so all 3 sports can be factored into the Performance Management Chart.
As I wrote in a similar thread a couple of years ago…and am now re-posting from my blog:
The wider use of software that permits the measurement of training load is leading to a dangerous trend. People are beginning to believe, either from reading (or misreading) things on the Internet, or listening to other braggadocious athletes / coaches (who may or may not be truthful or properly measuring training), that there are particular, objective training goals that they should aspire to. Chasing particular stress “point” totals, using RaceDay Apollo or other software, is a fool’s errand. Moreover, the idea that you should chase particular totals is leading to really bad trends in training and injury patterns, which I observe in my medical office on a regular basis.
Those comments may seem a bit unexpected coming from someone who coaches at the elite level and develops software that follows points, tracks trends, and attempts to model and predict performance, but hear me out. Your approach to training needs to be absolutely customized if you are going to be the best you can be. The point total on any given day that will lead to your optimal performance is highly individualized. The way to find it is to train appropriately, specifically and at a reasonable volume for your fitness level, mechanical durability, chosen event, etc.
Appropriately and specifically mean you need to do training that has to do with triathlon. Doing a gazillion sets of squats has practically nothing to do with sensible triathlon training. Getting on the elliptical for hours on end in an effort to improve your running is nonsensical. You don’t get “extra points” for that sort of thing. Or rather, you get points in some sense, but they have little or nothing to do with being a good triathlete.
Reasonable means a level at which you are able to recover from day to day without a problem, and at which you do not risk injury.
Once you have addressed the above, you should regularly test your ability to perform. Observe the training composition that leads to improving performance. Then, and only then, look at the training load total that helped you go there. Then, use the “big picture”, that is, the composite of the two, to determine what you need to do to get better.
Finally, be very careful when looking at the combination of stress scores from different sports, even if they are all triathlon specific. Those totals are useful to determine “shelled” or “not shelled”, and that is all. You will find that 100 “points” that are composed of 55 from running and 45 from cycling yields very different results than the reverse.
FWIW,
Phil
You’re preaching to the choir.
I couldn’t agree more that the training programs should be personalized to someone’s specific physical abilities and training history and goals. I would see this as the the stratification trends/continuum in the medical field. For example, the use of aspirin is the complete opposite of a stratified medicine. Pretty generic like that 26week HIM program you can pick up in a magazine. The other end of the stratification continuum would be the use of biomarkers and the application of a Herceptin regimen to a Her2 positive cancer patient(I work in oncology). That is very personalized as would be the training program one could work from using this kind of objective feedback to modify/adjust their training program. BUT there are industry standards that are widely accepted from which to start until that level of stratification is identified.
That’s all I’m after…of course you wouldn’t arbitrarily target a certain CTL for a training program but there are targets that you can start with coupled with a close, constant stream of feedback to adjust as the situation requires.
I agree with your statement that people tend to blindly pursue these targets without understanding them. I’m totally with you on that one.
