Ironman - Sub 10 Mentored Thread

kennyb3

Yeah and they did a review of turbo power figures and times against real life climbs in a magazine (cant remember which one off hand) last winter at some stage. One had the tester climbing Mount Ventoux in a quicker time than Lance. The accuracy of some models leaves a bit to be desired. They dont take account of wind, rolling resistance, traffic, bike weaving etc.

Before anyone jumps in I know the benefit of a PM and using watts to train.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Have you got a Powermeter JB? I was cycling with a couple of lads last week who agree that the Taxc numbers are generally a bit higher than PM Values. Tunney did his IM bike split last year in 4:59 AFAIK and on 205watts. So 36kmh for 5 hours on 205w?! 205w on the Flow corresponds to 31kmh or so. Unreliable. So if a table does exist what would you base your wattage estimates on? I'd love to be doing this IM on power numbers that I have trained on and I know well enough to rely on RPE too but alas not to be. I'm very interested to see that tables or stats etc. around this though

No PM Mcos. I know we have discussed this in the past but i am starting to think my turbo stats are too high even though the machine is correctly calibrated. I remember Tunney mentioning that you would need about 205/210 watts to hit a 5 hour bike time in IM. These figures would contradict my belief that my turbo stats are off though. Take that 3.5 hour of the 5 hour turbo at the weekend which had about 1200mtrs of climbing, i hit an avg watt of 198 for an average speed of only 32.4kpmh which seems much lower than Tunneys stats Then you have last nights session with no inclines with an average wattage of 259 for an average speed of 40kpmh
I would just love to see a proven set of stats for wattage/avg speed although i know there are a load of variables to be considered. I cannot fully trust my current turbo stats but i reckon your tacx flow is probably under estimating your avg speed based on the wattage you are putting out and your on the road averages in training.
If i was going off my turbo stats i could hit a 5 hour bike at IM and hold 210 watts but we both know i am way off that Looks like i will be relying on RPE and may make an investment in a PM next year.

kennyb3 wrote: »

Yeah and they did a review of turbo power figures and times against real life climbs in a magazine (cant remember which one off hand) last winter at some stage. One had the tester climbing Mount Ventoux in a quicker time than Lance. The accuracy of some models leaves a bit to be desired. They dont take account of wind, rolling resistance, traffic, bike weaving etc.
Before anyone jumps in I know the benefit of a PM and using watts to train.

Not suprised by that KB, sure i am a good 4/5kpmh slower out on the road compared to the turbo. I know i do push it harder on the turbo but the rest of the difference would be made up of what you suggested, wind, rolling resistance, traffic and bike weaving.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

Not sure of the accuracy of this calculator but entering in some numbers from previous turbo sessions my stats are not that far off +or-1kmph

zico10

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Running speedwork: I identified my running weakness as base endurance and cadence and this is what I worked on for the winter. The running volume I did was 99% at base heart rate. With the added volume I didn't do the speedwork as I didn't want to risk injury or over doing it. I'll incorporate some intervals and fartlek into the programme now that the runningvolume is lower.

You know your own limiting factors better than anyone and the approach you took to running is obviously paying off. I don't know whether running longer at a lower intensity is a bigger injury risk, than shorter but more intense intervals, so I won't start preaching.

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Bike target. I've penciled in 5:15 which is 34kmh. I'd be confident of holding that or even 35-36 but have no idea what the climbs will take out of that. I'll cycle on RPE and HR and if that gets me 5:15 or better, happy days. If I can get the swim + transitions in 1:10, the bike in 5:15 comfortably it leaves me a 3:30 marathon to run which should be doable. My easy pace off long bikes has been 4:45/km

I wouldn't go chasing a time as such, but I think you should be able to go faster than that. I thought and still feel I could have been in or around 5.15 and your cycle in Joey Hannon among other things I see in your log suggest you're a stronger biker than me.
3.30 marathon for someone who did 3.00 in Connemarathon should be no trouble. Just cycle smartly, not forgetting to take adequate fuel on board and staying well hydrated.

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Oh and I've dropped the HIM, so just a sprint distance race over the next 9 weeks is all

I saw this in your log, I think it was a wise thing to do.

shotgunmcos

Hey Zico, You have a weekly hill rep session in your plan where you bomb up short hills hard. Did you do much in terms of climbing ex 3-5km climbs or was it unnecessary for Copenhagen?

I've tried your running format this week, speed session Tuesday, LR last night and fartlek this morning. My legs don't know what hit them. My knees feel like they belong to a man twice my age! Looking forward to tomorrow off!

mloc123

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Have you got a Powermeter JB? I was cycling with a couple of lads last week who agree that the Taxc numbers are generally a bit higher than PM Values. Tunney did his IM bike split last year in 4:59 AFAIK and on 205watts. So 36kmh for 5 hours on 205w?! 205w on the Flow corresponds to 31kmh or so. Unreliable. So if a table does exist what would you base your wattage estimates on? I'd love to be doing this IM on power numbers that I have trained on and I know well enough to rely on RPE too but alas not to be. I'm very interested to see that tables or stats etc. around this though

Keep in mind... disc, 40 on the front, helmet, frame, position, weight etc..

All of these have a big bearing on wattage to speed.

zico10

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Hey Zico, You have a weekly hill rep session in your plan where you bomb up short hills hard. Did you do much in terms of climbing ex 3-5km climbs or was it unnecessary for Copenhagen?

During my base building phase I did a good bit of cycling in the Wicklow Mountains. All my long cycles bar one were done on the N11, which was probably hillier than the course of Copenhagen, which had only two climbs if you could call them that. So I guess the answer to your question would be no it wasn't, or at least I felt it wasn't necessary.
Some of my intervals would involve climbing, but this was more strength building than any race specific preparation.

shotgunmcos wrote: »

I've tried your running format this week, speed session Tuesday, LR last night and fartlek this morning. My legs don't know what hit them. My knees feel like they belong to a man twice my age! Looking forward to tomorrow off!

Again I think you shouldn't be changing things too drastically, aerobically I'm sure you're capable of these sessions, but again not being used to them it doesn't surprise me you feel like this.
You need to be careful whose advice you follow as well, I might not even know what I'm talking about after all.

shotgunmcos

zico10 wrote: »

Again I think you shouldn't be changing things too drastically, aerobically I'm sure you're capable of these sessions, but again not being used to them it doesn't surprise me you feel like this.
You need to be careful whose advice you follow as well, I might not even know what I'm talking about after all.

I agree. Lots of advice around but you have to do what works for you. I had done the LR fartlek combo before but not with a speed session preceding them. That made the difference. I'll see if I adapt better over the next 2 weeks, if not I'll knock it on the head.

Aerobic Capacity is pretty significant alright but you can only stress the legs so much before allowing them to bounce back

Zico, you are merely speaking from experience of having done sub10, all your comments are much appreciated in this regards dude

zico10

This is the final week before taper starts. The long run is the long run I did. I realise it's quite a jump from the previous long run I posted, but I just messed up the times along the way.

Day|AM|PM
Monday|Weights + Core, Total 45 minutes| 3X 200m max speed (out of saddle), 2X 500m @ 95% (out of saddle) and 1X 1.5k @ 10km pace. Max speed means sprint as hard as you can for about 100/150m and hold for 3 seconds.
Tuesday|Swim - objective: skills ~ 2300 metres|Long Run - 3 hours, 30km @ <4.30km
Wednesday|Run Intervals - 2km x 3 @ < 3.55/km|Cycle 20 mins warm-up, 30 mins @ PE of 9, 10 mins @ PE of 6, 30 mins @ PE of 9, 10 mins @ PE of 6, 30 mins @ PE of 9, 20 mins cool down
Thursday|Run - main set = 2 mins easy, 1 min hard, 2 mins easy, 2 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 3 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 4 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 3 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 2 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 1 min hard, cool down|Weights + Core, Total 45 minutes, Swim - objective skills / with some pace work - 2500 - 3000 metres
Friday|REST DAY
Saturday|Long Swim 4,000m|
Sunday|180-200km TT style bike ride, set up exactly like you intend to ride on race day. Fueling and hydrating the same way you plan to on race day. Followed immediately by 14km run @ <4.30/km

zico10

3 Weeks to Race Day, Taper On!

Day|AM|PM
Monday|Weights + Core, Total 45 minutes|4X 100 sprint @90% on lowish gear. Main set, 10 minutes of 6 second seated power efforts @95% at 65/70rpm, 24 seconds rolling between efforts. 2 sets to be done
Tuesday|Swim - objective: skills ~ 2300 metres|Long Run - 2 hours 15 minutes, 30km @ <4.30/km, remainder @ <4.15/km
Wednesday|Run Intervals - 2km x 3 @ < 3.55/km|Cycle 20 mins warm-up, 20 mins @ PE of 9, 10 mins @ PE of 6, 20 mins @ PE of 9, 10 mins @ PE of 6, 20 mins @ PE of 9, 20 mins cool down
Thursday|Run - main set = 2 mins easy, 1 min hard, 2 mins easy, 3 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 4 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 2 mins hard, 2 mins easy, 1 min hard, 2 mins, cool down|Weights + Core, Total 45 minutes, Swim - objective skills / with some pace work - 2500 - 3000 metres
Friday|REST DAY
Saturday|Long Swim 4,000m|Long Cycle - 30 mins warm up, 30 mins PE 10, 3 hours PE 8, 30 mins PE 10, 30 mins cool down, Total 5 hours
Sunday|Brick - 3 hours 30 minute cycle at PE 8, 65 min run @ <4.30/km

zico10

2nd Week of Taper, 2 weeks to race day. Reduced running by a further 25% and started to reduce cycle to 75% of max.

Day|AM|PM
Monday|Weights + Core, Total 45 minutes|Cycle - Intervals; (200m @ max speed, 500m @ highest maintainable speed for the distance, and 1.5km @ 10k pace) x 2
Tuesday|Swim - objective: skills ~ 2300 metres|Long Run - 1 hour 30 minutes, 20km @ <4.30/km, remainder @ <4.15/km
Wednesday|Run Intervals - 1km x 5 @ < 3.45/km|Cycle 20 mins warm-up, 15 minutes @ PE of 8, 5 minutes at PE of 6, 15 minutes at PE of 8, 20 mins cool down
Thursday|Run - 10 minutes warm up, 15 minutes fartlek running, 10 minutes cool down|Weights + Core, Total 45 minutes, Swim - objective skills / with some pace work - 2500 - 3000 metres
Friday|REST DAY
Saturday|Long Swim 4,000m|Long Cycle - 30 mins warm up, 30 mins PE 10, 1 hour 45 minutes PE 8, 30 mins PE 10, 30 mins cool down, Total 3 hours 45 minutes
Sunday|Brick - 2 hours 40 minute cycle at PE 8, 40 min run @ <4.30/km

Notwitch

Zico,

Perhaps I'm reading this wrong but can you just confirm that on the weekend before the race you did the 4,000m swim, 3:45 bike and then the 2:40/40 brick the next day?

Seems like a lot more (at relatively high intensities still) than a lot of plans would be targeting that close to race day?

Interested in others views as i'm leaning towards similar volumes?

zico10

Notwitch wrote: »

Zico,

Perhaps I'm reading this wrong but can you just confirm that on the weekend before the race you did the 4,000m swim, 3:45 bike and then the 2:40/40 brick the next day?

Seems like a lot more (at relatively high intensities still) than a lot of plans would be targeting that close to race day?

Interested in others views as i'm leaning towards similar volumes?

No you're reading it correctly. I wouldn't have thought it was a huge volume though. My own actual training peaked with a 190km bike ride, which took well over 5 hours. 3.45 is way off this. My cycling strategy on race day was to go out at my own perception of PE 8 was. This needs to be maintained for 180km, so a 1.45 cycle at PE 8 shouldn't be draining you.
Likewise compared to race day, or what else you hit in training, a 2.40/40 brick should be pretty minor. The sub 4.30 pace I ran the brick run at, would have just about covering 9km. This would have been (And I hope still is), a fairly relaxed pace for me to hold.
Finally on the swim, it's not an eyeballs out effort and if at this stage in your IM training you find a 4,000m swim taxing, then you haven't been swimming smartly enough.
If you're training has been hitting similar peaks as I outline above, then I don't see how a weekend like this one could negatively impact on your race.

shotgunmcos

Its not the weekend back to back sessions in Zico's plan that struck me as a lot since they are both bike related. Its the intensity for teh Tue, Wed and Thurs running that would leave my legs too sore for those 2 back to backs. You have to bear in mind Zico ahd some serious runnig speed/endurance behind him leading into the programme. This is a classic example of not following someone elses plan to the letter. I think Zico's bike was his main limiter relatively speaking of course, well after swimming perhaps but swimming is least important in the IM. As such there seems to be a heavier focus on cycling intensity in this programme.

zico10

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Its not the weekend back to back sessions in Zico's plan that struck me as a lot since they are both bike related. Its the intensity for teh Tue, Wed and Thurs running that would leave my legs too sore for those 2 back to backs. You have to bear in mind Zico ahd some serious runnig speed/endurance behind him leading into the programme.

shotgunmcos wrote: »

This is a classic example of not following someone elses plan to the letter. I think Zico's bike was his main limiter relatively speaking of course, well after swimming perhaps but swimming is least important in the IM. As such there seems to be a heavier focus on cycling intensity in this programme.

100% in agreement with the first point MCOS makes, never slavishly and blindly follow someone else's training. It helped me get to a sub 10 IM and even at that, I'm sure there were somethings I could have done better.
It sort of pains me to have to admit to the bike being my limiting factor, but
I think these comments would be accurate enough.
In year's previous though I was always fairly happy with my cycling and think a shortage of quality sessions over the 16 weeks caused it to be my limiter rather than a lack of ability. I think I gave both cycling and running equal treatment in my programme and don't think one received a heavier focus than the other. I'm not sure I completely nailed the cycling part of my training and as I said in my first few posts, I'll revise my approach to cycling when I next undertake training for an IM. Over the 16 weeks I was nearly always happy with the quality of my running. I wouldn't say the same about my cycling though and think next time I'll need to include one extra quality bike session a week.

shotgunmcos

zico10 wrote: »

100% in agreement with the first point MCOS makes, never slavishly and blindly follow someone else's training. .

To add to this. There is a lot of good stuff going on in the logs section of this forum and an abundance of free advice being dished around too. However, while some sessions or plans may look good and someone may be getting good results from it, the same approach may not work for you. Particularly as most are fully or partly self coached and have created a plan for themselves and their goal. For example I tried zico's long run wednesday evening and fartlek thursday morning combo and it was too much for me. I got through it yes but the net effect on the week meant I was more fatigued for a key weekend session than I wanted to be. Hence the Fartlek was thus dropped as it was the lower priority of those 2 runs.

zico10 wrote: »

It sort of pains me to have to admit to the bike being my limiting factor, but
I think these comments would be accurate enough.
In year's previous though I was always fairly happy with my cycling and think a shortage of quality sessions over the 16 weeks caused it to be my limiter rather than a lack of ability. I think I gave both cycling and running equal treatment in my programme and don't think one received a heavier focus than the other. I'm not sure I completely nailed the cycling part of my training and as I said in my first few posts, I'll revise my approach to cycling when I next undertake training for an IM. Over the 16 weeks I was nearly always happy with the quality of my running. I wouldn't say the same about my cycling though and think next time I'll need to include one extra quality bike session a week.

Dude, you know I made that comment relatively speaking right? You would certainly spank most on these boards anyway on your bike. I was just saying the your bike is only a limiter against your own running ability. Your IM Marathon was fantastic and while you say you could have been under 5:15 on the bike on the day, perhaps it would have cost more on the run than those minutes gained. Overall you paced it very well, proving the point above that your plan worked a treat for you

zico10

shotgunmcos wrote: »

Dude, you know I made that comment relatively speaking right? You would certainly spank most on these boards anyway on your bike. I was just saying the your bike is only a limiter against your own running ability. Your IM Marathon was fantastic and while you say you could have been under 5:15 on the bike on the day, perhaps it would have cost more on the run than those minutes gained. Overall you paced it very well, proving the point above that your plan worked a treat for you

I know that, relative to my run and relative to the bike splits of people who finished around the same time as me in Copenhagen, my bike split wasn't what you'd expect. At the end of the day, this time last year all I wanted to do was break 10 hours and I did that, so I have to be satisfied. I was telling myself for the entire final week not to kill myself on the bike. It was tempting at times during the race to just let rip, but I managed to resist the urge and the plan definitely worked.
Saying it hurts me to admit it, has nothing to do with your post. I don't like to admit to weaknesses, apart from swimming, and after my first year in triathlon I thought my biking was stronger than my running. Plus the fact that my bike that my bike split was slower than expected, makes me think my approach to training for it was wrong.
I await with great interest for your bike split in Roth. The result might make me a convert to Power Metres, have OCD when it comes to my heart rate and all the jazz that goes with analysing every minute detail of a 6 hour session on a turbo.:)

zico10

This will probably be the week you travel to the race and the logistics of this will make training difficult, which is why I didn't bother with any training the day I flew to Copenhagen.
As regards eating the week of the race, I tried the carb depletion, carb loading strategy. Eating as many low carb foods from Monday through to Wednesday. This was easy manage in Ireland, but having to eat out in Copenhagen, it was not so easy. Thursday, Friday and Saturday I was ate high carb foods, pasta, etc.
I usually drink a lot of cofffee, but I drank no coffee this week, until the morning of the race, when I had two cups with my breakfast, which I had three hours before the start of the race. Finally I had a sports bar half an hour before the race.
The race itself I would say is all about not fupping things up for yourself on the bike. I would suggest riding conservatively, I was advised to be cycling in one gear easier than you feel you should be in throughout 180km. This is the approach I took and I feel it served me very well. Know what you're going to do for eating and drinking and stick rigidly to it.

Day|AM|PM
Monday|30 minutes swim easy pace|Cycle - Intervals; (200m @ max speed, 500m @ highest maintainable speed for the distance, and 1.5km @ 10k pace) x 1
Tuesday|30 minutes swim, easy pace|Long Run 45 minutes, 10km @&lt;4.30/km, remainder @ <4.15/km
Wednesday|Travel to Race|Put bike together
Thursday|30 minute swim|Run 5 minutes easy, 5 minutes fast, 5 minutes easy,5 minutes fast, 5 minutes easy
Friday||Cycle - 10 minutes easy, 8 minutes fast, 4 mniutes easy, 8 minutes fast, 10 minutes easy
Saturday|REST DAY
Sunday|Race Day


This will be the last training week I post. I'm not sure how much interest this thread generated and I don't know if all those who thanked me in my initial post kept reading or not. But thanks to anybody who at any stage took even the slightest bit of interest in the thread.
Thanks to everybody who posted along the way. I don't know if what I had to say will be of much use to you, but I hope at least one person got something out of it.

Alan

kennyb3

I think the biggest thing is that you ve provided so much that will be here for good. I mean even if someone doing an IM in 2 years they can be referred to this thread. So i wouldnt be worried about the uptake, there are very few that will do it in any one year but plenty who will use it over the years.

catweazle

I would agree Kenny - I kept away from participating in the discussion as a sub 10 is a long way away from me but it was an interesting topic to follow.

Maybe in a few years I will crack it open again

Thanks for all the work Zico

couerdelion

I aren't ever sure that I would want to do an ironman and if I do it wouldn't be for a few years. The longest I've done so far is a sprint! But I have enjoyed reading the thread and the discussion it has generated. Thanks Zico.