LA seen motorpacing in Austin

From: "Andy Coggan"

There isn't any "either/or" to aerobic training, it's all shades of gray.

A couple of questions, please:

What do you think about Lance's reported big effort uphill behind a scooter?

Would there be a "functional" problem with training behind a motor during the
off season if efforts were kept at moderate intensity, even if duration might
be "long'? TIA --Tom Paterson

In article , Tom Paterson
wrote:

From: "Andy Coggan"

There isn't any "either/or" to aerobic training, it's all shades of gray.

A couple of questions, please:

What do you think about Lance's reported big effort uphill behind a scooter?

Would there be a "functional" problem with training behind a motor during the
off season if efforts were kept at moderate intensity, even if duration might
be "long'? TIA --Tom Paterson

I'll repeat what my coach told me a few days ago. Once, or maybe twice
per week, some intervals at, or just below LT will maintain alot of
your ability in this range during the "base" training phase (2-4
months). You'll probably get all of this that you need on the harder
hills and during mountain bike riding.

If by "moderate intensity" you mean something in the range of 10-20bpm
below LTHR, this type of training will be done frequently after the
first few weeks of mainly lower intensity training.

-WG

From: warren

(I asked):
Would there be a "functional" problem with training behind a motor during
the
off season (snip)?

(W.G. replied):

You'll probably get all of this that you need on the harder
hills and during mountain bike riding.

Hills, ok. IMHO pacing behind a scooter/MC (implied good driver) is a lot safer
than enthusiastic mountain biking.

The question I asked was, to restate: is there something wrong with training
behind a motor in the off season? Again inviting Mr. Coggan to reply, and
repeating "TIA".
--Tom Paterson

It doesn't follow that you should devote the majority of your annual training
to developing this because in order to improve something you should train
according the the requirements of the characteristic, not it's importance.

Wouldn't pace at lactate threshold be very similar for runners? But an hour a
week, or about 10%, is what's usually proscribed.

Andy Coggan wrote:


Power at lactate threshold is the most powerful physiological predictor of
performance in events from as a short as a pursuit to as long as a grand
tour.* It therefore follows that all except non-endurance trackies should
devote the majority of their annual training to developing this
physiological characteristic.


Why? The physiological "limiter" (I hate that term) has been identified, and
therefore an appropriate approach to training chosen.

You seem to be confusing training at/near lactate threshold with training to
improve lactate threshold. For example, while runners may only do an hour a
week, or 10% of their training volume, running that fast, all of their
slower training also serves to enhance LT as well. Thus, I stand by my
earlier comment: except for non-endurance trackies, the majority of an
annual training program should be devoted to developed lactate threshold (in
every sense of the word as understood by an exercise physiologist).

Andy ("it's an aerobic sport, dammit") Coggan

"Ron Jenkins" wrote in message
...
It doesn't follow that you should devote the majority of your annual
training
to developing this because in order to improve something you should train
according the the requirements of the characteristic, not it's importance.

Wouldn't pace at lactate threshold be very similar for runners? But an
hour a
week, or about 10%, is what's usually proscribed.

Andy Coggan wrote:


Power at lactate threshold is the most powerful physiological predictor
of
performance in events from as a short as a pursuit to as long as a grand
tour.* It therefore follows that all except non-endurance trackies
should
devote the majority of their annual training to developing this
physiological characteristic.


Why? The physiological "limiter" (I hate that term) has been identified,
and
therefore an appropriate approach to training chosen.

"warren" wrote in message
...
In article et, Andy
Coggan wrote:

You seem to be confusing training at/near lactate threshold with
training to
improve lactate threshold. For example, while runners may only do an
hour a
week, or 10% of their training volume, running that fast, all of their
slower training also serves to enhance LT as well. Thus, I stand by my
earlier comment: except for non-endurance trackies, the majority of an
annual training program should be devoted to developed lactate threshold
(in
every sense of the word as understood by an exercise physiologist).

Confusion arises if you forget you're not talking to an ex phys person.

That's why I've been giving all these talks as part of the USAC coaching
education program: so people better understand the basic principles of
exercise physiology and hence training.

Andy ("San Francisco, here we come!") Coggan

In article et, Andy
Coggan wrote:

"warren" wrote in message
...
In article et, Andy
Coggan wrote:

You seem to be confusing training at/near lactate threshold with
training to
improve lactate threshold. For example, while runners may only do an
hour a
week, or 10% of their training volume, running that fast, all of their
slower training also serves to enhance LT as well. Thus, I stand by my
earlier comment: except for non-endurance trackies, the majority of an
annual training program should be devoted to developed lactate threshold
(in
every sense of the word as understood by an exercise physiologist).

Confusion arises if you forget you're not talking to an ex phys person.

That's why I've been giving all these talks as part of the USAC coaching
education program: so people better understand the basic principles of
exercise physiology and hence training.

That is a very valuable service you're offering and I hope you have an
overflow crowd in SF. I hear there will be a certain Italian guy there
too.

-WG

In article et, Andy
Coggan wrote:

"warren" wrote in message
...
In article et, Andy
Coggan wrote:

"warren" wrote in message
...
In article et, Andy
Coggan wrote:

That's why I've been giving all these talks as part of the USAC coaching
education program: so people better understand the basic principles of
exercise physiology and hence training.

That is a very valuable service you're offering and I hope you have an
overflow crowd in SF. I hear there will be a certain Italian guy there
too.

I was told that if I was going to give out handouts, I'd need at least 40 of
them...so that'a s pretty turn-out, as these things go.

Yes.

But if by "a certain
Italian guy" you mean Testa (he's Italian, right?), he's not one of the
presenters, nor have I noticed his name on any of the emails sent to those
who are registered.

Hunter mentioned he would be there (to spectate?) in an email. I'll ask
Max on Friday.

-WG

In article , Ron Jenkins
wrote:

I probably shouldn't have read that PDF defining LT training as 91-105% of
threshold power

Yes, there is alot of information out there, and some of it is good but
terminology differences are common. I think of strict LT intervals as
being similar to what you said above, but Andy's right in that there
are many types of less intense training to be done that will (in at
least some way) improve how fast you can go at your LT.

-WG



warren wrote:

Confusion arises if you forget you're not talking to an ex phys person.

What I don't understand now is what kind of cycling-related training might be
done that wouldn't, at least in some way, increase how fast you can go at your
LT and thus be included in the original comment that over half should be done
to improve LT.

I fear the precious notion of LT training is now so diluted as to be useless as
an organizing concept for training.

Ron

warren wrote:

Yes, there is alot of information out there, and some of it is good but
terminology differences are common. I think of strict LT intervals as
being similar to what you said above, but Andy's right in that there
are many types of less intense training to be done that will (in at
least some way) improve how fast you can go at your LT.

-WG