My Top Five* Training Manuals (*and then some)

Aside from George Dallam's Championship Triathlon Training there are approximately NO (nil, none, nada) specifically-designated multisport books in my unofficial top-twenty ranking of "best training-related books". These reads are ranked primarily on technical merit, much like a figure skater might get judged. Looks don't count! Just give me content and depth and perhaps a little inspiration, though truth be told my "inspiration manuals" are categorized differently, as training-related manuals are about as inspiring as is cancer of the esophagus; there is little by way of emotion or artistry in these mostly scientific manuals. Still, that's not why you should own (and have read and reread) them. You should own and have read (and reread) them because they are self-help books and badness knows, if you're like me, you could use the all the help you can get.

Okay, enough blabber. In order, my top five* training manuals are...

1) The Science of Winning by Dr. Jan Olbrecht. That's right, a swim book. This book is next to impossible to find in this day and age, but well worth the trouble, methinks. Olbrecht, of course, was the coach to Luc Van Lierde amongst many other champions. This book pretty much covers it all, though it is explicitly understood that swimmers can bear a larger brunt when it comes to training intensity, due to the nature of the sport (i.e., less impact, better cooling, more scantily-clad bodies in the vicinity, etc). Still, there's lots to learn and apply within this little gem.

2) Swimming Fastest by Ernest Maglischo. That's right, another swim book. Thanks to Alan Couzens for advising me to pick this one up (which, by the way, isn't such an easy task, what with its heftiness! There are 792 pages contained within and a picture of yours truly on the very last page; if that isn't reason enough to pick up a copy, I don't know what is!). (Oh, and since I've mentioned him, Alan's blog is, without question, a top-five training-related blog and well worth your surfing time. On this note I might post a "Top-Five Blogs", as according to me, though you already know three of the top five: this one; Alan's; and of course, Gordo's...that is when he's not waffling on about financial crap or posting yet another photo of his shirtless, flexed upper body!) Anyway, Swimming Fastest is about the thickest book you'll ever find on training, right up there with the next top-five book on this list. (I had to pore through its entirety when I first received it to make sure Maglischo didn't accidentally include a chapter or two on cycling or running. He did not.) But don't let this frighten you. Both books are well worth a look (or a couple thousand looks, as that's about what it'll take to get through 'em).

3) The Lore of Running by Dr. Tim Noakes. Not much to say here. If you don't own this, you're not really serious about your training. But if you don't care to read it you could always use it for weight-lifting.

4) Distance Running by Robert Lyden. If you're a runner here's your cookbook to success. If you're a triathlete, here's your cookbook to better running. This unknown book is still easy to find and is one of my "go-to" manuals when I need to sound or write something smart.

5) *Please note that I have a five-way tie for the fifth book in my top-"five" list; standard Chuck affair...

a) A Scientific Approach to the Marathon by Renato Canova & Enrico Arcelli. This little pamphlet of a book is even more difficult to get your hands on than is the first book on this list, but is also worth the trouble, particularly for the marathoners amongst us. Triathletes probably won't find too much use in it but coaches can...and should.

b) Running the Lydiard Way or Run to the Top by Arthur Lydiard & Garth Gilmour. Lydiard, of course, needs no introduction. If it weren't for him I'm not sure I'd have been an athlete. I have multiple books of his, all personally signed on my behalf, and they actually sit inside a safe! Along with my international condom collection (no comment), they are my only possessions that warrant such, um, protection.

c) Run Faster by Brad Hudson & Matt Fitzgerald. The most "readable" of reads and perhaps the best book for the self-coached runner. There are plenty of applicable lessons for the triathlete here within.

d) Run With The Best by Irv Ray & Tony Benson. This is the book I'd basically use if I were attempting to beat my old high school track PRs. But even though I'm not attempting to beat my old high school run PRs, I still use it. Benson and Ray are finally updating it and the new edition should be out soon.

e) Running Your Best by Ron Daws. Another gem and one not a book to be loaned out. You won't find this one anytime soon, if ever, as Daws passed away long ago and quit writing around the same time.

PS: Not that this has anything to do with anything, but today is National Coffee Day. Wow. Too bad I quit drinking the crap or else I'd celebrate. What are us non-drug users supposed to celebrate I wonder?

Bad Bacteria

PS: Happy 95th Jack!

The Week(+) in Photo Form

1) Fat kid inhaling a bag of chips near me
2) Yours truly: ham'r time
3) The "grounds" for Park City: mining
4) Mining iron near the middle of nowhere
5) Park City's own Ironman
6) Mountaineering on Hwy 150
7) Mountain biking the Mid-Mtn Trail
8) Cows somewhere near Francis, Utah
9) Angie hiking one of the many ski runs
10) Traffic-less Amore
11) Alpine Reflections
12) Fall has fallen
13) Home Accupuncture = not Hocus Pocus
13.1) Egrit: an Unusual Roadkill

Go Jenna, Go!

Say what you will, but you have to hand it to Jenna Shoemaker. Had eBay been around when I was competing I'm sure I'd have tried a similar approach. Jenna, you see, posted an auction on eBay where the winner gets to take her out to dinner, for the low sum of $250. Or at least that's what the opening bid was "valued" at. As a professional triathlete, Jenna is struggling to survive like any other young pro.

This drug called triathlon is a challenge in so many ways, but particularly for those who aim to make a living doing it. I know very few (perhaps 10-15 all told) who have been able to, and not a day goes by that I fail to realize I was so very fortunate I had been one of them.

Just about twenty years ago I was a reasonably-paid professional cyclist competing throughout Europe. There I witnessed the sad realities of the sport and soon decided to choose a different path. Drugs and deceit weren't for me (or at least not performance-enhancing drugs, anyway). While I didn't know where exactly my new path might have led me, I knew it was the only one I cared to be on. Often times we don't know where we're headed but if the trip is deemed worthwhile, then there is little to worry about. Or at least this is how I've always seen things.

Well, what a trip it would end up being. In just two short years I went from being in a similar position to that of Jenna (worse, I'm willing to bet, since after my cycling funding ceased I was living in my car, sleeping in cemeteries, eating out of bulk bins and down to, I kid not, $2.13) to being the highest paid triathlete in the sport...or at least the highest paid athlete making his living from the sport. I'm sure many other competitors were making (and earning) more, not to mention the race organizers (which, of course, I have now mentioned). Ours, it seems, is a country club sport with little room for the struggling athlete or the poor people.

But if there's one thing I learned about sports over the years it's that the "poor" almost always end up being the fastest athletes, not just because they're typically the younger competitors but because they can more closely identify with what it takes. Jenna will succeed, I'm sure, and she is proving she is willing to do what it takes, at least in a survival sense. As I look into representing athletes as a potential source of fun and income, she, no doubt, will be the first one I approach. And not just because she's attractive. Though that she is.

By the way, her auction has received two bids thus far and it ends tonight.

The Tri-Dash: A True Sprint Triathlon

Triathlon, by its very design, is an endurance sport. In general, the capacity to go fast is inferior to the ability to last. But it needn't be this way.

And so it is I hereby propose a true sprint triathlon, the Tri-Dash. And this is what I have in mind…

First, the rules. Then the events.

The rules are essentially like any other swim-bike-run triathlon but for one primary difference: there are no transition areas or transitions. That is to say each of three events is a separate entity, occurring as its own competition. Each event is separated by a number of hours, though all three of these events are to take place in the course of a single day. The results of each event are judged not on a points system (as per decathlon, heptathlon, etc) but strictly by time standards. Athletes qualify for the final through a round of qualifying heats. There would be a women's race and a men's race, of course.

The events…

The Swim: The swim consists of a single 100-meter freestyle sprint, from the blocks. It takes place in an Olympic-regulation-size 50-meter pool and each athlete competes in his or her own lane and through qualifying heats.

The Ride: The ride consists of a 1-kilometer time-trial on an Olympic-regulation 333-meter velodrome. Tri(athletes) are to start individually from a standing start and compete on a fixed gear bike with the gearing ratios of their choice, though equipment is strictly regulated as per UCI (cycling's international governing body) standards. Aero-bars are allowed.

The Run: The run consists of a single 400-meter dash, from the starting blocks. It takes place on a 400-meter track and essentially follows the rules as that of the International Olympic Committee's track and field rules: each athlete competes in his or her own lane against seven other runners. Runners also qualify through a series of heats though qualifying standards are not based solely on run times but rather combined swim, bike and run qualifying times, so that the final is a true final among the eight fastest sprint triathletes. Runners in the finals all start at one time, despite the "standings" (i.e., time differences) going into the final. That it to say there is no "handicap" start in the final run event as per modern pentathlon.

How I see things…
Fast and fun! Any male capable of breaking 3-minutes would likely be deemed "world-class" and perhaps can consider himself one of the truly fastest triathletes in the world. Female times would likely hover within seconds of the male individual event times.

My best attempt in the Tri-Dash is as follows (as noted, I only possess any semblance of speed in the pool)...

• 100-meter freestyle swim (Santa Barbara, CA 1999): 57.2
• 1-kilometer time-trial (Colorado Springs, CO 1990!): 1:10.7
• 400-meter dash (Boulder, CO 1993): 58.5

Total time: 3:06.4 (though these times occurred over a nine-year period rather than in a single day, thus rendering me disqualified).

Baseline Fitness

September is the Sunday of summer. What a bummer. Up here on the northern hemisphere of our mad world autumn is but a few days away. Behind it winter tailgates, rapidly approaching. I've decided that someday, when I'm rich beyond belief, I'm going to skip winter altogether and just keep hemisphere hopping…up and down, up and down. Be like the sun. Follow the sun. I've done this in the past, despite being poor beyond belief, when race directors actually offered me a nominal amount of funding to track the sun and join the fun. Chile. Argentina. Australia. New Zealand. Those, no doubt, were the good ol' days. Buenos dias, mate. Fair dinkum!

But these too are the good ol' days. Fall and winter are not only opportune times to justify that inherent laziness lurking within you, but also a great time to ingest colossal quantities of food and alcohol. I mean, why not? After all, you'll be dead before you know it (alas, you probably won't even know it then)...nothing more than food (and alcohol) for worms. They'd certainly appreciate any extra meat on your bones.

Well, there is at least one compelling reason as to why not: Next Year's Performance. Next year's performance depends wholly on what you do this fall, this winter, this year, last year and in the years before it. Sucks, don't it?

Now this doesn't mean you should skip out on having some fun or partaking in some good eats (or drinks), but simply that you need to preserve a baseline level of fitness if you take next year's goals seriously and/or expect them to be met. This only sucks if you loathe winter or wintertime training. And if this is the case, you should lose yourself and join me in sunny Solvang this winter! Four seasons of summer!

What is a baseline level of fitness, exactly?

A baseline level is that which allows you to jump into "base-building" (however you care to define that) when the time comes, without incurring injury or illness (typically about the time you look into the mirror and hate what you see, or about the time the scale breaks.) It's the earthen underneath the foundation, if you will. Without it or any semblance of fitness, you'll not only delay next year's early-season development but most likely only come to attain a level of fitness you've previously reached, if that. It's best to build upon it and not just repeat the same results time after time, year after year (unless, of course, you're Chrissie Wellington or Craig Alexander or Simon Whitfield; these types are exempt from such a round and round clause).

How would one define a baseline level of fitness, exactly?

Exactly, I don't know. (There are no "exacts" in this sport, except at the finish line.) Only you do. But here's what I suggest. (First, the small print: the following is based on years of experience and can only be applied to those who give a sh!t.) Okay, back to my suggestion: if you trained fifteen hours a week during the height of your season this season, aim to train half of this. This will give you a "baseline level" of fitness. So, let's see, 15 divided by 2 equals, um. Uh. Hmmm.

Hold on; let me go get my pocket calculator.

(Insert Jeopardy theme here…)

Okay, I'm back. The answer is seven and a half hours. So, if you trained fifteen weekly hours this summer, aim to do seven and a half throughout fall and winter. This same equation can be applied regardless of the amount of training you did (see the chart below). So, for example, if you trained twenty weekly hours this summer, aim to maintain half that throughout fall and winter (whatever half of twenty is; math has never been my forte...along with art, science, womanizing, patronizing, realizing or hypothesizing). And if you trained thirty hours a week shoot for half of that weekly figure until next spring arrives. Again, sorry, I'm not sure what half of this figure is ("..is fig.."?). The sun just snuck behind a cloud and my calculator runs on solar, sorry. That's the last time I buy one from a cereal box.

This Be Not Half-Assed equation (as I hereby now call it) will allow you to come back to a fitness level to your liking (a "baseline" level) that much sooner, when spring rolls around. The way the years fly by these days (that is if years could fly by in days), it'll be here before you know it, so stay motivated while the time is right. And it's always right.

The "Be Not Half-Assed" equation for wintertime fitness maintenance…

35 weekly training hours in summer = 17.5 weekly training hours throughout the winter.

30 weekly training hours in summer = 15 weekly training hours throughout the winter.

25 weekly training hours in summer = 12.5 weekly training hours throughout the winter.

20 weekly training hours in summer = 10 weekly training hours throughout the winter.

15 weekly training hours in summer = 7.5 weekly training hours throughout the winter.

10 weekly training hours in summer = 5 weekly training hours throughout the winter.

05 weekly training hours in summer = 2.5 weekly training hours throughout the winter.

1 weekly training hour in summer = Quit the sport, you half-ass, you.

Ill-advised, Ill-adjusted, Ill-equipped

I coach a few athletes competing at the Hawaii Ironman next month and this is a time of year when their training can be considered "ridiculous". I know this to be true since I hear this often-misspelled word over and over again (though truth be told, it's hard to know whether it's been misspelled when it's only been heard). It comes from the athletes themselves, of course.

Me: "…so you'll need to push during those last four hours, or else the workout just won't count."

The athlete: "That's RE-diculous, dude. Haven't you any regard for the training we did yesterday? Last week? For the last month? This year?"

Me: "What, that training?! That wasn't training! That was simple to prepare you for this! Jeeez."

The athlete: "Okay, I guess."

Me: "No guessing needed. Look, if you want to succeed---and isn't that why you're paying me?---then you'll need to do your best. And now is the time for it, just as it's been all year."

The athlete: "You suck."

Me: "That's irrelevant. The key thing is that we don't want you to suck. Capisce?"

The athlete: "Capish."

But what is ridiculous training? Is it even required?

Ridiculous is, as Forrest Gump might say, what ridiculous does. And let's face it: ridiculous is an Ironman. And so when aiming for something ridiculous it only makes sense to do ridiculous things. Two wrongs can make a right.

For example, I once decided on a whim to scale a large mountain in the Andes that would not only challenge me but also, quite possibly, kill me. It was, no doubt, ridiculous, especially considering my then mountaineering "skills"…at the time I was known to put the "ills" and even the "kill" in skills. With that in mind, I decided I'd prepare by donning a heavy backpack and running up at fifteen to sixteen-thousand feet elevation as often as I could. During my very first outing in such rare-air, I fainted and landed face-first in a pile of donkey dung. It smelled like ass. I'd wake up two hours later covered in a light dusting of something white and cold (and no, I'm not talking about Joan Rivers). I knew what I had done might be considered ridiculous by some people's standards (and I also knew I could've died had I slept much longer, though it'd still beat being anywhere near Madam Rivers, but never mind that), but then ridiculous too was what I was preparing for, an ascent of a mountain known to kill those ill-equipped (and even some of those fully-equipped). Only ill-advised or ill-adjusted individuals go into something ill-equipped. (Life notwithstanding, of course.)

Like a 22,000-foot mountain, an Ironman is not something to be taken lightly. Especially one in such a foreboding place like the big island of Hawaii. While finishing an Ironman might not necessarily be considered life-threatening, it is something we must respect when placing it in our crosshairs, no more so than when we want to kick some serious ass during the event, as do the athletes I'm guiding. You don't go kicking a mountain's ass (they don't have asses, last I checked) but you can kick the asses' of those you go against come race day. But the only way for this to happen is to periodically step beyond the realm of comfort and routine and achieve the re-diculous, no matter how you care to spell it. Only then can Ironman day be spelled out the way you want it to.

How to Become a Champion Endurance Athlete

I still believe that in our sport of sports there is a place for the champion athlete. While triathlon may be defined as a participant sport for the recreational hobbyist, and while it rewards those who simply take part (which of course isn't so simple), there remains room for those who aim for the top, a platform in which to achieve greatness, if only for a brief moment in time.

Tangent! ...

Ours is a society made up of decreasing standards for the individual (and yet from a young age we're all led to believe that WE ARE WINNERS!). Illiteracy is increasing here in the US, as is almost every known (and soon-to-be-known) disease; our standards of healthy living are dropping. The Army has lowered its enlistee standards (not surprisingly; I certainly wouldn't ever sign up in this day and age). Same too with the Navy, the Boy Scouts, most major universities, our government's "Body Mass Index," numerous state high school graduation requirements, the Presidential Physical Fitness Award standards, and so on. Our inmates receive better healthcare than the majority of our population. Our environmental standards remain archaic (though in archaic times we were less abusive to our planet, of course). I think the whole affair is deplorable, but then I suppose if we're truly all winners, I should just quit worrying about it; we'll find a way to win! We're Americans! We're Number One!

What a joke.

In all honesty and back to my original thought, I still believe there is a place for the (real) winners amongst us (and I hope one day to join your ranks). Moreover, we should not apologize for wanting to be better than good enough, especially as standards continue to decline. Finishing a triathlon is commendable, no doubt, and victory may very well be defined by the individual, but we mustn't frown upon those who desire something more, something greater. For those who dream of becoming a champion athlete, above all else and above all others, the following is "all" it takes. (Please note that though the standards may seem excessively stringent, they help to weed out the rest of us losers.)

How to become a Champion Endurance Athlete

1) Pick the right parents and be sure that they've picked the right parents and that their parents have picked the right parents, and so on. Inherent ability is, quite honestly, the Lottery of Life. (And to an extent we've all won it, though some more than others.)

2) Start young and dedicate yourself entirely. Failing this, dedicate yourself entirely, no matter your age. (Training) time is of the essence, and you must put it in. Be in a hurry, but be patient. See #11 below.

3) Believe that anything is possible, and make it so. Your results reflect your degree of dedication.

4) Be enthusiastic, motivated, willing to suffer and able to make sacrifices. Develop an immense work ethic and then take uncompromising action. Work relentlessly and outwork those you'll compete against. Train first; ask questions later.

5) Know your destination and how to reach it. Have complete clarity of purpose and use the SMART principles in choosing your targets. Are they…

• Specific?
• Measurable?
• Achievable?
• Realistic?
• Time-Sensitive?

Setting mileposts along your path to success is another key to achieving it, so choose some goals en route to the big one. Conversely, if you'd rather be a loser like me, you can always just wing it.

6) Stay focused through setbacks. Expect pitfalls but don't fall with them.

7) Speaking of falling, don't fall for the façade that is luck. If you're reading this you probably have the opportunity, now do something with it.

8) Know thyself. Be honest with thyself. Confront that which you do not like about you and what which needs to change in order to achieve your goals. If you're unsure ask a friend or a coach or better yet, someone honest (i.e., someone who doesn't mind hurting your feelings).

9) Given this knowledge of yourself, train wisely. Training wisely is harder than training hard, which is hardly surprising. So don't just train for training sake; train for victory, not some arbitrary physiological or psychological response. Finally, remember that training is everything and everything is training. In other words, everything you do as a human being affects everything you do as an athlete. Understand your responses to training and all else.

10) Continually develop your routine, then hone this routine. Trim the fat. As Antoine de Saint-Exupery said so eloquently, "Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add but when there is nothing left to take away."

11) Stay the course. Don't keep worrying whether the grass is greener on the other side of the fence (or anywhere else); just keep watering your own.

12) Give it time, as it'll take plenty of it. As per Gladwell's book, 10,000 hours of practice is about all it takes to shine! But be forewarned that time alone isn't enough. You must determine your future by doing things correctly NOW. In other words, practice doesn't make perfect…perfection does. The path to excellence is excellence.

13) Never neglect the placebo effect. If you believe in what you do, whether it's right or wrong, the chances are it will work for you. Just be sure of this before believing in everything you do! Demand proof not from others but from yourself. See #3 above.

14) By performing well you open yourself up to criticism from others. By performing poorly, you open yourself up to criticism from you. Ignore the former; listen to the latter. Avoid or ignore critics, cynics, pessimists, doubters, detractors, scoffers, skeptics, naysayers and negative people. Unfortunately, the world is full of these types, no more so than on the Internet (this, I believe, because they're trapped at a job they do not like, and their envy toward those who are not is elevated), so you will need to hone your skills accordingly. Moreover, don't ever participate in these behaviors yourself. A true champion would never ridicule or belittle others and would instead continue to develop his or her own confidence. For what it's worth, confidence is everything. Carry yourself with aplomb.

15) Be a student of the sport. Put the 'stud' in study! But only after you've trained. (Training is study time.) In becoming a champion your homework never ends, just as the tests do not. Don't be too full of pride to approach those who know more than you. If you think you know more than they do, go find out. It's your career. I know if I was in my twenties again I'd be seeking advice galore, then deciding for myself.

16) Regarding pride, rid yourself of it. Pride and ego are both a necessary component of sport, but they must be derived from true unyielding confidence. Winning should build this confidence, not solely the athlete's ego. A podium can be as much a prison as any small, confined space.

17) Eat as though your life depends upon it, because the truth is, it does. Today's dietary habits will likely not affect your immediate goals or health; the effect will be felt many tomorrows from now. See #11 and #12 above.

18) Get enough rest en route. Even champs need a break every so often. Knowing just how much rest is "enough" depends on how well you know yourself (see #8 above). Remember: no horse has ever run himself to death without a jockey on his back. If a "dumb animal" like that is capable of averting his own downfall, so too should you be. Develop your instincts, then trust them.

19) Enjoy the journey (though this isn't always enough when becoming a champion is the objective).

20) As I've quoted in this book…

The bottom line…
Is the finish line.

Unlike the lab sometimes does, the finish line never lies. It is the ultimate measuring stick. All else is conjecture and verbal diarrhea.

++++++++++++++++++++

PS: The photo is of my first-ever book cover, though with a few more pounds I could easily be a candidate for the next version of this one.

++++++++++++++++++++

PPS: With all this talk of champions, I just remembered today that it's been a year already since my bud Evan Tanner passed away, when his KLR650 motorcycle (the same beast I own) allegedly ran out of gas in the California desert. For those of you fortunate enough to know him or know about him, he was a rarity in this world: a world champion UFC mixed martial art fighter who yearned for something more. Just read his penultimate blog entry...

"Today, I ran to the store to pick up a few things, and with the lonesome, quiet desert thoughts on my mind, I couldn't help but be struck with their brutally stark contrast to my current surroundings, the amazing congestion in which we exist day to day. The landscape as far as I could see, crowded, choked, with me and the rest of the species, an almost writhing mass of organisms, fighting over space and resources....on the highways, in the parking lots, on the sidewalks, and in the aisle of the stores. And to think, there are still places in the world where man has not been, where he has left no footprints, where the mysteries stand secure, untouched by human eyes. I want to go to these places, the quiet, timeless, ageless places, and sit, letting silence and solitude be my teachers."

RIP bro.

Half Full or Half Empty? Who Cares!

The optimist sees the glass as half-full. The pessimist sees it as half-empty. The triathlete sees it and asks, "Um, can I drink the rest?"

But all the meanwhile the triathlete wonders whether that might be a wise choice since there may not be enough sodium in the drink to prevent hyponatremia. Moreover, the triathlete must also question whether its fructose and glucose mixture will affect his or her gut during the marathon. But never mind all that...

Bottoms up!

More IFAQ (Infrequently Asked Questions)

Below is an encyclopedic set of questions (in italics) that recently befell me. Each is followed by my responses, some of which might be benefit you, the blog reader (all one of you). There are more links than you might care to visit, so don't go suing me if you develop tendonitis and the dreaded Swollen Mouse-Clicking-Phalange Syndrome. Ask your doctor if this blog is right for you. Then take ten and enjoy! Side effects are unknown at this time.

++++++++++++++++++++

Hi Chuckie,
I've got some rather lengthy questions for you. You usually are pretty good about answering everyone's questions on your comments page, so I figured I'd give it a go. I'd really appreciate any of your help.

Last year I started to train for triathlon, and I eventually found your blog and the wonderful information in it. I think I became addicted to following it as I procrastinated from schoolwork. I've read about 90% of your archives! We have similar thoughts on many things, including the thoughts of anyone in the "certified establishment". Eventually I overcame the addiction to your blog as I concentrated on training and not sitting in front of the computer. Obviously I still follow you quite closely and your training styles. My goal is to be a professional triathlete and I've always thought you would make a great coach for me, if I had any money to pay you. Maybe someday! I do not train socially but I am thinking about coming to one of your camps down in Solvang. I could use the sunshine in the spring, as I am up here in beautiful and misty Portland Oregon.

I've decided in order to reach my goals I need to accelerate my learning curve and reach out to the experts and the people who know a lot more about training than I do (you).

I've bought a lot of books on your list and I've started moving through them. Although the only place I can find Jan Olbrecht's "The Science of Winning" is at a swim shop in the UK. There are many philosophies out there and reading through all of them makes for headaches. But I enjoy learning about the training.

1. I had a question about peaking/periodization and how that relates to off-season training. If peaking exists, and one develops a periodized plan (whether non-linear or linear) in order to arrange that peak, how do you reconcile the off-season (or just non-race season) training with that? Basically my question revolves around the fact that I don't want to stop training this fall/winter, I want to build off of my fitness that I've gained this summer training for races. But all this peaking crap I've read has jumbled up the ideas in my head. If I keep training right now (at a relative peak) can anything bad happen? If I train hard for 5 months this winter will that bring about a peak too early in the season? Some periodization plans call for no training for a long extended breaks in the off-season...So that you're "rested" and ready to begin building again. I say why not build on a peak? right?

2. And would you say you agree with the non-linear periodization or linear periodization? I just read Brad Hudson's book "Run Faster" and a lot of it makes sense, his ideas about doing a little bit of everything all the time, and developing a overall run fitness before introducing 8 week peak builds. But I don't know how much of this applies to Triathlon training. That brings me to my next question:

3. What do you think, are the notable differences between training for the single sports on their own, and doing it all together for triathlon? I understand that run strength is more important than pure, fresh speed, and bike endurance is very important to not interfere with the run. Swim volume in triathlon training can't really approach pure swimmer volume for more than a few weeks, and since the distances are way longer than a 200IM event, strength is again required over speed. Am I on the right track with this? What other ways are good to train to run fast off the bike? jacking up the bike mileage? doing transition runs? At the same time I think, well, I need a little pure speed in everything if I'm going to run bike and swim as fast as the top people in the sport. A low 30's 10k off a sub 1hr bike ride is fast. A low 30's 10k is fast relative to everyone else. Even a 2:45 marathon by itself is an achievement. Those guys have got to be able to be very very fast, maybe not elite runner level fast, but certainly right around 30 for an open 10k, and 2:25 - 2:35 for a marathon. (And I'm not even talking about the ITU guys). So certainly it takes a lot of strength to run a 2:45 off a bike ride in which you averaged 24 miles an hour. Anyway I'm getting off track. Just wondering what you think about how close triathlon training comes to just being single sport training x3 (or maybe just x2). I have read that back in the day, pro's did this type of training...and they were really really fast back in the day...

4. I am going to get a power meter, what kind do you recommend? Right now I am riding a Cervelo Soloist Team (the aluminum ...GASP... kind), Figured I would tell you in case it mattered as to what kind of powermeter I can/should get. I know this is a lot. Thanks for anything in advance.

-Dan, an Aspiring Caveman, Portland, OR

++++++++++++++++++++

Hi Dan,
Thanks for the considerate words and the questions, I think! Despite the winter weather woes, Portland is a great area for tackling your goals in this sport since there's a surplus of active people and a plethora of fun, challenging events. You could certainly be worse off! Oh, and with regards to Olbrecht's book, yes, this is a tough one to unearth. You could find a friend ("mate," in English) in the UK and have him buy it and send it your way but for such a hassle and expense there are comparable works that perhaps equate to a wiser investment. For example, quite a few people (many of whom I respect, like Alan) recommended I procure a copy of Swimming Fastest by Maglischo, as it's apparently another first-rate manual. It should arrive in a few days. I have a personal list of favorites and I suspect it will coexist with them nicely.

I'll try to tackle your questions in the order you've posed them, along with some of my customary thoughts and lengthy tangents (how's that for a disclaimer?!)…

First though I'd like to emphasize that there's an overload of information on the Internet and much of it is unadulterated crap, so be careful spending tons of time reading or perusing; over-thinking is synonymous with under-performing! This particularly applies to forums, where any ol' idiot can post...and usually does. You're better off simplifying and learning from your own experiences, especially if you're young and especially in light of your goals. And, of course, the best way for that to happen is to pull yourself away from the computer and get out there.

In this context, I often preach to those I guide that "You're your own best coach" and each of them seem to understand this. All I really mean is that no coach can truly know what's going on inside an athlete like the athlete himself can, not even when the coach is standing right beside him or having the athlete piggyback him to the top of the hill (no comment).

Insofar as each athlete is his/her own best guide they must also come to realize that an adviser is there only to assist in the learning process. It's not always easy, of course, because there is no single "right way" for each of us to train or race. But that's the advantage of employing two or more heads instead of just one: it'll speed the process of finding YOUR best way to. Always surround yourself with help, whether or not you think you need it!

The biggest reason we cannot (and indeed should not) all train alike is that our responses to training affect each of us differently. And when you factor in individual lifestyle responsibilities and pressures it's no wonder few athletes respond similarly. Because of this the athlete/coach should take everything into account when considering future training requirements. You have to weigh your recovery needs and outside responsibilities (i.e., "reality") to help form your training load, and of course, such loads will need to frequently change, as life continually does. I once wrote that…

"One must train hard in order to learn how hard one can train. Likewise, one must race hard in order to learn how hard one can race. Once these lessons have been learned they must be repeated over and over again and then completed disregarded, as, with changes in fitness, the lesson also changes…"

Now, with that said, there are a few physiological and psychological principles that apply to each of us; remember, we're more alike than we are dissimilar. But one problem is that we cannot all take full advantage of reaching our true ultimate physical and psychological peak, so adaptations or alterations must be made. If, for example, you work and attend school and only have twelve hours a week to dedicate to race preparation (i.e., training), then there's little point in applying the same stresses or tactics or principles that a pro who trains twenty-five or thirty hours each week might otherwise do. But, like them, you should consider the following...

1) Your current level of fitness
2) Your overall ability (strengths & weaknesses)
3) The objective for any given workout
4) Your short and long-term goals

Anyway, long lead-in aside, and to answer your questions…

>>>>If peaking exists, and one develops a periodized plan (whether non-linear or linear) in order to arrange that peak, how do you reconcile the off-season (or just non-race season) training with that? Basically my question revolves around the fact that I don't want to stop training this fall/winter, I want to build off of my fitness that I've gained this summer training for races. But all this peaking crap I've read has jumbled up the ideas in my head. If I keep training right now (at a relative peak) can anything bad happen? If I train hard for 5 months this winter will that bring about a peak too early in the season? Some periodization plans call for no training for a long extended breaks in the off-season...So that you're "rested" and ready to begin building again. I say why not build on a peak? right?

Like most coaches I'm of the mindset that peaking exists, if only psychologically, but there are those who do not (and yet they produce top-notch athletes). One thing is for certain: fitness is ever-changing, if only slightly. A myriad of considerations affects our fitness, and motivation often (as in almost always) leads the way. If an athlete can remain motivated year-round, there is little point in holding him or her back. I coach a few athletes like this and their results show that there's no harm in it.

But!

But in terms of physiological adaptations, you need to recognize that fitness does not/cannot depend on constant or continual sameness, as mentioned above. To build it you must challenge yourself and doing so when already challenged or have yet to fully absorb the load (i.e., benefit from) is a sure-fire way to introduce the risks you've probably read about. Remember: training is basically: load/unload/reload (i.e., two or three steps forward, one step back), both in a micro-cycling (short term) sense and a macro-cycling (long term) one. So while you might find yourself more race-ready tomorrow because of today's actions, you have to ask if this will mean you'll be that much better off a week or a month or a year from now. To answer that you can look to your training gains, by using the power meter, the heart rate monitor, a GPS unit and, in the pool, the pace clock. They don't lie, but they don't always tell us the entire story.

The worst that can happen by trying to maintain a super-high (i.e., peak) level of fitness (relative to yourself) is that you are more likely find yourself ill or injured (risk is highest when you're continually striving) or find yourself losing motivation en route. The latter can easily happen when living in a rainy climate or when the hormonal responses to hard training start to wear on the brain and the rest of the body. You have to learn to recognize the signs before you find yourself hating the sport, whether its moodiness/irritability, inability to sleep, general fatigue, a lowered immunity, and so on. Motivation, or the lack thereof, is often preceded by overtraining. (By the way, I don't believe in the whole notion of "overtraining" but for a rare few cases. Rather, the problem is known simply as "under-recovering." This, however, goes well beyond the scope of your questions or my response.)

Even if none of them were to occur---illness, injury or motivational woes---you'd need to be sure the fitness you're trying to maintain (or attain) relates to your long-term construction and outlook, and not just in preserving a foothill-like peak that has you fit in January but flat when it matters most, in June or July. You'll want to make sure it won't leave you shy of your ultimate intention, which, in sticking with the theme of all this stuff, isn't always easy to understand.

For what it's worth, almost all the great coaches advise their athletes to take some sort of a break at some point of the year. The question is for how long and of what sort---full rest, active rest, cross-training, what? (In general, I rarely advise complete rest or inactivity except for those focusing on one big race a year, and usually an Ironman at that.) Often times a full break has the athlete hungrier than ever when it matters most, and this is perhaps what matters most. Again, peaking is as much mental as it is physical, if not more so. If you're not hungry to hurt late in a race, what's the point of being fit?

All said, the issue here is in mixing physiological principles with psychological events as they transpire. My advice is if you're motivated, don't ever refrain from training. Just be sure that it's the kind that has you building toward future goals and not just immediate ones (and there is a difference). Be patiently hurried. In order to be sure of this, measure your training responses and keep track of your motivation…and roll with it! Again, it's all a learning opportunity, so don't look at any of this in anything less than the most positive light.

>>>>And would you say you agree with the non-linear periodization or linear periodization? I just read Brad Hudson's book "Run Faster" and a lot of it makes sense, his ideas about doing a little bit of everything all the time, and developing a overall run fitness before introducing 8 week peak builds. But I don't know how much of this applies to Triathlon training.

Hudson's book really hit home with me but so too does Lydiard's original work, and each man has his own approach. Like all coaches, I blend an array of approaches into one...mine. But even then it evolves continually and is applied differently to each individual. To claim I have "an" approach is to limit myself and those I coach; there are no absolutes. (Beware of those who speak in absolutes: "never ice after a workout," "never stretch," etc.) It's worth noting, however, that there are more commonalities in Hudson's and Lydiard's respective approaches than there are differences, as with any two endurance coaches. To boot, they are (were in Lydiard's case) both run coaches. Triathlon, particularly the Ironman stuff, is an entirely different entity, as explained further down, below your next question.

For the most part, if I've been working (or am going to be working) with an athlete for 2-3 years we'll lean more toward a slow-to-build "linear" approach. But the truth is there's also always some non-linear aspects involved, so to call it linear in the purest sense simply isn't accurate. But the problem with trying to achieve all the training responses desired at once is that the body can't really maintain them all; certain responses take years to develop, others just months, so it might just be a "sprinkling" of some training components/necessities/considerations and a near full-on focus on others.

While training might be simplified to something as basic as "load/unload/reload" or "stress applied/stress removed," each component is far more detailed and involved than that, and of course there is plenty of evidence (i.e., gold medals) that Lydiard's approach works and evidence that Hudson's works, both scientifically and anecdotally (naturally). Finally, and back to the simplicity thing for a second, it's important to keep in mind that training is really nothing more than RACE PRACTICE; this should help you see how silly it is to debate training methods. Debate only yours.

But I digress.

All said, there's little point in training a single aspect at a time and I know of few coaches, if any, who do. Phil Maffetone might preach sticking to a specific submaximal heart rate cap in the early build-up, but even then he prescribed short downhill or alactic efforts to those he coached (one of which was the guy writing this blog), so they could still train their nervous system to fire more quickly. So while his theories might be viewed in such a manner, his practice wasn't strictly about a single component at a time. Trust me, his athletes wouldn't have been so fast if they only trained slowly all year.

In general, and due to the non-abusive/low-impact nature of it, I have athletes swim fairly hard year-round (with a wide mix of intensities and skills involved). I also typically have them ride long year-round (which is good for building their aerobic engine, not only allowing them to be stronger cyclists but stronger runners too) with less of the intense stuff but always a little when it's required; those who work or attend school still ride long but maybe just once a week on weekends, as opposed to three or four days a week for the pros I guide. Finally, I have them run frequently but with far less intensity or overly-long stuff, for obvious reasons. But it depends on the individual and his or her strengths, weaknesses, tendencies and needs. There are simply too many variables for a one-size-fits-all response or a one-size-fits-all template here. One size can never fit all, but all can fit nicely into one (adjustable) size.

So while it might not be wise to be doing a whole bunch of run sprint training in December when your next race is an Ironman in July, it can make good sense if you're focusing on an Olympic-distance event in early March. Understanding your own physiological and psychological responses helps to identify which of the two---predominantly linear or predominantly non-linear---might fit you best, if at all. My suggestion: include a little of everything but a LOT of what matters for your long haul objectives.

Lastly, it's important to understand that all the planning and periodization in the world won't get the job done. Only getting the job done gets the job done! Indeed, I don't even really employ "periodization," in that I use what I call the "Here Now" method of coaching. While I may have a general plan of attack, I don't honestly care what such a plan might call for. Instead, I look at where the athlete is NOW, at this very moment. In other words, how do they feel after yesterday's training and after the warm-up? How are they performing? What's their mojo like? Are they on fire, or are they asleep? The best training plan involves constant adaptation and input, and a plan is only the second best way to train, if that.

>>>>What do you think, are the notable differences between training for the single sports on their own, and doing it all together for triathlon? I understand that run strength is more important than pure, fresh speed, and bike endurance is very important to not interfere with the run. Swim volume in triathlon training can't really approach pure swimmer volume for more than a few weeks, and since the distances are way longer than a 200IM event, strength is again required over speed. Am I on the right track with this?

You've just about answered your own questions here, but in truth they are such a loaded set that there's no easy way to answer them. But since I have no life, I'll take a stab at 'em!

First of all, the biggest difference between triathlon and any of the three individual sports that comprise it are the duration of the events. Only cycling events and ultra-marathon swim or run events can be considered comparable. Because of this, the training must be adapted and directed to it. Endurance (the ability to endure) becomes paramount, regardless of speeds sustained. Speed is a relative term, of course, and speed can only be built by training at or near the speeds you hope to compete at, but you have to understand that speed isn't (or shouldn't always be) the sole consideration. If there's a cost to that speed, then it must be taken into account as well, and there's always some sort of cost.

The athlete who wins a triathlon may be the fastest in the event and therefore considered "speedy," but quite often there are plenty of athletes they've beaten who possess more pure speed, that God-given stuff. This doesn't mean you wouldn't want to be speedy of course, but that you want to do the appropriate work to beat those who might be speedier or have more raw natural talent. A good example of this is Peter Snell, the great New Zealand middle-distance runner in the 1960s. Snell was fast but nowhere near as fast those he went against. His 200-meter sprint time was the slowest of any of the finalists in the 800. Indeed, he "snatched" his Olympic gold medals by wearing the others down, and this in just 800 meters of running, an event that demands FAR more speed than any triathlon! So it becomes especially critical in something lasting as long as a triathlon to re-frame your thinking into speedy over the course of the goal event and not simply "speedy."

To illustrate this, I'm sure at any given point in a triathlon I could ask you to sprint faster for a short while and that you'd be able to (e.g., almost every competitor can sprint toward the finish line if necessary and almost all of them do!). But could you sustain even a semblance of that speed? Probably not. This, therefore, is an endurance or stamina related issue, not a speed issue.

Basically you have a few different kinds of speed…

• Pure Raw Speed (e.g., up to 200 meters while running; up to 50 meters while swimming; and perhaps an all-out 20-second power effort while cycling)
• Race Goal Speed (e.g., 19-min 1,500m swim; 10K race pace goal; 40K ride wattage goal)
• Current Race Capacity (e.g., 22-min 1,500m swim speed; current 10K pace capacity; current 40K wattage capacity)
• Relative Speed (as compared to other competitors)
• Aerobic Speed (determined by metabolic cost and the athlete's ability to sustain it)

Naturally, to be at the top level in an endurance sport like triathlon, each consideration is important. But pure raw speed is nowhere near as decisive as one might think. And anyway, you can only do so much to increase your God-given speed, whereas the others are all highly trainable. It's important to understand and appreciate all this, as you seem to, since you basically answered your second part of your #3 question here. Yes, you are on the right track!

>>>>What other ways are good to train to run fast off the bike? jacking up the bike mileage? doing transition runs? At the same time I think, well, I need a little pure speed in everything if I'm going to run bike and swim as fast as the top people in the sport. A low 30's 10k off a sub 1hr bike ride is fast. A low 30's 10k is fast relative to everyone else. Even a 2:45 marathon by itself is an achievement. Those guys have got to be able to be very very fast, maybe not elite runner level fast, but certainly right around 30 for an open 10k, and 2:25 - 2:35 for a marathon. (And I'm not even talking about the ITU guys). So certainly it takes a lot of strength to run a 2:45 off a bike ride in which you averaged 24 miles an hour. Anyway I'm getting off track. Just wondering what you think about how close triathlon training comes to just being single sport training x3 (or maybe just x2). I have read that back in the day, pro's did this type of training...and they were really really fast back in the day...

Damn you Dan! Another multi-part question with so many variables that need to be considered…

Let me first reiterate that you (plural: an athlete) need to weigh your current capacities/in-capacities and immediate objectives before proceeding with any course of action. If you know right now that you're not a fast runner off the bike, for example, then you will need to figure out precisely why. A fast ride beforehand will show that your bike strength might be fine, so you can narrow it down somewhat, to either poor ride pacing (which relates to lack of stamina…when it's required you run well afterward) or to your run strength/stamina. Pure run speed is irrelevant, as your swim affects your ride and your ride affects your run. But, that said, if you ride and swim well (and well within yourself) and proceed to run poorly, then we know it's your running that needs the focus. Still, because triathlon is an endurance sport, this relates more to run strength than run speed. Strength, as in stamina.

(Now, as a quick aside, if a race comes down to a dash for the finish line, pure speed will probably matter but methinks, at that point, it's still as much correlated to stamina and tactical elements as it is pure speed ability…ask Simon Whitfield about this.)

I've witnessed plenty of athletes capable of swimming or riding or running well. But when all three activities took place in succession (i.e, a triathlon) the weakness would often manifest itself late in the ride or during the run. So would this mean the athlete is a poor runner? No, not at all. It simply means he or she is a poor triathlete or has performed poorly when it mattered most…i.e., either poor training execution or poor race execution.

Now, if race day pacing is/was well executed, only then can you assume that running is or might be the issue. Let me give you an example.

We've all seen good swimmers and/or cyclists (whether they were triathletes or single-sport athletes) who just can't seem to run, despite their motor and given abilities in those other events. Well, this is as much due to body type and biomechanical "issues" as it is due to his or her pure run capacity and speed. Any such issues that come at a cost (i.e., affect the athlete's economy) will therefore also need to be addressed. Running (or any other activity) isn't simply about moving through space in quick fashion. The activity's cost has to be considered, particularly the longer an event becomes…and particularly when fatigue might already be considerable (i.e., following the swim and ride). Again, this relates to stamina and endurance and not so much just speed. Less economical runners might be able to "fake it" for a while but it's those who've closed the gap between their aerobic speed and their pure speed who are more likely to reach their goal race speed.

A lot of this, of course, depends on endurance and training volume but a lot of it also depends on skills and doing things correctly in training…and not just going through the motions for vast chunks of time each day or week or month. The bottom line is that an athlete must become efficient at carrying out the exact activities required so that less energy is wasted during competition and long hard exertions remain less stressful…that the effort doesn't compound too soon. And a focus on "speed" is not always the right way to go about it since the cost tends to increase exponentially with increased effort.

In my assessment and experience, pure endurance should come first. Ask yourself: can you go the distance? Then go about the rest of the considerations: how fast can the distance be accomplished? How fast can each discipline (the swim, the bike and the run) within that distance be accomplished? What glaring weakness stands out? Are there more than just one weakness? How is my pure speed? How is my aerobic speed and economy? How close am I to my race goal speed?

Know that there are numerous routes to your long-term personal summit but the one you chose must be one you believe in 100% and one that proves en route that you're on the right track. The hard part isn't the peak but in finding the right route for you. As I once wrote in an old magazine article, "There are many ways to do your best and of those, one of them is best." But I think when attempting to find your way, effort is the key...not speed.

Oh, as per your last question---what kind of power meter do I recommend?---I'd let your budget decide. The SRM is the crème de la crème while the PowerTap is a tad more affordable. Because most those I guide consider the sport their profession, I typically advise the SRM (as it tends to be less finicky and more reliable). But the folks at PowerTap are quite helpful and closer to home if any evils were to arise. As mentioned, the PowerTap is much more affordable and still very reliable. Either way, I wholly recommend getting one or the other, as they'll vastly speed up your training learning process and as we know, speed is what it's all about!

Thanks for writing and making me think! -Chuckie