OS Training Hack - thoughts on doing (sub)Threshold training only (no VO2 max)
So I took a peek at the second half of the OS training plan and it contains VO2 training not just for the bike (as in the first half of the plan) but now also on the run. I'd like to get some perspective on the value / risk of VO2 training, and thoughts about hacking the plan and swapping these for more threshold - subtreshold work.
As a background, for the first half of the OS I did not do the VO2 intervals on the bike, for the simple reason that for most people, VO2 max is around 120% of FTP and if VO2 max training isn't done, it will prevent the FTP from going up (a lot). In my case however my VO2 Max was 142% of FTP so it seemed more valuable to replace these intervals with FTP instead. Midway through the OS to my surprise I still got a 5-6% increase in VO2 max, and about 10% in FTP. This does also means that the ratio of VO2 Max / FTP is still 135% so for the second half, I don't see again the value of doing VO2 intervals.
My plan for the bike is to replace these Thursday training sessions with sweet spot training instead. From experience I've learned I respond very well to sweet spot training so I think this might serve me better.
As far as running is concerned, progress with the threshold based training in the first half of the OS was great (PR during my test! and up 4 vdot points). So why not continue with a similar training set as the first few weeks but with these newly earned z4 pace intervals instead? Two years ago when also doing the OS, these VO2 intervals were difficult to recover from and after a few weeks resulted in pulling a hamstring. At 200 lbs I don't seem to be able to handle that type of work very well (prone to injury). So my thoughts would be do hack the run with more z4 intervals instead of z5, at the new paces, to prevent injury and use a 'system' that has already proven it's value. Alternatively I can swap the VO2 Max intervals with z3 intervals, similar to what I plan to do on the bike.
My race schedule for next year consists of a half marathon mid February for fun (but will be an all out effort), then IM 70.3 California end March (B-race), IM 70.3 SG in May (A-race), IM Syracuse in JUne (B-race), IM Wisconsin in September (A-race).
Comments
All that said, I totally get the point about the risk of injury during z5 run intervals. In the OS before last I got a hamstring injury doing them and have been really gun-shy ever since.
Thanks Matt - I will probably dig up Allan / Coggan's book and dig up what they say about VO2 max training in general or on the bike. But for running it is definitely making me quite uncomfortable because the benefits may not outweigh the injury risk.
The other thing here is our IM and HIM training plans do not contain any VO2 intervals if I remember correctly on bike nor run, they seem to be only present during the 2nd half of the OS but not in the (long course) race preparation plans. Would that also be an indicator the value is somewhat limited?
The question is just, what's gonna give me the better bang for my training buck at this point in the season, more FTP/z3 or include VO2 Max on the bike? Same for the run, with the extra factor to take into account then the injury risk...
On a more physiological note, I do put some credence in the notion that higher intensity work does a better job of stimulating the body's recovery response, particularly the production and release of human growth hormone. I'm not sure that long sustained FTP efforts do that as effectively, even though such work is critical for getting your body ready to race long course triathlons.
I find at my size I need to watch for the hamstring and shin splint issues to. Jack Daniels suggests a great few weeks (5) at running sets at Z4 2x a week with 1 day hitting the Z5 and he is only touching that for sets of no more than 1 min on time.
As Matt suggests , all do some Z5 albeit less than sets of 1 min duration. Even at that if you think it is to much you can 1/2 it to 30 sec.
Food for thought.
Secondly, they seem to define VO2 Max as 106-120% FTP which means with my 135-142% I'm well into their Anaerobic Capacity zone. Which means if I'm doing intervals at 135-142% intensity I'm really in a different training system that creates muscular strength and anaerobic capability but will eventually be of little use in an IM.
Hmmm.
@ ;Ben - I see you are racing IM Wisconsin...me too. 2nd time. I can assure you that the IMWI bike course has many, many short, very steep hills where you will be 15-20% above your FTP just so you don't fall off the bike. The key is to not hammer the up hills & go 40-60% above ftp, and to being able to recover quickly back to your target watts on the descents. VO2 training will help prepare you for this. Hope this helps. See you in Madison next Sept.
As for the injury topic included in this discussion, the coaches make special note in the OS plans to state that you should stay at your Interval Pace that you developed through testing. I could definitely run my intervals at a pace faster than what they have recommended, but my form would most likely fall apart and that might lead to an injury through compensation. I would recommend ignoring Z5 HR's during these intervals and go strictly based off of pace. Yes, you are going to be running fast, but the only way to get faster is to train fast. If you run slow all the time your body is going to get great at going slow, but not much else.
Though HIM and IM races very rarely involve work intensities in any of these zones, this work is very important to stressing the body and adapting it to higher work loads so that easier ones put less stress on the body, therefore raising your FTP. Do not forget about the substantial benefits and improvements that you get from this type of training in your heart and your lungs.
I can definitely understand that, that would make a lot of sense, but what confuses me is that if it would be such a crucial part of IM racing and training, then why we do not do this as part of our focused IM and IM training plans? In other words, if I am on the november out season plan, and IM Wisconsin is in September, it will be 7 months after the OS is completed and I don't believe there is any more VO2 max scheduled between now and then. Just like there are no VO2 max intervals scheduled for training plan athletes (unless I am wrong about the IM plan intensities). I understand our training plans are designed to fit most people but I would expect this would be something anyone would benefit from, not just the athlete racing Wisconsin.
Ben, as an fyi, the 2009/10 IM plans did have some Vo2.
First, Ben V has both OS experience from previous years but also data that shows his "ratio" is well over the 122% that we have identified as the "ideal" ratio of FTP to VO2 power....IOW, his VO2 is clearly higher than threshold. Not to mention that his current OS is going really well and not showing signs of slowing down. With all of that info, I say go for the continued threshold work. If it ain't broke (and you might not need it)....
That said, questioning the value of VO2 now in the OS b/c it doesn't show up elsewhere in another plan is a pretty sketchy assumption. We do value it, but in the Fast The Far approach of EN, we have limited time to build up your endurance before race day. If you are looking to win your AG in an Ironman, your plan might include some VO2 all year to maintain that high-end fitness...I did this in my custom/hack/build up to Kona 2012 with some solid results.
But the average AG athlete will have a hard enough time processing the threshold work and increasing volume. This is part of our coach "overall season calculus" where we try to balance risk, reward and return on investment. As anyone who played in the 2009 power hack where we first started with VO2...they still remember the crater they fell into...
While you don't specify what sweet spot training is in numbers, I will say that our basic threshold efforts work. For everyone else reading/lurking, there is no need to hack the EN plan until you find yourself doing it but not making gains. Then we have to hit the drawing board and do some serious planning for you.
Thanks Coach P - this is very helpful! Apprciate your thoughts and recommendations!
Just to clarify, my ratio of VO2 Max to FTP is very high (1.42) but I don't think it's because my VO2 Max is so great (403 Watts in last test), but more because my FTP is (for me) just low (298 watts). I started the OS with an FTP that was only about 75% of it's normal peak value during the season after life got in the way in the 2nd half of the season. (2011 peak FTP was 360-365 Watts, 2012 more around 340-350 Watts). That's also why I think what I could use the most is extra work to drive my threshold power up, rather than try to increase my VO2 max (which I guess didn't make that much of a drop prior to starting the OS).
So looking at the training schedule, there's the typical Thursday bike that I can replace the VO2 max sessions with FTP. But I've experienced risks with too much FTP in the past also - it becomes difficult for me to recover from and as a result I may plateau. Last year early in the season I was at that point, then I cut out most FTP training and replaced it with sweet spot (defined as approx 88-92% FTP) and my bike power when up like a rocket. Which is why i was thinking to do sweet spot intervals on Thursday's, since they help improve my FTP, and at the same time are a bit easier than 95-100% threshold intervals.
But i think it is good to point out I'm specifically doing this because my VO2 / FTP ratio os 'off', not doing a hack to do a hack. I just think the testing showed my FTP to be my 'weakness', and it seems to make sense to work on the weakness as much as possible.