Triathlon Coach

Every decision that you make as an athlete or coach, from the perspective of training stress, is typically based on some balance between race specificity and what is physiologically best to continue progress. Sometimes the most race-specific workouts, may not be the best for long term physiological development. Conversely, sometimes these objectives align well and make the athlete’s planning a bit easier. Consider the athlete who is extremely aerobic in nature, either having been born as such, or having developed that way after many years of aerobic training (more than 8,000 hours!!!). Many times, this type of athlete will respond best to short, highly intense intervals. In fact, it is often these very athletes who require this type of training, in order to continue any significant long-term aerobic development. These are the athletes who, when given the option to do a 20-minute all out effort or a three-minute all out effort, will choose the 20-minute effort without even a thought, otherwise. Typically, the maximum average pace that these athletes can sustain over only three minutes, is very similar (on a relative basis) to that which they can sustain over a full 20 minutes. This is the same athlete whose Olympic distance race pace is only minimally faster than their 70.3 race pace. Simply put, they lack that extra gear! Continued aerobic work would be the athletic equivalent of trying to get water from stone, so it calls for a little change of pace early in the season to get those gears back!

In the battle of race specificity and physiology, these athletes will typically be best served to side with the physiological component, when between 16 and 30 weeks out from race day. But, as race day draws closer and closer, be it a sprint race or full Ironman, it is absolutely essential to include as much race specific training as possible (aerobic in this case). Even if early season short intensity work is required, aerobic efficiency will still be needed for any long course event. However, due to the Ironman’s very long duration, the aerobic physiology of most athletes simply does not meet its demands. As a result, this type of short repeat work should only be done after a solid period of aerobic development, and fall during the final 12 weeks before race day where it is still useful for “sharpening”.

Traditionally, long course athletes have avoided high intensity intervals opting for more race specific, longer aerobic workouts. But, higher intensity intervals provide a more efficient and powerful anaerobic energy system; the ability to operate at intensities beyond anaerobic threshold! This is a tool, not necessarily required for good Ironman racing, but sometimes required to continue aerobic development over the long haul. Also, many times an athlete’s race day power distribution may contain points that exceed anaerobic threshold, even at the Ironman distance. Having some robustness in this area will help those athletes reduce the impact that these “match-burning” power surges have on run performance. Shorter repeats also help promote efficiency of sport mechanics by improving neuro-muscular connections. All valuable considerations for the long course athlete.

Additionally, the recent research by Dr. Jens Bangsbo of the University of Copenhagen has shown that if you want to run, cycle or swim faster, at any distance, you have to train at a pace that is almost as fast as you can physically move (Journal of Applied Physiology, November 2009). He has shown in this study that the potassium pump partially responsible for creating the electrical potential between sodium and potassium for muscle contraction may play a role in long endurance race fatigue; the efficiency of this process begins to breakdown. The same research has shown that certain types of workouts can improve the efficiency of this process and avoid this breakdown. This type of training can be termed “Potassium Pump Training”, or as I like to call the specific session we use at QT2 Systems, PPTs. These workouts consist of 10 repeats of 30 seconds all out, each followed by 2 to 3 minutes of rest. The key is to be completely rested before each 30 second sprint, so that maximum intensity can be used, and to promote good mechanics, as it can be very difficult to maintain form when in a fatigued state. PPTs can be implemented once each week, per sport, and are most safely implemented in the water, and on the bike. Only those who have shown a terrific resilience to injury should attempt PPTs while running, as the risk associated with an all out 30 second sprint can have unfortunate consequences.

So, as you prepare for your 2012 long course racing season, consider adding PPTs to your toolbox. They may help you to rediscover some of those long lost missing gears and help continue aerobic progress over the long haul.

During this time of year when everyone, including triathletes let loose to enjoy the holiday cheer, it is a good time to focus on some ways to balance the endless holiday party platters and treats. The average American will gain between five and 10 pounds, in the time between Thanksgiving and New Year’s. What can we do to help avoid this, to some degree, and provide nutrient density that supports the training volume that we are trying to get in, in between parties? The answer: Juicing!

I have been juicing for the past couple of years. As odd as this may sound, it can be a therapeutic break in a hectic day. The juice itself can be very tasty, or not at all. The beauty of juicing is that you decide exactly what type of juice you are going to make, based entirely on your mood. Some days I feel like a fresh apple, ginger and cranberry will do. On other days, something moves me to combine kale, garlic, and beet; a tequila-like cocktail that you won’t soon forget! Either way, you’ll quickly find that juicing provides a bit of a boost, which will make you feel healthier.

For those who have never juiced, there are two primary types of juicers: 1) the high-speed centrifugal juicer, and 2) the slow speed auger. I have, and like a lot, the slow speed auger. It is easy to use, clean, and ready to juice anything you throw into it.

For athletes, the benefits of juicing run pretty deep. Juicing fruits and vegetables provides a huge dose of phytonutrients (plant chemicals) in a very concentrated, easily absorbed form. This quality, alone, makes juicing whole, fresh, ripe, and raw fruits and vegetables one of the most powerful vehicles for achieving optimal health; upon which speed is built. Here are some of the most commonly touted benefits of juicing:

1. Many of the common juicing ingredients contain chlorophyll, a substance found exclusively in plants. It has a structure similar to hemoglobin which is the substance in blood that is responsible for transporting oxygen. Some research has found that consuming chlorophyll enhances the body’s ability to produce hemoglobin, thus improving the efficiency of oxygen transport.
2. Fresh juices have the ability to deliver a group of nutrients know as enzymes. Enzymes are your body’s work force. In addition, fruit and vegetable juices are good sources of the traditional nutrients like vitamins and minerals.
3. Since juicing removes the indigestible fiber of fruits and vegetables, nutrients are available to the body in much larger quantities than if the fruit or vegetable were eaten whole. Because the process of digestion that is necessary when you eat whole foods is bypassed, the body can quickly absorb larger amounts of nutrients from the juices than it can from solid foods.
4. Finally, fruits and vegetables provide one more substance that is absolutely essential for good health in the athlete – water!

I typically try to include choices, in my juices, that I wouldn’t typically eat on their own, in a raw form. Below are my four favorite recipes that apply particularly well for the athlete:

Apple/Ginger Juice
2 apples
1/2 lemon
1/2″ of ginger root
1/2 cup of cranberry

Red Stuff Juice
12 plum tomatoes
1 apple
1 cup of cranberry
1 beet

Triathlete Juice
1 beet
2 cups of kale
1 head of romaine
1/2 lemon
1/2 inch of ginger root

Carrot/Garlic
2 cups of baby cut carrots
1 cup of broccoli
1-2 cloves of garlic (Not too much…this packs quite a punch!)

The first rule of juicing is that an apple can act as an excellent sweetener! Rule number two: If you want to hide the taste of something, like a dark leafy green, lemon and ginger will do the trick! And lastly, romaine will add volume to your juice without much taste.

I’m sure that you noticed some reoccurring ingredients in the above recipes: primarily beet, ginger, and kale. These are my favorite ingredients to use as a base for my juices, as they provide the following health benefits for athletes:

Beet – Beets are a unique source of phytonutrients called betalains. Betanin and vulgaxanthin are the two best-studied betalains from beets, and both have been shown to provide antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and detoxification support. Studies have shown that beet ingestion actually improves endurance performance! Beets are very high in nitrates, which, when processed in the body, increase our levels of nitric oxide. Nitric oxide helps to relax blood vessels, and improve oxygen efficiency. Hence the lowered blood pressure and increased endurance of beet juice drinkers. Lastly, beets are a rich source of iron, which many athletes struggle to get sufficient absorption of!

Ginger – Many studies have shown that ginger acts as an anti-inflammatory and is a powerful natural painkiller. For the triathlete, these are ideal qualities as most of us spend our days chronically inflamed, after frequent and damaging workouts. I like to put ginger root in my post workout juices for this purpose. Typically ½” of the root will do!

Kale – Researchers have identified over 45 different flavonoids in kale. Kaempferol and Quercetin are at the top of the list. Kale’s flavonoids combine both antioxidant and anti-inflammatory benefits in a way that gives kale great qualities to help avoid chronic inflammation and oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is commonplace in the athlete, as the primary energy system utilized during exercise is aerobic and therefore oxidative in nature. This fat oxidation creates damaging free radicals, which kale helps to minimize the damage of, in our bodies.

As you navigate the upcoming holiday season parties, don’t be afraid to do a bit of juicing. This practice will help you stay healthy throughout the holidays, and may even create some really good habits that you can carry into the 2012 season. You may get a few cockeyed smirks along the way, but tis’ the season! So, join me in the Core Diet “Holiday Juice Challenge”: Juice once a day, every day from Thanksgiving to the New Year! You pick the juice, and when you drink it. You’ll step into 2012 a stronger and healthier athlete..I guarantee it!

It is often thought that as athletes, and specifically triathletes, if proper attention is paid to our training, nutrition/restoration, race fueling, and race pacing that we will just naturally race to our potential.  We, at QT2 Systems, consider these to be our four cornerstones of success.  But, often is the case that we do not race to our potential, despite tremendous fitness.  When this occurs, a probing analysis must consider all aspects of our preparations/execution, including the four cornerstones, and perhaps something deeper still.  This adds a layer of complexity to the performance package, as our foundation of cornerstones becomes pentagonal, and much, much more complicated.  This fifth element, mental fitness, is the least tangible of the cornerstones, and therefore the most difficult to wrap our hands and minds around.  The original four cornerstones all have basis in the hard sciences that study human physiology which, though always being refined, are universally well-understood.  The introduction of mental fitness brings with it a level of abstraction, because it deals with the human mind, and despite tremendous gains over the last century its scientific ramifications have not yet been fully defined.  

Despite an incomplete understanding of the human mind, and how it works, enough research has been done in the area of athletic performance to determine the appropriate strategies needed to overcome mental limitations, as they arise.  Let’s consider just a few…

The First Line of Defense
When an athlete does not perform up to expectations, based upon training indicators, the first and foremost places to inspect are the day’s race fueling and execution/pacing.  These executables are, invariably, the most common areas where athletes who have subpar performances struggle.  These executables, combined with more than adequate preparations (training and nutrition/restoration), form our four cornerstones of successful race performances.  Any missing piece can result in races that do not meet our expectations.  And, the longer the race, the greater negative effect that any single missing component will have.  But, it is when all four of these pieces are firmly established, in place, and we still miss our expectations, that we are left scratching our heads in wonderment.

In steps mental health, to form the basis of our fifth cornerstone.  As we all know, without good physical, systematic health, it is difficult if not impossible to create physical fitness, which results in speed.  Well, the same holds true on the mental side of the equation.  Good mental health is required, for an athlete to develop or maintain strong mental fitness, and thus speed.     

What Is Mental Fitness, and Why Is It So Hard To Come By?
Competition in and of itself is quite a daunting proposition!  In it, you avail yourself to comparisons against others, within a confined set of rules.  Your abilities, be they strong or weak, are put forth to be judged.  This can be a tremendous undertaking for the human ego!  How an athlete perceives the environment of the competition, and how it makes them feel is fundamental to mental fitness.  Those with strong mental fitness can adapt to any setting, and either take full advantage of it or, at the very least, be completely unaffected by it.  At its most basic level, take for example this year’s Ironman Lake Placid.  On the morning of the event it was announced that it would be a non-wetsuit swim, for those competing for a Kona slot.  Those with strong mental fitness were able to recognize that this was the hand that they had been dealt, and though it might result in a slower swim time, would leave their race primarily unaffected.  Others panicked!  In essence, the key components of mental fitness really boil down to the following during competition:

• Failure – Very little fear of it.
• Goals – Not thinking about performance outcomes.
• Focus – Being “in the moment” and focused on the activity at hand.
• Experience – Having your body just complete the task almost involuntarily.
• Control – Sticking to your executables, and staying within your targets creating great sense of personal control.

Motivation
Intrinsic motivation is one of the most important attributes of mental fitness, and can best be described as the athlete’s desire to train and compete, on a daily basis.  An athlete’s “love of the game” will typically fuel the desire to be competent and self-determined in their respective sport.  This tends to be second nature to most triathletes, otherwise why would we sign up for races a year in advance and get up at ungodly hours of the morning to train for them.  But, when this intrinsic motivation begins to wane, there is very often a bigger picture issue related to either physical or mental health, such as overtraining and depression, respectively.  As a result, it is quite possible to be both intrinsically motivated and lacking in mental fitness.  Their mutual exclusivity is the very reason for this discussion, and what constantly bewilders coaches and athletes alike.

Task Relevance
Task relevance considers an athlete’s mindset while training and/or racing.  Athletes who are able to focus their full attention on task relevant items, be they training or racing, are constantly reminding themselves of things such as “I will stay focused on the bike, and peddle at 90rpm” and “I will run this hill strong, keeping my eyes on my target”.  These are signs of a mentally fit athlete because, despite any outside distractions, they are able to concentrate only on the task at hand.  Conversely, the mentally unfit athlete will tend to allow themselves to be distracted by outside stimuli, thus focusing on task irrelevant items.  A looking glass into their minds might reveal thoughts that fall along the lines of “If I don’t perform well, I am going to disappoint my family and friends” and “If I don’t place in the top-10, my sponsors are going to drop me”.  The difference in mindsets is quite clear, and it is not too difficult to see the positive impacts of one, and the very negative impacts of the other.  While a focus on task relevant items will not necessary lead to physical success, it will certainly put the athlete in a position to fully capitalize on their fitness.  By the same token, the toll of focusing on task irrelevant items can take the wind right out of an athlete’s fitness sail, so to speak, as too much mental energy is spent on why something can’t be done, rather than why it can.

Athlete Arousal
For those of you snickering like a 15-year old boy in the back of the classroom, “arousal” is actually a common term used to describe the level of excitement that an athlete is able to bring to an event or workout.  Athletes should work to identify their optimal arousal level, such that they are neither a jittery mess, nor a wet mop at the starting line.  Athletes want to make sure that they are aroused enough to push themselves to their physical limits on race day, but not so much so that they begin making mistakes and focusing on task irrelevant items.  To this end, caffeine or other mental stimulus can play a very important role in reaching the proper arousal level.  Finding thoughts to reduce arousal level in some athletes, and thoughts to increase it in others is an important component to mental fitness.

As we all know, caffeine is one of the most effective ergogenic aids available.  Its use in endurance sports has been extensively studied mostly from a physiological perspective.  Here, I discuss its use relative to mental fitness.  Caffeine is a stimulant of the central nervous system and has an excellent record of increasing alertness and decreasing perceived exertion.  For this reason, athletes who tend to have a bit of trouble reaching the arousal level necessary to fully push their fitness limiters can consider its supplementation.  On the very opposite end of the spectrum, those who have little trouble reaching appropriate arousal levels should potentially avoid its use, perhaps until later into an event if at all.  Caffeine use in these athletes will, more likely than not, lead to over arousal which can lead to task irrelevant thinking.

When it comes to mental fitness, there are typically two primary types of athletes.  There are those who are motivated by the avoidance of failure, and there are those who are motivated by the achievement of success.  Few can be fully classified as either one or the other, so we should consider how best to approach each, and then apply differing tactics across athlete types.  Just as optimal physical fitness is a highly personalized undertaking, mental fitness is equally as individual.  What’s good for the goose may not be so good for the gander.

Motivation:  The Avoidance of Failure
Athletes who are motivated by the avoidance of failure (MAF), will typically perform best in events that are perceived to be either very, very easy or very, very hard.  These athletes will thrive at local sprint races, where the competition is perceived to be very weak, or in a race like Kona, where they perceive the competition to be head and shoulders above themselves.  But, at a regional championship, or satellite Ironman, where the perception of success is 50/50, they will talk themselves right out of a potential Kona slot.  As a result, these athletes should stay away from caffeine, as they tend to become over-aroused, very easily, and begin to focus on task irrelevant items.  This is a shortcut to the following thought process:

• The environment is perceived to be a threat to self-esteem
• A disconnect between ability level and what is required for perceived success
• A fear of consequence from coach, sponsors, or peer group.

And so begins a nasty cycle of mental cat and mouse, as these thoughts lead to further and further arousal, for an athlete who doesn’t need it.  Successful MAF athletes will focus their attention on process goals, and their coaches will work to mold the athlete’s perception of an upcoming event as either very easy, compared to their training, or as nearly impossible.  These athletes can be negatively affected by too much detail in their training program.  Seemingly benign information, such as tracking nutritional intake, or assigning exact power and pacing numbers for a race can quickly overwhelm the MAF athlete, because each represents an opportunity for the perception of failure, and subsequent focus on task irrelevant items.  As a result, a training program that is less focused on detail and metrics can be the best approach for these athletes.  Although detail in all aspects of a training/nutrition program is a hallmark of quality coaching, physical progress is of little value to an athlete, if it cannot be utilized on race day.  In the end, there is only one true metric of success, in competitive racing:  how quickly you are able to cross the finish line.

As an extremely detail-focused coach, MAF athletes certainly require a great deal of caution, for me.  Too much detail can lead these athletes to believe that inconsequential items can have tremendous race day impacts.  For example, we typically assign the exact timing and portion size of a race morning breakfast, based upon the race’s distance.  MAF athletes may overreact to missing the timing of their breakfast by 10 or 15 minutes, by perceiving because they have made this mistake that they have little, to no, chance of performing in a competitive way.  The MAF athlete assigns 20% importance to something that is deserving of only 0.5% importance.  In the end, the focus that both the athlete and coach place on 0.5% items, despite being physiologically and nutritionally sound, may actually be greatly detrimental because of the way the athlete perceives the mistake.  It is a matter of perception, and if a particular level of detail is going to create the perception of failure, then it is simply not worth it assuming its miss isn’t detrimental to physical performance.  Because of my focus on detail and metrics, I have made these very same mistakes, and have seen athletes at the peak of their fitness not perform up to expectations on race day.  Left scratching my head, I began considering the importance and effects of the mental game, and what I call “mental fitness”.  Though a significant paradigm shift, what I found begged the question:  why focus on SO much detail, if it undermined the athlete on race day?  Why not focus on less detail, and take a more qualitative approach to their preparations and race day execution?  As the athlete’s mental fitness develops, then more and more detail can be introduced into the fray.  Remember, it doesn’t matter what the reality actually is, it’s much more about how the athlete perceives the situation.  I encourage athletes to think about the how they let their environment make them feel; this is at the pinnacle of mental fitness.    

Motivation:  The Achievement of Success
Athletes who are motivated by the achievement of success (MAS) perform very well when they perceive success to be 50/50.  They “want the ball”, when the game is on the line and are able to rise to the challenge defined by how they perceive their environment.  Regardless of the reality, if these athletes perceive a challenge, they embrace it.  When faced with a 50/50, the MAS athlete can summon the optimal arousal level, leaving them focused and motivated to perform as their fitness suggests.  The MAS athlete responds very well to detail, and tends not to perceive “failure” as detrimental.  Rather, they maintain perspective of the details, in relation to their training as a whole, better perceiving the reality of each.  The MAS athlete knows that missing the timing of their race morning breakfast by 10 minutes, really isn’t a big deal in the grand scheme of things. 

Caffeine may be a serious consideration for the MAS athlete, who may sometimes struggle to reach the arousal levels necessary for optimal performance when the environment is perceived to be overly easy, or overly hard.  Unlike the MAF athlete, who can be sent over the edge by caffeine, the MAS athlete may employ it for both, best effort workouts and races, alike when there is little outside challenge to the task.  At times, the MAS athlete may require a bit of help to concentrate their efforts on the importance of a key workout, or a local sprint race where they know they will win.  Where the MAF athlete can be a bit too much like the Tasmanian Devil on race morning, the MAS athlete can too closely resemble Deputy Dog depending on the situation.  Deputy Dog is going to require some caffeine to get through a set of mile repeats, at a best sustainable effort when there is very little outside stimulus!   

Support Systems
Coaches typically fall into two categories.  There are those who use positive reinforcement to motivate their athletes, and those who use punishment.  99% of the time, positive reinforcement is the most productive approach, with punishment only used sparingly.  Most coaches, and family support systems, fall somewhere in between these two approaches.  Punishment can be extremely detrimental to the MAF athlete, because it causes them to further focus on task irrelevant items, and reinforces their fear of failure.  This can catalyze the cycle of negativity discussed above.  MAS athletes, on the other hand, can sometimes react positively to some punishment in their program, as they tend to perceive it as a challenge.  It is very rare that a coach will be successful utilizing either model, exclusively.  Coaches, and support systems should consider the athletes who they are working with, and gauge their approach accordingly.  An approach heavily weighted in the punitive model should be used cautiously, and only for those athletes who the coach knows will view the punishment as an opportunity to rise above it. 

While many coaches are who they are, and take the approach that best suits their personality, I urge coaches to allow their approaches to be more athlete-centered than coach-centered.  This may require the coach to wear more than one hat, but will ensure that their athletes are able to maintain an appropriate mental approach to training and racing.  Just as a good teacher must consider how best to motivate each individual student, a good coach must do the same.  Positive reinforcement is never the wrong answer.  But sometimes, when you need a little more emphasis, to get your message across, punishment can be a very effective tool, specifically for the MAS athlete.  Where the MAS athlete can typically handle some level of reprimand, the MAF athlete may feel alienated by it.  This can result in a poor athlete/coach relationship, culminating in hostility and/or discouragement.  For the MAF athlete, this can create a loss of motivation, with a renewed focus on failure.

Conclusion
When corresponding with an athlete, be it by phone, email, or in person I first think about the type of athlete I am dealing with, relative to the athlete types outlined above, and then frame our discussion around how the athlete will best respond.  All but a very few athletes are neither 100% MAS, nor 100% MAF, and where they fall on the spectrum can vary on a yearly, monthly, and even daily basis.  As a result, I adjust my approach accordingly.  Once you are able to understand the athlete’s state of mental fitness, you can better guide their performance on race day, with the goal to always display the fitness they have developed and shown in training.

MAF athletes require a focus on developing a more positive motivation process.  Utilizing MAS specific tools on the MAF athlete can be detrimental, and actually cause them to focus on failure, more so than anything else.  Punitive practices, caffeine usage, too much detail in the training program, and the forced environment of “stepping up” to perceived 50/50 opportunities are all examples of what can derail the mindset of the MAF athlete.  As coaches and athletes we place the bulk of our attention on the physical aspects of the sport, and for good reason.  But, when we find ourselves, or one of our athletes, not performing to physical expectations, we must take a step back and consider this additional sphere of influence.  The sport of triathlon is multi-faceted, and as a result, we are always presented with any number of potential limiters.  Like the physical, limiters in mental fitness can be just as restrictive.  Remember, that each athlete is an individual; that each athlete interprets their environment according to their own perceptions.  Just as we would never expect each athlete to respond to exactly the same physical stimuli, we cannot expect each athlete to motivate in kind.  I believe this is one of the reasons why many triathlon squads that take a standard approach to all athletes from a mental perspective can be successful for some, but detrimental to others.

-Jesse

This post was written by QT2 Coach Tim Snow, while yours truly did the editing.  It’s a good one!

Like an effective taper protocol, the Ironman marathon remains one of the greatest mysteries of our sport. “A mystery, wrapped in an enigma”, those who have it figured out make it look so easy, and we wonder how and why it is possible to run with such ease, after a 112-mile ride.  They are few and far between, but we see them at every race, running their way through fields of competitors who can only watch as they pass by.

Bike splits get the press.  Run splits define the race.  At the Ironman series events held weekly, the world over, it is not uncommon to see a strong cyclist sneak away from the field, and hold on for the win.  The fields in these races tend to be pretty thin, opening up the door for these uber cyclists to break away and not elicit an effective response.  But, at the big show, on the Big Island, the World Championship wreath has seldom been placed atop the head of an athlete that we wouldn’t easily identify as a strong runner.  Sure, it has happened.  But, rarely!

To the astute observer Ironman is exponential, with a specific pattern of events defined by the masses.  It is not uncommon for Pros, and age groupers alike, to have a decent swim, move up through the field during the bike, maintain that position during the first loop of the run, and then completely fall apart.  After the race, groups of athletes gather together, sharing stories of their day, astonished by the fate of their run’s second loop.  The litany of bewilderment may include, but will not be limited to, “my hamstrings and quads just started cramping”, “my legs simply wouldn’t turnover”, “I think I was low on sodium”, and “my stomach was completely bloated”.  These are just a sample, but you’ve heard it all before.  In fact, many of us have probably used a few of these, once or twice.

So, what are the ingredients of a good Ironman marathon?  What are the key components which, if properly executed, make the difference between trudging through the many miles, and running your way to a Kona slot?

It All Starts In Training

Preparation is key!  Durability is the number one race day limiter for 99% of Ironman athletes.  Your running legs must be prepared for the full 26 miles, after more than six hours of activity.  To this end, many fall into the trap of thinking that this is merely a function of running mileage.  Au contraire, mon ami!  Sure, your legs have to be able to handle the demands of running a full marathon.  But, doesn’t it go a long way, if the bike is not as damaging to your legs?  That seems pretty valid.

Bike volume!  Bike volume is so effective because it not only builds bike fitness, but it also builds durability.  This bike durability ensures that your running legs are fresher at the outset of the marathon.  We, at QT2 Systems, typically like to see no less than a 5:1 bike to run volume ratio, and many times higher for athletes with bike limiters.  Many struggling runners will operate at a smaller ratio, as they increase their running volume, thinking that they have to train more like a runner.  Running actually wreaks havoc on cycling strength.  Too much running volume, relative to cycling, can actually have just opposite of the desired effect.  Cycling, decimated by too much running volume, become less powerful.  Not only does this equate to slower bike times, but it also means that the bike leg becomes significantly more taxing, leaving your running legs in a more vulnerable state.  If in doubt, err on the side of increased bike volume.  Not only will you bike stronger, but you will feel and be fresher, as you set out on the marathon.

Proper Bike Pacing

How many times do we need to watch an athlete making a mockery of the bike course, trying to create their own personal sonic boom, only to be doubled over on the run course?  I have even seen them lying on the side of the road, as though sniped from afar.  Triathletes are smart people.  But, all logic seems to be forgotten, the moment that we straddle our bikes.  Whether we like it, or not, the bike and run legs of an Ironman are not mutually exclusive.  I know that your bike cost $6,000.  Mine did too.  I understand that you believe it to be the “ultimate triathlon weapon”.  Page 83, I read that ad too.  But, that doesn’t mean that you can try to ride it as haphazardly as you’d like, and still expect to run well.  If you want to try to be Aquabike World Champion, I can respect that.  But, you signed up for an Ironman, and an Ironman requires you to run!

The strong runners in an Ironman are the patient athletes.  They build into the bike leg, constantly increasing their effort, and are very easy to spot.  They are the athletes that you are huffing and puffing by at mile five of the bike.  Proper bike pacing is part and parcel to running well in the Ironman.  Over pacing places too much load on the legs, too soon, and often leads to a bike leg that gets slower and slower, throughout.  This can still equate to a decent bike split, but leaves the running legs in a very bad position.  As a result, the legs are too shelled to run effectively.

Fueling on the Bike

The bike leg of an Ironman is an opportunity to fuel the upcoming run.  This is the portion of the race when the bulk of the day’s calories and fluids are consumed.  Proper pacing allows the athlete to ride intensely, but to also focus on fueling the race.  Heart rates are relatively low, allowing for the absorption of these fuels.  If at any point during an Ironman your intensity is not allowing you to consume your fuels, then you are going much too hard!  Slow down!  Back off!  Ironman requires you to think beyond the moment, and a strong run is going to have to be adequately fueled.  Translate feeling good on the bike into opportunities to eat and drink more.  While every one else is leaving T1 with a full head of steam, storming their way towards the front of the race, the runner is front-loading their fluid intake, to ensure adequate hydration.  I don’t mean to give the impression that the bike should be ridden nice and easily.  That is certainly not my intent!  But, the bike leg is so much more involved than simply riding for speed at one given moment.  It is a time to multi-task, and carbohydrate/fluid consumption is one of those tasks very high on the list.  Any level of intensity that stands in the way of multi-tasking should be eliminated, immediately.

Proper Bike Cadence

Strong runners know that their cycling cadence is going to play a key role in defining their running cadence.  Ideally, an Ironman running cadence will fall between 90 and 105 steps per minute, depending upon height.  This minimizes the braking and impact forces of each step.  Bike cadences that vary to much start to adversely affect running cadence.  For this reason, the goal of any Ironman athlete should be to choose gearing that is going to allow for cycling cadences that are as close to 80-95rpm as possible, regardless of the terrain, and be able to do that throughout.  Gone are the days of powering up hills, or through flats, with gearing that grinds the legs down.  This is the equivalent of doing 112 miles worth of leg presses, and then heading out for a marathon.  Not a good plan!  When it comes to cadence, ride how you want to run.

Proper Run Pacing

It’s not all about the bike!  The run matters too.  Proper run pacing is often defined within the very first mile.  Some believe that the Ironman marathon can be negative split, so they start off very slowly, building into their intended pace.  This is actually one of the very few times when I would disagree with this kind of a pacing strategy.  The Ironman is just too long of an event, and the body is not going to be able to remain stimulated throughout its entirety, without significant peripheral fatigue.  The strong runners in an Ironman will actually take the pace out at about 20-30 seconds per mile faster than what they expect to average on the day.  Knowing that a fade is inevitable, they try to log as many miles as possible, before it sets in.  Once the inevitable occurs, durability and sensible bike/run pacing allow for the athlete to weather the effect, within a relatively small pacing window.  While many Ironman athletes may see the difference between their fastest and slowest mile paces differ by more than two or three minutes, the properly paced runners will realize no more than a minute’s difference in pace.

Naturally, the key to properly pacing the run lies in the application of everything mentioned above.  But, knowing what you are and are not capable of is half of the battle.  Athletes who are limited by durability should feel no shame incorporating planned walk breaks into their run pacing strategy.  At some point, those lacking durability are going to become peripherally limited, and forced to walk.  Better to do so under your own volition, in a controlled and voluntary manner.  Why not spread your walk breaks over the course of the marathon course, perhaps through every aid station?  I’m not referring to a slow pedestrian pace, but rather a solid power walk with run like cadence.  This will allow you to take down your nutrition, such that it can be effectively absorbed, all while aggressively moving forward and giving your legs a bit of a break, and reset.  We have all been out on a run and stopped to tie our shoes or allow traffic to pass by.  Once we resume running our legs feel slightly fresher than they did before.  This is the goal of this particular strategy.  In fact, I know of a certain female who currently owns the second all-time fastest marathon split in Kona, and is still not afraid to pull this out of her bag of tricks.

In Ironman, consistently strong runners don’t just happen.  Their run splits require a great deal of preparation, patience, and premeditation.  Unfortunately, it is not as simple as just training more like a runner.  The bike plays a significantly greater role in the run than it is credited with.  Strong run splits come at a sacrifice, primarily of the ego.  The runner knows that it is not sexy to hold back on the bike, and consider the race as a whole, rather than three independent events.  As an entity greater than the sum of its parts.  The runner knows that he or she will always have to endure the inevitable – “You know, if your bike was stronger…”  Runners also know that you can never count them out, that they always have the final say in a race.  And, that most triathletes are just a few changes away from being just like them.

I’ve been working on a new project the past few months along with QT2 Coach Tim: “Your 26.2” is a new operating business of QT2 focused on providing training plans for runners and marathoners! We wanted to get this offering out to the public to help attract a more wide range of ability levels and to help provide runners the knowledge base many triathletes have.

Historically, QT2 has been an intimidating platform for beginner runners and our hope with the new site is to provide a more welcoming atmosphere for them. We’ll be using the same training and nutrition principles as those utilized and proven at QT2….they are just packaged a bit differently, offering some lower price points for membership. The member area inside this site, is just packed with great information for runners including nutrition, fueling, pacing, and injury fix guides. Also inside the member area is an Ask The Coach Forum similar to QT2 Mission Plans where athletes can ask questions of Tim and I at their own discretion. This “Ask the Coach” model has really been successful at QT2, so it was a “no-brainer” to bring it to the new site.

I’m excited about this new project! Please go in and check things out and let us know what you think! MARATHON TRAINING PLAN.

-Jesse

Some athletes are slaves to their power meters and have a permanent indentation on their upper-torso, from the strap of their heart rate monitor. Others live for the moment, and think only of how they feel right here and now. They wouldn’t know where to find a pulsing artery. Athletes in the sport of triathlon will typically have two very different approaches to training and racing. They tend to be either very quantitative or very qualitative in nature. Each has its pros and cons. As the founder of QT2 Systems (Quantitative Triathlon Training Systems), I’ll let you guess which approach I promote to the athletes that I coach (for the most part)…

The qualitative athlete trains and races purely by feel. Their season is typically set up as blocks of aerobic development, intensity building, strength endurance, and speed, depending upon the specific time of year. Weekly workouts are scheduled as a series of hard, easy, or moderate efforts. They may wear a heart rate monitor, or use a power meter, though not within any particular parameters.

The quantitative athlete will typically have a more structured periodization plan, outlining their entire season of training and racing. While the periodization plan acts as a working document, it defines the basis and logic of the season. Training is done with a HR monitor, at a minimum, and a power meter, whenever possible. The athlete focuses on specific training and racing zones, initially defined through testing and adjusted throughout training.

Either approach can be successful in creating a healthy, well-tuned athlete who makes progress year after year. But, how should the success of either approach be measured? I like to assess two primary qualities. I first look at the athlete’s relative improvement from one season to the next; are they making progress every year in their race results. . The other metric that I feel is telling of an athlete’s training program is consistency in race results. Do they have one amazing race, followed by a race where they are just way behind? After many years of coaching athletes of all levels, I can comfortably say that these are two of the most difficult items to obtain and master. The success of these may be significantly more dependent upon your athlete’s ability to execute the training program, than the program itself. Regardless of how you slice it, the coach is the one who is ultimately judged by the athlete’s performances, and rightfully so. I call this the “one metric” assessment, and is what most outsiders use to judge coaches, and rightfully so.

There is a danger, especially among many self-coached athletes, in looking at the training programs of those who are currently winning or having high rates of success. These metrics can be greatly influenced by the successful athlete’s genetics and therefore the result itself may act as a mask for an otherwise poorly developed training program. For this reason, I encourage athletes to look to long-term progress in year-to-year race results and consistency in race results over the short term, when evaluating the training program of a fellow racer. These aspects are good indicators of both a solid training program, and an athlete who executes it well. More importantly, these qualities can be found in both the 8:15 and 12:00 Ironman finishers, alike. The athlete’s overall finish times, really does not act as a valid measure of their training program.

Are you, or should you be, a tracker of metrics? Below we will discuss the three biggest factors in the argument for or against metric tracking.

Training Load
Qualitative athletes never really know what their training load truly is. Even if they are very aware of their body, and its telltale signs, the qualitative athlete can tend to either over or under do particular workouts. This type of workout inconsistency will typically result in very similar racing inconsistencies. Some results will be remarkable, while others leave you scratching our head, wondering what went wrong. Why? Because the actual build up to each race, ends up being very different, from event to event, as the nature of the pre-race intensities are so variable. As a result, the athlete will load and unload training stress in very different ways, leading into races.

The quantitative athlete, on the other hand, is better able to plan and execute the appropriate training stress, because they know exactly what is going into their training stew, at the beginning of every day, every block, and every season. But, just as a stew is only as good as the ingredients that go into it, a season plan is only as good as the information on which it is based. That said, it is still very easy to over or under do the planning aspect of any particular training session. Even if perfectly executed, any given workout can result in an inappropriate training load for that point in the season.

Race Day Execution
Qualitative athletes go out on race day and rely on their experience to guide their day. In many cases this is a fantastic approach, which can lead to breakthrough performances. Leaving the HR monitor and power meter at home can be very freeing and allow the athlete to really push on performances, otherwise thought impossible. However, for newer athletes and even seasoned veterans moving up in race distance, racing by “feel” may result in a bit of trial and error, as it can require a tremendous amount of practice. In long course racing, and especially Ironman, where the opportunities are relatively infrequent, this can result in a great deal of disappointment with the possibility of redemption a long way off.

The quantitative athlete approaches their races with a clear pacing plan, developed around very specific wattage and pace, or heart rate targets, which are always derived from recent training data. Initially, the athlete may feel a bit handcuffed by the pacing strategy, feeling as though it is holding them back. Most well-developed pacing strategies will feel much too easy very early on, causing a bit of doubt to creep into the athlete’s mind. But, if executed properly, the pacing will result in a “slow bleed”, where the athlete crosses the finish line in utter exhaustion, not a moment before, nor a moment later. This type of pacing and execution results in the fastest possible triathlon time. Despite racing by the numbers, quantitative athletes must also have an eye on their “feel”. It is never wise to race solely by data. The data should be used as a guide, alongside perceived exertion. The two, together, can become a very powerful combination.

Freedom
Qualitative proponents have a clear advantage in this piece of the argument. Reduced stress while training, from a lack of constant benchmarks and numbers staring them in the face can be a pretty strong selling point. Quantitative athletes have the power meter and/or heart rate monitor dictating every step that they take. And when a workout isn’t going as well as planned, that (insert expletive) device reminds them of it! There is something to be said for heading out on a ride or run, without that stress constantly present.

Quantitative athletes, on the other hand, are able to see real-time validation of their hard work, and the progress that results. Naturally quantitative athletes do not see this type of training as lacking in freedom, but as defining purpose. They know exactly what they are supposed to do each and every day, and most importantly, why. Many find a great deal of solace in that.

I’m sure that you guessed right, that I am a quantitative guy. After years and years of tracking athlete data, I have found that it is the most efficient and accurate way to ensure long-term progress and speed the race day learning curve. When all is said and done, your ability to “feel” your effort on race day can be greatly enhanced by training tools, such as a HR monitor and/or pace and power meter. Many very talented professionals and age-groupers toe the starting line in Kona, each year, only to realize a result that in no way represents their fitness, because they do not yet know the feel of the proper pace. At the same time, there are many others who well know exactly what the race should feel like, but have typically learned as the result of several fails. These are the same athletes who know what it feels like to overheat, to suffer dehydration, or to over pace the early portion of the bike, and know exactly what to do when this occurs. They know these things, because they have lived them. Had these same athletes been a bit more quantitative in their training and racing early on, then perhaps they would have more quickly developed the feel, and had suffered fewer racing tribulations.

Time is of the essence in the sport of triathlon, and anything that can be done to speed the learning curve should be taken very seriously. I am a big advocate of using metrics, very early in an athlete’s career, as teaching tools. This allows the athlete to learn quickly, and then be able to use their own sense, as they gain experience and see the opportunities to perform at surprising levels. Many beginner athletes see very experienced and successful professionals not using metrics in their training and racing, and believe that this is the way to go. What they don’t see is the road that it took to get there.

Whether I have already converted you over to measuring all that you do, or you are still skeptical, it is a great idea to at least record race day data. This will allow you to review and learn from your efforts, opening a very clear lens on exactly what went well, and on what could have been better. What was executed perfectly, and what was executed poorly. This learning experience helps the athlete to approach the next event with a more accurate feel for the race. It doesn’t take too many iterations of this, and the increasingly well-informed athlete can begin to hone in on their feel. Once this is done, feel becomes a metric just as valuable as any power meter or heart rate monitor.

-Jesse

With the Ironman racing season fast approaching, I thought that this would be a perfect opportunity to walk (or should I say “run”) through some Ironman pacing strategies. Specifically, I would like to take a very close look at Caitlin Snow’s run pacing, from this past year’s Hawaii Ironman World Championship, which resulted in a 2:56 run split, the second fastest in the history of the race. Click here to view her pace and heart rate file from race day: Caitlin Snow Hawaii Ironman Run Pace Analysis

As a triathlon coach and Ironman Coach, I have developed many Kona race strategies over the years, but the execution in this particular example is one of the best that I have ever seen. Notice how Caitlin’s heart rate was kept very well controlled during the early portion of the run. Although we used perceived exertion, pace, and heart rate to pace the day, we typically choose HR as the primary, dominant pacing metric for warmer races. At a hot race like Kona, heart rate can account for potential heat accumulation, where a pace based strategy may not. When heat accumulation occurs, it is typical to see a dramatic decoupling between pace and heart rate. For example, heart rate will continue to increase through the opening miles, while pace slows or remains steady. In these situations, the athlete is accumulating heat more quickly than it is being dissipated. In most cases, holding pace constant, while heart rate grows, will cause stomach bloating and eventual unraveling due to heat related stress. The athlete’s only option is to then slow the pace and allow the system to rebalance itself. This can be very difficult for the minds of well-trained athletes to grasp, as they are often hard-wired to maintain some pre-determined pace, no matter what. On the other hand, heart rate based pacing, in hot environments, allows the athlete to identify heat accumulation, and adjust the pacing accordingly. Conversely, when tied to a pace based strategy, the athlete will typically continue to accumulate heat, until it is too late.

Given this information, the objective is to always maintain a steady heart rate throughout the entire run, and/or have it rise only during the final 10k. Of all the possible metrics that can be used to assess an athlete’s total race day, the run heart rate file can provide the most valuable information. Any issues that arise on race day, and can negatively impact a race, will cause the heart rate to decrease throughout the run. For example, poor nutrition, over-pacing the bike, going out too hard on the run, and porta-potty stops, will all result in a falling heart rate deeper and deeper into the run. What you see in Caitlin’s file is a very steady heart rate throughout the entire run, and even a slight increase in heart rate during the closing miles. This was a perfectly executed day! Caitlin’s nutrition, her pacing during the bike and early into the run were spot on, and resulted in this flawless heart rate file which in turn resulted in a flawless pace file. By the same token, the previous year saw a heart rate file that started out very high, decoupled from the pace during the first five miles, and resulted in a bloated gut and difficulty handling nutrition. A dropping heart rate after mile 10, gave us a result that we were both disappointed with; about 13 minutes off of her expected pace.

Ironman is a peripherally limited event. The length of the day causes the muscles to become more and more fatigued, making it increasingly difficult to stimulate heart rate. A well-developed racing strategy should aim to maintain a high, steady heart rate, even as the race progresses (i.e., don’t do anything during the race that may cause you to have a dropping HR on the run). Those who most effectively achieve this objective will have the best race, relative to their abilities. Unfortunately, most athletes get caught up in pushing much too much wattage early into the bike. This fatigues the peripheral system, and sets the heart rate bar much too high. This will either lead to stomach distress, or a peripheral system that is unable to stimulate the heart rate during the run, or late into the run.

-Jesse

For those interested, I did a pretty detailed interview with these guys last week.  Check out Tri Swim Coach – Triathlon Swimming podcast episode #42. This podcast covers how I got into triathlon and my approach to triathlon swimming. HERE!

Triathlon swimming and swim mechanics is an area where athletes are subjected to a whole host of opinions, and determining which are valid can become difficult. As a triathlon coach having performed underwater video analysis on hundreds of individuals, the great majority of them 50 to 85 minute Ironman swimmers, I feel very confident in identifying the most subtle of issues and how to mitigate them. Similar to my writing on run mechanics, of a few weeks ago, this is geared towards highlighting the most common and critical items related to swim mechanics within the sport of triathlon.

Of the three disciplines in triathlon, swimming is the most difficult AND critical to master the mechanics of. Swimming has infinitely many degrees of freedom, as compared to running and cycling, because of a lack of sturdy connections to firm ground. As an activity’s number of degrees of freedom increase, so too does the difficulty to master its mechanics. While running, you typically have one foot in contact with the ground, at all times, providing one less degree of freedom than swimming. Cycling, on the other hand, allows constant contact with the saddle, both hands, and both feet, accounting for five fewer degrees of freedom relative to swimming. As difficult as it is to master the mechanics of running, it is exponentially so in swimming, where there are really no solid contact points, and plenty of opportunities to create your own problems.

I want to first discuss some of the sources of athlete confusion, as related to swimming. Much of this confusion is born from pool-trained swimmers or coaches, focusing on a longer glide phase and lower stroke count. Open water swimming, in choppy waters, requires a strong back end of the stroke, with a follow-through that pushes beyond the hips. Athletes having a long glide phase in their stroke, tend to be slowed by open water chop while in this portion of the stroke, being re-propelled with each pull phase. Unfortunately, a long glide phase typically results in a slow turnover and, therefore, fewer pull phases per minute. Fewer pull phases mean fewer opportunities at forward motion, because of not being re-propelled through the water. Based on these facts, rough open water swims require a higher turnover than their pool-based counterparts.

The above can be evidenced by collegiate pool swimmers who see a major de-couple, relatively speaking, between their pool and open water swim times. Although their graceful glide and strong front-end propulsion results in fast and efficient pool swimming, once offered to the unrelenting chop of the open water, these attributes are quickly minimized. This can be especially frustrating for those who race at the Professional level, come from a swimming background, and typically crush their competition in the pool. Come race day, with mass starts, and bodies in front, behind, on either side, and sometimes on top of you, the front end is the first part of the swim stroke that gets lost in the flurry. With people and feet occupying the space where a nice, long, and gliding swim stroke might occur, it becomes nearly impossible to get a strong catch and pull within the front quadrant of the stroke. This leaves the mid to back end of the stroke as the critical piece for maintaining any forward momentum. Since the back end of the stroke and follow-through are protected, no matter how crowded the swim is, it only makes sense to apply a strong focus of our attention here, for top-level triathlon swimming.

These two points explain why pool-born swimmers can be very graceful and fast in the pool, but may have a good deal of difficulty translating this in-pool speed to the open water. It is the front-end focused swimmers, having a long glide, strong catch, and low turnover/cadence who are most efficient in calm, smooth, non-crowded waters. However, this same group is often out swim, time and time again in the open water by the high turnover crowd, who thrashes through the water with a strong back end to their stroke.

One of the most frustrating aspects for swimmers with poor mechanics is that many spend countless hours in the pool, swimming hard, 5,000 meter workouts with masters groups, but fail to make any significant progress in their open water swim speed. This equates to a misappropriation of the athlete’s “stress budget”, because a good deal of stress is utilized with little or no return on the investment. In a case like this, the stress spent on swimming is likely better spent cycling and/or running, where speed is less dependent upon mechanics, and gains in fitness are much more likely to directly impact race speed. As such, the athlete may be able to consider backing off on swim intensity, to focus on the mechanical issues that are impeding gains in speed on race day.

Using the above points as a backdrop, let’s discuss some of the most common issues that I see in the swimming mechanics of triathletes. We will discuss these in the order of importance, with the numbers in brackets indicating the approximate percentage of athletes who I see exhibiting the issue.

Poor Balance [20%]
This issue is indicated by hips that drop, causing the swimmer to become increasingly vertical in the water. This creates a significant amount of frontal area and hydrodynamic resistance, both of which must be overcome, before the body can make any forward motion. It is very similar to riding your TT bike down the Queen K, in the upright position. This resistance is so large that it is really not worth working on propulsion, or even fitness, until this body position is addressed! A good test, to determine if this is an issue for you, is to swim without doing any kicking, at all. If you struggle to make it through 50 yards, then you likely have some balance issues that are worth addressing. The key to working on balance, for open water swimming, is that once you have improved your in-water balance, stop doing the balance drill sets! These sets tend to reduce stroke cadence, increase glide, and create front-end swimming.

Missed Catch [90%]
I would estimate that only about five percent of triathletes actually have a true catch in their stroke! The catch allows the creation of an anchor for your arm and hand (the paddle), before engaging the lats, in any significant way, to create forward propulsion. Without the catch, engaging the lats and rotating at the shoulder tends to push the water downward and body upward. This exacerbates any existing balance issues, and creates small forward propulsion. This issue can be a double whammy, because it increases resistance AND decreases propulsion.

Poor Timing and/or Low Swim Cadence [50%]
Ideally, your leading arm should be leaving the front quadrant, just as the fingertips of your trailing arm are entering the water. This sort of timing creates more constant propulsion, forward momentum, and leads to an appropriate swim cadence. By swim cadence, I am referring to strokes per minute, NOT strokes per length. The ideal swim cadence is very dependent upon your height and swim speed. Typically, at a pace of 1:50 per 100 yards, an athlete will take between 55 and 65 strokes per minute. At 1:20 pace, we are looking at about 65 to 80 strokes per minute. In each of these, taller athletes should fall at the lower end of these ranges.

Upward Glide/Extension [40%]
Upon entry into the water, the leading arm is extended with an upward glide. This not only increases frontal area, but it also inserts a delay into the swim stroke. This delay can allow the trailing arm to catch up to the leading arm, which creates a timing issue similar to that discussed above. This delay also reduces the number of propulsive phases per minute, and therefore reduces forward momentum in a rough open water swim.

Straight Arm Recovery [20%]
I have heard many coaches say that they don’t care what the recovery of their athletes’ strokes look like. To be perfectly honest, neither do I, EXCEPT when I see it adversely effect timing, entry, and extension! Unfortunately, this is almost always the case! A straight-armed recovery often results in a straight-armed entry, with the shoulder entering the water first, followed by the elbow, and THEN the hand. As a result, there is a tremendous amount of resistance created, as the arm “rolls” into the water. The time required for this type of recovery often results in the leading arm getting much further along in its stroke, much too soon. This can create a timing issue that is the exact opposite of front quadrant swimming, wasting energy, because maximum propulsion is created as the body is thrust into a flat position.

Weak Back End [80%]
This is quite specific to triathlon, or open water swimming, versus pool swimming. A good back end of the stroke should see the wrist crack, just as the elbow becomes aligned with the body. This is done in an effort to maintain a perpendicular bearing between the palm and the body as the hand moves along the body and completes its follow through. This effectively increases the length of the “propulsive zone” during by maximizing the back end of the stroke. Many swimmers do not crack their wrist, instead pushing upwards on the water with the back of their hand, thus missing an opportunity for continued propulsion.

Cross-Over [30%]
Many swimmers develop a cross-over at some point during their stroke. This will typically occur at either entry/extension, or during mid pull. At entry/extension the forearm is the first thing presented to the water, causing an increase in hydrodynamic resistance. This also tends to produce a zig-zag effect as swimmers move through the water like a snake, again increasing frontal area and hydrodynamic resistance. When viewed from the front, entry and extension should occur directly in front of the shoulder with the index finger and thumb entering first. The palm should then be rotated to horizontal (vs. outward), creating space for the remainder of the body to rotate into.

On the other hand, a cross-over at mid pull reduces the swimmer’s effective paddle area, reducing the strength of the pull. Swimmers with this issue tend to either have relatively weak shoulders, or are suffering a cognitive disconnect with the proper mechanics. At mid pull, the palm should be vertical, below the armpit, or just slightly outside of that position.

Over Rotating When Taking a Breath [70%]
Swimmers who show their entire face, when taking a breath, tend to do so by over rotating their head. This is very closely related to a weak back end, as discussed just above. You will often see the palm drive outward, searching for an anchor that the body can use to “push” off of to get that big breath. Rotation of the head should be just enough to gain that breath by biting at the air, with no more than a single goggle lens breaking the water’s surface.

Disconnected Shoulders and Hips [15%]
While this issue tends to be less common, it certainly does rear its ugly head now and again. This often presents itself with the hips rotating well before the shoulders. This decreases the body’s ability to be well streamlined. From a side-looking view, the shoulders and hips should be connected, as if one. When the hips rotate, so too should the shoulders. When the shoulders rotate, so too should the hips. They are all interconnected!

Strength Limiters [15%]
Relatively low BMI athletes run the risk of being strength limited, in the water, from both a propulsive and mechanics standpoint. Many swimmers struggle to produce an appropriate cadence, because they lack the lat strength to pull through the water quickly enough. It can also be the case that weak shoulders will prevent the athlete from holding a good arm position at mid pull, creating the cross-over effect discussed above.

Why focus on the negative? Now that we have discussed the most common and impactful swim deficiencies, let’s talk about the measures that we can take to fix them! Let me begin by sharing a couple of methods to identify stroke mechanics, that may be handy, when underwater video analysis is not readily available.

Golf
I like to use this as a metric to measure streamlining and body balance. The Golf test is performed by swimming 50-yards, and recording your time, in seconds, and the total number of strokes it took. Take the sum of these two numbers, and that is your score. Like the sport of golf, the lower the score, the better. A score that is above 65, for taller athletes, and 75, for shorter athletes, is typically indicative of the need for work with balance drill sets, to improve streamlining.

100 No Kick, 50 Kick
This test helps identify propulsive needs. This is carried out by swimming a 100-yard TT without kicking at all, followed two minutes later by a kick only 50-yard TT, using a kick board. Your time for the 100-yards should then be divided by your time for the 50-yards. If this score is outside of the 1.50-1.70 range, then you should either be working more on your kick propulsion, or your upper body propulsion (i.e., arm position, catch, pull, follow-through, etc). A ratio that is greater than 1.7 is indicative of relatively weak upper body propulsion. A ratio that is lower than 1.5 may point towards a weaker kick.

I rely heavily on the following drill sets to compensate for the issues that we have discussed up to this point. Whether a swimmer’s particular issue is identified using the above test metrics or by way of underwater video analysis, these are extremely effective measures that can improve your open water swim speed.

The TI (Total Immersion) Family of Drills
This series of drills mainly addresses balance and streamlining issues. For these issues, there is nothing better! But, once your balance issues are fixed, these drills should be avoided, because they tend to slow swim cadence, and increase front end glide.

If you have: Poor Balance, Straight Arm Recovery, Cross-Over, and/or Disconnected Shoulders and Hips

Fist/Free
This drill is done by swimming 100-yards, the first 50-yards with closed fists, and the second 50-yards with open hands. This helps to improve the catch phase of your stroke, by making you very conscious of your arm and hand positions, following the fist lengths.

If you have: Missed Catch

Aerobic Paddles
This helps to improve swimming-specific strength and the catch phase. Using paddles in an aerobic manner, similar to the 50 fist/50 free drill, forces swimmers to become more aware of their hand positions, through the entirety of their stroke.

If you have: Missed Catch, Weak Back End, and/or Strength Limiters

Ankle Bands
The use of ankle bands shut off a swimmer’s kick, forcing them to balance their body in order to create a more productive pull for forward motion. Forward velocity helps to create balance, and is a function of good mechanics. For this reason, this drill is very effective for most triathletes, as it addresses almost all of the deficiencies that we have already discussed.

If you have: ANY of the above issues!

Tabatas
Tabata intervals are a great tool for mechanics, to help improve turnover. These can be done once or twice each week by sprinting 25-yards, while focusing on high stroke turnover, followed by 10 seconds, and repeated 8 to 10 times. Within a single workout, this can be done for two sets of 8 to 10 repetitions, with two minutes between each.

If you have: Poor Timing and/or Low Swim Cadence

Single Arm Swimming
Single arm swimming is the number one way to connect a swimmer’s hips to their shoulders. This drill is done with one arm out in front, while stroking with the other arm. Once this is mastered, the arm that is not stroking can be held at the swimmer’s side.

If you have: Disconnected Shoulders and Hips

Swim Cords
Swim cord routines are an excellent way for swimmers to help ingrain good arm position, and the elusive high elbow. It is always easier to work on these items with the consistency of dry land, than in the multi-variable environment of the water. Swim cords also help to target potential strength limiters in swimmers with relatively low BMI.

If you have: Missed Catch, Weak Back End, Strength Limiters

Cognitive Thinking
Believe it or not, cognitive thought can address each of the above issues! All of the drill work in the world is useless, if you are not thinking about your swim mechanics with each and every stroke. For example, thinking “fingers tips down, wrist aligned”, early in your swim stroke can help to create a higher elbow, and faster cadence.

If you have: ANY of the above issues!

Vertical Kicking and Fin Work
Vertical kicking and fin work are great ways to improve an athlete’s kick propulsion, and focus on “hiding the kicks behind the hips”. For those with very poor kicking ability, vertical kicking in the deep end for 1:00 sets, is a great way to generate more kick propulsion that originates from the hips. This can be done with a kick board in your hands, slowly moving it above your head as you progress. After three sets of 1:00 can be maintained with the board above your head, it is time to move onto a bit of swimming with the fins, which help the swimmer more effectively feel their kick.

If you have: A 100 No Kick, 50 Kick ratio that is below the 1.50 threshold.

Pull Buoy Swimming
Focused aerobic pull buoy swimming is a great way to shut off the kick, and allow you to focus on many of the upper-body related limiters, identified above. This is especially beneficial for any identifiable body rotation limiters.

If you have: ANY issue other than Poor Balance!

If you are looking for an efficient and comfortable way to swim in training and racing, focus on the front end, a low stroke count, and long glide. If you are looking to lead the swim portion of a triathlon, focus on a strong back end, and high turnover, both of which still require good balance in the water.

Different swimming objectives require different training techniques and mechanical demands. So, when receiving swim advice or looking for a coach, make sure that you clarify the type of racing that you are looking to do, and make sure that the advice matches your specific objectives.

Check out the video below!

-Jesse

To some this may sound like Accounting 101, and in many ways it is, but stress budgeting is one of the most important concepts to the overall success of a triathlete. Often overlooked by many less detailed triathlon coaches and self-coached athletes, this is part and parcel to surviving and benefiting from the training of a triathlon season. I encourage athletes to approach their workouts/season planning with a total stress budget in mind. That is, planning and executing their season on micro, and especially macro levels, consistently expanding their stress budget, without breaking the bank!

My aim is to further explain what this budget is and why it is so important to your success. We will also explore how to appropriately determine, expand, and properly manage your own budget. While I am sure that many have broached this topic, in the past, my goal is to finally break it down in a logical and believable way, that will finally convince those hard headed type-A triathletes that this is the most productive way to approach making progress in this sport. So, go and get your balance sheet and maybe a ledger, or two, because it’s time to determine your stress bottom line…

1) Your “stress budget” is the maximum level of stress that can be added to your system, without it becoming counterproductive. Many athletes often continue piling on stress factors through intensity, volume, poor nutrition, and/or life logistics, long after their acceptable budget has been far exceeded. This undermines the super-compensation cycle, staggering progress, due to improper rest and recovery. For the purposes of this writing, the “stress budget” will refer only to systematic stress or physiological stress, the primary symptoms of which include, but are not limited to hormone levels that are out of balance, abnormal blood work, and lack of immunity. These are all beacons of overtraining. We are not referring to peripheral system stress, which is typically experienced on a day-to-day basis, and presents itself as general fatigue, i.e. tired legs. Although these two types of stress can be closely linked, they are typically managed on very different levels. Stress of the peripheral system should be managed on the micro level, by ensuring that best effort workouts are immediately followed by recovery type workouts, allowing the body to restore and rebuild for the next key workout. Systematic stress, on the other hand, should be managed on the macro level, through a training plan that is designed around, and incorporates, an appropriate gradual increase of stress, over time. Such training plans will typically include a “bird’s eye view” of your overall season or multi-year plan.

2) Your total stress budget is by and large a function of the prior year’s acceptable stress level. Following a year of training and racing, you should have a pretty good sense of your acceptable stress budget, in terms of volume, intensity, and life logistics. This is the volume/intensity that you are able to turn over, on a weekly basis, without becoming injured our burning out. I typically refer to this as “sustainable volume”. With this, you can make reasonable increases in stress, when planning your coming season of training and racing. This, of course, assumes that your life logistics will remain consistent throughout the coming season. If you foresee a change in these logistics, then an appropriate compensatory change must also be made to your training stress, in order to maintain a balanced stress budget. For example, if you are planning on an increase in responsibility at work and/or an addition to your family, then you cannot expect to maintain the same level of training stress, because the stress of your life logistics will have risen so greatly.

3) Your total stress budget can be increased or decreased based on your restoration techniques. Factors such as an increased amount of sleep, better nutrition, and frequent massage can significantly increase your total stress budget, because they allow the body more time and means to recover from training. These factors can be looked at as an investment in your training, with the dividends being increased recovery and an expanded total stress budget.

4) Your speed, on race day, is directly correlated to your acceptable stress budget. The higher that your acceptable stress budget is, the faster you will be, assuming that you fill it with a large percentage of training stress, rather than life stress. An improved stress budget allows you to appropriate more stress towards sport-specific activities. At the end of the day, the athlete who most improves their stress budget, and then spends the majority of this budget on sport-specific preparation, will most develop their natural born talents. This is why Professional athletes perform so well, as compared to Age Groupers. Professional athletes tend to be naturally gifted in the sport, but those who train on a full-time basis, essentially minimize life stresses, as compared to those who maintain a full-time job. This allows them the opportunity to devote a great deal of time to the restorative process, thus expanding their total stress budget, and then spending that additional budgetary time on further/more intense training.

5) There are more and less effective ways to spend your total stress budget. Once you have expanded your stress budget, through gradual year-to-year stress increases, and executed perfect restoration, you can begin to realize how your overall budget has increased. If this newly expanded budget is spent on staying awake more than 16 hours each day, or further complicated life logistics, then athletic progress simply will not improve as it could.

The figure below illustrates the concept of total stress budget, with a few graphical examples. This figure assumes that all four athletes have the same total stress budget, as indicated along the y-axis.

Athlete #1 – Most of the age group triathletes, training for the Ironman distance, fall into this category. These athletes tend to be very driven, in all aspects of their lives. They have lofty athletic goals, and equally lofty employment and family responsibilities. As a result, these athletes are often working well beyond their available stress budget, as they try to cram all of these priorities into their lives. This athlete is systematically burnt out, maybe injured, and certainly lacking long term progress. Unfortunately, this is the worst-case scenario, and also the most common! These athletes would be best served to take a good, hard look at all of the factors pulling on them, and determine if any of these can be mitigated. Because work and family responsibilities tend to be unyielding it is often their training that must be reformulated. Initially, this can be a difficult pill to swallow, but will very likely improve training, racing, and frame of mind.

Athlete #2 – With very high goals, but lacking appropriate levels of stress in their training, these are the second most common type of athlete. Actually under budget, the progress of these athletes is actually being limited by too little training stress. These athletes will struggle to make real long-term progress, because of the combination of low training stress levels and a somewhat high level of bad stressors. With significant stress budgets, which are being both under and incorrectly utilized, these athletes would realize greater training and racing performances by considering how they can incorporate greater training stress into their program and possibly cut back on the opposing factors in their lives.

Athlete #3 – On the right track, these athletes have some training stress and limited life/logistical stress, but underutilize their total budget. These athletes are much more uncommon, but many times can be that shining gem out there that has great potential, that no one has realized. These athletes typically do not have children, have low-stress jobs, and a great deal of unrealized potential. They are often unaware of the work that is required to make real long-term progress. Together, with a good coach, these athletes should consider how to implement a greater amount of training stress into their program, so as to induce even greater progress. Already having the infrastructure needed to support the necessary restoration, staying within budget should be accomplished with ease. Again, these athletes are a rarity! If you find them as a coach, you have a great opportunity in most cases.

Athlete #4 – With a large percentage of their stress budgeted towards training, and very limited “bad” stress factors, these athletes hit it perfectly! Excellent nutrition and restoration help to maintain or improve total stress budgets, and these athletes continue to take full advantage of that budget. These athletes excels beyond the rest, and over the long term makes real quantifiable progress.

Many athletes often make the mistake of adding stress, at the expense of restoration. Like using gasoline to quell a fire, this has a significantly negative effect. The added stress and decreased restoration increase the amount of the budget being utilized, while actually decreasing the budget itself which can quickly lead to a dangerous overdrawing on the account. These items are twice as dangerous, and include training at the sacrifice of sleep, or poor nutrition during periods when great nutrition can be utilized. In these cases, opportunities to increase the budget are replaced with activities that both fill AND reduce the available budget! Since these factors are twice as potent, the focus as an athlete should be to avoid these mistakes! As a result of my work with athletes over the past 10 years, I have found that about 70% of age groupers, training for long course triathlon, most closely relate to Athlete #1. About 15% are most similar to Athlete #2, 12% Athlete #3, and only 3% like Athlete #4. Based on what we have discussed above, it should be of no surprise that Athlete #4 most often qualifies for Kona. These athletes have spent three, or more, years properly expanding and utilizing their stress budgets, and are reaping the rewards. Among the Ironman Professionals, I estimate that about 80% are Athlete #1, with a much larger percentage of their stress the result of training, and about 18% Athlete #4. VERY few Professional triathletes, at the Ironman distance, fall under the Athlete #2 or #3 ranks, as they typically understand and OVER estimate the amount of hard work needed for success.

So, as you approach the 2011 season, eager to succeed and take on additional stress by any means necessary, I urge you to take a step back and consider where you fall in the accounting. Keep in mind that the correct type of stress applied within the constraints of your total stress budget, typically improves performance, while stress outside of it simply hampers progress. Become a #4 athlete! Don’t always act on what you “want” to do since in most cases for triathletes, that “want” is the wrong decision that breaks the budget. This redirection of wants is real sacrifice in this sport; not the 6 hour rides everyone does in preparation for race day.

-Jesse

For those who are interested, I’ll be leading a great Long Course Racing workshop at the Ney York City TRI expo next week on the 12th of March (11am). If you are going to be in the area, sign up HERE and stop in for a great workshop covering all of QT2’s philosophies on this topic! I’ll make sure your 90 minutes is worth it to you and information packed! At a minimum, we’ll cover: (1) How to build an appropriate training schedule from both a macro and micro perspective; (2) Periodization planning; (3) Weekly workout layout and key sessions; (4) Intensity level development; (5) Taper schemes; (6) How to properly fuel race day including carbohydrate loading; and (7) How to properly pace race day.

We’re also going to offer all participants of this workshop a 10% discount on any per diem QT2 training service, or a 5 week FREE trial of our new VCoach Service.

QT2 will also have a booth at the expo so at very least, stop by and say hello!! CoreDiet Head Dietitian Jaime Windrow, my wife Chrissie, and I will be at the booth, so bring your questions, and get a FREE body fat check! With this team at the QT2 booth, we can cover just about any training, racing, and nutrition topic you can dream up.

We hope to see you on the 12th!

-Jesse

Swim mechanics and bike fitting get all of the hype these days. As triathletes, we are often keenly aware of our mechanical faults in the water, and how to make our bike position as powerful and aerodynamic as possible. The mechanics of running, however, have not yet received the respect that they deserve, until now! My goal, with this writing, is to help triathletes, and runners alike, to overcome many of running’s common mechanical pitfalls.

Running mechanics is a topic that many athletes feel is of little consequence. But, running mechanics can mask an athlete’s true fitness and speed potential, especially at the Ironman distance, where many of the supporting muscle groups become so fatigued late into the race. These inefficiencies typically combine with an already slowing “engine”, and lead to very slow marathon splits, relative to the athlete’s open running ability (greater than 12% decouple). This occurs on a regular basis at both the elite and age group levels, and can often be avoided by paying run mechanics the same level of attention afforded by swim technique and bike fit.

The goal of Ironman running is to bring as much of your open running abilities into the race as possible. We like to see no more than an 12% decouple between an Ironman run split and an open run time. To this end, it is important to maintain an anabolic mental state. Anabolic? You bet! Chest out and head up, like a sprinter exploding across the finish line. That is what I mean by anabolic. This is in direct contrast to the catabolic carriage, which is evidenced by a crumbling posture and negative state of mind. Obviously, it is unlikely that any of you are going to cross the finish line of your next Ironman looking like Usain Bolt. But, that should certainly be the ideal that we strive for, and close attention to running mechanics is our fastest ticket in getting there.

How do we reach this anabolic state of mind? The answer is in addressing and eliminating the issues that lead to a catabolic state that currently haunt may haunt you. Poor flexibility, weakness in non-primary muscle groups, a cognitive inability to find proper posture, and mental weakness on race day can all contribute to your catabolic state. So, with these items in mind, let’s consider the most common areas of deficiency seen in runners and triathletes. While we’re at it, we’ll discuss how these can be fixed before they derail the fitness that we have worked so hard to produce.

Poor extension
This is measured by how far behind the body your leg (i.e. femur) extends during the recovery phase of your running stride. I typically like to see a minimum of 16 degrees of femur extension off of the vertical. This quality is critical in good running posture, because it typically leads to a higher running cadence. By extending the femur further behind the body, your lower leg tends to recover much higher and closer to your rear-end. With this higher recovery, the lever created from your hip, down has less rotational mass and is therefore in a position to recover forward, faster. This faster forward recovery leads to a higher running cadence and, most times, a better strike location relative to your upper torso position.

By now, most runners have realized that a higher running cadence is critical to reducing fatigue, increasing speed, and reducing the possibility of injury. Due to this realization, many runners have begun running with a higher cadence simply by heading out the door and thinking about the need to run with a faster cadence. This approach typically leads to hip flexor injuries due to an increased load on the hip flexors. The key to a proper increase in running cadence is good upper torso position and hip flexor flexibility, which greatly improves femur extension.

Upper Torso Position
This is the position of your body from your waist to your ear, relative to the vertical position. Ideally, I like to see the upper torso at a forward angle of about five to ten degrees off of vertical. Upper torso position is critical to improving running cadence and a foot strike that falls beneath the body. This improved foot strike position reduces braking forces and vertical bounce. A good upper torso position also permits the upper quad and psoas a bit of “slack”, allowing for good extension, as discussed above. While creating a good upper torso position is very much cognitive in nature, it also requires good soleus flexibility. Many triathletes lack this flexibility, leading to poor running mechanics, and many times, Achilles tendonitis and/or planter fasciitis. Extreme vertical bounce in a runner’s gait quite obviously leads to slower than necessary run times, as the balance of time moving vertically is NOT spent moving horizontally. This extreme vertical bounce can also overload the hips in, most cases upon contact with the ground. An additional one to two inches of vertical bounce, beyond normal, can relate to as much as 300 to 600 feet of vertical climbing in a flat 40-minute 10K, running at 90 steps per minute. This vertical bounce essentially creates hills where they are not!

So far, we have discussed two flexibilities that are critical to good running mechanics: soleus flexibility and hip flexor/upper quad flexibility. These are the very same areas that become very tight with frequent riding in the aero position. Therefore, it is with no surprise that we see so many poor running strides on the marathon course of any Ironman.

Hip Drop
This is best evaluated through video run analysis, and is presented by the dropping of one or both of the hips, upon foot strike and weight transfer. Drawing a horizontal line across the very tops of the hip bones, a drop of more than 14 degrees can be indicative of weak gluteus media and/or TFLs. A good video analysis will very easily identify too much hip drop and the effects that it has on your running stride. From behind, this hip drop can be seen as a zig-zag pattern that starts at the feet, extending up through the hips, back, and head. Upon the striking and dropping of the hip, we essentially see all of these body parts going in different lateral directions. The legs and hips end up leaning in different directions. The back follows the legs, and the head follows the hips. Hence, the zig-zag effect! This is a major chain-reaction of lateral deflection being directed in opposite directions. For example, with a weak left gluteus medius the right hip drops and the left hip leans to the left, causing the legs and back to actually lean to the right. And, in a last ditch effort to keep the body from falling over, the head goes the way of the hip, leaning to the left. All of this, when our aim is to run neither left nor right, but forward! The required unnecessary compensatory muscle contractions related to this lead to an added usage of muscle glycogen, at a time when we are doing our best to preserve it. Furthermore, the hip drop also tends to contribute to a lower running cadence, because more time is spent in contact with the ground, upon foot strike and rebound. The more energy that can be put into moving forward, rather than left, right, up, or down, the faster that you will be.

Lack of Shoulder Rotation
This is a measure of how much your shoulders rotate about your torso while running. The shoulders play an integral role in efficient running posture. Many athletes are under the false impression that they should be running with a very square shoulder position. In fact, it is just the opposite as the best runners actually use their shoulder mass as a tool to help propel them forward, late in races when their lower bodies becomes extremely fatigued. A lack of shoulder rotation tends to be cognitive in nature and/or related to a weakness in rotational core strength. A strong upper torso rotation, late in the run, requires a great deal of rotational core strength, as the athlete is relying solely on the soft-tissue strength of their core to facilitate the rotation.

Dropped Arm Position
This relates to the position of your arms throughout the run stride. Both dropped arm and “elbows out” positions are typically the result of hip weakness and/or cognitive habit. Typically, runners with weak hips on one or both sides tend to drop their arm on the side of the weak hip, in an effort to pull the body back over to that side. This is one of those inefficient compensatory motions that slow runners down. These arm positions tend to limit cadence as more rotational mass is presented in the form of more arm mass further away from the shoulder. This can actually limit run cadence! Most world-class runners exhibit the same acute elbow angle deep into their recovery posture, as they maintain during the drive portion of their arm swing. It is as if the elbow is being pulled directly back from its most forward position with a fishing line!

Compensation for any of the above identified deficiencies fall into two different categories, namely cognitive and improvements in strength/flexibility. Those cognitive in nature require the runner to make mental changes to their posture while running. Below, I focus on the best, most targeted, run-specific stretching and strengthening exercises, to address the deficiencies identified above.

These exercises are those that I most commonly prescribe to athletes, following a detailed running mechanics assessment. Each of these directly impact one or more of the above critical areas, required for great running mechanics.

1) Single Leg Squat – This is the single most commonly prescribed functional strength move that I use with the athletes who I assess. They can be done with a TRX, standing alone in your living room, or in the gym on a smith machine. In each of these cases, the eccentric loading that must be resisted by your hips helps to eliminate hip drops through strengthening of the glut medius and TFL, among other muscle groups.

2) Eccentric Calf Raises – This is the second most commonly prescribed run-specific strength/flexibility move that I prescribe. It helps to create a better forward upper torso position, leading to a higher running cadence and much reduced braking force. This move also practically eliminates below the knee soft tissue injuries.

3) Two Joint Hip Flexor Stretch – This move is very run-specific and really helps to target the hip flexors and upper quads, which are areas that are chronically tight in triathletes, due to high cycling volumes. For many years I prescribed a traditional psoas stretch to help fix very short extensions, as discussed above. However, I later realized that the two joint stretch was more functional, helping to engage the upper quad, and critical to creating better extension and running cadence.

4) Hill Bounding – This is better categorized as a key workout, but in many cases can help to lead to better running mechanics. Initially introduced by Coach Arthur Lydiard, I have successfully used this workout, with my athletes, for the past 10 years as a key workout AND run mechanics drill.

5) Rotational Core Work – By now, almost all athletes have realized the importance of core strength. What many athletes fail to realize is that rotational core strength is more important as a functional exercise! Practically any core specific abdominal move is fine, as long as it has a rotational component. For example, bicycle crunches.

Most of the primary movers related to running receive plenty of stress from the training program. But, in most cases, these more peripheral items tend to be underworked. In fact, the integration of these five moves into your regular functional strength routine, can help to fix poor running form, or maintain already strong technique. Just two sets of each, once or twice each week, is all that is required.

Translating even great running mechanics and great open run times into Ironman takes a great deal of work, beyond simply muscle strength, fitness, and flexibility. This task requires the creation of a very confident, anabolic atmosphere while on the run course. Alongside well-developed day-to-day nutrition and race day fueling programs, proper running mechanics allow an environment to begin the positive process while the other items, including proper pacing, make it all come together on race day!

Below is a video run analysis of Caitlin Snow and Mirinda Carfrae:

With the holidays now behind us, and the reality of a new season beginning to set in, consider thinking about your body composition as one of the primary areas where improvement can be made during the New Year. Athletes typically think about body composition in a very one-dimensional way. Most do not get too far beyond considering only their body weight and/or the percentage of their body weight that comes from fat. Outlined below is a more effective, sport-specific approach to looking at body composition, using traditional metrics in a more synergistic way.

The two primary metrics to consider are Body Fat Percentage (BF%), and Body Mass Index (BMI). There is limited sport specific value in using these metrics separately. However, when used in conjunction with one another, they can provide deep insight into sport related limiters, which go well beyond the impacts of only body weight on race speed and/or vanity.

The first step in carrying out a detailed evaluation of body composition is to take a fairly accurate measurement of body fat. There is no need to go crazy in getting an exact number in this context; as a number that is within plus or minus 1.5% will be more than appropriate. Through work with a dietitian and/or coach most athletes should target an approximate race day BF%. Assuming this BF% is about as low as the athlete should safely be, based on age and gender, a goal body weight should then be determined under the assumption that this goal BF% can be reached via dietary manipulation. For example, if an athlete currently weighs 160 pounds with a BF% of 12 percent, and has an optimal/goal BF% of 8 percent, we would assume that the athlete will lose 4 percent of his body weight through dietary manipulation. To determine this athlete’s goal race day body weight we calculate 4% of 160 (.04*160), which is about 6 pounds. Assuming that this athlete does not lose a significant amount of muscle during the weight loss phase, they can expect to race at about 154 pounds and 8 percent body fat. This is the athlete’s Lean Adjusted Body Weight. This process, by itself, is a powerful tool in helping to determine an athlete’s optimal race weight, as well as the impacts on performance that may be seen by reaching this optimal body weight. Assuming that this goal BF% has been properly determined and that there has not been a significant loss of strength, due to a loss of lean muscle mass, each pound of lost body weight roughly equates to a 3 second/pound/mile improvement in running pace and about 3 seconds/pound for every four miles on the bike. With this in mind, once the above athlete has shed these six pounds of body fat, an improvement of about 18 seconds/4 miles and 18 seconds/mile, can be expected on each the bike and the run paces.

Integrating BMI into the evaluation of an athlete’s body composition, alongside BF%, adds a great deal of value to the process, because it adds the ability to consider the athlete’s muscle-mass content. Consider the idea that every sport has it’s own optimal BMI number, where strength does not act as a limiter to performance and is not in excess of what is needed. If an athlete’s lean adjusted body weight results in a BMI that is below the sport’s requirement, then there is a good chance that strength acts as a limiter to performance. In this case, strength should be a primary target of the athlete’s season plan, along with the appropriate dietary changes to support muscle mass development. To calculate lean BMI, multiply the lean adjusted body weight by 703, and then divide this number by the square of the athlete’s height, in inches. If this lean adjusted BMI is much above that required for the selected sport, then it is likely that the extra muscle mass being carried around is not needed for optimal performance in the sport and actually slows the athlete down. In my experience for triathlon, the optimal lean adjusted BMI is about 20.0 for females, and 21.0 for males. Remember this metric only has value when combined with BF%, to create a lean adjusted body weight for the BMI calculation. For example, if BMI is calculated, for an athlete with significant body fat, without first being adjusted for lean body weight, it will result in an artificially high number, due to significant body fat, with no correlation to the sport-specific strength evaluation. It should be noted that a sport such as rowing would have a higher optimal BMI, due to the significant strength component required.

When evaluating the sport-specific body composition of a new athlete, the typical process is to 1) determine the athlete’s current BF% and, with the assistance of a good coach or dietitian, determine a target race day BF%; 2) adjust body weight assuming that this goal will be reached; 3) calculate BMI with this lean adjusted body weight; 4) evaluate this BMI versus the aforementioned sport-specific ideals (Triathlon: 20.0 Females, 21.0 Males); 5) if above or below these ideals, consider manipulating the athlete’s training/nutrition program, with the goal of working towards these ideals. How to go about reaching these goals, in terms of muscle mass gain/loss, is beyond the scope of this particular writing, as it can be very specific and quite complicated. Regardless, the process outlined above sheds light on how an athlete may be able to squeeze additional speed out of an already sound training program, and further understand where their specific limiters may lie. It is only when BF% and BMI are combined that a truly powerful tool for evaluating potential athletic limiters is apparent.

-Jesse

This writing discusses that tough time of year when many athletes take a bit of downtime from their training and are tempted by nutritional pit falls. Although a reduced training load may mean that it is a great time to kick back and relax, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is a great time to pack on excess body weight via body fat, or reduce nutrient density intake. Below, I hit upon the major topics that coaches should consider when making off-season nutritional recommendations to their athletes.

For many athletes, the off-season matches quite well with the holidays, meaning that it tends to be even more difficult to stay nutritionally sound and control body composition. For most athletes, a reasonable upper bound weight gain from the previous season’s leanest body weight should be no greater than about 10 pounds, and no less than four pounds. From a body composition perspective, this range does a couple of things to help the athlete enter the following season in a beneficial position. It ensures that it will not be too difficult to obtain a lean body weight, because an excessive amount of body fat was not gained. This also helps to reduce the risk of injury upon returning to training, because of the reduced load on soft tissue, joints, and bones. Lower isn’t necessarily better either; many folks who were very lean the previous season require weight gain to fully recover from both systematic and peripheral system standpoints.

During the off-season, athletes should take care to include foods high in nutrient density, alongside the treats they typically deny themselves in-season. After all, they are trying to recover from the previous season that was, undoubtedly, stressful to the body and therefore requires some foods that are nutrient dense.

In general, these are my top five tips to help athletes navigate their time off and reach the objective of controlled body fat with adequate recovery from the previous season:

1) Core Ratio: When not at a holiday party, try to focus on what we, at TheCoreDiet.com, call the Core Ratio. The Core Ratio is a means of evaluating any packaged foods, that come with a nutritional label (i.e. not fruits, vegetables, lean meats, nuts, or seeds). It is calculated by finding the sum of the total carbohydrates and added sugars, and then subtracting any dietary fiber. This number is then divided by the sum of the product’s fat and protein. A ratio below two represents a product that is lower glycemic, and therefore a more suitable choice for maintaining stabile blood sugar, throughout the day. Unnecessary surges in blood sugar can potentially cause an increase in the storage of unwanted body fat. Eating within the “Core” during periods of the week when you are not in a situation where you feel you need to splurge, can really help mitigate the potential “damage” of the holiday season.

2) Workout Windows: There are times during each day where it does make more sense to splurge during the off season. I like to recommend that athletes keep their holiday parties and splurge meals within a window following a workout that is as long as the workout itself was. That is, if a 3 hour ride is completed on a Saturday that ends at 4:00 p.m., after having a solid recovery drink immediately post workout, the athlete is free to enjoy anything they’d like until 7:00 p.m. This helps allocate excess calories that may be consumed, to a period during the day when the athlete’s body is hypersensitive to using them for recovery. Another way to think about this is that during the workout itself, a good fueling program should replace about half of the caloric expenditure. The post workout window provided here helps replace the other half of the caloric expenditure. It also helps reinforce a powerful concept: “I must workout to reward myself with a splurge item”.

3) Protein Focus: During the off season athletes who focus on protein tend to have an easier time maintaining weight and supporting or gaining muscle mass lost from the previous season of racing. Protein has minimal impact on blood sugar and also helps displace the potential to have refined sugars or other empty carbohydrates during tempting situations. A good approach for most athletes is including a good portion of protein with every meal during the off season. This protein will help support base work when many athletes are in the gym, and will also provide a fuller feeling, which ultimately reduces intake of those foods which really tend to influence blood sugar and cause unwanted gain of body fat.

4) Cheat Day: I like to include a cheat meal in every athlete’s nutrition program, one time each week, throughout the entire season. This cheat meal, during the off season, can be used on any day without meeting the previous recommendations of this writing….it is like a free pass. Examples of the weekly cheat meal may include pizza on a Friday night, outside of workout window. Oftentimes these cheat meals can be organized to fit into an athlete’s training, such as on a Friday night before a long weekend of workouts. These cheat meals can also be used for holiday parties, or dinners during the off-season. I find that the weekly cheat meal makes a long term nutrition program much more manageable, sustainable, and often more effective over the long-term.

5) Four Fruits and Veggies: A good rule of thumb for most athletes is to consume four servings of fruit and four servings of vegetables every day, in addition to any other foods or holiday party dinners they may be having. This ensures that although excess calories via junk foods are being consumed, the athlete is still receiving good nutrient density to help support recovery from the previous season. The added fruit and vegetable intake also helps displace the potential to consume excessive empty calories during the off-season.

Triathlon nutrition during the off season can be a challenge for athletes and coaches alike. Following the simple recommendations above can really help athletes manage their body composition, and recover from a previous season of racing without foregoing this fun, stress-relieving period that every athlete deserves during the off-season.

-Jesse

Over the years, I’ve seen many, many tests to determine heart rate associated with anaerobic threshold (TH); anything from blood lactate tests, to metabolic testing, or as simple as 220 minus your age with some other factors. Below presents what I like to use as the easiest most efficient way to determine TH heart rate for those athletes that may not want to have more complex testing carried out. What this procedure does is cross check your zones with a few methods to give you a fairly confident value that you can then base your heart rate zones on for training. I think some folks get a bit careless determining this value which results in hours and hours of training time spent developing an energy system that you may not want to be developing! Remember, these methods only give a single data point on a curve which happens to be the most important point to have, however some of the other more sophisticated methods provide the full curve and therefore also allow you to evaluation physiological specifics and target those areas within an athlete’s training program. With that said, here’s the simplest most effective ways I know how to find Anaerobic Threshold heart rate:

Bike
Primary: After a warm-up, complete an 8 minute all out time trial on your bike recording average heart rate, and average power:

• TH heart rate is typically about 8 beats below the average heart rate for this test. TH power is typically the average power from this test multiplied by 0.92.

Cross Check: This method requires no immediate testing if you already have the data:

• Take the highest HR you have ever seen on the bike (within the last 4 years) and subtract your resting HR from that number. Then multiple that “heart rate reserve” by 0.81 and add back your resting to that number.

Take the average of these two methods or choose one versus the other based on how accurate the data input were to each.

Run
Primary: After determining your bike TH heart rate, you can then offset it to your run TH heart rate by adding 6-14 beats. Almost every athlete I have worked with falls within this range with most being right around 10. So, first add 10 and then make the following adjustments to the number you get:

• If you are a woman shorter than 5’-3” subtract 2
• If you are a woman taller than 5’-9” add 4
• If you are a male shorter than 5’-6” subtract 2
• If you are a male taller than 6’-0” add 4

Cross Check: After a determining your TH above, confirm your running estimate by completing an open running road race while recording average heart rate. A great estimate of threshold from an open road race is:

• Average 5K heart rate minus 15 beats
• Average 10K heart rate minus 10 beats
• Average half marathon heart rate minus 5 beats

Take the average of these two methods or choose one versus the other based on how accurate the data input was to each. After two open road races confirm the offset, its likely best to use that number and disregard the primary offset above if it suggests something different.

I always like to cross check TH heart rate with a few different methods since this is the number a lot of an athlete’s training will be based on! For a full set of heart rate training zones based on threshold heart rate, visit the QT2 member resource area. The bottom line is that most athletes should spend more than 70% of their time at less than 86% of this number with almost 100% during the early season. It takes patience! Happy training!!

-Jesse

As I sat on the train this morning, I finalized my thoughts on a topic I’ve been bouncing around for the past 6-10 months. It’s a topic that 99 percent of coaches and athletes likely don’t consider. Let me lay the ground work, and the typical scenarios:

1) Athlete who increases stress properly, but without compensatory restoration measures – in this case the athlete becomes burnt out, stagnant, and lacking progress. Many times they believe this “plateau” is due to lack of work, so they do more. This typically further undermines restoration techniques, and leads to over training, declined performance, or injury.

2) Athlete who identifies burnout and reduces training stress as they believe they are working too hard and THAT is why things aren’t progressing. They do not change restoration techniques. This approach typically results in an improvement in overall systematic health, and initial race speed. However, over the long-term, progress is not as consistent as maybe it could be due to reduced stimulation of the aerobic system over years.

3) Athlete who again identifies burnout and decides a reduced volume and increased restoration type approach will fix them up. Along with these changes they also increase intensity some. This athlete makes tremendous progress for a 6-10 month period because they “freshened up” from an overtrained state, and still have the deep aerobic fitness they developed from the large mileage they were doing previously. They typically have 1-2 great races before the progress starts to slip as their aerobic fitness slips.

I’ve written on the micro level before that “two wrongs don’t make a right”. In that writing a few years ago I was referring to the athlete who trains hard one day, but then eats junk, and doesn’t sleep enough. That athlete then wakes up in the morning and says “boy, I feel beat up so I better listen to my body and take the day off”. In this case, they didn’t take care of their restoration, which led to a missed training day…..two wrongs! #2 above is very similar to this concept but on a larger scale.

Of the 3 response scenarios to feeling beat up, and overtrained, now obviously #1 isn’t the solution, #2 gives the athlete the sense that this is the right answer because they feel better and improve their race results. #3 can be the most misleading because many times the athlete has come from years of big volume and under-restoration. Following that build up, they reduce their training volume, rest a bunch more, and increase intensity. This is very similar to a taper that an athlete may do leading into a major goal race. It produces a short term performance peak as they still have fitness from the large volume they were doing, and then shake out some of the fatigue that may be limiting their race speed. This case is counted in months rather than weeks. The major detriment with this approach comes 1-2 years down the road as their deep aerobic base begins to erode. With all of this being said, let’s look at two more scenarios where an athlete may apply this type of an approach (lowered volume, with higher intensity):

1) Athlete who has 6-10 years of big volume and maybe weak restoration. The athlete is over the age of 35. In this case, it may not be a bad approach since the athlete is getting older, and a peak in race speed (fitness minus fatigue) may be their last chance at performing at a world class level.

2) Athlete who has 4-8 years of big volume and is 28. Over the short term, this is an approach that will produce results, but for an athlete of this age, their development should still be focused on long term progress….4-5 years down the road. Many times the path to speed, 1 year away is much different than the path to speed 5 years down the road, and actually the path to speed 1 year away undermines the 5 year approach. Many athletes who take the lower volume, higher intensity approach at this age, halt their long term progress for short term gratification.

3) Athlete who has 1-3 years of training and is 24. In this case, the lower volume, higher intensity approach is detrimental to the athlete’s career and long term progress because a deep aerobic base is never built. This doesn’t mean an athlete at this age who takes this approach won’t be world class; it just means they won’t be as good as they could be. Talent out of the box can be very powerful, and compensates for many, many mistakes in training that mislead a talented athlete that what they are doing must be the best thing since they are succeeding.

In my honest opinion, for the problem scenarios above, the proper approach would be to leave stress via volume in the program (when an athlete starts to feel beat up), improve restoration to compensate for the continued big stress, and continue long term progress. Unfortunately, many age groupers cannot logistically compensate for big stress via improved restoration. In these cases the stress should likely be reduced (from volume) and compensated for via added intensity; then taking the extra time to focus on restoration (sleep, nutrition, etc). Also, in a few cases where the athlete has dug themselves too deep in a hole over the course of several years, its necessary to have them take some serious time off and build back volume very slowly. The last case where it may make sense to take a lower volume/higher intensity approach is when an athlete’s career is reaching the final 3-5 years. They already have the deep aerobic base from years of training, and a 1-2 year taper of sharpening might do them some good. Coincidentally this also corresponds quite well with most athletes’ training volume reaching the 10,000+ hour level over the course of their life (“life-hours”). I continue to believe this is a key benchmark in endurance sport potential.

In summary, it’s not about the high intensity/low volume versus low intensity/high volume debate you hear all the time between coaches, and/or athletes. It’s more about what the appropriate measure is given an athlete’s logistical circumstances and particular history in sport. I hear too many coaches categorize complex training approaches to “I use a low volume, high intensity approach”. Again, in my opinion, it should be approached in a bit more detail and at a minimum should consider all of the various inputs you have from an athlete.

My hope with this post is to get you thinking…..

-Jesse

Recently, I’ve noticed many athletes with run limiters really focusing and in some cases over focusing on their run training volume. Although bigger run miles can lead to better running, that doesn’t always lead to faster run times off of the bike in triathlon. How does one know what the correct balance is between bike and run training for the sport of triathlon?

If you are an athlete that is training for a triathlon, I never like to see the run volume on a weekly basis much more than a 1/5 of the bike volume. That is, if the bike mileage is 200/week, we shouldn’t see the run mileage beyond 40 miles. This applies for all races where bike training mileage is below 150 percent of critical volume (450 in IM, and 275 in half IM). What this does is ensure that the athlete has the bike durability required to use their run off of the bike. Although run mileages that exceed this rule may improve open run times, this improvement will likely be negated (and in many cases reduced further) in triathlon running due to the significant impact that the bike ride will have on the athlete on race day….they are simply not in a position to run well off the bike.

Ok, so how does one go about improving their off the bike run times if they can’t increase run volume beyond 1/5 of bike volume? First off, we look at what their de-couple is…..meaning how much slower they run a 10k, or half marathon off the bike versus open. Assuming there is no nutrition limiter, and the bike is executed (paced) in a reasonable way, we look for less than 8 percent. That is, if you run a 1:40 open half marathon, we shouldn’t see half iron run splits of slower than 1:48. If we do, than there is likely a lack of bike durability and good running off the bike will come with more bike miles. If the de-couple is less than this, then it’s their open running ability that’s limiting them. In this case, if they have already been running at 1/5 bike volume, the best approach is likely a run focused period of 3-4 months, that culminates in a run race like a marathon. During this period we can go below the 1/5 to improve open run times, and then going back to a more balanced triathlon preparation program into their next triathlon. The key is to not go below the 1/5 in preparation for a triathlon, since any improvements in open run time will likely not translate to improvements in off the bike run time due to lack of bike durability…..the athlete is simply not in a position to run well when they get their feet on the ground.

This is a simple but common mistake for many triathletes. Manipulating training volume is one of the most powerful tools we have as coaches, and the balance should be approached VERY carefully.

-Jesse

This writing expresses my thoughts on “metobolic efficiency” and how this term is currently being used within many triathlon training circles. The term has been around for quite some time now, however the process has been around since the beginning of time. All it says as it applies to our sport is “let me train my body to use aerobic energy systems at as high of an output as possible”. This is the least costly way to fuel the body during exercise. How we get there is where the real debate begins. As of recently, there has been a big push making the argument that dietary changes can impact these adaptations. Although, I think most everyone would agree, that it’s primarily training intensity around aerobic threshold that improves this “efficiency” in the most direct way. The concept of dietary manipulation to promote efficiency has been extrapolated by many into the practice of so called, “starvation rides” or runs where an athlete eats/drinks nothing but water for a 3-4 hour ride, in an effort to “force the body to use fat for fuel” which is inherently aerobic in nature. The research on this practice is very skeptical, and comes with a whole boat load of potential detriments which I don’t believe make it an unacceptable risk on a regular basis. Let’s review those potential detriments:

1) For folks with low BMI’s who are strength limited, this type of a workout can be extremely catobolic in nature meaning their bodies begin to use muscle to create carbohydrate (neoglucogenisis). This process is a nightmare for these low BMI athletes because it swindles down muscle mass and exacerbates an already problematic limiter. Not giving your body what it needs to exercise long durations can be the straw that breaks the camel’s back in these cases, promoting low immunity, and an enhanced strength limiter.

2) Starvation rides (or runs) have the very high potential of being nutritionally limited. Meaning, prior to physical energy system related items being trained (or stressed beyond where they have been prior) the workout is first limited by the fact that there is not enough fuel. Now, the reason we do all of our training and restoration is to be able to go out and have better workouts that push previous limits. For this reason, I am a huge believer in never having a nutritionally limited anything! Whether it be a training day, or race day, never let it happen! We make too many sacrifices on a day to day basis in an effort to improve our workouts and improve our racing to let something that we have 100 percent control over limit our effort.

3) In the sport of IM, particularly those with high sweat rates, training the gut is probably at the top of the list of items that need to be carried out. Regardless of fitness, for these folks their races are commonly nutritionally limited, and therefore not a display of fitness at all. Starvation workouts do not provide the opportunity to train this very limiter.

With the overall practice of starvation rides gaining momentum the past few years, I’ve seen many athletes that may or may not have improved there “efficiency” with this practice, walk the marathon because on race day, they have no trained ability to take in calories. Arguably, QT2 produces some of the best runners off the bike in both the professional and age group ranks. One of the primary tools used to achieve this is an unrelenting practice of a detailed race fueling plan, in training, EVERY day.

As with all choices in life, the starvation practice is a risk versus reward decision, and in 90 percent of athletes it’s the ability to handle nutrition that undermines them in IM…..not necessarily how “metabolically efficient they are”. In a slightly off topic, but related concept, the best way to address limiters in triathlon is by dealing with the “in series” items first. Meaning, work on those limiters which are actually limiting your race first! Some limiters occur in parallel and others in series. When looking at a set of limiters that are in series, it doesn’t do you much good to work on one further down the chain before your primary limiter, since you may never get to the point of having that item actually be the limiter on race day! In this case, the practice of starvation rides comes with risks, likely exacerbates your primary limiters, all before it does something that really has no specific conclusion on whether or not it actually works. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen an athlete spending significant time working on a limiter that never actually limits their race.

To make matters worse, I see many athletes using the starvation workouts during the early season “base phase” while simultaneously in the gym trying to gain strength. Carrying out a very catabolic activity like a starvation ride, really doesn’t mix well with a solid weight training program and an anabolic atmosphere with positive hormone balance.

Having said all of the above, I do think that variety is one of the absolute keys (in correct doses) to really tweaking and improving once you’ve reached your initial success. Given that, if you insist on trying a starvation ride or run, I suggest doing it only once a month at a maximum. MAYBE there is some benefit to be gained without really impacted the bigger picture detriments above if done infrequently enough. I’ll consider this concept similar to having a “cheat meal” once a week while dieting. This is an old body building trick that actually works quite well in re charging the metabolism, and typically results in a better overall diet program versus a flat out deficit program day in and day out.

In summary, I believe more research and testing needs to be carried out on the topic to come to any conclusions, but we do know consistent starvation rides come with a whole host of risks, of which I’m not willing to accept for the athletes I coach at this time.

-Jesse

Triathletes typically have a significantly more difficult time becoming proficient competitive swimmers than their single-sport counterparts. First, and foremost, because triathletes must focus on three very different disciplines they simply do not have the time, on a day-to-day basis, to put in the necessary swim volumes that would promote adequate sport-specific efficiencies. As a result, triathletes must be extremely meticulous in how they develop mechanical efficiency in the water. Of triathlon’s three disciplines, swimming is the most dependent upon sport mechanics due to the significant difference in the resistance of water versus air. A compounding factor is the difficulty in gaining mechanical proficiency in the water, due to a lack of solid contact points on which to anchor the body. Cycling provides five contact points, and is therefore the easiest discipline for developing mechanical efficiency. Running, with only a single contact point, has its difficulties, but still does not provide the level of difficulty of swimming. Having no contact points, swimming allows many “degrees of freedom” for inefficient movement. So, the question becomes: How can we help our athletes focus their limited time and energy where it is most appropriate through specific swim test sets throughout the season?

In the water, training for speed can really be broken down into two primary components, namely fitness and mechanics. Mechanics can be further broken down into balance/streamlining and propulsion. The first three test sets, below, focus on identifying an athlete’s mechanical limiters and will help to direct their early-season swim training. Later in the season, the final two swim sets will evaluate an athlete’s fitness, gage progress, and help to predict race performance.

Balance/Streamlining
Swim Golf – This test set has been around for quite some time, and for good reason! It evaluates streamlining, and is therefore a very good indicator of your athlete’s in-water balance. Using it during the early part of the season can help to guide the athlete’s next couple of months of training, and will not impact more race specific training. Swim Golf consists of a timed 50-yard swim, and its corresponding stroke count. The sum of the time, in seconds, that it takes the athlete to swim 50-yards, and the stroke count represents their total score. Athletes who are 5’6”, and taller, should aim for a score that is under 65, while shorter athletes should strive for a score that is below 70. Athletes who meet these thresholds are likely well streamlined, have good balance, and can move onto the propulsion-focused sets, below. Until then, the athlete will be best served by focusing on drills that continue to address in-water balance and streamlining.

Propulsion
No Kick/Kick – Following a warm up of about 500 to 1,000 yards, the athlete should kick a 50-yard Time Trial, take a 1-minute rest, and then swim a 100-yard TT, without any kicking. If dividing the no kick TT time by the kick TT time, both in seconds, yields a score between 1.55 and 1.65, the athlete has reasonably good propulsion from both the kick and upper body. Having already “passed” Swim Golf, the athlete is known to have good in-water balance, and overall propulsion. Therefore, this test really determines the source of the athlete’s propulsion. A score below the acceptable range is likely indicative of an inefficient kick. Focusing on ankle flexibility, and having the kick originate from the athlete’s hips will help to bring the kick on par with the upper-body propulsion. Scores above the acceptable range may be a sign of an athlete who is unfit, has a lower BMI with limited strength, and/or lacks a high elbow and good arm position. It should be noted that an athlete’s overall propulsive progress can also be tracked using this set throughout the entire season using the sum of these two times as the metric.

The above test sets are great ways to assess the effectiveness of an athlete’s early-season drill work, but neither of them are indicative of whether or not the athletes’ targeting drill work is leading to faster swimming. This next set is simple, but an excellent way to evaluate swimming efficiency during the early season.

Overall Mechanics Progress
150-yard TT – Following a warm up of about 500 to 1,000 yards, the athlete should swim a timed 150-yard TT. Repeating this, every two weeks during the early-season, is an excellent measure of mechanical progress. The length of this effort is perfect in the early-season, because it is not long enough for fitness to play a significant role, and not enough quantity to undermine a focus on aerobic base.

Having addressed the two major pieces of the mechanics puzzle, the following set will evaluate the specific physiological needs of the athlete, as race season approaches and training becomes more intensive.

Fitness ad Physiological Specifics
Over/Under – Following a warm up of about 1,000 yards, the athlete should complete a timed 400-yard TT, followed by a two minute rest, and then a timed 1600-yard TT. The athlete’s total swim speed (fitness and mechanics) can be assessed by the addition of these two times. Because the 1600TT is so aerobic in nature; likely 80-85% aerobic energy production, versus the 400TT’s 30-35% aerobic energy production, this set is an excellent indicator of an athlete’s physiology and training needs. If the ratio of the 1600 time to the 400 time is greater than 4.5, the athlete either lacks aerobic fitness and durability, and/or is very anaerobic. A heavy dose of continuous aerobic swimming will help to further develop the athlete’s aerobic system and decrease this ratio if required for their race distance. A ratio that is below 4.2, indicates a very aerobic athlete who will benefit from training that is oriented towards shorter swimming intervals near anaerobic threshold, and strength work, such as no kick swimming, and/or paddle work.

Incidentally, the 1600TT portion of this set, is also a very good predictor of an athlete’s Olympic distance open water swim time, with a wetsuit.

The final set wraps everything together and gives a great sense of an athlete’s overall swim progress throughout the race season. This set is also an excellent predictor of Ironman swim performance.

Fitness and Race Performance
Monster Set – This is a continuous set, completed on an interval pace at which the athlete is comfortable bilateral breathing during an aerobic set. If chosen correctly, the interval should leave five to 10 seconds of rest following each 100-yard repeat. The 100s and 200s should be completed at a best sustainable effort, the pace that can be maintained throughout the total number of repeats specified. The “pulls” should be completed at a pace that allows the athlete to make the chosen interval. The complete set is 4,900 yards:

1000 continuous pull (buoy, no paddles),
9 X 100 at best sustainable effort,
4 X 200 paddles (paddles only),
7 X 100 at best sustainable effort,
600 pull continuous pull (buoy, no paddles),
5 X 100 at best sustainable effort
2 X 200 paddles (paddles only),

The athlete should record their average pace for all of the 100-yard repeats and the 200-yard paddle repeats. The average 100-yard pace can then be multiplied by 43 to get the athlete’s estimated Ironman swim time, with a wetsuit in open water.

I hope this series of swim test sets helps you to direct and prescribe your athletes’ swim training throughout the year. By avoiding a one size fits all approach, an athlete’s specific limiter(s) can be addressed, and their swimming potential realized as time efficiently as possible.

-Jesse

I write this post after just coming off of a long day hike last weekend.  Many folks get caught in their swim, bike, run routines to the point of fault in their own training programs.  There are a few other activities, even during the race season that hold merit and are actually quite race specific.  This writing is aimed at discussing one of my favorite of these activities: hiking.

When I say hiking, I don’t mean taking a walk in the woods…..what I mean is a focused cadence march with a backpack (some people call them death marches), and significant vertical climbing. Hiking in this manner is an aerobic activity which tends to be very peripherally limited.  For instance, I’ve rarely been on a 12+ hour hike and been able to have my average heartrate (HR) be above 100 bpm.  This is while working very hard climbing peak after peak.  You can always tell how peripherally limited an activity is by how decoupled the HR becomes from perceived effort.  That is, although you may feel like you are working very hard, the aerobic system stress is very low.  This is the primary quality that makes day hiking so specific to IM racing or other longer events.  For instance, if you look at 95 percent of the folks racing IM, you will see an HR that drops off during the last half of the marathon.  There they are, walking along at mile 20 of the marathon with their HR at 90bpm, but they can’t run because their legs hurt so much (high perceived effort)! Based on this, the person who keeps their HR stimulated the best throughout the day typically has the best race relative to their ability.  I find one of the best metrics to evaluate how a whole IM race went for a particular person, is the run heartrate file.  The HR during the run wraps in almost all the factors that make up an athlete’s race day package: pacing on the bike, fitness, race fueling, run pacing, ability to keep their head (attitude) pushing the machine forward, etc…

Long day hikes in the 5-15 hour range, allow an athlete to spend large amounts of time on their feet (while building durability), and allow them to eat race day fuels for long periods of time….all good stuff.  The negative factors for long day hikes, are extended recovery times, and the possibility of injury (twisting an ankle).  Based on this, hikes really need to be timed properly within an athlete’s schedule as to not undermine performance at key goal races.  Typically, one or two 10-14 hour hikes, or three to four 5-7 hour hikes a season is enough to get a great durability boost, without being too un-race specific and impacting race day sharpness.  Keeping these efforts at least 2 weeks out (for the shorter hikes), and 5 weeks out (for the longer hikes), is the best bet to allow adequate recovery.  In terms of season timing, hikes are a very strength driven aerobic activity, so therefore make the most sense to do during your base phase while working on aerobic system robustness and soft tissue strength.

Some of my best runners, have used this technique VERY successfully in IM programs to the point of replacing one of the final 2 or 3 long runs during an IM build up.  When trying to fit a long day hike into your training periodization plan for the season, we typically count them as 35 percent run volume, and 35 percent bike volume.  30 percent is lost to the lack of sport mechanic specificity, and lack of aerobic system stimulation (relative to biking and running on a minute for minute basis).

Go take a hike!

-Jesse