Is the TSS table ("legs bank") still valid for HIM?
I thought the HIM webinar tonight was very informative. But there was a lot more "it depends" than the typical / historical EN race execution mantra. I wonder why the "legs bank" chart was not part of the presentation. Last year I viewed it as the cornerstone of my execution. It quantifies what IF you can go to based on bike split, which is tremendously helpful. Obviously if you're biking 2:20 you can go harder than 3+. Is this still a core part of the EN philosophy or not?
0
Comments
From what I have picked up from previous HIM-specific discussions, the general feeling of the coaches is that for the stronger racers (and particularly the stronger runners), the "penalty" to be paid by over-biking is not nearly as severe as in IM distance; that the observation is a few minutes lost when you have a bad run, not 10s of minutes or more. Thus if you were really "racing" and you knew the course particularly well, you might risk things a bit. But for just general consumption, the "leg bank" idea of about 180 TSS for the bike split is still quite worthwhile.
Unless I hear a strong indication otherwise, I'm sticking with that interpretation...and I have a goal at KS that will imply racing my best.
We didn't intentionally leave it out.
But the fact is that there's alot of gray area between a guy likely to ride 2:30 vs someone likely to ride 3:15 vs these two people on flat vs hilly courses, have strong vs weak runs, very little vs a lot of HIM racing experience, etc
In short, the HIM bike is fundamentally different from IM:
In short...you're racing, it's almost impossible to capture all of that in a table, and at the end of the day you gotta use your head.
+1
I did my first ever HIM races last year and I think the execution resources were incredibly valuable. I burned my "gears" into my brain, knew where I wanted to be on the "legs bank" chart, rode 1.02 VI and laid down two great runs. My bike splits were 2:26 and 2:20 so I really think this applies to a wider range than the 3+ hour cyclists. That's one of the beauties of TSS -- total time on the bike is captured in the metric. Frankly I think the folks who can press the bike are the stronger runners who will be able to hold it together for the half-marathon. Yes I know that implosions are less spectacular in an HIM, but as I said you do certainly see a lot of people walking the run. And in my own experience I found an "implosion" can still be quite impactful...in the above two races I ran a ~1:36 half marathon, then in my third race imploded and ran a 1:52. Another great example is my buddy who did the same races as me. In the first he rode a 2:34 with a silly-high VI and imploded on the run with a 1:59. Then 4 weeks later after I admonished -- and taught! -- him to ride "steady 85% power" rode a 2:36 on a faster bike course (the course on which I rode 6 min faster) but followed it up with the 1:34 run that he was capable of.
Of course execution is not truly a "science". We all know that. But I think getting away from emphasizing the value of ninja-like execution at the HIM distance and putting some of the really useful tools on the shelf is not the right direction for the vast majority of our team.
You're absolutely right, my apologies. Let me see if I can clear things up:
Resources, from Race Central:
Let me try to summarize my guidance / thoughts as clearly as I can:
If these conditions are met, then, in my opinion and experience:
I suppose it's possible that my view is a function of the races I've done and the races of other athletes that I've coached and observed. I've only raced 3 x HIM's...actually 2, as I only did Vineman once. I've raced Cali Half and Wildflower ~6x each. These races have VERY easily identifiable terrain features where, if you've met my conditions above, you can absolutely bank time on the bike and likely not give it back on the run. Let's talk about Wildflower:
My FTP for IMWI last year was about 305w = ~ 260w at .85 IF for an HIM. If I were to race WF with that fitness, there are (counting in my head) 4-5 specific locations on the bike where I would plan to ride harder than 260w:
Everywhere else, I'm riding 250-260w, low VI, everything we talk about. And I don't feel my numbers above are crushing it by any means. They are right at, under, or just above my FTP. But I have the power files, experience on the course, etc to know that those intelligently, strategically, moderately greater efforts applied above will yield a bike split ~4 minutes faster than the super steady low VI ride and I know from experience that those efforts will likely not cost me 4' on the run. They likely won't cost me anything.
Now...is this style of racing for everyone? No, see my conditions above.
Does it have any place in IM racing? Absolutely not.
But is it helpful to have a purely numbers driven (ie, enter chart on the Y and extract % FTP on the X axis) pacing method? It's a good starting place but, in my experience, such simplicity can also create situations where people follow the wattage gears into a brick wall because it's very difficult to capture in a table and gearing chart how to adjust your pacing for
These questions are answered in Race Central, in our podcasts, webinars, and conversations like this in the forums. It's this depth of knowledge about all things race execution that we want you to have because this is the knowledge you use to solve non-standard situations. In fact, hopefully this conversation has helped some of you identify yourself as NOT meeting my conditions above and therefore NOT following this guidance
. And I hope you understand why and you have a deeper understanding of this topic of HIM race execution.
I hope this helps!