Fitness and execution goals to make IM roll down interesting

Scott Liston

So I did a little work on what fitness -- weight, FTP/W/Kg. and VDOT, and execution - IF and TSS points -- would be needed to make the Monday morning after an Ironman interesting for me, i.e., be in the roll down hunt for Kona.  I did my first IM, IM Louisville, in 2010 so the data for current is from that race.  Note that it was hot so the times all have 45 minutes to an hour in them vs. other IM races.  I assume the race is always hot and equally affecting the competitors.  The goals below are also informed by the Craig Harris calculator for running and the work Matt Samojeden did analyzing Kona qualifying performances by age group.  My question to my teammates is whether you think the combination of improvement in weight, FTP, and VDOT is balanced and resonable based on results experienced in the Haus and whether I have the execution IFs right.  I know the fast run is necessary < 3:40 and that seems most daunting. I also expect that the execution IFs I have chosen are on the low side.  So take a look and give me your input.  Thanks,  Scott

 

 

 

 

cwhyte

First off, your vdot 51 data is incorrect. I didn't check the others. 75% of T pace for a vdot 51 is a 3:55. You'd have to be a vdot 56 to pull off a 3:38 at that %. Also, it obviously depends on the course and your position on the bike (W/kg) but an IF of .70 for an W/kg = 4.0 person should definitely yield a faster time than a 5:45.

Having said that, those kind of goals are a double-edge sword. I would recommend against having any time-based goal. Focus on something like this:

1. Building a structured program based on a set of training and racing principles
2. Consistent execution of your training
3. % of improvement (in FTP and T pace) based on current fitness

Thanks, Chris

Al Truscott

Chris wrote half my post for me. I was going to say your goals are (if getting from where you are to a chance at Kona is your dream):

1. Lost the fat

2. Consistent, dedidicated bike and run work day after day, month after month, year after year. Bike with faster people once a week if you can.

3. Race one or two IMs a year for 2-5 years.

4. Pay attention to details and commit to IM success as your number one life goal.

Adjust your targets yearly based on your proven, current performance.

The one metric you can control the most easily is the BF%. You might want to be more aggressive in your target there. 5-7% should be your goal if Kona is your dream. The less non-muscle you carry with you, the faster you'll go on wheel and pavement (too bad that doesn't work inthe water.)

 

Scott Liston

Chris and Al -- a heartfelt thank you. I see what I did wrong on the run calculation: I was keying IF off of the 5K pace rather than TH (15K pace). Good to hear that 4.0 w/kg. yields more speed. But I take your overall themes: focus on taking care of training today with consistency, mind the details, lose the fat, and get more experience to execute with excellence and really, really want it.

That said, I was just trying to get a sense for what it takes from a numbers standpoint to help gauge where I am, the length of the road ahead, and what realistic progress looks like. But again, I very much appreciate the wisdom from those who have been there!

Matt Samojeden

Scott, I read into your post that you have a goal 3 years out to shoot for a KQ slot at IM LOU in the 50 -54 age group.    Chris and AL have given some spot on advice above.  I think you are looking for some level of quantification of how fast and strong do I need to be to maybe get a slot. With some target set for a goal multiple years out, you can as they advise go through the process of driving year over year improvements.  You can see if X% gains per year are realistic given certain training approaches and time commitments.

 

So to play the numbers and time goal game, let’s look back at the results for the hot years of 2007, 08 and 10. The table below is the results for those years presented as the average of the top 5, the top 10 and then the 5^th place individual. No surprise that times vary year to year based on the conditions and who shows up to race. 2007 was not as hot as 2008 or 2010 accounting for the faster overall times. The 2007 highs were mid to upper 80’s vs mid to upper 90’s in the two real hot years.   2007 had a couple of screaming fast people in this age group with the fastest being a 10:11:26. This skews the average for that year a bit.    

 

 

This age group at LOU typically gets 3-4 KQ slots, it all depends on the distribution of the people into the age group buckets. So assume 4 slots on a lucky year. With this being the last qualifying race before Kona, and having only 6 weeks to recover before the race, the odds of having someone not take the KQ slot increases. So that 5^th finishing position I think has a solid chance at a roll down. (we know some luck guy that got a roll down with an 8^th position finish  ) .

 

Looking at the times above, a finishing time of 11 hrs to 11:20 should get one into the hunt. As a sanity check, I built out a couple of scenarios and looked to see what age group place would have resulted from the time. Three scenarios covering that time range follow.

 

Scott – I will leave the time goal selection to you my friend. I hope this helps provides some perspective as to what the times historically have need to be. I will PM you the spreadsheet with all the details.

 

Ok with that out of the way, On to your questions on IF levels and such. Starting with the bike, as we have said before comparing FTP levels and w/kg to get a time on the bike has many factors that influence the end result. BUT I agree with Chris, assuming a good aero position, a 275 FTP ridden at .7 IF will get you around the course faster than a 5:45. As a data point, my 2010 IM LOU bike ride time with the pee breaks and the special needs stop removed (factor in what you need) was 5:39:33. This was with a NP of 177, 3.65 w/kg and VI of 1.07. Your targeted watts of 275 x 0.7 = 192 should get you down into the 5:30 range or better. Try this site for doing “what if’s” and the impact of relative changes in power. http://www.triathloncalculator.com/output.php

 

An IF of.70 on the bike seems to be the target that many people use and is supported by the EN pacing tool.  I think some of the young bucks may go to a .72 or .73. Best to try higher levels in a race rehearsal. I read your 2010 IM Lou race report and noticed a high VI of 1.1. Need to get this lower!

 

The run –– what vdot in normal conditions does one need to run a 4 to 4:10 marathon in hot and humid, nasty conditions???? This is the hard question we all struggle to answer. My best estimate is you will need to be in the vDOT of 51-52 range (or better) and executing at an IF of ~ .78. The good news is just getting your weight down to 152 gets your current vdot up to 45. As Al points out, weight reduction is the quickest way to get faster.

 

Back up to the 5000 foot level. Over 3 years you are looking to achieve the following % improvements in the segments from your current level. Swim + 19%, Bike + 15%, Run +19%. Can that be done?  I think yes given the EN work works plans.To your question on balance – yes looks reasonable. You may want to consider a bit less focus on the swim and a harder push on the run.

 

Best of luck in your journey, enjoy!!

Matt

 

Scott Liston

Matt

Excellent, as always.  Thanks for the thoroughness and bringing the data from the IM LOU to the table.  I have sharpened my % body fat goals, backed off on the swim just a bit, validated the speed estimates from triathloncalculator.com and fixed the VDOT calc issue.  I know I need to get the VI of 1.1 down.  I also know there is improvement room in my aero position so the bike speeds I used are conservative.  The body comp improvement is the free speed I need to make these goals come to life.  And these goals will put me in the hunt based on previous years.  Thanks, again, to all three of you.  Scott