To supplement, I did screw up my race on June the 2th (5:38 with a terrible falter on the bike and a jogged-through half marathon), but nailed the one on September the 8th (finishing in 4:59 after a 2:30 bike). My experience is that you have to cut yourself some slack in terms of the workload sometimes, and do a solid taper. The TR plans are tough.
4 Likes
How’d it go following the TR plan? I am taking the plunge this year and following the half plan and curious. Thanks!
Hey thanks for reaching out. Overall it went well. With the introduction of outside workouts, I wound up following the IM specialization plan with the low volume option by doing the 2-3 weekly rides indoors for about 1-1.5 hours and ride outside for my long ride on the weekend. At first I used the option to convert the indoor ride to outdoor but bailed when I was flooded with notifications telling me I was out of the target power range. Way too annoying.
So wound up just doing my long rides on my own and for longer than TRs 4-5 hours.
On race day, bike went South at first due to swallowing some lake water as it was full contact out there. That in turn made me nauseous and made it hard to get in aero. However, managed to get back in the game and legs felt good! Fitness carried over to another 8 stage multisport A race 3 weeks later.
So for me, I think I liked the structure, efficiency and push for the weekly sessions but no way was I going to do 5 hours on a trainer indoors in the Summer. For long rides, I think TR has work to do to improve upon the outdoor ride conversion feature. Just my opinion. Good luck Training!!
2 Likes
Great post and congratulations, you’ve done something many of us cannot. Or would not…that is do a HIM. Your run was excellent, reading I thought you were going to say you blew after going out harder than planned. But your focus to training meant you COULD do a harder run. So congrats. And whats next? Kona?
1 Like
@robcumine Hahahaha nah. If you asked me that 5 years ago, I would have said “Absolutely!!”. Now, Im realistic with my goals. I have a new baby and want to start to grow the family. Training for an IM is hard, training with the intention of getting to Kona is like reaching the Moon. I am not prepared to sacrifice that much at this part of my life.
A low 4hr Half Ironman is on my radar though in the next 2 years.
5 Likes
Congrats! That 70.3 time is super quick!
I found your nutrition point really interesting. Did you calculate your calorie needs and track your intake or did you just go by feel? How else did you manage recovery?
Hi Leigh, I did count my calories using myfitness pal, and I have been using it for years. It was around 2400 calls per day. Because I was trying to loose some weight as well, I was running it fine to that line though, and sometimes just needed the sugar hit to get me going on some of those morning sessions.
Supplement wise, I used fish caps because I heard or read somewhere it helps with inflammation.
My recovery was nothing special, I just ate like normal, tried to sleep when I could, but The new baby was a good test 
. I missed a couple of swim sessions in the final 4 weeks so that may have helped me as well keeping my Critical training load and fatigue in check. Using training peaks as a self coached-ish athlete I think is a wise move and worth the $100ish per year.
1 Like
Thanks for the post. Can I ask why you chose a medium volume 70.3 program over high volume? I am just wondering if you see a benefit in terms of gains or was it a commitment decision. Can you offer me any insight into choosing between them. I just automatically signed up for 70.3 high volume as I’m about to haul my ass to get ready for a half next year. I came on-line and to look for a review and found your.s thanks for writing it!
my history is 3 halfs 5:30 build from couch potato 2 years ago and new to the sport pretty high volume, like 11-14 hours a week, 5:22 with a very half cooked schedule and not really training consistently, 5:15 4 weeks out from my first full IM as my A race 5 months ago. I did in 11.06. (1.05 swim, 5.48 bike, 3.54 run)(just died on that run) I was averaging 11-17hours training and was pretty consistent.
i would really like to break 5 hours.
Sub 5 hour half here. to answer the initial question:
Low volume is suggested if you are going to “skip” days on medium volume. If you pick medium volume and adhere to the majority of the plan, thats also good. However, if you skip too many days, its better to stick to low volume and nail everything, then add workouts. You can get plenty fast on a low volume plan.
High volume plans are IMO a bit too much volume, unless you REALLY know you can handle it. TBH though, your asking a question here about what to choose and you are not sub 5, so TBH I would AVOID high volume half and full volume. You will either skip way too much or get too fatigued. Even going sub 4:30 off the low and mid volume plans are totally doable. I did a quassy-mid volume half plan this year and ended up skipping a bunch of the later season workouts just due to injury and marathon building. I went sub 4:30 on my races. I average 10-15 hours a week. This season I am going to do low volume the whole time and add as I see fit. Better to nail workouts and add than skip.
You need to nail quality. 18-20 hours of volume is not created equal. With a 18-20 hours, I would say sub 5 should be easily obtainable even with sub-par structure, so my inclination is you are not being structured enough or just need more time amassing volume and race experience.
My advice is to choose the low or mid volume plan and stick to the workouts as best as you can, and if you want to add, then add volume. You should be able to get into a sub 5:00 70.3 easily with the TR programs if you follow them to a T. High volume is basically for people with no jobs or basically pros. I think its just way too much volume. They talk about this in the podcasts. Compliance is very low for high volume plans and theres a bunch of Kona qualifiers that used low volume.
1 Like
I agree with your general approach @Achin, but I’ve dropped the “if they can do it, I can do it” attitude as regards some people nailing it (e.g. some can do great despite sleeping little). There are always examples of people who qualified for Kona - and I’m not talking about the W50 age group - on 10-12 hours a week. But they’re few and far between. We should be concerned with the volume most athletes need, and not with outliers. Of course I agree that 10-12h/week should be enough for most not-too-old males to go under 5h in a 70.3. If I could do it, they can do it 
The high volume plans are a LOT of volume though. I mean he was looking to go sub 5. If you are pushing sub 4:30 and looking to go sub 4:15 or whatever, then maybe the high volume might be more in the “ballpark” of what someone might want to try. I would argue that high volume is just way too much volume for most athletes and they spoke about this exact thing on the podcast. He is at a 5:15 in build to an ironman. He is totally capable of doing it again and sub 5 with some small adjustments to his training. High volume might just put him in a huge hole.
I think most people could hypothetically qualify for Kona on 15h-20h volume/week. Theres tons of examples of this. I don’t think that many of us need more than 18h a week and would challenge you to justify even that volume. I am sure there’s lots of junk miles in a typical 18h week.
I honestly think if you are doing even 12-14 hours a week and struggling to nail a sub 5 on a 70.3, theres a ton of low hanging fruit to pick before someone should try to up to a high volume plan. Either that or you are doing something very wrong. If you have high workout compliance, the results will come with time. But IMO upping to high volume sounds like a terrible terrible idea. He even mentioned “high volume” as 11-14 hours per week. I would argue high volume is 16-20h/week. Many ironman athletes are doing 18-20 in the peak weeks already. But hey, if you want to try it please report back. Would be nice to hear what happens and if it works for you.
Welcome Hazey to the forum, and thanks for the questions.
The reason I chose the Medium Volume plan vs High Volume was purely down to adherence. Hitting every session week in, week out will make you a better athlete. Also, I should add that these plans aren’t just a walk in the park. Each session is bloody tough, stacked on top on each other, it was all my body could handle. I was working full time, and juggling a newborn, supporting my wife. I couldn’t fit any more in.
The peak weeks are still 14hrs of absolute quality training. The high volume plans are just too much at this race distance for me.
You should be also look into best bike split to work out your pacing strategy. This helped me focus on my race, which set me up for a great run. Based on your enthusiasm and free time, a sub 5hr should be well within your sights.
I’ll keep saying this over and over again. One session at a time, the thinking about what to do, and how hard to do it already worked out for you. You need to just slot the sessions around your life.
You know what though. You don’t have the worlds eyes on you, you don’t rely on this sport for income. Have a go at High Volume, if in the first 4 weeks you start to miss sessions, just flick back to a mid plan, no-one is going to judge you. Hell, at least you would have learnt something.
5 Likes
Thanks a bunch!! Great feedback and food for thought. Appreciate your time mate.
From what you’ve said sound like i did a really shit time/performance for my ironman/half this year. considering I put in such high number of hours (usually 13+). Yes i did a few weeks 18hs peak) I did miss sessions but not heaps. Probs 90% compliance. I built for 30 weeks. I may have peaked to soon as well.
Anyways i will try to be more consitant with mid volume and see what happens. Thanks again.
Also i am a she not he. The 11-14hour was for a half build which i thought was quite high volume.
1 Like
Lots of food for thought guys thank you!!
I agree 100%.
(And no, I won’t train 18-20 hrs a week, probably ever. Not planning to go full distance in the foreseeable future, and even then I’d settle for 12-15-ish probably).
1 Like
I don’t know what a “good” half ironman time is for a female. But I’m intrigued now. Is your age in your forum alias? I’ve checked the results for Challenge Almere-Amsterdam, a race that I know is flat and fast, and 5 hours would place a female in the 40-45 category THIRD out of 48 participants. In W35, the placing would be 2/35, and in W30, 6/36.
Your 5:15 would land you 4th, 8th and 10th, respectively. The other age groups are obviously slower. So I guess you’re a fast athlete after all.
Also, your 11:06 in the full distance is I think pretty spectacular. Well done!
I’m 34… hazey41 relates to my old post code in uk 20 odd years ago, god knows why i still use it.
Hmm yes, maybe I’m not comparing apples with apples. confused about volume again now lol.
I finished 5th and 7th in age group last two races. Port macquarie 70.3 a Cairns IM in Aus they are average courses. Not super fast or hard. Quite a few girls finished around 10 hour mark in cairns
Which volume and missing sessions is a perennial topic - I’d always advise starting Low Volume and adding, rather than starting Mid or High. Before TR I did 9-13h bike per week outdoors, Ive tried Mid, I’ve tried High, I am fully committed to LV for 2020! Low Volume is not Easy Volume.
Come on over to the IM 2020 thread and let us know your race plans and training troubles!
2 Likes
Giro empire are fast aero shoes. You can actually cut out the tongue and replace the laces with elastic ones and make them aero AND super quick to get in and out of.