Training Volume
I am new to EN but have had heard great things about it. I am currently training for San Francisco Triathlon @ Alcatraz in August but my primary goal is my first Ironman (IMTX) in May. My longest races in the past have been 70.3's with my most recent time being a little under 5:30. Since that race I have eased back a little from the HIM volume while training for the SF race. My concern is that while following the short course plan I will be losing some of my endurance fitness with the decreased volume-or at least I think I will. Again, my bigger concern is the IM in May so I want to maintain as much base as possible for the transition. In the interstes of full discosure I had been using the Mark Allen training program the past 3 years and realize this plan is a different approach-which is what I am looking for. Is it OK/advisable to add some volume or should I stick strictly to the program? Thanks for any feedback.
Comments
Welcome to the haus. The first advice I have for you is to read the Long Course training manual. This will help you acclimate to the philosophy covered in EN, which will retrain your terminology away from terms such as "base training", etc. that have long been in the tri world. I would also caution you about focusing on IMTX at this point in time. You have 11 months to go before then, which is a very long time to try and stay intently focused on an A race. I would suggest you stick to the plan and focus on Alcatraz, trying to have the best race possible. You'll then take September off before jumping into the October OS plan, which will really rock your brain if you think your short course plan doesn't have enough volume.
What I'd caution against is riding around at 70% intensity for an extra 2 hours, just to get volume. You'd be better off seeing if you can sit on 80-85% (what we define as the work zone) for more of your ride and if you want to try to add another 30-60 minutes at this intensity---you'll see that it is much harder than just noodling around for 2 hours.
One thing you'll find within EN, is that volume is not a huge indicator of fitness. With the plans, we get in as much work, if not more in 3 hrs than some of these base building plans get in 6 hours. The intensity of the plans is what makes the volume easier when you go at lower intensities. Given that, if you just like killing yourself on the bike for longer periods of time and think it's fun--go for it!!!
Start reading as much as possible in the wiki. Also read this thread:
http://members.endurancenation.us/Training/TrainingForums/tabid/101/aft/622/Default.aspx
and this one for the run
http://members.endurancenation.us/Training/TrainingForums/tabid/101/aft/6296/Default.aspx
and this is how it plays out on race day
http://members.endurancenation.us/Resources/Wiki/tabid/108/Default.aspx?topic=Riding+Steady:+Training+vs+Racing
Good luck and welcome to EN
-Keith
Keith has said it all Ben.....I'd forget about IMTX till next year. I know that may be hard to do being your first Ironman - but do not fear - you will be ready. In fact, I wish, prior to my first full distance race, that I did the SC stuff, then OS and then IM prep. That sounds like a good way to get fast and then go long.
Ben,
After 10yrs of IM coaching and thousands of athletes, I can tell you that the biggest limiter isn't physical...it's how long can maintain an "I'm training for Race X" focus before you go nuts and everything else in your life suffers, including your training. The way we structure an IM season could be summarized as:
The IM world is full of age group triathletes following the advice of former pros or "elite" coaches who've decided to write a book. That book is 70% recycled garbage from other books they've read and 30% their perspective on training should be done based on the experiences and success they had as a pro or, more importantly, someone likely with a MUCH bigger pool of resources to throw at the training question -- time to train, time to recover, etc.
Read the "Volume Elephant" thread at the top of this General Discussion forum. The reason why our athletes do it they way that they do is because PnI spent years doing stoopid shit...so you don't have to! In short, I challenge you to find a more Ironman-knowledgeable Team (Coaches + Athletes) in the triathlon space. We do it the way we do because we've learned through experience, not from a book.
All, Ben is likely posting because, in an email conversation with me, he voice his concerns and I recommend he post some questions to the team. Specifically, I'd like to hear from IMTX or IMSG athletes (ie, early season IM) who did it our way of low volume OS followed by IM training. Please share your experiences with us. Thanks!
Oh how you will pay for that lower volume! If you don't get stronger on the bike using the EN plan, then you are already at your maximum potential.
Yes, volume Is overrated. As Coach R has said, we use intensity in place of volume for much of our training program, giving us two-for-one: we get faster by training harder, and we get the equivilent amount of work as, say a five hour ride or 3 hour run in a 3-4 hour ride or 2-2.5 hr run.
In addition to the value of our training as a "substitute" for volume, our race execution strategy makes it easier to use the speed and strength we develop. By avoiding surges on the bike, and by building into the pace in the run, I've found I don't need the volume I used to do to get the same or faster times. E.g, when I went from 3-4 3 hour runs before an IM to doing "routine EN" 1:45 - 2 hr runs plus 2 x 2.5 hour runs, and started pacing my bike and run during the race per our execution strategy, my IM run times dropped dramatically, from 4:30 down to 4:03
Ben, I started out like you doing some sprints, oly's and 1 70.3, then I joined EN when I decided to do my 1st IM. I did not come from a strong S,B,R background.
I followed the plan as written, and read everything EN had out there, I did not know any better at the time to even worry about doing more volume. At the age of 46 in 2009 I did LP and went 11:03:00, last year I did Wisconsin with a time of 10:33:00.
I just keep doing what they tell me, I will be doing LP in 4 weeks and expect to improve once again. My advice: Follow The Plan, it works !!!
Ben,
Welcom to the Haus. I can't add to much more other than to Coach Rich's point about focuing on a race for this year. 11 months is a long time to train for that race. As others have mentioned after that race take some down time and hit the October OS and build more speed. Follow the plan and you will get the volume in after transitioning to the IM plan.
Gordon
I'll see you in Texas next year! Did it this year and I'm signed up for next year. Kinda bummed that they have reduced Kona spots from 75 to 50. Gotta get a little faster! There was an EN rally held this year about a month before the event that I would highly recommend attending next year (it's free, just have to get there.)
From my perspective, it's not even on my radar screen yet; plenty of time. As everyone as noted above, "Fast, then Far". I'm probably not a typical EN person, but I've been here since the beginning 4/5 or 6 years ago. Just pulled up my Training Peaks account to look at training time over the past year. 242 hrs biking, 76 swimming, 122 running for about 8.5 hours/week total. I was off for a month with an injury, so it's a little low compared to about 11 hours/week in 2009, but still not the mega hours a lot of plans have.
I no longer follow plans, but have been around long enough to know what I need to do. I'll typically print out the 12 week summary to get key dates like when to start long runs, do the race rehearsals etc. and the rest I just get to fit my life style.
I'd advise following plans to start. For the first 2 years I followed the plans very closely, including writing many files of the rides for my Computrainer to match.
I've gone from a middle of the pack to a top of the pack person over the past few years. Swimming still sucks, but it's a three event sport
Tom