I know this is a very basic concept but is that the general idea? Is that too much? Too little? For context, I’m doing 3 swims, 2-3 bikes, 4-5 runs per week. Always include one hard workout (like intervals or tempo) for each. Is that normal or should we only be doing 1-2 hard workouts per week and keeping the rest in zone 2? I’m thinking about this both from a fitness and heart health perspective.
Appreciate any input.
I am generally ignorant and self-coached. I am doing more than that. I am top 10 AG in Ironman-branded races and top 15 overall in local races.
Swims: 2x/week and always hard intervalsBikes: 4x/week - at least 2 hard intervalsRun: 4x/week - 1-2 hard intervals
Once a week is definitely not enough unless you also have a race that week. I find that hard bike 3-4x, hard run 2-3x and hard swim nearly every session is doable. On the other hand I have seen very genetically talented people go great on 1x hard per week on run and bike.
Also depends on your background, if one is a former Div I swimmer or runner can get by with less. Or a cat 1 road cyclist.
What’s “hard?†Sweet spot intervals or a tempo run? Or 50m swim repeats or track repeats where you start to develop tunnel vision?
If you’re only pushing yourself a few times a week across all sports, you may be leaving some on the table. But it’s very different for someone who has been racing for 10 years and someone in their first year of tri.
Once a week is definitely not enough unless you also have a race that week. I find that hard bike 3-4x, hard run 2-3x and hard swim nearly every session is doable. On the other hand I have seen very genetically talented people go great on 1x hard per week on run and bike.
Also depends on your background, if one is a former Div I swimmer or runner can get by with less. Or a cat 1 road cyclist.
Yikes
I think 1 high intensity session in each sport each week is a good place to start. David Warden’s chapter on Interval Training in Triathlon Science comes to this conclusion after analyzing studies to balance improvement with avoiding overtraining. Note that this is looking at above threshold work.
If you’re talking also about non-easy but below threshold work, perhaps there’s room for more.
In Phil Skiba’s books, he advocates for some intensity pretty much every day, though in smaller doses on some days. I have tried this and did not find it sustainable.
I think swimming is the first place to add more intensity, then cycling, then running.
Also, doubling up (especially a swim with a bike or run) two higher intensity workouts in one day is an approach that can allow for more intensity overall but still have a pattern of about half of your days being hard and half easy.
Once a week is definitely not enough unless you also have a race that week. I find that hard bike 3-4x, hard run 2-3x and hard swim nearly every session is doable. On the other hand I have seen very genetically talented people go great on 1x hard per week on run and bike.
Also depends on your background, if one is a former Div I swimmer or runner can get by with less. Or a cat 1 road cyclist.
Can you outline an example week that fits this description? A week that is repeatable for many weeks? I’m finding this hard to believe unless our definitions of hard are different.
I’ve been reading/listening to more research about how we typically need less higher intensity work than we think to have the positive effects for longer endurance events. I’ve usually responded to small doses, so maybe I have a bias towards that reasoning. For 70.3 events I get by fine with a sweet spot session and a session with something like strides/30 sec. sprints for bike and run.
Once a week is definitely not enough unless you also have a race that week. I find that hard bike 3-4x, hard run 2-3x and hard swim nearly every session is doable. On the other hand I have seen very genetically talented people go great on 1x hard per week on run and bike.
Also depends on your background, if one is a former Div I swimmer or runner can get by with less. Or a cat 1 road cyclist.
I am always looking to learn more.
My goal, as with many, is to get faster
I have not heard of people doing this many hard workouts per week on a regular basis
What is your definition of hard?
What sorts of results are you achieving from doing this?
I am generally ignorant and self-coached. I am doing more than that. I am top 10 AG in Ironman-branded races and top 15 overall in local races.
Swims: 2x/week and always hard intervalsBikes: 4x/week - at least 2 hard intervalsRun: 4x/week - 1-2 hard intervals
Holy goodness that are some great results!
I like reading your posts here
One hard workout, per sport, per week IS definitely ENOUGH.
That’s the goal!!
And a hard goal at that!!
The problem is that we aren’t born with the ability to “just go out and do an intense workout.”
It takes a lot of other types of workouts, before you are able to do truly intense workouts.
This is the flaw with every get fit fast scheme.
To do one truly intense tempo workout, per week, per sport - you need decent speed, good endurance, good durability and the ability to recover well.
In short, to do one solid tempo or interval workout per week - you will probably need to also do long easier (endurance workouts), shorter easier workouts with speed work, and frequent other easier workouts.
So…
Yeah.!!!
Once you have done the 5- 8 other workout you need to do so that you are ABLE…
Then ALL you need to do is three hard workouts.
Once a week is definitely not enough unless you also have a race that week. I find that hard bike 3-4x, hard run 2-3x and hard swim nearly every session is doable. On the other hand I have seen very genetically talented people go great on 1x hard per week on run and bike.
That sounds absolutely impossible.
I have 3x hard swims a week and it’s all I can do to get in one halfway decent hard bike ride, and maybe one sorta decent hard run. And I’m not even doing 10 hours a week.
Once a week is definitely not enough unless you also have a race that week. I find that hard bike 3-4x, hard run 2-3x and hard swim nearly every session is doable. On the other hand I have seen very genetically talented people go great on 1x hard per week on run and bike.
That sounds absolutely impossible.
I have 3x hard swims a week and it’s all I can do to get in one halfway decent hard bike ride, and maybe one sorta decent hard run. And I’m not even doing 10 hours a week.
I think it’s a matter of definition.
The point is not how much, or how intense the training, but how to get the best adaptation.
It’s about the BEST recovery!!
And that comes from laying around AFTER lots of long, hard training.
Not constantly hammering it.
One “key workout, per sport, per week” might be a good way of looking at it!
But it’s going to take a lot of other workouts, some hard in certain ways, before you can successfully complete the key workouts.
But yeah…
It’s definitely NOT possibly to do long intervals or tempos (at 98% of race pace)- 6 times/week.
So…
Even only TWO really hard workouts, per sport, per week is NOT possible.
I think volume is really what you need to think about to answer this question. 9-11 total sessions with 3 hard workouts (1/discipline) makes sense to me. I’m more like 15ish sessions/week & do 3 hard workouts/week (1/discipline) (sometimes 4- 2 swim, 2nd session shorter) M-F & then 1-2 more hard sessions on the weekend (hard = includes quality but the weekend “easy” sessions are usually long sessions). High end would be 6 but I feel like that’s not super sustainable. 5 is a good number for me. Still not doing more than 20% of my volume hard.
I think the thing to watch out for is if your easy days are truly easy. No reason not to get in 3 hard workouts/week unless you’re spending a ton of time in the grey zone on what are supposed to be easy days.
I also am liking the double threshold days I’ve been experimenting with during this winter’s base build. Instead of working out different disciplines on back to back days I’ll workout hard twice in the same day & then have just easy volume for a day or two. Key is to make sure you’re dialing into threshold effort. Can’t knock out VO2 stuff like that regularly but can get really strong stacking up the longer threshold sessions.
A lot of good responses. Sounds like, if nothing else, 3 hard workouts per week is not OVERdoing it. I’m also thinking about this based on long-term effects on heart/cardio health and what is too much intensity in a given week.
First develop a plan that is individual to you. What are your strengths and weaknesses? What are your goals/races? Are you weak in one discipline? Are you weak at endurance or speed?
Swimming is the least impacting on the body so it allows for more intensity to be done. Running has the highest impact so increased intensity comes with increased risk.
I really don’t think you can lump the three sports together here. You can (and most workouts do) swim relatively hard, pretty often. Yea you’ll accumulate some CNS fatigue if you push it but your body should recover well since it’s non weight bearing and working muscles that the other two sports use less of. Bike workouts fall somewhere in the middle, and hard run workouts are really what you need to manage closely. As a triathlete, a fast/tempo day and a long run are about all you would normally see for most mortals (in terms of “hard”), unless you’re working a specific block. The remaining energy is better spent working the bike and swim, diminishing returns and whatnot.
I would factor your age(ability to recover) into the equation.
I could do 98% of Ironman race pace 6 times a week.
Once a week is definitely not enough unless you also have a race that week. I find that hard bike 3-4x, hard run 2-3x and hard swim nearly every session is doable. On the other hand I have seen very genetically talented people go great on 1x hard per week on run and bike.
Also depends on your background, if one is a former Div I swimmer or runner can get by with less. Or a cat 1 road cyclist.
Could you please share your age and/or supplement routine?