Showing posts with label Coaching. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Coaching. Show all posts

January 01, 2013

Happy New Year

One of the things I like about cycling is the time it affords one to think.



Ideas come to me on rides and I occasionally remember them all the way home and write them down, or better yet act on them. More often then not they are spur-of-the moment pearls of wisdom and insight that i promptly forget when the next hill or interval comes along. 

Such was the case on Saturday. I hadn't been on my bike much at all since the last BASP at Coyote Point December 9th, and District CX was coming up on Sunday so I thought a little blow out might help, and it did. During the ride I had one of those epiphanies...a thought that was SURE to revolutionize my training, my coaching, my life, the sport of cycling, or something equally impressive...but I forgot it and can't seem to pull it back. 

I hope it comes back...it was pretty good. I'm kinda the same about memories in general. I simply forget, so I wanted to take a quick look back at 2012 before it gets lost. Let's break it into simple categories: 

Mitch Going Fast!
Race Team - Smaller and leaner this year....Sterling Cross p/b Fusion IO was still in all a success by the numbers. We had ONE elite rider - Mitch Trux...but he pulled a bunch of podiums and was constantly in the top 10, usually the top 7! Our other standout cateogry? Single Speed A's! We pulled a podium at almost every race we did this year. Either myself of Patrick Kitto...weird that we couldn't seem to put it together at the same events...had solid rides at all the BASP's and a host of other events in and around NorCal including:
  • WIN! BASP #1 Candlestick Park - Patrick Kitto
  • 2nd BASP #4 Candlestick Trippel - Matt McNamara
  • 2nd BASP #5 Coyote Point - Patrick Kitto
  • 3rd BASP #3 Sierra Point Night Race - Matt McNamara
  • 3rd Santa Rosa Cup #3 - Patrick Kitto
  • 5th NCNCA District Championships - Patrick Kitto
  • 5th Surf City #1 Aptos HS - Matt McNamara
  • 6th NCNCA District Championships - Matt McNamara
I think that's about all the races we entered except for 2 mechanicals and a terrible mud race at Manzanita...not bad. Next year....we're going bigger badder and faster!

A Jeff Namba Photo



Athletes - This year I had the pleasure of working with an Elite Team in HONG KONG...Team Direct Asia! They were awesome to work with and the topped it off by taking the OVERALL GC and TEAM GC at Tour De Bintan..a big race in SE Asia. I also had the pleasure of working with some juniors - two talented sets:
  • USAC Regional Development Camp - This is my third year working with Larry Nolan and the other coaching stalwarts at the camp, but this year we did it a little different..we divided into teams and got to work with our riders individually the whole week - AWESOME! 
USAC Campers

  • Matadors HS MTB Team - I kinda lucked into this one, but it was time well spent as our small 3 rider team finished 16th in the team overall standings for Division 2 in NorCal...a pretty huge accomplishment that was only possible with a true team effort by each rider! 
Matador Racing 2012
My other athletes were also consistently strong and impressive. There are too many to go rider by rider, but suffice it to say that we won some races, reached some new personal bests and I don't think anyone took a major digger this year, which is huge in my world From KMH killing Du's all year to Adam Carr racing the Tour of Vietnam (UCI 2.2) and Joe Carpenter slogging off several top rides in 8+ hour MTB races! Can't wait to jump deep into 2013 and see what turns up...

Personal - This year started off slowly with almost no riding from January til May..then I dialed up a solid summer and hit some of my best power numbers EVER, including new PR's on 5, 20, and 60 minute efforts. That fitness carried me thru a gradual decline in the fall that culminated with almost NO riding the past 6 weeks...

SO - HERE'S TO A BIGGER AND BETTER 2013...so Happy New Year to all...(yea, done with 1:20 left in 2012, I'll post pics to this shortly


August 27, 2012

Playing With Numbers....


Montebello is a sweet little climb near my house that has a couple of steep pitches, it’s a favorite.  I use it pretty regularly for what I call 3-peats, 3 times to the school (2 miles up),  usually in the 13-15 minute range.  Today I didn’t want to ‘hit out’ super hard…hoping to keep good form away a bit longer before my annual implosion, so I decided to do a little experiment.  My current FTP is set at 320W, so I thought I’d see the difference in pacing a 320W effort on three trials. First I did the climb at 320W aveage. Then I did it again at a 320W average, but did the first 5 minutes at 10% over (352W) and gradually lost average power the rest of the climb as close to 1 watt at a time as I could. Finally, I tackled the climb at 10% under FTP (288W) for the first five minutes and then tried to raise my average back to FTP over the remainder of the climb in 1 watt increments. Scientific? No, not really…but let’s see what we got anyway:


320W Steady
320W First 5m 110%
320W First 5m 90%
Time
15:36
15:44
15:28
Average Watts
320
321
321
Normalized Watts
323
323
324
Kilojoules
300
303
298
TSS (Intensity Factor)
26.4 (1.008)
26.7 (1.008)
26.4 (1.00)
VI
1.01
1
1.01



Very interesting…the fastest was the 5m @ 290W start, but let’s see what else stands out...

Here are the three efforts laid out together:
yellow @ 320W, red @ 320W+10% and green @320W-10%:

Recall that green was a steady push from 5:00 on and you can see the slight uptick in power (top graph) and cadence (lower graph). I like to look for landmarks in the files as time stamp reference points. For example in the first 5:00 the file shows a noticeable jump in cadence at around 3:00 –  4:00…this is where the course flattens out for a bit and you can see that the second effort (+10%) moved to both a higher cadence overall and a bit earlier than the other two. In contrast the third effort (-10%) had a much lower cadence in those first few minutes (closer to 40RPM) as I had to try and keep average watts down, so the stair step of cadence comes nearly a minute later, and the power remains well below the other two at all points.




Moving a bit farther up there is a final ramp that shows up nicely. On the first run it is about  1:30 @ 350W and 71rpm:

On the2nd run it is closer to 1:39 @ 302W and 65rpm as I tried to keep the average at 320W for the whole interval.

On the 3rd pass I am still chasing the 320W average a little bit (started the final climb at ~317W), but had to be careful to not go too hard. In the end that got me to the top in 1:22 @ 359W and 72rpm, very similar to the first pass, so why the 9s second difference in time? Entry speed.


You can see the differences in speed over the last 6:00 of the climb in the graph below. It’s pretty easy to reference landmarks on each and you can see that the final pass was faster in almost every area over the final minutes as I was both chasing the targeted 320W average and covering more ground. The first landmark is the obvious bump in speed around 6:00. The red represents the +10% pace, so I arrived at this ‘flat’ section about 20 seconds faster than the first pass and about 35s faster than the final run. By the second speed surge at around 9:00 the gap is down to about 5-8 seconds over the first pass, but still hovers near 35 seconds to the final run. Finally by the third speed surge, about 11:30 in, the final effort is starting to close the gap, down to about 15 seconds. Note that the final 0.22 miles were done at 9.2 mph (1st pass), 8.2 mph on the second and 10mph for the third pass. In the five seconds before the final surge I averaged 19.7 on the third interval, but only 18.5 on the second, and a modest 17.3 mph on the first. This section is flat to slightly downhill, offering a small respite before the final surge if needed, or a chance to make up some time if you can.


For comparison let’s look at my fastest time up Montebello, a 13:01 effort that averaged 357W (I was about 7 pounds lighter too!).  The five seconds before the final surge only averaged 16.4mph, but the final surge was done in 1:04 at 473Wavg. The full climb is demonstrably more impressive all around when looked at side by side with these three...
Power:

Speed:

Guess I need to lose some weight and ride harder!

UPDATE: A friend asked a couple of good questions about the climb itself and my efforts relative to the grade, so here is some additional information on the climb - the full climb is just over five miles (5.3) and averages 'only' 6.9%




But I only went to the school:  


Info and the gradient graphs from a really great site:


Here is the raw data:

Raw Data:

Dist    Grade   Alti.   Location
----    -----   ------  --------
0.00    15% 550 start - Stevens Canyon Road
0.01 12% 555
0.04 10% 570
0.07 10% 580
0.10 11% 600
0.14  4% 620 Brookside Stables - left turn
0.16  9% 630
0.18 10% 640
0.22 12% 660
0.25 10%  680
0.28 12% 690
0.30 12% 700
0.33 10% 720
0.35  7% 730
0.38  6% 740
0.41  8% 750
0.44 8.5% 760
0.46 4.5% 770
0.50 6% 780
0.52 6% 790
0.54 8% 795
0.57 8.5% 810
0.59 9% 820
0.63 13% 840
0.66 11% 855
0.69 8.5% 870
0.71 12% 880
0.72 12% 890 Peacock Court
0.75 12% 905
0.77 10% 920
0.80  5% 930
0.84 5.5% 935
0.86 9% 940
0.90 9% 970
0.93 6% 980
0.96 10% 990
0.99 13% 1010
1.02 14% 1030
1.05 14% 1050
1.07 16% 1060
1.08 12% 1070
1.10  8% 1080
1.12  6% 1090
1.15 5.5% 1100
1.18 8% 1110
1.20 11.5% 1120
1.23 9.5% 1130
1.27 8% 1150
1.35 7% 1180
1.38 8% 1190
1.41 10% 1200
1.44 11% 1220
1.47 8% 1240
1.49 4% 1240
1.52 11% 1250
1.56 11.5% 1270
1.60 10% 1295 View
1.65 10% 1310
1.68 8% 1335
1.73 9% 1350
1.75 7% 1360 Pichotti home
1.78 1% 1370
1.81 -2.5% 1370
1.83 0% 1370
1.85 8% 1380
1.87 12.5% 1390
1.89 9% 1400
1.92 9.5% 1410
1.94 8% 1425
1.97 6% 1430
1.99 8% 1440
2.03 10% 1455
2.05 8% 1465
2.07 1% 1470 Montebello School















June 22, 2012

Sprint Technique

One of the best things ever is when a couple of sprinters, should I quotes that(?), "sprinters" get in a huff off. It happens every few months on a blog I follow and it's a riot every time. Thanks for the entertainment, did you ever decide who was the fastest Cat 4 world threat?

Alas, while sprinting may come down to hubris and elbows, in the end technique trumps the day.

Good sprint drills are ones that challenge you to deliver power in a variety of ways.  Before I knew much about power as a training tool I wrote an article about delivering power that is an interesting perspective in the discussion of technique. The focus was on technique and rider bike connectivity rather than watts production - and although incomplete for not discussing the high cadence end of the equation, I've posted it below...

First a sample workout that you might like:

FTP Coastdowns - As easy as it sounds...ride 2:00 at your Threshold Power with your average power screen visible and intervals view on. After 2:00 at FTP soft pedal and coast your AVERAGE power down 10Watts then SPRINT it back up to the FTP average and repeat the 10W Loss/Sprint sequence for an additional 8 minutes (10 minutes total on interval). Rest 6-8 minutes between and repeat. Do 2-3 reps the first week and add a rep or additional time to the interval each week. Here are a few graphs that break it down a bit:
1. Full Interval - 1h16m at 0.94 IF (288Wnorm/FTP 300) - you can see the 2:00 start off interval each time and the high variability of efforts. VI was 1.3 for this workout - not quite steady state, yet a circa threshold effort for the duration


2. Interval Detail:
10:00 @ 1.10 / 1.03 VI / 88rpm avg overall

3 Individual Effort Detail
Lots of short and crisp efforts in the 12 - 15s range, and a nice block of 1:20 averaging 341 @ 96rpm early in the interval when power spikes higher and return-to-average times are shorter. As the interval continues the peak power values drop, the efforts take longer to return to FTP:



Throwing those efforts all together we get a quadrant analysis that looks like the one below and reflects the Neuromuscular/Quadrant 1 inclination of the efforts, with a solid foundation of Type II muscle fiber recruitment in Quadrant 2:



Thanks for reading...the reward is my 1998 Intro To Power...

POWER! It means different things to different people, but rest assured if you want to be a better cyclist you
need to have more power. Yes, endurance work, planned recovery, lactic acid work, and VO2max efforts are all important components of a complete training program, but in the end power is what drives the bike forward. In assessing your power you must ask yourself these questions:
1. How much power do I have? We offer a couple of otions to assess your current power
2. Where is my power best? Flats? Steep climbs? Downhill at high rpms?
3. Where is my power worst? Focus on improving these areas first
4. How do I get more? Read on faithful scribe...

Watch top World Cup riders in both Cross Country and Downhill. They rely on and deliver power with
amazing grace and blistering efficiency. They apply power throughout the pedal stroke, at all different RPM’s and across all conditions. They have mastered the technique with brutal effects. To help you develop this type of focus try these three easily adaptable techniques:
*Note: If you haven’t done the requisite base training then don’t attack power efforts with too much vigor in the early season or you will pay for it through injuries and overtraining.

  1. Big Gear Efforts: Riding a big gear at high RPM is a great way to increase power. First, get comfortable turning a big gear at low RPM’s. Try 50-65RPM in your largest or second largest gear for 2 minutes. Focus on applying pressure throughout the pedal stroke in a smooth and circular manner; literally pedal circles. These efforts help you improve your muscle fiber recruitment and increase the total number of muscle fibers involved in each effort, making your pedal stroke more efficient. Once you’ve developed base level competency at low RPM, it’s time to work with higher RPM efforts. Start with 30 second to 1 minute efforts at 80-90 RPM (RPM efficiency varies from rider to rider but is usually highest around 90 RPM). Use manageable gears to begin with (53x19 road, 46 or 48x17 MTB) and work up from there. Spend a few weeks adapting to this new form of training and begin increasing the duration of your efforts. You only want to attempt focused power intervals 1x per week, although you can incorporate power into much of your regular riding too.
  2. Rider/Bike Connectivity: This is the relationship between you and your bike. Sorry, but you won’t need to buy it new tires and a bell to get it. What you need to do is ride your bike. Learn how it reacts to your inputs and commands. Practice riding your bike with little or no upper body movement. Watch your favorite professionals, emulate their strengths and overcome your weaknesses. When climbing click up one gear before you stand, this helps you maintain the same rhythm and speed. Practice riding wheelies, jumping objects and skidding the front and rear tires (yes, you can skid the front tire). All of these techniques will make your application of power more supple and responsive. Get to know your bike and feel you are part of the same symbiotic relationship, because you are.
  1. Ride with Stronger Cyclists: If you can’t find anyone to ride with who really pushes you, get out and broaden you circle of riding partners! Seriously though, riding with people stronger than you helps develop power across a spectrum of conditions and tactical situations. Hard accelerations uphill, long gear wind-ups for the finish line, sprints to single track, all of these tax your power systems in different ways. When you’re with stronger riders, attack them! Don’t be afraid to go hard because you might “blow up.” What’s the worst that can happen? You blow up, get dropped and have to ride the rest of the 50 miles home into a fierce headwind by yourself? Hey, great opportunity to work on your low RPM power!



That's It For Now!



June 05, 2012

H.I.T.oo Early

H.I.T. - a current buzzword for lighting it up....High Intensity Training is all the rage! It seems that most everyone has a workout or class that is HIT...and given the nature of exercise physiology one must ask why?

What's the nature of physiology? Well, high intensity - anaerobic (despite the misnomer) efforts are produced via fairly straight forward pathways..namely the ATP-PC system (very short term) and Glycolysis (up to several minutes)...these capabilities - capacities, are the result of developing the infrastructure needed to support them whether by volume of 'stuff' that facilitates energy production or the aparatii that allows sufficient recovery, neither of which I have currently.

As I have both terrible fitness and occasionally surprising power on rides during the last month or so, it seemed like a terrible idea to do a HIT workout on Thursday, but I did it anyway as I was riding with a client and it was on his schedule. The workout is called FTP Coastdowns and it consists of riding 2:00 averaging FTP and then letting that rolling average drop 10 watts or so by softpedaling for 10-20 seconds...then sprinting the average back up to FTP before letting it again drop 10W...and repeating for 8-12 minutes total interval time. Rest intervals should be at least 1:1, but we cut it short a little...anyway, here is what the workout looks like in both macro and up-close views:

Close up of a coast down - 2:00 at FTP'ish (in this case 330W - which is really about 110% of my current FTP) followed by a block of efforts between 5 and 15 seconds at between 400 - 880 watts...usually with about 17-20 seconds at ~180 Watts for recovery.

The upside is that I could do 7'ish minutes of it..the downside is that it was a 10-12 minute interval, and I was DONE by the third block! That I could consistently turn out 5-15s efforts at better than 500W is probably more about Type II muscle mass and genetics than training - but I'll be curious to see what I can do when true fitness returns. True fitness requires taking the time to actually build those systems mentioned above...so that is my goal these next months, but I can't say I'll swear off the hard stuff completely. Here is the workout macro view - 34 efforts like the ones above:


Would I improve by doing just these types of efforts - or doing more of them..probably, but my hypothesis is that I'd plateau much earlier than if I take the time to build a more efficient engine and improve my overall endurance and capacity. Guess we'll see. I need to do some more reading to better understand how this all falls together...


May 26, 2012

Relative Fitness

We all know the value and import of 'fitness' - that undefined element of racing success that seems so transient and largely elusive depending on how much you ride. If you don't ride you don't have much capacity, but lots of freshness...if you ride a lot you have capacity, but little freshness...what power types call ones training stress balance....and while I appreciate the essence of it, I have of late been a bit perplexed by its application...

I always consider 300W to be a decent reference point of where I'm at. If 300 is easy to hold I'm probably doing ok in my progress, but I don't do too many full hours at 300W, and have only done a 'best' 60m at about 326Wnormalized - or about 4.3W/Kg. I've done much better on 20m or so...up to about a 4.65W/kg (man do I want to see 5W/Kg sometime). Anyway, a couple of weeks ago, after a solid stint of not riding - I did an hour of power at 307Wnormalized, which was very suprising since I had no real fitness, freshness, or capacity to speak of - then again that's not too bad for having a TOTAL of 29 hours of training in April and May, so what gives?

What allows for a baseline of relative fitness that is roughly 88% of an all time best*? The first step was validating the power numbers were ok....so I opened the file and hand edited it..plus I'd calibrated it mid-ride as well, so I feel pretty confident. I think a bigger question is the speed of degradation of ones fitness...without this getting too far into the article format here are some points to ponder...

1. 5 weeks of detraining in swimmers showed a peak VO2 loss of 7% and a similar decrease in resting metabolic rate as well.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22027854
 2. The effects of detraining are less noticeable in long term athletes, and the return to 'fitness' is quicker too...sort of the 'once you've been there, it's easier to get back there" rule. I did find this interesting though - the long term benefits of doping (in this case steroids) as a permanent adaptation (and possible impact on doping jurisdiction:
http://www.doctorsolve.com/blog/2010/08/a-new-kind-of-muscle-memory.html


Ok, so the point of this post was to look at relative fitness - to that end I'd have to say that my sustained steady state fitness seems to have a fairly high basement - that is to say even when I don't train much I can still hit some pretty good numbers on steady state efforts. But, unfortunately, racing is often not about steady state fitness, it's about attack, assess, counter..and that requires the type of fitness that I do not have right now, and which is the kind of elusive that makes one wonder if 6-months will be enough (I doubt it)...

*sigh*
 


May 14, 2012

Ah, It's Been Too Long

Since I had a good rant/post....so here goes

Today's Topic #1 - Bike Fit

First off....why does every shop and nearly every Johnny-Bike-Racer think they are a bike fitter? WTF is a bike fitter anyway? Someone who has taken a weekend course that gives you all the "right" angles and set ups? Better still..someone who 'knows a lot" about anatomy and biomechanics but hasn't bothered with an academic course on the subject?

Sure, I know it all boils down to a cash-center, what is it they call those...a revenue stream? Anyway...there is good money to be made on fittings, so that's why they are omni-present in the corner of nearly every local shop, but honest to god, I've heard some of the weakest arguments for bad choices, seen lots of questionable set ups on athletes who come in having already been "professionally" fit by someone else.

BTW... IT'S NOT A QUESTION OF PUTTING PEOPLE'S KNEES AT 30 DEGREES!

 Yep, there are a lot of heuristics that come into play, but lately I've been spending much of my of my time teaching people how to pedal correctly. By the way it's not based on this:
The myriad of problems this presents have been long discussed previously - as well as by me on facebook in a rant against the above pic awhile back...and I don't feel like finding the post again..so click the link and read up on it!

There are GREAT pratitioners - Curtis Cramblett has quite a reputation, Wade @ Spokesman in Santa Cruz does too. Ditto for Julie Bates at Roaring Mouse...and a few others I suppose. I'm not singling out any individuals for scorn...but really, why are you qualified*? Which brings me to...

Topic #2 - Props "Thanks to my coach! I couldn't have gotten here without your help and guidance, your friendship and cajoling!" or "Shout out to my coach, if you are looking for a good one...etc/blah/blah/blah"

I think I've gotten about four notes like that in the past near-decade of full time coaching . It's not that I'm seeking vanity and glory..but maybe just a little bit of props for whatever help I might have provided in getting the upgrade, the break through performance, or the big win.

I mean really....you'll ask for my help, pay me good money, endeavor to follow the well-crafted plan (with adjustments along the way), read my analysis and commentary - and then promptly develop amnesia that it wasn't your absolute talent and tenacity alone that won the day!

Then again...Maybe ego is ruling my world tonight and I just want people to like me!?

Which leads directly to

Topic #3 - The Cool Kid Contingent



My parents divorced when I was in fifth grade and I got myself into some trouble..couple of suspensions for fighting, enough that I squeaked thru to 6th mostly on the kindness of my teacher. I switched schools and suddenly got to re-invent the angry kid who fought a lot into the 'new' kid who ended up with lots of friends. I got to do it again in 7th grade, 9th grade and 10th grade too...always striving to be accepted and allowed.

Once life had settled in during H.S. I found myself friends with most everyone in school, but not necessarily one of the popular kids and that was great! I could talk to anyone, hang out with anyone and still maintain those crucial elements of status -whatever status a sixteen year old with a bike instead of a car might have. But that was sorta the point I think...I never really made it to the upper echelons of high school, or cycling..but I've always had good friends and enjoyed a certain entre thanks to some street cred. But the Cool Kid Contingent would never deign to let me hang for very long - in cycling or H.S. I'm not Rapha cool, Oakley cool, or Specialized cool..and while it bothers me a little sometimes - mostly when the CKC is on full flame of faux- awesomeness that repulses most  (and I'm still not worthy!) - I think I must fit a niche somewhere...The nice guy niche? The mediocre niche? The nearly-edgy niche?  I don't know...but I do like my Twin 6 stuff...just don't tell 'em or they may want it back!

*which may well beg the question "Why Are You Qualified?" - fair question...because I am, call me and we'll talk about it! Probably the Degree (even if it is a stupid BA!), the Anatomy, Physiology, Biomechanics, Exercise Physiology, Motor Learning, Motor Behavior and Graduate Courses, the continuing education and lifelong fascination with cycling are hints...

May 04, 2012

Belgian Training - Day 9 Beastie Boys Edition

I talked to my new coach - all motivated now! Enough so that I went to bed by 10p and got my 7.5 hours.

And onto other stuff....

The Beastie Boys Adam Y died today. He was 47 and I am shocked! Haven't really followed the band over the last few years...didn't even know he had Cancer...but that doesn't change the seminal impact of the Beastie's on my life. I'm sure there are thousands of others, millions perhaps, for whom the Beastie Boys continually spoke an anthem that resonated...

Fight For Your Right....To Party! It was the embodiment of all that teen angst, rebellion and wild living for a high school kid in Colorado Springs - conservative central. I bought the album and proceeded to annoy my parents to no end, loudly, and from the basement. Yep, Licensed To ILL was a staple



Then they hit out with Paul's Boutique, which I liked but grew to LOVE over the next two decades...especially while living in Arizona in 1989 - riding and racing with lots of free time to rock out in the 1 room hovel I shared with a friend. I guess I got lucky because soon enough it was the only thing I listened to and "Licensed To Ill" started to look sophomoric (although I still listened to it a bunch). B-Boy Bouillabaisse has to be in my top 10!


Beastie Boys - B-Boy Bouillabaisse from oli_mac on Vimeo.


Check Your Head - with its reverb and feedback mixed cacophony..wasn't on my list at first...but I got lucky and found the bounty of the album eventually...probably thanks to long conversations with Mary Jane.


Ill Communication - what can you say? I think "Root Down" is my all time favorite song


Hello Nasty - well, they don't have "Dr Lee PhD" available on video..so we'll default to "Dedication" and this  sweet mash up: Sorry Gotta Click It - but worth it even if it's incomplete..


That was the last full album I bought..but I can assure you I'll be getting the others this weekend.

I can't begin to list the situations in which I've jammed Beasties....from bike rides to snow days, studying to partying it was a near constant companion throughout the 90's. Mix tapes for girlfriends, motivation for time trials. LOUD!

Thanks Beasties for it all...

April 25, 2012

My Latest Pez Article -

Personality and Performance
Classics season is a showcase of talent. From Flanders to Liege we have a four week window into what it means to be the best in the World. In addition to the obvious physical gifts, there are individual and personality traits that have helped these riders reach such lofty heights. Let’s look at the role of personality in performance.
 By Matt McNamara
Professional cycling doesn’t have the luxury of a draft. There is no annual combine to assess talent. Instead we speak of a riders threshold power or VO2max as the keys to success. Unfortunately, for cycling, there aren’t a lot of great stats that can be referenced in making those selections. There is no “on-podium” percentage, or relative-finishing-position across races that has any real statistical merit, so we are left to a mix of physiological measures and perception as guides.

This isn’t the case in most other professional sports and perhaps that’s part of the allure of cycling – it really doesn’t operate like most other sports. Yet the quest to find top talent is terribly important to teams and coaches seeking the upper echelons. Teams cannot simply sign a rider on potential alone and invest years in developing that potential in the hopes that it may pay off eventually. Certainly the physiological characteristics are essential, but there are a host of psychological and personality factors that come into play as well.

While sports psychology is well recognized and oft discussed, the role of individual personality traits seems to be less considered at the outset. By and large personality traits, those intrinsic templates we use to view and interact with the World around us, are stable across ones lifetime. Let’s look at a few of the indicators that teams might consider, and that you might want to have a look at for your own development.

The Five Factor Model Most research on personality references what are called the “Big Five Factors” of personality and their constituent traits:

  1.  Openness to experience – ranks the individual as inventive/ curious, appreciative of a variety of experiences versus being more consistent and cautious. 
  2.  Conscientiousness – compares tendencies towards efficient/organized versus easy-going/careless. A tendency to show self discipline and aim for achievement; planned rather than spontaneous behavior 
  3. Extraversion – looks at predispositions towards being outgoing and energetic versus solitary and reserved. 
  4.  Agreeableness – Ones tendency to be friendly/compassionate and cooperative rather than cold/unkind, suspicious or antagonistic towards others. 
  5.  Neuroticism – compares nervousness and sensitivity (a tendency to experience unpleasant emotions like anger, anxiety or depression easily) versus someone who is more secure and confident. By and large these traits are considered fixed and unchanging across time. 
Of these, conscientiousness is the trait most often affiliated with performance as it considers ones tendency towards self discipline and their drive for achievement against outside expectations and measures. Conscientious individuals are considered thorough, reliable, organized, industrious, and self-controlled, among other traits. Conscientiousness is not without it’s limitations, however, namely that it relies on factor analysis of associated adjectives and in so doing eliminates those adjectives with few synonyms (and antonyms) from consideration. Another confound is that research has shown that the relative importance of the above qualities will likely vary depending on the type of achievement under consideration.

Indeed it has been suggested, for example, that self-control, ones ability to resist temptation, is a poor predictor of very high level achievement, whereas achievement orientation was shown to better predict job proficiency and educational success than did dependability.(1)

Grit
Researchers seeking to further understand high achievement, and the traits of star performers, have come up with a novel assessment that, by name at least, seems a perfect measure for cycling – Grit! Grit is defined as “perserverance and passion for long term goals.” Tenacity, drive, and determination are related terms, with the key element being a long view towards goal attainment.

Angela Duckworth, a researcher at the University of Pennsylvania, is acknowledged as the primary force behind the development of the Grit model. Her primary paper cited six different studies they conducted, each aimed at validating the idea of grit as a predictor of future success. Duckworth and colleagues developed a self-report scale that attempts to determine individual levels of grit. To establish a viable level of validity the scale had to meet four essential criteria: evidence of psychometric soundness, face validity for adolescents and adults pursuing goals in a variety of domains (e.g. not just work or school), low likelihood of ceiling effects in high achieving populations and a precise fit with the construct of grit

Research Summary The first study sought to validate the scale across an open spectrum of respondents and included questions that tapped into an individuals ability to sustain effort in the face of adversity (e.g. ““I have overcome setbacks to conquer an important challenge,” “I finish whatever I begin”), consistency of interest over time (e.g. “My interests change from year to year” or “I have difficulty maintaining my focus on projects that take more than a few months to complete.”).

Items are rated on a 5-point scale from 1 = not at all like me to 5 = very much like me. Of particular note was the tendency for “grit” to become more ingrained as we age and with higher education levels. Older college graduates demonstrated a higher level of “grit” than younger or less educated ones.

Several of their other studies looked to explore the real world realities of the model. For example it was demonstrated that spelling bee participants who scored higher in grit survived longer in the competition. Grit also proved to be a valid predictor of first year success and retention at West Point Military Academy.

Of course all of this correlation and relevance has some counfounds,chief among them was that the model is built on self-report. For example the answer tracking of the questions on the test are fairly easy to extrapolate in context, which may lead people to answer “how they should” – the so-called social desirability effect. The second confound is that respondents are asked to reflect on past actions, which are then extrapolated to future outcomes. Of course the fact that different respondents across different populations respond similarly.

Finally, the research used select populations and didn’t offer insight into a relationship to other predictors of success like self efficacy and locust of control. A Familiar Refrain? If all of this sounds vaguely familiar, it may be that it tracks well with Malcolm Gladwell's writings on expertise (if it’s not familiar, you have some reading to do!). Gladwell's summary noted that expertise is derived from continuous effort and focus – 10, 000 hours of it! Indeed, Ericsson and Charness (1994) concluded that in chess, sports, music,and the visual arts, over 10 years of daily “deliberate practice” set apart expert performers from less proficient peers and that 20 years of dedicated practice was an even more reliable predictor of world-class achievement.

Summary Performance is all too often ascribed to physical talents and physiological gifts alone. Certainly there are a vast array of psychological components that set the star rider apart as well. Into the mix steps the work of Angela Duckworth and the role of Grit. Grit is defined as perseverance and passion towards long term goals. Grit is a personality trait that has been shown to be a strong predictor of overall success. From spelling bees to West Point, individuals who score highly on the “grit scale” are more adept at the long game of deliberate practice that ultimately results in expertise and achievement.

References: 1. Duckworth, Petersen, et al “Grit: Perseverance and Passion for Long Term Goals. Personality Process. 2007 2. “The Emotional Quarterback” – Jonah Lehner, Wired Magazine Online April 6, 2011

June 16, 2010

Lactic Acid - Part 2


It is a common misnomer that Lactic Acid is the cause of fatigue and cessation of high intensity exercise, yet training plans built around your individual Lactate Threshold are highly effective despite the debunking of the “Lactic Acidosis” rationale. Let’s learn why…

By Matt McNamara

Last month we looked at the intricacies of Lactic Acid/Lactate production and its role in limiting performance. The short summary of that article is to say that Lactic Acid production is NOT the limiter in high intensity exercise, and the science behind that belief was founded on an inferred cause and effect relationship between lactate production and cessation of exercise that, ultimately, proved to be untrue.

While lactate production may not be a limiter, it is clearly a marker of overload and does play a role in athletic development and performance. Lactate Threshold based training, when paired with use of a powermeter, is seen as the gold standard for endurance based performance improvement. So let’s explore the real meaning and value of Lactate Threshold based training.

What Does Lactate Threshold Really Mean?
First off, Lactate Threshold is commonly defined as “the exercise intensity at which lactate production exceeds lactate removal, and thus begins to accumulate in muscle and hence in the blood.” Unfortunately, the definition of what constitutes “Lactate Threshold” is highly variable.

Many researchers establish threshold as the point when lactate concentration rises 1 mmol above an exercise baseline. Others use a fixed value, for example 2.5 mmol per liter, as the threshold point. Still another approach is to use D-max which takes the mid-point between the baseline and maximal lactate concentrations. In the end the most important consideration isn’t the way threshold was determined, so much as the concept of Lactate Threshold (and associated terms) as illustrating the non-linear relationship between lactate concentration and exercise intensity.

It is also important to acknowledge that terms like Maximal Lactate Steady State (MLSS), Onset Blood Lactate Accumulation (OBLA), Ventilatory Threshold (VT), Individual Anaerobic Threshold, Critical Power, etc are talking about roughly the same range of intensity. Each of these, MLSS and OBLA in particular, correlate well with the power training concept of Functional Threshold Power (FTP), which is itself defined as your maximal sustained power output for approximately 60 minutes.


Now that we have a clearer idea of what is meant by Lactate Threshold, and we know that Lactic Acid is not the cause of fatigue, let’s look at other factors that might play a role.

Other Causes of Fatigue
In 2005 researchers from Edith Cowan University in Western Australia set out to do just that. Models to Explain Fatigue During Prolonged Endurance Cycling, Chris Abbiss and Paul Laursen’s comprehensive review of fatigue literature, looked at no fewer than ten different explanations of fatigue.

Abiss and Laursen point out that fatigue is usually defined by the type of research being done. For example, if one is looking into psychological causes then they will tend to classify fatigue as “a sensation of tiredness,” while a biomechanist might look more at changes in force output to qualify fatigue. Fatigue research is also driven by a reductionist approach; those doing the research tend to look for a single ‘answer’ to the question of fatigue.

Among the different paradigms and models explored were the anaerobic/cardiovascular model, the energy supply/depletion model, neuromuscular fatigue, biomechanical, thermoregulatory, and muscle trauma models. In addition the psychological/motivational model, central governor, and complex systems models were also reviewed. A quick summary of characteristics might demonstrate that:

Neuromuscular fatigue tends to be divided into a question of where along the neuromuscular pathway inhibition occurs, while the muscle trauma model seeks to explain fatigue as coming from damage to the muscle itself, or to alterations in the chemical homeostasis.

The biomechanical paradigm seeks to define fatigue as the result of decreased efficiency of motion, where increasing efficiency lowers the production of metabolites (like lactate) and energy consumption, helping attenuate increases in core temperature. This segues nicely into the thermoregulatory model which looks at the role of core temperature and the increased demands on the physiological systems brought about as a result of increased core temperature towards critical points at which exercise capacity is reduced or terminated.

While psychologically no single variable appears to be responsible for motor output alteration due to afferent (outgoing) signals, it is thought that numerous mechanisms are responsible for the subconscious perception of fatigue and alterations in central activation and perceived exertion.

The central governor and complex systems theories seek to explain fatigue as a function of oversight by an as-yet-undefined central mechanism, or through the complex inter-relationship of multiple feedback loops seeking to maintain homeostasis, respectively.

Their net conclusion is that any number of systems may contribute to fatigue in a specific way for a specific situation, but in general the limitation of the system is derived from oxygen delivery to the muscles, especially at high intensity.

To further clarify in the Abiss and Laursen article fatigue was defined as “tiredness and associated decrements in muscular performance and function.” This is an important point as much research has looked at performance to exhaustion. The relevance comes when we look at how to best apply some of the factors above into the creation of a responsible training program. Many of the changes we seek are built around the optimization of oxygen delivery and increasing metabolic efficiency during the training year, so how does Lactate Threshold help?

Threshold As Proxy
An individual’s Lactate Threshold is the single most important physiological determinant of endurance exercise performance. It is trainable, reliable, and a sort of proxy for other important metabolic processes that underlie performance.

For example hormone production, like epinephrine/norepinephrine, shows a similar curvelinear relationship with increasing exercise intensity. Plasma potassium concentration, catecholamine concentration, plasma ammonia concentrations, growth hormone, cortisol and many other elements also demonstrate the same threshold type trends as lactate.

Power at Threshold
Now that we’ve established what Lactate Threshold is, how it is determined, and what processes it parallels, let’s spend a little bit of time on what advantages threshold level training can bring to your performance.

For untrained athletes the Lactate Threshold benefits of training can be seen at a wide range of intensities. Simply getting on the bike regularly will bring about many changes including increased mitochondrial density, blood lactate response, and reductions in lactate concentration at a given intensity.

For the trained athlete however, continuous training at intensities around Lactate Threshold has been shown to be beneficial since the time of the fabled East German sports machine in the twentieth century. The East Germans were famous for doing extended hours of training at OBLA!

In a similar vein, Gorostiaga et al in 1991 compared a continuous training group at circa-threshold intensity to one that did only structured high intensity VO2max type intervals (of the type that are all the rage today) and found some compelling differences. While the VO2max group did show a two fold increase in percentage change in VO2max (16% increase v 8% increase), the continuous training group had a ten fold increase in citrate synthase production compared to the VO2max group (25% increase v 2.5% increase). Citrate synthase is one of the main markers for muscle mitochondrial capacity, and is a good reference for total metabolic efficiency.

Both of these examples (the first decidedly anecdotal) serve to illustrate the value of continuous training at an intensity around Lactate Threshold. This has most recently been termed ‘sweet spot’ training, but the idea has been advocated by Lydiard, Coggan, and others in various forms or years. Typically “sweet spot” is defined as approximately 88-93% of your Lactate Threshold power, however the true measure of intensity should be determined by your ability to repeat them over multiple days in a training block.

These circa-threshold efforts should be at least twenty minutes in length, but can last up to two hours or more for advanced athletes. A key determinant of the duration and intensity is your ability to replicate the workout intensity/duration again the next day. A well prepared, motivated athlete doing 60 minutes at 88-93% of threshold power (FTP), should be able to replicate that workload again the second and third days. If you can’t then you probably went too hard, too long, or don’t have a good estimate of your FTP and need to adjust. My suggestion is to start doing some field testing to establish your FTP and then see what you can do. Have fun and let me know how it goes…

References:

1. Abbiss, Chris, Laursen, Paul – Models to Explain Fatigue During Prolonged Endurance Cycling. School of Exercise, Biomedical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Australia. 2005
2. Coggan, Andy – Explaining Lactate Threshold. Webinar Presentation. 2010
3. Robergs, Robert A., Ghiasvand, Farzenah, Parker, Daryl – Biochemistry of exercise-induced metabolic acidosis. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 287: R502–R516, 2004

May 06, 2010

Lactic Acid Article


Lactate and Lactic Acid production are routinely offered as the seemingly natural cause and effect parameters that lead to fatigue and a decrease in performance, but are they really the source of the problem?

By Matt McNamara

If you’ve read anything about training in the last ten years you’ve probably come across the idea of Lactate Threshold and a discussion of how lactic acid production limits performance. The argument often goes something like this:

“As exercise intensity increases lactic acid production rises at a rate that, eventually, overwhelms the bodies ability to buffer this build-up and a decrease in performance naturally follows.”

Heck, I’ve repeated the mantra myself time and again over the years, despite KNOWING that it was an incomplete explanation of what actually happens. The truth is it provides a simple, though not wholly inaccurate, way to explain the well-documented trends of decreasing performance with increasing lactate concentrations. The idea of cause and effect just sort of fit well. So rather than perpetuate mediocre understanding, let’s jump in and learn a bit more:

A Brief, Albeit Incomplete, History
Lactic Acid was first isolated by Swedish researcher Carl Wilhelm Scheel from a batch of sour milk in 1780 (hence the commonly used term “lactic” instead of the far sexier formal name of 2-hydroxypropanoic acid, but I digress). Otto Meyerhoff and Archibald Hill, Nobel Prize winners in 1922, demonstrated that Lactic Acid was actually produced as a side reaction of Glycolysis, a primary metabolic pathway that converts carbohydrate/glucose into pyruvate, in the process converting energy into ATP through a 10-step set of reactions. In the absence of oxygen this conversion is sustained with Lactic Acid. This anaerobic process releases a proton (H+).

This was a key finding as it seemed to offer a cause and effect relationship between lactate production (lactate is, essentially, the salt or base of Lactic Acid) and the extended concept of Lactic Acidosis, or a decrease in pH that results from the release of protons in the system (cell or bloodstream).

This cause and effect relationship was taken as fact by researchers throughout the 20th and into the 21st century. However, in reviewing past and current research, Robergs et al (2004) have shown that there was no actual empirical evidence to support the cause/effect relationship; rather it was largely based on statistical correlation and the reputation of the Nobel Laureates Meyerhoff and Hill (which was richly deserved, I might add).

So, if the cause and effect nature of lactate production and acidosis is not an accurate portrayal of the role of Lactate in the onset of acidosis, and therefore performance, what is?

Debunking Lactic Acidosis
In 2004 Roberg, et al wrote an extensive review of the literature that sought to debunk the long-standing cause and effect relationship between lactate production and metabolic acidosis. Their sixteen page review takes an exhaustive, and somewhat intimidating, look at the true biochemistry of metabolic acidosis.

For example they detail the role of the phosphagen, glycolytic and mitochondrial systems in producing ATP and the differences in how each manages any released protons. They also note the difference in the nature of the proton release in glycolysis depending on whether the carbohydrate was derived from blood glucose or muscle glycogen. Glycogen is less acidifying to muscle during intense exercise.

Roberg then goes on to detail the many benefits derived from lactate production including the alkalizing effect of LDH, Lactate Dehydrogenase, or that it then circulates away the lactate to other areas that need it including the kidney, liver, and heart, for use as a substrate.

Finally, they looked at the role of nonmitochondrial ATP production, via research by Gevers in 1977 and 1979. Gevers established that metabolic processes other than LDH might contribute to the removal of protons in the form of the turnover of ATP via glycolysis. In other words that non-mitochondrial ATP production was likely responsible for metabolic acidosis.

But here’s where lactate threshold based training comes in

Training Threshold
Lactate threshold based training is a great tool. More specifically using the combination of a powermeter and a threshold based training approach is a highly effective way to manage your training.

Andy Coggan recently hosted a webinar on Lactate Threshold via USA Cycling. In addition to a comprehensive look at the establishment, definitions, and relationships of training around one’s lactate threshold. Among the cool takeaways

The first is to see terminology like Lactate Threshold, Maximal Lactate Steady State, Onset Blood Lactate Accumulation, etc as talking about roughly the same range of intensity. It’s likely going to be between about 80-90% of your VO2max for sustained periods of time. This will raise your general metabolic fitness. Further specialization is ideal for targeting specific race preparation

Coggan also noted that it has been shown in a wide array of studies that many other factors and processes contribute to fatigue. Things like epinephrine/norepineprine (adrenaline/noradrenalin), plasma potassium, and cortisol level, etc. often show a similar threshold type profile to that of lactate.

Abiss and Laursen did a comprehensive look at fatigue in 2005. Models to Explain Fatigue During Prolonged Endurance Cycling looked at no fewer than 10 different models of fatigue including the cardiovascular/anaerobic model, neuromuscular biomechanical, thermoregulatory models, and several others. Their net conclusion is that any number of systems may contribute to fatigue in a specific way for a specific situation, but in general the limitation of the system is derived from oxygen delivery to the muscles. Since we established above that metabolic acidosis is not derived from lactic acid, but that lactate production is an important contributor to oxygen delivery, it time to embrace those burning quads and get to work improving that lactate tolerance.

Perhaps next time we’ll look at that – drop me a line if you’re interested in a part 2.

References:

1. Abbiss, Chris, Laursen, Paul – Models to Explain Fatigue During Prolonged Endurance Cycling. School of Exercise, Biomedical and Health Sciences, Edith Cowan University, Australia. 2005
2. Coggan, Andy – Explaining Lactate Threshold. Webinar Presentation. 2010
3. Robergs, Robert A., Ghiasvand, Farzenah, Parker, Daryl – Biochemistry of exercise-induced metabolic acidosis. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 287: R502–R516, 2004

April 20, 2010

Spring Fling!

A quick update before I put my head back in the computer...

The past 6 weeks has been a foggy haze of coughing and allergies that hit a crescendo last week when my doctor prescribed Advair and Singulair to try and stem the tide of sickness that saw approximately 7 HOURS of training in March! I'm not wild about taking prescription drugs - espeically those with a 30-day run time mandatory - but I do want to get healthy and able to ride sometime this season, so I did it.

On the plus side I feel much better and just got back from a SOLID trip to Sea Otter working for TRP Brakes. It was a very enjoyable trip because we got to meet and greet hundred of cyclists and dozens of industry folks who all had nice things to say about TRP Brakes. We even made a few connections for the upcoming Cyclocross season. I'll have our 2010 program information our shortly - it's gonna be a good one.

On another topic: CyclingNewsAsia - is a fledgling site that serves the growing asian market including China, Taiwan, Malaysia and all points on that side of the ring of fire. I like the arc of their approach - user friendly and slightly entry level. The goal is to ably educate newer riders on all that cycling is. They are also smart (or not) enough to let me write some content too! My first article just went up last week and another will follow shortly. If you want to learn what's happening in the production hot-bed of Asia, check them out.

More soon...

Matt

November 09, 2009

Archive #1 - The Training Week

Nearly all of us have limits on our available training time, yet all of us are looking to improve our cycling abilities and performance. This often creates a paradox where we try to cram as much “stuff” as we can into our rides, but end up with sporadic fitness gains and performance. To this end let’s look at some ways to organize your training to accomplish all of the above and more.

The Training Week – Classical View
Cycling, like many other sports, is built on the history of what came before. It has been, for example, a long standing tradition to take a rest day on Monday after a weekends racing. The rest of the training week has followed a similar pattern: Tuesday is for sprint work, Wednesday is for threshold training, Thursday is long endurance day, while Friday is a tune up for the Saturday and Sunday races. This plan, as the story goes, puts the most intense workouts early in the week, when the body is most prepared for them.

This pattern has been drilled into athletes, and coaches, for a long time, and is often considered to be merely the micro-cycle component of a periodized training plan. Tudor Bompa, long credited as the father of periodization, first introduced macro, meso, and micro cycles in the 1950’s. Indeed, the original concept of periodization was built on Hans Selye’s General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS), which looks at the stress placed upon a system, and the adaptation that occurs as a result.

When he came to the United States in the 1980’s Eddie Borysewicz brought a similar structure to the training program at the United States Cycling Federation (USCF, precursor to USA Cycling). His plan, espoused in the seminal (for US riders!) “Bicycle Road Racing – Complete Program For Training and Competition,” included Monday rest, and sprints on Tuesday and intervals Thursday. Wednesday was endurance, while Friday was recovery/tune up. Saturday was high intensity/race simulation and Sunday was the longest and hardest day.

Recently I was cleaning out some of the vast clutter that is my filing system and came across the 1994 U.S. National Team training plan for Senior Men. The plan was written by then National Team Coach Chris Carmichael. In thumbing through the pages a familiar pattern began to emerge. In the forty weeks of training listed there was not one week where the “Monday rest” pattern was broken. Fortunately, there was substantive variation in the day to day program design of the rest of the program, a testament to Carmichael's embrace of modernization of training even then. Interestingly, there is no mention made of lactate threshold based training. It is either Aerobic, Anaerobic, or VO2max!

The Training Week - Updated
The previous examples are not offered as a “what not to do” but more as back drop when looking at your own training. To be sure the foundations of periodization are sound and should form the basis of your plan design. Rather than preach a “perfect” model for organizing your week, let’s look at some of the factors that may play a role in how you might schedule your week and optimize your workouts.

Optimize Your Training Time
If you are on a limited training schedule you have to learn to optimize the time you have available. That means cutting out the ‘junk’ hours and focusing on the task at hand. While it sounds logical and doable, you’d be surprised how easy it is to squander training time. Take that extra 20 minutes to warm up and you’ve cost yourself both the 20 minutes, and the positive training effect of having stepped up the intensity, even if it’s only to a tempo pace. Multiply that over 3 training days and your 10 hour training week only has 9 hours to accomplish the goals you set.

One of my current favorite workouts is what I call a “Sweet Spot – Level 2.” A traditional “sweet spot interval” is doing 88-93% of your Functional Threshold Power (FTP) for 60 minutes. If you do a 15-minute warm up and cool down then you’ve got a very good training ride in an hour and a half. A level 2 effort takes the warm up and cool down and moves them up to tempo efforts (ok, maybe a five minute warm up). Instead of rolling around for 20 minutes at 50% of FTP, you are on the gas immediately and holding 70-75% of FTP for the warm up cool down (ok, maybe five minutes warm down too). In the end you have the same 1.5 hour workout, but you have a higher total training stress score and more aerobic development.

Another favorite workout is the 3peat Threshold Workout (or 2peat, 4peat, etc). Find a climb that is at least 10 minutes long, the minimum needed for a true threshold level workout. Time yourself up and down holding a steady threshold effort on the way up and a brisk recovery pace on the way down. Now that you have a baseline see how many up/down cycles you can do in an hour.

Around my house that is a 3peat climb on Montebello Road; a 2-mile climb that averages around 10%. It usually takes me about 15:30 to climb at 300W (which is about my FTP) and about 4:15 to descend, so if I do 3 up/down in an hour it gives me about 45:00 minutes of threshold work, a nice recovery between intervals, and a serious dose of climbing. As fitness goes up I can push harder to try and get as far below an hour as possible. My current best is 55:55 with individual intervals of 13:35 at 350 Watts, 14:44 at 319 Watts and 13:54 at 343 Watts, for a total TSS of 100.7 and an Intensity Factor of 1.07 at 258 Watts average/322 Watts normalized (My FTP was set at 310 at that time, but was probably closer to 330). Since it’s about 15 minutes each way to the climb this is a pefect workout on those days I don’t have long to ride.

Recognize Stress
Hans Selye referred to the effects of either “eustress” (positive/beneficial) or “distress” (negative/detrimental) on the system. Eustress resulted in feelings of improvement, increased muscle strength, and other markers of a positive impact on your training. Distress, on the other hand, leads to tissue damage, fatigue, and ultimately can lead to overtraining. The challenge is to recognize the difference.

Let’s look at the Monday rest, Tuesday sprints model for example. You race on Sunday and do pretty well, although you are tired. Monday comes and you are feeling pretty good, but it’s a rest day so you chill. You don’t sleep well on Monday night, work stress is piling on, you ate a double death burger for lunch and now you “have” to go do your sprints or else you’ll lose fitness and never upgrade! The workout is a mess. You don’t even come close to your top speed or max power, your heart rate is stagnant and you feel so slow you think about giving up the sport. Clearly you’ve experienced more ‘distress’ than “eustress.”

While that is an extreme example of how life, for us working stiffs, can interfere with your ideal training plan, it does offer a little insight into possible modifications to your training that won’t cause you to lose fitness or motivation.

Ride Hard Fresh
Time and again coaches advocate recovery over additional intensity, volume, or both. Improvements in Chronic Training Load (CTL) are most effective long term when the ramp rate (or gain) is approximately 6 – 8 TSS points per week. If the athlete is gaining CTL at a faster rate it is generally unsustainable long term.

Let me take a step back here and define what is meant by Chronic Training Load. CTL is a measure of accumulated training stress across a long period of time, typically at least 30 days. It is expressed as a rolling average of Training Stress Score (TSS) points per day. For example a CTL score of 100 means you have averaged 100 TSS points per day over the length of your ‘snapshot’ (eg 30 days). By tracking your training across time in this manner you are able to get a good overall picture of both your training trends and fitness improvements.

Time and time again athletes forego that advice in the pursuit of fitness gains. Unfortunately that tends to create randomization of training. That is to say that week to week the athletes total training load shows wider variation than that which is recommended for a ‘responsible’ progression. Are you one of these athletes?

If so, try something different. Schedule your weeks training around a more gradual gain and then play with the daily specifics to try and address physiological needs. If you are focused on developing FTP, spend lots of training time at FTP. If your focus lies in VO2max development, spend your training time on that. The caveat is that you have to scale back the volume, and possibly the frequency, of training you do, but that doesn’t matter. If you’re target is 600 TSS points for the week and you can get it done in 9 hours instead of 12 you’ll have three more hours to spend on another part of your life while still making steady and substantive gains in your total fitness.

Summary
It is far too easy to fall into a predictable pattern of training. Coaches and other athletes will readily offer you the ‘perfect’ training week as described across time. However, with the demands of work and family often taking priority it is common for one’s training to stagnate on a traditional plan. Rather than continuing to follow the same patterns to the same conclusions try to vary your training around a few core principles.

Freshness: Training should be a positive stress in your life. If you start a training ride and are carrying residual fatigue from the weekend races give yourself an extra day to recover.

Focus: Look at your current training. Are you optimizing your training time or just riding around on your bike? Find or purchase some high quality, highly focused workouts that will help you get the most out of your limited training time. If you use a power meter, look at the files. Did you ride for two hours and average 50% of your threshold power even WITH the 2x20 minute intervals? Perhaps it’ time to try some focused tempo efforts!

Consistency: Try to create a realistic training plan that allows you to progressively improve your fitness over time. Sure, you can ‘get fast’ in a few weeks of heavy overload, but you’ll ultimately pay the price in reduced motivation and time off from training later when the cost of those hard miles comes due.

Putting these elements into your weekly training schedule will help you realize consistent gains, have more fun, and chew up the competition at the next race (which is the fun part!)