Tomorrow is a rest day. I’ve done this type of training before, it’s ok.
I’m not saying its not okay, i’m saying it’s okay until its not okay. You are copying and pasting a previous workout made from a coach from his methodology indiscriminately and also mentioning you don’t self-coach yourself and have limited experience or background/experience with training theory and such. Not saying what you are doing is wrong, but you may end up overcooking yourself long term.
My point is seems to be in your best interest to do a bit of research and understand WHY something is built the way it is instead of just doing something because it feels right. If I tried what you are doing I would absolutely destroy myself. As you get more fast, you accumulate more fatigue, and you may end up doing something that could negatively impact your overall race results over time.
We are all armchair coaches and this is a hobby for most of us. But it sounds like you might be a bit trigger happy with prescribing intensity to yourself. Again you did it before and it was all good. But each year is different and as you get faster, any sloppy mistakes come out to bite you
I ran 9 miles today. 5 was at 70.3 race pace. 4 was easy jogging and/or walking recovery.
During the week, my 60 min run might look like 4x3min intervals at 5k pace. So 12 out of 60 minutes is a harder effort.
Or 2x3min at 10x pace followed by 6x45sec hill repeats.
I am not going out and hitting it hard all the time. My workouts are designed with a warmup, the working set of harder efforts mixed in, and then a cool down. Even my 18-22 mile IM training runs were broken up into 1-2mi repeats with a target pace, with recoveries mixed in.
I ran 9 miles today. 5 was at 70.3 race pace. 4 was easy jogging and/or walking recovery.
During the week, my 60 min run might look like 4x3min intervals at 5k pace. So 12 out of 60 minutes is a harder effort.
Or 2x3min at 10x pace followed by 6x45sec hill repeats.
I am not going out and hitting it hard all the time. My workouts are designed with a warmup, the working set of harder efforts mixed in, and then a cool down. Even my 18-22 mile IM training runs were broken up into 1-2mi repeats with a target pace, with recoveries mixed in.
Again just spit-balling here, but is there a reason you chose to do 5 miles at tempo? Why not above race pace? Why not run less at higher pace? Are you trying to run the MINIMUM amount to get the MAXIMUM speed? Have you tried to look at Jack Daniels pace calcs and the plans he has laid out? Alternatively have you considered that you might be best served doing just more volume at a slower pace? IMO if you are running top race splits (overall) then yeah, speed work is kinda needed. My personal opinion is way too many people add speed work when they could get more benefit from more volume. That speed work should be inserted to strategically and minimized to improve your overall times.
If you are to add speed work regularly, I would be afraid of injury and unless you are either A) following a specific plan that is structured specifically for those speed workouts, B) training like a runner for a running race or C) know exactly what you are doing and why you are doing it, I can see some risk to your overall training. The other question is does the speed work impact your bike sessions? It’s not just “how can I get as fast running as I can” for us, its “how can I get the fastest overall time” and sometimes it may be better to increase intensity on the bike and reduce it on the run. Devils advocate here; why don’t you increase bike intensity OR volume instead? Would that lead to OVERALL gains in time? You could cut 5 mins in the run, but could you cut 10 mins on the bike instead? Or perhaps you are a sub 3 marathoner, but can you actually translate that after a 5 hour bike? Or even an IM bike in general?
Mmm, this is an interesting discussion but I feel certain points are more relevant depending on which plan and which volume we’re talking about.
A relatively fast thirty minute brick run is a very different thing to a fast 2h brick run, for example.
Swim should also be a part of the discussion; as a skills focussed leg, many people are getting in the pool fatigued which is going to undermine the session.
Again just spit-balling here, but is there a reason you chose to do 5 miles at tempo? Why not above race pace? Why not run less at higher pace? Are you trying to run the MINIMUM amount to get the MAXIMUM speed? Have you tried to look at Jack Daniels pace calcs and the plans he has laid out? Alternatively have you considered that you might be best served doing just more volume at a slower pace? IMO if you are running top race splits (overall) then yeah, speed work is kinda needed. My personal opinion is way too many people add speed work when they could get more benefit from more volume. That speed work should be inserted to strategically and minimized to improve your overall times.
If you are to add speed work regularly, I would be afraid of injury and unless you are either A) following a specific plan that is structured specifically for those speed workouts, B) training like a runner for a running race or C) know exactly what you are doing and why you are doing it, I can see some risk to your overall training. The other question is does the speed work impact your bike sessions? It’s not just “how can I get as fast running as I can” for us, its “how can I get the fastest overall time” and sometimes it may be better to increase intensity on the bike and reduce it on the run. Devils advocate here; why don’t you increase bike intensity OR volume instead? Would that lead to OVERALL gains in time? You could cut 5 mins in the run, but could you cut 10 mins on the bike instead? Or perhaps you are a sub 3 marathoner, but can you actually translate that after a 5 hour bike? Or even an IM bike in general?
So here’s the deal, I hired my coach who came highly recommended. He’s qualified for Kona multiple times, has been in the sport about 30 years, just finished ranked #1 in the world for his AG, and he a track record of success coaching others. And he himself has a coach. He has a general framework or methodology for his coaching plans that he’s developed over the years. There’s lots of different training plans and philosophies out there from different coaches. It this is what has worked for him and his athletes, so that’s the framework of how my specific training plan was created.
I exceeded all my goals and expectations training this way. By a lot. He focuses on high quality workouts and not a lot of “junk miles”. Every workout has a focus and purpose. The plan fit with my schedule, it felt challenging, but not beyond my capabilities. And I didn’t suffer any injuries due to training. Yes, I said i was injured in 2018, but that’s from getting hit by a Maxima going 55mph.
So that’s the framework I am trying to stick to. My times and paces have changed since I am a different athlete now than 2 years ago, that’s up to me to adjust and keep track of. But I fee after being under his tutelage for 8+ months, I have a good handle on how far I can push myself, when to push, and when to back off. And like I said, these plans (that I can go pull from my TP history) worked for me.
So what I’m trying to do now is keep the high quality TR bike workouts as part of their tri plans. But I’m swapping out what I feel to be lackluster swim and run workouts, with ones I’ve done and had success with before. I don’t see it as a major overhaul, just a slight tweak to get what I feel are better run and swim workouts. TR has VO2 max run workouts, I just few the ones I have in my catalog from the last are better for me. And they were prescribed to me by someone who knows me, and has worked with me, and has a lot more credentials and experience in triathlon coaching and plans/training than Chad (and I don’t think Chad would dispute that).
Because the majority of running just needs to be done at an endurance pace. So many get hung up on the icing workouts without the cake. Most triathletes just need to do consistent miles and actually up the amount of miles. To do this effectively you cannot be running all sorts of intervals.
You’ll see more improvement doing 5-6 runs a week and getting 35+ miles a week in opposed to complicated track workouts, even though those look cooler.
ou’ll see more improvement doing 5-6 runs a week and getting 35+ miles a week in opposed to complicated track workouts, even though those look cooler.
Agree broadly, but some personal anec-data: When I ran a lot of slow, I got good at running a lot, slowly. I’ve learned that my body still needs a bit of intensity to run fast.
I still agree with you overall, though.
Like @Tim_P, I would like to see more detail on the running and swimming sides of the TR triathlon plans. I raised those concerns in a thread a while back:
I’m a big fan of TR and have been using it for a couple of years for triathlon training. I’m currently following the mid-volume full distance plan and am quite satisfied. I know that TR is oriented toward cycling, but I would really like to see it offer more for triathletes. In particular, it would help if: More explanation were offered for the run and swim workouts in the TR plans. When using TR for cycling, we get so much information about the goals of (and science behind) individual w…
That being said, I’ve noticed that not many people on this thread have addressed @Tim_P’s main concern/ question: “I’m looking for feedback from people who have followed the TR plans to a “T”. How well did it prepare you for race day?”
As of today, I have followed the TR plan about as closely as possible. I’m doing the mid-volume full distance plan in preparation for IM Texas. I have completed the 12-week base and 8-week build phases. I have missed only five of a possible 220 workouts and have varied from the TR script just in a few small ways. For instance, I do different swimming drills. While I cannot yet comment on how well it prepared me for the IM, I can say that I’m as fast and fit as I’ve ever been. I switched to triathlons about six years ago after a decade of marathon running. About a month ago I ran less than a minute off my half-marathon PR, which I set at age 38 at the height of my marathon fitness. I’m now 46 and running half the volume I was during marathon training.
I’ll try to revisit this thread in eight weeks after TX, but for now I will say that 20 weeks into TR triathlon training my answer is: “yes, it prepares you. It prepares you really well”.
The last year I was tri training I did 8-12 weeks building up running mileage and 3 times a week I would have something like 6-8 twenty to thirty second strides at 5k pace, then it went to one tempo run a week with still two days including strides.
I kept asking my coach “when do I get to go to the track? I want to run 400s!” Only to be told to trust the plan.
When I got to do a running time trial I smashed my 5k PR by 90 seconds, in the middle of a build, without feeling like I was crushing it.
And this was coming off a few years of running 3-4 times a week were I’d go to the track twice a week.
A steady build and increase of mileage goes a long way. If it wasn’t for tearing my meniscus several years back I would have just gone back to being just a runner but alas here I am a bike racer now ha. Still miss all running workouts.
Yeah, that just doesn’t match my experience, personally. My biggest volume was 5-6 weekly in the 40-60mpw range; I got a bit faster, but not much. I could definitely just keep running, but my mile pace never really improved much more than when I was in the 25mpw range. I do think a lot of people just need to ‘run more,’ though.
Because the majority of running just needs to be done at an endurance pace. So many get hung up on the icing workouts without the cake. Most triathletes just need to do consistent miles and actually up the amount of miles. To do this effectively you cannot be running all sorts of intervals.
You’ll see more improvement doing 5-6 runs a week and getting 35+ miles a week in opposed to complicated track workouts, even though those look cooler.
I AM doing a majority at endurance pace. But to say triathletes can’t be running all sorts of intervals…I just don’t agree. For a 70.3, you can’t train your body to run at X pace for 13.1 miles if your training is running X pace for 5-8 miles at a time. This is aside from the whole time factor…I don’t have time to dedicate 5-6 days and 35+ miles per week running. Not when I have bike and swim workouts to do too. My peak mileage during full IM training was 34 miles, and 20 of that was in 1 workout. There is value in teaching your body to run faster and building speed in your legs. There’s value in intervals, repeats, and fartleks. If just running a lot at a moderate pace was sufficient to go faster, that would be like saying to just ride Baxter 5x a week and forget all the other workouts.
-
I didn’t say “triathletes can’t be running all sorts of intervals”. I said running more frequently is beneficial. To run 35 mile a week is a weekly long run of 13 miles, and then four 5.5 mile runs.
-
You’re comparing running with riding. Riding allows for higher intensity because it is non impact. Look at pure runners as well as lots of other triathletes. Lots of endurance pace runs. Meed to build up the body ability to run. And if you’re talking about IM/70.3 the biggest factor is endurance off the bike. The time spent running 5k paced 1ks on the track could be better placed with another workout.
Just my $0.02. Before hiring a coach I subscribed to the intervals all the time. Bike consisted of a lot of ansel adams and morgan mixed in with a long steady ride at IM pace. Runs were a mix of short (400/800/1k) intervals, a tempo run (~10k pace intervals) and a long run (IM pace). While that got me decent results initially, I plateaued.
When I hired a coach the FIRST thing he told me was I need to allow myself to run slower. I was shocked how many “EZ” runs were on the schedule. During a run build of 50-70 miles per week, probably over 90% of the runs were EZ runs. Hard to mentally get my head around, but I bought into it The threshold bike workout and then some intervals on the weekend were the cherry on top. After that first year, I felt like I could run for days and for the first time was able to get my 70.3 run time within 2 minutes of my standalone time.
At least in my experience, intervals did a great job of steepening the initial curve of fitness, but after that I flattened out. The additional volume and more importantly the EZ running to allow my body to build on the mileage and have quality bike workouts is what paid off the most. I initially thought my coach (similar accolades as you mention) was kind of phoning it in, but after seeing the results I realized there was a plan behind it. All that to say, a plan doesn’t have to be sexy to be effective.
I agree, the runs are pretty vanilla, but given the hard work that they prescribe on the bike, it’s hard to argue with that approach in order to let your body recover. I’d say either give it a shot and buy into the run workouts, or don’t sweat it and do what you want to do. You’ll find out what works for you either way. Your experience may be different than others. I personally am following their plan, but subbing in my own swim workouts as theirs just don’t get me excited to get up and get in the pool.
I’ll preface this by pointing out this is my opinion, you’re entitled to your own.
I think TrainerRoad is good for bike training, but I agree with others that the swim/run portions of a triathlon plans are very lacking.
The triathlon plans put too much emphasis, which I understand as they are selling cycling software.
For example week 6 of the mid-volume olympic plan, 3 “hard” workouts"
Owens (Log In to TrainerRoad)
Elephants +1 (Log In to TrainerRoad)
Phoenix +2 (Log In to TrainerRoad)
Compare this against:
Swim #1, 35-40min, with a 500m main set
Swim #2, 40-45min, 1,300 main set
Swim #3, 50min, all easy swimming
Run #1, 45min, 20min of “work”
Run #2 45min, easy with walk breaks
Run #3 30min hard brick run
I don’t see many intervals for running through the plans in any form (be it 1-2km/mile reps, or 400m speed work).
In my opinion, swimming needs more volume (where are the >3,000m swims?) and needs more run volume AND intensity.
If just running a lot at a moderate pace was sufficient to go faster, that would be like saying to just ride Baxter 5x a week and forget all the other workouts.
But it is. Many people are doing speed work when IMO they should really be focusing on overall volume. You can get to be quite fast without speedwork. If you want to nudge out some higher end speed then yes, speed work is required, but I see no issue in hitting sub 1:35 HM splits off volume only with no speed work. Hell, I am of the opinion that your bike fitness transfers over as well, and you need less speed work than a full-time runner as you are getting some anaerobic and high end muscular endurance from your cycling. Again, if you read on what some of the very qualified individuals have said, they are explicit when they mention that you don’t need much speed work to get fast times.
I feel like you are making these assumptions and giving advice without properly digging into the weeds and researching why you need speed work in your case. Over-prescription is not great when you are doing a general plan for many people. Specific training is found from a coached solution for obvious reasons; its personalized. How is TR going to know what your SBR background is? What your PR’s are? What elevation they all were at? Temperature? Nutrition? Bike geometry? Injuries? Experience level? Etc.
Edit: Again I am not saying you are wrong, but it sounds like you need more understanding of “why” rather than “because I have done it before” if you want to get the most out of your training. Your coach built your plan and each workout off of each other with your own needs specifically for you; perhaps at the time it was the best for you; is it the best for you now? Maybe it is, maybe it is not. How can you know? Do some research so you can sniff test your training. Many of us are doing a sniff test on what you are doing and come to similar conclusions. Perhaps you are a onto something here, but we as the general public need some quality explanations before we can take what you say at face value. What you are saying is largely going against traditional training methodology. As an individual with a scientific background, I am totally happy to change and alter and modify my opinions about a subject if I am given proper information on a theory.
I didn’t say “triathletes can’t be running all sorts of intervals”. I said running more frequently is beneficial. To run 35 mile a week is a weekly long run of 13 miles, and then four 5.5 mile runs.
You’re comparing running with riding. Riding allows for higher intensity because it is non impact. Look at pure runners as well as lots of other triathletes. Lots of endurance pace runs. Meed to build up the body ability to run. And if you’re talking about IM/70.3 the biggest factor is endurance off the bike. The time spent running 5k paced 1ks on the track could be better placed with another workout.
Huh? You said “you can’t be running all sorts of intervals” which is what I was responding to.
My intervals are not strictly 5k efforts, I think people are under the impression I’m just going out and doing 400m repeats on the track. I do 1 60min run during the week with some faster intervals built in. 1 60min easy run working on form and cadence. And a longer weekend effort with intervals (but slower than the mid-week intervals.
My intervals are not strictly 5k efforts, I think people are under the impression I’m just going out and doing 400m repeats on the track. I do 1 60min run during the week with some faster intervals built in. 1 60min easy run working on form and cadence. And a longer weekend effort with intervals (but slower than the mid-week intervals.
Perhaps you are doing something more akin to fartleks? Intervals for running imply speed work specific training. Perhaps that is where some of us are getting confused. Still, Fartleks are speed work and are typically not done every effort. Unless again you are a top racer where you start doing funky stuff and high risk type things to eek out those last few minutes
I agree with the OP that the swim and run portions of the tri plans leave a lot to be desired. That’s why I don’t follow them and do my own. They look like they’ve been written by a cycling coach that doesn’t have much tri experience.
I also agree that it can’t be as good as hiring a dedicated coach and one shouldn’t expect it to. However, even as a generic training plan, I think there is room for improvement. The swims just need to be redone. The volume is way too low and long steady swims have no place in a tri plan that’s not basic. I think swim workouts can be done in a way that most people can use them.
The problem is the run. There are variations of run plans. Different volumes, different intensities, and above all people at different ages and injury histories. I think what needs to happen is the run needs to be separated out of the tri plans. That way, you can have low, mid, high volume tri run plans as well as ones with varying intensities.
That way you could tailor your plan by adding whichever bike plan you want, whichever run plan you want, and whichever swim plan you want. That would also solve the problem of those of us who do other outside plans, who have to delete the run and swim workouts out of the calendar.
I believe, that on the podcast they have mentioned that there is a high level former triathlete that’s works at TR. There are also plenty of coaches and triathletes that are very good at making plans that would be willing to put their input if coach @chad would feel the need to. I would not mind doing it for free and I’m sure quite a few triathletes would love to lend a hand as well.
I think the idea of different volume disciplines within a tri plan would be key. Being able to prioritize different disciplines depending on the season would be really nice to have, that said, I can also understand how that would be from a programming standpoint. Think about a high run volume focus with a low volume bike and swim. If you were just doing a low volume bike plan, separate of tri, you may make those two rides higher intensity, but coupled with the high volume run it would likely need to be different than that, so setting about the plan and programming for it would be tough. All that to say it would be nice to have, but can understand the challenges with implementation.