Jim Kelley's (Birkierunner) General and Long Course Group (OPEN) (Page 16)

Mimi's right.  Sometimes we are simply feeling lazy and need to mentally kick ourselves in the butt to get out and do it.  Other times you know you are on the verge of sickness and its not worth pushing through it.  I was sick for a week 2 weeks ago then just as I was getting over it (after having done a 50km x-c ski race on Saturday at the end of that week) I got nailed with some stomach virus on the Sunday night and spent another week doing absolutely nothing.  2 weeks of doing nothing other than the 50k race.  Trying to train during that time would have been counter-productive....I think 2 weeks is an extreme example but 1-2 days off is a worthwhile investment.

I've been at both ends of the spectrum...racing 2 Ironmans on my old road bike with clip-on aerobars....all the way to a new Felt DA with Zipp 808 up front and Zipp Super 9 disk on back.  I tend to advise not spending tons of money unless you have tons of disposable income or don't want your kids to eat generic mac 'n cheez until they leave for college...oh, scrap that, you spent your kids college money on fancy tri toys.....they have to be a ditch digger.....not you Ted    I'm starting to get very cynical about the literal "arms race" involved in buying tri equipment.  As someone already said...its the engine, no the toys (within reason - you can't race on your old banana bike...am I the only one old enough here to know what a banana bike is?).  The only exception is the helmet....I mean c'mon...its all about the looks.....(not really)

Welcome Diana!

YES!!!!

Hi Michael, so sorry to have taken so long to get back to this question. With regard to the question on which pattern of building volume is correct…I would say neither. Both of these patterns are totally arbitrary and the Going Long pattern reflects more outdated methods of periodization – probably influenced by Gordo’s exposure to Joe Friel as a coach. I don’t want to get too negative but an arbitrary pattern of building volume (e.g. 3 weeks increase, 1 week decrease) simply does not take into consideration an athlete’s needs, goals, and limitations. Without knowing the needs and limitations an athlete has, its not very effective to lay out an arbitrary pattern of building hours. I also don’t agree with the concept of base that you’ve laid out. The term “base” has so many different interpretations that it has almost become meaningless. I could argue that the 8 weeks of “prep” that you have done could be called “base”. I use a different system where we divide general, specific, and race into training blocks where each block focuses on a specific adaptation we want to elicit. The athlete’s strengths/weaknesses will dictate what needs to be worked on in these blocks.

I really don’t use the term “muscular endurance” to describe any sessions I prescribe to athletes. I’ve read the use of the term in Going Long and Friel’s TTB and their use of the term simply doesn’t make much sense to me because its too general. So, I can’t really answer your question in those terms. Instead, I determine the athletes strengths/weaknesses by field testing in swim, bike, and run with test of varying lengths. For instance an athlete’s performance on 5 minute and 20 minute bike tests will give me an idea of what types of workouts I need to prescribe to address limiters. This will be addressed fairly early in the athlete’s program and will change as the athlete grows stronger. Phil Skiba’s house analogy in his book The Triathlete’s Guide to Training with Power is a good way to describe this. After limiters are addressed we switch to more race specific workouts as the goal race approaches. I’m guessing you might think this answer is a little un-satisfying but I think it’s a reflection of the different types of training resources/books you are relying on versus my approach.

Natural terrain will have a big impact on rest periods on a bike - downhills basically force a rest regardless of what your workout calls for at the moment you hit the downhill.  You can overcome some of that by choosing routes that are more amenable to providing the terrain/profile that will let you accomplish what you want for a given day.  If you have a 1 hour or a 2 hour indoor workout assigned I would hope that the workout has a specific purpose in mind and the length of the workout is what is necessary to accomplish that...i.e. beyond the warmup and cooldown there is no wasted "filler" just to occupy an arbitrary amount of time.  So, I would not modify the amount of time the workout calls for if doing it indoors.  On the other hand, if we are talking about 4-6 hour rides then yes, you are probably going to be doing a lot more steady pedaling indoors (versus a bunch of coasting outdoors) so you could probably still get a proper workout and cut down the allotted time a bit.

I can guarantee that Ironman Arizona's swim course will not have "wave inflation"   

I just started cycling in January.  The last time I did much cycling before that was about 13 years ago when I would ride my bike 10 miles to work and 10 miles home 3-4 days a week while doing a summer job on my college summer break.  At the time I had a mountain bike and a street bike.  I would average 14 MPH on my mountain bike and 17 MPH on my street bike doing the commute.  I no longer have that street bike (it was stolen while I was still in college), but I still have the same mountain bike and in January started my triathlon training with it.  I was able to get 14.8 MPH out of the mountain bike on my Saturday morning long rides but wanted the extra 3 MPH that I was seeing on my rode bike when I was commuting so I shopped around for deals and ended up with older model TT bike that fit the budget.

Since I wasn't going from training/racing on a street bike to a trainning/racing on a Triathlon bike the context may not be the same.  I also am going from basically no bike training for 13 years to a TT bike after just a few weeks of training on the mountain bike so that too should make a difference in the context, but the first think I noticed was that I couldn't pull up on the aero bars to increase power to the pedals like I could when riding upright with my hands on handle bars.  I was used to doing that going up hills or when I would taking off from a stop.  So on the aero bars it was less of a jackrabbit take off and more of a gradual build up of speed.  I got used to the gradual build up of speed with about 2-3 weeks of riding.  The aero position is all about saving energy over long rides of three plus hours not about explosive speed in a short distance.  I didn't feel like I was more efficient or able to put more power into an aero bike, but I did keep the heart rate way lower and my average speed has slowly been increasing every week as I learn to hold better position (flatter back, tighter tuck, etc.) and build up my leg biking muscles.  I am now seeing average speed up to 18.8 MPH on my weekday rides (15-25 miles) and my HR is an average of about 10 BPM lower than I was on the Mountain Bike.

Next, after I had been riding my TT bike for a 1-2 weeks someone told me that it would take a lot of training to get used to riding aero but that was not my experience.  I pretty much went 100% aero from the first time on the bike and haven't given it a second thought (well I do get out to climb really steep hills if I can't get up them in the aero position and to grab water bottles, etc but other than that I am riding aero).  I got a 58cm frame based on the manufacture's size chart and the frame size of the mountain bike and street bikes I have owned.  I found out that a 56cm frame is what a new bike fit would have put me in so I am a little long on my bike, but I had a major knee surgery from a HIgh School wrestling injury (the surgeon said it was the worst he had seem in over 300 surgeries) and I think the longer frame may make it easier to adjust my stretch when the knee starts to feel aggravated or weak.  So my bike fit may or may not be the best, but it is more fun to ride than the mountain bike and street bikes I have owned in the past, so I think that is an indication that it is a good bike for me.  The brick runs off the bike have been going well too.  I was concerned that I wouldn't be able to run after a hard ride but have now done enough brick runs off the TT bike to know that the I can ride hard and still run well off the bike.  That is another indication to me that the TT bike is good for me.  I did a little over 47 miles on the TT bike on Saturday (my longest so far) and I am still loving it. I have a 50-55 mile ride planned in two weeks and a 60+ mile ride planned in two weeks after that then I will start my taper for my triathlon debut (which will be a 70.3 in my hometown).  

music to a coach's ears