The problem is that most of us cannot possibly log long indoor rides without losing our marbles and mentally burning out by perhaps Feb 29th (is that Monty’s and Molina’s birthdays…)?
I like what Rich Straus and Mike McCormack suggested elsewhere…that you may as well make the most of your traininer time and go hard now and then go longer when you can get outdoors…I really find this to being a practical implementation for real world age groupers stuck in misery indoors with limited time.
In general, I agree with 95% of what Gordo writes, but I’m not so sure about this particular one as it applies to the bulk of age groupers…what views do you guys have on this?
Personally, I don’t really have an off season…its more like ‘racing season’ and everything else…also I race every month aside from April, Nov and Dec…its just that in some months I am also racing long, so it seems to me that it would make the most sense to go moderately long in the lead up to the long races…plus I consider “the last 5 years” as basework for what I am doing now or in this year…not just the last few months.
I believe Gordo and Mike McCormack have fundamentally different philosophies re: training. There was a huge post on the old Gordo forum regarding this.
For Ironman athletes I think there is a growing consenus that you move from General to Specific training as your key event approaches. This would imply gradually decreasing intensity and emphasising Endurance. I agree with you, the practicality of massive sub maximal mileage training bases for the average working stiff is lost on some of us. On the other hand, can’t we get some credit as aging athletes for decades of endurance training? I think this is McCormacks’s pitch, that the reverse pyrimaid at least accounts for years of endurance training. For newbies, the big aerobic engine build might be appropriate. Weren’t you the one who coined the phrase “the way to get in shape is to stay in shape”? I liked it.
I think it’s generally accepted that those of us that live in the east must substitute intensity for volume in the winter months, at least on the bike. Some of us get to go longer than others at least on weekends. I can usually ride 2.5-3.5 hours semi comfortably on weekends in the northern part of VA. I find that long enough to maintain a good bit of aerobic base bike fitness with a harder session thrown in during the week.
I’m sure I speak for many here though when I say I tend to swim and run a ton in winter months. We don’t get much snow here, but are still greatly affected cycling by available daylight. Gordo gets to live in the summer of NZ right now. Rich is a sensible man sensitive to us east coasters.
Like I said, I usually agree 95% with what Gordo says (usually 100%)… in this case though, I’m sure he’s taking the reality of the working age grouper into account here…at the same time, I’m not sure that he is giving years of accrued base credit…finally, I don’t think he’s giving the concept of “overall training load” much credit either, or am I missing something in the xtri.com article.
How about neither? If either / both your: 1.) important short races and/or 2.) ultra event (s) are more than 4-5 months away, I don’t see a lot of reason for 3-hr. trainer rides or intense intervals … Now frequency (100 runs in 100 days), I’m down with that. But a few fartleks or a little hard stuff on the trainer? I only throw that in minimally to stave off boredom and to make sure I still can. I bet most people do the same.
This is a very good post/point as I have been pondering this myself lately. I have typically followed the long, slow, base training for a (spring Mary for example) then more specific race prep, intensity, speed, etc.
I do agree with the other poster than many on this board have enough of a “base” already to implement the latter approach, but many newbies might not do as well with it.
Hope to read some more discussions regarding this.
.
Of course it doesn’t have to be–but if you’re trying to maximize your performance, my opinion is that most of the time it should be an either or thing. This obsession with more has to really stop. If you’re an age-grouper who just isn’t training that much, just do more and you’ll improve. However, when you start bumping up against your genetic ceiling and you’re striving for 2-3% gains, one really has to be a little smarter about it. They don’t pass out medals for TSS points, last time I checked.
In what I’ve both experienced and observed, doing too much volume when doing periods of high intensity ends up compromising the absolute intensity of the hard parts, and ends up in sub-optimal performance. While one can (and should) do some brief periods of both, doing this a lot results in one just not being able to go as hard as he or she really can, IME.
imo, the training protocol doesn’t matter much for the average ager as long as you’re training consistently. however, it is tough to focus on intensity and aerobic conditioning at the same time imo as they are two different systems. train intensity and you need to recover more (at the expense of aerobic conditioning). also depends on the type of events that you’re training for. if ironman, you probably want to train slow twitch muscle fibers regardless of volume levels whereas shorter distances, you may want to emphasize fast twitch more. finally, training intensity increases risk of injury without a proper foundation first. my guess is that the typical ager does not have this foundation to train with intensity at first without a high risk of injury/burnout.
I have races that are 1-3 hours in duration in Feb, so I’m not just putting down mindless volume…there is a reasonably amount of intensity in my training…right now (Dec) was more focused on volume (overall in all sports)…in Jan, I back off on overall volume and increase intensity…in Feb, back off volume more and race 4 of 5 weekends (actually spills into March)…or course, this is on XC skis. With respect to riding, most of my rides are in the 40-90 min range and are pretty hard to: complement the intensities that I will apply to XC ski races in Feb Fend off boredom Maximize the benefit of my bike sessions, so when I hit “live ashphalt in April” in my 6 week bike build to St. Croix, I can hit it full tilt and hop straight into 200-300 miles per week with lots of miles at half Ironman intensity and 2-4 hour duration
Return from St. Croix in May and then pile on 5-6 hour rides in every possible window of opportunity that I get to do so between then and the first weekend in July before tapering for Ironman LP.
Bottom line is that the hard riding now is “off the base from last summer’s Ironman build” and when I build to the 2008 Ironman, it will be the base for the 2009 winter of hammering.
If Tom Evans reads this thread he might want to pipe in…if you heard his interview with Welchie before IMCDA, he said that he spent all winter going hard racing on XC skis and then he flips over to going longer at “not so hard intensity” when the snow melts and he flips over to tri focus.
iwhereas shorter distances, you may want to emphasize fast twitch more.
Unless they’ve shorted up some tri’s to the distance of the kilo or the 400, ‘fast twitch’ isn’t too important in any endurance sport. A 4KM bike race is an endurance sport, as it pretty much anything longer than that
finally, training intensity increases risk of injury without a proper foundation first
I can see that in running, and maybe even swimming if you have horrible technique/are beating up the water. In cycling, the forces are so low that as long as your bike fits correctly and you have a modest amount of riding under your belt, ‘intensity’ doesn’t have any more risk associated with it. I really don’t know anyone who’s hurt themselves from ‘riding too hard’…
think of it this way, what you are calling “hard” on the trainer and what a lot of people call “speed” work, substitute the word “strength” work because that is basically what you are doing with higher intensity workouts on the trainer this time of year. Now that you have changed the name to a more appropriate and more fitting term, doesn’t it make sense that you want to build strength during the pre-season?
Now as far as Gordo and his theory of going long, you can build a lot of strength in going long, but for the average age grouper, their idea of going long is a couple of one hour rides during the week and a 2 - 3 hour ride on Saturday. That doesn’t even begin to scratch the surface of what long is, especially in this sense of building strength through over distance. What is long is going to vary from one individual to another, but the reality is that “long” doesn’t really start until you are going over a minimum of 250 miles a week on the bike, week after week.
think of it this way, what you are calling “hard” on the trainer and what a lot of people call “speed” work, substitute the word “strength” work because that is basically what you are doing with higher intensity workouts on the trainer this time of year. Now that you have changed the name to a more appropriate and more fitting term, doesn’t it make sense that you want to build strength during the pre-season?
No, it doesn’t–since strength is not the limiting factor for pretty much any endurance sport. That statement is more confounding than ‘reverse periodization’!
Intensity on the trainer is not ‘building strength’, and saying so just really confuses the issue, IMO.
I think a lot of this comes down to “how much time can I commit to this hobby at various times of the year?”
A lot of articles and blogs carry a “what is the perfect training approach” theme, rather than a “what can a real person do” theme. Some of us don’t care what would be the “perfect” plan that a person who hopes to win the overall in a race would follow.
Suppose you only have 1.5 to 2 hours a week to ride your bike in the winter. (Suppose that is because you can’t fly off to continents in the other hemisphere to spend your winter. Suppose further that you’re married to the mother of your 3 kids and she enjoys your training about as much as you enjoy listening to her new Celine Dion CD in the car while shuttling said kids around to sports and music lessons. Suppose your life is completely different from a globe-hopping pro triathlete. Just imagine such a mythical world…)
How are you supposed to “go long” on those 1.5 to 2 hours a week?
Should you noodle around in Zn2 for 1.5 to 2.0 hours a week, or use that time to build up some fitness?
It all depends on your schedule. Yours is more stacked than most. Like someone else said, most of us don’t really scratch the surface of volume (or probably intensity either) . That’s fine if we are OK with our gradual improvements and results. Its fun playing with all this: After a 4-year build up, I put in almost 400 hours the first 6 months of last year (my most ever) training for my first IM … The plan is to put in just 250 the first half of this year and I do not plan to be any slower in short events in June. But I could be fooling myself …