How much of your athletic potential can you achieve by training swim/bike/run 3x per week each?
What about twice per week, or 4x per week?
Obviously if you swim bike and run 5-6 times per week each you are going to be round 100% of your potential after a few years, but what abouts if you only can realistically fit in 3x per week each sport?
How much of your athletic potential can you achieve by training swim/bike/run 3x per week each?
What about twice per week, or 4x per week?
Obviously if you swim bike and run 5-6 times per week each you are going to be round 100% of your potential after a few years, but what abouts if you only can realistically fit in 3x per week each sport?
Again, this is something that is sooooooo individual. Some people can rock out on 2x a week in each sport when another can barely finish doing 4x per week.
This is a very similar question to your **Does Triathlon Have to Become your Life to Get Good at It? ** thread.
How much of your athletic potential can you achieve by training swim/bike/run 3x per week each?
What about twice per week, or 4x per week?
Obviously if you swim bike and run 5-6 times per week each you are going to be round 100% of your potential after a few years, but what abouts if you only can realistically fit in 3x per week each sport?
or chronically injured, overtrained, and/ or generally burnt out. Highly individual question, but in general it is better to be undertrained than overtrained…
3x per week each? all of it if you get around 30 hours in
4x per week each? again all of it if you get around 30 hours in
2x per week each? 95%?
How much of your athletic potential can you achieve by training swim/bike/run 3x per week each?
What about twice per week, or 4x per week?
Obviously if you swim bike and run 5-6 times per week each you are going to be round 100% of your potential after a few years, but what abouts if you only can realistically fit in 3x per week each sport?
Maybe you should stop trying to figure out how little effort you need to put in to something in order to be good at it, and instead, find something you actually enjoy doing for its own sake.
Maybe you should stop trying to figure out how little effort you need to put in to something in order to be good at it, and instead, find something you actually enjoy doing for its own sake.
Well said.
It sounds like the OP does enjoy it, but is time limited (like most of us)…
Then why does it matter what % of his potential he can reach? Do what you can, see where it takes you, enjoy the ride!
curiosity perhaps? you’ve never asked a question that doesn’t matter all that much in the grand scheme of things, but is simply interesting to you?
Exactly. Train as much as you can CONSISTENTLY, with some logical form of structure based on science or hte experience of a proven coach, then execute. Just having a plan and executing will reap big rewards. Unstructured training brings unpredictable results.
Frequency can help you fit more in. You might try and get creative and look for opportunities rather than be resigned to being unable to do more.
It’s not just the frequency, it’s the duration and intensity. If you did 3 sessions in each sport and each of those sessions was a key one, you could get pretty close to your potential. E.g. if your 3 runs were a long run, a threshold session, and a speedwork session. Problem is that most people couldn’t handle training like that and would injure themselves (I know I wouldn’t last long training like that).
People who achieve very impressive results off relatively low volume training typically seem to have done so having previously done the high volume training. So not only do they have the advantage of a huge aerobic base, they also have bodies and form/technique that have adapted to dealing with a large training load, and can therefore handle a lot of intensity in the relatively small amount of training they do.
How much of your athletic potential can you achieve by training swim/bike/run 3x per week each?
What about twice per week, or 4x per week?
Obviously if you swim bike and run 5-6 times per week each you are going to be round 100% of your potential after a few years, but what abouts if you only can realistically fit in 3x per week each sport?
14-18 total sessions per week700-800 hours per year7-10 years
That should get you to your potential for most endurance sports. Fleck, did I miss anything?
Edit: probably a bit high for running, but in line (some may so low) for cycling, swimming, XC skiing, speed skating, rowing, kayak etc etc. 730 hours per year is only 2 hours per day.
14-18 total sessions per week700-800 hours per year7-10 years
That should get you to your potential for most endurance sports. Fleck, did I miss anything?
Dev,
I would want to know more about what “Athletic Potenial” is - lot’s of variables right there with elasticity depending on those variables.
If we are talking your absolute best, then we know that, most endurance sports athletes are at their very best, in the 25 - 35 year age-range. Yes, there are some exceptions - both individually and for whole sports ( swimming is as many know is much younger for the peak)
So using the Gladwell 10,000 hour number, which I find is a good rough estimate, assuming that you start to get into it and putting those house in in your mid to late teens, which most world class athletes end up doing, then, you will reach your peak performance years in the 25 - 35 year range.
But for some “athletic potential” may mean something completely different. Above, I am using national/world class performance as the benchmark.