+ mile run weeks leading into the race.

Meb was second to Alan Culpepper that year and I read that he didn't run two-a-day workouts but averaged 14 miles a day. And neither one is a surprise to anyone who has followed running the last few years. They have both been improving against the worlds' best for a while. According to the interviews I heard by running high volume.

However, before them, when was the last standout performance by an American distance runner? Perhaps Bob Kennedy in the 5,000, but once again you are talking about a guy who trained with the great Africans on occasion and ran a lot of miles.

Chad

nowhere did anyone say that you can reach your potential without volume, merely that simply piling up miles by itself will not yield optimal shape...

Tergat does A LOT of quality on top of volume, same for Lance, Jan, Dave Scott in his time etc...

do you really think biking 7hrs a day will make you fast? heck, to paraphrase Fausto Coppi, then my postman will be world champion...

Lance rides a lot and does a lot of intensity...

Duration and intensity applied at the proper time. It's axiomatic that you can't go hard every day in the same sport, and one way to spoof that axiom is by dividing up a run or a ride or whatever into two sessions divided by a predetermined amount of hours of rest in between. Even then, one of the two sessions is usually at a level of intensity less than that of the other.

Outside of certain hard-and-fast physiologic parameters, two athletes may not respond identically to the same training program. What works for Tergat may not work for Kastor etc. A fatal flaw in a lot of triathletes training plans is that they try to emulate exactly what is published in the latest edition of whatever Tri magazine it is that they're reading, and don't usually have enough experience or confidence to listen to what their own bodies are telling them.

You don't get faster by working hard all the time. You get faster by judicious use of hard work and judicious use of rest.

Kahuna

nowhere did anyone say that you can reach your potential without volume, merely that simply piling up miles by itself will not yield optimal shape...

Nor did I say this, however, I suspect that were people to build to high volume first and have the patience to let it do its work, then they would reap far greater benefits than any amount of lower volume and "quality" work.

do you really think biking 7hrs a day will make you fast? heck, to paraphrase Fausto Coppi, then my postman will be world champion...
Actually, I do think you would be pretty fast if you could ride for seven hours a day at a nice steady pace with the occasional rise in heart rate from hills. After a winter of 5 hours a week, mostly on the indoor bike at 135 bpm (68 percent max) I raced 50K at 168 hr and 250 watts. This summer I nearly doubled the 5 hours a week to an average close to 10 for the last 8-10 weeks and just rode the first 2 1/2 hours of a 4:20 ride at 148 average hr rate for 250 watts.

A friend of mine who was a USAT national champion in the mid-90s and 4-time military national champion almost never does any speed or "quality". He just churns out mega-volume most people couldn't comprehend and he still wins races at age 40. He was never injured and used a little racing coming into his important races to hone his speed.

Chad

Ok - I will be the fly in the ointment to challenge the IM results achieved by reverse periodisation.

Let me say at the outset that I am interested in IM, not short course. Accordingly, strength and endurance are far more important to my racing than having a particularly high LT. As a general statement, IM is not about going faster, it is about slowing down less.

I have tried a few different programs and, surprise, I have found that there is a direct correlation between training volume (at or about AeT) and race performance. For me, periodisation means do heaps of AeT volume for about 3 months and then spend about 1 month sharpening up with some LT work. For IM, the "sharpening" phase is almost optional as the key issue is endurance, not speed.

My mind is not closed to hearing contrary views, and I would be interested to hear if M2 (and other coaches) are having success at IM with reverse periodisation. By "success", I mean sub 9 hr age-groupers.

It may be that we are not that far apart - i.e. I assume that with a reverse periodisation approach you still pile on the volume as you approach the key event - that is the key ingredient in any IM program. The only difference is that you have already done your "sharpening" and are trying to carry it through the high-volume phase, rather than adding the sharpening work on at the end.

Flame away.