Dan’s Souza thread, and the near-weekly threads here, TriNewbies, etc. and sometimes even over on Gordo’s forum always seem to center in on our fear of “training like we (they) used to”…we put it down to gadgets, widgets, hr/power controls, etc. etc. for keeping us from really reaching out there…
I’m not so sure this is all true. By and large, many of the folks thinking/talking/wishing about all this “old-school” training are thinking/talking/wishing about a very small percentage of folks…the Molinas, Souzas, Allens, Scotts, etc. are very few and far between…and the great athletes will always be doing things that the “weekenders” will not be able to do, at least not when they’re older and have full time families and jobs…
But there is the argument that the performances are not, by and large, any better today than 15 years ago…when people just trained…
But lets suppose it is true that we’re just afraid to train outside our comfort zones (keep in mind, I’m using a corporate “we” and this may or may not apply specifically to YOU reading this…)…we’re afraid of 40x400 track workouts…in fact, we’re afraid of the track altogether if we’re IM athletes…
If it is true…how do we recapture that essence? I’ve seen all sorts of attemtps…training sans hr/pm/computer…so-called “epic” training…etc…each attempt has its merits…but none seems to completely capture what folks are talking about when they begin to rail against the training box they find themselves in. In other words, lots of folks are talking…how do we do the walking?
I will admit up front that I am from the Old-School.
What I think has happend is that training has become, like many things in our soceity, a commodity. When something becomes commoditized, it needs standards and limits so that people can put some value on it. I bet that in less than 10 minutes you can go online pay some money and get a very detailed IM training program that is, at first appearence custom geared to your needs and situation.
I come from a different generation. We did not have all the gizmos, charts, graphs and online tools that are available today. Training was more of an adventure. We would just head off on a 100mile ride and find the route as we would go. Sometimes during the ride we would be riding all out for extended periods of time. Sometime we would have to stop to recconoiter directions etc . . but it had more of the feel of an adventure and was not part of some “training program”. I first noticed the “training program” phenomenon a number of years ago when I would call around for people to go for a long ride hard ride or run with and I started getting responses back like, “Well, I would love to Steve, but my program calls for an easy spin today”, or something to that effect. 15 - 20 years ago we were gung-ho to just get together for a ride or a run with anyone at any time. We gave no thought really to what was hard or easy. When we felt good we would go hard/fast, when not feeling good, we would go easy. I recently read an interview with the top junior runner in Kenya right now and he said, that’s more or less the way he and his group run/train - go hard when they feel good, go easy when they don’t.
Well, yes, and no, Francois. I should caveat that my original post is VERY first-order thinking on the problem…
Then again, if Bannister had done what exercise physiology SHOWED at the time…he’d probably never have broken 4:00. I realize that gets into a bit of a chicken or egg situation…
I don’t think its about disregarding all of this stuff…HR, power, and other measures are good things…but is adhering to that stuff stifling our training creativity? I can’t think of any coaches I know that would advocate 50x400 on the track…even the so-called “epic” training that many are doing (caveat: I’m not talking about Molina’s original concept…but rather the me-toos out there)…isn’t as free-form and reaching as purported…
A friend of mine did his first IM in 1989. To train for the bike he would do what he called “Tour de Village Pantry”. He would just get on his bike and ride for 8 hours stopping at Village Pantry convenience stores along the way to refuel. It was an adventure. I miss those days.
FWIW, Fleck, I’m from the same time period…first tri 20 years ago now…before that was riding bikes seriously at 13…running 20+ miles/week at 15…very much from the age before aero and gizmos.
"I recently read an interview with the top junior runner in Kenya right now and he said, that’s more or less the way he and his group run/train - go hard when they feel good, go easy when they don’t. "
Ahh. the confluence of passion, positive cultural influence, talent, and a love of just plain working out. goddam them for not being ordinary like me.
I used to do stupid shit like that when I was younger. Sometimes it paid off. but more often than not, I’d be just a little too stiff on race day. Or totally burned to a crisp by August. It’s the price I pay for being joe-average. Sure, I think I have the capacity for more suffering than I think (I think). It’s just, I’ve come to a point where it’s not worth it for a goddam ribbon, prize money, whatever.
I can’t think of any coaches I know that would advocate 50x400 on the track…even the so-called “epic” training that many are doing
the best tri coach in the world would. but that’s why people criticize him for being too hard. it’s mostly about people imposing limits on what is “reasonable.” few want to press the limits anymore.
go hard when you feel good, easy otherwise is really difference from epic stuff where you just train and train and train…and with this kind of volume, I doubt very much you work much your Vo2max for instance.
The thing is that there are lots of advances in exercise physiology and going back to doing 9hrs bike ride is pointless.
" . .training like we used to meaning without any interest for what exercise physiology shows?"
Possibly, as I am sure there people who did this. I am grateful that my coaches and mentors back from the early days in both running and triathlon seemed to know what was going on physiologically. This was backed up when I did take my BSc in Biochemistry and then finally, when I first used a HRM - and this was a few years after I had stopped tri training seriously - what I found was that for my key benchmark training sessions, my HR matched up almost perfectly with the zone that I “should” have been in for that given effort. So while it could have been best described as, trial-and-error, in fact it had been just about right all the time.
“going back to doing 9hrs bike ride is pointless.”
And here is a point where you and I are going to diverge a bit, Francois. Surely it is true that physiological factors may make training that long somewhat pointless…but there is always the mental aspect of pushing out there…In that I find phenomenal value. Sometimes it isn’t about training the body…its about training the mind. I think that is one thing the physiological approach will never fully develop.
This way that the greats used to train, sure it would work for some, but others it’s just going to destroy. However, come race day these other athletes may be very good if they train another way.
Then again, if Bannister had done what exercise physiology SHOWED at the time…he’d probably never have broken 4:00. I realize that gets into a bit of a chicken or egg situation…
From my understanding he was an experimentalist. He was helping *determine *the known exercise physiology of the time.
I think you nailed it on the head when you said training was more of an adventure. This is why I have turned to adventure racing to find this kind of epic, over-the-top nuttiness.
I routinely tell people that I train to do Ironman for fitness but I adventure race for fun. Yeah, most people think it’s ridiculous to be out doing 4-5 day adventure races while I’m preparing for an Ironman, but these races are fun. They push me and excite me in a way that training for Ironman never could. The exhiliration I get from the fear of the unknown is a wonderful thing.
Don’t get me wrong, as IMG approaches, I’ve had to tail off the trail runs, the MTB rides, the nighttime orienteering sessions, etc. to make sure I didn’t get injured. I love the focus of training properly for triathlon. But its just not what I call adventure - that’s why I do two different sports (well, more accurately, that’s why I do 8 or 9 sports instead of 3!)
it’s a lot tougher mentally (and physically) to go on the track and run 12x400 at Vo2max and try to hit your times and respect rest.
I enjoy riding a lot. going out all day is never a big deal…even 7-8-9hrs…
Going on the bike for 5hrs with a lot of race pace now that’s getting tougher physically and mentally.
Lets not get stuck on a particular measre of time, Francois. For you 9 hours may not be beyond yourself…what is? 12 hours? A series of rides like Dan describes of Souza? Whatever it is, thats what we’re talking about…and it is different for all of us…
I won’t argue that the typical 12x400 workout you describe is not tough…it is. I happen to like it…but there is something to be said about extending that workout…to the point where the workouts become events unto themselves. I’ve pushed out to 25x400 several times before…solely on guts and dares from a training partner…Yes, I suffered during subsequent trainiing…rest cannot be ignored…but I think too often we think there is a hard walled box that we should stay within.
Then what would the benefits be of goign 25x400? Just the knowledge that you did it? That you won a bet/dare? (a collective you, not you specifically, TriBriGuy)
I know the reasons you do it probably are more than that, but you reach a point where the costs (injury, prolonged recovery) outweigh the benefits (confidence, win a bet, etc)…or do you?
PS - I’ve never done 25x400…but I think I’d like to try.