Register    Login    Forum    Search    FAQ

Welcome
Welcome to <strong>The TEAM CORE Chat Forum</strong>.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free, so please, <a href="/profile.php?mode=register">join our community today</a>!


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Testing for Triathletes - the right way!
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:49 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:12 pm
Posts: 107
Location: Perth, Australia
Testing for Triathletes - the right way!

In response to a few poignant questions from TEAM CORE athlete Ian Murray on the 8th January 2008, I thought it beneficial to post my responses here for your information:

[hr]

Hi Ian

Thanks for the email.

Ian Murray wrote:
Question: There are between 0 and 4 sessions per day (on the Training Peaks Online Training Diary), which confuses me. For example yesterday (Monday) there were two run sessions and two bike sessions?


1. As most of the sessions will be done with the group, you don't necessarily have had to have "read" the session before turning up. However, if you miss the squad session, the detail of this session is posted on TP (hence the 'extra' session for that day). When you come to filling in your diary online, simply select whichever session you actually did, i.e. group or solo, and input the data there. As a suggestion, if you input a little more in the "athlete comments" about how you actually felt, this will enable me to better guage your recovery status and progression etc.

Ian Murray wrote:
Question: I will need your assistance in determining my HR zones. I use a Polar HR monitor which tells me my HR Max is 184 and VO2 Max is 53. In June 2005 I did have VO2 & HR assessed (treadmill & Bruce2 ?) in my annual medical in South Africa. At that stage I was working full time (office bound) and did no exercise (weighed in 10kgs higher than now). My VO2 Max was 43 and Max HR = 183. I can also see my recent HR during exercise from my Polar downloads. I have entered numbers online & TP has determined my various HR zones. Please check & advise.


2. Your HR zones seem fine on TP. Remember, HR is very variable and as such not the greatest method for determining intensity, i.e. if I have asked that you go at a perceived exertion of 75% for example, this may equate to 150bpm, however, as HR is so heavily influenced by ambient air temp. and dehydration etc, at any given intensity, your HR may vary by as much as 15bpm...as such do you "slow" down to accommodate or do you maintain your intensity and manage the elevated HR? This is a source of much contention between coaches and physiologists. My recommendation is use your HRM as a guide only, but use your own perceived exertion (I will always say "7 out of 10" for example) as your true guide. Outside of using a power meter on the bike and footpod on the run, this is your best guide for how well you are going. We'll probably do a seminar on this once the program is started as its an area that often causes confusion and misunderstanding across all sports.

Ian Murray wrote:
Question: I see that the ATP follows Joe Friel's format. I bought his book "Triathlete's Training Bible" when we were travelling around the world earlier this year. I would be keen to work out my ATP with your assistance & the book's guidance. This way I can see the "macro" picture.


3. Joe Friel was actually the "inventor" of Training Peaks and someone whom I have worked closely with on several occassions in the past, the last being in January 2007 over in Boulder, Colorado. You do not need to calculate your ATP (Annual Training Plan) in this case Ian as I have calculated that as part of the Half Ironman Program. This is featured in the attached TRI_Calendar.xls attachment. Essentially, we'll be following the training periodisation format below. This is an adaptation of Friel's ATP. The ATP in its simplest form (as you've read in the book), is rather rigid and lacks flexibility with respect to upcoming races and various other calendar issues, such as public holidays, Easter, pool closures etc. Be aware that for every program I run, there is a great deal of "behind the scenes" planning and periodisation - rather than overload you with too much information about "how", "why" and "what", I choose to keep things simple and break it down as either 2 weeks "on", 1 week recovery, or 3:1. Here's what the next 16 weeks look like:

Busselton Half Ironman Periodisation (Annual Training Plan):

Week Starting Monday:

14 & 21st January - Base 1 (2 weeks)
28th January - Recovery & Adaptation (1 week)
4th, 11th & 18th February - Base 2 (3 weeks)
25th February - Recovery & Adaptation (1 week)
3rd, 10th, 17th March - Build 1 (3 weeks)
24th March - Recovery & Adaptation (1 week)
31st March, 7th & 14th April - Build 2 (3 weeks)
21st & 28th April - Taper (2 weeks)

Ian Murray wrote:
Question: Do you have any advice for strength/weights work? I do go to the gym once a week for this. Is it best to follow the exercises as outlined in Joe Friel's book?


4. Friel's advice on Strength Training and his workouts are great - he is VERY knowledgable in this area. You may also like to look at the attached sessions (1 & 2 + some Core Stability) which I myself have compiled specifically for triathlon and with the guidance of Michelle lending a physios' perspective.

Ian Murray wrote:
Question: As I am changing over to the Gold Program, what can I do with my remaining PAYG tickets (8 will be left by next week). Can I use them for stroke assessments?


5. Unfortunately, remaining "PAYG" credits cannot be transferred for 1-2-1 Stroke Correction sessions. I suggest you hold onto all your remaining credits and we will extend the expiry date for use post-Gold Program.

Ian Murray wrote:
Question: Have you ever taken the squad through the "beep" test - running between two cones between "beeps" which reduce in time. It is a way of assessing VO2 Max. I do it at my gym every 6 months, and find it interesting to keep track of.


6. VO2 Max "testing" (i.e. the "Beep Test", which is a fairly crude but usable way of assessing this) is a method of testing any given athlete's maximal aerobic capacity and is often seen as a way of determining the "ceiling" of ability for that athlete. It is a measure of how much oxygen your body can utilise per Kg of body mass per minute and is expressed in ml/Kg/min. For example, we know that Lance Armstrong is a superb cyclist. We know that he has (or had) a VO2 Max of close to 90ml/Kg/min which is truly amazing (when most good athletes will only have a VO2 Max of between 58 and the high 70s). Much of this was a product of huge volumes of structured training, periodised in appropriate bouts of intensity over a large number of years (i.e. it is 'trainable'). However, an athlete's genetics are also believed to determine the absolute maximal aerobic capacity that he/she will ever be able to achieve. What this means is that if you or I were to train as hard as Lance Armstrong and for the same number of years, it is highly unlikely that we would attain the same level of physiology (irrespective of actual results) as he has. As VO2 Max is used in such a way to determine your "ceiling of ability" and correlates particularly well with events lasting between only 3 and 8 minutes, it is not necessarily the best testing protocol for endurance events such as a Half Ironman triathlon.

Testing for an athletes "lactate threshold" (this is referred to in the TP program as FTP or Functional Threshold Power / Pace for those using power meters and/or footpods) is a much better procedure and has been shown to be the greatest determinant of endurance performance. It is also highly trainable and can be tested very easily in the form of regular time trials over a measured course (appropriate to the distance you are training for) to give an indication of where your relative threshold is at any given time. Your body produces lactate even when resting (most people are unaware of this), and it is a product of the way in which our bodies produce energy. When at rest or exercising lightly, our bodies have enough oxygen readily available to buffer the production of lactate and prevent lactic acid accummulation in the blood and muscles. Lactate is actually used as an energy source itself when the oxygen is freely available so many are wrong to assume that it is a 'bad' waste product. Its not, we need it. As you increase your intensity however, there comes a point whereupon the rate of removal does not equal the rate of production and as such lactic acid begins to accummulate rather rapidly in an exponential fashion. This is what we call your Lactate Threshold (LT). Above this threshold point, an athlete will rapidly fatigue and have to slow-down or stop in order for the body to return to 'normal' and recover. Functionally speaking (and for the ease of reference) an athlete can perform exercise at his / her LT for up to ~60 minutes, and as such in order to test for LT, an athlete should perform time trials of approximately this length to determine whether or not they are improving. Regular (every 4 to 6 weeks) testing of up to 60 minutes in duration can often become physically and mentally diffcult, and as such various clever physiologists have determined that the following test proceedures (when the results are entered into an appropriate algorithm calculator) can be used to determine your LT without having to push much past 20 minutes:

SWIM = 400m flat-out swim, followed by a recovery period of ~5 mins, then a final 50m sprint time trial. This can be used to determine Critical Swim Speed (as its known), which again is a measure of an athletes "threshold"

BIKE = 20 mins cycle time trial. Either see how far you can go (and note your average HR) or monitor your average wattage using a power meter (not cheap at ~$2000+). A follow-up test is much more reliable using a power meter as even on the same course, you and your bike are subject to environmental conditons such as wind, road surface, temperature etc, which the power meter is not (i.e. your power is irrespective of anything other than how hard you can push and as such is seen as THE absolute measure of your peformance).

RUN = 5km time trial. Easy to test and less susceptible to environmental change (at least in comparison to the bike). Using Jack Daniel's Tables (not the whiskey but the legendary running coach!), it is possible to calculate your threshold pace from this shortened run.

Now, if you view the attached spreadsheet 'Triathlon Training Zones.xls" you will be able to input this data as and when we do the above time trials and as such have a guide as to how well you're progressing and also what you could hope to swim / bike or run for a given distance based upon this. I created the spreadsheet in the hope that bringing these training zones all together in one format was a simple way of determining how hard you should swim, ride or run for any given workout. Remember, these are guidelines only, and as much as I probably appear to be a "Number Nazi", really you are your own best guage of how well you are going or how hard you are pushing.

Hope that all makes sense? If people are keen I'd be more than happy to set up a seminar in the next few weeks to go over some of this further. We have Adam Young coaching with me at the moment from over in the UK who is also very knowledgeable in this area and together I'm confident we could answer most of your questions (hopefully!).

Remember, physiology can be quite complex (as you may be already thinking!!) and at the end of the day you still have to get out the door, do the training and ENJOY it, otherwise you won't be motivated to do more!

Enjoy!

Paul

_________________
Keep-up-to-date with the latest happenings of The TEAM CORE at www.theteamcore.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:51 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:12 pm
Posts: 107
Location: Perth, Australia
James Millen wrote:
Hi Paul,

Just wanted to say that in my humble opinion this is an excellent piece.

Back in the day I was lucky enough to train under people who were and remain big with this kind of stuff (no need for name-dropping) so I've had quite a lot of experience of my training being heavily immersed in it. Regular lab tests for lactate threshold, VO2, max outputs, core temperature analysis (not so nice), Conconi tests etc.

Your answers do a great job of factually explaining things making very reasoned points, but importantly are very succinct & readable - no easy task given that this is all the subject of University degree courses!

From an athlete's perspective & experience I firmly believe that the incorporation of any degree of individual physiological analysis that an athlete can get, understand and apply is vital to the success of a training programme, if on nothing more than the "knowledge is power" basis. I'd argue for the benefits with anyone!! Particularly for me the more knowledge & understanding I had of how my body performed, its parameters of capability and how to manage them, the more I felt in control of training but more importantly racing - it was no coincidence that "control" was one of my key psychological words for Long Distance racing.

I take your point about the variability of HR's and the management thereof. It has been interesting for me that different coaches & sports physiologists I have trained with carry varying opinions as to HR levels, ranges & zones for different intensities in acknowledgment of this.

I think our only slight difference in opinion, however, comes with the use of perceived effort over heart rates. The points I would make on this are:
Rate of Perceived Exertion (e.g. Borg Scale) must by definition be reliant on an athlete's experience of exertion and 'feel' relative to the scale. In your example of '7 out of 10' an athlete must be familiar with '10 out of 10' to be able to pitch exertion at any factor thereof, and it follows that (whilst respecting the generality of the scale) there must equally be an appreciation of 5/10, 6/10, 8/10 and 9/10 in order to achieve the desired result of 7/10.
Where HRs are affected by 'third party' factors, it could be said that RPE is affected by human factors: optimism/pessimism, mood, motivation, general psychology etc. For example, when I first started training under HRs etc I was pessimistic as to my running ability i.e. if asked to run at 7/10 I would run slower than a scientifically established 70% pace. Conversely I was full of bravado on the bike and would declare myself at RPE 15/20 ("Hard" on the Borg Scale I think) just before I spectacular blew in a lab max test. Every time!
Whislt agreeing with your point that due to 'third party' factors a run at 160bpm may be entirely different from one day/week to the next, HRM's still importantly provide a 'control' - the matter of fact that as an athlete you are running at 160bpm. For me learning about the factors that make this seem & feel variable, and how they affect you as an individual and your performance when you evaluate and analyse your training are important in developing your experience as an athlete. This is lost if you simply attempt to cater for these factors upfront.

I say again though, great email! Well done!

J

_________________
Keep-up-to-date with the latest happenings of The TEAM CORE at www.theteamcore.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

Board index » ASK ALL YOUR TRAINING QUESTIONS HERE! » Ask the COACH!


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

Community Chest
Community Chest

cron