So, unsurprisingly, I was so excited to get up and ride this morning. It's been five days since Timberman, and I was ready to tear it up! I started early in the morning and felt awesome (and rested!).
Then a chipmunk ran out in front of me and I ran over him. Like RIGHT over him.
That may sound funny, but it really made me sad. I went back to check the spot--hoping maybe I hadn't killed him. But I did. I killed him. (or her.) The rest of my ride was sort of lackluster after that. I get to feeling good again, and then I would remember that I callously smushed wildlife and took a life.. When I got home and I told Andy he gave me a hug, and for some reason that made me cry. I know it's just a chipmunk. But I killed it.
Poor guy.
Okay. Enough on that.
I got a number of comments on my last post about running off the bike, and that made me want to write about it.
It is really looked down upon to run poorly off the bike. Have you noticed that?
Triathletes--especially very experienced triathletes-- have disdain for it. I liken it to college seniors rolling their eyes at freshman who when partying barf at like 9 a.m. because they haven't yet learned proper partying pacing. It takes a season of heavy drinking to build up tolerance and to understand the subtle art of drinking enough to make one wasted enough to secure a hook up--but not to puke before--or especially during that hook-up. It doesn't matter if one pukes after the hook-up. Likewise--you don't want to fall apart on the bike or during the run (puking during the bike or run is especially unfortunate)--but if you fall apart or barf after the race is over, then that is fine. The analogy works quite well.
So aside from simply gaining experience, what things contribute to an athlete having a good run after a good bike? It is a combination of things for sure--and not always the same things.
Some people will have you believe it is straight forward. I don't believe it is. One belief is that if you go too hard on the bike--especially if you hit "superthreshold" heart rate or watts too many times for too long each time during the bike leg, your run will be in the crapper. However, I know people who race the bike incredibly hard from start to finish and they are still able to pull out a good run--even when the data says they should not have one.
That said, for MOST people that theory holds true. It is not smart to stand up on your pedals and hammer up a hill at peak wattage in the start of an Ironman, for example. It will certainly not HELP your run, and it very well may kill your run if you do it too many times.
There are a number of other things that can kill your run, though. Here is a short list:
- you didn't take in enough fuel on the bike
- you took in too much fuel on the bike
- you took in the wrong combiniation of fuel on the bike.
- you had only one type of sugar on the bike
- you didn't take in enough fuel etc on the run
- you cramped on the bike or you cramped on the run
- you held a pace/wattage that was way too high on the bike even if it felt "easy" at the time.
- you took the run out too hard
- your training volume on the bike was too low
- your training volume on the run was too low
- your training volume, in general, was too low
- you did too much work above the correct hr when training
- you did too much work too far below threshold during training
OR it could be as simple as:
- you suck at running
- you suck at biking and it took a lot out of you even though you didn't bike hard
- You had bad luck
I think it's important to list out reasons for a possible failure on the run because people are SO quick to make assumptions as to why a run sucked. The truth is there are so many variables, and any combination of them can cause trouble.
I think the thing people like to blame most is nutritional failures on the bike. I think the nutrition explanation is usually bunk. Most of the time people simply haven't done the training on the bike or the run or both to insure a good run--especially at the longer distance events. You can argue with me on that--but I'm pretty sure I am right.
Now the question--why was MY RUN 15 minutes slower than my 1/2 marathon PR at the half on Sunday?
Answer: My run volume and bike volume going into the event was not sufficient. Also, I have been running like shit for awhile now--probalby because of accumulated fatigue from IM training and racing.. Finally, that run course is hard, damn it!
It may be I am wrong about why I didn't run closer to the time I can do for an open 1/2 marathon. I don't know.
I'm open to your opinion, even though I will likely not listen to you.
Here is a picture from my run at Timberman. I think I am looking svelte... even if I am also clearly not running fast enough!
17 comments:
I'd say you missed your PR because you insulted the Smurfs and bad karma got you. :)
It seems you're missing a huge issue on your list- practicing running off the bike. While this is less important the longer you go (IM), it's always part of the weekly schedule. I also think you need practice doing this at race pace. That will physically and mantally make the first couple of miles easier come race day, which sets up the rest of the run.
I'd like to hear more about your thoughts on taking in different kinds of sugars- I know many who only take gel and "gatorade." Does that count, or are you taking about different solid sugars?
As for comparing your time to a 1/2 marathon, 10-15 minutes sounds about right.
I fully believe your nutrition on the bike may not give you a PR run but it sure can contribute to a SLOW last 6 miles
if you under fuel or as you said overfuel ( liquids)
and yes this is assuming you have the training for that distance. I think you can fake it ( or blow it nutritionally)on the sprint or Oly but not the longer ones.
I'd suggest that it's not so much "running off the bike" as it is running when you're coming off a period with a lot of bike volume. If you rode your current bike volume (and run volume for that matter) and then went and ran a standalone half, how close to your PR would you expect to be? I would think not very considering you would set up for a PR with a schedule optimized for running, leaving the bike in the garage. So then throw in a swim (which you did not mention, but it's got to fatigue your core) and 56 mile time trial as a warmup, and you lose more time.
You do look pretty lean, and lean people bonk harder, no doubt about it. No fat there to fall back on, so you have to fuel. Drink more beer.
Poor chipmunk!!
I like your thoughts on reasons for not running strong off the bike. I think I fall into the last 3 - ha.
Ok,
1- why does your hair look like its in an elegant french twist or something??? That is great.
2- Sorry about the chipmunk. While trying to get a HUGE spider out of my shower this morning (didn't want to share), I accidentally smushed him and I apologized while doing it. And spiders aren't even cute. Chipmunks are:(
3- About the run/bike thing- I think one thing about triathlon that can be hard to deal with is that there are SO many factors which sets you up for SO many unknowns and every training day/race is like an experiment with one subject and a million variables. We try hard to nail everything down as much as possible but there is no such thing as knowing all the answers unfortunately. But feel free to post them if you get them:)
ps love the drinking analogy.
Thanks for writing this.
I am following the blogs of 3 really fast triathlets who are both running 1:30s in the HIMs and have PRs of 1:25 and 1:26. One is an experienced biker but the other one is not. In following their training I noticed that they are both training A TON, including 100mile bikes followed by 12 mile runs.
I ran 10 min slower than my PR in my HIM today, but it hurt a ton more than the race when I got my PR. For me, this has a lot to do with the bike (since I put in a ton of volume in running).
another reason to not run well off the bike (anymore) is age/shortened stride that accompanies that..)
sucks-'cause I DO remember what a fast full stride feels like...
Great photo!! Good list too..
There are so many variables that contribute to foot racing performance at the end of a tri that it is difficult to diagnose from the peanut gallery.(it could be your new bike fit, it could be that you have raced 3 marathons and 4 or so half marathons in the last year, it could be you are glycogen low going in to the race, dehydrated, low iron, upside down trained, too anxious, on and on.......who knows without an up-close look)
I do know this, the first part of Solobreak's answer is probably closer to likely than the others.
but, his last remark about lean athletes and bonking is not correct.(science and statistics trump rumor)
Give your coach permission to give you a brutally honest analysis of your training and racing.
Mary, don't let your Mom find out I might be wrong. Thanks Mike! I should re-phrase to say lean athletes that I know seem to run low on fuel more often (they had to get lean somehow...). Lots of variables, but I still think you should drink more beer!
yeah, so many reasons and i'd offer some advice but, even though i've had relative success running off the bike, nobody ever listens to me.....lol.
i think you just need to honestly evaluate what you are doing and how it is working. often, we are such creatures of habit that we keep doing the same thing yet expect different results from it... and simply because we like to do that/ train like that, we continue to do that and get the same results.
Solo - the reason that you know more lean people who bonk is not because they do not have the fat stores to aid in the fueling during competition, it is because they did not have proper glycogen stores or they did not manage their energy properly.
If an athlete tends to undereat(under fuel) they would tend to appear more lean than a fatty.
Concurrently, athletes that have the drive(compulsion) to undereat tend to have the drive to extreme expecatations(they redline and crash and burn)
I know all the old-school stuff - the fatter is better theory because of additional fuel is a very widely spread rumor, but it has been proven incorrect.
If you are really bored you can read the attached.
http://i55.tinypic.com/24wc4g1.jpg
and on second read I saw that Pam stated what I stated, too many variable to tell.
Solo - the reason that you know more lean people who bonk is not because they do not have the fat stores to aid in the fueling during competition, it is because they did not have proper glycogen stores or they did not manage their energy properly.
If an athlete tends to undereat(under fuel) they would tend to appear more lean than a fatty.
Concurrently, athletes that have the drive(compulsion) to undereat tend to have the drive to extreme expectations(they redline and crash and burn)
I know all the old-school stuff - the fatter is better theory because of additional fuel is a very widely spread rumor, but it has been proven incorrect.
If you are really bored you can read the attached.
http://i55.tinypic.com/24wc4g1.jpg
and on second read I saw that Pam stated what I stated, too many variable to tell.
Mike, yup, that is the key, and why I re-worded things. If you "train up" (on purpose or just because it happens) your glycogen capacity you can end up seeing big fluctuations in body weight during the training week. That freaks some people out, if they are obsessed with being super lean, and can lead to undereating. I'll chase the link sometime later on, thanks. I guess my point here in Mary's case is that at the level she has attained, there is less margin for error. Thanks again!
solo - we agree
Post a Comment