Very interesting training article
Coach Patrick brought this article to my attention. It has some very interesting ideas about IM training.
(MY) SECRET SAUCE TO A SUB 9HR HAWAII IRONMAN: UNCONVENTIONAL WISDOM
To do very well in – or even just to complete - an Ironman distance triathlon (2.4mile swim, 112mile bike, 26mile run), you would need to do many bike+run brick workouts, complete weekly 2-3 hour long runs, pedal 6+ hour rides and spend at least 20 hours swimining-biking-running per week? Yes or No?
I did none of those and had the best triathlon results of my life in 2011, including a sub 9hr finish at the Hawaii Ironman World Championships. An accident, luck or a secret sauce for endurance success? Read below and let me know what you think.
I met a number of ordinary, yet super-fit, individuals during my recent race trip to the Hawaii Ironman World Championships. With a limited sampling, it seems that many of the even first time Ironman triathletes who qualified to the event train 20hrs or more per week and some consistently 25hrs a week. I was not surprised to hear that there was one common denominator between my and most others’ preparation and training: I had done almost the opposite from everyone else. Since I heard the disbelief and question “..and you did what?” so many times, I thought this topic is worth a brief post for others’ benefit.
I won’t have a scientifically or statistically meaningful sample of individuals to draw conclusions from, but I hope that I can make a point by using my own experiences as a data point to extrapolate from. For context, this year 2011 has been so far (and by far) the most successful year for me in the triathlon adventures. For example, I have become the 2011..
- Overall amateur champion at Wildflower Triathlon Long Course
- Overall amateur champion at Hawaii 70.3. Ironman
- Age group world champion at Ironman 70.3. distance
- Age group world champion runner up at Ironman World Championships (Hawaii) with a sub 9hr finish time
In addition, all objective metrics (such as power measured by “watts” on the bike, running pace) as well as relative metrics (how I’ve performed against my other competitors) are significantly up from the previous two years. So something is working quite well, while many other things have remained constant over the past three years: my overall health, work load, sleep, nutrition/diet and race body weight.
With a 300+ employee company to run and just more than an hour per day to dedicate to workouts, my training has always been “little, but with great quality” thanks to the amazing principles by Matt Dixon of PurplePatch Fitness.
Here’s what 9 out of 10 triathletes and training tips in most magazines tell me about triathlon training (the conventional wisdom), and especially, how to become a superb athlete at the Half- and Ironman distance.
1. It takes 20+ hours a week to qualify to Hawaii Ironman, and certainly that if you aim for a “top” age group performance.
The unconvential wisdom: No – it is possible with about 12hrs/week
Since the beginning of the year, I’ve had 2 weeks with more than 15 hours of training, and one of those weeks included three days (3-4hrs/day) of casual bike touring in Finland during a mini-vacation. An average week is around 12hrs, which also includes warm-ups, cool-downs and some commute bike riding.
Weekly training hours in 2011:
In comparison to my own previous years, this volume is about the same or 1-2 hrs per week LESS than earlier.
2. You need a massive, fatigue accumulating 2-4 month build-up and then taper 3 weeks to be really fit for a big long distance triathlon race.
The unconventional wisdom: No – it is possible to be race ready almost every week without the need for a long taper, by focusing on intense efforts over a day or two and then recover well during each week without training oneself into the ground.
Even more so than limited training hours, weekly focus on recovery has been the most radical change for my 2011 “season”. Most endurance athletes (from recreational to more serious) seem to purposefully dig a really really deep hole (in terms of fatigue) over several months to barely survive until their taper period, and then start a 2-3 week race-taper and hope for the best to get out of the hole and be fitter and fresher on the race day than when they started the massive build. I’ve seen this ranging from first time marathon runners to experienced triathletes.
In weight lifting this approach would be unheard of: If you don’t get stronger (lift more weight or more repeats on a given weight) after each workout, you’d immediately change something or have a significant recovery period before next lifting session. It is obvious that if you don’t become stronger, your body is doing the opposite: breaking down due to too much or too frequent weight workouts.
Many endurance athletes tend to think that grinding through workouts day in, day out, no matter how tired, makes them stronger eventually at some point.
The approach we applied to my training this year was that of the weightlifters’. I never trained more than 2-3 days before a good rest day. And if my numbers (pace, speed, watts) weren’t up in the next workout, I took another rest day or two. The principle was simple: I should get stronger and faster every week (or day), not just hoping to get there after a 3-4 months of hard work and a 3 week tapering period.
I started using Restwise (which I’d highly recommend to every athlete) to better quantify my recovery (chart from last 3 months below). If my recovery score was too low, I took a rest/easy day until the scores were up (80-100%).
Similarly, I used quick 10-15min mini-tests in most workouts to see if I was improving; and sometimes stronger efforts like 20min max effort on the bike with maximum power. If the numbers weren’t up from previous time – time to rest.
I was race ready and well rested with 2-4 days of easier workouts throughout the previous 8 months. My final Hawaii Ironman taper was 4 days, after a 50minute all out (395Watts average; which, again, was a personal all-time record) bike time trial race just 5 days before the Ironman race. Similarly, I decided to race a Leadville 100Mile mountainbike race at 11,000feet altitude and prepare with a 48hour “taper”. These were only possible because I didn’t have 3 months of accumulated fatigue to shake off, but fresh and progressively fitter legs throughout.
3. You need to do big brick workouts (bike+run) to be able to run fast off the bike. You also have to train to run on tired legs by doing massive bike rides a day before a long run.
The unconventional wisdom: No – I’ve had my all-time fastest runs and overall times in triathlon events in 2011 with literally ZERO brick workouts in the last 8 months (except 4 races).
I couldn’t find a single real brick workout from my training log in 2011, except a couple 5 or so minute shake ups and one 10 minutes jog after a bike ride. It certainly takes a few events (or workouts) to get used to the feeling of running after a long and/or hard bike ride, but that feelings will never go away. I still feel crappy for the first 5-15minutes of running off the bike, similar to feeling in my first triathlon 5+ years ago.
Secondly, I’ve avoided doing any major run workouts with tired legs. Running with tired legs and/or bad form is the easiest way to injure oneself. I haven’t found scientific research that would explain why training with tired legs (=lower power) and bad form (=injury risk) would actually make a better runner even if you have to do that after a bike ride in a race.
Instead, I’ve had all my runs in an almost fully recovered state, which has allowed me to run much faster and stronger each time.
4. To be able to run a strong marathon at the end of an ironman or half-ironman, long runs of 2-3hrs are must, maybe even more.
The unconventional wisdom: No – most amazingly, I very rarely ran more than 80minutes and only did one 2h run during entire 2011.
As you can see from the chart below, I rarely hit the trails for more than 80 minutes. I did one 2 hour, mainly for self-confidence as I couldn’t believe that I had to run a marathon in 3 weeks but had not done a single run more than 15 miles.
At the same time, I’ve recorded my fastest ever runs on both half-ironman (13.1mile run) and Ironman (26.2 mile run) distances this year.
Instead of logging miles and spending hours running, risking injury and compromising other workouts 3-4 days following a massive run, I’ve focused on a lot of race pace (below/at/over) running. A typical “marathon” workout could be 3-4 times 15minutes where 5 minute sections are below, at, or slightly above expected race pace. That’s a 75-80minute workout and I’m able to recover in 24-48hrs vs. 3-4 days after a massive 20mile+ run.
More often than not, after people fade at the last half of the run in a triathlon, they say they need more and longer long runs. I would guess that the most common reason for fading at the end is just bad pacing in the beginning (of the bike or run), bad nutrition/hydration or simply not enough race pace running in training – and not that the long run wasn’t long enough in training
5. You need to do double sessions, maybe even triples with lunch hour training.
The unconventional wisdom: No – Except one single week in March, I never did more than one workout per day (always morning) in 2011.
I’ve found that is is completely possible to get strong performance gains with a single workout per day and 10-12hrs or so per week. Typically a big week for me looks like this:
- Monday: Rest (or 30min easy swim)
- Tuesday: Bike intervals on trainer (60-90min)
- Wednesday: Run intervals on trails (60-70mins)
- Thursday: Bike intervals on trainer (60-90mins)
- Friday: Rest / Swim (40-60mins) / easy run (legs recover)
- Saturday: Bike “long” (4-5h with no intervals, social time with wife/friends)
- Sunday: Run “long” (80-90minutes with intervals and Swim if time)
Accident, luck or a secret sauce?
I realize that I am extrapolating from a single data point, but before you stop spending time with friends and family, reduce nightly sleep to 4hrs and spend all your time logging miles in a quest for improved endurance performance, read this post one more time. It might help you reinvent the conventional wisdom.
For the business readers: Many of these same principles apply to improving performance at the office. For example, unfortunately hours spent at the desk, lots of “hard work” and conventional wisdom are often associated with great performance, when in fact efficiency, true business impact and unconventional wisdom are the things that actually propel individuals, teams and companies to a greater performance these days. And too often the person who gets the promotion is the one who spends the most hours at the office rather than the one who comes up with a real break-through idea and executes it efficiently. Not very different from the mile counting triathlete who still follows the conventional wisdom and finishes at the bottom of the race results despite most hours in her training log?
Comments
This is a great article. Wow, this dude is not only the founder of Trulia but a world champ amateur?? Sounds like this guy might just be an exception to all the the rules. But of course I believe in these methods or I wouldn't be here. I wonder when he says he does his runs at "race pace" is that really z4 tempo race in our terms? Because certainly it wouldn't be our E1 IM race pace. I am not familiar with the software he speaks of "Restwise" but it looks like something interesting to look into.
Lesley, some people did a trial with Restwise and found it to be fairly subjective. There was a thread for it and a quick search should bring it up.
This guy is a genetic freak but agree with philosophy of not being burned out for last 3-4 months prior to race. I think EN might have a patent infringement lawsuit against Purple Patch! :-)
He did leave out his history for racing and genetics.
But as a self coached person in EN, I take a day off when I want. No brick walls for me.
I used Restwise in 2010 and didn't find it useful, too subjective. I woke up in a good mood everyday. I am a morning person. Other issues too, but I don't know that anyone continued with it after trying it.
None say, hey there might be an opportunity here Every poster clings violently to the notion that increasing Zone 1 volume is the all important step (and only important) step to success.
Meanwhile I'm off to do some Zone 4 bike work. I need to crush these dopes in Placid.
Thanks for the article...however, I kinda raise my eyebrows at his cavalier attitude.
Over the past year I've tried to attend as many Pro / Elite Amateur Triathlete seminars as possible (Macca, Chris Foster, Lesley Patterson, etc. etc) and realized all these folks paid their dues early on in their careers with freakishly long hours of base-building work which most claimed is necessary for podium success at major races. So this guy is either bluffing or is naturally gifted, which unfortunately makes his advice somewhat moot.
Reminds me...back in college when I played trumpet in a nationally-recognized music program, none of us could fathom how the 1st chair trumpeter in the ensemble was also a heavy smoker/drinker/partier who never spent a single second in a practice room.
Some people have "it." Others have to work for it. Skipping proper tapers and cutting way back on training doesn't seem like good advice to me, unless you happen to be genetically gifted.
If I took a day or two off after every day my numbers didn't go up I would have more days off than training days. My legs feel tired most of the time and every two weeks or so I have a day where I feel strong.
The ability alone to have an FTP that high means he's gifted. His VO2max is probably 75.
What I find really interesitng is that the approach he describes is not meerely a twist on the EN approach. The hours per week are clearly lower. There are no bricks or two-a-days. The taper philosophy is radical, whereas EN's is relatively conventional. There are lots of rest days. Etc.
EN approach to training is dynamic. Our coaches both took a "non-EN" high-volume approach to their Kona qualification races, and it worked. But I wonder if RnP might support some testing of a radical departure from the norm as the one outlined above.
We all will appraoch Ironman training with our own unique combination of inborn athleticism, and endurance (or other) sports background and "base" training. The message I see in this post/article is not that the guy is different from you or me in his genes or background, and thus needs less volume than others. Rather, "high" volume is not needed to maximize one's performance, no matter what your genes or training history. This guy got under 9 hours at Kona with this method; someone closer to the middle of the bell shaped curve might not do as well, time wise, but could still turn in a superior (for that indiviudal) performance without spending 20-25 hours a week.
I don't know where I lie on the curve (I would rate myself at the 75th %-ile for natural ability). But I do know that from 2005-2010 I spent at most 13 hours a week, average, swimming, biking and running, (another hour weight lifting, stretching) and yet found myself at the pointy end of my AG in IMs. I would throw in 2-3 weeks a year of 20-25 hours, but mostly because I like to do big bike weeks (trips, vacations), not because I was trying to enhance my training. The keys I found for success (both before and after hooking up with EN) were: intensity (hard, "short" intervals) on the bike trainer, in the pool, and on the track, about once a week each; consistency in training week after week, month after month, year after year; specificity in training (don't ride slow when you can ride fast or run multiple days in a row just to make an "x" on the calendar); and a willingness to back off for a day or two if I feel lethargic, sore, drained, not right, grumpy, etc. All things this guy indicates have worked for him.
We all won't get under 9 hours at Kona (I'll never know what I could have done at age 39, having started all this at 50, but I doubt I could have been much faster than 9:45-10). But none of us has to do massive hours of training to get to the peak of our potential.
Another example: a 55 y/o in my local tri club just got back from Beijing, where he won his AG at the ITU World Champs. He routinely runs an average of 8 miles a week, almost all of it as hard/ fast as he can. Bikes maybe 75-100 at most, and swims twice a week. Granted, he's a lean, mean racing machine, but another example of success without excess.
Someone on ST actually emailed Matt Dixon about Sami Inkinen's training. Here was the feedback:
I read the latest blog article written by your athlete Sami Inkinen (http://samiinkinen.tumblr.com/...waii-ironman-secrets). With enough consistency... would this limited amount of volume bring success to any or most athletes?
The funny thing is that the recipe for any athlete is very different. Sami is a big guy (180+) and responds well to intensity. Different to Rachel Joyce or Jess Smith (who won 70.3 worlds as an amateur) who are smaller and need higher volume. The key to coaching is finding the recipe for EACH athlete. This being said, I don't believe a high volume athlete should train beyond their capacity to maintain health ( and ability to adapt ). We build Sami's training as this is all he has. We are FORCED to do 12 or so hours. Not by choice. We just maximize his time budget. Does not mean 12 hours per week is the dream recipe. My pros do plenty more - as they have time to recover properly. Sami's point is that many age groups are have lots of time commitments drive themselves into a hole without thought. I agree
You wrote an article on your blog a while back about Jesse Thomas and the secret to swimming better. It more or less said the key to being a great or better swimmer was swimming more. How can you explain Sami's success with the incredibly low volume of swimming. I'm assuming he was a collegiate swimmer and needs to put in little work to swim fast?
This is VERY individual.
He is by no means a swimmer.. and not fast. He has improved a lot over the last 4 years of coaching, but no where near where he could be. The issue is that he needs a consistent swimming load of high volume to make the breakthrough. He cannot commit to it with his commitments.
He needs ~ 50% of his training volume in the winter months to be swimming to improve. It has not been possible up till now.
The fact he swims as good as it is... simply talent and a little miracle. I would not call it good or effective coaching, and would NOT work for most.
I absolutely believe in large volume for swim improvements.
The key is that he swam well over an hour at IM hawaii. "OK" for amateur, but not good enough if he wanted to race pro. Luckily, he is not competing against those guys. He took advantage of the large group and swam above his training or ability... in THIS case (swimming).
If Sami wasn't a collegiate swimmer, I'm assuming that he has some endurance sport background either in cycling or running... more than likely at a high level.
no high volume background at all. None. Not a former collegiate athlete either. what he has been is consistent over the last 8 + years
15 lbs? You fat bastard!
I was beginning to feel as if we do / say the same things as someone else as they hear EN training style for the first time
It's good to be open to possibilities and unconventional wisdom (which may or may not work for me, as an individual).
We all believe in the work/rest/education aspect of what they are preaching but this guy doesn't represent himself or the training as well as the head coach does. The IMTalk interview is really good and the guys are a riot. Worth a listen.
Here is Dixon taking to Ryan Hall about recovery. The part around the 2:00 mark where he talks about surviving until the taper is exactly how I feel before a race.
I keep turning all my running background (high mileage for distance running in college)...and the new philosophies like Hudson etc. ...and my experience with EN in executing my first full IM successfully...and I really think people are missing something...it is not an either or proposition...(if you have the time & schedule flexibility) Volume absolutely has its place...look at Coach P going into Kona...he packed on a couple of Big volume bikes...Big Volume weeks/weekends have a real positive impact....there is no doubt that VOLUME can help...but it is about reaching your Quality peak/ peaking Quality; then building volume at that quality level...and not sacrificing your quality peak to achieve some volume level..if you can maintain higher quality at higher volumes (with recovery) you will be better than the just qualiy and lower volume...EN works exactly for fitting IM training into a non professionals work-life schedule...but pro's are able to do higher quality and higher volume because they have genetic predispositoin and athletic ability to do the work and the time to fully recover.....
I would love to be able to do more volume at higher quality....but can't maintain that successfully without cracking...
I am really looking forward to the OS as I am done with volume!
@Tucker, yes, I was shocked too...just got too comfy in the final 10 days with my food as the volume dropped. I think a lot of it was water in response to the heat (not having acclimated yet), but regardless, it wasn't what i wanted to hear 40' before the starting gun was about to go off!!!
Ha! Does anyone want to hear that ever?
Another thing I think people are missing is that not only has he likely been very consistent, but within that consistency has been very hard work. I've done endurance training consistently for over 20 years but only since EN has any of it been structured or intense.
The aspect of Sami's training that interests me most is the resting. Trying to find the balance between sufficiently intense training that provides gains and feeling fatigued all the time has been a challenge for me since joining EN.
I would be interested in the product. Do you think it can be so subjective on whether you want to work out or not on a given day? So it could be an excuse not do something or not..
Part of me thinks that this term gets thrown around a little to easy when someone is good at a sport but maybe I'm wrong. It would be easy for me to write off say, coach P as a genetic freak but I'm not so sure. Hasn't he just been doing this a lot longer than me which makes him 3+ hours faster than me at IMLP. I understand that some folks have certain body make ups or things like how tall you are that might give you an advantage but how does this really relate to getting good at a sport. Michael Phelps is all torso and has huge hands that he was born with but he still had to work really really hard to win all that gold. Just like coach P has so many more hours on his bike in a z4 than me. OR is it better comparing Coach P to say a Craig Alexander. Two guys who have lots of training time and years of experience but Craig just has that God Given Gift that makes him a 8:30 IM guy...or Genetic Freak..
What specifically would make Someone like Chrissie W. or Craig A. Genetically gifted. More red blood cells, bigger hearts. Or is it really just hard work and the ability to suffer just a bit more than the average person...
Thanks.
P.S. Wasn't there a horse a long time ago that won the triple crown. When the horse died they did an autopsy and discovered the horse had a heart 3x the normal size.
I agree that that term can be used a little too easily, but it has long been known that one's VO2max is only trainable up to a certain point, and that genetics plays a role. Those with numbers in the 70s and 80s definitely have an edge in their basic makeup that is a level beyond what ordinary folks can train to.
While Coach P's heart rate does seem to be freakishly low
, he has decades of hard training under his belt, many IM finishes, a background in rowing, as well as a serious work ethic. He came to Louisville to support us in August, was only there 3 days, and did 3 100+ mile rides. Add those factors together and you get some fast times.
The main advantages are a high VO2max and the ability to buffer lactic acid. I remember watching one of those Discovery Channel lead-ups to the TdF a few years ago and they were pricking Lance's finger during a training ride to measure his lactic acid level. It was something like half that of a normal person's, and still less than that of his own teammates'. Take all these traits and apply hard work and a deep desire to win and you get a champion. The same is true for any sport; when the most talented athlete also works the hardest and has the deepest desire to win, they will. They always said Michael Jordan shot more practice free-throws than anybody, that Tiger (back when he was on top) hit more balls on the range than anyone, etc.
The key is 8yrs of consistency and focus. In my experience:
Lastly, I think 99% of us begin to bump up against life, other interests, commitments, etc long before we bump up against genetics. I have no doubt that if I had continued to apply the focus (obsession?) I had in about '00-'04 through '05-11...I'd be in a much different performance place than I am now. But it's a very, very rare few who can sustain that focus and that interest, passion, commitment to the sport for that long, given the other commitments in our lives.
This circles back around to the comment in Troy Jacobsen's article, about dimishing returns and at what cost does that 10-15' of performance come, with regards to missed/compromised opportunities in our lives. I'm playing on a dirtbike from 8-11a tomorrow. Riding again all day Sunday. Planning a 3-4 day trip to Death Valley next month, riding across the desert with 3 guys and camping in the bush off the bikes. Riding from LA to Barstow to Vegas, 500 miles, over Thanksgiving weekend. Have about 5-6x snowboarding trips lined up this season, the more dirbiking in the spring. You folks have kids, families, and other important things in your lives. Everything has a opportunity cost and rate of return, whether it's personal fulfillment, time on race day, etc.
All discussions of how to train should be framed within a discussion of these opportunity cost and ROI considerations. In my experience, intense focus sustained for a very long time is extremely costly and is NOT for everyone.