1. They're Assuming peaking comes down to the moment of competition, its actually the process of shaping sporting form over an annual or multi annual plan. The "two weeks of peaking" they're referring to is actually a period for supercompensation to take place via Long Term Delayed Effect which is why training is reduced: to recover and supercompensate. Reading this article, its quite obvious they have no idea about this nor any experience:
Principles for training aimed at speed development Verkhoshansky
Speed training for high level athletes, Yuri Verkhoshansky
2. The Gorski quote is about the depth of the Soviet cyclists, not "peaking"; and Soviets are the creators of periodization and the conjugate sequence system- the inventors of "peaking" and LDTE, they completely missed that- they "stay up all the time" because they're training in prescribed training block in the conjugate sequence system.
3. They're picking their argument against events which are measured in seconds, fractions of seconds, and centimeters, millimeters, which have hundreds of variables other than the sportsman's peaking form that effects the performance: wind, angle of trajectory, environmental conditions, illness, performance psychology, injuries, technical and biomechanical alterations, tactical alterations; events where the slightest minimal alternation can drastically change performance outcome. They argue Maurice Greene's 9.87, 9.82, 9.80 and his inability to set a pr to beat Justin Gatlin; think about that. That's not a second. Not tenths of a second. Thats HUNDREDTHS OF A SECOND. Think of how much time that is in relation to moving your leg. That's the core of their argument against "peaking periodization"? The same applies to every event they mention, except the Ironman which the difference is collective. Maurice Greene and other sprinters frequently pull hamstrings and hip extensors, hince why Tyson Gay and Usain Bolt aren't setting PRs this month. These people should congratulate these athletes for being so consistent by HUNDREDTHS OF A SECOND in their maximum performance in dealing with these injuries.
4. Its complete conjecture. They aren't coaches of these elite athletes nor professonal sports scientists so their entire argument is based on their own assumption from watching youtube videos, reading wikipedia, and not examinations of specific physiological parameters in explosive strength, starting strength, maximum strength, reactive ability, maximal anaerobic power, maximal aerobic consumption, and maximal anaerobic threshold which evolves through the training process to peak form. They aren't around these athletes nor investigating their performance or the progression in training effect through the season. They don't know the detailed changes in training, sporting form, injuries or obstacles that interfer or maximize performance. And they aren't even providing legitimate, proven evidence gathered by themselves to back the argument. Anyone of the athletes they presented that didn't set a "PR" or "SB" in competition very well could have in training or in physiological parameters mentioned above and simply was not able to squeeze out every MILLIMETER AND CENTISECOND in their competition.
I want to look at that Nebraska study, but it isn't on pubmed but I know they're spinning it.
5. Where are their athletes in these competitions that didn't use "peaking" to compare to peak athletes to? If they're methods of "not peaking" are so superior they should be out performing athletes that do "peak" in the exact competition. But where are they? They can't say they have superior method to something and not have their own method in the same competition to compare to!
6. Brian Mackenzie is an endurance coach. He has the opportunity to produce a 13 minute 5k runner and an 11 hour 100 mile runner, one RAW with no prior background. I want to see him do it without periodization or peaking. Lets see it, Crossfit Endurance has been online for what 3 years? and he hasn't produced anything yet.
And finally, they are not looking a the COMPLETE evolution of the sportsman. By COMPLETE this means from age 13 to retirement. Usain Bolt DID NOT run a 9.58 as a 13 year old. Then how else did he gain that ability? ??????
If anyone wants to legitimately read articles on this subject the best place is here http://www.verkhoshansky.com/Article...0/Default.aspx