On Building a Faster Ironman
Post to the Forum Which Shall Not Be Named...
Good discussion. In my experience:
There is no going faster without making yourself faster. You train to lift your FTP on the bike (develop raw, how-fast-can-I-go-for-60' speed) and then develop endurance for the race distance. Your twin focuses on building the endurance with no regard to building speed (typical IM training). On race day your FTP is 270w to his 240w. You will beat him, badly. There is no faster IM bike split without a higher FTP (keeping body weight, aerodynamics, and other variables constant). There is no magical endurance pixie dust that will allow your twin to ride your bike split without your FTP, even though he's done more volume than you. The same is true for the run, using VDot rather than FTP. However, there are caveats on the run regarding the need to build durability, etc.
It's best to separate the need to get faster from the need to build endurance for the race distance. Trying to get faster while also building longer/endurance doesn't do a great job of doing either. Better to create a good portion of each training year where your only focus is on getting much, much faster with no concern for training volume or building endurance. Build fast then put far under it.
Race execution is free speed on race day. Lots to be gain by learning how to race vs trying to figure out new and sexy ways to train more and get faster...and then still booger it on race day because you don't know how to race.
Mental toughness augments execution skills and fitness, it's not a replacement. Lots of fit tough guys walking the marathon because they raced like a bag of hammers.
Realize there is difference between training volume as a training method and volume as a lifestyle. I think many triathletes ride and run long because it's just what they do, it's their lifestyle, and haven't really given much consideration to the training value or time cost of that volume. It's particularly easy to do if you're surrounded by a culture that measures everything/solves training question with discussions of volume. 4-5hrs on Z1-2 on Saturday is just what you and your friends do...yet you wonder why the roadie drilling himself in Z4-5 for 2-3hrs can ride circles around you. Yes, even if he rode with you on your 5hr ride he would still beat you because he is faster. Period.
So a prescription for a go-faster Ironman might be:
Determine your w/kg at FTP. Compare this to about 4.0w/kg, as this would the "that tri-dude is pretty strong on the bike" fitness for your standard 5'7"-6ft, 155-175lb triathlete. I'm making assumptions about bike fit, aerodynamics of your bike set up, etc. That is, it's very good. See where you are in relation to this 4.0w/kg and what FTP % gain or kg loss you need to create. Current FTP is 235w, goal is 280w....make it so.
Determine "how fast do I need to be to run marathon xx:yy." Take your goal marathon time, break it down to a per mile pace. Then go to a Jack Daniels VDot pace calculator to figure out the VDot that corresponds to an E-pace of that goal marathon time above. For example, 3:35 goal IM marathon time = 8:30 pace = the E-pace that corresponds to a VDot of 53 (totally made that up, didn't do math or look any of it up :-). Current VDot is 45....I gots to run faster and build my VDot from 45 to 53. The best time to do that is when I'm not also trying to build at 2.5hr long run and riding 8-10hrs/wk.
In my experience, it's not very valuable to discuss what changes did you make, what is the secret sauce that makes you faster than the next guy. Instead, attach objective numbers to where you are now, determine how those numbers measure up to where you need to be, and develop a plan to make your numbers bigger. Put weight on the bar and lift it. Measure improvement, put more weight on the bar and lift it. Repeat.
Comments
Rich,
You use 4.0w/kg for a very solid biker....."in general" that strength would get you what IM split?
My goal is be 19-20mph on IMLOU and targeting 3.5w/kg for me....is this appropriate?
Mike, not really sure about the split. From just having observed my own riding, riding with many different flavors of athletes for several years and watching them progress (or stagnate), 4.0w/kg is when you start saying "that dude is definitely legit." I'm not talking about midgets or big doodes, for whom 4.0w/kg means something else on flats or hills, or roadies from whom 4.0 is...eh...not all that. But in tri world, if you're 5'6" to 6' and 155-180lb, 4.0w/kg is definitely strong. > 4.2w/kg...you need to really start looking at your run cuz you're likely "strong enough" on the bike.
My point of the post was rather than discussing what is the secret sauce that gets you to a sub 10hr, or 11hr, whatever your goal is IM, break it down into numbers: what are your current w/kg, FTP, and VDot, then set goals for yourself. I also wanted to drive home that there is NO beating someone on race day if you don't have a higher FTP or VDot than them (keeping aerodynamics constant and "controlling" for race execution).
6-7hr rides don't mean jack on race day if they don't lift your FTP...period. I have years and years of my own data to back this up. If my FTP is 240w and yours is 270w, and we weigh the same, have the same fit, you WILL ride faster than me on race day, no matter how much volume I've done. Same for VDot. There is no magical endurance/volume pixie dust that makes you faster at long distances if you are not faster at shorter, 1hr distances.
Rich,
I love the explanation, it is great stuff and something that I will print out and keep in my "tri" notebook. At the same time it also scares me. I'd love to have 4w/kg, the problem will be getting there! I was just crunching numbers and if I get to the weight I want to be, I'll have to increase my FTP by 86 watts!!!! Nobody said hard work was easy I guess. Anyway, I'm sure it takes different amounts of time for different people depending on their situation in life, but are we talking years for most of us AGs? I've gone up 32 watts since November that is surely not going to be the case for the rest of the season, just wondering on basic timelines if you have made a commitment to change your lifestyle with tri training and average between 6-10/wk throughout the year for us mortals. Sorry if I've asked the impossible, I know how specific everything is in sport, but doesn't hurt to try! Thank you.
Dan
Michael, I have used two sites to estimate what a FTP improvement will do for my bike split at IM Lou. The benefit we both have is we have a time split from last year and a known FTP level at that time. The first site is http://www.triathloncalculator.com/ and it has a bike course data base and you can select the IM LOU course for the proper amount of hills.
Here you go, on page 4 or so, I think.
The triathloncalculator.com nailed my bike time and run time for Arizona last year within a minute (not including pee breaks)! The swim time was whack. To get my swim time, I'd have to do 400 yards in 4:20. I can't swim 300 yds that fast!
So, the more important question, is comparing, say, CDA to AZ. It gives me a 5:52 which is - yep - equal to my best time on that course, minus pee breaks! It also helpfully indicates I should go for 172 watts, which is just about what RnP say as well. This gives me some understanding of what to expect time wise compared to IM AZ.
Of course, the "Ascent" factor has Kona being an "easier" bike course than CDA - clearly, that's not true, for me at least. They need a heat/humidity/wind factor option!
Al, clearly...you need to learn how to pee on the bike. There are no pee breaks in Endurance Nation
Rich ... get back to me in 20 years on this one!
Page 3, Post #65 in the thread.
And Rich, you've got 1 or 2 directed posts in that thread looking for feedback if you're interested.
Rich,
I've read your post more than once, and I really think it is one of the best pieces of advice that I have ever read, anywhere. And now seeing it in ST and having others discuss it makes it look even better! Just wanted to let you know that you guys are highly respected, and I'm proud to be a part of this passion called Endurance Nation. Great stuff man!
Dan
@Tony, thanks but not really interested. One guy in particular asked me to explain the Fast before Far thing, saying that "a coach he knows" says the opposite, to build a base first. Not really interested in explaining any more than we already have in a gillion places.
4.0w/kg...it's a goal. You could say that 300w FTP, for boys, is a similar goal, same for sub 18:00 5k, etc.
Spun up? Me? Hardly! When have I ever been known to do that?!?!
[returning to my abacus to crunch the numbers]
At current (over)weight 4 w/kg = FTP 328w (64% improvement needed). At current FTP (200w) 4 w/kg = 110# (need to be animated corpse). At goal weight 4 w/kg = FTP 260w (30% improvement needed). At best race weight in last 2 years 4 w/kg = 291w (45% improvement)
Only about 7 weeks left in my OS, so I'm hoping to see another 5% improvement at the end for 210w, unlikely to see any of those FTP improvements over the course of the summer so best bang for my 'fast doode' dreams is probably still getting closer to goal weight. If I split the difference between goal weight & best race weight in 2 years, and if I'm able to get my FTP up to ~220w I'd still have a w/kg of ~3.2 w/kg, which wouldn't be too shabby for me.
First of all, we're talking about several seasons of work. Pretty sure I've said this before in this forum, but, in my experience, most sane, well-balanced, got-a-real-life peeps typically maintain that level of focus for about...3 years. The focus that is "I'm going to do the OS with the goal of this, then I'm doing this, racing that, doing this after I race, with a clear plan, vision and sustained dedication and discipline for 3 years, or about 3 to maybe 4 Ironman races. After that, the process truly has to be part of your lifestyle because, for many, it's not really much fun anymore. That's when you see guys like me who prefer to do whack shit with their fitness. Racing may or may not be in that category, depending on the mood.
Second, when once you've wrapped your head around the work that is required to lift your FTP from X to Y, and then you do the w/kg math and play with the kg, you see that kg is where the "easy" money is. I'm now very much aware that the pint of sorbet I had on Saturday in a moment of weakness (~400cal) basically negated about 30-40' of the hard work I had done on a climb that day, at least from a weight loss perspective. Of course...I still ate it, but once you start to think like that, a lot of things fall into place.
For the purposes of riding faster, especially on hilly courses, and certainly more so for running faster and staying injury free, losing weight is more powerful, and likely easier given our training volume, than trying to figure out new and better ways to build fitness by slamming our heads into the wall.