sign in sign up
<<
Home , Calendar, Yesterday (time)

ERFORMANCE P CYCLING CONDITIONING A NEWSLETTER DEDICATED TO IMPROVING CYCLISTS www.performancecondition.com/cycling Part 3: The Design Phase and the Macrocycle Joe Friel, Training Bible Coaching "You must increase stress to produce gains."-Hans Selye

BEG he following interview INT discusses the periodiza- ADV T tion process for cycling endurance athletes. • As the progresses/athlete PC: matures the training load shifts from How does the risk-reward continuum low-low toward high-high affect the design process? • The key is a moderate shift to con- JF: Every workout has a risk and a re- trol Risk (patience). ward. The risk is sometimes low, but that Joe Friel reward will be just as low. If the cyclist tries for a higher reward, the risk is greater. This is manifested by pos- Figure 1 sible injury or the potential of a stress debt for a period of -overtraining. Another negative outcome is the breakdown of the im- mune system, which leads to illness. The creation of the risk-reward scenario is always the manipulation of volume, , density and intensity of training. As one or more of these factors goes up, the risk is increased, but so is the reward. (Figure 1 illustrates the risk-reward concept).

PC: Let's explore the concept of diminishing returns on risk investment. The better conditioned the athlete is, the less the reward will be. However, the risk is still there and perhaps greater. How does the coach deal with this issue?

JF: As the athlete becomes fitter, what was risky and had a certain reward attached to it is no longer as risky or rewarding. It takes greater risk (and more stress) to bring a desired reward if the athlete is very fit. I tell my athletes that when they are at their highest level of fitness, the before their most important race is the riskiest time of the season. It does not take much for something to happen that could take them out for the rest of the season. They may become so fit and powerful that they could blow out a knee. The only way reward can be gained is to take some risk at a higher level. You cannot hurry risk-it must be controlled and patience must be practiced.

PC: It comes down to constantly pushing the envelope. How do both the coach and athlete know when to stop pushing and simply back off?

JF: The key is to avoid getting to that point. I keep charts on my athletes which give me a good idea where they are at a specific point in time. It can go back several with some athletes. Looking at where they were in previous years and measuring where they are now gives me a good indicator as to what we can do. Knowing how an athlete feels, doing comparison field tests and knowing what they mean in relation to performances is critical.

PC: Figure 2 presents your steering principle, the concept that the training must be continually modified in response to the training and outside forces produced by the training process. Can you discuss this "steering principle?"

JF: The basic concept is the training plan must always be reviewed and modified to fit the current situation. The athlete is constantly gaining and losing fitness and form. S/he must be aware of this and prepare to make changes. The model in Figure 2 is what the coach does in dealing with all the changes. We start with the design phase- the coach lays out the annual training plan for the athlete and the goals to be achieved. This is spelled out in the training objectives. The re- alization phase marks the training's beginning. There should also be an assessment at some point. It could be a field test, clinic test, a low priority race or the coach and athletes sit down and talk. The assess- ment is compared to the objectives. We return to the realization phase and continue training until the next assessment if the results are as ex- pected. The coach and athlete should return to the design phase, see what was done wrong, rectify the situation and restart the model if the Figure 2 assessment results are disappointing. This is a continuum that spans the athlete's entire career.

PC: Figure 3 displays the endurance training objectives. These must be achieved over time, which is a factor. It is tempting to address as all of these objectives at once. Can they be developed simultane- ously?

JF: I break it down into smaller chunks so that the objectives can be handled easier. I look at it in three categories or the 3 S's: skills (hav- ing the athlete pedal economically, for example), strength or force (it can be in the weight room, hill or big gear work) and specificity. It should be understood that there are also factors that are highly specific to the and what is done in the race (aerobic capacity, power and sprinting abilities). These three S's that must be periodized. The sequence that I use is starting with the athletes' skills. Why build aerobic capacity if their pedaling skills are bad? I think it is a waste of time. The is strength, which includes weight room training. We develop good weight training techniques before we add load. Much of the first part Figure 3 of the season is working on skill. It takes a few weeks to develop the necessary skills. We start to introduce force or to get the muscles to generate force once this is done. This begins in the weight room and evolves into big gear training, which leads to hill work. Finally we add the element of specificity based on the event the athlete is training for. We begin working aerobic capacity, maximum steady state, pacing, power, etc. It is important to note that since we are working toward event-specific training, we don't stop working on force production or skill. It is merely a change in how long we spend on these components because we have estab- lished well-developed skills and strength by this point (see Figure 4).

PC: You alluded to recordkeeping's importance in the periodization process. It helps the coach identify the pattern the athlete follows in their training. What challenges does the coach face here?

JF: The coach's biggest challenge is to work with new athletes whose training pattern and have yet to be established. The first is a big learning curve for both coach and athlete. The coach should get as much about the athlete as soon as possible before they begin work and recordkeeping should begin immediately. Training history can take many forms. The simplest is for the athlete to keep a daily training log of workouts and to record things like how they felt and how they responded to the workout. These are basic subjective measures and, to some coaches, the most important aspect of recordkeeping. It is just as important for the coach to do pe- riodic field testing to establish baselines and comparison points for Figure 4 the . Coaches must know what is going on in training with ongoing measurements. This is where the power meter serves a useful purpose because it provides a wealth of information. It gives the coach a real sense of how the athlete is doing daily. Numbers come in every to give the coach comparisons of heart rate to power. This information essentially serves as a field test for the ath- lete. I keep records on many training aspects. For example, we record the athlete's best effort for 6 and 30 during the last six . I think it is an excellent idea to include as many details as possible. The coach must rely much more on subjective measures if they do not use the power meter. Heart rate is good, but it is not a good way to analyze performance. It cannot be compared to pace on a bicycle-wind and hills have a big impact on performance.

PC: How much data and training information should a coach have in order to make confident periodization training decisions?

JF: I am in my fifth season of coaching an athlete. I know him quite well and have a very good sense of where he is physically. I also re- alize that there are little changes constantly happening with both his physiology and his . Even though I do not make decisions, I still must weigh this with the circumstances. Therefore, I am never Figure 5 100% confident that what I do with this athlete is correct-it is more like 90% confident. Individual issues also make a difference. For example, how do we taper the athlete for a race? Over the years, I have learned that he needs a lot of rest three days before the race. He does well with this tapering strategy. There are also when my gut tells me that this is too much of a taper and reduce it. I make daily deci- sions on every athlete I coach based on what happened . If the athlete looked tired the day before, we may back it off a little the next day and assume we can go harder the day after. I would say I am only 60-70% confident with my newer athletes because I simply do not have the history to make those good decisions.

PC: The macrocycle is the start of the (yearly) periodization plan. Based on your of this process, what are the different models to periodization using the macrocycle? What are the benefits for the endurance athlete?

JF: The coach must select a plan that will work for each athlete they train based on their specific goals and events. When I wrote The Training Bible, I addressed only one-the linear (classic) model (see Figures 5 and 6). This model increases the volume in the base period at low intensity with duration and frequency increased. As we get to Figure 6 the build period of the season or the specific preparation period, we put less emphasis on duration and volume. We emphasize race readiness by tapering the intensity and volume as we approach the race day. Some may assume that volume and intensity work independently, that it may not be effective for novices who may not adapt well to high intensity and volume or that it may not be optimal for elites. Research has shown that increasing intensity while keeping volume high is beneficial for some. There are variations from the classic model. The reverse lin- ear turns the base period that I described around-volume increases while intensity decreases in the build period. This works well with someone who is doing long, steady, low-intensity races, like a triath- lete training for the Iron Man (see Figure 7). The next variation is the undulating model. It changes in vol- ume and intensity throughout the year. We do not have long periods that focus on intensity or volume-we change as much as needed on a monthly, weekly or even daily basis (see Figure 8). This might be best for athletes who need more recovery and who cannot handle two to three weeks of high intensity or volume work. The greatest gains in this pattern are in the nervous system (economy) by promoting adaptation to force application under varying circumstances-low re- sistance/high speed and high resistance/low speed. The next model is the conjugate sequence periodization, or Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 front-end loading (see Figure 9). For a four- period early in the training, the athlete is initially overloaded with a large amount of volume. This lasts for a week to 10 days at about 50% more than they normally train at, for example, around 18 of training for an athlete who usually trains 12 hours in a week. Then the athlete backs off three days, works on skills, resumes intensity training at normal volume and then finally rests for a few days. This has proven benefits for athletes who are training for events like races. It increases fitness, but it can be very risky. The stress is much greater in the conjugate sequence periodization compared to the linear, thus allowing for a greater adaptive re- sponse. The cumulative fatigue associated with traditional linear periodization methods is avoided. By training multiple abilities concurrently, gains made in previous periods are not compromised (this can occur in the linear method).

PC: The coach's next challenge in designing a marocycle is creating a multi-peak periodization model. Most cycling athletes do not race once a year-the need to peak is repetitive. How does the multi-peak scenario affect the planning process?

JF: Periodization decisions must be made based on when those points are scheduled. The more dates you have, the more of a challenge it becomes. I would ideally have two "A" priority races in every season separated by 12-15 weeks-one early and one late in the season. How- ever, race officials never schedule these races to accommodate each of my athletes. I must make decisions as a coach, for example, on how I will peak my athlete with two "A" priority races three to six weeks apart. It becomes more of an art and less of a in such decision-making based on how the athlete's training progresses. We decide what is best for the athlete to do for the next race after we finish the first "A" race. Should the athlete rest more, train with greater vol- ume, greater intensity or some combination of all these factors? This takes us back to the models and which is best for the par- ticular situation. If you add more "A" races (I have seen as many as five), it becomes extremely difficult. You give up a little fitness every time you peak for an "A" race. Peaking for a race demands that the athlete reduce fatigue. The only way you do that is by giving up fit- Figure 10 ness at the same time. The coach controls this by allowing the loss of fatigue faster than fitness. The more this is repeated over the season, the more the athlete's fitness declines. I tell my athletes give me two or three "A" races and we will see how this fits into the (see Figure 10).

PC: Combine the macrocycles into a three-year period. How does a coach ensure from year to year?

JF: A lot depends on the athlete in question because there are the two ends to the long- development spectrum. I see tremendous performance changes in the junior athlete (16-17 years old) during this three-year period. Power output increases dramatically. On the other hand, my goal for a 55-60 year-old athlete is to improve at a reasonable rate and not lose performance. What happens to each athlete differs because of this development spectrum. I personally think three years is reasonable. The 56-year-old athlete I have coached for five years has improved quite a bit. He can still do the workouts he did two years ago and much more. I see continued improvement because I always think long-term with him. The natural tendency for athletes is to think short-term-the next race on the schedule is the most important. This is fine as long as the athlete's coach realizes that the next race is not the most important thing in their lives. The focus should be down the road. A long-term view (with occasional minor ad- justments) from the coach's perspective is healthy and keeps the athlete pointed in the right direction. A vision for the future is essential for long-term success.

PC: Do you plot for one, two or three years at a time?

JF: I do not initially commit the second and third year on paper. I want to gain as much information as possible about first-year athletes. I look more to the future as I learn more about them. During the second year, I plan for the next two years and I talk with the athlete about their vision. They tell me where they want to go and they dream big. They also allow me to brainstorm, see where we are now and decide how we can get there (see Figures 11-13). More Information Please! Joe is the author of Cyclist's Training Bible, Cycling Past 50, The Triathlete's Training Bible and The Mountain Biker's Training Bible. Joe can be reached at [email protected] or by logging onto www.trainingbible.com.

Figure 11 Figure 12

Figure 13