It's not one good workout, it's an accumulation...

Recently, I had an athlete who is pretty talented, (clearly in the hunt for a Kona slot in his AG), push his longer race simulation rides, well beyond Ironman intensity. He did this, and was very excited about the numbers. He should be excited, the numbers were impressive.

Then came his 2 key run sessions in the week, and he was so fatigued from pushing the Ironman bike day, he couldn't complete the workouts. By the time he came back to his weekend race simulation ride, he was feeling a lot better and hammered the ride harder than prescribed again. He did even better than the previous week, so he was really excited.

Then came his 2 key run sessions in the week, (again), and he couldn't complete the sessions, too fatigued again. Again, feeling better come the weekend, he hammers the bike ride harder than prescribed in the training log.

Starting to see a pattern here? A few days later, he tries to push his key run session when he is tired. He tells me, "My run isn't improving." He was correct, his run wasn't improving, because he hammered so hard, he missed key run sessions to address it. When he did do it, he had too much fatigue to make them of any value.

Now he has learned, the key isn't having one awesome/amazing/hammering workout per week, it's having a number of solid/quality sessions you can back up together on a consistent basis.

Darren Smith, one of the top triathlon coaches in the world, told me once, "You get a lot more out of 80% consistently than 95% once in awhile."

If you're digging deep in training, realize you'll get a lot farther by backing off a bit and being consistent.

Coach Vance

Timing of Weight Loss with Training and Racing

One of the topics I'm finding popular with my athletes at this point of the season is their weight. A few are not happy with their weight, wanting to squeeze out another kilogram or two. Here's the problem though, for these athletes that want to do this, right now we are in the specificity part of the training year. We are preparing specifically for the demands of race day, and that means intensity, and a good portion of the total training volume is at that intensity.

For these athletes to be able to handle the load of intensity to prepare adequately, and recover quickly to make the next race-specific workout a success, they can't be actively trying to lose weight now. It must happen passively, without cutting calories and meals.

In my time as an athlete for Bob Seebohar and Joe Friel, I learned a lot about nutrition, but probably most importantly was not necessarily the nutrition, but the timing of the nutrition. I will spare all the details for you, but in general, if you're eating to support training, then eat what you need and want. When you're not eating to support training, such as during a rest day or recovery period, eat only what you need, and make it fruit, vegetable and lean-protein based.

Ask yourself, "Why am I eating right now?" If the answer is you're hungry, or need to pre-fuel or refuel from hard training sessions, then eat without worry or concern, but make sure it's just what you need. If the answer is you're bored, or just because everyone else is eating around you, then adjust it to only what you need, (perhaps not eating at all), and what will support your training and goals, (not junk food, or sugary items).

Another tip most people don't realize, is that for every gram of carbohydrate, (CHO), the body stores, it stores 4 grams of water. If you eat a very starchy-based diet most of the time, the body will horde more carbs, and thus retain more water. Stick with a clean diet of less CHO or processed items when not training, (fruits, veggies, lean protein), and you'll be amazed at how the body can drop weight quickly when it sheds the carbohydrate it doesn't need and loses water weight.

Again, if you're in the high-intensity, race-specific phase of training, now is NOT the time to actively pursue weight loss. Get in what you need and focus on getting the recovery and intensity right. Weight will take care of itself.

Coach Vance

All TSS Points are NOT Created Equal

I've been asked by a number of athletes lately about PMC charts, and TSS. A lot of athletes use PMC charts and combine everything. I know a number of athletes using PMC charts with TSS scores estimated for strength training sessions, swimming, and more.

One athlete I spoke with was asking me, "How much of a TSS should a workout be over CTL, by percentage, to be counted as too much, too little, or just right?"

But let me clarify something which many athletes miss, that all TSS points are not equal from sport to sport. For the purposes of simplicity, let's define each sport and their TSS.

rTSS = TSS points from run workouts
bTSS = TSS points from bike workouts
sTSS = TSS points from swim workouts

I will not even begin to mess with strength training here. Too many variables.

1 rTSS does not equal 1 bTSS nor 1 sTSS, and that is universally true for each sport. Think of it in terms of how you would feel the day after a 100 TSS session, which is 1 hour all-out effort, (FTP).

100 rTSS = This is like racing a 10K or even a half marathon for some athletes! You'll likely be very sore the next day, and running hard again is probably a few days away, at least. Push the envelope a little too soon and injury is just around the corner. The weight bearing aspect of running really beats the body down.

100 bTSS = You could easily go out and do a bike ride the next day, and even race fairly well. Heck, the Tour de France proves this! The athletes hit over 100 bTSS on an almost daily basis.

100 sTSS = You could easily do a 100 sTSS swim in the AM, and come back and put in another big swim set in the PM. The medium of water helps to keep the physically damaging stress at bay.

In the end, if you're combining PMC charts, that's fine, I do it with bike and run, never with swim, (I will explain that in another post.) However, if your goal is to exceed a certain TSS over your combined CTL, this is a bad idea, because the physical weight of the TSS must be considered, or you're likely headed to injury.

For example, if your bike CTL is 100, run CTL is 45, and your swim CTL is 80, for a combined CTL of 225 TSS/day, and you're going to do a big run workout where you want to get 10% more than your combined CTL, then you're doing a run of nearly 250 TSS!!! That's a HUGE workout.

Consider instead the individual PMC charts and where each sport is at in terms of CTL. 10% of your current CTL for rTSS is a lot different, as that would be a 50 TSS workout in this instance, and that's totally doable. 30 percent would be 60, which is also fair and conservative at a 45 CTL.

It's fine to monitor total load, ATL especially, with a combined PMC chart of many sports, but be careful about judging individual sport workouts on that combined PMC's CTL, as the TSS values are not anywhere near equal from sport to sport.

Coach Vance

Commitment is obvious...

I have an assistant who helps me track certain metrics which TrainingPeaks can't do, by putting them in an excel spreadsheet for each athlete. If these metrics are improving, then I know I am doing the right things as a coach. If they aren't improving, then I know something is wrong and must be addressed.

My assistant noticed something, and I had to chuckle at how obvious it was, but the sad thing is I guess it isn't that obvious to some athletes. She said she noticed the athletes who do the workouts as I write them, and complete them, improve in the metrics, those who aren't consistent or don't do the workouts as written, don't see the improvement the others do.

It sounds obvious, and it is, it's commitment. Without commitment, improvement isn't going to happen. The higher the goals, (such as trying to qualify for Kona, trying to podium there, or trying to be top 10 in the WTS rankings), the more important commitment is. When it's there, the results and improvement make it obvious.

Coach Vance

Port Macquarie Training Camp 2013

In September, I am planning a trip to Australia to work with athletes on the Ironman Australia course, and do some speaking in Sydney and Melbourne. You can find out all the info at this link, but here are the main details...

Details

When:  25th – 29th September 2013

Where:  Rydges, Port Macquarie

Costs:  $1,500 twin share (single room supplement available)

Group Size: 20 max – get in quick

*Please note that all attendees must be Triathlon Australia Registered Members for Insurance Purposes

What’s Included:

• 4 nights accommodation at the Rydges Port Macquarie (twin share)
• All breakfasts, dinners and lunches
• Training nutrition provided by Endura
• Expert training guidance and technical analysis
• Sag wagon
• Training jersey
• The experience of a life time

What’s not included

• Travel to Port Macquarie
• Hotel Car Parking

 You can register here...

Hope to see you there!

Coach Vance

Podcast Interview for Triathlon Science

If you're interested in a good podcast, and want to hear more about my new book, Triathlon Science, check this interview out that I did with Triathlete Training, run by Eric Schwartz.

http://triathletetraining.com/triathlete-training-podcast-episode-5-with-triathlon-science-editor-jim-vance/

If you have the book, let me know what you think!

Coach Vance

Understanding the Bike Demands of Ironman - Part 1: Kona Pro Men

If you ever use Quadrant Analysis in Training Peaks, (QA), then you likely see how the specifics of a race can really be seen, and the neurological demands on the athlete. I'll avoid explaining the basics of the QA, and instead refer you to here, and dive right into some observations. My hope is to take this one course at a time, and really begin to identify the difference in demands from race to race, course to course, so we as coaches, (and athletes), can train more specifically for the race, as well as learn what might be the best way to ride a course.

With this in mind, let's start with the race everyone is dying to do and know more about, Kona. Obviously this race has the best field of long course triathletes in the world, but there is a difference in the type of races being executed, from the pro's, to the age group competitor, to the lottery winner who is just looking to finish. For this first post on this, I will be focusing on the pro men, courtesy of TrainingPeaks' files of Pete Jacobs, Luke McKenzie and Michael Lovato from 2012.

Ironman World Championships - Kona 

(click on all images to enlarge them)

Most people probably don't know this, but there is about 3000 feet of climbing in Kona, (depending on what source you use to measure), due to the large rollers, and the climb up to Hawi. Add in the quality of the field, and you begin to see the athletes really pushing themselves hard. Let's look at the course profile, because that is a very important aspect of determining training specificity.

So the course is mostly an out and back, with a big climb at the half-way point, called Hawi, (pronounced ha-vee). You can see that there are some other decent uphill sections, with some big spikes within those as well. So there is a constant up and down, never really a flat portion, but the up and down is rarely very steep, as most athletes are able to stay in the saddle for the majority of the race, save for Hawi. 

This is the QA of 2012 World Champion, Pete Jacobs. Pete has an FTP of 370 watts. You'll notice he spent almost 90% in the lower force quadrants. Could there be something to this?

Pete's percentage of samples in Quadrants - 1: 4%, 2: 8.7%, 3: 27.1%, 4: 60.2%

Pete's run split: 2:48:05

Next we will look at Luke McKenzie, who finished 24th in the same 2012 race, and has an FTP of 360 watts, riding only about 3 mins slower than Pete.

Luke's percentage of samples in Quadrants - 1: 0.1%, 2: 36.4%, 3: 58.5%, 4: 5%

Luke's run split: 3:20:32

If we compare with Pete, then quadrants 2 and 4 really standout, as Luke varied greatly from Pete in those. Consider Pete had about 12 times more samples in Q4, which was lower force, higher cadence, and less than a quarter of the amount of samples in Q2 than Luke, which are low cadence high force, (think mashing). Surprisingly, Q1 which means the biggest surges, Pete had quite a bit more in comparison than Luke, but seemed to be able to manage that with such a still small sample, and much less time overall in higher force quadrants. 

Next we will look at Michael Lovato, who finished 25th, right behind Luke. I have estimated Michael to have an FTP of 375, based on the TSS provided by TrainingPeaks, of 274. (Proof that the higher FTP isn't always what matters, but how well you can ride close to it). Michael ran much faster than Luke, but didn't seem to ride near as well, from a time perspective. 

Lovato's percentages of samples in Qaudrants - 1: 1.4%, 2: 13.3%, 3: 49.2%, 4: 36%

Lovato's run split: 3:03:13

Comparing Lovato and Pete, Lovato's Q1 and Q2 seem to be in line with Pete, 14% of samples in those two for Lovato, 13% for Pete. The biggest difference seems to be the Q4 time, as both Luke and Lovato spent the majority of the time in Q3, lower cadence, lower force. For Pete, he spent most of the time in Q4, and about half the time in Q3 that the others did. 

The small yellow triangle represents the average of all the samples, and for Lovato and Luke, they fall in the Q3. For Pete, it falls in Q4. 

So does this mean athletes should be spending more time training with higher cadence, lower force? Not necessarily. It could be that Pete was simply better fit, able to push the gears faster than the other two, and able to run well anyway. Certainly, Pete has been a heck of a runner, having the fastest run split at 2011 Kona. 

I think if there is a conclusion to draw from this, less Q1 and Q2 time is probably best. I do think there is something to be said for having the neurological fitness to be able to hold Q4 for that much of the race. Just for fun I highlighted the samples from the top of Hawi and back for Pete to see if there was a change.

Pete's samples from Hawi and back in Quadrants - 1: 0.9%, 2: 7.9%, 3: 37.3%, 4: 53.9%

Of course, we can expect that he will fatigue, but there really was little change in the percentages for the Q1 and Q2. Q3 saw much more, as it seemed he just couldn't likely hold Q4 as much as he would have liked. (He's racing hard after all!) His average for those samples falls in Q3 now. 

Comparing his cadence from the first hour and the last hour, it dropped by 6.82%. Lovato's cadence fade was actually less, but his power fade for the first and last hour was 10% more than Pete's. Luke had the largest cadence fade, and the largest power fade. See this table which summarizes:

So what does all this mean? It's easy to say athletes should do what Pete Jacob's did, but it's not that simple. This is a small sample size of 3 athletes, and there are a number of factors which could play a role, and athletes are not all the same, far from it. But I do believe this is a small bit of evidence on what it takes to perform well at Kona. It would seem that Pete was trained well to hold a high cadence, and had the neurological fitness to do so. His cadence fade affected his power less since he was still holding a relatively high cadence to start with, possibly saving the higher force outputs for the run. 

In the next part, I will look at some top age groupers from Kona, and see what their QA's look like, if there is any big differences or not. What will we see? Truth be told I'm not sure, haven't gotten that far yet. I would love to do a similar post on the Pro Women, but the data is really limited. Let me know if you find some good files to compare. 

Coach Vance

The 6 Key Components for Performance

There are 6 key components I have found for high performance....

The first 3 are:
1. Preparation
2. Preparation
3. Preparation

Sounds silly, but getting prepared for the race is what it is all about. Training properly, getting the fitness gains and performance levels where they need to be takes a commitment few are willing or able to give, especially at the highest of levels.

The last 3 are:
4. Execution
5. Execution
6. Execution

Sounds silly again, but perfect preparation is meaningless if an athlete doesn't execute properly on race day. For example, watching the ITU WTS San Diego event here this past weekend, I saw a number of excellent runners go out WAY TOO FAST for the first lap of the run, only to blow up and be beaten by athletes who they are better runners than.

We see a lot of execution errors among amateur triathletes, from pacing to nutrition, and even if they did all the perfect training, highest level of fitness, they become their own biggest hurdle. They likely weren't confident enough in their preparation as well, which brings us back to the first 3.

Have excellent preparation, then execute according to that preparation. They go hand in hand, at all levels, from amateurs to high performance.

Coach Vance

Confident my athlete is ready...

I spent the day watching the Collegiate Triathlon Championships, today being the first ever draft-legal championship race. It was exciting, and a great start to an event which will likely grow the sport exponentially in the US and greatly help our US development. 

I had an athlete in the race today, and he is racing tomorrow. He swam great, out in the top 10, about 17 seconds off the lead. He followed the plan, and dropped out at the start of the run. Tomorrow he races the Olympic distance non-drafting, and he is ready to do well tomorrow. How do I know this? Besides using my own intuition as a coach and my own eyes which show me, his data shows me as well. 

Here's his Performance Management Chart for the bike and the run, which has calculated his training stress, (TSS), from each session we've done over the months.

There are some important numbers which help show how much rest is enough, and how much is too much. CTL is the blue line, basically represents his fitness. His loss of "fitness" during the taper was only, but he dropped so much fatigue that the short term training stress, (ATL = pink line), is now less than his CTL value. This difference is positive 1.7. These values help show he has had an excellent taper, and is ready to go for the race tomorrow. 

Is this perfect? No. Will these numbers mean he is going to perform to his absolute best and win the race? No, but they do increase the odds and probability that he will race to his potential at this point in time. There are a number of things that go into racing well, like mental prep, technical skill, and race execution. But so much of performance comes from training, and putting your odds in your favor that you're doing that right should help your confidence as an athlete. We will see tomorrow how he does.

Of course, if you're not using data, then you're just flat out guessing. We are all guessing and making judgments on what the right amount is, especially coaches. At least this guess as a coach is backed with data and evidence, in addition to my intuition, sight and experience.

Coach Vance

"Going by Feel" Part 2

As I mentioned in the last post, there is a disconnect among many athletes, high level triathletes especially, that using data or science means you can't go by feel, when actually, going by feel is paramount at the highest level of sport.

When you're trying to eek out the extra half percent to 5 percent, depending on where you sit on the performance continuum, you have to maximize each training day, and a great sense of "feel" for what is best on the day is critical. Everyone is working hard, those are working smartest and getting the most of every session, (BOTH hard AND recovery sessions), are the ones advancing.

Darren Smith, one of the most successful coaches in ITU history, uses his own metrics of having the athlete tell him how they are feeling before each session. They have to have a number to give him, on a scale. This number is 100% feel! It's a metric though that allows Darren to give the right amount of stimulus on the day.

Those of you who don't have a Darren Smith on deck or at your side for each workout need something to help you assess. Knowing your numbers and how they are responding to the training stress you are giving them, is only going to help the feel process, giving more confidence with evidence of what the right decision is, whether to push or back off, what energy system to train, and how much.

Feel is the best way to train for those last few percentages of improvement, but at the highest levels it is crucial to get it right. Margin of error is too small.

Coach Vance