Endurance adaptations on 20' per day

mgraffeo

Great study below.  Authors' conclusion includes:

"two very diverse forms of training induced remarkably similar changes in exercise capacity and selected muscle adaptations that are related to exercise tolerance. Given the markedly lower training volume in the SIT group, our results suggest that intense interval training is indeed a time-efficient strategy to induce rapid muscle and performance adaptations comparable to traditional endurance training."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1995688/?tool=pubmed

Not to suggest dropping the IM plan any time soon, but certainly significant implications for those of us who occasionally find ourselves with 'only' 20-30 minutes to train in a given day.  I'm thinking chronic business travelers, busy moms, on-call professions like docs and firefighters...

mgraffeo

An interesting editorial commentary on a follow-up study, slightly more plain language

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2375570/

Al Truscott

These results look applicable to a 1 hour TT cycling, so given your Olympic focus this year, Mike, it's good news for you. For HIM and even more so IM athletes, I believe that we'd need to build some far onto the fast for another six weeks after this "Get Faster" type plan. I can't see toeing the line at IM Canada in three weeks without a few 5 hour rides and/or some typical EN weekend rides. To say nothing of a few 2-2.3 hour runs. Anyone want to volunteer to do an IM on 20-30 minutes a day of intense training only so we can study this?

John Withrow

Not exactly the same, but there is a group that already trains substantially less time than even EN for an Ironman... http://www.crossfitendurance.com/

Brenda Ross

I have an athlete that trains for Olympic tri's and all he can give me is 4-5 hours a week, so I have embraced this idea. It seems to be working. He keeps on getting PB.s, but I agree that I do not think this would work for HIM or IM

filarl

Thanks for the link, I'm a sc only due to typically only 4-5 hrs week avail. Will deff check it out...

mgraffeo

None of what's being presented here is fundamentally different from the thought process we're all used to. As Chris Whyte often says, "raise the left, fill the right" (think of a mean maximal power chart). Most of us have no problem with the analogy that raising our roof (VO2) gives more room for our ceiling (FTP) to grow into. What I find interesting about this research and the research on Tabata intervals is that they suggest that raising the atmosphere (max power production) gives you more room to grow your roof, and hence your ceiling.

Al, et al, I'd bet you'd have to race at a lower percentage of your FTP if you did EXCLUSIVELY this kind of work, but if this kind of work bumps your VO2/FTP up significantly, it could still be a worthwhile tradeoff. I may be willing to do the experiment in future years, though I've got a different design I'm working on for 2013.

I do believe that for anybody working on 'get-faster' adaptations (ie. focused on raising their FTP), occasionally substituting a workout like these (either out of necessity or deliberately) should have no adverse effect, and may even have a positive effect. It's a good feeling for those of us who find that life tends to hand them a lot of lemons re: planned 1 hour workouts mid-week...

Al Truscott

Posted By Brenda Ross on 07 Aug 2012 06:32 AM

I have an athlete that trains for Olympic tri's and all he can give me is 4-5 hours a week, so I have embraced this idea. It seems to be working. He keeps on getting PB.s, but I agree that I do not think this would work for HIM or IM

There's a local athlete won won his AG @ ITU. WorldOly champs while running a max 8 miles a week.

Coach Rich

I think that discussions / theories like this are more applicable on the bike, less applicable on the run, especially as the race run distance increases. At some length of race run, durability becomes more and more of an issue. In my experience, durability is best built through running frequency. Volume is the result of frequency and should not be the goal. That and seeking out "durability building" runs. What works best for me is moderate to hard downhill running.

Our own Trent Prough has basically volunteered to try out a version of this for us at IMWI, taking HIM fitness to Madison. I have very few doubts that a strong HIM cyclist (ie, doing our weekday interval work plus the ~3hr ride) could take that bike fitness to an Ironman. A high FTP is a high FTP and a very challenging weekly 3-3.5hr ride is "close enough" to work for a 5-6hrs Ironman cyclist. I suspect that this guy might have some confidence / mental issues as well as some neck, shoulders, back, and ass issues related to going from 3.5hrs to ~6hrs, but the endurance is definitely there.

The potential disconnect between HIM and IM training, however, is the durability build by 2-2.5hrs long runs vs 1:45-2hr long runs. In my experience, that difference will express itself on the IM run.

mgraffeo

Great perspective, all.

Rich, what would you guess is the impact of that training delta (1:45 runs vs 2:15 runs in training)? I'm assuming you mean that the athlete who only builds up to 1:45 runs will have a harder time executing the run guidance, and maybe should target a slower target? Or does it just make it harder to run past mile 18-20 regardless of pace? Does the number of 1:30+ runs make any difference?

Al Truscott

 Just my own experience, but ... I've had successful IM performances (i.e., 2 of my AG wins) on diminished bike and/ or run volume, specifically, shorter than usual long rides and runs. But my absolute best times have come from training incorporating 2-3 runs of 135-145 minutes and at least two six hour rides in the six weeks before the event.

There's also some(obvious) durability value from years of routine riding and running.

Having said all that, I find the longer I do this sport, the higher value I place on judiciously placed short intense sessions, like hard strides, 25/50s all out at the end of a swim session, and powering up steep hills on the bike. I suspect the final taper week ... Days 10-4 before an IM ... Is a good time for that kind of work, in place of easy or long stuff.

Michele Cellai

My first thought in reading this was- Well if I can ride Tour of California after ONLY doing OS training, then I could certainly do a full aquabike distance. But my thoughts for the run were the same as Rich- adaptability. You would need some run volume of whatever flavor in order to complete the full IM distance without injury.

Coach Rich

Posted By Mike Graffeo on 07 Aug 2012 07:52 PM

Great perspective, all.



Rich, what would you guess is the impact of that training delta (1:45 runs vs 2:15 runs in training)? I'm assuming you mean that the athlete who only builds up to 1:45 runs will have a harder time executing the run guidance, and maybe should target a slower target? Or does it just make it harder to run past mile 18-20 regardless of pace? Does the number of 1:30+ runs make any difference?

 

Mike,

Anything I gave would be anecdotal, based on what I've seen over the years with athletes and with my own training. A few notes, based on this conversation:

• In my experience, long runs become exponentially harder (in terms of mental and recovery cost) in about 15-20' increments after about 1:45. That is, a disciplined athlete can bang out a weekly 1:20-30 long run pretty much all year, especially if there's a social component, and that distance can usually be easily integrated into whatever other training you have going on around it. From 1:30, not a big deal to add 15' to that for a little "icing" in preparation for a half marathon or half Ironman. From 1:45-2hrs...that will definitely start to affect downstream sessions. 2:00-15...this is legit, from a mental and recovery cost standpoint, and you need to play heads up ball, for reals, with downstream workouts. ^This^ becomes MUCH more difficult at 2:15-30. There is about no rooom for any slack or extra credit work around this run, especially considering it's almost always accompanied by 4-5+hr long rides in the week as well.
• We all need to figure out what works best for us. Due to my feet, left ankle, and tight hips, long runs above 1:45 have a very high cost. For me, it's much better to get my volume by using frequency, and increase the difficulty of that 1:45 long run through addition of hills and hard downhill running in the 2nd half of the run. For CDA, I can see myself running very hard for 2hrs most of the year and "maybe" doing ~2 x ~2:15 long runs as full on RR runs.

Bottomline, probably the most valuable training events you can have, week after week, year after year, are:

• A standing ~1:15-30 long run. Bonus if it's social = greater likelihood of being consistent. Don't overthink it, just do that long run every week, from now through the end of time.
• A standing ~2-3hr eyeball shredding Saturday ride.

Everything else scheduled for the week can be as hard, easy, long or short as you like. My personal prefference is 40-45' Z3-4 runs and 60-90' > .89 IF rides. B considering that most EN members are / have / will have their sights set on long course triathlon, these two weekly events above will allow you to just turn up the dial a hair and jump right into HIM or IM training when you need to.

Coach Patrick

Just an aside, but I am doing 12.5 hours per week to Kona, with a max 5 hour ride and a 12 mile run. Two by FTP bike during the week, then long and steady on the long ride. Two swims. Two tempo runs and race pace work on the long run. Will be interesting to see what comes of this....Mike, think of it mixing the hard work that sees gains with one longer session year round (but easier) in the bike and the run. I am clearly no poster child for minimal work given my history, but I love the manageability of my life.

As for the run issue, I think run performance is the intersection of Fitness, Pacing, Nutrition and Conditions. Does Jimmy get to run a better Ironman because he has been in that really hard place for 6-8 weeks prior to his race in a few long runs? I agree it helps, but I think that "fatigue" can be met by 2x hard run workouts during the week and a quality session as well. Especially if you consider our long runs pre-race right now are mostly at LRP+30" per mile with a walk break every mile...

jimmy augustine

interesting discussion. I came from the crossfit endurance world prior to en. I came here because I could not get results past 13.1 that I found satisfying. from an n=1 perspective though, my fastest marathon to date was built around high intensity and no lead up run longer than 13.1.
most of yall sleepwalk faster than i run though. Still, roi is a topic that is near and dear to me so I felt compelled to chime in.