The Off-Season: The most important phase of all

“Resuming training too early is much like pulling an onion out of the garden and realizing it is not yet fully grown. One cannot put it back in and expect more growth!”

- Peter Coe (Coach of middle distance legend Sebastian Coe)

The opening picture for today’s post was put together by one of the athletes that I work with at the end of his season for 2008. I think it pretty eloquently describes how many of us feel at the end of a tough season. I know I’m certainly ready for a break after my own 2008 A-Race, Ironman Arizona. Before I get into the ‘whys’ and the ‘hows’ of planning an appropriate off season, a quick summary race report of my AZ experience:

AZ was without doubt the physically easiest and mentally hardest Ironman that I have completed to date. Let me elaborate:

Swim: Great swim, was as lazy and efficient as I could be, stayed right on the buoy line and jumped from feet to feet. After the initial obligatory chaos of a mass swim start, took advantage of the many folks swimming way harder than they should have in the first 1500m or so. Stayed on their feet until they flamed out and then jumped across to the next fastest swimmer. Don’t think I could have swam any easier. Was surprised to see 1:05 on my stopwatch as I was running along the dock. Felt much slower. Was equally surprised to see an average heart rate of 147 for the swim. Never ceases to amaze me how high the heart rate is on the swim despite feeling very easy. I’m sure the feeling like you’re in a boxing ring with 1500 other people for the first 10mins has something to do with it. I’m a lover, not a fighter :-)

Bike: Quite windy on the uphill section of the course, with a ripping tailwind on the downhill back to town. Plan was steady on the way out, easy on the way back. Good amount of coasting @ 48km/h+ on the way back. First lap everything according to plan. Drank 2x500 cal bottles of Infinit and was feeling very good. That said, lots of folks were ripping by me, obviously working. I was taking it easy, using the legal draft wherever possible to conserve energy. Had a couple of big guys sitting up into the wind. Was very sad to wave them goodbye :-)

Second lap things started to go wrong. I broke the cardinal rule of IM racing and tried something that I hadn’t rehearsed: 2x gel flasks with chocolate gel. I have used the chocolate gel before and the flasks but never together. Word to the wise – the chocolate is not easily squeezed through a gel flask. Didn’t stop me trying though. Probably sucked down 9/10 air, 1/10 gel in my attempts. That plus riding into a hot, dry wind and I had the makings of a huge air bubble in my gut. Good news is it cleared, bad news is it took 10hrs to do so! Managed to get 600cal of tangerine gel down + a bunch of water before I was bloated beyond all belief. Last lap of the bike was not comfortable. Slowed way down (HR under 125) and sipped water as my buddy Dr. J advises but it was too late. So, I was 8hrs in with ~1800 calories in me (planned on having 4000 by the time I got off the bike). Knew at that point that it was going to be an interesting ‘run’.

Run: Was soooo happy to just get off the bike and with my 30mi of very easy riding, still had a little energy in the tank. Got back on the plan – first lap of the run easy 6:00-6:15k pace (HR under 140). Still feeling great as I ran through the crowds to begin lap 2. Plan was to push it up to steady 5:30-5:45/km pace (HR 140-150). Knew I was in trouble when HR started going down. Tried to get calories – coke, gel etc but stomach was still shut down and more bloated than ever. Started to walk and become resigned to the fact that it’s going to be a long day. It took 5+ miles of slow walking/staggering before stomach cleared and I could start taking calories. Made up for lost time. Couldn’t stomach fluids at that point so hit up the pretzels and choc chip cookies hard! Energy levels started coming back so got back to running. Feet started to hurt a bit by that point (started looking for grass wherever possible), but other than that, felt really strong and ran through to the finish: 13:22. Disappointed about the time, but happy that despite one of my most challenging days to date, my inner monologue kept coming back to one word: Finish.

And, as I crossed the line, and hit up the burger joint, thus began my off-season and the topic for this post :-)

The off-season or transitional period is probably the least understood training phase of the annual plan. Athletes vary widely in their interpretation of what the purpose of the off season is, and indeed if an off-season is needed at all. The “I’ll sleep when I’m dead” mentality is all too prevelant among the type A Ironman world. It is my opinion that this is a grave mistake and a mistake that can fundamentally limit the expression of your long term athletic potential.

I am not the first to come to this conclusion. Bondarchuk, one of the leading experts in periodization has studied factors leading to long term athletic stagnation in elite athletes (1995) and, the #1 predicting factor that he came up with was athletes who either a) fail to take an off-season or b) athletes who continue specific training during their off-season. So, without further ado, let’s get into the nitty gritty.

First of all, what is the purpose of the off-season?

Simply, the purpose of the off-season is to shed ALL of the fatigue accumulated in the preceding season so that the athlete is starting from a blank slate at the start of the next preparation period. If you hold onto just 20% of your fatigue from the previous season, the cumulative effect means that after 5 years you’ll be starting the next season as fatigued as you were at your peak training volume 5 years ago. This is going to significantly compromise your ability to tolerate the extra training load that you want to do that season and ultimately lead to a plateau in your long term performance.

It should be noted that while studies have shown a significant correlation between performance fatigue and hormonal markers of over-reaching/over-training, less of a correlation has been exhibited between subjective ratings of fatigue and performance indicated fatigue. In other words, while you may feel ‘good to go’ and ready to start the next season, it is the lingering fatigue that you don’t feel that will ultimately limit your performance.

How long should the off-season last?

For an ‘average’ athlete training at 100 TSS/d, upon cessation of training, fatigue will decay rapidly for the first 2 weeks (hence the taper length implications) and will then continue to decay albeit at a slower rate for the next 2+ months (see figure below). On the other hand, fitness decays at a much slower rate. In fact, it will take most fit athletes 1 year of no training before they have lost all of the fitness that they achieved with training. Intelligent athletes can exploit this difference in decay rates between fitness and fatigue.

For an average athlete, at ~60 days post race they will have less than 1% of fatigue remaining from the season. Yet, they will still be retaining 17% of their fitness from the preceding season. Zero fatigue plus some fitness is a great deal for an athlete looking to undertake an all time high training load in the following season.

If some is good, is more better? Like all aspects of training planning, timing is everything. If our hypothetical athlete waits another month to start his preparation for the next season, fitness will decline to only 7% of starting levels. Therefore, it is certainly possible to extend the off-season for too long.

On the flip-side, for those athletes looking to shorten the off-season, and get a jump on next season, it is worthwhile remembering that training performed more than 5 months before your target event has very little performance impact (Morton, 1991). Save your mojo for when it counts.

Are these recommendations true for all?

Short answer is no. In general, the better trained the individual, the longer the off-season needs to be.

Completely novice athletes can shed fatigue very quickly. In a study by Busso (1991) untrained individuals shed all fatigue within 2 weeks after a 14 week training program. On the other hand, in a study of Olympic level swimmers by Hellard (2005) some fatigue was shown to remain up to 6 months after a swimming season. In other words, even for the elite, the gap between fitness and fatigue narrows each and every season. When fitness and fatigue reach the point that they are decaying at similar rates, performance is maxed out. For this reason, individuals with very fast fatigue decay rates have a great advantage. Or, put another way, athletes should do all that is possible to speed recovery at all times. In this sense, health and performance overlap.

So what should I do during the off-season?

1. Not very much.
Keep in mind that your #1 objective is to shed (not create) fatigue. Taper studies offer some recommendations in this regard. In most studies volume drops of 60-90% have elicited the greatest improvements in performance, presumably due to the greatest rate of fatigue shed (Costill et al. 1985). IOW, 10-40% of your in-season volume offers the best short term fatigue vs. fitness compromise.

With a couple of exceptions (see below) any exercise that you do should fall under the category of ‘active recovery’, i.e. you should feel more invigorated after the session than before it: A walk in the forest, an easy spin on the mountain bike, renting a canoe for a couple of hours. Think ‘feel good’ and ‘fun’.


2. General Training
At this point in the season, the more removed from the specifics of your event, the better. As mentioned above, after the non-existence of an off-season, the next greatest predictor of training stagnation in Bondarchuk’s study was starting specific training too early in the season. Just how general? You can come along to my girlfriend’s aquarobics class and ask me. That’s where I’ll be this Sunday :-)

3. Speed/skill and flexibility training.
Of course, when we talk about “fitness decay” we’re using a general term to describe a number of physiological components. In reality, each one of these has a different fatigue decay and fitness re-acquisition rate. A couple of particular physiological attributes differ markedly enough that they demand specific attention during the transition period.

First of all, flexibility can decline 100% within 4 days of training cessation (Maglischo, 1990). While it can be re-acquired at a good rate, the off season is the perfect time to make in-roads in this quality. IOW, do some yoga classes.

Additionally, skill, speed and power are three related qualities that can diminish rapidly and take a lot of time to reacquire (Hsu and Hsu, 1999).

The transitional period offers a great opportunity to give some weight to some of these fast decaying physiological qualities that we may neglect during the inseason but with semi-specific training means, e.g. ball sports provide a good agility and basic speed challenge to us ‘linear athletes’ who do most of our movements at one speed in one plane. Likewise, circuit routines that incorporate basic speed and agility via tools such as agility ladders, slideboards, plyo-boxes etc are a good inclusion to keep you busy and prevent basic skill, speed and power decline during the off-season.

Train smart.

AC

Rocky VI: Fitness v. Fatigue

“That which does not kill us makes us stronger”
Friedrich Nietzsche

So, being in the middle of an Ironman taper for the past couple of weeks seriously got me thinking about the role of fatigue in the training process. Dropping a significant amount of load over the past couple of weeks has me feeling like Superman, running my 200’s almost 5s faster than what I do in a normal training week, swimming times that I haven’t seen in a long while and feeling an unfamiliar pep throughout the day.

These sensations got me seriously asking the question, what if I was to throw down a training block right now? What sort of quantity/quality could I accomplish? Of course, it’s purely speculative, but I do know that I have energy and motivation for training that has been missing over the last couple of months while I have been pitching my tent in the valley of fatigue.

I guess all of this extra energy devoted to firing a few more neurons brought me full circle, back to that undying question: When it comes to fatigue, how much is too much?

Any athlete who has taken the time to browse through the popular literature on triathlon training will be familiar with the following figure:

The figure is a graphic display of Hans Selye’s General Adaptation Syndrome, which, when it comes down to it, is the very crux of the whole training process. You apply a stress that is beyond the athletes normal day to day level, the athlete gets fatigued, the body recognizes the fatigue and, while the athlete is recovering, supercompensates beyond the initial fitness level so that if the stimulus is encountered again it will be ready for it.

Now, most athletes are at least aware of this process on some level (though a great many fail to apply the recovery portion in their training). However, without putting some numbers on the x and y axes, this theoretical construct stays firmly in the realm of training theory. If we really want to put this concept into practice, we need the answer to some very fundamental questions:

When it comes to endurance training (numerically);-

• How much fatigue do we want to accrue before resting and recovering?

• How long can we maintain a given training load, with improving fitness, before we need to ‘up the ante’

• How long should we rest to ensure that our body supercompensates to the highest possible fitness level before an important event?

• How long can we maintain this fitness level before we have to ‘get back to work’?

A number of researchers, beginning with Banister (1975) have ‘done the math’ on the preceding questions and have come up with the following mathematical model to answer them:

For the mathematically inclined (for those not inclined, feel free to skip to the next paragraph – the important stuff):

pt = Performance at any given time
p0 = Initial performance level
T1 = Rate of decay of fitness
T2 = Rate of decay of fatigue
k1 = Amplitude of fitness decay
k2 = Amplitude of fatigue decay
ws = Daily ‘dose’ of training.

While the math deals with some pretty abstract stuff, when we express the model graphically, throwing in some ‘real world’ numbers, the implications are pretty clear. The following model, using the above formula with real world data acquired from distance runners was created and tested by Morton et al. (1990)

On this chart, the x axis represents the number of training days and the y axis represents fitness gained and fatigue accrued.

This chart represents the physiological response to a uniform training load of 100 TRIMPS/day. In our terms, this would equate to about 2.5hrs of easy-steady training per day. This load is a constant from day 0-120, i.e. 2.5hrs each day, every day.

The implications are clear:

As anyone who has swam competitively and experienced the early season return to ‘2-a-days’ can attest, just like Rocky Balboa in Rocky IV, you are going to take a beating in the opening rounds, as fatigue (Drago) dominates fitness (Rocky). For the first week or so, Drago has a slight upper hand but you are still primed and ready for a good fight. Then, as the fight goes on, Drago begins to dominate the early rounds big time. There may be times during the opening month that the accrued training will make it very tough to keep motivation up. You will be tired and at points will want to quit/change your plan, but as Rocky says:

“Going that one more round when you don’t think you can is what makes all the difference in your life”.

So, you stay the course and like all Hollywood endings, somewhere around Day 50, you start to get the upper hand and providing Drago isn’t too steroid supercharged (i.e. your training load is not so ambitious that you fail to adapt and get sick), you start to win and then at Day 120, you jump on the Russian PA system and in one fell swoop you end the cold war by stating the immortal words:

“If I can change, and you can change, everybody can change!”

OK, I’ve taken the metaphor too far :-)

Back to the important stuff, a couple of things to remember:

1. At least in this case, fitness didn’t trump fatigue until ~50 days of constant loading. How many of us bail or change the program (either up the ante prematurely or insert premature recovery) before giving the program a chance to work?

2. Fitness continued to improve to a standard training load for ~4 months before approaching the asymptote, i.e. max fitness gains for a given workload/level of fatigue. At this point, it would be necessary to increase the stimulus to ensure further fitness gains.

3. One may suggest that the greatest fitness “bang for your buck” would be to structure training around 60 days cycles, i.e. loading cycles that take the athlete to the tangent to the curve, i.e. ~60 days in, when fitness begins to exhibit a tendency toward diminishing returns.

These three conclusions provide a good deal of validation towards the efficacy of the ‘basic week’ structure and serve to place periodization in it’s appropriate perspective.

Another question that the model can help to answer regards the taper, i.e. what is the optimal time period to reduce training load prior to competition? And what performance improvement can be expected?

In other words, what happens to performance if we cease (or reduce) the training stimulus at a given point? The chart below shows what happens if we taper training 60 days in.

The model shows that by tapering load 60 days in, the athlete can expect performances equal to what would previously have taken 120 days of continuous training to achieve. In addition, it shows that the optimal performance will occur, in this case, 23 days after the beginning of the taper (on day 83) when the athlete experiences the greatest gap between fitness and fatigue.

Of course, there is a cost to ditching training load. This cost is paid with diminished fitness (see below).



In the case of this model, the athlete can expect to lose ~33% fitness over the course of the taper period. However, they also lose 85% of the accrued fatigue (due to the different rates of decay between fitness and fatigue). So, in the grand scheme of things, when performance is the name of the game, it’s a good deal. However, it is important to note that this drop in fitness essentially takes the athlete back to the fitness level that they were at 50 days ago. In other words, over the course of this training cycle, the athlete only gets to ‘keep’ 10 days of the fitness that they accumulated to carry over into the next cycle because they took 60 steps forward, but 50 steps back. For this reason, one needs to seriously consider the # of A races (races that they taper for) that they place in their season (or during the course of their athletic development). 3 x A-Races essentially means 150 days of lost training just getting back to their peak seasonal fitness.

So, you may say, all of this is very interesting, but how universal are the training responses to this training model?

You may be surprised by just how robust the training model is. It has been applied to and shown to be valid for a number of sports ranging from strength sports (Hammer Throwing) to endurance sports (swimming, cycling and running).

It has also been used with athletes of a wide ability range from elite swimmers (Mujika et al, 1995) to novice cyclists (Busso et al., 1991).

In all of these studies, the fitness acquisition and decay rates have been surprisingly similar. The fatigue constants on the other hand have differed, primarily in accordance with the athletes fitness. Somewhat unsurprisingly, higher level athletes who undertake greater loads require more time to shed the associated fatigue.

These fatigue constants have ranged from mean values of 2 days for untrained men undergoing 4x60min cycling sessions/wk (Busso, 1991) to 13 days for moderately fit cyclists undergoing 5 days/wk of interval training (Busso, 1997), to 19 days for elite swimmers training 45-50km/wk (Mujika et al. 1995)

The constants used in the above charts (Tf=15 days) are therefore within the range of moderately trained individuals and should provide a good starting point in predicting performance response within that group. On the other hand, if you’re a couch potato or your busting out 50km+ per week in the pool, you may need to ‘tweak’ the charts accordingly, which brings us to the next point….

While a model that predicts a large sample of athlete’s performances is good, a model that predicts your athletic performances is even better. To this end, wko+ offers athletes a tool that enables them to come up with their own performance model that best predicts peak performance. It uses similar concepts to those above, a Chronic Training Load number (fitness constant), an Acute Training Load number (fatigue constant) and a Training Stress Balance (performance prediction number) to enable athletes to model their own training response.

Of course, like most tools, it must be properly calibrated to be accurate. In this sense, it is important that the athlete sets an appropriate Acute Training Load (fatigue constant) in accordance with performance markers from their own training. If this is done properly, wko+ offers athletes a fantastic individualized snapshot into their fitness, fatigue and form at any point during the training season and enables them to make intelligent decisions as to:

What is an appropriate long term training load for me?

What races are worth shedding fitness for?

When should I change up my training plan?

How long should I taper ?

Etc.

It is only with this kind of strategic information that an athlete can really hope to win the long term battle between fitness and fatigue.

Train smart.

AC

Daniels for IM

“Ignorant people see life as either existence or non-existence, but wise men see it beyond both existence and non-existence to something that transcends them both; this is an observation of the Middle Way.”

-Seneca

From the times of Zatopek and Lydiard, there have remained 2 basic schools to endurance training – the ‘far before fast’ school (Lydiard, Viren, Seiko etc) and the ‘fast before far’ school (Zatopek, Peters, Pirie etc).

Advocates of the latter school have often claimed that the athlete who is most successful at the shorter distances will ultimately prove most successful at the longer distances. With the recent marathon success of athletes such as Haile Gebresellassie (an athlete with a sub 3:50mile best), it is hard to argue with this perspective.

One modern day exponent of this approach is the man pictured above, the ‘Godfather’ of modern day distance running, Mr. Jack Daniels. In fact, Daniels has gone so far as to draw up mathematical predictive tables that estimate what an athlete will run for the longer distances based on what they are able to do over the short. In the triathlon world, a similar approach has been used by Hunter Kemper’s coach, Mr George Dallam.

A number of somewhat less astute Ironman coaches have proposed a similar relationship for Ironman racing e.g. ‘give me an athletes 40K time & I’ll tell you what their IM split will be’. The reason that this approach is far less accurate/predictive for Ironman is that it crosses physiological systems. Let me elaborate by presenting a table from Australian physiologist John Hawley, that shows the ergogenesis (source of energy contribution) of different events.



You can clearly see that for the performance durations that Daniels tables are looking to predict, i.e. 4min to 2hr, there is a very high contribution given by one energy system – the aerobic glycolytic system, with 81-92% of energy demands of a mile (a 4 minute event) to a half marathon (a 1 hour event) made up from this energy system.

However, given the fact that success in Ironman events (and for most folks, Half Ironman events) is more dependent on aerobic lipolytic power (i.e. ‘fat burning’ than it is on aerobic glycolytic power, using durations that represent close to 100% glycolytic contribution as predictors is subject to a good deal of error.

Rather than relying on performance in aerobic glycolytic events exclusively, a better prediction can be gained by looking at this number along with a representative measure of the athletes aerobic lipolytic power, i.e. training performance over long sessions and over the course of the training week. In this way, the Daniels tables can be modified to better represent equivalent performance standards for IM.

In studying data from a number of ultra runners and ultra-distance triathletes, I have found that the relationship between short distance performance and Ironman performance is not a natural logarithmic function as postulated by the Daniels model, but rather a curvilinear function with a modified ‘tail’ due to the increased contribution from alternative energy production mechanisms, i.e. aerobic lipolysis, or ‘fat burning’.

In the Ironman world, knowing one point on the curve, as Daniels suggests is not sufficient to predict performance. Even knowing 2 points on the curve, as Dallam suggests is insufficient. While the power of the athletes aerobic glycolytic energy system certainly plays a part, to create an accurate model of Ironman performance, it is important to know how the athlete performs not just in the glycolytic energy systems, but also the lipolytic.

This difference in the nature of the curve for a large data sample of Ultra distance athletes vs. Long distance athletes is shown below.



The gap between the red line and the blue line is indicative of the extra fat burning capacity required by athletes who participate in ultra-distance events.

In a practical sense, this information can be used to modify Daniels’ original running formula to ensure that appropriate attention is being given to both the aerobic glycolytic and aerobic lipolytic energy systems and that the Ironman athletes development is progressing in a ‘balanced’ way.

In terms of periodization and actual programming, this table can be used as a ‘checklist’ where the athlete achieves each of the performance standards in each fitness row before moving on to the next fitness level. To ensure that the athlete has an appropriate level of ‘far’ and ‘fast’ at any point in his/her training development.

So, without further ado….

Here is a scaled down version of Daniels original table:

Daniels Original Tables









And a modified version in accordance with ultra-distance athletes relative strength over the longer durations of the curve.

Daniels for IM









The ‘tipping point’ between the two tables occurs in between the Threshold and Marathon Pace categories, i.e. the point where fat oxidation begins to make a significant contribution to the energy demands of the event.

In addition to the practical applicability of these tables, some sports scientists have suggested that the ergogenesis table listed above can be used as a good starting point to determining % weekly breakdown during the specific preparation period (Bompa, 1998). In other words, for an event that is 50% lipolytic and 50% glycolytic, half of the weekly sessions should be at or slower than Half IM effort, while the remaining 50% should be in the glycolytic range (5K pace to Threshold efforts). This approach makes logical sense and has a good deal of ‘real world’ support from athletes like Seb Coe, whose 800m (~2min duration) specific training was broken down into 60% aerobic/40% anaerobic sessions (Coe, 1991)

In a previous blog (Big A’s Dojo), I had presented some general recommendations as to appropriate levels of performance for the various physiological systems that indicate a generally balanced development. For the Ultra-distance athlete, these can be (slightly) modified as follows in accordance with the above tables.

Yellow Belt (VDOT 45-50):

- A 30mi (flat) run week in less than 4:36

- The ability to execute a functional strength routine with good form and optimal range of motion
- The ability to do 6x200m strides (pain free) in <50s/200

(Total Glycolytic=0% of weekly total)

Blue Belt (VDOT 50-55):

- A 40mi (flat) run week in less than 5:24 including:

- A 14mi long run in less than 2hrs

- 6x200m strides in less than 46s/200

- 6x1mi intervals in less than 7:00/mi w/1min rest

(Total Glycolytic = ~15% of weekly total)

Black Belt (VDOT 55-60):

- A 50mi (flat) run week in less than 6:30 including:

- A 20mi long run w/7mi @ MP in less than 2:40

- 6x200m strides in less than 42s/200

- 6x1mi intervals in less than 6:20 w/1min rest

- 4x1200’s @ 9:00 w/a 800 jog in less than 4:30/1200

(Total Glycolytic = ~30% of weekly total)

You will see that the above provides practical recommendations in accordance with appropriate strengths and weaknesses and the ergogenesis of the event(s). For athletes whose race duration is in and around 12hrs, the contribution of energy via glycolysis is negligible and therefore almost ALL training for athletes with a base training pace of >9:00/mile should be focused on improving the athletes lipolytic capacity (slower than marathon pace training).

As athletes get progressively faster and the glycolytic component increases, the need for marathon pace and faster than marathon pace training increases. However, even for speedy athletes or short course specialists, the amount of glycolytic training that the athlete can tolerate is directly affected by their ability to spare glycogen via fat-burning. For that reason, achieving the long duration benchmarks during the early season is always the first priority.

As Peter Coe points out in his landmark book “Better Training for Distance Runners”, these relative performance tables can not only point out relative weaknesses that should be given attention during the specific preparatory phase of training, but they can also provide useful information as to what event the athlete is best suited to. If, after a prolonged period of attention, the athlete still has a hard time hitting the relative performance levels of a balanced Ironman athlete, they may find greater success in events that better fit their natural energetic balance (e.g. short course racing or ultradistance/adventure racing). That is one of the great things about the diversity of sport. If you look hard enough, we all have a particular sport or event that was created for someone (and probably by someone) just like you. The trick is getting to know yourself as an athlete well enough to find it.

Train smart.

AC

Fun in the Sun

Hey gang, with the sunny season coming to a close and the legs getting over our last race effort enough for us to contemplate doing it all again, I thought I would throw out a quick reminder of the camps that Endurance Corner will be offering as a winter escape in 2009.

Last year’s two camps in Tucson were definitely a highlight of my year and I’m pretty psyched to have the opportunity to log some miles in the Arizona sun with some of you fine folks in 2009.

I’ve included a summary of what’s in store, along with some of my own impressions from last years camps (lifted directly from my training log) for your consideration. If my brand of good clean family fun sounds a lot like yours, be sure to drop Justin Daerr an email at Justin “at” endurancecorner “dot” com and sign up.

Endurance Corner Tucson Camp 2009

Endurance Corner, out of Boulder, Colorado, will be hosting two triathlon camps in 2009. The first camp will take place in Tucson, Arizona and will be a training-based camp open to sub-13 hour Ironman athletes (or those of equivalent fitness levels).

ENDURANCE CORNER TUCSON CAMP

This camp takes place from Sunday, March 29, 2009 to Sunday, April 5, 2009 (training from Monday the 30th to Saturday the 4th). The camp is designed to help jump start your cycling into the 2009 season with run and swim options offered every day as well.
The 2009 Camp includes:

*A century ride to Madera Canyon

*A summit ride of Mt Lemmon (nearly 6000 feet of vertical gain)

Big A’s Log: “Goal was to "Poker pace it", roll-out easy, 0-10mi of the climb steady, 10-20mi of the climb MH. Went totally according to plan apart from my jump on the G-train as they rolled past. Bailed out when I hit threshold HR (@ ~340W!!) Didn't hurt me too bad. Recovered well, downed a coke and hit Miles 10-20 pretty hard. Descended pace and effort
Laps:
Roll out (Udall Park) to Base: 16:33 (129/143)
Mile 0-6 43:56 (142/160)
Mile 7-8.5 7:37 (170/175) G-Train (G, Mat, JD. G was at 342W, HR 154 from 4000-5000ft!! Stayed until HR popped over 175
Mile 8.5-10 12:15 (151/169)
First Half: 1:03:52
Second Half (to mile 20), Mod-Hard: 1:01:32 (152/164)
To Van (rolling): 5:50 (145/157)
Descent: 48:26 (118/148) Recovery
Back to Udall Park (riding JD & G's wheel) 18:12 (135/151) Steady”

*Rides over Gates Pass from both summit directions

*A 55-mile route beginning in Oro Valley

Big A’s Log:“Decent ride. Woke up with a sore throat and thought I might be getting sick. Had a great swim (see above) though and was feeling OK for the bike. Got a big gas bubble in the early part of the bike that wouldn't quit so that was a bit painful. Probably the result of slamming 2 cokes before heading out mixed with a bit of mucus. Group was rolling steady as we pushed out but rollers slowed Chris and David up to my recovery pace so I stopped to take a pee. Unfortunately it was just before a downhill into a headwind so I had to TT at mod-hard for quite a bit (about 10mi) to catch them. Then dropped back to steady after I saw them. Rest of the ride, excepting the Gates Pass climb was easy (A1). Good basic training day without too much stress. Should stand me in good stead for a 20hr bike week!”

*A long run in Saguaro East Park

*A century ride including the epic 12-mile climb to the observatory atop Kitt Peak

Big A’s log: “Solid day. Taylor, Matt and Chris had mechanicals so I wound up pacelining with them to the climb. Mainly upper steady with a touch of mod-hard. Then when we got to the climb, hit it hard with Taylor. Very hard!!
Plan was to go 160-170bpm for first 6mi then 170-175 to the top. Didn't totally work out that way. Had a few surges over 170 in the first 6 (Taylor said that I almost shook him, which is no small feat considering his power:weight!!). Tried to pick it up at the top but only held the 170-175 for a while before I had to drop back and Taylor pulled away. I think the 170 is a good OBLA estimate right now.
Laps:
45:16 (148/165) Paceline 286 to Kitt Peak Rd (16.09mi)
1:08:08 (167/175) Climb (12.22mi +3500ft) 301W
30:41 (109/169) Descent. Gusty!! (12.22mi)
44:26 (146/163) Paceline back to 286. Headwind. (16.09mi)
Pretty tired by the time I got to the sportsmobile. Solid end to a solid week.
Note: Dr. J: 1:13
JD 1:01 (300W)
Same wattage at ~13lbs less bodyweight”

Coaches attending the camp will include:

Gordo Byrn: Author, Sub 8:30 IM finisher, Ultraman World Champion, and founder of Endurance Corner.

Alan Couzens: Exercise Physiologist, Coach, Athlete.

Kevin Purcell: Triathlon Legend! World famous Coach and Athlete (Kona qualifier)

Jeff Shilt: Sports Doctor, Coach, and Athlete (Kona Qualifier)

Justin Daerr: Pro Triathlete and Camp Director

Where will I stay?

Athletes will be staying at the Hotel Arizona (double occupancy) from Sunday March 29th until Sunday April 5th. Athletes may request a single occupancy room for an additional fee.

What will I eat?

All meals from the evening of March 29th until the morning of April 5th will be provided for athletes attending the camp at Hotel Arizona. For the days we are on the road we will have lunch provided on site.

What if I have bike problems?

Professional Mechanics from Wheels on Wheels (WoW) will be on hand to help assist with any on-road problems as well as CLEANING your machine each day after you ride. All bikes will be stored and secured each evening by WoW and will be ready for you each morning at the designated roll out time. You just need to fill up your water bottles each morning and we will take care of the rest.

What about daily sports nutrition?

Endurance Corner will provide sports bars and sports drinks before each ride. Nutrition will also be available in all sag vehicles accompanying your daily rides.

What does it cost?

$2,350.00 covers everything, but your flight to Tucson. A $500.00 deposit will secure your spot until January 1, 2009.

If you have any questions please email them to: justin at endurancecorner dot com. You can also see this message on Justin's cool blog at:

http://www.justindaerr.com/blog/index.php/endurance-corner-tucson-camp-2009-2/

Stay tuned next week for an article on applying Daniels Running Formula to Ironman events.

Until then...

Train sunny :-)

AC