Memorial Hermann Ironman Texas 2012 : Official Thread (Page 9)

Not that I know anything at all--and maybe KJ will chime in about it--but they have always been really good at assessing things like this and doing the best they can to adjust things when it is necessary for the athlete.  I wouldn't stress about it...yet...

Anyone else starting a 30 week program this week?

Kinda, sorta, not really. I'm doing my own thing and using Going Long and the Triathlete Bible as guides.

So what plan are you using?  Don't think I ran across a 30 week plan in my research.

I used a BT Gold plan for my HIM.  It worked out fine. I'm still new to the sport so a majority of my training will be aerobic endurance workouts for biking and running.  No need for speed work at my level.   I'm starting my running off at square run with a 3 mile long run.  I had an ITB issue that sidelined me before Augusta and I just want to play it safe and build that mileage slowly.

I also like the idea of an on 2-off 1 schedule and most written plans are on 3-off 1.  I have plenty of time to assess my progress and if I feel I am falling short I can start a pre-written structured program in January if guiding myself isn't working out.

FINALLY!

Keep snagging up the stragglers who haven't checked into the group yet and get this ship sailing towards next May.  Enjoy the ride everyone.

I really haven't dropped any bike fitness since my half.  So 3 hour rides are simple for me.  Been riding that for a long ride for many months.  I feel very comfortable with that base.  I am learning to use my new power meter to train and race the bike even smarter.

My weakness is swimming.  I just started swim lessons to straighten out my stroke.  The coach the first day assessed me like this, "Your kick is bad, the catch is poor, pull is weak, recovery too slow, but your breathing is excellent."  My poor form puts me swimming 2500 yds. in an hour.  Fixing the stroke will definitely speed that up a good bit and take less energy to do.  So even with a poor stroke, I at least have a good base.  Not going to try much endurance swimming until January I think.  More important to work on swimming cleaner.

The run I'm determined to take nice and easy.  According to my estimates I will not make it to 18 mile long runs until April.

Now a question for the experienced, what do you consider the longest SBR you should do in training?  I figure a 112 mile bike once or twice will be fine, 4500-5000 yd. swim a few times, but just one run of 20 miles.  I feel anything else is too risky.  What are your opinions?

Not starting a plan but I'm busting my butt trying to get faster on the bike and run and avoiding the pool

I'll miss a bit of time between Christmas and the New Year as we move back to the U.S. and I wait for my stuff to get back, I'll start a real plan then or shortly after I eat all the foods I've been missing.

Hmm, I am with you on the bike and swim but my longest run will prob be 16-17 miles. I am a pretty slow runner and doing a run/walk rotation of 5/1 min a 3hr run would prob be in the 16-17 range so that is the plan. As this is my first IM I am planning on using the BT beginner 20 wk plan. Currently I am very loosely doing the first 4ish weeks of it and just getting in what I can. I am definitely not getting in close to everything planned in the week yet. I am just slowly increasing until I should be doing the whole weeks worth of stuff a few weeks before I actually start the 20 wk plan. 

Here's to an exhausting exciting next 30 weeks!

I'm the opposite of you guys, I just ran a marathon on Oct 16 and I'm doing another one on Jan 15.  I rode a 65 mile bike ride the weekend after the marathon to remind my legs what the bike feels like.  I've been hitting the pool 2X per week to try and stay a little sharp, but my focus has been on the marathon (just PR'd with a 3:43 =)). 

The swim is my nemesis mainly due to lack of experience.  I can do a 4000m workout, but not without stopping for a drink of water and certainly not anywhere near 1:40/100m.

Once I'm done with my marathon on Jan 15, I'm going to pick up on some kind of beginner IM training plan since this is my first one.  I'm thinking 5-6 centuries on the bike and at least 2-3 20 mile runs (I've run enough marathons that a 20 miler isn't that tough if I run it slow enough and on a soft surface).  Anyone think that's too much?  What type of long swims should I add in there?

Truthfully I have no clue what my plan will be. I am doing a marathon in Deleware on Dec. 10 and then hopefully have something in place by the first of the year. Riding long will suck here in Michigan until April or so, so it will be a lot of long trainer rides, hoping they get the computrainer video out soon.

Long runs will probably be often for me. I rode 120 miles to Indiana to run a  marathon really easy 3 weeks out from CDA this year and I really liked it and felt no ill effects. I will have to come up with something fun for next year.

Good to see this thread getting active so far out.

There's no need to run that far in training.  The recovery element associated with it is to great.  I'll let my coaches explain a bit more:

http://www.endurancenation.us/blog/training/ironman-athletes-stop-running-longer-than-2-5-hours/

The pace doesn't really matter.  Think of it this way - the majority of people run the IM marathon nothing like they run in training or any other race.  I think you'd agree that it's a completely different animal. Folks finishing an IM marathon in over 4.5 hours are doing a lot of walking.  If you can run solidly for 2.5 hours, recover and get in all your quality workouts - you can run/walk for 5 or 6 on race day.  You don't need practice walking.  I'd also submit that a 2.5 hour run (however far distance wise) done at intensity (Zone 3) has a far greater effect than a "slow, zone 2 run, going up to 16-18 miles."

While fixating on distance, you're giving less credence to recovery.  If it takes one of your clients 3.5+ hours to do your prescribed 18 mile training run, what toll did that just take on their body?  What was the expense to future workouts the next day or day after because they needed long recovery or didn't recover properly (the downstream workout effect)?  It's taking a tremendous toll.  You'd be kidding yourself if you thought otherwise as it's basic human physiology.  Asking them to do that several weeks in a row is risky from an injury or burnout standpoint.

I know this is coming off as critical and I don't mean to sound jerky but there are debatable issues here.

Like most topics regarding Ironman, I firmly believe "it depends."

Lots of threads in the Iron-Distance forum on this subject. For me personally I had a much better IM run experience getting in a number of longer runs (2.5-3hrs) than when I only did one 2.5-hr run. I am a BOP runner as it is, so capping my runs at 2 or even 2.5-hrs only yields me 13 or so miles. I know IM run training is a different animal than marathon training, but that is what worked for me.

No one said you only had to run 2.5 hours once in training.  It's don't run more than 2.5 hours for your long run.  You can do that several weeks in a row.

I think the point is that one size does not fit all. Could you agree to that?

I'd certainly agree with that and 3 hours isn't WAY more than 2.5 hours.  Nevertheless, I think designing a plan that caters to distance has the *potential* to be negligent depending on the abilities of the athlete.

Let's say the athlete runs 12 or 13 minute miles and you want them to run 18 miles... that's nearly 4 hours of running.  I don't know about you but I wouldn't want to long run for 4 hours every week.  That would be the equivalent of running a marathon (or more) every week for me.  My body would give up after a couple of weeks of that.  Recovery would quickly become an issue and risk of injury would skyrocket. I'm a firm believer that time is what kills you, not the mileage.  Your body doesn't really care that you ran xx # of miles.  Your body cares that you ran for xx amount of time.  All that said, why do we expect slower folks to spend that much time running?  If faster folks who are arguably in better shape and probably recover better don't run 3.5 or 4 or 4.5 hours in training, don't you think it's a bit over the top to ask that of people who aren't as fast or recover as well or might be older or might be heavier or whatever the case might be?  Let's leave pro triathletes out of this discussion for obvious reasons of genetics and endless time to rest and recover.

The problem is many triathlon coaches adopt their running philosophies from running coaches who coach distance runners.  The only thing a marathon and an Ironman marathon have in common is 26.2 miles and that's where the similarities end.  That "long run for xx miles" stuff is fine for marathon training.  That's because they're just running and not training for three different events.  The recovery from a 3.5 to 4 hour run would take away from my ability to ride my bike and/or swim the next day.  Either I skip the ride/swim or I ride/swim anyway (because we're stubborn type-A triathletes) and start putting myself into a recovery blackhole.  Then my future workouts are in jeopardy because my body is completely thrashed and I can't recover like I want or I'm missing key workouts so I can recover.  All because someone said I had to run 18 miles.  What about training during the summer?  Running in the heat takes a lot more out of you than when it's cooler and pacing slows down.  Using my 13 minute per mile person example - now that 18 mile run takes 4.5 hours to complete because it's 95 degrees out.