Tracking! These intervals can be really vexing because some weeks you got it and some weeks you don't. Success just by hitting the numbers, it's also about doing that work that forces you to take so deep. Your building new pathways and that takes significant mental and physical resources. All of which goes "into the bank."
I'm curious to know how you feel about other elements of your training relative to how those intervals are going.
Do you feel as though the weekend sessions are sapping some of your energy?
What else could you do to improve your recovery before the sessions?
Are you doing along with warm up to get started?
Is your cadence for these intervals consistent with how you normally ride or is it higher or lower?
Numbers down last week, and I was burnt out to the extent of needing (not wanting - needing) to skip the long run and the long ride. z5+ bike Intensity really does a number on me, historically (see my 'depressed thread'* in main forum from a few weeks ago - this has been the case since the days of Crucible Fitness! https://endurancenation.vanillacommunities.com/discussion/26626/zone-5-bike-and-depression-symptoms#latest )
*These 5/18 and 5/25 sets are "working to failure."
A's to your Q's:
Do you feel as though the weekend sessions are sapping some of your energy?
a: Not one bit, but very much the other way around!
What else could you do to improve your recovery before the sessions?
a: good q. I'm not sure: I enter these with max sleep, max hours of rest between the previous days session, and fed and watered. Maybe 'active recovery' session of Yoga and stretch/meditation earlier in day?
Are you doing along with warm up to get started?
a: generally a 15'warmup, and I'm able to get into early intervals with no real problem. it's the later intervals where I have been faltering.
Is your cadence for these intervals consistent with how you normally ride or is it higher or lower?
a: lower, in the very short intervals. A bit closer to 'normal' cadence as I get past 1' of work.
@Dave Tallo - thanks for the candid update. I understand how challenging these sessions can be. Especially when we have higher numbers that we aren't able to hit.
It's important to note, however, that it's not just hitting those numbers that builds your fitness. You are adding huge swaths of fitness across the board on the left-hand side of your Power profile that we haven't had before.
Previously, these high numbers were mistakes that you made. Now we are consistently hitting them. That's HUGE.
These are your new bests for this calendar year.
These ^^ are bests in your last THREE years. The work, my friend, is working. No we don't have that much more to go, so I just have to encourage you to do your best. I still want to make sure that we're getting those longer easier aerobic sessions on the weekend, and if you're not able to hit the numbers during the week, feel free to do the harder intervals when you're outside on the weekends if the terrain is better.
so for the experiment's remaining two weeks (key sessions 2x weekly bikes as 2x30", 1x1', 5-7x3'), I'll be aiming for these numbers:
30": 410
1': 350-370
3': 275-280
just as intended ... the experiment has given lots of insights to things that work, and don't work. I'll probably test 20 minute and 5 minute power as session 2 of 2 in the last week, I'll write the debrief when it's all done.
6 weeks of ‘hard’ biking at 10s – 3m maximum power
Notes
Carried out with full compliance to ‘key’ sessions,
extra sessions done unless fatigue was too great
followed a very good/excellent post-session recovery protocol
shuffled prescribed days of week for these key sessions to ensure adequate recovery (original Tues Thurs was too short)
Overall fitness was fair, but (comparatively) very low FTP at time of experiment, and high weight
I was able to have almost unlimited rest /sleep during the period
The findings
Short-term
Overall (lifetime) increase in max10”-3’ -> power
No increase in other bike performance measures
Overall detriment to running frequency
Overall detriment of run quality / pace / power
Overall detriment to recovery
Long-term
Spillover to bike FTP?
Spillover to Run LT/FTP/Pace?
Carryover to “overall fitness?”
Observations
These sessions left me unable to train in any meaningful way for between 1-3 days after on either bike or run
these did ‘raise the curve’ on the left
These did not add to any secondary or overall metric outside of 1s-3min power – no contribution to bike vo2 max, bike FTP, bike endurance, run v02 max, power, pace.
These adversely affected run and bike endurance
These adversely affected consistency with direct result of missed – skipped days following sessions
I think this was a “gave it every chance for success” run: (a) A full six week run with key sessions, (b) entering the session with six or so week of v02 work already completed, and (c) having a long training block already done (so there wasn’t a “catch up” that my legs needed, and I didn’t enter out of shape).
The killshot: in the final week, two sessions of 7 x 3’ (3), is the major data point I was rested for the sessions, carried in minimal fatigue, and the power I achieved in the 3’ intervals was less than or equal to my 5’ power from my Feb test (done on week 0 of the outseason with no riding in my legs.)
The only reason I have a higher-than-ever 0s – 3m power is I have never worked these before. ( Axiomatic, as I have never worked them because I hadn’t believed them to be relevant to IM triathlon. )
No findings in wko5 chart analysis to show demonstrable improvements to relevant areas
Discussion / Conclusions:
The period was long and deep enough to support that I’m not a “intensity Responder.” But given that I do well at IM, my training and fitness DOES respond to something, and I think there’s a linear relationship to show I get fitter with more volume and therefore a “volume responder.”
This period shows that I am unable to adequately recover from these session. Simply, one session has a huge downstream cost that would leave me unable to even train on subsequent days.
I did not seem to absorb training of any other type during this period: no progress or negative progress on bike endurance, FTP, or similar run measures.
There was no confirmation bias I brought in: I really wanted this to work.
the cost / benefit is not only small (as a minimal responder), but it was negative (as this put me in the hole.)
This type of training is not suitable for specific Ironman execution. I don’t ride or run above aerobic in those situations. FRC isn’t an Ironman thing.
The value of this experiment
This reinforced my thinking about “training to the curve” / “training to Strava” versus “training to the event”
This reinforced my thinking (for my case) as debated w R Stanbough.
There might be some role for v02 work for me, but it is probably minimal, and the maximum benefits I think get realized after a very small amount per week/session. (Or maybe 1 v02 session every two weeks.) In other words, 2 sessions / week is way too much to absorb and contribute to fitness.
It’s showing me little – nil interplay between doing v02 / max work on the bike, and seeing carryover on run vo2 max.
It opens the question of “if not by v02, then how?” And this might be answered by being able to / training to ride and run very close to 80percent for a long, long time, and training to that.
This doesn’t close the option for a comparable “FTB build block.”
It will / would be interesting if I did a similar “0s – 3min run power’ block, and I suspent that I WOULD respond to that (having tried this in about 2011 and 2012. done this in
To monitor over post-block:
At two weeks out and 4 weeks out:
Is this showing any contribution to accelerating FTP Progress? Ae progress? Higher FTP?
Ditto Improvements in run pace or power?
Overall, a success in the spirit of using experiments to find out what works for me. Even if this showed s approach doesn’t work!
@Dave Tallo - Thank you so much for the thorough update. Before I dive into the data, it's clear that the cost of high intensity work for you is significant. On some level, I find that fascinating because you have such a deep background of Endurance.
For an athlete who showed up Untrained, I could understand why the high efforts were so debilitating. But in your case it's interesting that it could take up to three days for you to process 20 minutes of training. Whether or not you are a "responder" to intensity, it's very clear that you are not an "absorber" of the work!
[edit] One QuesTion i have WRT to your cycling for these intervals, and overall as I dive in, is your lower cadence? I see you doing 3' intervals at 75 rpms...and Kona at 71 rpms. That amount of torque is a killer, especially for someone as lean as you are. Even I need to push low 80s, and during intervals I am closer to 90 rpms. So tell me about this cadence thing. 8 years ago was fast Dave pushing 71 rpms to KQ? And what is your crank length? [/end edit]
We already know that you're a volume responder to Training, as we have seen in the past. But your performances have shown that "typical training" is not sufficient to stimulate continuing adaptation over time. This is why we are seeking alternative means for making you stronger.
While this didn't give you an instant boost, I reserve judgement to the rest of your season...so let's see on that. Even if there are zero physiological benefits for you (which I am not sold on yet), there is a mental boost to looking at 250 and saying "that is 10x easier than 350" any day. But you'll have to tell me!
I think you are getting at a bike energy system vs run energy system; and its possible that you respond more to run intensity vs bike intensity (you are a low muscle mass guy).
If I'm not mistaken, we spoke about transitioning from this bike focus. To doing some run focus work as well. I'll be curious to know if that's where your head is still at for now. I don't want you to do all that woman at repeat :-) means, but we can start working out from 400 to see how things go.
If you do transition to the run now, I'd like to dial in some parameters for the bike. I don't have access to your TP.com anymore (password change?) but I would like to see a bit of a "Transition" period. IOW, if you have closed out the bike "work" then let's take a week or two before jumping right into run work. I'd like you to hit a few longer rides (5-6 hours, road bike or comfy bike is fine, not hard work at all) before transitioning. I don't want to go 2 x 6 weeks without a big bike window, and I don't want the bike volume to muck up run strength (not a huge risk, but still).
Comments
for reference/tracking following week 2
1' = 360
ACTUAL/CAPABLE DURING (these achieve 'to failure')
30' = 420
1' = 340
-
Tracking! These intervals can be really vexing because some weeks you got it and some weeks you don't. Success just by hitting the numbers, it's also about doing that work that forces you to take so deep. Your building new pathways and that takes significant mental and physical resources. All of which goes "into the bank."
I'm curious to know how you feel about other elements of your training relative to how those intervals are going.
Future Dave is going to be so strong...
~ Coach P
Numbers down last week, and I was burnt out to the extent of needing (not wanting - needing) to skip the long run and the long ride. z5+ bike Intensity really does a number on me, historically (see my 'depressed thread'* in main forum from a few weeks ago - this has been the case since the days of Crucible Fitness! https://endurancenation.vanillacommunities.com/discussion/26626/zone-5-bike-and-depression-symptoms#latest )
*These 5/18 and 5/25 sets are "working to failure."
A's to your Q's:
@Dave Tallo - thanks for the candid update. I understand how challenging these sessions can be. Especially when we have higher numbers that we aren't able to hit.
It's important to note, however, that it's not just hitting those numbers that builds your fitness. You are adding huge swaths of fitness across the board on the left-hand side of your Power profile that we haven't had before.
Previously, these high numbers were mistakes that you made. Now we are consistently hitting them. That's HUGE.
These are your new bests for this calendar year.
These ^^ are bests in your last THREE years. The work, my friend, is working. No we don't have that much more to go, so I just have to encourage you to do your best. I still want to make sure that we're getting those longer easier aerobic sessions on the weekend, and if you're not able to hit the numbers during the week, feel free to do the harder intervals when you're outside on the weekends if the terrain is better.
Two weeks left brother!!!
~ Coach P
so for the experiment's remaining two weeks (key sessions 2x weekly bikes as 2x30", 1x1', 5-7x3'), I'll be aiming for these numbers:
30": 410
1': 350-370
3': 275-280
just as intended ... the experiment has given lots of insights to things that work, and don't work. I'll probably test 20 minute and 5 minute power as session 2 of 2 in the last week, I'll write the debrief when it's all done.
Debrief on Experiment #1
(Pasted from my own files)
The experiment
Notes
The findings
Short-term
Long-term
Observations
The only reason I have a higher-than-ever 0s – 3m power is I have never worked these before. ( Axiomatic, as I have never worked them because I hadn’t believed them to be relevant to IM triathlon. )
No findings in wko5 chart analysis to show demonstrable improvements to relevant areas
Discussion / Conclusions:
The value of this experiment
To monitor over post-block:
At two weeks out and 4 weeks out:
Overall, a success in the spirit of using experiments to find out what works for me. Even if this showed s approach doesn’t work!
@Dave Tallo - Thank you so much for the thorough update. Before I dive into the data, it's clear that the cost of high intensity work for you is significant. On some level, I find that fascinating because you have such a deep background of Endurance.
For an athlete who showed up Untrained, I could understand why the high efforts were so debilitating. But in your case it's interesting that it could take up to three days for you to process 20 minutes of training. Whether or not you are a "responder" to intensity, it's very clear that you are not an "absorber" of the work!
[edit] One QuesTion i have WRT to your cycling for these intervals, and overall as I dive in, is your lower cadence? I see you doing 3' intervals at 75 rpms...and Kona at 71 rpms. That amount of torque is a killer, especially for someone as lean as you are. Even I need to push low 80s, and during intervals I am closer to 90 rpms. So tell me about this cadence thing. 8 years ago was fast Dave pushing 71 rpms to KQ? And what is your crank length? [/end edit]
We already know that you're a volume responder to Training, as we have seen in the past. But your performances have shown that "typical training" is not sufficient to stimulate continuing adaptation over time. This is why we are seeking alternative means for making you stronger.
While this didn't give you an instant boost, I reserve judgement to the rest of your season...so let's see on that. Even if there are zero physiological benefits for you (which I am not sold on yet), there is a mental boost to looking at 250 and saying "that is 10x easier than 350" any day. But you'll have to tell me!
I think you are getting at a bike energy system vs run energy system; and its possible that you respond more to run intensity vs bike intensity (you are a low muscle mass guy).
If I'm not mistaken, we spoke about transitioning from this bike focus. To doing some run focus work as well. I'll be curious to know if that's where your head is still at for now. I don't want you to do all that woman at repeat :-) means, but we can start working out from 400 to see how things go.
If you do transition to the run now, I'd like to dial in some parameters for the bike. I don't have access to your TP.com anymore (password change?) but I would like to see a bit of a "Transition" period. IOW, if you have closed out the bike "work" then let's take a week or two before jumping right into run work. I'd like you to hit a few longer rides (5-6 hours, road bike or comfy bike is fine, not hard work at all) before transitioning. I don't want to go 2 x 6 weeks without a big bike window, and I don't want the bike volume to muck up run strength (not a huge risk, but still).
What say you?
~ Coach P
Thanks a lot for the thoughts. Going to send you a note offline about what’s next, etc, etc.
@Dave Tallo Just tell me where to find that message and I am on it!
~ Coach P
Thanks - I sent the message to your gmail account.
On it!!