Over-reliance and over-emphasis on training toys ...... (Page 5)

Yes, I would.

Man...

I think I'm Alien from the Peloton...LOL...I don't use any special devices or toys...I only have a good bike for me...running/biking shoes...helmet....tri-suit....my watch...and...cyclocomputer...and...train every day...enjoying and having fun...and...I usually have a very succesful Season....after 6 years in this business....Yes!!!!

Good Luck with all your toys!!!! LOL

It's not phobic at all.  I wear a Garmin (sometimes).

My training methods are born from my experiences.  I tried the gadget route, and discovered that I became sucked into the minutiae of training, and it was doing more harm than good.  I was to the point where I actually didn't want to run.  At all.  At that point, I started re-evaluating what I was doing, and discovered that I was too tied to the daily training numbers, and not focused enough on why I ran in the first place: because I enjoy it.

So yeah, I intentionally pull away from gadgets.  I also work a job where people wanting to implement new toys without ever thinking through the implications of them has a profound effect on my daily operations (I do computer programming).

To me, technology for the sake of technology is almost always bad in the long run.  And that's really what this thread was about, way back at the start.

I also disagree with people who argue that one "needs" an HRM to train properly (or cadence sensor, or power meter, or whatever).  You don't need those things to train properly.  They help, sure, but they are not required.  I'm not saying that's been what's happening in this thread, but I have seen people make those statements on this site.

So, I've been down the gadget road, and it's just not for me.  I don't usually care that people use gadgets to train, so long as the person works on understanding the hows of training with a chosen method.  To me, that's vastly more important than whether you use technology or not.

And I'm also pretty sure that there are people out there who do entire IM-distance races without relying on HR or power.

I didn't read through all 5 pages of the discussion, but I totally agree about the emphasis some people but on toys without understanding the use of the data.

 I was at a 5k this past December and one of the people I ran into (a BTer) ran the race. She is a beginner and I almost choked on my spit when she told me she had to slow down her 12:30min/mile pace because her HR was too high. I bit my tongue but I soooo wanted to tell her "It aint that far. Throw that thing in a drawer and just friggen run like your arse is on fire!!"

^^^I agree with that one.

people new to running will think like that, though, myself included.  when I first came on this here site, I blasted into someone (may have been Rick/Daremo ) for telling a person new to running to run a 5 k all out.  I suggested otherwise.

At least now I know I was wrong....you run a 5k like you are exiting a Higgins boat and are storming omaha beach--don't let your HR tell you to slow down and get you shot.

Of course you don’t have to use a HR or a PM to train or race successfully for triathlons, there are many athletes successfully doing so just by RPE. But these tools can make your training and racing better if use properly. In your case it is your preference to train without those tools because you have the experience to know how to train and race without one. You don’t believe there is any value at collecting data to make better decisions for your training.

Jorge, I (and from my reading of it Scout) am not advocating AGAINST using them to enhance training.  It is that there is this ever-present "obsession" for lack of a better word - with them.  And the seeming need to use them when they are not at all necessary.

And most of them are NOT coached.  They are doing the training and plans on their own.  There is a huge difference there.

Fred, Bryan, you, et al. are coming at it from a perspective of experienced athletes now, and all have had coaches or are coaches.  You have all had the experiences of using them in some capacity and understand the value they may have and how to (generally) use that information to revise your training and workouts accordingly.

But that is the crux of what sparked this thread originally.  Using them truly as tools to enhance the training, to allow your coach (or to see your athlete) to monitor changes over an extended period, and to provide additional feedback to go along with what your mind perceives and your body feels.  THAT is fine and is where they are tools.  The toys come into it when someone cannot live without it, don't have the slightest perception of how to apply the data they find, don't have a properly structured plan to take advantage of them, or simply got one because Joe/Jane triathlete next door has one.

In the running world, there is not much of an emphasis on toys.  Most collegiate level coaches don't even bother with them.  They know what works and what doesn't in their athletes.  In the cycling world, there is power and cadence ....... many don't bother with HR.  But the majority of people using a power meter in the cycling community are really just looking at their peak values and what they can sustain on rides.  They are not using a structured plan to increase their FTP values.  They are simply riding their usual training rides and recording the numbers.  And guess what?  They are going up as a result ......... of their usual training rides.

If an athlete comes to me and wants to use various tools/toys in their training I have no problem prescribing workouts based on them.  But I will also give them workouts where I want them without them at all ...... just a watch for running or a cyclometer for distance and cadence for rides.  If they can't handle that, I don't want them as an athlete ......... it is part of the vetting process of choosing a coach or an athlete.  You find one you agree with the philosophy of and that you trust in.

I don't really have any unique comments to add, other than I feel that this whole issue is a "To each his own" kind of thing.  For me, I'm an anal-retentive engineer who reviews scientific and clinical data for a living.  Having toys (specifically, a Garmin 305, a cheap bike computer, and a lap watch for the pool) fascinates me.  It's like my own N = 1 clinical trial, and it motivates me to improve.  I can easily see how it may discourage some people, in which case my advise would be to ditch the toys/tools immediately.  I'm at the point now where if I forget a tool/toy, or it's not charged, etc., I don't let it bother me and I do my workout either way.  But I'd prefer to have them.

The only other comment I have relates to when I was a newbie runner a few years ago.  I was coming straight from the couch.  But I have the type of personality to run fast and run hard.  When I was an out of shape newb, that meant I ran for a very very short period of time.  I wanted to run longer, but was very bad at pacing myself.  A cheap Polar HRM GREATLY helped me learn pacing, and was worth every penny.

Exactly.  It confuses me when someone says "I cannot train without my Garmin/HRM/iPod."  That last one especially....  But I digress.  You can train without them, people do it all the time.  And the idea that an HRM is the "best" way to train is silly, especially if you don't bother to understand what it is that you're doing in the first place.

I'm always telling people not to confuse "cannot" with "don't want to." As in, "Don't say you cannot run 26.2 miles when you really mean you don't want to train for the distance." Makes me a real popular guy among the non-athletic types.