Showing posts with label Training Theory. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Training Theory. Show all posts

December 20, 2012

Oh Fitness, Where Art Thou?

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...

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!



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

February 24, 2012

Training Article Archive - in one fell swoop!


Toolbox: Heart Rate Recovery Metrics

Tuesday, February 21, 2012  6:47:57 AM PT




Toolbox: Recovery and Fatigue

Tuesday, January 17, 2012  8:42:19 AM PT





Sufferfest Videos: From The Power Perspective

Saturday, November 12, 2011  9:32:39 AM PT




Toolbox: Five Favorite Workouts

Tuesday, November 08, 2011  11:25:26 AM PT




Toolbox: Getting To The Good Stuff

Tuesday, October 18, 2011  2:00:53 AM PT




Toolbox: The Perfect Transition

Tuesday, September 20, 2011  10:46:09 AM PT




Toolbox: The Future Is So Bright

Monday, August 15, 2011  1:16:17 PM PT




Toolbox: Training Zones - What The Experts Say

Tuesday, July 12, 2011  6:48:44 AM PT




Toolbox: Heart Rate Training Intensities

Tuesday, May 31, 2011  2:13:57 AM PT




Toolbox: Training Zones - HR & RPE

Tuesday, May 24, 2011  1:01:29 AM PT




Toolbox: Spring Classics Workouts

Tuesday, April 12, 2011  1:41:00 AM PT




Toolbox: Finish Prep

Tuesday, March 08, 2011  8:53:09 AM PT




Athlete Forward: Cutting Edge Training Management

Tuesday, February 15, 2011  6:25:35 PM PT





Toolbox: Prioritizing Spring Racing

Tuesday, January 25, 2011  7:50:43 AM PT




Toolbox: Shifting Paradigms In Athlete Development

Tuesday, December 21, 2010  9:47:25 AM PT




Toolbox: Shifting Paradigms In Athlete Development

Tuesday, November 09, 2010  6:31:18 AM PT





Toolbox: Real World Training

Tuesday, October 12, 2010  5:35:34 AM PT





Toolbox: Silly Season Time!

Tuesday, September 14, 2010  6:56:27 AM PT




Toolbox: Five Favorite Workouts

Tuesday, August 10, 2010  5:51:08 AM PT




Toolbox: Carbohydrate Availability and Performance

Tuesday, July 06, 2010  7:49:35 AM PT




Toolbox: Lactic Acid – A Deeper Look

Monday, May 03, 2010  11:06:58 PM PT




Toolbox: Lactic Acid Explained, Part 2

Tuesday, June 08, 2010  3:39:00 AM PT




Toolbox: Looking Back, Looking Forward

Tuesday, March 30, 2010  6:00:33 AM PT





Toolbox: Pedaling Dynamics

Tuesday, March 16, 2010  6:17:22 AM PT





Toolbox: Cutting Edge Sleep Strategies

Tuesday, February 16, 2010  7:10:42 AM PT




Building Early Season Fitness 2: Tempo Training

Tuesday, January 12, 2010  7:25:26 AM PT





Toolbox: Training Intensity Mix Part 1

Tuesday, December 01, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT



Toolbox: Cutting Edge Nutrition Strategies

Tuesday, October 27, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Cutting Edge Hydration Strategies

Tuesday, September 22, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT





Toolbox: Choosing To Compete

Tuesday, September 8 , 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




PEZ Does USPRO: From The Couch To The Start

Thursday, August 27, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Kicking It Old School

Tuesday, July 21, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: The Training Week

Tuesday, June 2, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Physiological Demands of Stage Racing

Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Individual Race Tactics

Tuesday, March 17, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Managing and Monitoring Interval Training

Tuesday, , 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Resistance Training Part 4: Determining Training Loads

Tuesday, January 6, 2009  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Resistance Training Part 3: Form Considerations

Tuesday, December 9, 2008  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Resistance Training Part 2: Program Design

Tuesday, November 4, 2008  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox: Resistance Training Part 1: Technique and Form

Tuesday, September 22, 2008  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox:Optimal Tapering Strategies

Tuesday, August 19, 2008  7:16:28 AM PT




Toolbox Tactics: Team Leadouts

Tuesday, July 8, 2008  7:16:28 AM PT






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 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...

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!)

August 11, 2009

Training Theory Applied - Part 3

Specificity

Racing is not training. The argument is that you can't create a 'true' race intensity effort during training. Ok, maybe not but that's no reason not to try and make the efforts you do put in as effective as possible.

Yes, I'm speaking of specificity!

In the hierarchy of training theory specificty ranks near the top (so it's no coincidence that it's my third topic I guess!). If you are not addressing specificity on most of your rides then you are either - just riding around, or wasting your time. A bold statement though that may be, I think I can demonstrate that it has merit.

The short explanation of what I mean by specificity is to DO WHAT YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO DO on any given day/ride. For many riders there are degress of specificity on any given workout, which although defensible, is not the point. The point is to do what you're supposed to do. "What you are supposed to do" will be answered in the next Training Theory Applied topic, but for now let's give it some metrics.

If your Functional Threshold Power is 300 Watts then your Threhsold level workouts should be very near the neighborhood of 300W. If your VO2max Power is 425W, then it's a fair guess that VO2 specific workouts should be right around 425W (*I chose FTP/MAP intensitites specifically due to their race level relevance). This begs the question "how near" should they be - good question. It's fair to say that for Threhsold level workouts you should probably be in the ball park of 90 -105% of FTP. For VO2max efforts you have an effective range of 85 - 110% of MAP (Maximal Aerobic Power).

Which leads to the next question - how long? Since the goal of workouts at FTP and MAP is to hit the needed workload, and maximize the effectiveness and total volume of time spent there you have two considerations - length of interval and length of recovery. Let's start with FTP efforts.

Several studies have looked at the minimum and maximum duration of workouts in order to determine the optimal range. For the most part it is well established that 10 - 12 minutes is the minimum interval duration for a worthwhile threshold level workout. The maximum is likely in the neighborhood of 60 minutes of focused FTP work. Certainly you can do much more than 60 minutes of threhsold work when intensity drops to 90%, especially when factored as Normalized power (which I believe has great relevance, but isn't the be all/end all of rating an effort), but the key word is focused.

On the recent Santa Cruz Mountain Challenge I spent the first 2h41m at 90% FTP Normalized! That was a hard day but if we look at the variability index of that ride we see it was 1.19, so it wasn't a very focused interval and therefore lacked the requisiste Specificity! In fact the longest quasi steady state interval (VI < 1.05) of that ride was a 30min block at 286Wavg and 303Wnorm, and I'm not sure I could have done that a 2nd time that day!



Which takes me back to the 60 minutes of accumulated threshold intensity on a given interval workout. It is a good target.

Recovery - another key component. On focused, SPECIFIC threshold efforts you shouldn't require too much recovery. Figuring that you "should" be able to do a 60 minute block of this intensity, then a five minute recovery from the standard 20min interval should be plenty.

VO2max Effort Length and Recovery: Since MAP is so much harder and more wicked than FTP you should look to maximize total time spent at VO2max! Which is to say at between 85-110% of VO2 Power. This range is cited in one of my favorite research papers by Thibault when he lays out his graded MAP interval protocol. Accumulated time at/around MAP is an important consideration because even a motivated athlete has a hard time doing MAP efforts of longer than five minutes for more than 2 or 3 intervals (eg 15minutes of accumulated VO2 time). I think it is an elegant representation of specificity! He even covers the rest intervals necessary at these varying intensities. Without reading the whole paper it is a fair estimate to say recovery time should be at a 1:1 or 1:1.5 interval/recovery ratio. As you gain fitness you can play with these recovery times.

Which brings us to our last point on Specificity for today. How do you know when to stop? A classic rule of thumb is to stop the interval when you can no longer hold at least 90% of the intended workload. This rule of thumb is fraught with problems however - for example if you hold 90% of 90% FTP - you're really only doing ~81% FTP. Not quite the intended effort level! So a modification is when you cannot hold the intended % of FTP or MAP workload you are likely done for the day. For example if you start a 20min block at 90% FTP and cannot hold it after 10 minutes...rest, recover and try again - if you still can't hold it then go home and rest.

Too often athletes squander their rides on easy pedaling and unfocused efforts. By addressing your specific workout needs you will see quicker progression and more overall satisfaction with your fitness gains. It will also translate into stronger race performances and more confidence that you can put the hammer down when necessary!

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.

April 15, 2009

Training Theory Applied - Part 1



The Athletic Mindset:

One of the first tenants of my approach to training is the cultivation of what I call "The Athletic Mindset". Though I've used the term for years - even going back to my first coaching clients in the mid 90's, I thought it wise to see if I was unique in using this term. The only other relevant references from a simple Google search are for a speaker series by Don Thomas, a former college professor and coach in Dalton, Pennsylvania, who offers an 8-hour course on Athletic Mindset Training($119 for adults) to help athletes learn to discipline their minds for athletic success; and a book by Christopher Bergland called "The Athlete's Way". I haven't read the book, nor seen the presentation so I think I'm safe in ascribing my perspective on the athletic mindset to my own experiences, research, and opinions, lots of opinions.

While trying to keep this post short and to the point let me say that the Athletic Mindset is merely a way to approach your training that encompasses both a sense of awe and a sense of purpose. There have been innumerable passages dedicated to the creation of a positive mindset, learning to discipline the mind and body, or improving your mental attitude. Rather than rehash what you MUST do to achieve optimal performance I'd rather encourage the athlete to look at their sport as a vessel for expression of their best self. We are often at our best when we relinquish control and expectation of an outcome and simply do.

For me there are several points that triangulate the Athletic Mindset. One eloquent expression of is the Japanese Zen Buddhist Philosophy. When you have a moment click the link. The mere reading of the passage will calm you.

Another point is attached to the concept of the flow state as described by Mihály Csíkszentmihályi in his seminal book "Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness. Many, if not most, of us can identify with the feeling of being in the flow, the trick is to make it part of each workout or competition.

The third triangulation is the concept of expertise. The term "expert" is tossed about in the daily vernacular of our culture without regard to the true nature of the idea, nor the strident efforts necessary to cultivate an expertise. Malcom Gladwell, among others, has written about "This idea - that excellence at a complex task requires a critical, minimum level of practice - surfaces again and again in studies of expertise. In fact, researchers have settled on what they believe is a magic number for true expertise: 10,000 hours."

Taken together these three ideas can form a foundation for ones approach to sport and the practice of sport. My philosophy is that when you can attach these precepts to your sporting life, and perhaps your life in general, you are opening the door to your potential.

April 09, 2009

Training Theory Applied - A Preamble


To me, one of the points of coaching is to develop and elucidate a performance vision. The background for that vision must be based on science and an ability to understand the complex series of relationships that coalesce in cycling. From aerodynamics, biomechanics, tactics, psychology, and nutrition, to the deep intracacies of exercise physiology and it's relationship to performance, a coach has to Know, Live and Love all the elements. Certainly every coach has particular strenghths, and good ones tap outside resources as often as possible when they reach an impasse or need assistance (let's hear it for message boards and google groups!), but the essence of the vision must be your own. My own...

This year I am in the fortunate position of getting to put my vision to the test - on myself. I've been lucky enough over time to be reasonably fit and reasonably competitive on a mostly unstructured program. If I ride quite a bit, say 10-12 hours a week, I get in a modicum of shape and feel competitive in races and strong on rides. Don't get me wrong, I know what I've done and can do. I'm very diligent with my powermeter, I download most every ride and have 3+ years of good data to review. I can easily tell you my Mean Maximal Power values or recite my tactical or psychological strengths and weaknesses. Still, I don't think I've done more than a handful of structured VO2/MAP workouts over the past three years, haven't worked on my sprint much, motorpaced, improved my climbing or even been that focused on my nutrition. I've just kinda gotten by on a modest amount of ability and a lot of years on the bike. Which begs the question (or questions) what can I do on a structured program and don't I owe it to myself and my athletes to try that which I've prescribed? This must be the year to find out...

April 08, 2009

What Out of Shape Looks Like

I have been doing about nothing on the personal cycilng front. As a point of validation let's look at my Performance Management chart over the past few years. It is both inspiring and depressing! Anyway, here it is (explanations below the image):



So let's review some data...
1. Trends - clearly I'm all over the place on consistency! From a low of 24.3 TSS/CTL points at the end of January 2007, to a maximum of 83.3 in Mid May of 2008. There have been 4 or 5 serious interuptions in training since January of 2007.
Typically they are periods of low activity lasting approximately 10 days to 3 weeks. Most training is between 55 - 80 TSS/day. The December 2007 Training block is the most substantial break from regular cycling I've takn in the last 5 or so years. It was a legitimate 4-weeks off the bike. It really set me up for a good 2008...but I had some hills to climb in the fitness arena.

2. Racing During This Period - despite my lack of sustained fitness, I did do some quality racing. Among the results I'm happy about:
- 3rd State Championships Masters Track Sprints, July 2007
- 3rd Masters Miss-n-Out American Velodrome Challenge, June 2008
- 4th State Championships Masters Points Race, July 2007
- 4th Single Speed CX NCNCA Cup, September 2008
- 5th State Championships Masters Kilo, July 2007
- 5th Masters Keirin American Velodrome Challenge, June 2008
- 5th Masters Scratch Race American Velodrom Challenge, June 2008
- Completed Elkhorn SR Pro/1/2 - 4 stages, ~230miles, June 2007
- Hit a personal best FTP of 340 Watts in November of 2008

3. So Now What? Well, I guess it's time to get back on the bike and start building some fitness. Currently my CTL is at a world class 30 TSS/Day - which I think is the equivalent of getting up and walking to the refrigerator. My body weight is at 170.6, body fat at a hair over 12.5% according to my Tanita (but really I think it's probably closer to 15%!). I'll do some testing this week and get a 'true' baseline of my fitness. If I were to guess, I'd say my:
- FTP ~280W
- 5s Power - ~1200W (best of 1380W)
- 1m Power - ~500W (best of 600W)
- 5m Power - ~350W (best of 420W)
My lack of riding is most visible to me in my 5min efforts - I just can't go very hard for very long! That and my pedal stroke is just crap rigth now! Well, all this lack of fitness does allow me to test some theories for training load and specificity over the next few months. Stay tuned, we'll see what we can come up with...

February 25, 2009

Webinar Series


Based on the success of our first couple of webinars we've swallowed the Kool-Aid and worked up a webinar series for aspiring athletes.
Here is our preliminary schedule of webinars:
Feb 25th - Interval Training
March 11th - Individual Race Tactics
March 25th - Team Race Tactics
April 8th - Tapering Strategies

more to follow!!

February 12, 2009

Pure Power Exposed!

Certainly you all know Ryder Hesjedal of Garmin fame. Well he's not content to have a wicked fast starts on the mountain bike (01 World Cup in Napa Mens Start)..Ryder thought it would be a good idea to try and break Jonathan Vaughters record for the climb up Haleakala, the 10,000 foot volcano in Hawaii (yep, 0 - 10,000 in about 57Km!). Here is the video:


Ryder Hesjedal :: Haleakala Attempt from Media One Multimedia on Vimeo.

A little data from the effort:
Time: 2:32:45 (old record 2:38)
Average Watts: 349 (4.81W/Kg)
Work Done: 3201 Kj - that's about 1280Kj's an hour, for 2.5 hours..impressive!

November 22, 2008

Putting On The Coaching hat

I've been reading a bunch of stuff lately (see the previous post), but not all if it has been pure candy. I try to read some relevant stuff too. Physiology, biomechanics, stuff that is important to both my day to day job and the performance of my athletes (which is my day to day job - a potential infinite loop of hilarity).

Anyway, there is some good stuff out there from coaches across the spectrum of spots (gotta read it all). I just read some very interesting stuff on the influence of the brain on fatigue and There is also some junk out there as well. A few coaches are pushing ideas and their own theories that are based more on ego than real science. I won't throw them out now, but may later...guess it depends on the quality of my coffee tomorrow. A couple of observations

1. Lots of coaches claim to have the next silver bullet of performance. This year it seems to be Tabata Intervals. Roughly, its a set of 6-8 intervals of 20 seconds ON, 10 seconds OFF performed at about 170% of VO2max (power i presume as the study had them on a cycling ergometer - though they are usually described as 'all out' by those referencing). I've been using them for about a year now intermittently (yep, one of the sheep) and can say that they are both effective and too easy. I haven't done them in the run up to a competition, but my athletes seem to like them. They are hard, but they aren't as hard as some other workouts I do. The argument is that those doing Tabatas had a 14% improvement in VO2 and a 28% improvement in anaerobic capacity over the course of a 6-week study doing these 2 or 3 times a week, while those exercising at 70% of VO2 only showed improvement in their VO2 (53 to 58 ml/kg). It just seems to me that doing a block of these 2 or 3 times a week isn't sufficient to make performance gain - think about it this way...6 sets of 20s is only 2minutes of workload - so although intensity factor is very high, total training stress is very low. Then again, as an interval model they are a valid approach. Then again so is Peak Power. Think of Peak Power as VO2 power. The strategem is to do your peak power for 60% of your T-max (maximum sustained duration at peak power). While a solid approach to High Intensity Training (HIT) I think that the Thibault approach is much more elegant. Dr Thibault has built a model for improving your VO2 power by working across a range of intensities (85-110% of VO2power) and durations (45s - 6:30m). I like it because it offers both a standardized approach and a wide variety of workout options to keep athletes motivated.

2. The next big 'revelation' is the move away from periodization in training. Carl Foster of ACSM asserts that no reliable studies validate the periodized training plan approach. While I haven't read the reference material he drew from, I did look around a bit and found an interesting look at the relative volume of training done at Lactate Threshold at an ACSM Annual conference, chaired by Carl Foster, that could certainly be a backstop to the idea of eliminating periodization if for no other reason than to minimize training time spent at higher intensities. That study, lead by Stephen Seiler, looked at polarizing training (increasing volume of low intensity and essentially decreasing threshold level work) and the positive results that came as a result. My worry is that athletes will simply hear that periodization is out and use it to justify an increase in volume of intensity (defined by me as Level 4/LT and above) that will ultimately lead to stagnation or perhaps overtraining.

Anyway, this idea of ego-centric coaching was all brought home recently on a series of threads authored by a coach with a great list of acronyms and accomplishments behind his name (which is a HUGE pet peeve of mine!!!!) but a complete lack both perspective and couth (sp?). He went on and on about how doctors are, basically, inept and dangerous, how chiropractic will be the wave of the future, and what a jerk another coach is for posting an educational link that happened to also be revenue generating for the other coach. It was distasteful and tacky. That he followed it up by telling this group (that includes many accomplished coaches, PhD's, etc) that the next big thing ("you heard it here first") was having trainers partner with doctors to help both gain credability. What? My first job out of college in 1995 was working as a trainer/exercise therapist in a clinical setting with chronically ill patients - yea...almost 15 years ago!


I guess my point is that each of you should really try and see the big picture with your training. Don't look at the next 'new' thing as the path to greatness. Don't presume that because someone has a lot of letters behind their name that they know what they are talking about. Challenge your sources. Ask questions. Don't settle...