tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post4572124801179636802..comments2008-09-02T16:56:31.054-07:00Joe Frielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06435040653614290227jfriel@trainingbible.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post-81500329073346794612008-09-02T16:56:00.000-07:002008-09-02T16:56:00.000-07:00JP--Linear/classicJoe Frielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06435040653614290227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post-51749184943404417972008-09-02T12:37:00.000-07:002008-09-02T12:37:00.000-07:00Thanks Joe...much appreciated response!Blake Beckerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14421671650780532668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post-46596613613797613872008-09-02T09:35:00.000-07:002008-09-02T09:35:00.000-07:00Just curious as to which type of periodization this athlete is following.<BR/>Thanks,<BR/>JPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post-45870178830248491712008-09-01T16:59:00.000-07:002008-09-01T16:59:00.000-07:00Blake--Peaking is certainly at least as much an art as a scince, although it's becoming more forumlaic it seems. But there will always bethose for whom something different works better. So with that in mind I'll take a stab at your questions...<BR/>1) I've yet to have an athlete have a good race with weak form. But I've only been using this method for 2 seasons. I still have a lot to learn<BR/><BR/>2) 42/7 unless I find a reason to alter that.<BR/><BR/>3) Yes.<BR/><BR/>4) I can't speak for how to peak when using a different peridoization scheme than what I use. It may require something altogether different in that case.Joe Frielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06435040653614290227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post-85000386373020428152008-09-01T10:01:00.000-07:002008-09-01T10:01:00.000-07:00HI Joe-<BR/><BR/>A few questions for you. <BR/><BR/>1) I followed the 10% rule for my last A priority race and found that it possibly left me a fatigued on race day. Do you feel that being glued to the 10% rule can cause an athlete to do too much in the taper?<BR/><BR/>2) What are you using as your CTL and ATL constants? I have 2 charts right now. 28/7 and 45/7.<BR/><BR/>3) Are the charts based on cycling data only?<BR/><BR/>3) Do you think that the 10% rule applies mostly to athletes that follow training blocks similar to what you recommend(rest each week)? Longer, more intense training blocks may take longer to "unload."Blake Beckerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14421671650780532668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post-67314737377265756432008-08-30T13:29:00.000-07:002008-08-30T13:29:00.000-07:00Rick--Good question. As with most everything, "it depends." The lots of variables but let's just two of the most obvious--how long the taper was and how stressful the race was.<BR/>The longer the taper before the first A race, typically the more time that will be required to rebuild race fitness. And the more stressful the race was 9such as an IM) the more time that's needed. <BR/><BR/>So in these cases I'd say the answer to your question of the optimal time gap would be around 15 weeks. That's unlikely for most triathletes and cyclists so I'd propose that the minimum in this situation in which i'd still be confident of success is 9 weeks. That may not be likely either. So bare bones would make it 6 weeks. I would not be confident of success with this but that's part of the challenge of training--how best to take advantage of sparse training resources to get maximal results.Joe Frielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06435040653614290227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6679795642497453426.post-23409246297391392162008-08-30T10:52:00.000-07:002008-08-30T10:52:00.000-07:00Joe, Thank you for another interesting post. What would be optimal spacing between A-priority races? RickRick Kileywww.gthankyou.comnoreply@blogger.com