Home› Racing Forum 🏎

Race Rehersal 2 - IM Beach to Battleship Oct 26

Pat KossPat Koss
in Racing Forum 🏎

Submitting this here as Rich has suggested for your input please.

Data here for RR2.  Bike:  Bike on TP    Run:  Run for RR2 on TP   (for reference, here are the data for RR1 RR1 Bike on TP and RR1 Run on TP)

Background:  I've done 2 full IM's (IMWI in 2011 14:44, and IMFL in 2012 13:10).  In both I thought I had a good race up till the run and then bombed, getting sick in each.  IMFL last year was much better @ 5:34 on the run but still pretty bad -- I'm confident that this is classic inexperience with a mix of bad nutrition and hitting the bike too hard.  I am a 4 hour marathoner with 2 x 3:55 PR's in the last couple of years. 

Weather yesterday for RR2:  Crystal clear sky with temps starting in the lower 60's and ending in the lower 80's.  Wind out of the NNE at 8-12 for bike lap 1 and 10-15 for bike lap 2 (bike largely in flat/open farmland).  I swam Friday evening, but due to rain Saturday was a washout and I did the bike/run on Sunday.

Overall I did 88 miles on the bike (just shy of 5 hours) and almost an hour run. 

Objective for RR2:  Work heavily on pacing at a much lower level than RR1.  Also, continue to fine tune hydration and nutrition.

 Regarding the pacing I kept an eagle eye on NP and TSS generated on my Garmin 510.  My TSS goal was about 50 points per hour to hit the calculated time (more on that later).  I based the calculation on my IMFL bike time plus 5 minutes (IMFL was 5:40 so 5:45 estimated time for IM B2B).  The pacing was easy to keep close to targets, though overall I was about 4 to 8 watts high to my target goals per interval.  TSS was almost on also, being just a little high.

Nutrition was good overall.  Lost just over 1% of body weight on the bike.  I'm a heavy sweater and that's pretty good for me but it is getting cooler too.

 The run was easy and near the end just had fun running more and more negative.

Oh, BTW the swim was fun on Friday night.  I'm a barge in the water and Friday evening I swam 1:20 for 3,800 m.  A year ago that would have been 1:30 to 1:35.  I've been training this year with our master's group so that seems to have paid off.

The biggest thing that catches my eye is my 18MPH on the bike yesterday.  I was much faster in IMFL (19.7x MPH), but yes I know that I bombed that run (no such thing as a good bike followed...).  I am drinking the cool-aid here.  But at 18 MPH (windy) compared to 19.7x at IMFL (IMFL bike 5:40 and little wind), that means I'm going to be out on the bike course a lot longer at @18MPH and would need to ride even SLOWER to make my TSS budget.

 When calculating the interval/watts/TSS objectives I significantly lowered my FTP.  I just have not had a good test since July 4th.  Prior to that I could back up a 237 FTP, but now I'm hard pressed to say what is accurate.  Looking at recent tests and intervals I guessed at 207.  So with 207 as a basis I calculated this weekend's RR2.  Going into the calculation I was not going to overstate it.  But the bike was pretty easy yesterday and I deliberately picked up the pace a little on the second lap.

 So my question is about pacing for B2B is should I use the RR2 goals which were pretty easy to hit?  Or would you adjust one way or the other.

Thanks in advance for your wisdom.

Comments

  • Al TruscottAl Truscott
    To me, a key element of the RR is how the run went and felt. You had a LOT left in the tank, so you left something on the table in your bike. You've been SWAGing your FTP, so only you can say with certainty how much you can bring it up and still remain conservative enough to have a good run race day. But following HR, keeping it in mid-Zone 1 until letting yourself go to high Zone 1 during the bike is a good point of reference, as is RPE, if you have confidence in that.
  • William JenksWilliam Jenks
    I would worry less about the speed than you are. In full gear and with all the bodies around (unless the person density is REALLY low...there's still a little draft), you'll be going a smidge faster than you are now on the RR.

    If you were to go 18.5 mph, that's right around the 6 hour mark on the ride. But if that let you run at legit 10 minute miles (4:30 marathon), you'd still be well ahead of the game overall.

    I think Al's advice on RPE and HR is good in the absence of good power data, but taking it just a tick too easy on the bike just isn't hurting anyone in the range of 12.5 hours and longer that I have seen. (If you dig through the power recommendations, you'll see that there is even a notation that TSS points are not so critical when you get to longer bike splits when your IF is low...I tend to think from my observations of other people's races reported here that those who undercook the bike in terms of intensity in the 6-7 hour range but pay a little TSS price for that are in the same boat.)
  • Coach PatrickCoach Patrick
    And remember that your performance in training is usually significantly slower than what you will see on race day. That said, the drop in your FTP means you have quite a bit of fatigue. Could be worth trying to cut back a bit so you get better sleep and more recovery...finally remember that race day speed is a function of a great second half of your run...so all decisions are made to set you up for that...
  • Pat KossPat Koss

    All good input.  Thank you!  I appreciate it.

     @Patrick, definitely hit the nail on the head on fatigue, so I have been focusing more and more on sleep (ask my wife). (on the fatigue note, got a good battery charge on a 2 x 1 @Z4 this morning...when in tired at 5am and NAILED THEM! )

    Overall I'm not worried.  The goal (aside from having fun and trying to PR) is to HAVE A GOOD RUN.  Both RR1 and RR2 runs felt really good, so I'm probably over thinking the bike split and not having a reliable FTP test since July 4 by backing off too much.

Sign In or Register to comment.