"Off" Season Recommendations...

Okay, it's now officially the "off" season here in North America, or at least it is here in the US (Ironman Cozumel takes place down near Cancun this weekend) and I thought I'd jot down some of the more important considerations for the Ironman-focused triathlete. If you have an Ironman on your "To-Do" list in 2010, listen up! (My To-Do list? Write To-Do list...). Anyway, race day will be here before you know it, so...

1) STAY ACTIVE. The vital aspects are to...

• Keep some semblance of fitness going all winter, whether it's specific to triathlon or a partially-related form of cross-training (hiking, snowshoeing, skiing, mountain biking, weight-lifting, pogo-sticking, shoveling snow, scraping windshields, lawn-bowling, curling, etc)
• Work on your specific weaknesses (athletes who train how they need to always beat athletes who train how they want to)
• If you're an Ironman athlete be sure to keep your weekly long run(s) going. Of all the workouts necessary for a solid Ironman performance this is the toughest on the human body; it is also the toughest (and riskiest in an injury sense) to reintegrate after a prolonged lay-off. Bottom line: no matter what, keep running.

So, if you're a pathetic swimmer living in a winter environment (weather forecast: sh!tty) you need to work your swim this winter once and for all, all the meanwhile maintaining a weekly long run (90+ minutes) and a few "filler" workouts that get you out the door when it's necessary (and it's always necessary when lofty goals stand in the way). If it's moving a bunch of chrome-plated weights around, then by all means move a bunch of weights around.

But about those weights. If your first (or big) race is in May (Ironman St George, for example), you'll want to do workouts that are increasing more like that particular race, to try to meet the demands presented to you that day. Lifting weights is, no doubt, a workout, and it's better than doing nothing. But if you're already a thickly-muscled guy who can out-lift those kicking your ass on race day (e.g., I'm willing to put money down that almost every male age-group triathlete can out-lift Chrissie Wellington or Jordan Rapp but yet they're nowhere near the same zip-code as either of them on race day; never mind that NO ONE was near Jordan this weekend. Here's your next American Kona winner, if you care about all that red, white and blue crap) well, then you need to reshape not your pecs but your priorities big guy, or else you'll always have those same excuses or comments I was forced to hear after this weekend's race in Tempe…

"Nutrition..." (the ubiquitous scapegoat excuse)

"Oh, man, I know I can do better than that..."

Well then, do so tough guy! Train by doing what the race asks of you, not what your feeble ego tells you to do. And though now is not necessarily the best time to go do some open-water swimming or long-ass bike rides (unless you desperately crave frostbite or hypothermia) it is a good time to rewrite the wiring in your head. Your head is ultimately what runs the show and until you get it screwed on right you'll always be required to dish-out those same lame excuses post race. The clock doesn't care about you. Nor does the race. So rewire yourself before time runs out. Winter---just like spring, summer or fall---is a good time to do what's needed.

The Ironman Mystery

It's Ironman day here in toasty Tempe, Arizona and I'm presently observing two thousand or so ___________ (fill in the adjective: tough, nutty, dumb, inspirational, etc) triathletes toil through this exceedingly beautiful fall (summer in disguise) afternoon. All but a handful look to be struggling and only a few hardcore lunatics boast grins on their sunburned faces, though such facial expressions could easily be taken for grimaces. It's tough to tell at this stage of the game. I'm not sure the athlete's themselves really know.

If there's one thing that absolutely mystifies me about this whole Ironman "lifestyle" (if you will), it's this eternal impulse to celebrate something we can't wait to finish. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that.

At any rate, I'd think I'd rather be competing than spectating. If there's one thing more painful than doing an Ironman it's watching one! Still, I enjoy watching others suffer as much as me. Let the pain reign!

Ride Hard Lots

Another of the many people named "Anonymous" left a comment on my last blog, asking the following. First though, here's another rant! What's with all these parents naming their children 'Anonymous'? That's even worse than 'Chuckie' and I'm still mad at my parents and trying to recover. Anyway, his question went like this...

Hi Chuckie, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on raising one's FTP as high as possible (without drugs of course). I'm a cyclist and am willing to do years of dedicated work to achieve this. I know there are no shortcuts, but other than the 'ride lots' mentality, what type of training would you consider to be most effective? Aerobic threshold, tempo, threshold, VO2, or a mix of all. Or is 'ride lots' the answer in the end? I'm relatively new to the sport (have been racing 3 years and am hoping to upgrade to Cat 2 next season), but come from an extensive swimming background, and would really like to see where I can go.

Dear 'Anonymous',
The easy answer is "ride lots" but with "hard" thrown in there somewhere. "Ride hard lots". But that's hardly helpful. Most coaches would tell you it comes down to specificity. Any type of training needs to be specific to the end goal if that goal is to be met. The problem is that we don't just get better at doing something by only taking the end result into consideration, including a sole focus like raising your FTP. In other words, you could do hard anaerobic FTP-focused interval training as often as possible, but this type of training is not without its faults. And raising your FTP isn't just about training at FTP intensities; a lot of athletes mistakenly assume this (though once established a high FTP does generally equate to a higher range of capacities over varying durations). (Of course, a high FTP does not mean better racing skills or the capacity to move up a category. The racing cyclist's goal shouldn't be solely focused on a number but rather acquiring all the necessary skills to improve and be competitive.)

Anyway, you first have to build to a level of achieving a capacity for more, if that makes sense; as I once told Tim DeBoom (who then made it famous in triathlon circles, though I'm sure it'd been said long before we ever started saying it), "You have to train hard to handle more hard training". In other words, you have to first train to handle more training (which eventually means "ride hard lots") and it takes time and training volume as much as it does short-term specificity.

You could track time spent at your FTP (your current one; not your goal one) and try to increase that time each week but again, there's a fair amount of risk in that. Doing anything all-out for an hour is highly stressful, even on a nice, expensive bike. And though the body can adapt to that stress, it can also reject it if it's deemed too hard or occurs too often, with inadequate recovery or inadequate restorative mileage between bouts. Training really ought to incorporate a little of everything, so long as it relates to the physiology and mentality required to raise your FTP. In the end, anything that makes you a more powerful rider or a better bike racer can be considered specificity. Miles do this and hard riding does it. There's a balance and a mix of efforts necessary that is unique to each of us. It's part trial and error but the basics can always be applied.

At the top level in cycling the guys with the highest FTP are the guys who put in lots of miles. In the purest sense they're also biggest guys, so FTP really ought to consider or include more of a power-to-weight consideration (if you can consider a consideration!) but since it's your own personal FTP, you shouldn't really give a damn about what others can do. Focus on yours and yours alone, and lose any extraneous weight in the process. Not to come across egotistical, but my FTP is quite high and it helps me go fast for hour-long durations. However, I weigh more now than when I was purely a pro cyclist. I was much more powerful then, even though my numbers weren't as great. Why? Because I hadn't fully developed. Nor did I carry around as much weight (I'd like to think most my weight gain since then was/is pure muscle mass but the dunk tank states its opinion otherwise; my goal is to become the biggest loser but I first need more to lose).

What's more, I wasn't just lighter but more flexible and aerodynamic, in addition to being more aggressive and highly stupid, all necessary traits for ripping the legs off others. Again, power up, weight down (and a focus on strong aerodynamics and specific skills like cadence and muscle recruitment). (Regarding muscle recruitment, FTP intensities and beyond are great for improving this but the slow-twitch fibers must also be fully developed and they don't always get there through shorter, more intense training.)

Specificity may very well be everything in training but an athlete's immediate training may not always be readily specific toward his or her end goal. It takes a layer upon layer or a brick-by-brick approach (read Alan Couzen's blog), not a quick route to the top. In endurance sports shortcuts always end up as dead-ends. You don't need to have a higher FTP tomorrow by training intensely today and everyday before now, even though you might be able to see it rise immediately by doing so. But you'd almost certainly come to reach a permanent plateau by training this way. Instead of worrying about immediate improvement you need to see your hour of power climb over a long enough period, the long term. Ideally, every six months should see an increase, and it'll likely be one that won't immediately erode. Miles help with that but lots of long miles alone won't do the job. You've got to up the intensity ante when your body is ready for it.

I hope this helps. There is no simple answer but to ride as much as your body can absorb with as much intensity as it can absorb. All said, more really is better but "absorb" is the operative word here. To absorb training you need to benefit, basically, and that involves every single aspect of your life: sleep amount, sleep patterns, nutritional habits/practices, recovery diligence, hydration, postural stress, real life stress and so on. The list is long but he who works hard to improve every consideration of his improvement (if you can improve improvement!) is he who I'd bet on come race day, even though my wager would likely be fairly meager, no thanks to an income that borders on no-come.

Benchmarks

Now is a good time of year to test yourself via some "benchmarks". Why? Because they allow you to learn a little more about yourself. Moreover, the results are bound to be disappointing, and they can only improve over time (assuming you actually do the necessary work to help them improve over time). We all have to start somewhere, so they say, and starting from the bottom gives you a pretty good platform in which to launch your FUTURE WORLD DOMINATION. Some of us (e.g., me) like this platform so much we stick around there our entire lives! I like to think that successful people simply wouldn't exist if losers like me didn't. You winners should be grateful for us losers!

Moving along, the following are the benchmark tests I have the bulk of "my" athletes do…

• 5-mile/8-kilometer run test @ 90% of his or her LTHR
• 1-hour indoor bike test @ 90% of the athlete's LTHR or at the athlete's IMT (Ironman Threshold…more about this in due time)
• 400 (meter or yard) all-out swim effort (all-out means ALL FRICKIN' OUT)

It is not without basis I use these durations or lengths.

For one, with the exception of the 400 (meter or yard) (eye)balls-out test in the pool, they relate to the same energy systems called upon on race day, assuming the athlete is competing in endurance triathlons and not my brilliant proposed sprint triathlon. Even the 400 relates to race day, however, in the sense that you'll be calling primarily upon your aerobic "system", though a fair extent is demanded of your often-latent anaerobic system. I hate to be the one to break it to you but what with the nervous energy and all, race day (even Ironman race day) is not just a long slow slog, physiologically speaking.

Anyway, each test is little more than a benchmark to allow you to see whether or not you're maintaining a baseline level of fitness or making gains in training, which, ideally, you should be, even now in November (though I will say that these gains shouldn't always be readily apparent). If you're not, you'll need to make some changes, fire your coach, or contemplate suicide. On the other hand (the one without the suicide apparatus), if you are making gains, be sure to keep doing what you're doing, as these tests relate closely enough to what the race will ask of you. (In general, I lengthen the tests for Ironman athletes, when time allows and the time is called for, and it's almost always called for.)

The 5-mile run test is no fancier than Phil Maffetone's or Mark Allen's run MAF Test. And speaking of running, why don't you run a search online and save me the trouble of having to write it all out? Please. In fact, I believe I've already run it by you here in the past, so you can search this blog, if you're fearful of leaving it momentarily (an understandable fear in my mind).

Anyway, the basics of this poorly-labeled "test" are to run (jog) 5-miles at a predetermined intensity (as gauged by your heart rate monitor) (usually about 85-90% of your lactate threshold heart rate), measuring your subsequent pace, finish time, perceived exertion level, conditions and each mile split en route. Yes, it's a rudimentary "test" (and hardly challenging) but it can tell you a lot, like just how pathetic your aerobic engine/development is.

The bike test is also simple and relatively easy. Ride one hour at a predetermined power output (one that relates to your goal race, and it's doubtful a FTP [functional threshold power] test does) and measure your heart rate response or at a predetermined heart rate while measuring your power output, preferably at race-like cadences in a race-like position on your race bike. Yep, you'll need a power meter.

Though I'm not a fan of electronic over-reliance or stuffocation, you should seriously consider owning a power meter if you don't already. That said, some of the fastest athletes I guide (read: Ironman winners) don't even use power measuring devices (though they do use power) and I'm certain they can kick your ass on a bike. Power is simply a tool; you're still the one who needs to do the grinding work. Again, and this is worth repeating, a power meter doesn't do the training for you; it simply lets you know what the training is doing for you! It's a meter, not a motor!

Anyway, this straightforward bike test also measures your aerobic progress (assuming it's progress!) and can easily be lengthened to two or more hours, to correlate to race day that much more closely. It's important that any benchmark test you do relates to your goals on race day. And on this note, I'm willing to bet that the ol' "Hour of Power" is likely less relevant to your goals than is a three-hour grind.

(Tangent! I myself have ridden a road bike since before pubic hairs began sprouting at the confluence of my anatomy. As such I possess a rather noteworthy FTP, higher than all but a few pro triathletes, despite my pencilneck weight classification. Still, the vast majority of these not-so-gentle-men would annihilate me throughout the course of an Ironman ride. So…does my high one-hour capacity for pain matter? The honest answer is a resounding "no". One must still do the work necessary to improve where it matters most, and it matters most AT THE FINISH LINE. All else is conjecture.)

The swim test is the most taxing of the three and may necessitate the need for a few cups of full-octane coffee ahead of time. The goal is to mix up the energy system requirements and swim at an ALL-OUT effort for approximately five to six minutes, or whatever length test gets you (or the clock) there in such a time frame. For some of us more flotationally-challenged triathletes this may equate to a paltry 300 short-course yards. For you gill-necked fish folks (i.e., freaks) this might mean almost as much as 600 long-course meters. Whatever the distance, keep it the same from week to week. And yes…you ought to be performing such an effort week in and week out, to see if your swimming is still weak, whether it's weak in or weak out.

I suggest giving the lifeguards a mental break this winter and working hard to improve your swim, so they can quit grinding their teeth on deck. This test will help you see whether or not you're making their jobs any easier. The goal: get faster, no matter what it looks like* (and without relying on all that stupid swim paraphernalia). Remember, in swimming it's all about rhythm, technique and then fitness. Indeed---and pardon the word-play here---it sucks to suck in the water.

*I hate to say it, but in the water, in general, you must look good to be good.

Back-to-Back Ironmans

I've been a traveling fool as of late (though forever a fool) and blogging has taken a back seat to my backseat driving. Below is a question I received a day or two ago about the whole rigmarole of doing back-to-back Ironmans.

Quick question... Why when training for two ironmans relatively close together do your athletes taper for the first but not the second one? How far away do the races need to be to taper for both??

For those I coach taking part in back-to-back Ironmans this is indeed the case. I'll advise the athlete to taper for the first Ironman and then skip the whole taper process for their second race, when the two "overlap". Tapering works but only when fitness is high (relative to one's self) going into an event. Of course fitness is high (and perhaps even higher) after an Ironman but so too is fatigue, and herein lay the "problem".

Fatigue and fitness trend similarly but Ironman fatigue is a whole 'nother gig. It demands full respect and FULL recovery. So if a second Ironman falls five or six weeks later there's no easy way to recover and taper in time for the second. Otherwise too much race fitness is lost. And since recovery really cannot be denied, the taper generally has to go. (On this note what I've witnessed as an athlete and now as a coach is that the taper process might even be over-emphasized some, because four out of five times the athlete performs better in their second Ironman. This could be due to many factors of course [e.g., experience that hasn't yet been forgotten] but methinks it's most often due to over-tapering the first time around, something I try hard to avoid. I've rearranged my whole line of attack over the years as to how an athlete tapers for an Ironman. The event is nothing like your average endurance event [or those pinpointed in "scientific studies"] and so its requirements aren't and probably shouldn't be the same.)

As to how far apart two Ironmans should be to require a similar taper for both, that's the difficult part of your question. The easy answer is that it depends on the individual, the race demands, and the athlete's diligence toward hastening post-race recovery (this, by the way, is the real secret to making gains: being diligent toward speeding recovering). Since there is no easy Ironman (contrary to what others might say about Arizona or Florida) it's obviously important to be fully prepared. In order to be fully prepared one must be fit first, then rested (in addition to nailing those tricky tasks of nutrition and race day pacing.) Where many Ironman athletes go wrong (and their coaches too) is in thinking they need to be "fresh" before the race. As I've said before, Ironman ain't a tampon ad, so feeling fresh is quite simply the wrong line of thinking.

Freshness essentially means a loss of fitness (remember: fatigue and fitness are cut from the same mold) and fitness (along with smart execution on race day) are what will get you to the finish line in the least amount of time, the goal for the vast majority of us.

But post-Ironman fatigue cannot be so great as to limit your gains in fitness, as measured not by how you "feel" but by what the numbers say. They don't generally lie. Try an aerobic test after an Ironman and the results are stunning. The muscle damage incurred won't even allow your motor to get the job done, despite the fact it's ripe for the task. But in a matter of days the numbers improve and may even exceed those seen pre-Ironman. This is a great sign you're making strides in recovery but then there's the "deep-seated" fatigue, the residual stuff that leaves your immune system suppressed, your hormones out of whack and your desire to live generally pretty low. Your leg muscles may be saying, "Man, I feel good," but muscles are only a petty part of Ironman recovery. There is so much more needing focus: tendons, ligaments, your heart, other organs, adrenals, hypothalamus, you name it. Even your bones and blood need rest after an Ironman. So too does your skin (and I'm not just referring to the blisters on your feet).

Unfortunately, it's hard to speed up all of this damage but you certainly can to a degree. Soaks, massage, improved nutrition, naps, elevation, compression, supplementation, hyperbaria, the NormaTec device, medication (and so on) can all help take the typical Ironman recovery from 3-6 weeks to 1-3. Again, much of it depends on the athlete (age, gender, fitness, weight, build, etc) and there is no cut and dried "this is how long it takes" response. Partying post-race delays recovery, incidentally. Note to self: no stage dives post-Ironman. Ultimately, the first fourteen days is the primary key in the whole turn around; there should be no pressure or urgency to train. Just move lightly and do whatever it takes to stimulate recovery, and that includes ice cream!

If an athlete approaches me and informs me they're entered in two Ironmans that are virtually back-to-back (Lake Placid and Louisville, for example) and their goal is to qualify for Kona at either event, we focus primarily on the initial one (assuming they're also willing to dish out the big bucks for my coaching services, of course! Supercompensation, it's called!). But first we look at the athlete as an individual and what the race entails. If the athlete cannot climb all that well on the bike and despises cooler weather, for example, then Lake Placid makes for a tough proposition. The individual is the primary consideration, the race secondary. We can all be prepared for that in which we normally do not excel.

Now, if the athlete failed to reach Kona by way of Lake Placid we have no option but to try our damndest at Louisville. This first means recovering fully from Placid. (On this note it is hopeful if the athlete also didn't kill himself or herself during the failed attempt.) Training then becomes anything (legal) to hasten recovery, and usually for two to three weeks. Fitness is lost but then so too is fatigue. We maintain fitness the best we can (i.e., in water or through short, frequent spins) but with the sole goal of stripping away all that nastiness caused by the brutality of Lake Placid. (…Placid, my ass!) Then after two or so weeks we start more serious movement (though I don't quite call it "training" at this point): hiking, jogging uphill, longer spins, harder pull-set swims. This movement can last a week or so when the real training (i.e., race practice) kicks in, just two weeks shy of Louisville. But two weeks of training is plenty of time to "reinstate" race-required fitness, so long as the whole notion of tapering is removed and a quality fitness "base" was established earlier in the training year. The taper process is no longer a procedure but simply a couple of days sans harder training. I've even had a few athletes skip those two easier days in the past, if they're still making gains right up to race start. While fitness isn't built in a day (unlike Rome), it does take days to get the job done, and days are what make up great race days.

So…
1) Taper as you normally would for the first Ironman, if fitness is "normal".
2) Do everything in your power to hasten recovery post-Ironman.
3) Don't rush into "real" training until your body is 100% ready; ignore your head and listen to your body. Maintain fitness through less abusive means.
4) Don't taper for the second Ironman if your fitness isn't as least as high as before. If gains are yet to be had, keep the momentum building right up to race day. Momentum is a good thing when doing or building toward an Ironman.
5) And if none of the above appeals to you, consider spreading your Ironmans out a little more (12+ weeks). Then again, if it's worth doing, it's worth over-doing!