SBR Utopia Season II - OPEN (Page 79)

Not really related to the "big day" stuff, but I've always been curious why it is that people do their long run on Sunday after their long bike on Saturday.  I've always set my schedule up to do my long run on Saturday (when my legs aren't fatigued from a long ride) and my long bike on Sunday. 

I feel like the injury potential is decreased setting up a schedule this way.  I imagine people do it the other way to train their legs to run well while fatigued....but I guess I'm not sure, as many people also advocate not doing bricks with long runs because there's no benefit to running on overly fatigued legs on a normal (non-race) day.  Maybe I'm missing something -- anyone care to enlighten me if there's a benefit to doing the long ride Saturday and long rund Sunday?

When I was just a runner/x-c skier I never went longer than 18 miles in any of my long training runs while prepping for the 10 stand alone marathons I've done.  They were 18 quality miles though

In the horse study you're thinking of, performance flattened out when they added on to the easy days, but it kept on increasing when the hard days became harder and easy stayed easy. The harder work needed to be spaced out farther to allow for the developments to take place. Doing hard work every day wasn't leaving enough time for the adaptions to occur. They only recovered just enough to do it again. What Arend is doing is hard work in two things, but it won't necessarily be *that* hard depending on just how much he pushes himself for these.

Arend, you said I-pace for the run, but how hard are the bike intervals? This looks very do-able (yet still challenging) if the bike intervals are are in say sweet spot to threshold territory.

For the regular workouts, people would do them in that order because they believed there was a lot to learning how to run on tired legs. But more people are realizing what you did and are switching the order. Or separating them with the longer run moved to mid-week, as it's the shorter and therefore easier one to fit in there.

A number still stay with that order as that's what their schedule will allow, for whatever reason, and they do the best they can with it.

Jim - how would you define the quality miles?  Is it based on pace, or something else?

Right - I think we're basically saying the same thing.  At this point all the running is going to be relatively easy, but I'm leaning towards adding the harder bike/swim workouts on those run days not marked as "recovery days".  The only problem with trying to do that is there are 3/7 days marked as recovery.  So, I'm scratching my head as how to fit everything in.

Honestly, I did/do much of my run training on PE and wasn't targeting a specific min/mi pace.  I was trying to say that they weren't long, slow, plodding 18 milers just to say I got "long runs" in, if that makes sense.  Almost 10 years ago so I don't have logs to refer to....

This off season, or maybe before Miami, I am planning on getting a new bike.  The stack and reach on the current bike is SO MUCH smaller than what the fitter came up with, I am surprised I've been able to ride it.

I have several questions if anyone has any input on them.

1.  I had my fitter put together a list of frames that would work.  Initially was looking at BMC/Cervelo, but finding the color I want, and the frame I want (would need an old geometry P3, for example), is a hassle.  So now looking at the Kestrel 4000.

Anyone ride one of these?  Thoughts?   Seems to get good reviews.

2. the Ultegra Di2 option is a $1400 premium over mechanical ultegra, which is basically $2500.  A bit over my budget, but may make the leap if it's just the Most Amazing Thing Ever. 

3.  I know 105 is considered good, but thinking I want to go to at least ultegra.  Then again, 105 is $2000, ultegra is $2500.  Currently riding DA front and rear derailleurs, so feels like a bit of a step down.  

4.  Currently ride a planet x, mix of SRAM rival and Shimano DA derailleurs as above.  Frame can be bought for $600.  I've always bought frames and swap the components (well, OK, I did once.  I don't buy that many bikes).  I figure used the frame alone is only worth $3-400?  Good condition but it's gotten a lot of use.   Thoughts on whether to buy a frame and swap it out or ust buy a new bike and sell the complete planet x?     Any idea on pricing a PX stealth with that component mix?

Chris,

Unless you're getting a screaming deal on the frame you want, I'd probably opt for the complete bike.  It will be so much easier to sell your PX complete than frame only.  Especially since the option to buy the PX frame only as brand new is readily available.

As far as componentry, I ride 6600 ultegra on my P2, and Rival on my CAAD10.  Both have crappy brakes (tekro and apex).  Shifting is fine for me on both, but if I desired to change one thing it would be the brakes and maybe the brifters on my road bike.  I rode an Evo with SRAM Red and the feel of the shifting and brakes were unbelievable, especially when trying to hammer through a technical route.  My GF's slice has Red on it as well and the feel of the shifting using the bar ends didn't leave me feeling as impressed.  Definitely smoother, but not something I really desired.

So to sum it up, if I had to do it all over, I'd go 105 or rival for a tri bike.  Road bike, I'd spend the extra money and upgrade to the highest level my budget would allow.

Haven't tried electronic shifting yet.

Too bad they don't make 105 Di2  :^

I won't touch Rival again, I bought it on the Planet X and it never worked right for me, hence the frankenstein SRAM/Shimano build.  Just my experience

That's exactly right and your description is how I would describe it - challenging but do-able.  The bike intervals were 2 x 10' just below threshold (like 98%) and then another 10' @ 83%

I'm with Jason, if anything I would get Ultegra brakes and shifters etc at 105 would be ok with me.  On both of my bikes and Tab's the cheap brakes on them seem to have given the most grief.  I put Ultegra brakes on my P3 earlier this year and it's so much better to not be fighting with them when they get a tiny bit gummed up or the spring starts to go on it.

On the electronic shifting, you likely won't need to shift at all in Miami outside of the start and the turn around.  

oh, lord, anyone else not getting email updates from the group or just me? I thought Armageddon had occurred because the group was so silent, but then I logged on and you all ar 5 pages down the road.....

I have bikes with all sorts of components: 105, Ultegra, DA, and SRAM red. In the scenario you outline I would go with 105: it is every bit as good as Ultegra (you won't notice any difference in shifting, etc). For me the deciding factor to upgrade components in these categories is a) weight savings and b) bling. Both of which are dumb reasons, particularly on a tri bike. A) you are already riding a quarq, if I am not mistaken, right? If so, you are not going to give that up, right? Well, that is the bulk of your "weight savings" right there between most groupos (if you are rifding a quarq you also want to make sure the bike you get can accept a compatible BB, adapter, etc). As for "bling," well, you are riding a disk cover, so obviously you are not interested in that. Otherwise you would keep the bike you have and buy a sub nine disk instead....

My road bike has SRAM red, which I love: it is noisy, feels kinda harsh, but boy is it snappy - I love the double tap shifting. OTOH,it was a disaster on my wife's bike ,which seems to kinda be the story with red in general: It is awesome or it is not.To get everything working with her setup (after a warranty swap on her frame that did not solve her issues) we ultimately changed out both derailluers to DA as well as her chainrings. Se has now has a frankencrank: SRAM cranks with DA rings that were dremeled out to for the quarq....

And the brakes are only for coming into T2, so no worries there, either.  

Pure awesome right there

Kudos and a big shout- out to Kathy G. She actually posted this a couple of years ago to a mentor group she was running and I was fortunate enough to be a part of. I tried it, and am a convert: this works miracles with the worst of shoes. You may not want to let your SO catch you doing it though...

to me this goes back to the difference between goals and outcomes. Racing to a certain time or placing is an outcome, and for various reasons subject to variables that are outside of your control. When aiming to attain certain it comes, we are usually worried about not reaching them, but what if we actually did not aim high enough? Both should be considered a failure. When using real, actionable l goals to guide training you instead at least have a better chance at performing to you maximum potential, whether that is an 8:00 pace or a 6:45.... While there are many actionable goals, and it actually helps to have several, examples might be that I am going to follow Barry Ps plan and run six days per week" or "I am going to run easy enough on my easy days so I can run hard enough on my hard days, even if that means I will walk sometimes." IME structuring training around actionable goals instead of outcomes is the only way to maximize performance. The problem is that it is actually more difficult. If you do not hit these kinds of goals, you have no one and nothing to blame but yourself.

Thanks for that Rusty.  That makes a lot of sense. It have actually wondered about the not aiming high enough component, though that doesn't often seem to be my problem ;P I am going to spend some time thinking about that and seeing how I can reframe things.

I didn't have to Dremel, but did use DA TT rings on the SRAM crank (with Quarq)

I actually don't have a problem either way.  It usually comes down to the weather.  If it's raining Saturday, I'll run and hope it doesn't rain on Sunday when I do the bike.  If it's sunny, I bike while I can.

Seattle...

Kudos Ben for the most subtle BDB of the week! For the mere mortals in the world that ride a 110mm BCD compact, you need a dremel. At least for the (now discontinued) Cinqo Saturn 975. I am sitting here looking at my 4th (3rd warranty replacement) quarq, and you DO have me wondering. The housing is completely different on the Riken. I wonder if 110mm BCD DA rings will fit the new quarqs with no modification?