I've got a really bad trend going...let's call it the ebb and flow of fitness. For the fourth year in five my fitness has ranged far too wide during the course of a year. If a Chronic Training Load above 75 TSS/day is considered the cross over point of 'real' fitness then I've managed only a few scant months of such over the last 60 months. I'll admit that I have a pretty good excuse for the loss of 2012 fitness, but still it's a bit disconcerting when you strive to be your best and it's constantly transient. First let's look at training volume over the past five years:
2008 is the largest at 390 hours for the year - about 33 hours per month, 2010 the lowest at a mere 243 hours, or just over 20 hours per month. The last 2 years are very, eerily, similar on a host of fronts. I don't know if I can hit 400 hours this coming year, but it is certainly a goal. Here is a look at my CTL track (blue line), with notes the last few years:
2012:
You can see the ramp rate jumps in May after a terrible spring. Peak 20m power is the highest I've tested since 2008 at 361W for 20m. CTL is also at the highest point since I started training consistently with power at a peak of 90 TSS/day in mid September just before 'Cross Vegas.
2011:
A slightly longer runnup to high CTL - peaking at 88 TSS/d in late August - had me better prepared for the CX season than in either 2010 or 2009. The fact that CTL dropped so readily in the months of the season illustrates the same lack of training consistency that is my unfortunate habit. Peak 20m values for the year
2010:
Peak value for CTL was only 64, again in late summer. Not sure why the bottom fell out of my early spring, but the fact that peak CTL was only 64 says I was pretty busy with the rest of my life this year.
2009:
This was one of the better years with regard to consistency of training after September 1st. Peak CTL was 74 in early August, but didn't plummet until the end of November. Instead it approximated the kind of gradual drop in CTL that would normally accompany a block of racing. 20m best was actually from a race in November.
2008:
Certainly a different look to the season. Peak CTL of 83 was in early May rather than late summer. This was the first season of Sterling 'Cross and CTL stayed high (well, sorta) thru the season, varying only 10 points from September to the end of November.
So what is the take away from all of this? Essentially it's that consistency is the most important part of fitness - and I'm pretty mediocre at consistency. Life has a funny way of interrupting training! Will 2013 be any better? Given a new situation I am optimistic...
A walk through my cycling life, a swim in my millieu, a run in the....where the hell is the cycling euphemism?
Showing posts with label Training. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Training. Show all posts
December 20, 2012
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*
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:
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
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:
- Openness to experience – ranks the individual as inventive/ curious, appreciative of a variety of experiences versus being more consistent and cautious.
- 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
- Extraversion – looks at predispositions towards being outgoing and energetic versus solitary and reserved.
- Agreeableness – Ones tendency to be friendly/compassionate and cooperative rather than cold/unkind, suspicious or antagonistic towards others.
- 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.
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
Belgian Training Day 2 (and 3)...
Tuesday I met up with one of my H.S. MTB athletes - well, I actually met up with the other 2 as well, but they went MTB'ing - and we headed out to do the legendary "Sweet Spot" or "Hour of Power" ride...60m at ~90% FTP. I figure my FTP is probably around 300W right now (maybe a bit lower), so I set out to do 270W, figuring that was going to be a stretch after not-a-lot-of-riding the past couple of weeks (months, years)...and figuring that Malcolm might not be ready to go full gas since this was his first time doing the workout. I use a sweet little loop by my house:
View Sweet Spot Loop in a larger map It takes about 22-25 minutes to do a lap, making it the perfect loop for this workout. You do have to wait - or blow - one stoplight, but that's not too bad for an urban area like this. Anyway, off we went and I quickly found that 270 was pretty easy - in fact I could hold near 300W without too much strain or heart rate drift. I even kept the "sprint-every-3-minutes" component because it wasn't that bad. Malcolm did a good job of sitting on my wheel (he's about 140 lbs to my 173 lbs - so in the draft he had it "easy"). Here's the quick version: 48 minutes of Sweet Spot, 12 minutes of Groveling! Things were going great into the third lap when I gapped off Malcom just before the turn around, roughly 45 minutes into the ride, and was feeilng pretty good. My average was down to 295 but I thought I might be able to pick it up again if I tried... then the wheels came off over the small hill on Arastradero - couldn't hold the power, couldn't really pedal very well...and over the next 12 minutes of nearly focused effort I lost about 12W of my average!. Here is the Strava for the ride: Roughly 20.5 miles in the hour...but still need the power download (F*%&king Powertap Cradle!)
Day 3 was NO RIDE b/c I wasted too much time on my job today instead of riding - oh yea, and I ate a McDonalds out of depression...I suck. Back at it tomorrow...
View Sweet Spot Loop in a larger map It takes about 22-25 minutes to do a lap, making it the perfect loop for this workout. You do have to wait - or blow - one stoplight, but that's not too bad for an urban area like this. Anyway, off we went and I quickly found that 270 was pretty easy - in fact I could hold near 300W without too much strain or heart rate drift. I even kept the "sprint-every-3-minutes" component because it wasn't that bad. Malcolm did a good job of sitting on my wheel (he's about 140 lbs to my 173 lbs - so in the draft he had it "easy"). Here's the quick version: 48 minutes of Sweet Spot, 12 minutes of Groveling! Things were going great into the third lap when I gapped off Malcom just before the turn around, roughly 45 minutes into the ride, and was feeilng pretty good. My average was down to 295 but I thought I might be able to pick it up again if I tried... then the wheels came off over the small hill on Arastradero - couldn't hold the power, couldn't really pedal very well...and over the next 12 minutes of nearly focused effort I lost about 12W of my average!. Here is the Strava for the ride: Roughly 20.5 miles in the hour...but still need the power download (F*%&king Powertap Cradle!)
Day 3 was NO RIDE b/c I wasted too much time on my job today instead of riding - oh yea, and I ate a McDonalds out of depression...I suck. Back at it tomorrow...
Labels:
Belgium,
My Training,
Power,
Strava,
Sweet Spot,
Training
April 30, 2010
Central Governor Theory and the RAAM!
I was driving to Sacto the other night and heard a discussion centered around the idea of a "Central Governor" theory for exercise physiology. It was a small part of pretty cool NPR piece about the Limits of human capacity on the show"Radiolab". Witout getting into the theory itself; During the show they referenced this movie too:
sort of a fun way to start the first weekend in May...
sort of a fun way to start the first weekend in May...
January 28, 2010
2010 Training Update #1 - The Coach

In typical fashion I've started to be able to focus on my training a bit later than I'd planned. I don't know why it is a suprise to me when it happens...it's been this way more often than not. Case in point:
January Hours/Miles By Year:
2002: 20hr / 253mi
2003: 56hr / 921mi - that was awesome!
2004: ?? / ??
2005: 43hr / 670mi
2006: 29hr / 505mi
2007: 23hr / 390mi
2008: 27hr / 424mi
2009: 19hr / 365mi
2010: 19hr / 313mi so far
So, overall January has not been a growth month for me. This year started off with a small, very small actually, flurry of rides in the first 10 days. I was 7 for 10 I think. Then the month got busy, time slipped by and here we are at the end and I'll be topping out at about 25hours and 400 miles yet again. So, what are your 'best' and 'worst' training months? Take a moment to look back and see what you've done for volume over the past several years if you can. It's a very enlightening process. I know that fitness will come back pretty quickly, so I try not to let it stress me out too much - but it's tough knowing that friends and competitors are racking up big miles while I am not. This week has been decent so far... 3 rides of Tempo/Threhsold intensity. Tue/Wed I did 3x10minutes at 90% of FTP within a 60min ride and today I knocked off another hour at the same - 270Watts - with a series of 7 loops of 6-7minute circuit completed at 100-110% of FTP (short enough that 110% was sustainable). My legs are a little tired - which is nice. Tomorrow I'll try to do another ride, and this weekend I'm mentoring on Sunday so i should end up with my target of 500TSS for the week. A good 'kickoff' to Februarry, which is usually a pretty good month for me - guilt I guess...
June 10, 2009
Training Theory Applied - Part 2
Consistency:
In the first post of this series(is it a series?) I wrote about The Athletic Mindset, and the triangulations that form it: Zen Buddhism, The Flow State, and Expertise. Now the trick is to employ these elements in a manner that helps drive development. For the most part that can be summed up in one word - Consistency.
If we take the precepts of the Athletic Mindset to be worth striving for, then bringing consistency to your workouts is an elemental first step. Yet, it is often difficult to master. There are too many distractions, too much work, too few hours in the day. Whatever the rationale it really boils down to a question of committment. Instead of striving for consistency, many athletes follow the 'too much, too little' paradigm. They'll have a world class ride, better still a world class week or two and then, because the training was so focused, too focused, they over cook themselves and training plummets for a day, a week, or a month. Or perhaps training is steady and work/life/family/stress gets in the way and training plummets. Whatever the reason it's these 'ON/OFF' patterns that result in sporadic fitnes gains. The challenge is to establish a new pattern...
Consistency
Consistency is really just making the committment to steady progress with your training. My recent ToolBox article on Pez Cycling News covered some of the traditional approaches to organizing your training week, including how some of those traditions may contribute to sporadic fitness. As noted in the article it is often a good idea to take a larger view of your training. One way to do that is to look at your goals for a particular block (threshold development for example) AND how that fits into the big picture of training towards that marquee goal you've set vis-a-vis training load. Another way is to look at the individual rides and better manage their efficiency. First let's look at Training Load.
Thanks to people like Andy Coggan, Hunter Allen, Eric Bannister, Phil Skiba etc. we have any number of ways to track training load for both individual workouts and over time. Personally, I like the Coggan model because it is built from a solid platform of research and it's pretty intuitive to understand (you can brush up on it here). I also like it because it's part of the WKO+ software that I use, so I don't have to do much to keep track of the numbers.
There have been several good threads about training load on the Wattage forum. They have dealt with the imposition of training over time - usually reflected in one's Chronic Training Load (CTL). The consensus seems to be that a gradual ramp rate of 5-8 TSS points per week (20-35 points per month) is sustainable long term up to an athletes as-yet-unknown optimal training volume. Of course the duration of this 'gradual build' is set by ones current CTL and, therefore, may not be the best tracking method for those alread close to an optimal training load (then again do YOU know YOUR optimal training load?). One thing is certain, by approaching your training load in a more longitudinal fashion you will likely build fitness at a rate you can maintain, and still see improvements throughout.
Let's say you have 10 hours a week to train. Theorhetically you have a maximum training load of 1000 TSS points (1 Hour at FTP = 100 points) per week. It is much more realistic to expect between 500 and 800 points in a given week for the same 10 hours (really, how many hours per week can you do at FTP!). You can then make an educated guess as to your individual capacity and set your training load accordingly. You may find it quite liberating to know that you only have to hit 550 TSS points this week and 555 TSS points next week to meet your long term training goals (hint - have long term training goals!). This awareness provides a great starting point for another element of consistency - the individual ride.
While variations in weekly training volume are easy for most athletes to see in the real world, they have a much harder time with the idea of moving training specificity from theory to application. By this I mean simply that they waste valuable training time goofing off. You know exactly what I mean...you start out on a two hour training ride and spend the first 30 minutes just riding along "warming up" then you knock off your 2x20minute intervals and roll back home at 'cool down' pace and call it a good day. While that is a 'specific' workout, it is not an efficient one. Consider that if you only have 10 hours to train in a week, you've just wasted 10% of your training time in an endurance or recovery zone that wasn't necessarily needed. Instead maximize the time you have by remaining cognizant of the goals for that workout and adjusting your efforts accordingly. Often I'll advocate starting a ride at the top end of Endurance, or even Tempo, to try and kickstart the workout while maintaining a higher average power. This is especially true on longer aerobic and tempo interval rides where the variability index would be lower than a higher intensity VO2 or Anaerobic intervals workout.
In the first post of this series(is it a series?) I wrote about The Athletic Mindset, and the triangulations that form it: Zen Buddhism, The Flow State, and Expertise. Now the trick is to employ these elements in a manner that helps drive development. For the most part that can be summed up in one word - Consistency.
If we take the precepts of the Athletic Mindset to be worth striving for, then bringing consistency to your workouts is an elemental first step. Yet, it is often difficult to master. There are too many distractions, too much work, too few hours in the day. Whatever the rationale it really boils down to a question of committment. Instead of striving for consistency, many athletes follow the 'too much, too little' paradigm. They'll have a world class ride, better still a world class week or two and then, because the training was so focused, too focused, they over cook themselves and training plummets for a day, a week, or a month. Or perhaps training is steady and work/life/family/stress gets in the way and training plummets. Whatever the reason it's these 'ON/OFF' patterns that result in sporadic fitnes gains. The challenge is to establish a new pattern...
Consistency
Consistency is really just making the committment to steady progress with your training. My recent ToolBox article on Pez Cycling News covered some of the traditional approaches to organizing your training week, including how some of those traditions may contribute to sporadic fitness. As noted in the article it is often a good idea to take a larger view of your training. One way to do that is to look at your goals for a particular block (threshold development for example) AND how that fits into the big picture of training towards that marquee goal you've set vis-a-vis training load. Another way is to look at the individual rides and better manage their efficiency. First let's look at Training Load.
Thanks to people like Andy Coggan, Hunter Allen, Eric Bannister, Phil Skiba etc. we have any number of ways to track training load for both individual workouts and over time. Personally, I like the Coggan model because it is built from a solid platform of research and it's pretty intuitive to understand (you can brush up on it here). I also like it because it's part of the WKO+ software that I use, so I don't have to do much to keep track of the numbers.
There have been several good threads about training load on the Wattage forum. They have dealt with the imposition of training over time - usually reflected in one's Chronic Training Load (CTL). The consensus seems to be that a gradual ramp rate of 5-8 TSS points per week (20-35 points per month) is sustainable long term up to an athletes as-yet-unknown optimal training volume. Of course the duration of this 'gradual build' is set by ones current CTL and, therefore, may not be the best tracking method for those alread close to an optimal training load (then again do YOU know YOUR optimal training load?). One thing is certain, by approaching your training load in a more longitudinal fashion you will likely build fitness at a rate you can maintain, and still see improvements throughout.
Let's say you have 10 hours a week to train. Theorhetically you have a maximum training load of 1000 TSS points (1 Hour at FTP = 100 points) per week. It is much more realistic to expect between 500 and 800 points in a given week for the same 10 hours (really, how many hours per week can you do at FTP!). You can then make an educated guess as to your individual capacity and set your training load accordingly. You may find it quite liberating to know that you only have to hit 550 TSS points this week and 555 TSS points next week to meet your long term training goals (hint - have long term training goals!). This awareness provides a great starting point for another element of consistency - the individual ride.
While variations in weekly training volume are easy for most athletes to see in the real world, they have a much harder time with the idea of moving training specificity from theory to application. By this I mean simply that they waste valuable training time goofing off. You know exactly what I mean...you start out on a two hour training ride and spend the first 30 minutes just riding along "warming up" then you knock off your 2x20minute intervals and roll back home at 'cool down' pace and call it a good day. While that is a 'specific' workout, it is not an efficient one. Consider that if you only have 10 hours to train in a week, you've just wasted 10% of your training time in an endurance or recovery zone that wasn't necessarily needed. Instead maximize the time you have by remaining cognizant of the goals for that workout and adjusting your efforts accordingly. Often I'll advocate starting a ride at the top end of Endurance, or even Tempo, to try and kickstart the workout while maintaining a higher average power. This is especially true on longer aerobic and tempo interval rides where the variability index would be lower than a higher intensity VO2 or Anaerobic intervals workout.
April 20, 2009
Those Arduous First Miles
I've finally crossed the mythical 1000 miles threshold for 2009. Yep, 1140 as of yesterday. I'm 'happy' about it - honestly I thought I had about 50 hours, but it turns out its more like 66! Hold that praise a second, here are the numbers from the first four months of the year:
Month Duration Distance TSS kJ 1'w 5'w 20'w 60'w
Apr-2009 14:36:31 276.14 931 9914 454 310 265 237
Mar-2009 18:53:17 324.13 1242 12153 446 330 306 228
Feb-2009 15:24:12 257.49 789 10187 374 301 232 210
Jan-2009 17:34:07 284.32 866 10998 406 316 271 219
Not exactly tearing it up, but maintaining I guess. This past week was my best training since December - all 9 hours and ~178 miles of it. Rather than look at the time/miles as unrewarding I'm choosing to see it as a foundation upon which to continue my transition back to some fitness.

Saturday I jumped on the local 'race-ride' aka The Spectrum Ride. It starts near my house and is a good test-piece to see where you're at. There are a couple of 'ouch' sections - Arastradero, Alpine, and a couple of spots on Canada - but generally the ride is easy enough that getting dropped isn't a worry. Despite that fact, this was still the hardest sustained ride I've done this year. My peak 60min effort was 273Watts normalized and we averaged 23.5mph for the 40'ish mile ride. A solid Level 3 workout. Friday I'd done the 'noon ride' and knocked off a 20min effort at 293Wnorm - so the combination made for a nice couple of rides. One thing I did notice was that I just didn't have the leg strength to close a gap on a small, hard, rise one time. It's never fun to have the guys on your wheel give you a push to close the gap, it's embarassing, but I deserved it and was really trying (sorry guys). I've got a ways to go, but I can start to see some progress in my ability to push a bigger gear and sustain the effort. I'm optimistic enough to consider racing Cats Hill in two weeks in the M35+ 1/2/3's...though I should just continue training instead!
Month Duration Distance TSS kJ 1'w 5'w 20'w 60'w
Apr-2009 14:36:31 276.14 931 9914 454 310 265 237
Mar-2009 18:53:17 324.13 1242 12153 446 330 306 228
Feb-2009 15:24:12 257.49 789 10187 374 301 232 210
Jan-2009 17:34:07 284.32 866 10998 406 316 271 219
Not exactly tearing it up, but maintaining I guess. This past week was my best training since December - all 9 hours and ~178 miles of it. Rather than look at the time/miles as unrewarding I'm choosing to see it as a foundation upon which to continue my transition back to some fitness.

Saturday I jumped on the local 'race-ride' aka The Spectrum Ride. It starts near my house and is a good test-piece to see where you're at. There are a couple of 'ouch' sections - Arastradero, Alpine, and a couple of spots on Canada - but generally the ride is easy enough that getting dropped isn't a worry. Despite that fact, this was still the hardest sustained ride I've done this year. My peak 60min effort was 273Watts normalized and we averaged 23.5mph for the 40'ish mile ride. A solid Level 3 workout. Friday I'd done the 'noon ride' and knocked off a 20min effort at 293Wnorm - so the combination made for a nice couple of rides. One thing I did notice was that I just didn't have the leg strength to close a gap on a small, hard, rise one time. It's never fun to have the guys on your wheel give you a push to close the gap, it's embarassing, but I deserved it and was really trying (sorry guys). I've got a ways to go, but I can start to see some progress in my ability to push a bigger gear and sustain the effort. I'm optimistic enough to consider racing Cats Hill in two weeks in the M35+ 1/2/3's...though I should just continue training instead!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
