Thursday, July 14, 2011
Twitter Answers #5
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
CrossFit Endurance & Ironman
"Saw a video article about 10 Crossfit Endurance (CFE) trained athletes who completed Lake Placid 2010 using nothing but the CFE program. The first timers included a 13hr 20 min athlete who did Lake Placid as his second ever triathlon. He had lost 85 lbs during the previous year, again using CFE as his plan. Most of the vets experienced PR’s, one guy shaving 25 minutes to come in @ 10 something hrs. The other link is the CFE website which shows the daily training plan.
I have my crossfit coach working with me to understand it, but here is the basic breakdown.
3-4 days a week of strength workouts (15min or so) combined with a typical Crossfit workout of the day (20 min or so). Then 6 workouts over the week of mainly intervals, 2 days for each sport. It works out to around 8-10 hours a week of very high intensity, mostly anerobic work.
For example, a typical day would be what I did yesterday… First thing in the morning… Front Squats, work up to 1 rep max. Rest 10 minutes. Workout for time, 25 155lb deadlifts, 50 pullups, 100 kettlebell swings @ 53lbs. Including warm-ups and stretching, about 1:15 of work. Then later in the evening (at least 3 hrs after your first workout) do long bike interval training. Ride a half mile, rest for the time it took you to do it, then ride 1 mile, rest for time it took, then do 2 miles, rest for time it took. Repeat this 3-5 times. Should be close to a max effort for each interval.
Eventually you’d work up to a 3 days on 1 day off approach with each sport getting 2 days of work. Their whole concept is to almost entirely eliminate the ‘long, slow’ distance training that sucks up so many hours during a season and can really start to beat up your body. If I do end up using this approach, I’m absolutely going to include one long workout each week, just for the sake of the mental training and nutrition, not to mention the fun of training with the rest of our team. I’ll be interested to hear what you think. Also, if you wouldn’t mind, what does your typical training routine entail? Thanks for the help!"
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Darren Smith - "Recovery on Demand"
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Sub 2 hour marathon? That's just the beginning!
The Sub 2-Hour Marathon is just the Beginning
With an onslaught of fast marathon performances over the past few weeks, (
The sub 2 hour marathon is the modern day 4-minute mile barrier, where we see much of the same doubt that humans aren’t capable of running that fast, (drugs not-withstanding). Recent articles in the New York Times, the Independent, and a host of other publications and forums all discuss the debate.
Haile Gebresalassie, Paula Radcliffe, Emmanuel Mutai, and many other top runners and experts vary in their belief if it’s possible, the possible timing of it happening, what it would take from an athlete, and the course requirements for such a mythical performance.
We’ve already seen the 1 hour half-marathon broken over 150 times. Call me overly optimistic, but the sub 2-hour marathon is coming very soon, by the Olympic year 2024 at the latest, and that’s just the beginning.
The real problem with all this belief that it’s impossible, or the timing is too far away for any of us to see in our lifetime, is that these people look at the result, not at the process. If you know much about me as a coach, you know I’m big on data and training tools. In cycling, we have power meters which have done wonders for training and performance. In swimming, we’ve had incredible leaps in suit technology, but we’ve also had important studies with force plates, swim flumes and video technology for stroke analysis, as well as incredibly bold and knowledgeable coaches creating new periodization models and approaches, across all sports.
Look back to the 1990’s, when a group of young east African men came onto the distance running scene, and re-wrote the record books for 5000 and 10,000 meters, month after month, year after year. We went from wondering if anyone other than Said Aouita could run sub 13 minutes, to today having seen it done over 250 times, and the record standing at nearly 4 minute mile pace, 12:37! Hell, the mile is now down to 3:43! That’s over 4 seconds faster per lap than Roger Bannister was trying to run!
Or we wondered if sub 27 minutes was possible in the 10K, and today the record stands at 26:17! We are now wondering if sub 26 minutes is possible. And believe me, it is. Yes, 2024 sounds a long ways away, but many of use remember the 1990’s performances like they were yesterday. 13 years is not much time at all.
One thing we’ve been missing with running is a way to measure output consistently, throughout an entire race, across different terrains, weather conditions and more. This tool is coming soon, and it’s so simple, it’s hard to believe it hasn’t arrived already, (a few companies are working on it), but when it does, the sub 2-hour marathon mark will be just the beginning. Every world record will fall once again, from the marathon, down to the 100 meters. Every field event, from the horizontal jumps to the high jump and pole vault, and all the throw world records, will all fall.
We are on the cusp of a performance revolution. The blend of the science of training and the art of coaching are entering into a stronger relationship than we’ve ever seen. What we have lacked is the right tool to help measure performance and output directly from the athlete, during the entire performance duration, in order to better understand the events’ specific demands, and the athlete’s strengths and weaknesses.
This tool is the power meter in a shoe. Much like we have power meters on bikes, when we can measure force production, and speed of the force from the foot coming into contact with the ground, we begin to measure output directly, not just in times or marks. Suddenly we will know much more than we have ever known, and this information will open the floodgates of a new level of high performance.
Here are just some of the ways a power meter in a shoe will affect training and performance:
- Better understanding of technique and the value of technique, as well as how to effectively tweak it
- Better assessment of fitness, objectively
- Better tracking of fitness, so performance plateaus can be avoided
- Better planning of tapers and perfecting tapering strategies
- Better understanding of recovery techniques and periods required, specific to each athlete
- Power to weight ratios and the affect of it on performance, proper ratios
- Better and more effective warm-up routines
- Better quantification of training stress, fatigue and fitness
- Better understanding of strengths and weaknesses, and effectiveness of training strategies to address them
- Objective feedback on periodization models, for improvement and tweaking
Those are just some of the ways we will see a new world of performances we can’t yet imagine. This is just in track and field, but it is safe to say these benefits will transfer to triathlon and other endurance sports, or any which involve running in some capacity, (soccer, basketball, and more).
They said 7 Tour de France victories in a row would never happen, but Lance was one of the few who adopted technology like power meters, early on in his career. Expect something similar with power meters for the athlete on foot.
The initial onslaught of data and feedback for coaches and athletes will be overwhelming at first, but those who study it and try to use the data to their competitive advantage, will be the ones who set themselves apart initially. Once the best athletes come into contact with the best coaches, who know and understand how to use this technology and data to design training programs and improve athlete weaknesses, the next revolution will begin, and the sub 2-hour marathon will be just one of many performances which will leave us dropping our jaws. Trust me, or just look at past history, and you can see the writing is on the wall.
Coach Vance
Friday, May 27, 2011
T1 Nonsense
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Marathon in your Ironman Prep?
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Mental Choices in a Race
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
Race and Disc Wheel Dilemma - New Data

One of the common questions people ask me about is race wheels, and whether they are worth it. I've always thought worth is a relative question, based as much on budget as performance. I remember asking Joe Friel why he always rode such nice wheels on his road bike, (Zipp 808's), for all his rides. He responded with, "Jim, by the time these wheels are worn out, they'll be obsolete anyway." Very true.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Twitter Answers #4
Thursday, April 7, 2011
There's no such thing as "The Only Way"
Chris' blog post was motivated by a great interview with one of the top coaches in the sport, Brett Sutton, on IM Talk. I listened to the entire interview, and I agree with a lot of what Brett says, but of course the devil is in the details and he speaks in large generalizations, because he has to, each scenario is different. (Brett's interview can be heard here: http://tinyurl.com/23l6pgz).
As a guy who is one of the biggest preachers of periodization, data and numbers, it might come as a surprise to find out I agree with Brett and Chris' basic concepts and beliefs. So many times athletes end up relying too much on numbers, and end up doing a numbers dance on race day, instead of RACING. Many times I see athletes who view their current power zones and think they can't surpass them. Suddenly the numbers are limiters, instead of being simply guidelines.
If you listen to Brett and Chris speak in the interview and blog, they are very critical of the use of tools, and Brett is especially critical of the idea of periodization. They call power meters and GPS devices gimmicks, toys or gadgets. To hear them, anything which seems close to periodization or provides feedback is blasphemy. I would argue they simply disagree with the common use today of these tools, and instead differ in the tools they use and the periodization model they follow.
So before every age-grouper goes and totally trashes these tools and decides to eliminate periodization from their training, I think it's important to consider the following...
Periodization
Periodization simply means, "training periods." I highly doubt that Brett and Chris never change the training stimulus, and conduct the same workouts all the time. Chris even discusses the need to balance all three sports, which requires changing training stresses.
Even in the interview, Brett discusses the need to train specifically for the race demands. So basically, Brett doesn't believe in traditional periodization, and to some degree, I can agree with that. Macca the same. But it is not that they don't believe in adjusting training stress, they just disagree with how it has been traditionally done. Anytime you change the stress for a period of time, with a different focus, that is "periodization."
Though it is effective for beginner to intermediate level athletes, (even many advanced level), traditional linear, reverse, undulating and similar periodization models do not seem to be as effective for high level, elite athletes to be competitive at the top of the sport. But you need to be at a high enough level of an athlete to make a different periodization model more effective than the traditional ones. You need to be able to advance the training at a rapid rate, and at a high enough volume. This requires a very high level of commitment, which most age-groupers can't do. Brett even discusses the level of commitment required, and how long it takes.
Training ToolsWhen it comes to their dislike for tools and "gadgets," Macca discusses using the clock on the wall to determine an hour run, trying to be back just on feel to one hour. THE CLOCK IS A TOOL! It provides feedback to Chris as to how in touch with reality his perception and perceived exertion is. This way, when he feels like he can make a move on the run in a race, he trusts that he can do it. He's proven it in his training.
Brett says he wants his athletes to stop using tools, and doesn't use a stopwatch either at track. But Brett pulls the reins in on his athletes during their 20x800 track sessions. Guess what Brett? YOU ARE THE TOOL FOR THE ATHLETES! He is the tool the athletes use to hold themselves back and reach the goals of the workout. Brett is the measuring stick by which the athletes measure themselves. Does Brett approve of their pace, their training intensities, their fitness levels? The athletes under him have their own perceived exertion levels, but if Brett disagrees with it, then it is not in touch with reality.
Our perceived exertion levels are only as reliable and good as their connection with the reality of our fitness and capabilities. Chris and Brett simply don't like to use the common power meter and GPS or stop watch for running to determine this. The better they see the skill of perceived exertion being correct, the better feedback they get/give.
Again, even as a "data and numbers geek," I agree athletes need to RACE, and quit staring at the numbers. Athletes need to build trust in their perceptions, take risks and learn what their capable of. Chances are they are more capable than they realize of better performance, if simply break the chains of the power meter zone, or running at a set pace.
But this is an acquired skill that takes months, if not years, of development, and has to happen over the course of each season as well. Brett and Chris are guys who don't balance a full time job with coaching/training. They can conduct the sessions required to learn this skill in a much more rapid timeframe than the average age-grouper. Brett can isolate athletes in a camp and keep an eye on them on a regular basis. He does this well, and the results are clear, but that's not reality for many athletes in the sport.
What can athletes do to improve their perceived exertion? USE THE TOOLS AND GADGETS! However, conduct many workouts where you simply cover them up, and stop looking at them. When the workout is complete, look and see how you did, relative to what your perceived exertion levels were.
Probably the best aspect of using tools and gadgets is the data provides a record of what actually happened. It provides guidance and feedback for how the training is progressing, and helps sets benchmarks for athletes to review and try to exceed. In future seasons, it helps show a path, or give guidance to new training decisions.
I tell athletes all the time, "The data isn't for you, it's for me!" I'm the coach, and I need more than just you telling me, "It went well," or "It went bad." My ability as a coach to give you feedback, especially if I can't be there to see and watch the sessions, is dependent on the quality of the feedback I get from you, the athlete. Tools which provide data about the sessions are the most pure feedback there is, and when used in conjunction with athlete feedback, becomes even more powerful.
I get the sense it is better for these two to say it is all art, and not science, because then it sounds like they are the only ones capable of doing it correctly. It is certainly an art and science mix, but to say one artist's way is the only way is not something most would ever agree with.
In short, Brett and Chris are very successful, but don't believe that their way is the only way or the best for each athlete.
Coach Vance