"off season" plans

tunney

longshank wrote: »

that was my understanding of winter training - build your aerobic base with more volume and less intensity while working on your limiters, although I find that hard in the winter weather, but then summer wasn't great for long cycles!!! I think you can't just to do a big block of volume before your ironman, you will prob just get sick/injured.

A slightly antiquated view and somewhat contraindicated. However lets not that get in the way of Brett Sutton impressions!

pconn062

tunney wrote: »

Weight loss and fitness gains are, by and large, mutually exclusive. You cannot get fitter while getting leaner. Pick one.

Is this exclusively a triathlon thing or does it carry over to pure running? Because during a fairly heavy block of training for a goal race I managed to drop my weight (and maintained it) from 11 stone down to a more respectable racing weight of 10 1/2 fairly easily simply by cleaning up my diet a bit. I lost the 1/2 a stone in 3-4 weeks.

peter kern

tunney wrote: »

A slightly antiquated view and somewhat contraindicated. However lets not that get in the way of Brett Sutton impressions!

tummy you are aware that a lot of world class coaches dont periodise and peridisation is more for beginner coaches, but that isnt to say that what lonkshank said dosnt work for beginner or intermediate triathletes. which this thread is clearly about.and it works quite well if weight loss is of high interest.

longshank there is many different ways to do something but while your approach might not work 100% its not a bad way.
what i was trying to say was 3 month ago miller 82 was a binge drinker in the last 6 weeks he is getting all too serious and wound up about triathlon ( at least thats what i feel) to become a proper Ironman is not done in 275 days it takes a bit longer than that. so why not having fun next year and then 2014 be more serious.

dave what periodisation do you use for 3.46h marathons with a 32 10 k pb ?

RayCun

pconn062 wrote: »

Is this exclusively a triathlon thing or does it carry over to pure running? Because during a fairly heavy block of training for a goal race I managed to drop my weight (and maintained it) from 11 stone down to a more respectable racing weight of 10 1/2 fairly easily simply by cleaning up my diet a bit. I lost the 1/2 a stone in 3-4 weeks.

+1
Crash-dieting and fitness gains may be mutually exclusive, but if your regular diet includes a Big Mac every day (and a packet of Haribo every night;)) or a rake of pints on the weekend - those are calories you can drop without losing fitness.
Or if you kept the same diet and added an extra 2 hours of training each week, wouldn't you lose weight and gain fitness?

peter kern

RayCun wrote: »

+1
Crash-dieting and fitness gains may be mutually exclusive, but if your regular diet includes a Big Mac every day (and a packet of Haribo every night;)) or a rake of pints on the weekend - those are calories you can drop without losing fitness.
Or if you kept the same diet and added an extra 2 hours of training each week, wouldn't you lose weight and gain fitness?

that would be way to simple and we dont do things simple in triathlon it has to sound really difficult to work.
i hear compresion belly gear is the new thing ;-0

RayCun

I knew I should have thrown in a reference to power meters

RacoonQueen

RayCun wrote: »

+1
Crash-dieting and fitness gains may be mutually exclusive, but if your regular diet includes a Big Mac every day (and a packet of Haribo every night;)) or a rake of pints on the weekend - those are calories you can drop without losing fitness.
Or if you kept the same diet and added an extra 2 hours of training each week, wouldn't you lose weight and gain fitness?

Yeah well only someone who has a perfect diet wouldn't gain from changing that around a bit. Most would have a few things they could change, and judging by the confessions thread many on here could make a huge change to bodyfat and weight without disturbing their training regime...

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

tummy you are aware that a lot of world class coaches dont periodise and peridisation is more for beginner coaches, but that isnt to say that what lonkshank said dosnt work for beginner or intermediate triathletes. which this thread is clearly about.and it works quite well if weight loss is of high interest.

longshank there is many different ways to do something but while your approach might not work 100% its not a bad way.
what i was trying to say was 3 month ago miller 82 was a binge drinker in the last 6 weeks he is getting all too serious and wound up about triathlon ( at least thats what i feel) to become a proper Ironman is not done in 275 days it takes a bit longer than that. so why not having fun next year and then 2014 be more serious.

dave what periodisation do you use for 3.46h marathons with a 32 10 k pb ?

@miller82 I have done you a disservice! I was not aware of your recent history. As such disregard my comments and go with Peters.

@peter kern : see what happens when you post with full sentences and proper(ish) grammar - you get your point across rather convincingly. Also knock out closing.

tunney

pconn062 wrote: »

Is this exclusively a triathlon thing or does it carry over to pure running? Because during a fairly heavy block of training for a goal race I managed to drop my weight (and maintained it) from 11 stone down to a more respectable racing weight of 10 1/2 fairly easily simply by cleaning up my diet a bit. I lost the 1/2 a stone in 3-4 weeks.

How do you know you got fitter?

I hate to go against the spirit of the board looking for quantifiable results. I'd even hate more to post links to studies from high end cyclists, which involved power meters, testing and what not. I'd really hate to point out the scientific conclusions.

"But I ran faster, that means I am fitter" Nope means you are faster.

RayCun wrote: »

+1
Crash-dieting and fitness gains may be mutually exclusive, but if your regular diet includes a Big Mac every day (and a packet of Haribo every night;)) or a rake of pints on the weekend - those are calories you can drop without losing fitness.
Or if you kept the same diet and added an extra 2 hours of training each week, wouldn't you lose weight and gain fitness?

Again a definition of fitness would be required and how it is determined. Simply being faster does not mean fitter.

RayCun wrote: »

I knew I should have thrown in a reference to power meters

Used correctly that can be quite telling.
Some very interesting conversations going on elsewhere on them and I was going to start a thread but it would end up being the inevitable.

RayCun

I'd accept, for the sake of argument, that professional athletes could lose weight, get a short term speed increase, but lose longer-term fitness at the same time.
But non-professional athletes who are far above their ideal weight can lose a lot of that weight before losing fitness - if they lose that weight sensibly of course, by eating healthily and having less to own up to in the confession box thread.

And if someone has a sustained period of racing faster in their goal races, but their power meter is telling them that they are not fitter, then something needs to be recalibrated. Probably not the race results.

sconhome

Ah go on, start the thread! Can always be locked if it gets out of hand

tunney

RayCun wrote: »

I'd accept, for the sake of argument, that professional athletes could lose weight, get a short term speed increase, but lose longer-term fitness at the same time.
But non-professional athletes who are far above their ideal weight can lose a lot of that weight before losing fitness - if they lose that weight sensibly of course, by eating healthily and having less to own up to in the confession box thread.

This isn't about loosing fitness while loosing weight, its about gaining fitness while loosing weight.

RayCun wrote: »

And if someone has a sustained period of racing faster in their goal races, but their power meter is telling them that they are not fitter, then something needs to be recalibrated. Probably not the race results.

Differnt a little in cycling as its non-weight bearing. Plus cycling has a nice handy metric that can be used as a definition for "having improved your capacity to perform". Power to weight. Two ways to do it - loose weight while maintaining present power generation. Maintain weight while increasing power generation. Either will work, and both do work. However its when people trying to do both as they think they will see double the results - they don't. Negligible improvements at best.

For weight bearing sports like running - lighter==faster (to a point) so the illusion of gaining fitness while loosing weight is maintained. However whats probably just happened is weight was lost while aerobic/anaerobic capacity remained static.

BennyMul

tunney wrote: »

This isn't about loosing fitness while loosing weight, its about gaining fitness while loosing weight.

Without giving away too many trade secrets. how would you approach this?
I am over weight and would like to try and improve next season, so how do you balance this?

RayCun

tunney wrote: »

This isn't about loosing fitness while loosing weight, its about gaining fitness while loosing weight.

Sure. But the only reason why it would be impossible to gain power while losing weight would be if all weight contributed to power. But fat doesn't help generate power.
If you are already so highly-trained and physically optimised that any weight loss=muscle loss then sure, you can't lose weight and get fitter. If you could calibrate your diet and training so precisely that the fat loss was exactly balanced by muscle gain then yeah, you can get fitter without losing weight.
But if you're 10k overweight and you cut out the second jam doughnut for breakfast each morning, you can increase your training load, get fitter, and lose weight at the same time.

tunney

RayCun wrote: »

Sure. But the only reason why it would be impossible to gain power while losing weight would be if all weight contributed to power. But fat doesn't help generate power.

Fat does not generate power of course. However hypertrophy of muscles will not happen during periods of calorie deficit, nor will any of the other multitude of changes that collectively result in "improved fitness", increased red blood cells, etc etc etc.

RayCun wrote: »

If you are already so highly-trained and physically optimised that any weight loss=muscle loss then sure, you can't lose weight and get fitter. If you could calibrate your diet and training so precisely that the fat loss was exactly balanced by muscle gain then yeah, you can get fitter without losing weight.
But if you're 10k overweight and you cut out the second jam doughnut for breakfast each morning, you can increase your training load, get fitter, and lose weight at the same time.

I'm obviously not same that a fattie (myself included) cannot loose weight and get fitter. I'm saying that this processes will not work when done simultaneously. There might be slight performance improvements but nothing anywhere as significant as if they were happening separately.

RayCun

tunney wrote: »

Fat does not generate power of course. However hypertrophy of muscles will not happen during periods of calorie deficit, nor will any of the other multitude of changes that collectively result in "improved fitness", increased red blood cells, etc etc etc.

Do you have a cite for this? Is this a binary thing? Eat 300 calories more than you expend each day -> hypertrophy and increased red blood cell count
Eat exactly in balance -> hypertrophy and increased red blood cell count
Eat 100 calories less than you expend -> no effect, sorry!

If you start a swim session in the morning fully fueled, and eat your regular diet through the rest of the day, will a can of coke with your dinner improve your fitness more than a glass of water?

tunney

RayCun wrote: »

Do you have a cite for this?

I can get.

RayCun wrote: »

Is this a binary thing? Eat 300 calories more than you expend each day -> hypertrophy and increased red blood cell count
Eat exactly in balance -> hypertrophy and increased red blood cell count
Eat 100 calories less than you expend -> no effect, sorry!

If you start a swim session in the morning fully fueled, and eat your regular diet through the rest of the day, will a can of coke with your dinner improve your fitness more than a glass of water?

I don't think anyone was saying that a calorie surplus was required, plus I doubt a day in calorie deficit alone would have an impact.

RayCun

tunney wrote: »

I don't think anyone was saying that a calorie surplus was required, plus I doubt a day in calorie deficit alone would have an impact.

I think it's going to depend on the extent of the deficit, both for a single day and over a sustained period. There obviously is a point where if you don't eat enough, you can't train as hard, you can't improve your fitness. And if you are ramping up your training you have to recognise that you will need more fuel for this training - if you are happy with your current weight you will need to eat more, if you are trying to lose weight you need to adjust your diet to handle the increased energy demands.

But I don't agree that you can't improve your fitness and your weight at the same time. If you have a lot of crap in your diet you can cut down, replace it with healthier stuff, meet the demands of training, and lose weight at a sustainable pace. Being 'in training' is not an excuse to clear the dessert trolley every day .

pconn062

tunney wrote: »

How do you know you got fitter?

I hate to go against the spirit of the board looking for quantifiable results. I'd even hate more to post links to studies from high end cyclists, which involved power meters, testing and what not. I'd really hate to point out the scientific conclusions.

"But I ran faster, that means I am fitter" Nope means you are faster.

I suppose not coming from a sciencey triathlon background I equate getting faster as getting fitter. I'm not measuring wattage or HR, I simply see myself getting quicker with better results in races while also dropping weight (and I suppose those two things are connected).

RayCun

In principle you could get faster in running just by being lighter. You could be doing the same training, have the same VO2, whatever, but you're not carrying a sack of blubber around so you run faster. But, from what I've seen, the people getting faster and lighter are also training more and better, and this training is contributing to their weight loss as much as diet changes.

peter kern

This isn't about loosing fitness while loosing weight, its about gaining fitness while loosing weight.

losing weight and getting fitter go hand in hand to a certain extend, of course losing too much weight to quickly is what you say you are right but losing about 1 pound a week would still allow to gain fitness while losing weight lets face it jan Ulrich was a master losing weight and getting fit he always looked as if he could not ride a bike after x mas and always struggled to get race weight but eventually he always got there and he was not much more druged up than his competion ( all athletes i talk about are now legaly done for drugs so no forum violation)
and guys that are heavily overweight could lose prob 1-1.5 k a week at the begining while gaining fitness.( after all fat is a energy system and the slower you go the more fat you use as anenergy system)
Some people more some people less.
pretty much all elite cyclists train on negative kalorine intake from jan to april and still gain fitness of course here you can argue that at some stage their get only faster climbing and lose time trial performance and their dave is totally right while it can still improve power to weight ratio the total power output ( which is more important for flat TTs will only be maintained or drop at a certain level )
but you want to be really skinny which I would thnk maybe 3% of people on this forum are and they usually know what they are doing.

So for most peole on this forum weight lose does not counterbalance fitness gains as long you eat well after training and if its done sensibly. dont forget its not always how much you but what you eat but when you eat. ( 1 kg of white bead vs 80 g of good protein a day versus , 1kg white bread puts on weight 80 g proteins help recovery really to keep that very simple just saying kalorei loss with good weight is better than taking in more bad calroies that have low nutriton value)
using me as an example i had a natural weight of about 77 kg when fit so if i was higher in the winter i could lose weight savely at 0,5 kg a week and still gained power, once i went bellow 76,5 kg i had to be very careful and to be honest i would not go bellow 75 kg as I knew that would be very risky.
for female athletes losing weight too fast and going to far below their natural weight can have very serious consequences.

But overall you can lose weight and gain fitenss, but at the same time there is some valid points that when you train the most intense losing weight is the best in your peak weak where you try to hold weight as much as pos.

Brick Session

miller82 wrote: »

I presume nearly everyones season is over now.

I've signed up for my first IM, so i want to keep doing something.
The plan is to back right off for the next three or four weeks (will still cycle to work (26km) every day and go to the gym most days), and then for November and December i want to do one swim session, one run and one cycle, as well as at least two classes of Pilates.

Whats everyone elses plans ?

Think I might go for a swim, a cycle and a run a few times a week and see what happens.

miller82

peter kern wrote: »

miller82 i would recommned to reduce Alcohol intensity by 40 % in the off season but still drink consitently so you dodnt become a lightweight. if Spirits are your weakness focus on them if Conagc is your weaknes focus on that and if Rum is your weakness focus on rum....
and if you cant hold the glass then strenght training is seriously needed
Remember winter training is summer pleasure.
hope that helps a bit and dont let anybody scare you, have fun
and many peole have walked the marathon with much more tarining ;-)
unless you are really serious than you listen to what dave said at least you can say you really trained hard and you walked because you had nutrition issues.
and once you are an sub 10 Ironman send me an email and we talk.

i see what you did there

miller82

peter kern wrote: »

what i was trying to say was 3 month ago miller 82 was a binge drinker in the last 6 weeks he is getting all too serious and wound up about triathlon ( at least thats what i feel) to become a proper Ironman is not done in 275 days it takes a bit longer than that. so why not having fun next year and then 2014 be more serious.

get over the drink thread from a few MONTHS ago.
Too serious ? who are you to say whats to serious for me ? Wound up about it, no offence, but shut up, you dont know me, so dont know what you're talking about.
A proper Ironman ? I want to train hard and do as well as i can given the time period i have, hence the questions and threads, i didnt realise i would be judged by "elites" like yourself.
"so why not have fun" again, you are being very presumption and making a judgement call on me based on nothing.

peter kern

i did say have fun and use it as a stepping stone for the future as ironman is a long term project that needs a strong foundation.
If its done proper its a 4 years journy at least.

If you are serious I would invest in a coach (which is not myself of course;-)

Ceepo

peter kern wrote: »

i did say have fun and use it as a stepping stone for the future as ironman is a long term project that needs a strong foundation.
If its done proper its a 4 years journy at least.

If you are serious I would invest in a coach (which is not myself of course;-)

Could you define "DONE PROPER"

Brick Session

I think a lot of cages will be rattled with that one

tunney

Brick Session wrote: »

I think a lot of cages will be rattled with that one

Most won't care about Barcelona so have no idea what you are talking about.

Brick Session

tunney wrote: »

Brick Session wrote: »

I think a lot of cages will be rattled with that one

Most won't care about Barcelona so have no idea what you are talking about.

???

tunney

Brick Session wrote: »

tunney wrote: »

Brick Session wrote: »

I think a lot of cages will be rattled with that one

Most won't care about Barcelona so have no idea what you are talking about.

???

Apologies. Cross wires.

In Peter's four year plan to doing an ironman. I disagree. I think it should really be a five year plan