I'm in Jackson Wyo and just came down from climbing The Grand Teton. It is my third summit by 3 different routes but this time was the best as I did it with my 17 year old son! I am shattered. My legs are IM tired. Lots of snow made it very tough. I digress but the point is that I would offer to help coordinate an EN high camp. Training high is amazing work and climbing is very similar to long tri training; aerobically and leg wise.
Chris, I was thinking one day the camp could drive down to Bishop and do climbs #1 and #3 of Everest Day 1, finishing in South Lake with lunch/sandwich. Hopefully we won't need you there to shovel salt down the necks of dellerious and cramping campers, like you did with me :-)
Question: with KQ game a-changing (already changed)... why bust your hump and use up all that Real Life(tm) time qualifying at a 140.6? If your goal is to get to Kona, and you know you can complete an IM distance race, why not try to get your qualifier done at a 70.3 race? If all that extra time is good for improved IM distance racing, would the enhanced EN program/plan/mojo do a better job of putting you at the pointy-end of the 70.3 crowd?
Don't know if that would hold up, but if you're Kona-or-Bust, i would think that a 70.3 will give you more opportunity to train like a fiend, pick a race that better suits your style of racing (so many 70.3 races to choose from), and a better chance to recover if you have an off day so you can try again in a month or two. You blow up (in a bad way) at IM, you're toasted for a long, long time... if you can even find a race to sign up for.
- 70.3 KQ spots are disappearing quickly, I wouldn't be surprised if they go away completely in the next year or so. - I think only about 3 or 4 races actually have them next year. - There are typically only 1 or 2 KQ slots per AG at the few races that have them - The REALLY pointy end (i.e. Kona podium guys) target these races often - Therefore the 70.3 KQ spots are typically significantly harder to earn than normal slots, just check out the Oceanside results from this year in every AG form 25-54 - I actually train very similar for the majority of the year whether I'm doing 70.3 or 140.6. The only real difference is about 8 weeks prior to the race
In my personal experiance, I had an good race at Oceanside and missed a roll down KQ spot (2 total were available) by under 2:00 and one place, however at IMWI I had a horrible run and still managed to take the first KQ spot out of 5 and had a spare 15 minutes or so over 5th place. The competition is typically MUCH more difficult at those 70.3s.
Ditto what Matt said about numbers of spots available at the two types of races. As well, racing a 70.3 takes a different skill set. I am not fast enough even to be in the top ten at at 70.3 but yet I have managed to do significantly better at the IM distance. Others are just as good at either distance. If you are, then all your points are right - way less recovery needed and if at first you don't succeed, you can go and see if you can do another one in a month or so (assuming you can get in, which you often can).
What Ann and Matt said. More importantly, fast, strong, smart guys at the HIM distance never spectacular implode on the run like what can happen in the IM. IOW, if you're crazy fit, and are a bit aggressive on the HIM bike and first bit of the HIM run and it comes back to bite you, it will only affect your last ~3 miles of the run....maybe you come off your pace by 15-30" per mile. Extend that mistake the IM distance, however, and it really comes back to you.
Short answer is there is much less of a "they'll come back to me" effect at the HIM distance.
@ Dan - to pile on, the reality is that there are now only THREE IM70.3 races with Kona slots for the general masses. This was the last year for slots at the Cali 70.3 so the remaining races for 2012 are the Hawaii 70.3 (28 slots), Buffalo Springs Lake 70.3 (28 slots) and St Croix 70.3 (30 slots). Hawaii is a long way to go to try and punch a ticket back to the same place 4 months later, but there are plenty of fast people who do it. Buffalo Springs currently has a licensing contract with WTC that guarantees their slots for 2012, but that's the contract end date, and is likely to be the last year they get them since the contract pre-dates the new earnings-oriented We Take the Cash. Since it's in Texas, travel costs are minimized compared to Hawaii and St Croix...if you aren't nationally ranked as one of the top 10 in your AG it probably won't happen in Texas. That leaves St Croix 70.3, ostensibly the toughest 70.3 out there due to no wetsuit, current in the swim, heat, humidity, constant wind, continual rollers and, of course, the BEAST. The declining attendance at this race means it may provide the best shot of the three. Maybe folks are coming as much since the location raises the costs considerably compared to a North American 70.3, but while total numbers are down, the race is still very competitive at the top of each AG. With Oceanside out of the picture next year, St Croix might become more competitive. St Croix also has a licensing contract. I don't know when it expires, but the trend doesn't look good for them either unless someone in WTC has a softspot for the sport's history.
To be complete, the Antwerp 70.3 (Belgium) is the only other one with Kona slots is one in Belgium, but they are reserved for handcycle athletes.
Keep it simple; Sierra Camp. I have family in Simi Valley (and a road bike I keep in their garage) so it would be fun to get out to the Mammoth area for some long rides.
This is all very interesting. I don't think it will be a problem that the EN KQ plan will be invitation-only. The type of people here are already maxed out on time which is one of the reasons why they chose the ROI approach that EN does so well. Also, I would assume that to get invited, you would need some very good results, and those that don't have them probably realize they aren't in the running for a KQ slot anyway.
While the training is fun...and so is this discussion...let's recall that the results of how it will all play out are still TBD. A big camp is nice, but I think if you are a 10-hours a week guy who does one 7 day block of 35 hours, it's not going to be enough to fundamentally change your fitness to the level of the competition we are talking about. It will make you, personally fitter, but not sure it will be enough relative to that external benchmark. But it would be fun!
@Matt, @Ann, @Rich, and @Paul: I didn't realize they had started to phase out the IM-Kona slots at half races. Important safety tip, and good information to know about the competitors. At least dropping those spots should help cut down on the bazillion people that qualify for Kona race.
Let me add a complicating dimension to the KQ training volume discussion. AGE!!!
I think most will agree that as we add on the years, we need longer to recover between a defined set of work. This longer recovery implicitly implies that a 50+ year old can do less relative work in a week than a 30 something. Sooo in this view, the EN nation Advanced IM plan may be a “KQ qualifier plan” for some age level and past that age it may be over training.
I like the direction of the discussion. I strongly believe that epic multiday effort can provide a break though improvement in fitness. I also agree that a one week event will not get you to Kona fitness. What is the secret recipe? My bet is the EN team will come up with a solution that leads all others.
My minor point is that as RnP design a potential KQ qualifying program, consider the reality of the age impact.
@ Tim - I did forget about Eagleman. This is another independent not owned by WTC so their slots are governed by the contract. The website indicates that there are slots but it is partially updated and the blurb on slots is in a section that was written for the 2011 race. We will see.
Just wanted to update you on my plans for August, to include my big epic week in Mammoth, CA:
In short, I've decided to not go up to Mammoth for this and here's why:
Turns out that when you're getting a place for free, the committment for you getting the place isn't as firm as it would be if you have put down cash . Basically, a couple of emails have led me to believe that this isn't the 100% deal that I thought and, since Joanne and Riley were going up with me, I can't keep them and me hanging for another week or so.
Two full days in the car (can do workouts before or after the drive).
Most importantly, I'm now experimenting with using long bike and long run data to rehearse, refine IM pacing. Basically, and this is something you're all feeling right now:
Very tough for any of us to get in a quality FTP and/or VDot test at the end of a long cycle of IM training and then apply those calc'ed paces to final race rehearsals.
At the same time, many of our more experienced athletes have a ton of long bike and long run data -- whether from training rides, runs, races, to include past performances on the courses we will be racing this summer.
So as I look at my scheduled long bikes and runs, I see these as opportunities to "take for a spin" watts and per mile paces that I "think" will work for me at IMWI, based on current fitness, past performances in races and in training events, etc. These...test drives...not sure I'd call them rehearsals...will be the foundation around which I'll build out a very solid 7-14 days of training, based out of my house.
The reason why I'm staying local is because the huge variable of altitude would significantly alter the quality/applicability of the data I would get from these training sessions. So, for example, I'm locked in the bars on a flat road in god's country, putting up big volume...but my watts are down by 10% because I'm at 7-8.5k feet = confusing. Same for run pacing. I then get back to LA, have a week to recover, then do my final RR's with increased fitness but having not seen sea level numbers for a couple weeks = confusing.
So...gonna build out what this block will look like, test out goal watts and paces on some key long rides and runs, go big via these events, recover, do a final RR ~2wks out from IMWI, done. The rub is that I'll fookin' shoot myself if I have to do this volume on the bike paths, our best opportunity here to stay in the bars, uninterupted, so looking to at least drive out of LA, maybe ride 135 down to SD, spend the night with Joanne and ride back the next day, etc.
As for what this means for EN Sierra Camps in the future, my opinion is that these will still be excellent, epic training opportunities that will end about 6wks out from your races, giving you time to recover, wrap your head around your new fitness at sea level, rehearse your paces and race.
thanks for the update, Rich. Still sounds like there will be epicness in the 7-14 solid days of training ... just out of a different location. Probably found a few extra hours of recovery there as well now that travel is off the calendar, as long as the time doesn't get eaten up by the kinds of chores that come with being around home (I learned this the hard way last week with a home-schooled 6d Epic thing.)
Rich - I hear you about the altitude confusion on FTP based pacing numbers. The same holds true when running "shorter "intervals (10 minutes and less), although longer runs don't seem to be affected.
I was mulling over the "Standard Test" vs "Test Drive" model for determining race day bike pacing this AM while running an HM, and came to the same conclusion as you. First SWAG the FTP from recent training efforts, then test it out on a Sunday ride after a harder one on Saturday was my plan. Rinse and repeat next week depending on how it worked out. For me, I would probably then do the weekend's brick on Sunday, as the quality of my run after biking is the key criterion for success.
But I'm 2+ months behind you, so I won't be trying this until Oct 11-Nov 1 for IM AZ.
One brother won his AG, 45-49, with a 9:36. We talked about the training he does -- self-employed, kids are older and I think mostly gone from the house, regularly puts up 18-23hrs/wk with extended stretches of 25-29hrs
You meet Paul Linck? He's the cousin of my training partner and really just started triathlon. In 4 years he's gone from absolute no clue beginnger to winning he AG....Amazing growth.
One brother won his AG, 45-49, with a 9:36. We talked about the training he does -- self-employed, kids are older and I think mostly gone from the house, regularly puts up 18-23hrs/wk with extended stretches of 25-29hrs
You meet Paul Linck? He's the cousin of my training partner and really just started triathlon. In 4 years he's gone from absolute no clue beginnger to winning he AG....Amazing growth.
Yep. I had seen him and his brother at a couple races, they said hi to me in the line at the coffee shop and we started to chat. Small world that he also lives in Atlanta, invited me to ride with him when I'm in town.
Funny thing is that he doesn't look like a guy who would win the AG. Small and stocky, not a whippet.
Well, I can tell you that the test-drive method isn't super effective, because if you goof it up, you have the last third of a 5hr long ride to suffer through the goof.
On Saturday I did 112. My normal pacing is to sit on about 200w (about .69 for me) for the first hour, then dial in 215-220w for the remainder. On Saturday I did 205w for the first 30', then 210w for the second 30', then 220-225w. 220-225w will likely be a good target for me on race day, but I'm carrying too much fatigue right now and I didn't help myself with the ~207w avg vs 200w for the first hour. I also became very dehydrated and bonky the last 90', with my calorie deficits likely catching up to me. Really, really struggled back to the truck. 5:06, but as 2:28-2:38...not ideal .
So I planned out my training for the next 5wks and I'm going with the most time efficient, focused direction:
FTP on the bike
Running volume
Swim frequency
FTP on the bike:
No matter how you slice it, having a higher FTP = permission to hold higher watts on race day. Cycling volume "might" get you there (I know it does) but a higher FTP absolutely does get you there. So I've scheduled 4-5 x breakthrough workouts in the next 3 weeks:
My Wed hill repeat session with Sawiris and my Cat3 friend, but cutting out the flat, punch the clock volume afterwards. Will be 1st time up @ 90%, 2nd time up @ max effort (benchmark is 326w last week), 3rd time up as 30/30 up the hill. Descend, go home and recover.
TT of my 9mi, 6% hill this Saturday, with some added climbing afterwards.
Repeat will session next Wed
Ride the Cool Breeze metric double next Saturday. Just find a good group and do a ton of work.
Do a flat FTP test 2.5wks out from the race and my final RR that weekend.
Basically, I know myself and know I go MUCH harder up a hill and I do MUCH more work when I'm in a group session. I'm more than a little burnt out on the solo tri bike volume.
Running Volume
~55-57 miles this week. Huge for me. 45-47 next week (Calling this week a run focus, next week a bike focus, stepping the run volume down before the bike volume comes down). Focused on run frequency, hilly MP runs, and long runs as progressively faster IM RR runs: 6mi at E+30", then 12mi @ E-pace. Last week finished with 8:23 average pace, will shoot for ~8:10 this week, etc.
Swim Frequency:
Swimming 4-5x/wk, mix of middle distance repeats (200-400m) and short, fast stuff. All pull. Swimming has zero effect on my bike and run, so I also see it as a way to put up an additional 3-3.5kj every week to keep the body composition improvements rolling. I have 18-20k swim weeks scheduled all the way up til race week. Note that a BIG portion of my weekly volume is coming from the swim time so, in my opinion, these aren't "true" 26hr training weeks as, again, my swim volume has very little impact on my bike and run. Huge time suck though with the drive to/from the pool.
154-155lb this morning, have LoseIt set for 1lb/wk. But the with the volume above and a house full of lean meat and fruit, the challenge is eating enough, not too much. Definitely going to take in more cals during my training sessions. I lost my mind yesterday, went to Trader Joes and bought some Blueberry/Pomegranate sherbert. It lasted about 8'.
Thanks for posting data. Interesting! I'm curious as to your thoughts on your swimming volume and building your running speed/endurance.
My take on your relative skills would be, strongest in swimming, then bike, then run. I would think you should be pushing running to the near edge of implosion. Why not 55-57 miles per week from now until race week, building speed/endurance as you go? I would think there are a lot of guys running 3:40, 3:30 or even faster in your age group. How fast do you think the run will be for you? For swimming, is there really any incremental value for you over 10K yards per week? For me it would be huge if I could ever get to the pool that often, but for you, I'm not so sure. I understand the bike philosophy and it makes sense to me.
Tom, we'll see how the ~55mi goes this week, maybe I'll do it again next week and drop a swim or a bit on the bike. But I'm hesitant to take that kind of run volume any closer to the race.
While the 40-44AG has gotten much faster, they don't seem to be swimming faster . So while best case run for me, I think, is 3:35-40, a 53-55' swim buys me 10-15' on these same guys who are swimming 1:03-08. Also, in the past I haven't swam much volume at all and it's impacted my comfort on the bike, so the swim volume is more about making the swim a non-issue than going faster. I've trained hard and swum low 53...or trained hardly at all and swam 55:xx. Looking to cruise to a 53:59-54:xx, noodle the first hour of the bike at 67-68%, getting a head start on hydration and eating, then go to work at 74-75% and finish strong. Same on the run -- do my E+30" for the first six, drinking a couple of bottles of fluid, then getting to work.
Also, swim volume and frequency closer to the race means I can continue to chip away at the body composition, maybe getting down to 151lb by race week. Finally...I have the time and there are worse things than swimming in the sun at lunch, though the lanes become a bit of a freak show after about 1pm...
Lastly, do the math on the potential speed gains of lifting FTP v lifting W/KG. That is, much harder to get 5w stronger than to drop a pound or two. At least, that's what I'm telling myself these days
Coach - given your year + bike focus, yeah, bike volume (multiple 5+ hour rides) is close to a waste of time at this point. Running - by 3 weeks to go, are you going to be putting in a volume = your average weekly volume of the past three months? At some point you have to stop cramming and let the work work via recovery; running needs the most time for that. Swimming? As long as you can handle it, why not squeeze every second you can out of your ace/trump card.
There is a magic body comp number below which things fall off precipitously, I think. For me, it's about 5.5% body fat, measured first thing in the AM. Below that (which is about 144.5 # for me), I don't have enough reserves for the IM day - that was part of my problem @ CDA this year. First I lost the weight (down to 130), then every time I tried to get it back, I got slammed with oral surgery and had to go liquid diet again, and never made it back to my racing weight by race day. Point is, don't go too low. And accept an upward drift in the last week, despite the desire to be a lean machine. Muscle matters, and it does weigh something. Switch to titanium bolts , maybe?
I'm right there with you and today is an example of the kind of audible/adjust things on the fly that I do all the time:
AM Bike: I met Sawiris and Cat3 Guy at Chantry. They chatted up the first repeat while I rode about 88%, very comfortable.
#2: "Ok, how about you guys spot me 30?"
"Why, we're here to pace you."
Well, about 3-4' into it the two guys that I have 25lbs on each decide to start racing each other. I try to keep up, implode, side stitch, 23 running miles in 3 days in my legs and pull the plug 13' in @ 315w vs the 326w I put up for the 17:27 climb last week. Rode the rest of the hill in at about 290w.
#3: did my own thing, as 8' @ 305w, 6' @ 300w, then 6 x 30"/60", all in the aerobars.
Swim: bailed. Yesterday was a great swim session with Barry. I could tell that today would have been punching the clock vs quality, just because I had scheduled myself to swim.
PM run: bailed. Decide it was more important to set up my second to last long run for success tomorrow vs punching the clock on tired legs for 5-6 miles.
I'm cutting about 80 miles from that cycling week next week, instead focusing on my local "FTP Builder Greatest Hits" stuff that I know works. Sorta replacing that with a second semi-long run of about 9 hilly miles, the run I did yesterday (ie, Tues = 9-10 mile run, Thurs = 18 mile run).
Anyway...I'm pretty good at adjusting things as I go and any training plan I've made myself has usually only lasted about 3-4 days before I started making changes to it based on how I feel
...I'm pretty good at adjusting things as I go and any training plan I've made myself has usually only lasted about 3-4 days before I started making changes to it based on how I feel
My take, the bigger the week, the more this applies. I find the OS and SC plans really don't need any modifications based on excess workload, but when I get above 14-15 hours a week (or maybe it's ~750 TSS bike/run points), I'm constantly monitoring and adjusting things based on current performance, fatigue, soreness, and perceived improvement needs.
Yesterday had a great 18 mile run with another 7 mile run and a swim on the calendar today.
Suited up this morning, got about halfway down the block and said "nope...that's not a good fatigue/sorness that I need to be running through, not the day after a long run." Flipped it and had breakfast.
Rode my hilly TT route to the Rose Bowl but kept the hard portion to about 88% for ~50 minutes, but with several big/sorta long pushes at a variety of cadences (mostly very low) and very high watts. Felt good and was kinda fun. Held myself back because I have a good, hard ride scheduled tomorrow.
Swam about 2k vs the 4k scheduled.
Easy spin home, total was about 1:40 with an ending IF of ~.78
Doode, at this point I just want to get it over with
My self-coaching instict keeps kicking in and I continue to modify my week/workouts to focus on quality vs volume. I cut out a couple runs last week to set up a quality long bike and long run, bailed on a couple swims, etc. Ended with 20:30hrs vs the 25+ I had originally scheduled, but I had a great long run, and bikes this weekend. Much climbing and the w/kg is definitely yielding another gear on my climbs. Just rolling over most of my stuff now. Rode Sawiris off my wheel on a long 45' climb. Just kept tightening the screws, matching his standing periods, until he popped
Comments
I am shattered. My legs are IM tired. Lots of snow made it very tough.
I digress but the point is that I would offer to help coordinate an EN high camp. Training high is amazing work and climbing is very similar to long tri training; aerobically and leg wise.
Question: with KQ game a-changing (already changed)... why bust your hump and use up all that Real Life(tm) time qualifying at a 140.6? If your goal is to get to Kona, and you know you can complete an IM distance race, why not try to get your qualifier done at a 70.3 race? If all that extra time is good for improved IM distance racing, would the enhanced EN program/plan/mojo do a better job of putting you at the pointy-end of the 70.3 crowd?
Don't know if that would hold up, but if you're Kona-or-Bust, i would think that a 70.3 will give you more opportunity to train like a fiend, pick a race that better suits your style of racing (so many 70.3 races to choose from), and a better chance to recover if you have an off day so you can try again in a month or two. You blow up (in a bad way) at IM, you're toasted for a long, long time... if you can even find a race to sign up for.
As they say: Inquiring mind want to know!
- 70.3 KQ spots are disappearing quickly, I wouldn't be surprised if they go away completely in the next year or so.
- I think only about 3 or 4 races actually have them next year.
- There are typically only 1 or 2 KQ slots per AG at the few races that have them
- The REALLY pointy end (i.e. Kona podium guys) target these races often
- Therefore the 70.3 KQ spots are typically significantly harder to earn than normal slots, just check out the Oceanside results from this year in every AG form 25-54
- I actually train very similar for the majority of the year whether I'm doing 70.3 or 140.6. The only real difference is about 8 weeks prior to the race
In my personal experiance, I had an good race at Oceanside and missed a roll down KQ spot (2 total were available) by under 2:00 and one place, however at IMWI I had a horrible run and still managed to take the first KQ spot out of 5 and had a spare 15 minutes or so over 5th place. The competition is typically MUCH more difficult at those 70.3s.
---Ann.
Short answer is there is much less of a "they'll come back to me" effect at the HIM distance.
To be complete, the Antwerp 70.3 (Belgium) is the only other one with Kona slots is one in Belgium, but they are reserved for handcycle athletes.
Keep it simple; Sierra Camp. I have family in Simi Valley (and a road bike I keep in their garage) so it would be fun to get out to the Mammoth area for some long rides.
This is all very interesting. I don't think it will be a problem that the EN KQ plan will be invitation-only. The type of people here are already maxed out on time which is one of the reasons why they chose the ROI approach that EN does so well. Also, I would assume that to get invited, you would need some very good results, and those that don't have them probably realize they aren't in the running for a KQ slot anyway.
Let me add a complicating dimension to the KQ training volume discussion. AGE!!!
I think most will agree that as we add on the years, we need longer to recover between a defined set of work. This longer recovery implicitly implies that a 50+ year old can do less relative work in a week than a 30 something. Sooo in this view, the EN nation Advanced IM plan may be a “KQ qualifier plan” for some age level and past that age it may be over training.
I like the direction of the discussion. I strongly believe that epic multiday effort can provide a break though improvement in fitness. I also agree that a one week event will not get you to Kona fitness. What is the secret recipe? My bet is the EN team will come up with a solution that leads all others.
My minor point is that as RnP design a potential KQ qualifying program, consider the reality of the age impact.
i can only dream of being a KQ, i would secretly like to be one, wouldn't everyone?
i do however like the idea of a week long training group with mileage and rides focused on different levels. bring it!
@al, i will PM you for the sept/oct dates, i think i may be in for 4-5 days! sounds awesome!
Hi Folks,
Just wanted to update you on my plans for August, to include my big epic week in Mammoth, CA:
In short, I've decided to not go up to Mammoth for this and here's why:
Most importantly, I'm now experimenting with using long bike and long run data to rehearse, refine IM pacing. Basically, and this is something you're all feeling right now:
So...gonna build out what this block will look like, test out goal watts and paces on some key long rides and runs, go big via these events, recover, do a final RR ~2wks out from IMWI, done. The rub is that I'll fookin' shoot myself if I have to do this volume on the bike paths, our best opportunity here to stay in the bars, uninterupted, so looking to at least drive out of LA, maybe ride 135 down to SD, spend the night with Joanne and ride back the next day, etc.
As for what this means for EN Sierra Camps in the future, my opinion is that these will still be excellent, epic training opportunities that will end about 6wks out from your races, giving you time to recover, wrap your head around your new fitness at sea level, rehearse your paces and race.
Anyway...there you go
Rich - I hear you about the altitude confusion on FTP based pacing numbers. The same holds true when running "shorter "intervals (10 minutes and less), although longer runs don't seem to be affected.
I was mulling over the "Standard Test" vs "Test Drive" model for determining race day bike pacing this AM while running an HM, and came to the same conclusion as you. First SWAG the FTP from recent training efforts, then test it out on a Sunday ride after a harder one on Saturday was my plan. Rinse and repeat next week depending on how it worked out. For me, I would probably then do the weekend's brick on Sunday, as the quality of my run after biking is the key criterion for success.
But I'm 2+ months behind you, so I won't be trying this until Oct 11-Nov 1 for IM AZ.
Yep. I had seen him and his brother at a couple races, they said hi to me in the line at the coffee shop and we started to chat. Small world that he also lives in Atlanta, invited me to ride with him when I'm in town.
Funny thing is that he doesn't look like a guy who would win the AG. Small and stocky, not a whippet.
Hey Al,
Well, I can tell you that the test-drive method isn't super effective, because if you goof it up, you have the last third of a 5hr long ride to suffer through the goof.
On Saturday I did 112. My normal pacing is to sit on about 200w (about .69 for me) for the first hour, then dial in 215-220w for the remainder. On Saturday I did 205w for the first 30', then 210w for the second 30', then 220-225w. 220-225w will likely be a good target for me on race day, but I'm carrying too much fatigue right now and I didn't help myself with the ~207w avg vs 200w for the first hour. I also became very dehydrated and bonky the last 90', with my calorie deficits likely catching up to me. Really, really struggled back to the truck. 5:06, but as 2:28-2:38...not ideal
.
So I planned out my training for the next 5wks and I'm going with the most time efficient, focused direction:
FTP on the bike:
No matter how you slice it, having a higher FTP = permission to hold higher watts on race day. Cycling volume "might" get you there (I know it does) but a higher FTP absolutely does get you there. So I've scheduled 4-5 x breakthrough workouts in the next 3 weeks:
Basically, I know myself and know I go MUCH harder up a hill and I do MUCH more work when I'm in a group session. I'm more than a little burnt out on the solo tri bike volume.
Running Volume
~55-57 miles this week. Huge for me. 45-47 next week (Calling this week a run focus, next week a bike focus, stepping the run volume down before the bike volume comes down). Focused on run frequency, hilly MP runs, and long runs as progressively faster IM RR runs: 6mi at E+30", then 12mi @ E-pace. Last week finished with 8:23 average pace, will shoot for ~8:10 this week, etc.
Swim Frequency:
Swimming 4-5x/wk, mix of middle distance repeats (200-400m) and short, fast stuff. All pull. Swimming has zero effect on my bike and run, so I also see it as a way to put up an additional 3-3.5kj every week to keep the body composition improvements rolling. I have 18-20k swim weeks scheduled all the way up til race week. Note that a BIG portion of my weekly volume is coming from the swim time so, in my opinion, these aren't "true" 26hr training weeks as, again, my swim volume has very little impact on my bike and run. Huge time suck though with the drive to/from the pool.
154-155lb this morning, have LoseIt set for 1lb/wk. But the with the volume above and a house full of lean meat and fruit, the challenge is eating enough, not too much. Definitely going to take in more cals during my training sessions. I lost my mind yesterday, went to Trader Joes and bought some Blueberry/Pomegranate sherbert. It lasted about 8'.
Week of 8/8 -- "Big Push" Week 1
Week of 8/15 -- Big Push Week 2
Thanks for posting data. Interesting! I'm curious as to your thoughts on your swimming volume and building your running speed/endurance.
My take on your relative skills would be, strongest in swimming, then bike, then run. I would think you should be pushing running to the near edge of implosion. Why not 55-57 miles per week from now until race week, building speed/endurance as you go? I would think there are a lot of guys running 3:40, 3:30 or even faster in your age group. How fast do you think the run will be for you? For swimming, is there really any incremental value for you over 10K yards per week? For me it would be huge if I could ever get to the pool that often, but for you, I'm not so sure. I understand the bike philosophy and it makes sense to me.
Tom, we'll see how the ~55mi goes this week, maybe I'll do it again next week and drop a swim or a bit on the bike. But I'm hesitant to take that kind of run volume any closer to the race.
While the 40-44AG has gotten much faster, they don't seem to be swimming faster
. So while best case run for me, I think, is 3:35-40, a 53-55' swim buys me 10-15' on these same guys who are swimming 1:03-08. Also, in the past I haven't swam much volume at all and it's impacted my comfort on the bike, so the swim volume is more about making the swim a non-issue than going faster. I've trained hard and swum low 53...or trained hardly at all and swam 55:xx. Looking to cruise to a 53:59-54:xx, noodle the first hour of the bike at 67-68%, getting a head start on hydration and eating, then go to work at 74-75% and finish strong. Same on the run -- do my E+30" for the first six, drinking a couple of bottles of fluid, then getting to work.
Also, swim volume and frequency closer to the race means I can continue to chip away at the body composition, maybe getting down to 151lb by race week. Finally...I have the time and there are worse things than swimming in the sun at lunch, though the lanes become a bit of a freak show after about 1pm...
Lastly, do the math on the potential speed gains of lifting FTP v lifting W/KG. That is, much harder to get 5w stronger than to drop a pound or two. At least, that's what I'm telling myself these days
Coach - given your year + bike focus, yeah, bike volume (multiple 5+ hour rides) is close to a waste of time at this point. Running - by 3 weeks to go, are you going to be putting in a volume = your average weekly volume of the past three months? At some point you have to stop cramming and let the work work via recovery; running needs the most time for that. Swimming? As long as you can handle it, why not squeeze every second you can out of your ace/trump card.
There is a magic body comp number below which things fall off precipitously, I think. For me, it's about 5.5% body fat, measured first thing in the AM. Below that (which is about 144.5 # for me), I don't have enough reserves for the IM day - that was part of my problem @ CDA this year. First I lost the weight (down to 130), then every time I tried to get it back, I got slammed with oral surgery and had to go liquid diet again, and never made it back to my racing weight by race day. Point is, don't go too low. And accept an upward drift in the last week, despite the desire to be a lean machine. Muscle matters, and it does weigh something. Switch to titanium bolts , maybe?
Al,
I'm right there with you and today is an example of the kind of audible/adjust things on the fly that I do all the time:
AM Bike: I met Sawiris and Cat3 Guy at Chantry. They chatted up the first repeat while I rode about 88%, very comfortable.
#2: "Ok, how about you guys spot me 30?"
"Why, we're here to pace you."
Well, about 3-4' into it the two guys that I have 25lbs on each decide to start racing each other. I try to keep up, implode, side stitch, 23 running miles in 3 days in my legs and pull the plug 13' in @ 315w vs the 326w I put up for the 17:27 climb last week. Rode the rest of the hill in at about 290w.
#3: did my own thing, as 8' @ 305w, 6' @ 300w, then 6 x 30"/60", all in the aerobars.
Swim: bailed. Yesterday was a great swim session with Barry. I could tell that today would have been punching the clock vs quality, just because I had scheduled myself to swim.
PM run: bailed. Decide it was more important to set up my second to last long run for success tomorrow vs punching the clock on tired legs for 5-6 miles.
I'm cutting about 80 miles from that cycling week next week, instead focusing on my local "FTP Builder Greatest Hits" stuff that I know works. Sorta replacing that with a second semi-long run of about 9 hilly miles, the run I did yesterday (ie, Tues = 9-10 mile run, Thurs = 18 mile run).
Anyway...I'm pretty good at adjusting things as I go and any training plan I've made myself has usually only lasted about 3-4 days before I started making changes to it based on how I feel
My take, the bigger the week, the more this applies. I find the OS and SC plans really don't need any modifications based on excess workload, but when I get above 14-15 hours a week (or maybe it's ~750 TSS bike/run points), I'm constantly monitoring and adjusting things based on current performance, fatigue, soreness, and perceived improvement needs.
Another change:
Dave,
Doode, at this point I just want to get it over with
My self-coaching instict keeps kicking in and I continue to modify my week/workouts to focus on quality vs volume. I cut out a couple runs last week to set up a quality long bike and long run, bailed on a couple swims, etc. Ended with 20:30hrs vs the 25+ I had originally scheduled, but I had a great long run, and bikes this weekend. Much climbing and the w/kg is definitely yielding another gear on my climbs. Just rolling over most of my stuff now. Rode Sawiris off my wheel on a long 45' climb. Just kept tightening the screws, matching his standing periods, until he popped