Am I doing enough?

Just my opinion, but I wouldn't go into an IM with a peak of 13 hours/week.  The way I see it, I would want to be doing more weekly volume than what I am expecting my body to do in 1 day at the race.  I'm know people have done a lot less and still finished, so that's just my $0.02.  

I read somewhere that it's a good rule of thumb to do 2.6 times the race distance in training every week... that's an awful lot of volume/time for an ironman, but kind of gives another perspective on matters.

My most recent HIM bike split was around 2:54, but I'm pretty sure I'm going to err on the side of caution and shoot for somewhere in the 6:35-6:45 range as I just don't want to risk the run being a complete suffer-fest.  I know, maybe it will be anyway  

So it sounds like maybe I ought to push up the weekly long rides so the longest one is fairly close to or at the full distance? 

Yea, I think I'd be fine with a 3 hr. run, I really focused alot on running over the winter, long runs have gone well, had a 2 hr. run Sat. a.m. and it went great. 

I would be ok putting in a little more than it calls for, so:

  - Could bump up the longer rides 

  - Add in some :15 - :20 min. runs after the shorter bike sessions? 

What kind of volume are most people at for IM build?  Aside from recovery weeks, like 16ish hrs.? 

Thanks man, makes sense to me, but I got myself down for a 9:45, hahahahaha

Only 1 IM for for what it's worth.  IMFL last year 13:19.  Not fast but beat what I thought by 41 minutes.  Training again for IMFL this year too.  Plan on 12:30 this year.

My training is a bit on the light side compared to a lot of people out here so don't feel bad.  Last year I don't think I even peaked at 16 hrs per week.  

Swim: I think I peaked at 7.5k per week, again only a couple of times.  Usually around 6k per week

Bike: two 5 hr and two 5.5 hr rides with a short run afterward.  I only put in another 2 hours on  the bike each week (90 min trainer and 30 min TT).  For IMFL I took it too easy on the bike and ended up around 6:45.  But that set up a great run for me.  Going to pick up the bike a bit this year.

Running: Peaked at 3:30 as my LR and that was only once.  Worked up to it of course.  Each week I'd have a track workout for 1 hr then another run usually an hour then bricks off the bike after my LR and TT.

So compared to many people on here I am not even close to their training schedule.  Heck I even have a day off scheduled each week.  I am 55 and need the extra rest time.  Sure I could probably finish with a better time if I put more training time in but it's not worth it to me.  This is about all I can/want to handle right now.   

good luck,

Duane

Thanks alot Duane, helpful stuff! 

I am more in the old school of putting in the distances/time for the distance.  I am not so genetically gifted that I can get by on minimal training and I have no background in any of the sports.  My peak training week for this year's IM are Swim 12,200, run 54 miles, bike 265 miles.  Long swim is 5100 yards, run 19 miles, bike 115 miles.  So 3x 18-19 mile runes, 5x 4000 yard + swims, 5x 95+ miles bike rides.  I do 1 moderate and 1 high intensity workout in each sport per week. 

I don't know if any of this is helping you.  My last IM was 11:40:18 and hope to do better this year.  I am 45 years old. 

So if you are genetically more gifted than I am, are younger, have a history of competing in any of these sports in the past or are shooting for a slower pace,  you can get by with less.  But there is a significant difference between a peak week of 13 hours of training versus 25 hours come race day.  Yes intensity can make up for some of it, but... you just are not going to have that deep of a base of reserves to draw on for the 2nd half of the marathon.  I could train significantly less to do a 14-15 hour IM.  So part of it is do you want to complete under the cutoff time or are you looking to go fast..er.  The main place I wouldn't skimp would be on the weekly longs in each sport.  You can get by without intensity if you have enough distance in.  An IM is not  a sprint for most of us. 

Wait, what??  2.6 x 140.6 = ~365 miles/week?  Even with a crazy 60 mile run week and 10,000 yards of swimming, you're still looking at nearly 300 miles on the bike in a week.

I can perhaps see this kind of volume for professional athletes but for 90% of us, that seems crazy and a recipe for burnout and injury.

I do agree that 13.5 hours peak is probably low, depending on your goals.  My plan has me peaking at 15 hours for three consecutive weeks, though I'll probably go over that a bit.

Well, it seems maybe I ought to ramp it up a little, even though my goal is in the 13.5 - 14 hr. range.  6:00 at Augusta last year, and I think I can go 5:40 there in a few weeks but I know I can't just double that time, especially because Augusta's swim isn't exactly one of the tougher ones

Sounds like I do need to be getting in some more interval type sessions?  Most people are doing at least one of those per sport per week? 

What are you doing now? You'll likely want some intensity in there. How much depends on the sport too. Intervals are one way of performing more intense work.

It's not impossible, but it is very difficult. You wouldn't just do a week that big, it has to be built up to. And no, I don't think quite that much is absolutely necessary for someone who just wants to finish. Those recommendations are more for reaching your potential.

Regularly hitting solid weeks of workouts will do much more than just deciding on a peak weak. It's your entire build up that matters. Not just the big one. Consistently hitting 10-12 hrs of well-planned and executed workouts can take one rather far. And then building towards the biggest weeks of mid to high teens just before the taper.

My first IM (training for florida) I peaked at 16 hours a week.  did a 13:53 race day, but I know I could easily have cut a half hour off that time by not dilly dallying in transition and stopping to talk to my family no less than 6 times during the run.  I also walked about a mile that I am fairly certain I could have run in hindsight.  max were 30 km run and 180 km run (not during the same week).

This time round I am training for Wisconsin.  Peak was 18.5 and 18.7 hours but had the same max distances and again not on the same weekend, but I added time during the week.

I am pretty sure that the 13 weeks to a 13 hour ironman is a pretty proven program and lots of people have used it to finish.  I think the only critism I have heard is that the time estimate might be on the generous side - like people that use it finish between 13 and 15 hours not 12 to 14 like the plan is designed for.

This.  I do solid weeks of training 10 - 12 hours week after week.  Very rarely miss a session and if I do I make it up during the week.  Just looked at my totals for the last few weeks, 11:10, 12:45 and this week 14:43.  Next week is recovery and I'll be down to 10:30. 

enjoy,

Duane

There is another training schedule in Gale's book that is 13 weeks to a sub 13 hr IM and volume maxs out at 16 to 17 hours. I followed the 26 weeks schedule then switched out to the sub 13 HR plan. 

This will be my first IM (Arizona) so I'm still 11 weeks out. Training seems to be going ok. I don't see myself going sub 13 in first IM but like the volume in this plan.   

26 HRS!!!!!!!!!!  Wow, WTF, I can't fathom that kind of volume, good stuff.

Maybe he meant a month   Heck I barely ran 54 miles when I was just marathon training and I can't even imagine getting in 265 miles on the bike.  My butt hurts just thinking about it. Very impressive.  I will never come close to this but then I will never come close to your finishing time either.

good luck!

Duane