Since everyone is different with different amounts of training behind them and different rates of recovery, shouldn't the question be "how do I determine the best taper strategy for me" rather than collecting a list of what works for others?

These aren't mutually exclusive concepts.

---

---

---

Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/

This is what always bugs me the most about people whining about other people spending their money on gear...

"Yeah you could buy those wheels or you could just train harder"

"Or I could do both"

Train smart, race smart, and buy gear. Or hell, just buy gear and train like an idiot, more stuff on the used market for me.

---

Benjamin Deal - Professional - Instagram - TriRig - Lodi Cyclery
Deals on Wheels - Results, schedule, videos, sponsors

I have found that a +20 to + 30 TSB on race day to mean that I am fresh and do the business.

+ 10 thru +15 is iffy;

Lower than that is roulette. I have raced well (only once) on +2TSB... But I also had a disastrous DNF (within literally 3 seconds I could tell my legs were cooked after getting on the bike).

Everyone is different, so my benchmarks might be different than others...

as already commented, its not an either/or situation
but yes, i would say peaking is second only to training in significance (assuming you're not riding a fat bike or something stupid tech-wise) and also one of the hardest/least commonly understood things.

peaking is relevant to everyone whatever their goals - many are aiming to "give it their all" rather than achieve any time/placing goal.

i've worked out a taper protocol that seems to work reasonably for me - i generally feel pretty good on goal race days - but i don't know if it is "optimal". i experiment to some extent but have limited appetite to risk writing off either training time or a goal race day to really experiment and anyway, its very difficult to objectively measure peaking results or identify causes in amongst the noise of life. i think thats the reason for the focus on tech - its clearly measurable as compared to peaking which is a dark art with individually varying results, though there are plenty of general principles that work for most.

While tech is measurable, the margins are getting smaller not bigger. Now so small that I think the difference that a person can make by peaking correctly makes a greater difference than $$ of tech.

Tapering is cheaper than tech. Especially if you don't have money lol.

I think it would be beneficial to have more train/taper threads.

---

Indoor Triathlete - I thought I was right, until I realized I was wrong.

Yet by far we have a few taper threads and a ton of tech threads.

My point is that peaking correctly would be much cheaper than tech and would pay off bigger. IMO Maybe we need to re-direct our focus for our benefit.

---

Indoor Triathlete - I thought I was right, until I realized I was wrong.

What is TSB? I googled and that didn't help.

Yes everyone is different; yet, we don't what others are doing/measuring to know how well they might work for us.

Sounds like you are onto something repeatable and measure-able.

---

Indoor Triathlete - I thought I was right, until I realized I was wrong.

Training stress balance. The delta between ATL and CTL.

Google TSB, ATL, CTL and you should find it. (I hope)