Tri Talk HomepageTri Talk EventsTri Talk ForumsBlogsTri Talk TrainingTri TradeTriPlayerWikiTeam Tri Talk
Thoughts On Training 'At The Right Level For You', Pt 2.
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Training
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
younggun




Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 4443
Location: Purf, Orstrayleeahh

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 6:59 pm    Post subject: Thoughts On Training 'At The Right Level For You', Pt 2. Reply with quote

In part one I tried to outline what a good volume of training might be for you given how fit you are. Here in part two I’m going to outline how you might use that training time in a training programme.

Clearly there’s lots of personal ways you can structure your training, there’s a lot of factors to consider including your athletic experience, natural ability and time available. That’s why when someone on the forum asks “what training should I be doing?” it’s very difficult to know where to start and I’ve been frustrated many times that I can’t provide a decent answer for them. These two threads are my best effort to provide some information on that difficult question.

Once you have looked up my recommended volume from part one, you can look below at a list of weekly training sessions that might be appropriate. As I said in part one, this training is your “peak sustained training” pre event. It’s something you would have prepared for well and build up to progressively but be able to sustain for several weeks on the trot at the peak of your training pre-race. The weekly sessions below are just a list of sessions, obviously you’d want to structure them into a training week, spreading out the harder sessions.

These sessions are my opinion on what a middle of the road training routine would look like. I’m hopeful that this will provide you with a good starting point – from there you can consider how your individuality might bias the training.

Don’t forget the basics of effective training: try and train slightly within yourself, monitor for signs of overtraining, build things up progressively (increasing the training load slightly every 3rd week seems to work well), take additional rest when you need it, focus on good nutrition, quality sleep, breathing...


I’ve used intensity jargon L2/L3/L4 etc, they correspond to L2 “steady”, L3 “tempo”, L4 “threshold” (think sustained race pace). For more technical definitions including HR and Power zones see: http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/levels.asp

Writing threads like this involves some risk – I’m exposed to being proven wrong on some things and open to criticism on others. I’m aware of that risk but overall I believe it is worth it. If you disagree or wish to highlight issues then please share, we're all here to learn and I do most days!

Adam
_________________
My blog about giving up the desk job and becoming a full-time coach or sports professional : www.adamyoungblog.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
die trying




Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 1078
Location: Doha

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:57 pm    Post subject: Re: Thoughts On Training 'At The Right Level For You', Pt 2. Reply with quote

younggun wrote:


Writing threads like this involves some risk – I’m exposed to being proven wrong on some things and open to criticism on others. I’m aware of that risk but overall I believe it is worth it. If you disagree or wish to highlight issues then please share, we're all here to learn and I do most days!

Adam


Thats what the forum is for I think Exclamation

Good on yer YG. No shame in posting something for debate - there is hardly ever a right/wrong/black/white answer anyway.

I liked your style with part 1 and have been waiting for part 2. Will be back with my opinions later on Very Happy
_________________
2011
Dubai Marathon
Abu Dhabi Triathlon
IM Lanzarote
IM Florida
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
savaloy




Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 7061
Location: London

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for this and part one. Over the last few weeks I've been planning my training programme and races for next year. As a guide I've been using Joe Friel's training bible and have now (in broad terms and subject to confirmation of a couple of event dates) set an intial 26 week training programme (with the aim of peaking for an Oly race in the first week of July) followed by a 10 -12 week programme (aiming to peak for 2 Oly races in September).

My starting point was to select the weekly training hours suggested by Friel (based on the maximum number of annual training hours for my chosen distance -Oly)) and work out whether the highest weekly volume was achievable in the context of my family/work commitments. Interestingly enough the volumes suggested by Friel appear to correlate with your peak sustained training volume graph (adopting the time I achieved for my first (and only) Oly) - which gives me some confidence that the programme I've (almost) arrived at is not totally off beam. Similarly, the distribution of intensities appear to correlate. The first noticable difference however is the amount of time Friel suggests spending on the bike - IIRC Friel suggests about 50% of time should be on the bike, whereas your example weekly training sessions appear to allow slightly less time than that for the bike - with a corresponding increase in time spent running. I'd be interested to know whether that is a conscious decision of yours (i.e. to spend less than 50% on the bike and more time running) and, if so, the reasoning behind it?

Thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tweenster




Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Posts: 3729
Location: Gosport

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adam

Thanks very much for the post; very useful IMHO.
_________________
Maybe a Sprint or 2 in 2012. Whatever, it will be on a road bike.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Triskele




Joined: 24 Jan 2006
Posts: 935
Location: Outer Kelvinside versus Culloden

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great stuff!

After what is effectively is a year off after only ~2 years real training, and less than 12 months of that being real training (that first year I was all over the place, mostly overtraining for my experience and ability), I can appreciate a well ballanced program.

I'm more or less starting from year zero again Mad

so this looks good from an educational point of off view to feed back into my Winter program...but

Wot not weight training Twisted Evil
_________________
___
"Beauty will be convulsive or not at all"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kemptonslim




Joined: 08 Nov 2005
Posts: 5893
Location: St. Luke's, London

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good suggestions, Adam. Just a thought: I've always felt that there's a point of diminishing returns for training. For a sprint, I just can't see that there's any value in 14 workouts in a week, and for Oly I can barely see any value. What are you adding? Well, from what I see, you have a lot of tempo and tempo-plus training in the big-volume schedules, and as we know the greater your proportion of intensity training, the greater your risk of injury is.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Nobbie




Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4394
Location: Wilmslow

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Interesting stuff, just one thing that strikes me when I compare with my schedule is the lack of a decent length L3 run on the IM schedules? There is a L3 bike on there. Any reason for this? as it seems the run training is overly focussed on basework.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Waldo




Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Posts: 164
Location: leafy Cheshire

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for this - useful stuff from yourself as ever. I'm looking to have a go at 1/2 IM next year, how would you adapt these if at all. Would it be a case of using the IM sessions but just cutting down the duration of the 2 longer ones?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
younggun




Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 4443
Location: Purf, Orstrayleeahh

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

savaloy wrote:
The first noticable difference however is the amount of time Friel suggests spending on the bike - IIRC Friel suggests about 50% of time should be on the bike, whereas your example weekly training sessions appear to allow slightly less time than that for the bike - with a corresponding increase in time spent running. I'd be interested to know whether that is a conscious decision of yours (i.e. to spend less than 50% on the bike and more time running) and, if so, the reasoning behind it?
Yeah I think you're right, Friel does suggest that. I believe that it should be a bit more balanced to give you the best overall race performances. People often say that the bike is half the race duration and so should be half the training but power required goes up with the cube of speed on the bike whilst it's linear with running, so increase your fitness 10% and you'll gain more minutes running than cycling. Also we have to run last and having run fitness really helps when you're knackered...

One possible reason that Friel's biased things towards the bike is to lower injury risk - which is particularly relevant to anyone overweight or without any run history. He's possibly baked such a scenario in to keep things safe. I would call that scenario as something to taylor for an individual, preferring to write the programmes as my opinion on true best performance training, if you see what I mean.

kemptonslim wrote:
I've always felt that there's a point of diminishing returns for training. For a sprint, I just can't see that there's any value in 14 workouts in a week, and for Oly I can barely see any value. What are you adding?
I think you're looking at the 16hr+ end of things? One problem we have as triathletes is that it's difficult to spend much time on each individual sport - as the volumes go up and you are able to spend more sessions then people do continue to see benefits from the frequency of them. Doing something every day does seem to cause the body to adapt. Pro olympic distance athletes train 6x/week in each sport, plus conditioning, and I believe that's why they do.

kemptonslim wrote:
Well, from what I see, you have a lot of tempo and tempo-plus training in the big-volume schedules, and as we know the greater your proportion of intensity training, the greater your risk of injury is.
Yes, there's a reasonable amount in there - because it's very beneficial to your performance if you can absorb it. The 16hr Oly and 18hr IM programmes are for guys already doing 2:05 and 9:30, so really fit guys and they should normally be able to absorb that training load. IMO someone less fit should be doing less volume but maintaining some L3/4.

Nobbie wrote:
Interesting stuff, just one thing that strikes me when I compare with my schedule is the lack of a decent length L3 run on the IM schedules? There is a L3 bike on there. Any reason for this? as it seems the run training is overly focussed on basework.
That's a very good question, I'll try and be brief! IM training is always a bit of a compromise because the long ride and run eat so heavily into your volume and take so much recovering from. To help your run endurance there's also pressure to achieve decent overall weekly run mileage. Since running's a high impact sport most find it hard to combine that run mileage plus run intensity plus the swim/bike training. So it's a compromise, we cut the run intensity and maintain some on the bike where it's less fatiguing. Saying all that, if you're a great runner and can handle it then go for it, taylor things to your abilities.
To tackle this compromise for most people I'd recommend that prior to this specific IM training they did a more rounded intensity mix so that their running was in good shape going in. Some faster running will increase your fitness and economy for sure. Many people now consider this to be the true definition of "base training" - getting your basic speed there - threshold and economy. Then you prepare for the specific demands of your race - in the case of IM this is about getting your ultra-endurance - whilst trying to lose a litle of those basic speed (read "base") as possible. This works pretty well normally, unless you burn out you can hold up your threshold and economy quite well for 8 weeks of ultra-endurance training.

waldo wrote:
I'm looking to have a go at 1/2 IM next year, how would you adapt these if at all. Would it be a case of using the IM sessions but just cutting down the duration of the 2 longer ones?
I would go the other way, take an olympic distance programme that's a couple of hours shorter than your fitness and increase the long run and ride a bit. Believe it or not a ½IM is much closer to Olympic distance in its requirements than an IM. If you took a well prepared Olympic distance athlete, give them 3 weeks where they increase their long ride and run progressively to 80 miles and 16 miles, then taper, they'll normally rip out a great ½IM. They just have to make sure they get their pacing right on the first hour of the bike - IM guys are much better at that normally.
_________________
My blog about giving up the desk job and becoming a full-time coach or sports professional : www.adamyoungblog.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
savaloy




Joined: 29 Aug 2007
Posts: 7061
Location: London

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks YG - that makes sense - really appreciate you taking the time to do this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wiganer




Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 11597
Location: walking in a Wigan-Wonderland..

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adam,

Mate, you are simply a TT legend.......showed my training partner this......within 10mins he had it copied, cropped and on his PC as his desk-top !!!! We will both be using it as our basis for IMUK 2008 !!!!!

Thanks...again Very Happy
_________________
Martin Holden Images
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
younggun




Joined: 26 Apr 2005
Posts: 4443
Location: Purf, Orstrayleeahh

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wiganer wrote:
Mate, you are simply a TT legend.......showed my training partner this......within 10mins he had it copied, cropped and on his PC as his desk-top !!!! We will both be using it as our basis for IMUK 2008 !!!!!
Cheques in the post I take it??!! Rolling Eyes
_________________
My blog about giving up the desk job and becoming a full-time coach or sports professional : www.adamyoungblog.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wiganer




Joined: 01 Oct 2006
Posts: 11597
Location: walking in a Wigan-Wonderland..

PostPosted: Fri Nov 02, 2007 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

younggun wrote:
wiganer wrote:
Mate, you are simply a TT legend.......showed my training partner this......within 10mins he had it copied, cropped and on his PC as his desk-top !!!! We will both be using it as our basis for IMUK 2008 !!!!!
Cheques in the post I take it??!! Rolling Eyes


yeah, c/o Some Lucky Git, White Sandy Beach, Very Hot Cove, The Caribbean

Very Happy
_________________
Martin Holden Images
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Paul L




Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 4350
Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 4:38 pm    Post subject: Re: Thoughts On Training 'At The Right Level For You', Pt 2. Reply with quote

Another great post Adam, cheers.

Unfortunately the table was a red x at work, but I can see it at home. Cool

Train Strong, Paul. Very Happy

PS
Now go and lie down away from computers! Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Rok




Joined: 10 Aug 2005
Posts: 664
Location: Where the streets have no name

PostPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mmmm. Very good.

However I'm slightly confused over the intensity levels.

My understanding was that a fair amount of training should be in the upper level 1 as well which is sub 75% of Max HR but that intensity is missing from the charts? ?

For me level 1.9 to 2.0 is around 158bpm which is 76% of Max, also my Aerobic threshold? (Threshold 185-187 ish)

I try to do a fair amount of training in upper Z1, am I wrong?

If i look at race performances my IMUK bike average HR was 150bpm which was 72% of max, although I did slow down purposefully to ease my stoumach issues and try and get some nutrition in.

Thoughts?
_________________
Shake n Bake
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TriTalk.co.uk Forum Index -> Training All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4
  Share
 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum





Home | About TT | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | Advertising | Contact TT
Copyright ©2003-2015 TriTalk®.co.uk. All rights reserved.