Trains, Travels

Developing a weekly training template isn’t motivated by laziness, it can save time but in practice I rarely coach an athlete who perfectly matches the template – everyone brings unique requirements. The real motivation is consistently developing an athlete’s fitness and performance while avoiding injury; it’s a balance of training load and fatigue. When it works the athlete progresses week on week, fatigue always within manageable level, but even the most careful plans cannot predict the life stresses of age group athletes. A weekly template is a starting point, a way to develop the basic building blocks of a complete schedule.

Each week the aim is for the athlete to execute their key workouts as prescribed – hitting targets where it matters. I place sessions to allow sufficient recovery, but what seems reasonable on paper won’t always work; recovery and life don’t go well together. I’ve already adjusted one athlete’s mix of intensity and volume this week to see if it makes their sessions more manageable. There are compromises with my template – it tries to make the best use of available time assuming that time is limited. For those fortunate enough to be less restricted more options are open, while for others I place the emphasis on a few key weekly sessions.

Once logistical requirements are met, a plan normally needs adapting for the time of year. Periodisation is a topic for another time, with most athletes I focus more on the training they need than sticking to a prescribed order. The macro is as individual as the micro. A traditional high volume, low intensity base for an experienced Ironman athlete seems redundant; besides, for those of us in winter, volume is a challenge. I shift the balance of intensity and volume towards bike or run (and very occasionally swim) depending on an athlete’s strengths and their season goals. When recovery is often influenced by work and life, it’s hard to progress well across all disciplines at once.

Sufficient recovery is the biggest issue within a plan. I don’t want to give too much, I want to adjust recovery to fit an athlete’s needs. Two easier days within each week may be more than enough when overall load is low, but fatigue can still accumulate block after block. Experience shows that given an optional workout my athletes usually do them regardless, they don’t choose more rest. It’s understandable, I’m a terrible judge of my own condition and have pushed myself too far on a few occasions. Training is a compulsion. Allowing an athlete flexibility in their recovery is unreliable, it’s better to schedule recovery blocks and lighter days to ensure it happens. Motivated athletes have a habit of wearing themselves down until they come to a halt.

Over multiple weeks certain blocks are lightened to allow more recovery. The largest cut backs are at weekends – it works well for working athletes and I prefer to maintain the intensive sessions. Replacing a midweek block with pure recovery would effectively gives a full recovery week, excessive in view of the overall schedule. Instead I regularly scale back an intensity block and potentially use the period for test sessions; testing early in the block, then a few moderate sessions to keep the block useful while the overall load is reduced. Managed correctly it should produce a stepped progression in fitness similar to the chart below.

Fabricated data in Excel is much smoother than real world results, but a good number of my athletes follow this trend. Life tends to get in the way of the perfect progression – illness being a prime example – a few unplanned rest days affect fitness like a scheduled recovery block. Ideally the schedule should be adjusted with an easier block to return to training, then continue as normal. Subsequent recovery blocks can be delayed to allow fitness growth, there needs to be fatigue to recover from. At this point feedback is a vital part of the coaching process.

One weekly template can cover a lot of bases. Finding a routine that fits with life so you steadily progress your fitness is the starting point, being able to adapt that routine throughout the season and maintain your progression finishes the process off. Reviewing my own training diary it’s clear this year that routine was often lacking; when I strayed from steady progress long-term goals suffered.

• Tweet
• Comment

I’m not about to offer a radical new approach to triathlon training. My ‘better’ training week doesn’t incorporate special workouts or enable you to finish an Ironman on five hours a week. For those answers you’ll need to look elsewhere. A season coaching a diverse group of athletes has refined existing ideas; evolutionary not revolutionary. At the micro level sessions remain the same and the build over a season hasn’t hugely changed. It’s the intermediate region – the weekly cycle – where my approach has steadily evolved.

Athletes rarely complain that I’ve given them too much. Most of those who seek out a coach are highly motivated and want more, it’s not often I am asked to schedule less. A clear example came while advising an athlete struggling with his performance – he pushed to increase his training load, but results were declining not improving. Life stress was high, training stress was high, breaks were minimal. Sounding a little like over-training the first step was obvious – stop. A period of light training started the turn-around, the more difficult step was developing a plan that worked. The athlete needed to feel he was working hard and progressing, but also needed protecting from simply doing too much.

The week needed very defined blocks that he would work through with very defined periods of recovery. The training had to be challenging enough that the rest was required and appreciated. And life stress played a role, like most age groupers he had limited training time midweek, the plan had to be achievable. So a block of intensity during the week and a block focussed more towards volume at the weekend with easier days between them. Three intensive days might be pushing it, but with a clear recovery day following I felt he would push through. Feedback was good, performance started to improve and the schedule was positively received. There was enough work to satisfy that need to push and enough recovery to keep it under control.

Two blocks, three days midweek and two at the weekend, the longer block focusing on intensity, the shorter generally for volume work. This structure and focus is partly a matter of convenience, most age group athletes need consistency and a schedule that fits their life. Otherwise duration and focus of blocks can be changed to suit an individual, the important element is the easier day between each block of work. Some athletes aren’t ready for as much intensity in a single block, some don’t need the volume work; the plan is adaptable.

My previous training templates offered two variations, either packing the weekend with training or allowing for some free time. The first could contain three easier days per week while the second potentially allowed only one. The newer template provides for two, the exact timings in the week don’t matter as long as they break up the blocks of work. The distinction between an easy day and a hard day is more defined; get it right and the easy day is needed when it comes. It can be motivating, work through the block and you know you get a break.

It isn’t for everyone. Some schedules will not match, some athletes find it too intensive and a few don’t need to ease up as much (though I encourage them to work harder within each block). Blocks and easy days vary in focus and intensity between individuals; an easy day doesn’t have to mean doing nothing, I often use them for quality swim work. While it won’t work for everyone it’s become a starting point, a template I’m confident can successfully progress most athletes.

It has it’s problems. Every key workout in the week should be performed well, this template stacks them against each other – a long run the day after a long bike or a threshold bike session the day after a hard run session. If recovery between sessions isn’t adequate adjustments have to be made. Newer athletes, those recovering from injuries or adapting to new techniques tend to be poor fits, often they need more recovery between sessions. Thoughtlessly and rigidly applied it may not get the best out of an athlete. The intention is to keep taking small steps forward, frequently easing up to ensure a smooth progression.

As promised – nothing radical, no short cuts, just refinements following another year. It’s interesting to see how experience adapts my approach, I learn from my athletes and how they respond to their plans. A year from now I may be writing about another new and improved training week.

• Tweet
• 6 Comments

As I neared the end of my sabbatical I pondered whether I’d be able to return to a nine to five. Nobody enjoys returning to work after a week’s holiday, imagine if you’d been away for two years. When you travel the pace of life changes – things slow down. You learn to take your time, after all you have plenty of it. I didn’t savour giving up this freedom. Coaching was a way to retain that flexibility and continue doing something I loved.

After four days glued to my computer I’m finally taking a moment to breathe (by writing this, at my computer). Eating, sleeping and occasionally coaching club sessions were the only times I stepped away from my desk; not quite the flexibility I planned. It isn’t another example of poor time management, but November was a packed month with racing in Vegas, BTF courses and their course work and athletes needing plenty of attention. I thought the off season was supposed to be laid back? Not that I’m complaining, it’s hard to complain when your first two paragraphs refer to a two year sabbatical and a week in Vegas.

A few days entirely focussed on my athletes’ plans was an opportunity to reflect on how things have changed. Besides the busyness, updated processes and improvements to efficiency, the details of my plans have subtly altered over eighteen months. Principles remain the same, my approach is still built around a set of key workouts over weeks and months, but I am better at balancing workload and rest within a week. Challenging athletes – over-trained or under performing – forced me to experiment, to adapt ideas and produce schedules that pulled them out of downward spirals.

Triathlon media seems to be placing greater emphasis on recovery lately. Recovery is important, but then so is training, you don’t get fitter without doing the work. The difficulty isn’t giving an athlete less, it’s giving them just enough. Often that comes down to finding the right timing. My original simple Ironman training weeks worked, those templates got me through my first races, but there is always room for refinements. A year of balancing schedules for a wide variety of athletes and my plans have a different rhythm with stronger distinction between easy and hard. For the majority of my athletes it seems to be working well.

Unfortunately building all those training schedules hasn’t left me any time to produce updated training week templates for the blog this week. But the pressure is off, so next time…

• Tweet
• Comment