Currently training for my first IM and my main focus is consistent volume - specifically I’m trying to keep over 300k/wk biking and over 65k/wk running. I’d like to get my running volume even higher in the leadup to IMC.
I’m using a TrainingPeaks ‘ATP’ plan based on the training bible concepts - this plan includes some pretty dramatic cut-back weeks on a 3/1 schedule - currently 3 buildup weeks in the range of 16-19-21 and then a cutback week around 11 hours.
I’m questioning this plan a bit as I’m not sure if I wouldn’t be better served keeping my run (and bike) volume relatively high on a consistent basis. 300k a week on the bike isn’t that tough on my body and it’s more time constraints that keep me from riding more. 65k a week running is a new thing for me, however so far it’s going well and I seem to have less injuries than when I was running less. Cutting back to say 30k every 4th week seems a bit extreme to me, and given that I’ve been feeling good overall, I’m wondering if it isn’t a bit counterproductive from an overall volume/consistency standpoint.
I’d love to get some input from the super runners on here about this.
You need rest.
It helps you recover and get faster and not get burnt out. I too hate recover ‘weeks’ but I know that by the end of a cycle I’m about ready for one and then when I come back from the recovery I usually feel much more motivated, stronger and notice usually my bike and run paces are just a little faster than before.
I can’t speak to the cycling side of it but with running you definitely want to take cutback weeks. Your body needs long periods of rest as well as short ones. That’s when the gains of the previous high volume weeks can really be realized.
I’m going to add a vote for consistent volume. When I am more tired I go slower and when I feel better I go faster, but I have never noted any great benefit to taking rest weeks. On occasion I will really be dragging and take a day off, but otherwise I try and keep things consistent.
My experience, as both a coach and an athlete is that it works a lot better to not plan a recovery week per se, but to allow for flexibility in your schedule. We adapt in a very non linear way. Sometimes, a new stimulus entails heavy fatigue after just 10 days. What do you do then? Wait another 10 days before you get an easy week? You may have buried yourself during this last 10 days.
On the other hand, you get to the end of some adaptation to a stimulus and after 3 weeks, you’re still fine and could easily add another week or 2. Should you? Probably not.
Keep the training going, and incorporate easy days when tired, or sequence of easy days after some serious training, and be flexible.
That requires also to be in tune with how you feel.
I think it depends on how long you have been training, how much volume you have as your historical base and how much intensity you are throwing in to your workouts. While I don’t race many IMs. during the peak of my half-IM training I am putting in 3 solid 20 - 22 hour weeks. I’m then cutting my volume in half for my rest weeks. However, I have intensity intervals in all of my swims (even if it is 30 minutes within a 3 hour ride) and bikes and most of my runs. Without the intensity, I could grind it out week in and week out because I have 8 years of training in my bank. I don’t see how people could really delivery quality workouts with regular intensity and not cut volume significantly. That is a recipe for injury and underperformance in my experience.
This sounds right to me. Flex your schedule around how you actually feel. Push more when you can, dial back when you need to.
Rest probably prevents injuries by allowing your body to recover from the things that are nt yet injuries.
One thing I am considering is using the ‘cutback weeks’ as an opportunity to really focus on high-intensity work. Right now I’m not doing much intensity running as I’m more focused on just getting into a solid, consistent weekly mileage. The cutback week seems like an opportunity to work in some intensity while still letting me adjust to the higher volume of the bigger weeks without a huge risk of injury. I realize that this probably isn’t what Friel has in mind.
I do realize that getting faster isn’t only about volume (and I’ve had good results with lower volume, high intensity running in the past) but historically I’ve lacked any solid, long periods of consistent volume in my running, and I feel like I need to address that leading up to IMC. My main goal is to run the whole IM marathon - if I run it slow, that’s fine. Speedwork isn’t a priority for me at the moment.
I’m using a TrainingPeaks ‘ATP’ plan based on the training bible concepts - this plan includes some pretty dramatic cut-back weeks on a 3/1 schedule - currently 3 buildup weeks in the range of 16-19-21 and then a cutback week around 11 hours.
I have been having the same thoughts about my TTB-based training plan. I agree with the concept of cutback weeks and prefer to have them, but I wonder about cutting back so much, and also doing so fairly frequently on a 3/1 schedule. A ~50% reduction in volume for a cut back week seems like too much. More than what I’ve seen in canned tri plans at least.
Anyway I’m not a super runner, but I’m curious to hear replies as well, especially regarding the extent of this cut-back & the frequency. FWIW in Pfitzinger’s Road Racing for Serious Runners, they don’t have any cutback weeks in mileage, that’s part of what got me thinking about this whole thing.
I agree with JoeO (although, I think, he is referring to a pure run training regimen).
For IM training, I tend to keep swimming and cycling volume fairly consistent week-to-week, but I do force myself to take a recovery week from running every three to five weeks (I know when I am due). Since you are injury prone and have increased your running mileage recently, it would be wise to err on the cautious side. Also, you’re a long way from IMC: don’t burn yourself out.
A tip to keep your volume somewhat higher: during your recovery week, take Mon-Fri easier but resume higher volume when the weekend comes around. Usually, the easier 5-day stretch is enough to rebound. That’s my take anyway.
I’m using a TrainingPeaks ‘ATP’ plan based on the training bible concepts - this plan includes some pretty dramatic cut-back weeks on a 3/1 schedule
There is no sound physiological evidence to support 3 weeks on 1 week off. Someone, and I won’t name Friel here, has done a rather good job at bastardizing the research into periodization.
I am finishing the base period of my ATP, which was similar to yours. My volume was also 16-19-21 with a 10.5 cut back week. I worried the first four week cycle that this would be too steep a drop in training and increased the volume. While it felt good at the time, my performance (measured primarily by my running pace at a given heart rate) in the next four weeks suffered. When I then controlled myself and only did the 10.5 hours, I feel I got more out of the workouts in the next cycle. So I would say stick with the plan. The volume you lose in the cut back week will be more than made up for by the quality in the following weeks.
However, Francois had an excellent response about your ATP needing to be individual and based primarily on how you feel. No cookie cutter plan will fit every individual perfectly. Personally, I am still learning what works and what doesn’t and the Friel plan was a good place to start.
I agree with JoeO (although, I think, he is referring to a pure run training regimen).
Admittedly yes, I am. I have been a runner-only for so many years (and doing triathlons for only a few) that I still occasionally forget while posting here that I need to consider two other sports in my answers. So maybe for a triathlete, a cutback week in running is still a hard week in cycling or swimming. Regardless, I do know that if you just do high running volume week after week after week, you might do quite well for a long time but eventually you will crash and burn. Also, it’s harder to hit those running performance peaks if you are never really rested for a race effort.
I like the idea of letting the cutback weeks happen when you need them, rather than on some set schedule. That’s what I try to do.
I do know that if you just do high running volume week after week after week, you might do quite well for a long time but eventually you will crash and burn.
I guess because the body needs downtime. It needs to recover, both in the short term and the longer term. I’m not an exercise physiologist though. I’m a lot better at knowing the “what” of it than I am at knowing the “why”. I’m just relating what I’ve seen and exerpienced first hand. Everybody has different tolerances but sooner or later, if you do not back off, you pay the price. Some people back off intentionally and seem to coast through season to season. Other guys crash and burn and are forced to back off.
Thanks for the reply. Thinking about the run training plans I’ve looked at (which would be limited to Advanced Marathoning), that had cutback weeks. if I think about when J. (a good friend who has run at the elite level) trains his mileage varies too.
I, on the other hand, have been cruising around at 70-79 mpw for the past seven weeks.
I wonder if cutback weeks are single sport specific: for instance, thinking about what M. does with our masters swim group (he has coached collegiately, he knows what he’s doing), there are recovery weeks built in there.
I know next to nothing about cycling training.
But if you have 3 sports to play with, easy enough to make a cutback week in one and up the volume in the other - as someone mentioned above.
From the plans I have seen for swimming and cycling (as single sports) and what I have read, the periodization doesn’t necessarily include significant, sudden, and periodic cut backs until the taper period. Each phase smoothly transition into one another in terms of type of work and volume but they don’t impose periodic recovery weeks. (Notable exceptions: recovery week following a training camp or B-competition, taper.)
On the other hand, as some pointed out, most every running training plans do incorporate periodic recovery weeks. My educated guess is that: 1/ running provokes a lot more muscle/joint/tendon damage (the recovery weeks are here for healing) ; 2/ running is more often self coached and, if not, solitary (i.e. the recovery weeks are here as safety nets when a coach won’t be able to detect the need for it).
Now in practical terms and from my experience (me and people around me) training for long distance triathlon: most do not need recovery weeks for swimming, most sometimes need recovery weeks for cycling, and most do need recovery weeks for running. Personally, once I reach critical volume, my swimming and cycling volume (not nature/focus of workouts) is going to remain relatively stable from week to week but I’ll cut back on running every so many weeks (when I feel the need for it and usually 3 to 5 days).
To the OP - When it comes to running, the higher the mileage and the least your experience, the more often should you schedule recovery weeks (every two or three weeks is a good place to start). With enough experience, you will be able to gauge when you need to recover (e.g. taking an extra rest day, replace/skip a demanding workout, or incorporate a recovery period). In doubt, err on the side of caution.