@ Coaches, Vets, Deep Thinkers: After Multiple Years in a Plan, Do We Need to Switch it up?
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results.
–Einstein (poss. misattributed)
Consistency is Key.
-Triathlon
I’ve been with EN for a bunch of years – and with Rich’s former Crucible Fitness shop for a few before that – and have followed the program for the better (literally!) part of my tri career. I’ve posted a zillion times that when taken as directed, this EN stuff works. I’ve exceeded any expectations I ever in had in multisport as a direct result of (mostly) following the program, year in and year out.
However, as I give more and more thought to continued growth in the long-term – looking at my development as an athlete over three, five or 10 years – coupled with trying to leave no stone unturned for natural improvement – I’m curious about whether consistency, and coming back to any one program in the long-term is a blessing, or a curse. (I’m not planning to leave – I’m just exploring unknown unknowns here.)
In the pro side of the ledger, we have consistency. Parboiled, it’s going to say “do The Work.” Create a program and the conditions that will let you keep doing The Work, until days become weeks become months become seasons. The Work should be Work, so you grow, and should be mixed up in the Optimum Blend that lets you keep Working in a virtuous circle. Once in a while you’ll pay $700 to The Man and prove you’ve grown. You’ll probably keep growing for a bunch of years. At the core of all if this, though, is consistency.
The results story behind this is irrefutable and following this path will take most people to wherever they want to go in the sport. The EN Optimum Blend that is my personal experience lets me safely and enjoyably do a bunch of work, such that I can come back year after year.
All of this is massively reinforcing.
But wait … in the con side of the ledger we also have consistency. Huh? Not the type where we come back day after day and grow, but the type where after, say, 3000 days, we grow, but but after repeated growth cycles, there emerges some kind of rut. And in the quest for natural speed, that rut has an opportunity cost. By analogy, after six weeks of a v02 microcycle, you’re tapped and the adaptations hit a ceiling, so you need to switch up the stimulus. Think of my question in terms of a macromacromacrocycle, where after 10 years (or whatever), the adaptations hit a ceiling, and you need to switch up the stimulus.
My example: I follow certain flavours of workouts arranged in a certain progression over a repeating cycle. At certain points in this cycle, I have a pretty predictable w/kg, or vdot. I know this work is absolutely necessary to prepare to the level I need to, but I wonder if there’s a point where The Work might have run its course, or need to be substituted for some other kind of work that hasn’t been a flavour I have used in the last 3000 days. A closer example: Over a full cycle (epic week included) building to my first IM of the season, I will do between 22 and 25 five-hour rides. I think these are the most sound preparation for me to efficiently race an IM. But what if all of the possible adaptations have been totally maxed out my body, and no matter what I do, these will continue to give me adequate preparation, but not the *best possible preparation? What if after a number of years, these have created a ceiling based on my genetics? And what about the opportunity cost? So instead of, say, weekly EN-flavour 5hr rides, I did a 180 mile ride every 10 days at .76 once a month? Or instead of the faithful 5h/45min brick that I do every Saturday during in-season, I did, say, a four hour ride at ABP at an increased cadence of 100, and then a 10 x 1 Hard Mile brick on the track? Or I took every sixth week completely, totally, off?
I’m tossing these examples out as crazy outliers because they seem completely gonzo, but is gonzo what the body needs, after doing similar sessions season after season, in order to grow to a next level?
Comments
Not gonzo. I think I know where you're coming from. You're falling back into self-coach mode. I'm not sure if we ever get out of that. We came to EN to learn. Doesn't mean that you or I can't tweak some things every now and then. The beauty of it is that we can tweak WITH guidance/advice/experience from so many other sharp & accomplished coaches and athletes.
By not having any 'A' race this year, I've left myself open to really study how I treat myself in between hard (or long) workouts. I'm average, at best, with my results in the past. I certainly feel like l could do a better job pursuing perfect execution of the plans but I'm looking at this year from a different perspective. I'm stretching the timelines out. Taking the Monday to Sunday brackets off of a plan. Now, logging Hard or EZ into WKO+ (tempo or medium and VO2 both count as hard efforts) as well as watts/IF's/etc and paces. Basically, doing OS (presently) work but adding recovery time, both in the wko and between wko days. What most athletes might knock out in the traditional 7 day stretch might take me 10 days to do. But, it's just a run of numbered days in my log, not Mon thru Sunday. Results? Yep, at this point, looking good. FTP taking bigger jumps than I usually get.
Also, I just flat out enjoy riding longer on the weekends. Ranging from 3 hrs to 5 hrs, like yourself. Pretty aggressive rides, not Rose Bowl Crit pace, but enough that I have to tweak my recovery to have a productive stretch before the next weekend's work.
Running wise, I'm rehabbing a bad achilles. And, this strategy of REALLY paying attention to ''Hard'' runs and how close they are to another ''Hard'' run is paying off. I've seen a pattern and I can closely predict when my legs are too tired, which may result in re-injury (speaking from experience).
So, no Mon to Sunday timeline. Just a long string of days that build to some B/C events this year. That workouts on that long stretch are flexible depending on so many factors. There's plenty of really hard EN work in that, but there's plenty of CH (that's me!) recovery added in as needed.
And, my hope is that, although I may not accumulate the exact workout log as everyone else, I end up at race day uniquely qualified to race at the best of my abilities.
Which brings me to my next thought....you sound like you're maxed out on Dave's Genetics + Hard Work = Plateaued Results, at least if you continue doing what you've been doing for the last 10(?) years. It's not perfect slope of improvement, is it? There's always something we can do better to get that little bit of improvement, before/during/after the wko. But, as weekend warriors, if you're finally maxed out, how far are you willing to go to get that next bump up? So, like you've said, maybe you just need a little bit of change, to get a physiological and mental benefit. But, if you're gonna change, do something that the body will recognize as different. (similar to the idea that most runners don't go hard enough on the hard runners nor ez enough on the ez runs,.....don't get stuck in the middle).
sorry, just random thoughts, but something in your post caught my interest.
Keep it rollin'!
Oh, man, what question are you asking here?
Having given my not-so-humble opinion above, I'll share my own experience, and see if it provides any value to the discussion. I'll limit this to triathlon, and the question of how to get as fast as you can and sustain that as long as you can. After a year's acclimation, and my first Ironman, I gave myself a five year window to try and get to Kona. I did not, however, have a grand macromacro strategy for how to get there, other than to show up every day. Each year, without much overall strategy except to improve my limiters, I found myself adding new elements to my training. EG, the first year, I started doing track intervals, the second year I added tempo runs, the third year I emphasized marathon training (using Boston as a goal), the fourth year I added altitude training, the fifth year I began doing hard intervals on a trainer. (This is just a sampling of the stuff I began adding over time.) If I had tried to do all of that all at once, I probably would have flamed out pretty quickly. I also injected something different from rote training and the same races over and over, like multi-day bike tours with like minded friends (not triathletes), mountain biking and Xterra racing. My point is, as Dave is suggesting, I was consistent in that I did something everyday. But I was switching it up, in that my training log would not look the same from year to year, even when examining, say, the 10 weeks before an IM.
I did meet my five year target (actually, KQ'd 4 years 10 months after my first IM.) For the next 6 years, I maintained a high level of performance, with a series of AG wins and KQs. I was still switching things up, first by refining my race execution strategies (following proto-EN rules), and then following EN training plans. But remember those training plans are not static. From year to year, they have been changing - adding this, tweaking that, dropping the other thing. The only thing that I can rely on being the same from year to year is the swim workouts. In addition, I kept switching things up on a regular basis as I always had.
But I think my improvements in terms of time stopped after about 10-12 years in. It’s tough to gauge this, as I have to discount the “normal” slow down which we all face at my age. So this is where Dave’s query starts to apply.My advice would be: by all means, do something different this year. If you’ve been doing a lot of longer rides, maybe what you need is to emphasize shorter, harder ones. From my playbook last year: Go find some 6-900 vertical foot “hills” @ 6-8%, and power up those on Tuesdays. Find a traffic free course of 5-7 miles or so, and hammer out 2-4 repeats on Saturday. Or what I did 10-15 years ago: Bike commute to work, and throw in an HIM + (70 miles @ HIM pace) on Saturdays.
No question humans crave novelty - in our friends, in our entertainment, in our environment. I suspect our bodies thrive on novelty as well.When thinking about changing the stimulus, however, practical considerations are really important. If I went to a high-volume approach and took my training from the ~10 hours/week (in-season) to ~20-25 with lower intensity I expect I'd see improvements. But there's no way I could invest that kind of time. Forget about ROI (which most of us who are pretty serious about triathlon skate on the fringes of already), that kind of time just isn't available to me, period.
With "high volume" off the table, "switching it up" gets into the details of how the workouts are constructed and sequenced, and for that you need to really study up or get a coach. High-performing folks I have seen who have coaches and do about the same overall volume as EN training seem to do similar things but the differences may be enough to see a new positive adaptation...for example, lots of riding at 90% which we never do in EN, or z2 riding after the MS and not z3 like in EN.
It is worth a try but I'm not sure I'd recommend "self coaching" my way into a new training approach...
p.s. after my marathon experience I really believe that tapering and peaking optimally can yield more benefit than the difference between two training approaches, one of which gets you to 95% of your potential and the other of which gets you to 95.5%.
Long Answer: You gotta do what gets you fired up. I think part of the question in my mind is more What Next...as in, I did this tri, loved the sport, dug myself in and set really big goals like "Kona One Day!" and then, many days later I did it! And I did it again! and now, well, holy carp, what's left to do?
Do you go faster than last time, and is that in-and-of-itself motivation enough? For me, it's not.
Do you pick some other challenges to keep you focused and have fun...and maybe find fitness along the way? That's where I am at.
In many ways, not too different than how Mr. Truscott has been rolling it (mentally)....stay fit, have fun, and then really get dialed in with 8 to 12 weeks to go. Because for me, the super human power I have developed to stay laster focused on a goal (Kona, body comp) for 365 days or more...is now my biggest enemy.
I hope I haven't hijacked you too badly brother!!!
As we know that unless we are increasing our training stimulus, we will plateau in our fitness. As you have been training for such a period, it is likely that you have explored most/all of the gains available under the EN-type approach.
Just thinking about bike training for a moment — the theory is that we bang out FTP intervals that mostly push up our FTP, as well as providing a smaller boost to your VO2 max — and so after a while most people's FTP stops rising because of a lack of VO2 max head room, despite lashings of FTP intervals — think a 5 min power divided by FTP equals, say, around 1.1.
If this is you, then it is probably worth considering adding VO2 max work all year round — perhaps 5 x 5 hack style intervals replacing FTP intervals?
If this doesn't describe you, then, in theory at least, you could push up your FTP by doing more FTP intervals.
I also assume similar thinking could be applied to pushing up your Vdot, although I note the higher risks associated with VO2 max work in running.
Coming back late to the party on this thread. I saw it at work and then never responded.
I'd agree with many of the comments by others. You've had great consistency, continued progressive overload and worked the EN plan very diligently over the years. If you have found yourself in a plateau then it's time to look at the variables.
If you are at the ceiling then how can you maintain what you have? I believe what you are asking is are there any stones to be unturned before the curve starts dipping?
If you are time constrained then perhaps moving to a 10day cycle, assuming you can recover may give some benefit. Pressing more work in to the schedule this way could allow for a bit more EN style work versus the regular weekly schedule. This could apply throughout the season OS, GFP, IM or only to the OS.
The other paradigm is high volume perhaps getting in some blocks of high volume would give a boost. When I say blocks I'm not thinking the big bike week but something 3-8 maybe 12 weeks train like you are a professional. Can you physically handle 25, 30, 35 hours a week of training? If the 25-30 hour weeks are not doable then perhaps a one sport focus maybe a solution. I'd consider this in a shorter duration 4-8 weeks but with similar volume to the previous but in one sport. There are all kinds of questions here like getting to a warm place to do this in the winter, injuries from increased volume and life challenges that I don't even know about.
As to your specific question about En 5 hour rides vs 180 every 10 days or 4 hour ABP rides. To me this requires some analysis and though on your physical response to these rides or any weakness you feel you have. The volume on the bike will get you to the point that 180K will seem very easy. Having to push .75 or higher on race day will require a very specific training to be able to run off that type of effort. If you have maxed the w/kg do you look at the ability to push a 0.01 or 0.05 IF over the course of the IM and still run well. I really have no idea where that balance is when you are out on the edge.
I recall a post from you outlining challenges with a neck artery (?) limiting VO2 work. Given this perhaps increasing volume and focusing on ABP maybe a better option than more intensity. Again there is the 7, 10 day cycles to consider.
I was hoping Mancona would post to this thread I'd hit him up in a PM. He seemed to get a good boost when moving from EN's plans to Dr Skiba (?). I have not looked at his plans very closely but his perspective on what changes you could make would be invaluable IMO.
Your comment in one of the running form threads on the Bobby McGee video of "not doing a one-on-one session until maximizing the utility of the video" this may lead to better measurement as you limit the parameters of change but is probably not leading to speed maximization on the fastest track. You have limited time to reach that IM best time if you have a need with running form and the means to pursue it I'd say go for it. I know from experience in figure skating that having someone video tape you, not even a coach was highly valuable. Let's just say what I though I was doing in the air sometimes was no where near what was actually happening.
I'm not sure of the value of a single one-on-one session this may need to be 3, 5, perhaps 10 session. I know back in the day Gordo Byrn documented his work with Bobby in multiple session, I'm not sure if this is still around on the web or not. Perhaps getting some feedback on his forum or from Bobby personally would give you some direction on this.
The challenge is how much do you want to change seeking that next 1% and being able to measure what worked. A huge departure could still give you sizeable gains balanced against blowing up a season. Being able to measure the improvement maybe a difficult especially if you are changes many things the results will be in the IM time only months later.
Finally if you are doing a lot of changes you will mentally need to commit to the changes up front or this could really damage your season. Given the progressions you are used to and seeing a certain w/kg (vdot) at point x of the season you will need to be wholly committed to a new plan.
Like Patrick said, you gotta find what gets you fired up, excited, and then decide what you want to invest in that.
You've been going at it, HARD, for a very, very long time. I strongly recommend you step back, put a bunch of ideas in a fun column, rank them, and go from there