training diff between sprint through IM distances

"Needed"is going to be proportionate to the distance. However, from my observation, there are individuals who train for sprints as if they are IM (or at least HIM) distance, and vice versa.

I'm not exactly sure what you are asking.  Are you asking about how the intensity differs?  Or just distance?  And what are these X and Y's you speak of?  I think we need some more clarification....

In my humble opinion, the frequency of workouts should probably stay close to the same, but ...
Spring and Olympic distances call for shorter training sessions at higher intensity while Half and Full-Iron training calls for months of base-building sessions, long-slow-efforts and close attention to race day nutrition.

... my two cents.

I'll agree that you probably need to be more specific in defining "properly".

But, generally, my view is that there are only marginal differences in training for short-course versus long-course.  They are all endurance events. 

One would assume that training plans are considered " training properly" , so why don't you just compare the plans, like those here on BT.

there is little difference, IMO.

the funny thing is some people that train for IMs will sometimes say, "I'm doing this to finish, I'll never be FOP...."

if those people did nothing but sprints with their "IM Plans," some would place in their AG every time.

main reason?  people dont train 10-15 hours/week to race a sprint because they dont have to to get to the finish line in decent fashion.  If you dont train 10-15 for an IM, you're in for a pretty long day.

its an endurance event, not a speed event, whether its a sprint or IM. 

i'll add one more thought:

some people say there is no pacing in a sprint, "you go all out!!!"  BS.  I've "gone all out" in sprints and had terrible bikes, not coming close to my potential.  I've paced bikes in a sprint and exceeded my expectations.  someone on here said the  appropriate pace for a sprint is the highest one you can hold for the length of the event.  (I think it was johnny k)  No one on earth can hold an "all out effort" for the length of a sprint.  that hit home for me.........


I should add, theres nothing wrong with doing an IM to finish.  should be most peoples goal first time around....


so, yeah, it all depends on your goals and what not, but there is little difference.

Unless you dont have a job, family or life that is.  than 25-30 hour weeks would make sense for an IM and really are not that necessary for a sprint, but would still make you faster in a sprint......

haha so some clarification needed it looks like.

1- i am looking at what you, as an individual think is best for you/would do, not what i should do.

2- i'm looking at how you go about the distances, not what in a perfect world someone should do.


generic comment but the type that started this debate between myself and a friend, goes something like this:

"when i was training for IM last year i saw all my times get faster, but now that i am back to training for sprint/olym longer stuff is slower with all the shorter harder workouts" or something along the lines of " when i was doing my HIM last year i lost a ton of weight, but put on a lot of muscle for sprints" etc etc

i'm more looking for peoples thoughts on the distances and how you aproach/look at them,

One might think that one who assumed that just might be mistaken in some cases....

I've done just 1 Oly so far, though I've done plenty of endurance cycling.  To me Sprints are different than other distances.  Sprints can generally be done on minimal water/carbs/electrolytes.  Muscle glycogen stores are sufficient fuel for most.  Oly's (2.5-3.5hr effort for most) start to require intake planning for best performance.  For HIM/IM that issue becomes critical.  Long training sessions become more critical to work out the hydration & fueling issues, as well as things like bike set-up (seat, bar position, etc.), distance shoes, etc.

Maybe 80-85% of my training is the same for IM versus all other race distances.  For HIM, it's more like 95% the same versus sprint/oly.

When not training for an IM, I would not do the 6-10 weeks of build that require 15+ hour weeks.  My weeks would stay more in the 9-13 area for all other distances.  But this is mostly due to the kind of intrusion those long weeks have on the 'rest of life'.  Otherwise, I would still do them (though they might be moved in my training schedule relative to the race dates).

What works for me...

I train for everything basically the same...at least on the "macro" level:  Build a weekly base that is at least equal to the total distance of the race (for each discipline involved) and then build to a peak that includes covering at least 95% of the race distance (again for every discipline involved) more than once--with the exception of the IM run, where I did two 20-mile runs and one marathon (which I would have raced anyway, whether I was doing the IM or not).  With the exception of some of my hilly rides and OWS, I train almost 100% by distance, not by time.  The only time that simple formula has disappointed me was on a very hilly run course...I was prepared for the distance, but not the hills.

On the "micro" level, I do actually spend more time on interval training for shorter races (esp. 5K and 10K)...at the very least, I do try to build in a TT during training for shorter races to confirm what sort of pace I'm actually prepared to handle.  And I do try to train for terrain when I have a good understanding of the geography of the course.

And I do believe that it's okay to get ahead in training and do some maintenance weeks...or even some additional build to try to improve on performance.  One thing I don't want to do for any race is just squeak in "under the wire", as it were, with preparation...ideally, I want multiple long sessions in each discipline, not just one 2-3 weeks out.

That's pretty much it.  Since adopting that approach, the only race I've ever felt I underprepared for (where I wasn't injured going in) was Wildflower, specifically the run...way, way hillier than I'd prepared for.  Obviously it's easier to "overprepare" for shorter distances (i.e., spend more time training for performance rather than survival), but--philosophically, at least--my underlying approach is the same as for the longer ones.

This got me thinking...

sprints and oly's--not much different in overall training time/length of a particular session, leaving you mentally capable for the challenges of the day at work/home.

HIM/IM training--lousy 3 hour runs, 6 hour rides that leave you wondering why you picked that distance to race, and thus contributing to mental implosion and decline of ability to handle a day at home/work.

3 hour runs.... ouch.

Pro olympic distance triathletes will most likely train more hours a week than an ironman age grouper.

The hours are probably the same between a pro olympic and pro ironman, it's just that the ironman would have 3 max long sessions a day with lower intensity and the olympic would have 4 max sessions a day with higher intensity and shorter time per session.

This is comparing Chris Gemmel (olympic distance pro) vs Cameron Brown (ironman pro)

I've met them both and also emailed them to find out their weekly and monthly mileage, it's also been in local newspapers.

that didnt answer my question;-)

fwiw i agree, my training does not vary much up to half IM so far, a bit of workout rearanging, but and a bit diff focus but thats about it.

I'm all for overdistance work for shorter races.

If one can comfotably go out and run a 12 - 14 mile run on the weekend and not have any issues holding the same pace throughout that run, that same person will be able to come off the bike and push the effort as a 5k or 10k run will be somewhat of a "joke" (for lack of a better term) compared to what they are used to running.  Yeah, different intensity in the race for sure, but still quite doable.

I would not change someone's training plan if they were trying to peak for a sprint or oly or IM.  I'd still follow a build progression that culminates in faster work in the final 4 - 6 week stage before the taper.

My training for years I did just sprint/olys and those I did HIM and/or IM have been what I'd consider very different. Part is progress I've made as an athlete.

I run a lot more training for IM both in total mpw and this year in frequency.

I ride longer doing HIM/IM races than when I just did Olys but not as much as some as I like to ride so probably did more than others doing Olys as longest race.

My swims are longer as well than when I did Olys/sprints.

I do mostly zone 2 this year and in previous years have done more zone 3 especially on the bike but that is a coaching difference.

Looking at my training volumes from '06 until this year. The last year I just did Oly in '06 was about the same volume as year I did HIM training in '07 but I did a lot more once I started IM training.

I like training more so I think if I ever decided not to do HIMs or IMs I'd probably keep training similarly.

As im not sure the policy on linking other forums into this1 i'll just paste the graph from barryp. the graph is discussing run training but im sure it could be applied to all aspects. Blue is endurance, red is speed, yellow is threshold, green is VO2 max. The graph describes volume of each type of training per the length of the race distance. So you were right in the assumption that regarless of the distance they all require Endurance training but per the graph the shorter distances should also incorporate a significant amount of other training. It looks like up to even the IM level for some people should require some aspects of VO2 and Threshold training.