Help analyze my HIM

Just looking through the logs, I don't see near enough volume for HIM training.  IMO it's not surprising you didn't have the fitness on the run.  The cramps early in the run May have been partially nutrition related too.  I'm not sure how many cals you took in on the bike, but at a glance it looks like not enough.  I was told to shoot for 200/hr.  But it's also likely your training volume just didn't give you that endurance to run off the bike and maintain a normal (to you) pace.

One thing I've learned is how important the bike is in an HIM distance.  You really need to have some serious volume coming into the race.  At that point you can maintain 70-80% or zone 2-3 on the 56 miles and be able to run after.

If you're aiming at your run training paces, you're not doing enough run volume. I eyeballed your Sep volume, which should still be fairly high, and most of your runs are 30-45 mins in length - which probably explains why you started out fine for the first 30-45 minutes of the run and then slowed down from there. I saw one long run in there of 1hr40minutes which is a great length for a weekend run, but in the month prior to race day, you should probably be doing close to that length on a weekly basis. As is, I would have literally doubled your run volume if you were aiming to run the equivalent of your shorter run training paces.

Your bike volume looks pretty good, but if your legs are feeling that toasted off the bike, you probably over-biked as well. I paced well in my recent HIM (5:0x finish) and when I jumped off the bike, I was feeling good to go for the run. I felt a lot better legwise on mile 1-6 on the run than I did in the last 20 mins of the bike.

Also for what it's worth, I think that if you're trained well for the HIM distance (esp volume-wise), nutrition is not a major factor. I took 2 cups of maltodextrin in 2 bike bottles on the bike and that was enough calories for my entire race, even with zero calories on the run (just drank water.) It's def different for IM distance, but for HIM distance, 2 cups of malto or perpetuem is plenty. It's the training, not the calories that matter.

For what it's worth (and I'm not holding myself out to be a guru on this stuff), it seems nutrition related to me...your fuel intake on the bike leg seems rather light.  How much did you take-in on the run leg?  

Through July I was up too over 500 miles on the bike, and 144 miles running but when I hit August I took a big hit with life/work and missed my goals as I really wanted to put in over 160 on the run.I think through July I was around 15 hrs a week and felt toasted all the time which also probably helped on my August totals.

Some of the fatigue could be nutrition related, but you should have been feeling at least some hunger pangs/shakes if it were really mostly due to a lack of calories.

In terms of leg cramps, that's exactly what I would have predicted with a slight overbike and then coming onto the run with your very limited run volume. I don't even need to look at your nutrition - that's an expected result unless you're experienced and have done HIMs/IMs at similar or faster pace in the past. 

I'd be willing to bet that even if you had more calories, your result would be at best less than 1-2 minutes better, if even that. 

I knew I had "peaked" too early for my run training but I really did expect to be able to go 160+ miles in August.

As far as the bike mileage was concerned I thought I could replace a lot of miles with climbing.  This year I really added a lot of elevation over my rides so while the actual mileage is less a lot of those rides are about 3-5000 feet of climbing, not sure if that makes a difference though.

I'm looking purely at time spent on the bike.  I see 3 good solid weeks for you in July and August and one more in June.  So that's 4 out of 12 your bike volume was up there.  Not a lot relatively speaking.  Besides that, it was not close enough to the event to benefit you much.  You likely lost some of that endurance come race day 

Total volume seems ok to me (similar to mine), but as others have said maybe you peaked a bit too early and didn't keep the training up closer towards race day.

I didn't analyze your runs too closely, but if you didn't get many long runs in as one poster said, that likely inhibited your run endurace.  Your body may not have been used to that distance if all of your runs were shorter in length.

Usually when you see that someone's HIM run split is only 10 minutes faster than their bike split...it means they biked too hard and didn't have enough run fitness.

I agree completely.  I just noticed on the OP's bike splits it looked like his HR was in the 140s for most of the ride (started out a bit higher and then came down), but on his run it shot up into the 160s within the first few miles.

I don't know what % of your max HR that bike was, but I'm guessing you weren't going extremely hard if your HR was in the 140s.   It looks more like a lack of run fitness than overbiking your abilities.  But this is just my guess based on my experience with pacing using HR.

I noticed this too on the run.  The first 3 miles were soft sand and I started out way too fast and had to consciously slow myself down but then I would slowly creep back up.  The sand really did take a good toll on me like I knew it would but I did try to slow it down during that part.

I wonder if my August had looked like July how much of a difference do you think it would have made?

I think (very unqualified opinion) if you Sept Looked like your August in the run department you would have fared a lot better (although that soft sand still would be challenging) but 6 weeks with minimal running showed it's results.

I just eyeballed your Aug run volume, and I'm sure that if you had kept that sort of volume up in Sep, you would have done substantially better on the run - to the point it would feel like a totally different experience. 

Dropping off the run volume 4 weeks out will really kill your run ability. I know, having once gotten injured 4 weeks before a "A" race marathon as a pure runner. I was running a LOT at the time (like 75mpw) for months, and lots of folks told me not to sweat it - the training was in the bank, as long as I did 'some' mileage, even with no more long runs. 

Needless to say, I didn't even come close to my target. I was shooting for a 3:10 (all my Mcmillan race estimates including a 20 mile race predicted a 2:59) and after those 4 weeks off, I ran a glorious 4:05 without sandbagging. I distinctly recall thinking 'WTFFFF!!!!' at the mile 6 mark when the legs actually started twitching with pre-cramps. 

4 weeks of very low volume/intensity run training will decondition your run a fair amount, even with the bike training. 

This.  I just went through exactly this scenario earlier this year.  Fast McMillan predictor, nailing sub 3 training paces, bam an injury that takes me out for four and a half weeks and poof...all gone.  

This is what I heard as well but now I know for next year.

I was out there yesterday as well, and I really don't think you can compare that run to many other non Xterra 70.3s.  My avg run time was 11mm, and I have been training on the beach.  It was also hot for us SoCal people.  If you had kept up your run volume in September you may have done a bit better, but don't kick yourself.  That was a tough run course.  

I have read some of your posts over the last year or so, and if I recall correctly,  you have 2 years or so coming off the couch, getting into Triathlon, and a fair amount of weight loss.  You have seen some great gains, but are kind of leaving the beginner phase and heading into the journeyman phase of Tri at distances most people don't do.  I think it takes a while to figure out each distance, and you are getting there with the HIM distance.  You are doing good stuff and building the engine.  Keep at it.  My situation is very similar to yours, and I strongly feel heading into the close of my second year of fairly consistent training that this is a long term process.  I plan to be a lot faster next year.  I learned a lot this year I will put to use.  Good luck, and if you ever want to meet up around Camp Pendleton to train, let me know.

Err... I'd say that having a great race is a lot more about having the fitness to pull it off than the pacing. Although I def agree with you that it's important to reassess your race plan/goal based upon what happened in training.

I'd still however definitely say he lost (temporarily) a good deal of run fitness with that big dropoff in run mileage training prior to race day. 

On the bright side, it'll come back quickly since he  had a good volume/base prior to that month.

I forgot about how hot it has been in SoCal lately.  I agree, that along with the harsh terrain on the run probably aided in your HR skyrocketing.

AdventureBear is right, its all about the pacing.  You may have done a bit better if you could have run within your proper HR zones, but it sounds like the conditions and environment made that more difficult for you.

You had a great race.  Be proud of your accomplishment, rest up, and then get back at it.

Thanks for all the input. 

Taking a step back and looking at this last race I do realize that not only did I cut about 10 minutes off my previous HIM time but also did it on a much more difficult course and I am very happy with that.

The race didn't go as I had planned in my head but so few things in life actually do.  I'll mark it down as a win.