Thoughts on the optimal training protocol for maximising aerobic base?

[Paul Kayley]

A) Train like the Kenyans - as many as 14 sessions per week of slightly-sub-threshold work

B) As per Morris - blocked days of high intensity intervals interspersed with blocked days of recovery

or

C) Traditional - do tonnes of volume and hope for the best


At a peripheral level, the aim I would say is to maximise aerobic muscle fiber charateristics, maximising the mitochondrial reticulum and capillarisation in as many muscle fibers as possible.

A) - relatively subtle, consistent and highly repetative stimulation of the higher end fibers

B) - more aggressive, stimulating more of the anaerobic fibers, but less consistent

C) - blooby boring and relies upon long and exhaustive training to force the involvement of the higher end fibers

[Mike ODonnell]

as i get older...the less I want to do...but the more I want in return....I go for B....more intensity, more recovery.....seems to work for my sanity and keeps me consistent in the long run...which is where my improvement comes in....consistency...

[Derek Simonds]

At a peripheral level, the aim I would say is to maximise aerobic muscle fiber charateristics, maximising the mitochondrial reticulum and capillarisation in as many muscle fibers as possible.

Ok I am with you.

In my training I have the best results for Olympic distance triathons with a combination of B and C. BTW I am probably not a great reference as I am traditionally a solid middle of the age group pack racer.

I will have 1 long bike a week, 1 long swim a week and 1 long run every 3 weeks with interval work for the run and swim interspersed throughout the week. The bike I will usually do 1 shorter session at a higher steady state mixed in with intervals.

Basically if you have any suggestions or want someone to try a different training methodology let me know as I am starting my race prep for my "A" race in September.

[Paul Kayley]

Originally Posted by Mike ODonnell

as i get older...the less I want to do...but the more I want in return....I go for B....more intensity, more recovery.....seems to work for my sanity and keeps me consistent in the long run...which is where my improvement comes in....consistency...

Yes, as I'm getting older I agree that it has to be fun... hard and intensive fun that is! The traditional method (C) just sucks in that respect, and I'm starting to believe that its fundamentally flawed.

Why take the long road -forcing the stimulation of higher end fibers via the long and slow attrition of the ST fibers, when the same can be achieved in a shorter session by just working harder?? If intermediate fibers are stimulated and fatigued regularly, they will become more aerobic in order to bolster their fatigue resistance - (A)&(B)... without the mind numbing high volume work.

But which of the first two models above will be the most effective in the long-term?

[Paul Kayley]

Originally Posted by Derek Simonds

Ok I am with you.

In my training I have the best results for Olympic distance triathons with a combination of B and C. BTW I am probably not a great reference as I am traditionally a solid middle of the age group pack racer.

I will have 1 long bike a week, 1 long swim a week and 1 long run every 3 weeks with interval work for the run and swim interspersed throughout the week. The bike I will usually do 1 shorter session at a higher steady state mixed in with intervals.

Basically if you have any suggestions or want someone to try a different training methodology let me know as I am starting my race prep for my "A" race in September.

It looks like you follow a traditional mixed model of training.... a bit of everything. I like more defined periods of training, using reverse periodisation when aiming to peak for a long distance event.

[Derek Simonds]

Originally Posted by Paul Kayley

It looks like you follow a traditional mixed model of training.... a bit of everything. I like more defined periods of training, using reverse periodisation when aiming to peak for a long distance event.

Do you have a log of your reverse periodisation training, I would love to see how it lays out.

I used to be very traditional which was basically all LSD. I hated it but it is was all I knew at the time.

[Paul Kayley]

Basically if you have any suggestions or want someone to try a different training methodology let me know as I am starting my race prep for my "A" race in September.

Check out Dave Scott's Triathlon Training. Its an old book, written in the 80s. My first copy has fallen to pieces! He stopped using method (C) because he was bored too, and adopted an interval based version of method (A). It worked for him, and worked really well for me when I was young and keen enough to cope with it.

The intervals he suggests all look really hard, but they are all based around time trial efforts of about LT. Just build up your number of sessions gradually. At the age of 20 I jumped in feet first and tried 6 of his sessions per discipline per week... I was toast after 2 weeks! I ended up doing his training plan based around 15 sessions per week, with one rest day, maintained for months. It worked so well!!!

Beware, his nutritional advice is somewhat outdated now!!

[Paul Kayley]

Originally Posted by Derek Simonds

Do you have a log of your reverse periodisation training, I would love to see how it lays out.

I used to be very traditional which was basically all LSD. I hated it but it is was all I knew at the time.

This very much depends what distances you are aiming to peak for?

[Josh Whiting]

I think an important factor is your maturity as an endurance competitor. If you have never covered the distance before you better put some LSD work in, if you've been competing at that distance for 10 years then things change somewhat.

[Derek Simonds]

Good point Josh. I have been mucking around with tri's since 2002. 2004 was my most focused year.

Paul my distance is Olympic. At some point in my life I am going to do an Ironman. I am not ready to commit to the time required for the longer distances.