Training load

[BikeMax]

In the interest of keeping things alive, here is one response to Stuarts challenging of the articles usefullness on the other forum mentioned. The respondent is highly regarded and is certainly "current" in his thinking.

 

Couple thoughts on this article, which has been briefly discussed on this forum before as well:

1) a link will suffice, when re-quoting the entire article makes the post awkwardly long (and also gives more credit to the hosting website) http://www.cyclingforums.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

2) cyclists would be wrong to write their training plans around a "quick glance" of this article. That doesn't make the article wrong or the advice bad.

3) the recommended steps do seem to lay out a plan for *managing* training stress, rather than haphazardly inducing stresses one day and planning recovery, 'just in case,' on the next. I don't see how that's a bad approach.

4) after taking steps to manage my training stress this year (via the Training Stress Score within the Cycling Peaks software), my training has not led to either of the two ends that you point to as likely. In fact, my training this year has been great, allowing me to score my first 3 career wins so far this year.

5) I don't really see what you feel is inherently bad about the advice in the article, assuming one reads the whole thing rather than just taking a quick glance.

[BikeMax]

Another well thought through response from a respected source on power training (whose coach is Dr Max Testa)

I agree that much of it makes sense, but what is interesting is where the point of view varies from what is widely practiced, at least among many amateur athletes.

For example, no recovery periods, no recovery weeks are planned. Rest is taken as needed, not as planned. Also, no extended transition period (or off, away from all training) between the end of one season to the next. And, training is planned to perform well in a limited number of events.

 

Show of hands, how many people put "rest periods" or "recovery" weeks in their monthly training plans? I agree with the author about not doing this, and I also agree that the athlete does loes some conditioning during these "recovery weeks".

 

My monthly plans never include a recovery period of more than a day or two in a row, unless it's for tapering before a handful of events in a season. When I need rest, that's when I get rest. Could be the 15-16th days of the month, or the 24-25th days.

The key, is knowing when you really do need rest, or when you can benefit from doing more training even though you feel tired in some aspects of your ability. It's useful to figure out exactly what area is fatigued, and then figure out other areas that can still benefit from training. Rest one area while you train another.

 

The limited (off-season) transition period... I mentioned this to one of my racing/training buddy's the other day. He rides every week of the year, as I've done for the last 3 years, partly from his suggestion. He says he doesn't want to lose the fitness he has because it takes too long to get it back, and that's time lost to improving from previous levels. The trick is to allow only enough time for you to recover and recharge at the end of the year, but then get right back to work. Some people can do this in 2 weeks, and some can do it in 4 weeks. If you're racing really hard at the end of the season it might take a bit longer, but longer than 6 weeks is probably more mental than physical.

 

The author talks about training and preparing for just a few events each season. Look at the tendencies for the pros doing well in the Giro or Tour. This year we see Floyd Landis racing a fair bit, but not Simoni, Basso, Leipheimer, Ullrich, Julich, Vinokourov, Cunego, Salvodelli, et al. Most don't race much at all before their major events, and/or the races they do are done in a controlled way with efforts made for specific areas of their ability, and to provide some race-mode testing of their current ability.

 

Smart training can allow you to address your specific weaknesses better than most racing can. So the question you can ask yourself each week is, would I benefit (in terms of a major goal or objective) more from racing or from training? Sometimes racing gets in the way of your training.

 

One thing in the article that won't work for many people is the author's/coach's perspective on who can handle the workload and what happens to those who can't. Basically, if you can't handle the workload you're not good enough to be on the (National) team and when you're burned up and burned out you're dismissed. They keep the few who can handle the load and discard the rest. This approach happens all the time in some pro cycling teams and to some riders formerly involved in the USCF system of coaching and racing.

 

So, while the author/coachs' approach may be okay for "team" members it has to be used with caution for individuals trying to maximize whatever ability they have and then competing with that ability.

[Bike-Thingy]

Glad to see you 2 are keeping yourselves entertained he he he .smileys/smiley36.gif . . .  . . . . but all this gibberish is still not going to help you tomorrow BikeMax, make sure to pack your body armour hehehesmileys/smiley36.gifsmileys/smiley2.gif

[BikeMax]

I hope the above replies have at least added another few viewpoints on the matter.

In essence, all the article is saying is;

1. Take rest when you need it as opposed to by some pre-arranged plan

2. A training session (particularly pertaining to "quality" training as opposed to long slow plods) should be terminated when you can no longer reach the target of the session despite trying harder.

3. Sometimes it is productive to complete a session even if you are feeling tired as long as you can achive the goals of the session (see point 2)

Maybe time to move on now..smileys/smiley17.gif

[Bike-Thingy]

 

Thx BikeMax, there was just no way I was going to read so much, but thx for the synopsis *don't know if I'm using that big word right*smileys/smiley9.gifsmileys/smiley36.gif

[VO2max]

Just completed the latest Carmicheal book on training... Although carmicheal believes in periodization (training 3 weeks with active recovery week) one thing that came out is that not even Lance Armstrong took off a month or two after a TDF or between 2 cycling calanders / years. Lance & Carmicheals point being that the fitness lost in for example say a month can only be recovered in 3 months time. It is just taking soo much more to recover lost fittness that it is not viable taking off long periods of time. Lance only took week or 2 MAX off before starting training again.

 

[CVANC]

The length of a training period designed for peaking will vary substantially depending on the individual and the racing situation. It could be argued that an athlete who wishes to peak for an Olympic time trial may start training several years in advance by performing intervals to increase his or her MSPO [maximal sustainable power output], however, a truly specialised peaking program should last ~ 8 weeks, therefore allowing a rider two, 3-week training periods separated by a 4-/5-day recovery period and culminating with a 7-/10-day taper prior to competition. (as you mentioned)