mancona's 2012 70.3 Vegas Race Report
Below is the race report I put up on my blog and here is some more info for Team EN. I could have just said ditto to Matt Aaronson's report as my expierence was almost identical.
Swim - I'm super happy with my swim. One of the easist swims of my life and I came out totally relaxed and feeling awesone. I also managed to set a new non-wetsuit PR (by almost 5 minutes) and came within 20 seconds of my PR with a wetsuit.
Here is the swim file... my garmin has it at 1.3 and many others have stated it seems a little long: http://connect.garmin.com/activity/221486917
Bike - I really dialed back my effort here. I typically ride HIM at .85 to .87. I targeted and hit .825 on this one. I felt great the entire ride and road the last 30 miles almost entirely solo. Very boring but nice as I just did my thing. For reference, FTP is 282 in aerobars instead based on 3, 5, and 20' test with the monad calc. Weight was ~137 on race day for a slightly lower than usual 4.53 w/kg. I will note though, my FTP is lower this year, but I have nailed very single FTP interval and my 1hr, 2hr, and 3hr power are up. Bike File: http://connect.garmin.com/activity/221486920
Run - I new the heat and hills would not work well with pace, so I did this one by HR. My average is usually 180-185 for a 70.3 so I started in the upper 170s and slowly built it up. Like Matt, I got a serve side stitch early in the run, but I walked a full aid station and then jogged really slow and was able to get rid of it quickly. My legs however never came around and I was reduced to going slower than my easy pace for the rest of the run. But I ran as strong as I could and never once gave up or backed off. Run File: http://connect.garmin.com/activity/221486930
Nutrition - I made sure to hydrate and load on salt for about 36 hours before the race. On the bike I took in 2 bottles of infinit and 5 bottles of perform + 7 salt pills. Totals for a 2.5 hour ride were: 1375 calories and ~5000 mg of salt. The result, for the first time I never had any type of cramping and never ran out of energy. My plan was only to take 3 bottles of perform but I felt I needed more so I took them. I also have trouble taking calories in on the run, so I've learned to taking more in on the bike seems to work better for me. On the run it was perform and coke at every aid station with 3 salt pills.
Overall, everything went perfect and according to plan, except I had no speed at all on the run. I felt fine after finishing and had almost clear urine for the first time ever after a hot race. As far as the slow run, i'm not sure if I overestimated my fitness or underestimated the condition/course difficultly.... either way, like Matt and William I'll be back to give this one another try.
Thanks for reading!
Here is the report from my blog:
For those that just want the quick version, I had an ok day. It could have been much worse as nothing went wrong. At the same time I was super flat feeling on the run and had my slowest 70.3 run in the last 5 years.
Overall, I'm ok with my race, but because it was a world championship, being flat on the run moved me way down the standings. That said I'm still proud that I was 141st overall and 34thin my age group at a world championship.
I was very impressed with this race. The course is outstanding for the most part and the weather makes it very challenging. It also seemed that many athletes from other countries made the trip which is awesome to see. I really hope that this race takes off and I can't wait to go back as I know I have a better race in me.
Sorry, I have no pictures as this was a solo trip, so just the boring details
This was my 3rd world championship race and this time I was much more relaxed. I felt like I was very well prepared, had nailed all my workouts in the last 8 weeks, and was confident I was ready for a good performance. Saturday I did my normal day before the race workouts. My swim was amazing, I went very easy but my stroke just felt great. The bike and run on the other hand were just fine but I wasn't feeling great like I usually do the day before the race. Instead of pushing it, I just backed down and went real easy for the bike and run. I was able to take an afternoon nap, stay off my feet and stay on top of my hydration for the rest of the day. That night I did the typical pre-race toss and turn and wake up every few hours.
Race morning, I was wide awake and felt good. I got my stuff setup quickly, had a good warm up jog and was ready to go.
Swim – 31:57
The swim felt great from the first stroke. I started to the outside and just swam for the first 5 minutes or so. I had very little contact and felt super relaxed. Then I worked my way over to the buoy line and got on some feet which lasted for a few more minutes until we started to overtake the wave in front of us. The rest of the swim was pretty much swimming around people which is pretty unusual for me. I had to sight significantly more than I'm used to and was worried that was going to slow my down a ton. I kept getting the urge to swim hard but I held back and just swam easy. I came out of the water feeling awesome and was shocked when I saw my time on my watch. It might not sound fast, but my PR is 31:20 for a wetsuit swim and I swam very hard in that race, this was 31:57 with no wetsuit and much less effort. My day was off to a great start but I had to focus on not getting too excited and take it easy through transition and the bike.
Bike – 2:32:04
Coming out of a very long T1 we had a moderate climb to get out of Lake Las Vegas and then a nice long descent into Lake Mead National Park. I took the climb as easy as I could and got some nutrition down and then relaxed on the downhill. This was perfect as it gave me a chance to let my heart rate settle before starting to work. The way out to the turnaround was rolling hills with more up than down. I watched my power carefully and really held back. As usual this meant I would get passed by a bunch of guys on every climb and then I would catch up on the downhill. Once we hit the turn-around I found myself with only a few other guys around and no one else in front of us. I went about 5 watts harder and stayed on the power nice and steady all the way to t2. Overall it was kind of boring, I saw less than 10 other riders total all the way back to T2. The last few miles seemed to take forever and I held back a little since I knew I was close to T2 and wanted to be ready to run. My power and heart rate were right where I wanted them and I felt great coming off the bike.
Run – 1:36:59
I left T2 and my body felt great but my legs were slow to turn over. They feel this way off the bike often and usually come to after a mile or two, so I just went with it. Right around the second aid station when I would have expected my legs to wake up, I instead I got a bad side stitch. I slowed down (even more), focusing on exhaling and walking the next aid station I was able to shake it pretty quickly. However I was now 3 miles in and my legs were still heavy and just didn't want to move any faster. I tried many times to pick it up but once the up hills came my legs just didn't have it. I actually felt totally fine finishing and my HR steadily climbed the entire run and never dropped off, my legs just didn't want to run.
I really don't think I overcooked the bike as I hit my target watts, which were reduced from normal as I knew I would be on the bike longer and in the heat. My nutrition and hydration seemed right as I didn't have any issues (other than the short lived side stitch) and no cramping and even felt fine right after the race and for the rest of the day. It was hot but I never got the overheating feeling, just the normal cooking in the sun feeling.
I felt I should have been able to run 1:25 on a good day, and 1:30 on an off day, but man was I wrong. Last year I went almost 17 minutes faster at Oceanside and 11 minutes faster at both Muncie and Austin. Both of those races were also hot and hilly. Either I underestimated my run fitness, the heat took much more of a toll on me than expected, or I just had a flat day.
Overall – 4:46:10
Not the result I wanted, but I'm ok with it, especially as my first hot/dry race like this. When I passed the finish on lap 2 of 3 I briefly thought about calling it quits, but I'm very proud that I kept with it and did not give up. My legs never woke up but I never slowed down either. In fact, I actually slightly negative split the run and my HR increases steadily the entire time like it should.
I'm looking forward to doing this race again and continuing to chase the perfect race that I know I am capable of. This race showed how much my swim continues to improve and my nutrition worked well with zero crapping or dehydration issues on a very hot day. I've also learned to except that I will get some sort of a side stitch in most long races and instead of panicking, I know how to relax and deal with them.
As usual I never could have made it to this race with out the support of many people and there are a few I need to mention. Theresa and Abigail who not only support my training and racing year round they encourage me. Zoot Sports and the Zoot Ultra Team Sponsors (Spy, Gu, Garmin, PR Bar, Zipp) for all of the awesome products and support, particularly Jake and Molly. All of my training partners that humor me and do my workouts. Phil Skiba for stopping me from training myself into the ground. As well as the many others like the Bartlett Masters team and Team EN.
Comments
I'm really not qualified to offer any advice, however looking at your run data I was initially struck by the variance in your pace, that is at least until I scrolled down and looked at the course profile. I knew the Vegas run was challenging, but at a glance it looks as if there are almost no flat sections on the run course and the constant elevation changes would be very disruptive, to say the least, to any efforts to run by pace-- hence your HR based approach I imagine.
Wish I could offer any more constructive advice, to me, looking at the course profile and the temperatures would account for most any perceived issues on the run, however I trust fully that you know your abilities, hills and heat or not. Hope one of the smart dudes can offer more, and also, I'm sure you will have ample opportunity to return to this course in the future and give it another shot.
Nice work. Just wondered what is your plan to get the run back up there?
I don't think my run fitness has slipped much if at all. I ran within 30" of a half marathon PR this spring and I've set 400 and 800 PRs on the track. I did race about 2-3 lbs heavier than usually as I've put on more upper body muscle due to all the swimming, which may have also contributed to the slower run on such a hilly course (but I also swam 4 minutes faster than my PR in a non-wetsuit swim.
That's my long winded way of saying I don't have a plan to change anything with my run right now. If slower runs become a tread or I can't hit my paces in training then I will start making changes.
Stellar race and even better perspective. At the hospital we often say the enemy of good is great. It is hard to settle in to something like a race and accept going slower than we have in the past or thought we could go. Had you ran through the cramps without slowing down, you could have DNF'd the run and been no where on the finish list, so that is a victory in and of itself.
I also think you have reached a point of the pointy end that the gain in the swim should be the big take away from the race. You put up 4 minute pr in the water...that is HUGE!!!
I think you are right on course with the "don't change a thing" mentality. Some days we run fast, some days we don't.
Sounds good. Always looking to learn from the pointy end.
Don't gain any more weight!
It was 100 deg, man, that's some serious impact on run times. No amount of fitness or acclimation can overcome that.
@Al - I hear you on the heat, but 33 other guys either had better fitness, execution, or acclimation, so I have much more work to do.
I sent P my bike and run files, so if anyone is interested here are P's thoughts. I'm going to experiment a bike with my cadence on the bike and see what it does to my HR. FWIF, I'll always had a really high max HR and have seen upper 190s many many times in races and training.
http://www.screencast-o-matic.com/watch/clQbbYN6K
Thanks for posting Matt. Obviously we are on different levels but appreciate the opportunity to glean insight off you guys.
Historically I've always been a high HR and high cadence rider as well, however, since moving to CA I've had a lot more opportunity to ride higher power but lower cadence on climbs. As a result, my self selected cadence has come down, while my overall comfort on both the bike and the run has increased.
It's really hard to correlate all of this, and unfortunately I don't have good HR data to back it up because I largely haven't used HR this season (not my best idea in retrospect). However, I *feel* that my HR is tangibly lower now that my cadence has come down some.
Unfortunately as well, I think it's probably pretty hard for a generally light and aero guy like yourself to push high power without correspondingly high cadence on generally flat midwestern roads. Just something to consider I suppose.
I agree that a lower cadence will lower your HR but 80-85 seems pretty low to me. Although (on an unrelated point) maybe training at a lower cadence will cause some new muscle adaptations and strength and raise your FTP (which I know from our prior conversations has not really moved over the recent past).
What I think you may want to do is really understand your physical performance metrics vs. the elite age-groupers and pros around your age. I think few if anyone at EN can provide appropriate benchmarks for someone at your level and at your age range. Some of these metrics would be:
(a) % of max HR they are racing at
(b) spreads between their bike and run HR
(c) cadence profile
I'd also be interested to see if the profile observed in your Vegas files is consistent with some of your other really successful races: Oceanside and Muncie, for example.
Thanks for sharing this Matt and P - helpful to us all. I have to admit I was shocked to see a bike HR that high. Was also good for me to see Matt racked up <165 TSS points.
My 0.02 worth was the thought I had listening to Coach P's analysis — do you have different max heart rates on the bike vs the run?
He seemed to be assuming they were the same.
Obviously I am not in your class as an athlete but my run heart rate is 10 beats higher than the bike (172 vs 162). As a consequence of this my heart rate of the bike in a 70.3 is lower than the run.
As I understand it, this is not that uncommon.
Good questions Matt. Unfortunately the rest of the tri world is not nearly as willing to share info/data as EN. Infact most of my competition wont even share their FTP or VDOT. Maybe it is just the egos of a bunch of 30 year old guys but I don't really have any data to compare myself to off hand. I've got a few ideas on who I can ask though.
Anyway, here is the data from my most recent 70.3s. I'm glad to post more or the actual files if you guys can think of anything else to look at.
Basically, Vegas was not a fluke and my bike/run HR/cadence are in line with most other races..
Race
Bike NP
Bike Cad
Bike HR
Run Pace
Run HR
Notes
Vegas
230
90
176
7:18
183
95, Sunny
Austin
232
87
177
6:36
---
91, Sunny
Muncie
239
88
174
6:32
182
85, Sunny
Oceanside
222
82
---
6:06
---
60, Clouds
Other things I noticed while reviewing:
- Open HM Avg HR has been 187, 185, 187 in my 3 most recent HM
- I was within 30” of an Open HM PR at a HM I do every year and setting new PRs in workouts on the run this year so I do not believe my run fitness has slipped
- Don’t know what my Max HR is or how to really test it (without killing myself). I’ve seen 202 more than once on my HRM.
- Most long rides and race rehearsals have a cadence closer to 80 and a slightly lower HR on the bike
You could test on the treadmill and a bike trainer.
A couple of observations…sort of "mastery of the obvious" here but might was well point it out:
- Oceanside: materially lower cadence and, most strikingly, materially lower power. And an awesome run. The question: how much of the better run was due to lower power and cadence on the bike, vs. the fact it was only 60 degrees and cloudy??
- Muncie: this is the telling race. A big PB for you with a great bike split followed by a strong run in pretty hot conditions. The HR numbers are almost exactly the same as Vegas.
Based on the Muncie numbers this could be as simple as:
a. Vegas was a lot hotter (95, but radiant heat off the pavement on the run felt even hotter)
b. Vegas was very dry and you are not totally acclimatized to the dryness
c. Vegas had a much more difficult bike course
d. Vegas had a much more difficult run course
e. You had a bit of an off day
Honestly maybe it wasn't even that much of an off day based on the power of combining (a) through (d). You might argue there were 33 people who didn't have the same issues whereas at most of your races you only get beaten by one or two (if that). But Vegas is a much more competitive race. One yardstick is to look at guys you've raced against before and see how you did relative to them, i.e. did you get beaten by a bunch of guys who you routinely beat. If not, maybe all the analysis is really moot and you didn't underperform too badly other than to your expectations. If so, then perhaps (e) is the culprit here.
ps. as for establishing max HR, I've heard of tests involving hill repeats too. For me, the last quarter mile of a 10k race usually gets me to what I think is my max (or very close to it)
At Oceanside I purposely target 10 watts lower for a number of reasons. My FTP was 10 watts lower then usual at that time, 100% of inside training and it was the supposedly the toughest HIM bike course I had done yet. Plus I was having a streak of bad runs and my one thing for Oceanside was to run well off the bike. It's tough because I had the run of my life at oceanside (but overall just a typical race), as my bike was probably about 3-5 minutes slower than it would have been at my more normal target watts. I wish there was a way to go back and do the same exact race at the same time and ride 10 watts higher to see what it would do to both my bike and run times.
Looks like I have no choice but to go back to Vegas and try again. I think what is really bugging me is I don't know what I would do differently next time, other than to experiment with a lower cadence and maybe try that as I don't think I need to hold back any more on the bike.
@Trevor - looks like I just have to move to southern california so I can "test" your theory. I've got about 10 good reasons to move west, but 2 much more important reasons to stay here.
At my relatively much more mundane level of performance, a hill just isn't the same as a flat. What I mean by that is that for hills of consequence, I am at a somewhat lower cadence than typical on a flat. I suspect most of us who race int the 3.5 W/kg and lower range are like this, despite having lots of low gears. In the notably-north-of 4.0 W/kg crowd, perhaps you really can "flatten out the hills" through gearing.
But, for a moment, let's assume not... LV race was definitely hilly, as was Oceanside (right?). Seems like you coped completely differently with respect to the cadence on those two races. (Austin and Muncie are closer to flat bike rides if I remember, but not sure...)
The reason I mention this I am sure you know... A watt is a watt is a watt, yes... but your muscles also know about torque/force. Lower cadence = greater torque/force. Can you throw that filter across the data and make anything meaningful out of it?
And if you do, make sure that you're doing a meaningful comparison. I would think that non-zero cadence averaging is the way to go, since zeros will grossly and non-statistically bias your data set.
Instead of doing that, though, how about just looking at the quadrant analyses for the four races, which have the torque/force built directly in and give you a visual on the distribution. Look for differences in teh distribution to correlate with run quality????
As for your max HR, no one knows theirs very well. That said, the old crappy rule of 220-age is suggestive that yours is probably not a lot higher than 205, given that you've seen 202. I've seen low 180s a few times in the last couple years and figure it's in the 185-190 region.
William - I appreciate your thoughts.
Race
Q1
H Velocity (m/s)
H Force(N)
Q2
L m/s
H N
Q3
L m/s
L N
Q4
H m/s
L N
Avg Force
Avg Velocity
Vegas
5.3%
8.7%
12.1%
74.0%
181.57
1.59
Austin
5.6%
13.8%
21.6%
59.0%
187.07
1.57
Muncie
6.4%
6.8%
18.6%
68.2%
186.63
1.60
Oceanside
3.9%
26%
34.8%
35.3%
181.91
1.58
Personally I doubt it. I suspect that 60 degree temps and riding conservatively made the difference in the Oceanside run. Maybe riding conservatively is what caused the lower cadence (or vice versa...).
On the HRmax - I generally use the last 30 seconds of a 5K as my max. A test I have done that is more workout like then 2x3' came from a Ryan Hall article a while back.
2mi w/up
1mi Comfortably Hard (T-pace)
400m - Accelerating
400m - All Out (checking HR every 100m)
As mancona said, his 800m reps are probably getting him darn close and if he is indeed over 200 as HRmax it is still amazing (and why he is an elite) to run at >92% of HRmax in an Open HM.
Matt Ancona (can't use Matt A. as we have two in this thread) - do you look at your HR using % of HRmax or as %HRR (Karvonen)?
Lastly - my $.02 is the favorable weather played a role in the run result at Oceanside.