This is a great forum!!! I’ve been watching for several months, but this is my first post.
I have completed 3 Oly and will be doing my 4th this Saturday. My goal is to complete a 70.3 next season. In reading old threads related to 70.3 training, there seems to be two schools of thought. A) Build a very solid biking base and run 6 times per week (but no need to do longer than approx. 10 miles). The cumulative effect of the running is sufficient. B) If you are going to race for 5 hours, your training needs to be for longer distances.
Not taking sides, I would just like to hear the logic behind each camp’s training technique. I’m from the old school of thought: If you race long, you must train long, but I do find A reasoning to be very interesting.
Not sure what you mean by cumulative, but too often people seek out special workouts, or special training programs the emphasize one thing over another. At a high level nothing beats a training prpgram that over the course of 6 months to a year, you consistantly train at a moderate to high level, day in day out, week in week out and month in month out. FWIW, that’s “cumulative” in my books.
My plan is that I can do a 13.1 in 8 minutes miles in training (stand alone, not brick) like it is a walk in the park. But I will probably do 1 half marathon in training though. Most of this is just lots of 6 mile days stacked with hiking and walking (I count these as foot miles anyway). Sometimes 2 x 6 mile runs in the same day separated by hours. I will probably aim to do one fast 13.1 in training.
Then hopefully when I go to do an 8 minute mile after Swim/bike, it will be easier and also there is the mental aspect (this is easy, I do 8 minute miles in my sleep!!!).
An old school of thought on run training related to weekly volume (WV) for a specific race distance (D) was to survive WV=D, to run WV=2D and to race WV=3D.
Obviously there are circumstances to consider but with regards to point A. If you are running 5-6 times a week with a long run of 10 miles, and 4-5 more runs (3+3+6+6) you’ll certainly get through the run in good shape on 28-30 miles week of training.
I don’t see this as mutually exclusive from rolling in a long brick workout every couple weeks (2-3 hr bike + 1.5-2 hr run) to achieve point B.
As Fleck said consistency is probably the most important element, but seems like you can tick both points off below in one program fairly easily.
I’m apparantly from an even older school of thought where, if you want to race 13.1, you need to build a good base AND do several 16-18 mile runs. If the toal of all three legs will take 4 hours, then you need to do some 4+ hour workouts. This no longer seems to be the preferred method???
I’m far from a physiologist but I suspect that due to the fact that a 70.3 extends into (past) the same workout time frame as a marathon, and like 26.2 for most mortals, is an aerobic event, several issues are raised.
The first is doing a race pace effort of the distance (or longer) will require recovery that interrupts your training disproportionate to the benefit gained. Second, since it is aerobic if your aerobic base allows you to run 30+ miles a week (with an equivalent bike training volume) then you are more than capable of putting it all together in one effort on race day with a slightly higher level of effort.
I am speculating but this is my take/experience with it.
From what I have read and witnessed from one of our friends who is about a 3 hour marathoner, this is what I have concluded.
More is not better. Running 7 times a week is not better than 5 longer pretty intense workouts. Quality counts.
You need to vary your workouts. Yes, some longer distance to build endurance and your aerobic engine, but also some speed workouts.
Recovery counts. Rest (off days), sleep, and nutrition count. You body is not a machine it needs to rebuild itself. Getting faster involves this process:
Stress the body → recover rebuild tissues and adaptation → higher level of stress —> recover rebuild tissues and adaptation
I think it is also important to take one week per month and do low volume workouts to give your body a chance to recoop. After the season is over, it is also important to take a week or tow and just do down stuff like walking and yoga.
I fully believe it is better to do a bike and run in the same day and then take the next day off vs. bike one day and run the other.
“since it is aerobic if your aerobic base allows you to run 30+ miles a week (with an equivalent bike training volume) then you are more than capable of putting it all together in one effort on race day with a slightly higher level of effort”
This is what I’m having trouble getting my mind around. To me, 6-3-6-3-6 each week is “base” training. To run 13.1 miles after a long bike leg requires your body to be conditioned for longer aerobic periods in the 3-4 hour range. You don’t get long individual aerobic periods doing 6-3-6-3-6. You do if you run 6-3-6-3-15.
Just don’t understand the idea of how running 4 miles longer than you have done in training is possible after the S & B.
First thing I’d point out is using your notation what I would have been talking about is 3-6-3-6-0-10-0 or something along those lines. The 10 can be an 11 or a 12 in the weeks before the actual race. One of those 6’s can be tempo/intervals as well if you like. Further more you can throw in a 40 mile bike/10 mile run once a week in your ramp up to the actual race.
Ultimately the schedule is not all that different from ‘base’ with the exception of the harder medium day and the longer long day.
Again - I am not a coach, doctor or scientist, but since none have weighed in here I’ll continue the dialog.
As the goal of most of this training is not to finish (the training run) by falling over in a heap you, through cumulative weekly volume, are building a capability to operate at this pace for long periods - so on race day you are able to push past prior total workout times at this pace, and perhaps finish (the race) by falling over in a heap.
I don’t think you should be doing 5, let alone 6, runs per week for a half (that is, if your goal is to be faster, not just to “get through it”). Four times a week for running, at least one of which is off the bike, and it should be 15-20 k (sorry, we don’t do miles up here). You should include some hard effort in this run (although it’s hard, try running race pace or harder right off the bike for 15-20 min, then back off, then do at least one more 15 min surge somewhere in the run; hard right off the bike will help you physically and psychologically prepare for that moment in the race, which can often be challenging). Another run should be speed (intervals), leaving you two more runs at moderate/easy pace. Running six times per week will give you some good junk miles but hamper your recovery from the hard runs, which is where you will get your benefit. Someone has yet to explain the logic to me that you can expect to run well the last third of the 21k run if your body is nowhere near used to being there (espy off the bike!) because it usually does only 10-16k runs.
Also, as you get later into the season, you should try back-to-back bricks for strength-building, depending on how confident/strong you feel (e.g. a four-hr brick on sat. with emphasis on a hard run, then a three-hr on sunday with an easy run; you should be able to bike moderate-hard both days).
The only time I run 6-7 days a week is on business travel, when all I can do is a 45-60 min early morning run (usually not hard owing to time zone blowback).
Others will disagree with this, but this is my approach.
Actually, it is either/or. The OP is talking about two entirely different approaches to training. One approach appears to have you building a super base with no race distance training runs, while the other approach does include longer runs (13.1+ miles). As several of the other posters pointed out, the recovery time and the possibility of injury increases substantially when you add the long runs.
I also would love to have someone explain specifically how you can race (not walk) 13.1 successfully if you have never covered that distance in training. At 57, those long runs are killing my legs and it takes forever to recover.
You do NOT have to “cover that distance in training” to do a HIM or IM or mary.
As was said, it’s not either/or. Ideally, it’s some of both.
Consistent, week in, week out running. Weekly long(er) run.
You can extend that long run a bit in the period prior to the race, and/or do some/more of it at a harder effort, to more closely simulate race pace.
In a perfect world, I’d run 6x a week, w/ 1 L run of 12-16m, and another semi-L run of 10m ez, 1 tempo or speed work day, the rest filler and/or T-runs, typically in the 4-6m range. I don’t currently live in a perfect world however, so I’m not doing nearly that these days.
If you’re going to crack 5 hrs for a 70.3, you’re going to need a balanced race strategy and training plan. Sub 5 is pretty fast in my book. You can be an exceptional runner and that will help, but you still have to swim 1.2 and ride 56 first. Hopefully, you are focusing on your limiters and striving to become a balanced athlete. I didn’t see any mention of your swim or bike plan.
Personally, I can’t imagine running 7X a week unless that is the only type of racing I plan on doing…and even then it would probably be 5-6X. I think most folks are in the swim 3-4X week, bike 3-5X week and run 3-4X week. On top of that, there is, especially once you’re well into the year a mix of intensities and durations that are designed to deliver an array of adaptations. If you’re running 7X per week, in my view you are a) taking time away from the other elements that need training too b) are probably not going to be able to go hard enough on your hard days or recover well enough on your recovery days because running (even after easy days) requires so much more recovery than swimming or biking.
Again, I don’t know you and you may be a master in the water and on the bike. But…this post reads exactly like something I would have posted 5 yrs ago when I was just starting to get into this, but had been a runner for 20 years. I was convinced I knew it all since I was was a fast runner in college, but I to learn the hard way (driving my coach nuts in the meantime) in balancing my training focus, the intensity (my problem was that I wanted to semi-hard everyday in every workout) in order to really improve.
A goal of sub 5 is great and personally my goal for that distance as well. For that distance, I focused on my strength running which requires a good base during the “off-season” and then tempo, hill repeats, and intervals for a fast half ie sub 1:30. If you’re a natural swimmer, it will be a lot easier. I would spend tons of time on the bike though so you can put all the running to good use. On your easy run days, do some solid bike workouts and then long ride and run on the weekend.
I personally think that if you’re a strong runner the 70.3 is the perfect combination to go fast as opposed to the Oly distance.
To me, 6-3-6-3-6 each week is “base” training. To run 13.1 miles after a long bike leg requires your body to be conditioned for longer aerobic periods in the 3-4 hour range. You don’t get long individual aerobic periods doing 6-3-6-3-6. You do if you run 6-3-6-3-15.
Just don’t understand the idea of how running 4 miles longer than you have done in training is possible after the S & B.
I might get flamed for this, but in my mind a 3 is about the same as a 0. To me a 3 is active recovery (almost a warmup so I can stretch,) and I prefer to do my active recovery on the bike. It’s hard to do a quality 3 unless you are racing a 5k, and you don’t do that every other day.
I guess this assumes a certain pace, but for me the minimum is at least a 45min workout. I think you would get more out of a 5-7-5-10 than a 6-3-6-3-6. I guess the former is 3 mi longer in the week (27 to 24) so it’s not exactly apples to apples, is it? But as the other poster said “if your aerobic base allows you to run 30+ miles a week” you can put it together on race day. This is quite a bit more than your 6-3-6-3-6 schedule.
“I also would love to have someone explain specifically how you can race (not walk) 13.1 successfully if you have never covered that distance in training”
I very rarely run longer than a 12 mile loop I have…maybe twice a year I’ll do 16 miles, and only because that is how far away my parent’s house is from my house and I save the commute time by running there.
Typically though, a 12 mile run would look like: 20 minutes easy, 20 minutes medium, 2x20’ tempo (2’ easy jog between), 10’ easy.
If I do the 12 mile run on Sunday, I’ll try to do a 10 mile run on Wednesday at medium (zone 2?) pace, and then a 1 hour with some kind of cruise intervals (5xmile@10Kish pace, 1’ rest for example) on either Thurs or Fri, and then a couple more 1 hour runs in to round out the week for a total of 4-5 runs during the season, and 5-6 runs in winter.
Here is my reasoning:
-Running very long stresses the body - biking very long does not.
-The 1/2 IM is a 5-5:20 event for most.
-If you don’t have the ability to keep going for 5:30 hours or so, you run out of gas on the run, whether you have enough run training or not.
-So, I think the best workout is a 5-6 hour ride followed by a 20-30 minute transition run. That gives one the endurance to race the 1/2 IM. I would still do long runs of above 13-miles, but I think the best workout is a workout that is longer than your race distance.
My first 1/2 - I did not know how to train; I followed a plan from a book that had me do 3-hour rides as my long ride. The plan had me train for the run like I was training for a 1/2 marathon. 3-hours and ten minutes or so into my race, I was completely bonked. Despite being in very good running shape at the time, I stared at my running shoes for 3-4 minutes in T2 before taking off on a very slow mostly walk on my way to a near last place finish in 7-hours or so. When I started training for IM, I got much faster at 1/2 IM’s.
“So, I think the best workout is a 5-6 hour ride followed by a 20-30 minute transition run.”
As an alternative to this point of view, the longest I ever ride is 3.5 hours, but usually under 3. Those 3 hour rides though, are far far more challenging than the 2.5 hour ride on race day. A typical ride would look like 20’ easy, 2x30’@HIM+(between HIM and OLY pace) w/5’ rest between, 10’ easy, then 4x5’ as hard as I can go with 3’rest in between, then the remainder @HIM pace.
Good points. My LSD training has resulted in me having comparatively slow bike times and fast run times in my 1/2 IM races. I did 2:40 a few times but more typically I’m around 3-hours on the bike, which is pretty slow. And then I run 1:33. I look at the results and often see every person ahead of me with a faster bike time than me. So, I have suspected this is a result of me dogging it during bike training (and racing).