re JeepFleeb's not so much volume comment (Page 2)

I stand corrected

Let me take a brief Hi-Jack to this and say something that I think gets missed quite often in this.

Consistency, consistency, consistency. I am the worst at this. We can argue all day about what type of training method or how many hours or what intensity to do x workout at but for the majority of age group athletes it comes down to just as Jorge would say "SUAT" Shut up and train.

I for one get sucked into this way to often. Worrying so much about doing a 100 mi ride or getting in that tempo run and in return I end up missing two days of workouts because I didn't have time to get in the full ride so I scrap it. I would be better off doing something rather than being so focused on such a specific workout and doing nothing.

Rant over

BTW, I don’t entirely disagree with what your coach advised, I just think is silly to believe all athletes will respond the same way to training and make generalized statements because they can produce misinformation. As I mentioned above, there are certain general aspects that we can follow for our training but there are many specifics we need to consider for each individual to maximize gains. i.e. I would be willing to bet that in general, those KQ are the ones logging the biggest loads but following smart training (specific); IOW consistent 5+ hrs rides or 100 Mi rides at/near race pace and logging consistent 2-3 hrs runs at race pace. OTOH for a beginner training for his/her 1^st race, avg fitness level and minimum endurance experience doing the same approach will be a recipe for disaster. In that case less volume more frequency might be the way to go. Yet an endurance veteran with a huge aerobic engine might benefit from less volume more intensity. In the end it is ALL about the training load that suits your needs…

My $.02 ........

It also depends on what sort of athlete the person is and how long they've been doing it.  Someone with a huge base of endurance sports work over the years can get away with shorter sessions and still have a reasonable time of it while someone newer to the sport attempts to get that base fitness by cramming 20 hour weeks for 20 weeks before their race.

Everyone just has to remember the components of this "load" thing that amiine is talking about.  They are:

Frequency, volume, duration, intensity.

Frequency = how often you do the activity within a cycle (i.e. run 4x, ride 3x, swim 4x a week)

Volume = how much total you do of a certain activity within a cycle (i.e. run 40 miles a week, ride 150 miles a week, swim 15k a week)

Duration = how long you do an activity in a single session (i.e. 90 minute run, 4 hour ride, 1 hour swim)

Intensity = how hard a session is (i.e. tempo run, LSD bike, short RI low yard distance swims)

It is the combination of those 4 things that dictate the training adaptations that you gain.  You can load up on 2 or 3 of those things while downplaying the others and gain a similar sort of overall fitness adaptation.  Like someone who has high frequency, high duration would then end up with solid volume while maybe doing everything at low intensity (think all those wonderful MAF people).  Others do high frequency and high intensity sessions but with lower durations and more rest periods.

One way is no better or worse than others.  The key is to find what works best for you!

Ok - This is a very interesting debate indeed and I can see both sides of it. I think the critical thing here is it depends on the athlete, BOP'er with small base and poor mechanics/muscular strength and FOP'er with big base and sound mechanics/muscular strength. 

I don't personally believe BOPers and MOPers can train with too much intensity without breaking down. And hence the formula for building fitness i.e. Frequency x Volume x Intensity + recovery = Increased fitness. Training needs to be manipulated via Volume and frequency. Hence as already alluded to in prior posts it is unrealistic to think a BOP'er can get by on 2.30hrs max at +10min mile in training and expect them to do anything except walk the last half of the IM run.

For FOP'ers I agree with everything Aarron says, Get out there and flog yourself i.e. manipulate the intenisty piece of the equation especially on the bike. This winter I rode with a pack of roadies what an eye opener these guy's just ride hard the shorter the ride the harder they ride. I am at week 12 of my IM program and my longest ride so far was this Sunday where I rode 4hrs in the hills of Connecticut I did 75miles in the 4hours and racked up 320TSS and a Norm Power of 212 on an FTP of 250. So for those of you power folks in 4 hours I put more training stress on my body than I will for my IM ride of 112miles. (Target TSS for IM Moo 300)

At the end of the day I could have gone out and rode @ 16-17mph for 6.5hours racked up 112miles and generated the same training stress score all that is doing though is making me good at riding long and slow and heading toward divorce court 8-) I am much faster this year 2mph as a result of changing from the long slow stuff to faster shorter stuff. The one piece of the puzzle that still alludes me is the recovery bit end of some weeks I am shelled other weeks I am fine. But that is why you buy a good program or get a coach in my opinion.

As a  partial hijack to  this thread as I believe it is inter-related in my opinion a lot of people get injured not as a result of training too hard but just having bad mechanics....I see at my tri group a lot of BOper and MOPer people with terrible running actions as soon as they try to add volume/intensity they invariably get injured normally lower limbs, feet and calfs. My mechanics were slightly off at the end of last year and I started to get the first symptoms of PF in my heel never had before. I went to a Chi running course and paid for a one to one session with a running instructor touch wood since this session I Have been running 90+ miles per month for IM training and no probs. I am a pretty good runner with good form but for some reason I was slightly bending from the waist and it was impacting on the palcement of my foot. Dude noticed it straight away video taped it and had me work on it took me a week to fix it. I guess what I am saying is if you have any technique issues for swimming and running mainly the mileage and grind of IM training will pick those up pretty quickly and breakdown is likely to occur.

Anyway just my thoughts I am not a coach so comments reflect my gut feel on these subjects. The whole intensity dear I say it "New Wave" vs the "Go Long" Friel  movement is an interesting contrast in our young sport which is gonna generate a lot of debate over the next few years. All I know is I am getting faster in all three disciplines by working hard! 

Nice correlation that...

I am saying they either you marry a very understanding person who is gonna let you train 20+ hours per week or you get faster before commiting to an IM. I have huge respect for people that train that kinda volume and achive IM. I Myself prefer the second solution my biggest week will be 17hours which is gonna be hard to fit in with work/family etc.

I disagree somewhat. 

Most "BOPers" are going to be walking in the marathon and it will have nothing to do with their run training.  It will be because they can't finish the swim & bike legs fast enough.  That is, they will have used up too much energy getting to the marathon start to have a chance at "'running" it.  No amount of run training (certainly no amount of 3+ hour runs) is going to change that for them.  The "BOPers" should probably be riding (and maybe swimming) more and harder (not necessarily longer).  They probably should not be not running longer or harder (but perhaps more frequently).

Hey Johhny thought you might disagree with me somewhat 8-)

We are in agreement with the frequency definitely what was behind my assertion on the increasing volume was let's say Joe Bloggs BOP'er has 2.30hrs as their longest run in training that is what I have in my program on a flat road Joe is going to run 10mph for the 2.30 13miles right. James G on the flat will run 8.30's that is approx 18miles.

I can't wrap my head around how Joe is going to even get to the finish line after biking 112 miles without being seriously beaten up.....You are a heck of a lot more experienced and smarter than me so maybe I am missing something...

JG

For me I see it as a durability or resilancy issue. How much does xx running pound on your body.

Currently a 2 hour run is comfortable for me but a 3.5 hour run is challenging as my body gets tired and sore. Aerobically I feel fine it is a durabilty/resilancy issue. How can I expect to do a 90-120 minute run as my longest runs and then go run 5.5 hours at an IM? I don't figure how that works for folks.

I don't think "maybe" is necessary there. In a performance article, Mike Ricci brings up some good points on swmming fitness in his reponse to the "Improving an IM" question. Including this: "It’s been my experience that athletes with a deep swim fitness usually run very well late in the IM race."

Until recently I was one that thought all the swimming wasn't worth the incremental gains in time. Now I understand why my plan is so heavy on the swim ( well,  that and he was a swimmer)

Joe is going to have a tough time of it.  But odds are that trying to get Joe to do some 18 or 20 mile runs is not the solution.  As even with that extra training, Joe will probably not run the marathon.

The best thing Joe can do is to get to the marathon as fresh as possible.  To do that, he needs to work on his swim & bike more--not worry about beating his legs on longer runs.  He will need enough run durability to manage the marathon the best he can.  But 2 or 2:30 long runs (along with good frequency) are plenty to build that necessary durability.

I agreee completely.  Too many people look at the swim in terms of "I need to work xx% more just to cut a couple minutes off my swim split, so screw it".  They miss the concept that they're not training for a swim split, but for a triathlon. 

amiine - 2008-05-21 12:32 PM

jamesG - 2008-05-21 11:11 AM

Anyway just my thoughts I am not a coach so comments reflect my gut feel on these subjects. The whole intensity dear I say it "New Wave" vs the "Go Long" Friel  movement is an interesting contrast in our young sport which is gonna generate a lot of debate over the next few years. All I know is I am getting faster in all three disciplines by working hard! 

there are a few of us who are in the middle and advocate the correct training load depending on the individual athlete needs

Yeah - I think you just summarised in two sentences  what I tried to say above in a novel.