To Infinity and Beyond - Becoming a Better DopeyBadger (Comments Welcome)

I can't remember if this has been discussed - are you exclusively running in the Kinvara 8's now? If not, I'm curious if maybe your form is different in other shoes and that's what could potentially cause issues.

Either way, good news that the form is so great in the Kinvaras!

Back in August 2018, it was the fear that the Kinvara 8s might have been a contributing factor to my ankle injury. I think the volume/specific turn on the route probably played a bigger role. So I had been avoiding wearing the Kinvaras until fairly recently. I've got a rotation of shoes right now:

-New Balance 1400v6 (lighter, faster stuff)
-Brooks Launch 6 (easy days)
-Kinvara 8s (Tempo/LRs)
-Next% (Racing)

I really want to be able to use the Kinvara 8s because I've got 4 fresh pairs still sitting in the closet. But obviously if they cause problems, then they're a no-go. But seeing as the PT thought they were on point today, maybe it won't be an issue anymore.

Entirely true that a different pair of shoes could be causing a form issue not see in today's test, but the PT only wanted to test out one. He chose to go with the one I run the longest distance in most frequently. So a fair point.
 
Back in August 2018, it was the fear that the Kinvara 8s might have been a contributing factor to my ankle injury. I think the volume/specific turn on the route probably played a bigger role. So I had been avoiding wearing the Kinvaras until fairly recently. I've got a rotation of shoes right now:

-New Balance 1400v6 (lighter, faster stuff)
-Brooks Launch 6 (easy days)
-Kinvara 8s (Tempo/LRs)
-Next% (Racing)

I really want to be able to use the Kinvara 8s because I've got 4 fresh pairs still sitting in the closet. But obviously if they cause problems, then they're a no-go. But seeing as the PT thought they were on point today, maybe it won't be an issue anymore.

Entirely true that a different pair of shoes could be causing a form issue not see in today's test, but the PT only wanted to test out one. He chose to go with the one I run the longest distance in most frequently. So a fair point.

Ah right, now I remember. If the Kinvaras were the potential issue, then it makes sense to test those (also makes sense to test the most frequent distance shoe). Sounds like they're probably not the issue, so you can use the shoes you have waiting in your closet. Yay!
 
Ah right, now I remember. If the Kinvaras were the potential issue, then it makes sense to test those (also makes sense to test the most frequent distance shoe). Sounds like they're probably not the issue, so you can use the shoes you have waiting in your closet. Yay!

:woohoo:
 
Had my PT appointment with the treadmill assessment of my running form. Essentially it was decided that when running in my Kinvara 8s (the only shoe he had me try out) I have near perfect running form.

-Little to no vertical oscillation
-Eyes forward and not looking down
-Arms not crossing body with no wasted movement
-Forward lean in my body
-Very little movement in my hip height during my stride (so any movement upwards is coming from my hips down)
-Foot strike nearly directly under my hips (just about a touch too far forward)
-Landing between my heel and mid-foot
-Nearly straight leg when viewed from behind upon impact (both knees ever so slightly lean inwards)
-Foot/ankle roll in and out of foot strike as desired
-High cadence with little to no wasted movement
-Slight pelvic drop on both sides upon impact.
-Legs were slightly too close during most strides when viewed from behind

There was nothing that I could to to actively change my form during running as the PT was happy with it from head to toe. The only corrective action would be on my slight pelvic drop. This comes from core strength and many of the exercises I've already been doing since November. So the PT said just keep doing what you're doing. It just takes a long time to make improvements there. The only injuries I will have will likely occur from either volume or intensity, not likely from my running form. Since I'm feeling healthy (finally), we see no reason for me to go back to PT unless something pops up again.

Don't let it go to your head, LOL
 


Had my PT appointment with the treadmill assessment of my running form. Essentially it was decided that when running in my Kinvara 8s (the only shoe he had me try out) I have near perfect running form.

-Little to no vertical oscillation
-Eyes forward and not looking down
-Arms not crossing body with no wasted movement
-Forward lean in my body
-Very little movement in my hip height during my stride (so any movement upwards is coming from my hips down)
-Foot strike nearly directly under my hips (just about a touch too far forward)
-Landing between my heel and mid-foot
-Nearly straight leg when viewed from behind upon impact (both knees ever so slightly lean inwards)
-Foot/ankle roll in and out of foot strike as desired
-High cadence with little to no wasted movement
-Slight pelvic drop on both sides upon impact.
-Legs were slightly too close during most strides when viewed from behind

There was nothing that I could to to actively change my form during running as the PT was happy with it from head to toe. The only corrective action would be on my slight pelvic drop. This comes from core strength and many of the exercises I've already been doing since November. So the PT said just keep doing what you're doing. It just takes a long time to make improvements there. The only injuries I will have will likely occur from either volume or intensity, not likely from my running form. Since I'm feeling healthy (finally), we see no reason for me to go back to PT unless something pops up again.
Welcome to land of niggles!! In my experience, you’ll never get rid of those unless you stop pushing your limits. Your form and core strength just prevent things from going horribly wrong when you do. For example if you run 22 miles, your form is going to break down ever so slightly and that’ll cause minor issues depending on shoes and weak spots in the chain. However you don’t go from 100% to 0%, so the added strength gives you more protection! Awesome progress!!
 
20 Weeks to Go! (K-20: The Fiend with Twenty Faces) + TrainerRoad High Volume Full Triathlon Plan Week 8/28 + 80 Day Obsession - Phase 2/Week 4

429292

8/19/19 - M - OFF
8/20/19 - T - 80DO-AAA + Mount Gosford (75 min; 63 TSS)
8/21/19 - W - 45 min Easy Run
8/22/19 - R - Holt Hill (90 min; 77 TSS) + 45 min Evening Run at Easy
8/23/19 - F - 80DO-Total Body Core + Bird-1 (60 min; 79 TSS)
8/24/19 - Sa - Phoenix (90 min; 95 TSS) + 30 min Brick Run at LR
8/25/19 - Su - 70 min Long Run w/ FF + 35 min Run w/ @PaDisneyCouple

Total Run Miles - 26.2 miles
Total Run Time - 3:46 hours
Total Run TSS - 226 TSS

Total Biking Time - 5:15 hours
Total Biking TSS - 314 TSS

Total 80DO Time - 2:04 hours
Total 80DO TSS - 20 TSS

Total Training Time - 11:05 hours
Total TSS - 560 TSS


Monday

Off day.

Tuesday

80DO-AAA in 2 sets of 15 within each series and then move to the next one.

Series 1 - Bilateral Press, Alt Unilateral Press, Lateral Raise, Y, Lat Side Bend, Standing Weight Knee Drive, Loop Standing Donkey, Forearm Plank Jumping Jacks
Series 2 - Chest Press, Fly, Kickback in Plank, Tricep Pushup, Corkscrew, Teaser, 1st Pos. Bridge, Single Leg Bridge w/ Loop
Series 3 - Pullovers, Renegade Row, Curls, Turned Out Curls, Loop Scissor Twist, V Leg Raise, Narrow Bridge Clam, Straight Leg Curls

Cycling: Mont Gosford is 1.25 hours of Tempo intervals spent between 70-80% FTP with intermittent, 2 to 3-minute recoveries at 55% FTP. RPM at 88. The 70-80% FTP is around Ironman bike leg pace.


Wednesday

Morning: Off

Evening Run:
Conditions - ⛅ Partly Cloudy, Wind 8mph to 17mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 76°F + 61°F; FL - 76°F
End: Temp+Dew = 75°F + 60°F; FL - 76°F

Nice and easy run. 5.1 miles in 45 min (8:48 min/mile) with HR of 134. About right where I expected everything.


Thursday

3:45am came so soon... But I was up and ready to roll.

Cycling: Holt Hill totals over 70 minutes of Tempo intervals spent between 70-80% FTP with intermittent, 3-minute recoveries. RPM at 90. The 70-80% FTP is around Ironman bike leg pace.

Evening Run:
Conditions - ⛅ Mostly Cloudy, Wind 5mph to 11mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 73°F + 57°F; FL - 73°F
End: Temp+Dew = 71°F + 57°F; FL - 73°F

Nice and easy run. 5.1 miles in 45 min (8:54 min/mile) with HR of 135. About right where I expected everything. A little tougher today than yesterday, but having a 3:45am bike ride will do that to you.


Friday

80DO-Total Body Core in 2 sets of 15 within each series and then move to the next one.

Series 1 (Shoulder) - Squat/Row/Twist/Row, Kneeling Lunge Clean & Press, Quad Ped Opposite Arm Knee Crunch
Series 2 (Chest) - Chest Press to Half Turkish Get-up, Spider Man Push-ups, Frog Sliders
Series 3 (Back) - "T" to Single-Leg Hip Hinge, Lat Pull Over w/ Leg Raise, Weighted Plank Hip Drop
Series 4 (Biceps) - Low Twisting Lunge Hammer Curl, Press Out to Curl, Weighted Standing Torso Rotation
Series 5 (Triceps) - Crab Position Tricep Dip to Sit Through, Alternating Skull Crusher with Bicycle Legs, French Twist

Cycling: Bird -1 is 3 sets of 5x1-minute intervals at 130% FTP where recoveries between intervals are 2 minutes long and recoveries between sets are 3 minutes long. RPM at 99. I think I underestimated this one since the duration was dropping from 3 min at 120% to 1 min at 130% FTP compared to last week. These were anaerobic sprints so similar to an R paced run.


Saturday

Cycling: Phoenix is 90 minutes of continuous riding where you'll spend 75 minutes between 80-85% FTP. RPM at 87. The 80-85% FTP is around Half Ironman bike leg pace. Not too many issues here and definitely getting more comfortable with these longer sustained rides.

Brick Run (immediately after cycling):
Conditions - ☀️ Clear, Wind 7mph to 7mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 71°F + 58°F; FL - 71°F
End: Temp+Dew = 72°F + 58°F; FL - 71°F

Transition = 6 min

Felt good and decided to go with long run effort. 3.7 miles in 30 min (8:08 min/mile) with HR of 139. Right about where I expected everything.

Spent a good chunk of the afternoon cleaning the bike and replacing the chain. While I've ridden nearly 4000 miles on this bike, this was the first time I cleaned it or replaced the chain. Probably should have done that a good deal sooner. The cassettes are still in good shape and don't look like "shark fins". So I just picked up the necessary tools and bike chain from REI. It was a bit of a learning curve even watching a youtube tutorial, but I made it through it. Haven't actually ridden on it yet, but it does feel much smoother now. Hoping I did everything correctly, otherwise I'll be calling Steph's uncle to come lend a hand.


Sunday

Morning Run:
Conditions - ⛅ Mostly Cloudy, Wind 3mph to 3mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 56°F + 54°F; FL - 56°F
End: Temp+Dew = 61°F + 56°F; FL - 56°F

I was excited to get up early for this one. The weather took a nice dive and so it was one of the nicer days since Spring. So I got out there a little after 7am. I just went with the effort and did whatever felt like LR. The data supports that my effort was spot on. 9.1 miles in 70 min (7:43 min/mile) with HR of 142. I took the last little bit as a fast finish again to test out M Tempo effort.

Screen Shot 2019-08-25 at 1.26.54 PM.png

Pretty much spot on as expected. The GAP of those three laps around the loop were 7:09, 7:09, and 7:16. Adjusting for T+D puts them around 7:05 M Tempo pace under ideal conditions. The pace for the LR would mostly support that as well at around 7:43 (GAP of 7:37) under those conditions make sense. Additionally, my Garmin gave me a VO2max estimate of 56. If I take 6 points off (like my historical race performance shows), then I get the following:

Screen Shot 2019-08-25 at 1.29.41 PM.png

Not adjusting for elevation in the run or the T+D yielded a marathon estimated pace of 7:18 based on this most recent LR. The last three FF laps were 7:16, 7:18, and 7:23. So everything is lining up well. So current HM predicted time is 1:31:46 under similar conditions to today (T+D around 110-117 with an elevation gain average of 31 feet per mile). DoLittle is in 4 weeks with a slightly lower average elevation (20 feet) and hopefully similar T+D to this morning. So looking good at this point and just need to continue to stay healthy.

@PaDisneyCouple was in town for a conference, so I skipped out on the 80DO - Cardio Flow and joined him on a run instead. It was nice to put a face to a screen name. We enjoyed a nice 3.2 mile run in 35 min.

IMG_2653.JPG

Time for another "peak" week. Finally introducing paced runs into the schedule at interval # by 1 min at Max pace. Additionally, doing 4:15 on the bike + 2:10 running next weekend. Lastly, a new wrinkle of the next several months is flag football with Gigi. I'm going to be one of her assistant coaches since they needed the help. So she's all set for her M/W 60 min practices with her mouth guard and fancy "sticky" gloves. They look like flowers, so she's super stoked about it. Last week before school starts for her, so all the local kids have been soaking up the summer. Never had so many kids in and out of the house like we've had the last week in the entire summer combined.
 
Looks like road construction has caused the DoLittle HM to change their route. So what was once a mostly flat race with an average gain of 21 ft/mile is now going to be a slight rolling hill race with little to no flat sections. Challenge accepted. The strategy of conservative start and fast finish will have to be re-evaluated since the race is now uphill, down, up, down to finish.
 


Looks like road construction has caused the DoLittle HM to change their route. So what was once a mostly flat race with an average gain of 21 ft/mile is now going to be a slight rolling hill race with little to no flat sections. Challenge accepted. The strategy of conservative start and fast finish will have to be re-evaluated since the race is now uphill, down, up, down to finish.

Love your attitude. I’d be going down a panic spiral.

Also great family picture!!!
 
19 Weeks to Go! (K-19: The Widowmaker) + TrainerRoad High Volume Full Triathlon Plan Week 9/28 + 80 Day Obsession - Phase 3/Week 1


8/26/19 - M - OFF
8/27/19 - T - 80DO-AAA + Galena (90 min; 107 TSS)
8/28/19 - W - 8 x 1 min @ Max intervals (Run)
8/29/19 - R - Gibralter (105 min; 112 TSS) + 30 min Brick Run at Easy
8/30/19 - F - 80DO-Total Body Core + Mist (90 min; 108 TSS)
8/31/19 - Sa - Putuo (255 min; 189 TSS) + 40 min Evening Run at Easy
9/1/19 - Su - 130 min Long Run w/ FF + 80DO-CF

Total Run Miles - 29.6 miles
Total Run Time - 4:05 hours
Total Run TSS - 247 TSS

Total Biking Time - 9:00 hours
Total Biking TSS - 516 TSS

Total 80DO Time - 2:41 hours
Total 80DO TSS - 28 TSS

Total Training Time - 15:47 hours (4th most)
Total TSS - 791 TSS (2nd most)


Monday

Off day.

Tuesday

80DO-AAA in 2 sets of 15 cycle through the whole workout and then back to series 1.

Series 1: Czech Press, Front Raise, Slider Windshield Wipers, Side Lunge Hold
Series 2: Bridge Pull Over, Camel Bicep Curl, Weighted Twisted Roll Down, Marching Bridge
Series 3: Bridge Bilateral Press, Tricep Kickback in Lunge, Weighted Knee Drops, Curtsy Lunge Pulse

Cycling: Galena is 3x20-minute Sweet Spot efforts between 90-94% FTP with 5 minutes of recovery between intervals. RPM at 94. This was the first cycling workout with the cleaned bike and new chain. What a dream. Except that the chain was skipping again and was super jarring since it was unexpected. I couldn't tell if it was the rear derailleur or for some other reason. But then I saw the bike was a bit loose and tightened it back up. After that I didn't have any more skipping issues. Felt nice to cycle when it felt so smooth and that also seems to have fixed the cadence drops I was having. Overall a tough workout, but doable.


Wednesday

Morning: Off

That afternoon was Kindergarten orientation and so G got to learn all about the procedures for the day. She's super excited for her first day next week. Then after orientation we had G's second practice of flag football. She was a bit more squirrley this time around. She bumped heads with another kid right at the end of practice and got a nice big bruise on her forehead. Although, she bruises really easily as evidenced by her legs. After a few minutes she was back out there again.

As soon as practice was done, we headed home and I threw on some running clothes. It was to be my first paced run of the training plan.

Evening Run:
Conditions - ⛅ Partly Cloudy, Wind 7mph to 16mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 69°F + 49°F; FL - 69°F
End: Temp+Dew = 67°F + 50°F; FL - 69°F

Workout = 8 x 1 min @ Max with variable elevation and RI of 2-3 min per interval

The workout was to be completed in 45 min. So I did some calculations to figure out how much time would remain in the workout after the intervals. Because of the wind, I reversed direction on the course I had planned to do and estimated would come out near 60 seconds.

Screen Shot 2019-09-01 at 2.40.44 PM.png

Overall the GAP average was 5:19. Not bad at all. In reality, most every one of these intervals would have been a 400m PR had it been extended out that far. So clearly the raw power gains from bike+run+strength are happening. The start/stop point was the same on all of these. I think next week, I'll switch up the path and every other do this path and then the second one a different path that is all up. Happy with the first "official" paced workout.


Thursday

A weekday workout longer than 2 hours so I had the day off.

Cycling: Gibraltar is 105 minutes of continuous riding where you'll spend 90 minutes between 80-85% FTP. RPM at 90. This is Half Ironman bike pacing.

Brick Run (immediately after cycling):
Conditions - ☀ Clear, Wind 12mph to 22mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 71°F + 56°F; FL - 71°F
End: Temp+Dew = 73°F + 57°F; FL - 71°F

Took it nice and easy and the stats supported that. In total, 3.4 miles in 30 min (8:53 pace) with HR of 131.

Should not have sat around the rest of the day though because my hamstrings really tightened up.


Friday

80DO-Total Body Core in 2 sets of 15 cycle through the whole workout and then back to series 1.

Series 1: Surrender to Shoulder Press, Quad Ped Crawl, Burpee Sliders
Series 2: Bent Over Row Tap Back, Squat Tabletop Row, Saw on Sliders
Series 3: Modified 1/2 Turkish Push-up, Side Reach Push-up, V Crunch to Scissor Crunch
Series 4: Runner's Lunge Curl, Static Sumo Hammer Curl, Slider Crawl Out
Series 5: Tricep Push up w/ knee tuck, Squat Hold Kickbacks, Weighted Windmills

Sore hamstrings lingered so I was doing lots of stretching and icing throughout the day.

Cycling: Mist is 6x3-minute VO2max repeats at 120% FTP with 3-minute recoveries between intervals. The main set is bookended with fairly long stretches of Endurance work. RPM at 97. This workout was perfectly timed and a nice relief for the week.

Watched the Badger game that night.


Saturday

Cycling: Putuo is 4 hours 15 minutes of aerobic Endurance work spent between 65-75% FTP. RPM at 92. This is Ironman bike pacing. Longest ride to date. I had 800 calories of Tailwind, a PB sandwich, and two PB granola bars. I also drank an estimated 140oz of liquid.

I got a late start to the bike ride because G was still sleeping and Steph had to work. So late start + 4.25 hours means this workout really bled into the day. Not a huge deal, but it pushed "breakfast" to 1:45pm. And then Steph wanted to go to a new restaurant at 5:15pm, so that didn't leave much time to digest and get out the door for workout #2. But I made it work. G also wanted to play outside as soon as I was done eating, so instead of resting in-between the two workouts I was outside chasing her around.

Evening Run:
Conditions - 🌧 Light Rain, Wind 5mph to 5mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 67°F + 53°F; FL - 67°F
End: Temp+Dew = 67°F + 52°F; FL - 67°F

Body felt fine after the 4:15 hour bike ride. Still tight hamstrings, but not awful. A total of 4.6 miles in 40 min (8:44 pace) with HR of 130.

Iced the hamstrings on and off throughout the evening to prep for Sunday.

The TSS for today (222) ranks just below the Chicago Marathon (239) in terms of highest TSS days ever. Only two Dopey Marathons and 2018 Lakefront Marathon rank higher.

I decided not to hold back on calories today and was up over 5000 for the day.


Sunday

Morning Run:
Conditions - ☁ Overcast, Wind 0mph to 0mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 55°F + 54°F; FL - 55°F
End: Temp+Dew = 60°F + 57°F; FL - 55°F

Decided to wake up early because of the cooler weather. Although it didn't turn out as cool as forecasted, but still cooler than most days recently. The hamstrings were fine most of the run. Really no pain anywhere whatsoever. But I was just generally tired during this run. A good late stage race simulator. Unlike 2 weeks ago during the 4 hr cycle + 2 hr run, I could tell I was not peaking this week. So it definitely was a bit more of a struggle getting the legs going. Cardiovascularly I was fine, but muscularly I was definitely feeling it.

Screen Shot 2019-09-01 at 2.54.52 PM.png

Pace was relatively even throughout. A little bit of a slow start, but things eventually fell into a groove. Also finished with my fast finish of three laps in the neighborhood and was right around the same place was before (a tad slower this week). The HR this week was much lower than previously. The whole run was an average of 138 instead of 143 and the M Tempo section I didn't even get close to the normal 150-152 range. But physically, I'm not sure I had much more to muster. Overall, everything pace/HR/effort wise is still falling close to the last several weeks.

The last time I had run over 2:10 hours (other than Chicago) was December 2017. So it's been almost 2 years since I've done a training run this long.

80DO Cardio Flow Phase 3!

Next week is a moderate week. The highlight is the 2 hour Half Ironman paced bike + 50 min run. At this moment in time, I'm planning to try and run the 50 min at M Tempo wearing my Next%. We shall see if that happens.
 
Some interesting data mining I've been doing lately

So not too long ago @avondale and myself were having a discussion about calorie deficit and losing weight. That conversation led me to opening up MyFitnessPal and finding some old weight data that I hadn't been able to figure out how to access in prior attempts. With this extra weight data, it enabled me to combine that information with other information I track to see if I could find any trends in the datasets. So let's dive in.

Weight Loss graph from 2012 to Current
Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 9.23.48 AM.png


With that access to MFP and Garmin, I was able to put together most of all of the recorded weight data I've got.

Garmin VO2max estimate value over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 9.25.34 AM.png


I then went into Garmin and found VO2max data from February 2017 to present. I decided not to include any Garmin VO2max data before Feb 2017 because I used to believe my maxHR was in the 190s (using 220-age). Since maxHR plays a significant role in the Garmin VO2max estimation, all of the data prior to making that change is completely erroneous. All of the data is using a maxHR of either 178 or 175 as I do believe it has dropped ever so slightly in the past few years.

I graphed this over time and blocked out the different training cycles. Arguably my peak performance of my life thus far was the Dopey 2018 races. As you can see at the end of that training cycle my Garmin VO2max peaked at a value of 60. And during the races themselves were in and around 58-59. Conversely, when I ran Lakefront in 2017 (my first sub-3 hr marathon attempt and still PR of 3:14), I peaked at 57 and dropped to about 54 on race day.

You can also see the devastating effect of time off from running on the Garmin VO2max value as the period of the stress fracture and ankle injuries show precipitous drops in the Garmin VO2max value.

Lastly, you can see a nice curve during both of the run+bike+strength training cycles. It still remains to be seen whether this methodology will yield a peak running VO2max similar to Dopey 2018 training, but it's still something interesting to follow.

Something important to note before moving forward. VO2max is not the end all be all. If one person as an estimated VO2max of 59 and a different person a 55, then that won't be the sole decider on who wins on race day. Plenty of other variables. However, with that being said, if the same person has a VO2max of 59 and 55 on different days (or training cycles), then that single person is more likely to be faster when they have a higher value. So comparing against others is not completely translatable. But comparing within one's own self can be.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the Garmin VO2max estimation is based on the relationship between %HR and pace during runs. As we know, T+D plays a role in pace. The higher the T+D the slower you'll run at the same relative HR. So a lower or lowering VO2max does not always mean a loss of fitness, but rather a more "in the moment based on recent runs elevation/T+D profiles" assessment of the relationship between HR and pace.

The relationship of Garmin VO2max estimate value AND resting HR over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 9.39.54 AM.png


So I plotted resting HR (in blue) with the Garmin VO2max estimation (in black) over time and with training cycles broken down. It's something I've always intuitively felt was true, but the data set reinforces the idea that when my resting HR is at its lowest is when my running fitness is at its highest. You can see when I have massive downspikes in resting HR (like 4/25/17 area, Dopey 2018 area, pre-Chicago ankle injury area, and TrainerRoad areas) is when my Garmin VO2max estimation peaks the highest. My off the ball guess is that this is when my heart is becoming more efficient even in my daily life. The stroke volume has increased per beat, and thus my heart needs to beat less. And this carries over into running because to transport the same amount of blood/oxygen/nutrients throughout my body takes less effort (less beats) by my HR and thus enables me to run faster with less effort.

When I suffer an injury (or am run training less) you can see my resting HR goes up. My body detrains and my stroke volume presumably goes down. Thus, requiring my body to beat more often in order to transport the same total volume of blood around the body on a per minute basis. This is also evident during the exclusive training months of only TrainerRoad+80DO where you can see my restingHR is at some of its highest values in the entire time period even though rigorous training was occurring. This can be explained by saying that cycling does not yield the exact same stroke volume efficiency changes that run training yields. But as soon as run training is introduced, the resting HR starts to plummet.

Now this isn't novel information. It's a known fact that run training will increase the size of the HR (I believe the left ventricular) and additionally increase the stroke volume for each individual beat. But to see it in possibly through inference in raw data is pretty cool.

Here's the thing though. Garmin VO2max is great for a measure of performance. Have a higher VO2max and you'll likely be faster. But that doesn't necessarily mean you're as fit/efficient. A component of the VO2max value is your current body weight. So being at a higher body weight requires a more efficient system to be at the same VO2max estimation value. Lower weight and the same efficient system means your Garmin VO2max estimation will go up. To remove body weight from the equation, we move to Absolute VO2max which is a measure of the total amount of oxygen metabolized per minute in the absence of body weight data:

Absolute VO2max (in Liters) = (weight in kg X VO2max) / 1000

Absolute VO2max estimate value over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 10.09.19 AM.png


So over the last 3 years, my body weight has oscillated from as high as 181 to as low as 157. During most of 2016-2018, my body weight was between 157-165 pounds. I raced Lakefront 2017 at around 167 pounds and gave that as a possible reason for my disappointing to me result (although there certainly other factors). So from October 2017 to Jan 2018, I dropped 10 pounds down to 157 and raced really well at Dopey 2018. As from the last Garmin VO2max estimation graph we saw my peak performance value of 60 coincided with that particular training cycle. So the question stands, was it the body weight loss from 167 down to 157 that yielded the higher VO2max value, or was there an increase in efficiency/fitness as well?

This is where I think Absolute VO2max can step in and help answer that question. Since we've now removed weight from the equation. The body weight is limited during the Lakefront 2017 training cycle (primarily because I was avoiding stepping on the scale and was using the mindset of "if I feel fast/healthy, then I'm at the right weight"). But right in the middle of the training cycle, you can see an Absolute VO2max value of 4.19 and at the end a value of 4.24. Looking back at the Garmin VO2max graph shows that the 4.19 occurred during peak VO2max values during that training cycle. But when the end of the cycle came the VO2max value fell, but the Absolute VO2max value actually rose. So more fit, but not as fast.

Compare that to the Dopey 2018 training cycle where I was consistently trying to lose weight (and did drop from 167 to 157 over the course of 2.5 months). Is the increase in VO2max estimation solely a response of dropping weight? To a degree yes, but it's also evident that there were fitness/efficiency gains made during that same time. The drop in body weight is not the sole reason for the dramatic rise in VO2max as evidence by several values found higher than 4.24 during the Dopey 2018 training cycle. In fact, the highest recorded value occurred when the Garmin VO2max hit 60, which also coincided with the lowest body weight of 157, but also showed the highest absolute VO2max value of 4.42.

Again, the stress fracture yielded a precipitous drop.

Now here's the second reason I wanted to put this graph together. During when I was primarily running, my body weight was between 157-165 pounds. But during these TrainerRoad training cycles, my body weight has been anywhere between 170-181 pounds. So the question became, am I as fit/efficient as I was in my heavy running days, but my weight is the reason that my Garmin VO2max is lower right now? Or said another way, is my current run+bike+strength training yielding similar results to my primarily run training in past years? The answer appears to be yes. During the last TrainerRoad training cycle, you can see that my absolute VO2max was staying all but higher than almost everything during Dopey 2018 training. And during this latest training cycle the absolute VO2max value has been steadily climbing. So I'm as (if not more) efficient/fit than I have ever been using this current training methodology.

Now this clearly begs a question, would I be just as efficient/fit using this current methodology if I were to lose more weight? Or is my current weight the reason I'm able to maintain this current training volume and efficiency/fitness values? I don't think I've got the answer to this one. But I think I'll continue to try and live a healthy lifestyle and see where the next 18 weeks takes me.

Next, I wanted to see if there was a relationship between how much running duration I do in a week and the Garmin VO2max estimations or absolute VO2max values.

Running Duration (in min per week) over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 10.30.34 AM.png


So this graph just simply represents the amount of run training I did in a single week. It's the cumulative duration in minutes per week. It shows time off from injuries, tapering, reintroduction of running, essentially running the whole gambit of a training cycle. Goes to show that during most of my run training cycles I was between 400-525 minutes per week on a regular basis (6.6-8.75 hours). Yet these days, I've been doing about 150-250 min of running per week (2.5-4.1 hours).

The relationship of Garmin VO2max estimate value AND Running Duration over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 10.37.59 AM.png


So I wouldn't necessarily say that the running duration and Garmin VO2max value peaks follow any certain trend. In the case of the end of Daniels 2017 training and Dopey 2018 training it would certainly seem like when the run duration dropped late in the training the Garmin VO2max value peaked upwards. But I'm not seeing any type of equivalency that says run X hours per week yields Y Garmin VO2max value.

The area I was more interested in with this graph was the more recent training. Did I ever have similar Garmin VO2max values on such low run training? Granted, there is other training currently occurring, but the idea was to try and see if that cycling+strength was showing up in this graph. Let's use a Garmin VO2max value of 56. During primarily run training cycles, it was taking around 450 min (7.5 hours) of run training to usually at least have a Garmin VO2max value of 56. But during the three periods of time where I was doing structured bike training + running (last three weeks of Stress Fracture during 2018 and the two TrainerRoad cycles) you can see my running duration was in the 250-270 min (4.1 hours) of run training to usually at least have a Garmin VO2max value of 56. So what does that say to me, a reduced run training volume supplemented with structured bike/strength training can yield a similar Garmin VO2max estimated value. It would appear that a reduction of about 40% run volume was around the same value. Granted during the TrainerRoad training cycle, the replacement has not been 1:1. Rather my normal run training volume (which was all the training back then) dropped from 6.6-8.75 hours, but the total time spent training has increased during TrainerRoad to 12-16 hours. So a reduction of 40% run volume needs to be accounted for by a near doubling of overall time spent training to yield a similar Garmin VO2max estimation.

The relationship of Absolute VO2max estimate value AND Running Duration over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 10.53.15 AM.png


For the comparison of Running duration on a per week basis compared to Absolute VO2max I see little relationship during the primary run training cycles. The volume was roughly the same from 2016 through Dopey 2018 and yet a general increase in fitness/efficiency was seen. So running volume does not seem to be the primary reason for any increases here. However, when running stops or is greatly reduced in the absence of other training, you can see the Absolute VO2max goes down. Additionally, during the 19 week off period from running when I was doing exclusively bike+strength training, the absolute VO2max value fell roughly to the equivalent of running levels around right before Daniels 5l/10k 2017 training started (right after Dopey 2017). But as soon as some run training was reintroduced during the latest TrainerRoad training cycles the absolute VO2max value rose quite sharply again. Again, even though the total volume of running is down, the absolute VO2max value suggests I'm in a really good place from a running fitness/efficiency place. Maybe not as much performance (as seen by Garmin VO2max), but definitely from a fitness place.

Lastly, I tried to view training from a "activity calories" aspect to see if there was any relationship between the Garmin VO2max or absolute VO2max changes and changes in activity calories.

Activity Calories (per week) over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 11.01.57 AM.png


About the only thing I glean from this is, not all exercises are created equal when it comes to my Garmin's estimation of calories burned on a per discipline basis (strength, run, or bike). Because I'm putting in about double the top end time spent training from my running days, but have only seen a roughly 50% increase in activity calories (6000 vs 9000 calories even though 8 hrs vs 16 hrs of training).

The relationship of Garmin VO2max estimate value AND Activity Calories over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 11.04.44 AM.png


Not really seeing anything of significance. The reason the increase in Garmin VO2max occurs during TrainerRoad is probably more of a function of actually running then it is a volume thing. Do you see anything here?

The relationship of Absolute VO2max estimate value AND Activity Calories over time

Screen Shot 2019-09-06 at 11.07.18 AM.png


Again, nothing really jumping off the page at me on this one either. Any trends you see?

In summary

So what did I conclude from this latest data mining exercise:

1) When you train well, Garmin VO2max goes up. When you don't train, Garmin VO2max goes down.

2) There appears to be a relationship between my resting HR value and Garmin VO2max value. When my resting HR is at its lowest is usually when my Garmin VO2max is at its highest. This is probably explained by the adaptation seen from run training where there is an increase in blood stroke volume increasing the efficiency of each beat to move the same volume of blood around the body with less effort/beats. An equal (and even increased) amount of cycling training does not yield the same body adaptation for increasing stroke volume (or reduction in resting HR).

3) Weight loss is not the sole reason why Dopey 2018 went so well and there was a really high recorded Garmin VO2max estimation. There is evidence in the absolute VO2max values (under the absence of weight data) that there was an increase in fitness/efficiency seen as well. The combination of weight loss and gains in efficiency/fitness yielded the positive outcome at that race.

4) While I'm on average about 5-10 pounds heavier during these TrainerRoad cycles than previous run training cycles, the absolute VO2max values definitely show that the training is working from a fitness/efficiency evaluation standpoint. It is not clear whether dropping additional weight would yield a better outcome because it stands to reason that my current weight is keeping me healthy.

5) I may not be as run fast as I've ever been, but the absolute VO2max data suggests I might be more efficient/fit than I have ever been.

6) During normal run training cycles I was usually around 6-8.5 hours per week. During TrainerRoad training cycles (thus far) I've been around 2.5-4.1 hours of run training and 12-16 hours of total training.

7) There does not appear to be a X value of run duration that equals a Y value of Garmin VO2max estimation.

8) However, it did appear that more often than not to have a Garmin VO2max value above 56 usually coincided with run training volume of about 7.5 hours per week. But with the addition of run+bike+strength, the total volume used to gain a similar VO2max value as dropped down to around 4 hours. So a reduction of 40% of run volume (from 7.5 down to 4) yields a similar Garmin VO2max value when the total amount of training using run+bike+strength nearly doubles (from 7.5 hours to 15 hours). So to yield a similar running performance when substituting with bike+strength is not a 1:1 relationship and rather something closer to 1:2 (for every 1 hour dropped in training you need to do an additional 2 hours of total training). For example, drop 6 hours of run training down to 4 hours (-2 hours running) needs to have 12 total hours of training to yield similar result (4 hour run + 8 hour bike/strength [likely more bike than strength]). And additionally, I'd venture to guess the bike/strength training need to be structured and progressive.

9) Nothing unique was seen when evaluating using Activity Calories.

That was a fun data mining adventure! So you've got any thoughts? Anything I missed or misinterpreted in your opinion? Any other combinations of data sets to throw together? Again, obviously all of this was done using a single person's data (me) so that's to say it may not be translatable to everyone. But I think some of the concepts seen here could easily be useful outside of just my data set.
 
Some interesting data mining I've been doing lately

So not too long ago @avondale and myself were having a discussion about calorie deficit and losing weight. That conversation led me to opening up MyFitnessPal and finding some old weight data that I hadn't been able to figure out how to access in prior attempts. With this extra weight data, it enabled me to combine that information with other information I track to see if I could find any trends in the datasets. So let's dive in.

Weight Loss graph from 2012 to Current
View attachment 433294


With that access to MFP and Garmin, I was able to put together most of all of the recorded weight data I've got.

Garmin VO2max estimate value over time

View attachment 433296


I then went into Garmin and found VO2max data from February 2017 to present. I decided not to include any Garmin VO2max data before Feb 2017 because I used to believe my maxHR was in the 190s (using 220-age). Since maxHR plays a significant role in the Garmin VO2max estimation, all of the data prior to making that change is completely erroneous. All of the data is using a maxHR of either 178 or 175 as I do believe it has dropped ever so slightly in the past few years.

I graphed this over time and blocked out the different training cycles. Arguably my peak performance of my life thus far was the Dopey 2018 races. As you can see at the end of that training cycle my Garmin VO2max peaked at a value of 60. And during the races themselves were in and around 58-59. Conversely, when I ran Lakefront in 2017 (my first sub-3 hr marathon attempt and still PR of 3:14), I peaked at 57 and dropped to about 54 on race day.

You can also see the devastating effect of time off from running on the Garmin VO2max value as the period of the stress fracture and ankle injuries show precipitous drops in the Garmin VO2max value.

Lastly, you can see a nice curve during both of the run+bike+strength training cycles. It still remains to be seen whether this methodology will yield a peak running VO2max similar to Dopey 2018 training, but it's still something interesting to follow.

Something important to note before moving forward. VO2max is not the end all be all. If one person as an estimated VO2max of 59 and a different person a 55, then that won't be the sole decider on who wins on race day. Plenty of other variables. However, with that being said, if the same person has a VO2max of 59 and 55 on different days (or training cycles), then that single person is more likely to be faster when they have a higher value. So comparing against others is not completely translatable. But comparing within one's own self can be.

The other thing to keep in mind is that the Garmin VO2max estimation is based on the relationship between %HR and pace during runs. As we know, T+D plays a role in pace. The higher the T+D the slower you'll run at the same relative HR. So a lower or lowering VO2max does not always mean a loss of fitness, but rather a more "in the moment based on recent runs elevation/T+D profiles" assessment of the relationship between HR and pace.

The relationship of Garmin VO2max estimate value AND resting HR over time

View attachment 433300


So I plotted resting HR (in blue) with the Garmin VO2max estimation (in black) over time and with training cycles broken down. It's something I've always intuitively felt was true, but the data set reinforces the idea that when my resting HR is at its lowest is when my running fitness is at its highest. You can see when I have massive downspikes in resting HR (like 4/25/17 area, Dopey 2018 area, pre-Chicago ankle injury area, and TrainerRoad areas) is when my Garmin VO2max estimation peaks the highest. My off the ball guess is that this is when my heart is becoming more efficient even in my daily life. The stroke volume has increased per beat, and thus my heart needs to beat less. And this carries over into running because to transport the same amount of blood/oxygen/nutrients throughout my body takes less effort (less beats) by my HR and thus enables me to run faster with less effort.

When I suffer an injury (or am run training less) you can see my resting HR goes up. My body detrains and my stroke volume presumably goes down. Thus, requiring my body to beat more often in order to transport the same total volume of blood around the body on a per minute basis. This is also evident during the exclusive training months of only TrainerRoad+80DO where you can see my restingHR is at some of its highest values in the entire time period even though rigorous training was occurring. This can be explained by saying that cycling does not yield the exact same stroke volume efficiency changes that run training yields. But as soon as run training is introduced, the resting HR starts to plummet.

Now this isn't novel information. It's a known fact that run training will increase the size of the HR (I believe the left ventricular) and additionally increase the stroke volume for each individual beat. But to see it in possibly through inference in raw data is pretty cool.

Here's the thing though. Garmin VO2max is great for a measure of performance. Have a higher VO2max and you'll likely be faster. But that doesn't necessarily mean you're as fit/efficient. A component of the VO2max value is your current body weight. So being at a higher body weight requires a more efficient system to be at the same VO2max estimation value. Lower weight and the same efficient system means your Garmin VO2max estimation will go up. To remove body weight from the equation, we move to Absolute VO2max which is a measure of the total amount of oxygen metabolized per minute in the absence of body weight data:

Absolute VO2max (in Liters) = (weight in kg X VO2max) / 1000

Absolute VO2max estimate value over time

View attachment 433316


So over the last 3 years, my body weight has oscillated from as high as 181 to as low as 157. During most of 2016-2018, my body weight was between 157-165 pounds. I raced Lakefront 2017 at around 167 pounds and gave that as a possible reason for my disappointing to me result (although there certainly other factors). So from October 2017 to Jan 2018, I dropped 10 pounds down to 157 and raced really well at Dopey 2018. As from the last Garmin VO2max estimation graph we saw my peak performance value of 60 coincided with that particular training cycle. So the question stands, was it the body weight loss from 167 down to 157 that yielded the higher VO2max value, or was there an increase in efficiency/fitness as well?

This is where I think Absolute VO2max can step in and help answer that question. Since we've now removed weight from the equation. The body weight is limited during the Lakefront 2017 training cycle (primarily because I was avoiding stepping on the scale and was using the mindset of "if I feel fast/healthy, then I'm at the right weight"). But right in the middle of the training cycle, you can see an Absolute VO2max value of 4.19 and at the end a value of 4.24. Looking back at the Garmin VO2max graph shows that the 4.19 occurred during peak VO2max values during that training cycle. But when the end of the cycle came the VO2max value fell, but the Absolute VO2max value actually rose. So more fit, but not as fast.

Compare that to the Dopey 2018 training cycle where I was consistently trying to lose weight (and did drop from 167 to 157 over the course of 2.5 months). Is the increase in VO2max estimation solely a response of dropping weight? To a degree yes, but it's also evident that there were fitness/efficiency gains made during that same time. The drop in body weight is not the sole reason for the dramatic rise in VO2max as evidence by several values found higher than 4.24 during the Dopey 2018 training cycle. In fact, the highest recorded value occurred when the Garmin VO2max hit 60, which also coincided with the lowest body weight of 157, but also showed the highest absolute VO2max value of 4.42.

Again, the stress fracture yielded a precipitous drop.

Now here's the second reason I wanted to put this graph together. During when I was primarily running, my body weight was between 157-165 pounds. But during these TrainerRoad training cycles, my body weight has been anywhere between 170-181 pounds. So the question became, am I as fit/efficient as I was in my heavy running days, but my weight is the reason that my Garmin VO2max is lower right now? Or said another way, is my current run+bike+strength training yielding similar results to my primarily run training in past years? The answer appears to be yes. During the last TrainerRoad training cycle, you can see that my absolute VO2max was staying all but higher than almost everything during Dopey 2018 training. And during this latest training cycle the absolute VO2max value has been steadily climbing. So I'm as (if not more) efficient/fit than I have ever been using this current training methodology.

Now this clearly begs a question, would I be just as efficient/fit using this current methodology if I were to lose more weight? Or is my current weight the reason I'm able to maintain this current training volume and efficiency/fitness values? I don't think I've got the answer to this one. But I think I'll continue to try and live a healthy lifestyle and see where the next 18 weeks takes me.

Next, I wanted to see if there was a relationship between how much running duration I do in a week and the Garmin VO2max estimations or absolute VO2max values.

Running Duration (in min per week) over time

View attachment 433328


So this graph just simply represents the amount of run training I did in a single week. It's the cumulative duration in minutes per week. It shows time off from injuries, tapering, reintroduction of running, essentially running the whole gambit of a training cycle. Goes to show that during most of my run training cycles I was between 400-525 minutes per week on a regular basis (6.6-8.75 hours). Yet these days, I've been doing about 150-250 min of running per week (2.5-4.1 hours).

The relationship of Garmin VO2max estimate value AND Running Duration over time

View attachment 433332


So I wouldn't necessarily say that the running duration and Garmin VO2max value peaks follow any certain trend. In the case of the end of Daniels 2017 training and Dopey 2018 training it would certainly seem like when the run duration dropped late in the training the Garmin VO2max value peaked upwards. But I'm not seeing any type of equivalency that says run X hours per week yields Y Garmin VO2max value.

The area I was more interested in with this graph was the more recent training. Did I ever have similar Garmin VO2max values on such low run training? Granted, there is other training currently occurring, but the idea was to try and see if that cycling+strength was showing up in this graph. Let's use a Garmin VO2max value of 56. During primarily run training cycles, it was taking around 450 min (7.5 hours) of run training to usually at least have a Garmin VO2max value of 56. But during the three periods of time where I was doing structured bike training + running (last three weeks of Stress Fracture during 2018 and the two TrainerRoad cycles) you can see my running duration was in the 250-270 min (4.1 hours) of run training to usually at least have a Garmin VO2max value of 56. So what does that say to me, a reduced run training volume supplemented with structured bike/strength training can yield a similar Garmin VO2max estimated value. It would appear that a reduction of about 40% run volume was around the same value. Granted during the TrainerRoad training cycle, the replacement has not been 1:1. Rather my normal run training volume (which was all the training back then) dropped from 6.6-8.75 hours, but the total time spent training has increased during TrainerRoad to 12-16 hours. So a reduction of 40% run volume needs to be accounted for by a near doubling of overall time spent training to yield a similar Garmin VO2max estimation.

The relationship of Absolute VO2max estimate value AND Running Duration over time

View attachment 433335


For the comparison of Running duration on a per week basis compared to Absolute VO2max I see little relationship during the primary run training cycles. The volume was roughly the same from 2016 through Dopey 2018 and yet a general increase in fitness/efficiency was seen. So running volume does not seem to be the primary reason for any increases here. However, when running stops or is greatly reduced in the absence of other training, you can see the Absolute VO2max goes down. Additionally, during the 19 week off period from running when I was doing exclusively bike+strength training, the absolute VO2max value fell roughly to the equivalent of running levels around right before Daniels 5l/10k 2017 training started (right after Dopey 2017). But as soon as some run training was reintroduced during the latest TrainerRoad training cycles the absolute VO2max value rose quite sharply again. Again, even though the total volume of running is down, the absolute VO2max value suggests I'm in a really good place from a running fitness/efficiency place. Maybe not as much performance (as seen by Garmin VO2max), but definitely from a fitness place.

Lastly, I tried to view training from a "activity calories" aspect to see if there was any relationship between the Garmin VO2max or absolute VO2max changes and changes in activity calories.

Activity Calories (per week) over time

View attachment 433336


About the only thing I glean from this is, not all exercises are created equal when it comes to my Garmin's estimation of calories burned on a per discipline basis (strength, run, or bike). Because I'm putting in about double the top end time spent training from my running days, but have only seen a roughly 50% increase in activity calories (6000 vs 9000 calories even though 8 hrs vs 16 hrs of training).

The relationship of Garmin VO2max estimate value AND Activity Calories over time

View attachment 433337


Not really seeing anything of significance. The reason the increase in Garmin VO2max occurs during TrainerRoad is probably more of a function of actually running then it is a volume thing. Do you see anything here?

The relationship of Absolute VO2max estimate value AND Activity Calories over time

View attachment 433338


Again, nothing really jumping off the page at me on this one either. Any trends you see?

In summary

So what did I conclude from this latest data mining exercise:

1) When you train well, Garmin VO2max goes up. When you don't train, Garmin VO2max goes down.

2) There appears to be a relationship between my resting HR value and Garmin VO2max value. When my resting HR is at its lowest is usually when my Garmin VO2max is at its highest. This is probably explained by the adaptation seen from run training where there is an increase in blood stroke volume increasing the efficiency of each beat to move the same volume of blood around the body with less effort/beats. An equal (and even increased) amount of cycling training does not yield the same body adaptation for increasing stroke volume (or reduction in resting HR).

3) Weight loss is not the sole reason why Dopey 2018 went so well and there was a really high recorded Garmin VO2max estimation. There is evidence in the absolute VO2max values (under the absence of weight data) that there was an increase in fitness/efficiency seen as well. The combination of weight loss and gains in efficiency/fitness yielded the positive outcome at that race.

4) While I'm on average about 5-10 pounds heavier during these TrainerRoad cycles than previous run training cycles, the absolute VO2max values definitely show that the training is working from a fitness/efficiency evaluation standpoint. It is not clear whether dropping additional weight would yield a better outcome because it stands to reason that my current weight is keeping me healthy.

5) I may not be as run fast as I've ever been, but the absolute VO2max data suggests I might be more efficient/fit than I have ever been.

6) During normal run training cycles I was usually around 6-8.5 hours per week. During TrainerRoad training cycles (thus far) I've been around 2.5-4.1 hours of run training and 12-16 hours of total training.

7) There does not appear to be a X value of run duration that equals a Y value of Garmin VO2max estimation.

8) However, it did appear that more often than not to have a Garmin VO2max value above 56 usually coincided with run training volume of about 7.5 hours per week. But with the addition of run+bike+strength, the total volume used to gain a similar VO2max value as dropped down to around 4 hours. So a reduction of 40% of run volume (from 7.5 down to 4) yields a similar Garmin VO2max value when the total amount of training using run+bike+strength nearly doubles (from 7.5 hours to 15 hours). So to yield a similar running performance when substituting with bike+strength is not a 1:1 relationship and rather something closer to 1:2 (for every 1 hour dropped in training you need to do an additional 2 hours of total training). For example, drop 6 hours of run training down to 4 hours (-2 hours running) needs to have 12 total hours of training to yield similar result (4 hour run + 8 hour bike/strength [likely more bike than strength]). And additionally, I'd venture to guess the bike/strength training need to be structured and progressive.

9) Nothing unique was seen when evaluating using Activity Calories.

That was a fun data mining adventure! So you've got any thoughts? Anything I missed or misinterpreted in your opinion? Any other combinations of data sets to throw together? Again, obviously all of this was done using a single person's data (me) so that's to say it may not be translatable to everyone. But I think some of the concepts seen here could easily be useful outside of just my data set.
Fun!! I’d reiterate weight loss is a function of the bodies adaption. Are you losing weight because you don’t have the resources to maintain or because your body wants to gain efficiency? When you cut calories you lose efficiency because those calories are cutting into the resources your body needs. You either cut carbs and lose fuel, cut fats and lose hormone production, or protein and can’t build as much muscle. Lighter is better, but only when it’s a byproduct of your body gaining efficiency and not because you’re forcing it.... and at some level it’s just genetics. Some ppl just aren’t short enough and some ppl just have larger frames. Focusing on weight loss will eventually decrease efficiency and increase injury rates, ultimately costing precious VO2max.
 
Lots of charts and analysis for a fairly obvious conclusion 🤣

No disagreement here, that first conclusion was pretty cut and dry. Low hanging fruit. I feel like the majority of the charts were more focused on the other 8 conclusions.

Fun!! I’d reiterate weight loss is a function of the bodies adaption. Are you losing weight because you don’t have the resources to maintain or because your body wants to gain efficiency? When you cut calories you lose efficiency because those calories are cutting into the resources your body needs. You either cut carbs and lose fuel, cut fats and lose hormone production, or protein and can’t build as much muscle. Lighter is better, but only when it’s a byproduct of your body gaining efficiency and not because you’re forcing it.... and at some level it’s just genetics. Some ppl just aren’t short enough and some ppl just have larger frames. Focusing on weight loss will eventually decrease efficiency and increase injury rates, ultimately costing precious VO2max.

All completely reasonable to me. My overarching goal is to be healthy and fast. If I'm those things, then I'm likely at the right weight.
 
Either that, or have Alberto Salazar coach you... I hear everyone of his athletes have a thyroid condition 😂

Joking aside, besides improving your insulin sensitivity, Iodine is a great way to help you regulate weight better. Iodine helps your thyroid work better(simplified version lol). Personally I’ve added kombu and dulse into my diet and I’ve noticed some nice improvements! Plus they have loads of other nutrients and potassium 😆
 
Either that, or have Alberto Salazar coach you... I hear everyone of his athletes have a thyroid condition 😂

:scared:

Joking aside, besides improving your insulin sensitivity, Iodine is a great way to help you regulate weight better. Iodine helps your thyroid work better(simplified version lol). Personally I’ve added kombu and dulse into my diet and I’ve noticed some nice improvements! Plus they have loads of other nutrients and potassium 😆

Those are some interesting looking foods. I'll see if the local grocery store has them.

G is SO cute. I love that she does little runs with you.

Thanks! She's a lot of fun to run with.
 
18 Weeks to Go! (18 Again!) + TrainerRoad High Volume Full Triathlon Plan Week 10/28 + 80 Day Obsession - Phase 3/Week 2


9/2/19 - M - OFF
9/3/19 - T - 80DO-AAA + Hunter-1 (120 min; 124 TSS)
9/4/19 - W - 10 x 1 min @ Max intervals (Run)
9/5/19 - R - 60 min Brick Run at Easy + Round Bald (86 min; 91 TSS)
9/6/19 - F - 80DO-Total Body Core + Alice (90 min; 107 TSS)
9/7/19 - Sa - Polar Bear (120 min; 131 TSS) + 50 min Brick Run at M Tempo
9/8/19 - Su - 130 min Long Run w/ FF + 80DO-CF

Total Run Miles - 28.0 miles
Total Run Time - 3:55 hours
Total Run TSS - 248 TSS

Total Biking Time - 6:56 hours
Total Biking TSS - 453 TSS

Total 80DO Time - 2:44 hours
Total 80DO TSS - 26 TSS

Total Training Time - 13:36 hours
Total TSS - 727 TSS


Monday

Off day.

Had off from work today. Spent a lot of time writing training plans. I think I was able to get out 6 new plans.

Tuesday

I knew going into it this was going to be a VERY tough week on fitting all the workouts in. Steph was going to be working 68 hours this week with several 12 hour days (7am-7pm). So it was going to take an all hands on deck effort to pull this week off with Steph's work schedule.

80DO-AAA in 3 sets of 10 cycle through the whole workout and then back to series 1.

Series 1: Czech Press, Front Raise, Slider Windshield Wipers, Side Lunge Hold
Series 2: Bridge Pull Over, Camel Bicep Curl, Weighted Twisted Roll Down, Marching Bridge
Series 3: Bridge Bilateral Press, Tricep Kickback in Lunge, Weighted Knee Drops, Curtsy Lunge Pulse

Cycling: Hunter -1 is made up of 3x20-minute intervals between 88-92% FTP interrupted with brief, 1-minute recovery valleys at the midpoint of each interval. 12-minute recoveries fall between intervals. RPM at 94. The 88-92% FTP is between Half Ironman pacing and Lactate Threshold pacing.


Wednesday

Morning: Off

Gigi had her first football game of the season. The team played well throughout. Gigi had her first carry but ran mostly sideline to sideline than endzone to endzone. So she probably ran 40-50 yards to gain 3. The game was a challenge. It was a back and forth affair. The other team had the ball with 3 min to play right on our goal-line. We had been playing man defense most of the game and had been getting gashed on the edges. So for this goal line stand I switched us up to a spread out zone defense and the team responded really well. Holding a slim 19-18 lead the team was able to hold them through all 4 downs and secure the win with them right on the goal-line.

Evening Run:
Conditions - ⛅ Mostly Cloudy, Wind 2mph to 2mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 61°F + 50°F; FL - 61°F
End: Temp+Dew = 60°F + 50°F; FL - 61°F

Right after the game was over, I threw some clothes on and got started.

Screen Shot 2019-09-08 at 1.01.34 PM.png

Not as fast as last week, but still overall pretty good. The average GAP was 5:29 (vs last week's 5:19). I switched up the route this time around and did the undulating hills first and then a straight uphill second. The straight uphills felt more comfortable than trying to run really fast downhill. So I'll probably stick to the straight uphills for the remainder.


Thursday

I had to switch up the routine. Because Steph was working late again, I couldn't run in the evening. So I switched running to the morning and cycling to the evening.

Morning Run:
Conditions - ☁️ Mostly Cloudy, Wind 0mph to 0mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 50°F + 47°F; FL - 50°F
End: Temp+Dew = 48°F + 46°F; FL - 50°F

So up at 3:45am and out the door at 4:19am. First sub-T+D 100 run this summer! A very easy 6.8 miles in 60 min (8:51 min/mile) at HR of 131. Took a little bit of time to get loose, but eventually it did happen.

Cycling: Round Bald is 3x20-minute intervals at 85% FTP with 5-minute recoveries between each. RPM at 94. 85% FTP is higher end Half Ironman pacing. I was keeping an eye on the clock because it was going to be super tight for when I needed to leave to pick Steph up from work. So I had to cut the last 4 min off the workout.

The day was an absolute stacked day. Waking up at 3:45am, running, getting ready for work, being at work, getting home and cycling, immediately leaving to pick Steph up, and eating dinner. But I was able to get everything done.

Friday

80DO-Total Body Core in 3 sets of 10 cycle through the whole workout and then back to series 1.

Series 1: Surrender to Shoulder Press, Quad Ped Crawl, Burpee Sliders
Series 2: Bent Over Row Tap Back, Squat Tabletop Row, Saw on Sliders
Series 3: Modified 1/2 Turkish Push-up, Side Reach Push-up, V Crunch to Scissor Crunch
Series 4: Runner's Lunge Curl, Static Sumo Hammer Curl, Slider Crawl Out
Series 5: Tricep Push up w/ knee tuck, Squat Hold Kickbacks, Weighted Windmills


Cycling: Alice is two sets of 3x3-minute VO2max repeats at 115-122% FTP. 3 minutes of recovery fall between Intervals and 6 minutes of easy spinning separates the sets. RPM at 98. This workout had a lot of variety and on paper looked rather tough. But I was able to manage getting through it and felt good all the way through.


Saturday

Cycling: Polar Bear is 120 minutes of continuous riding where you'll spend 105 minutes between 80-85% FTP. RPM at 90. This was the longest Half Ironman paced bike leg thus far. A nice challenge but definitely doable.

Brick Run (immediately after cycling):
Conditions - ⛅ Mostly Cloudy, Wind 7mph to 7mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 61°F + 57°F; FL - 61°F
End: Temp+Dew = 64°F + 59°F; FL - 61°F - by Klimat.app

Transition = 7 min

I was excited to try out the Next% for the second time. This was the last test run in them prior to the DoLittle HM in two weeks. Originally this was scheduled as just an easy 50 min, but I decided to move it to a M Tempo run just to see how it felt in the Next% again.

Screen Shot 2019-09-08 at 1.10.37 PM.png

A little too excited for this one. Came out of the gate WAY too fast at a 6:35 min/mile (6:43 GAP). Tried to hold the effort as long as possible. It was poorly paced (GAP of 6:43, 6:44, 6:51, 6:57, 7:07, 7:16, 7:19, 7:16). HR suggests that M Tempo pace was around 7:00-7:10. T+D adjustment of 1% suggests max M Tempo pacing on flat ground is 6:56 min/mile at the moment. I'm going to have to be a lot more conservative at the HM in two weeks or I'll risk a similar blowup. The question is, how much energy am I losing from the 2 hours of Half Ironman bike pacing right before the run? It'll be interesting to see how the race plays out.

Workout ended up being a TSS of 206 which is the 4th highest for a training event yet and the highest single "continuous" training workout (the 3 higher ones were cycle in morning and run in evening).

Spent the next 6 hours out in the yard doing some hard labor prepping for aeration. My body held up well even with the hard effort that morning.

Sunday

Morning Run:
Conditions - ☁️ Overcast, Wind 7mph to 7mph
Start: Temp+Dew = 56°F + 52°F; FL - 56°F
End: Temp+Dew = 58°F + 53°F; FL - 56°F

Since I decided to make Saturday's brick harder, then I made today's longer run easier. The duration was the same as scheduled (75 min) but I did it at an easy pace instead of long run pace. A total of 8.5 miles in 75 min (8:50 min/mile) with HR of 130.

80DO Cardio Flow Phase 3!

Next week is the peak of Phase 1 of TrainerRoad. A 4:45 hour bike and 2.5 hr run. Then hopefully save enough energy for the HM the following weekend. Just have to get through this upcoming week and then the training plan calms down for the next 1.5 months. Almost time to open up the prediction game for DoLittle as well.
 
Wednesday

Morning: Off

Gigi had her first football game of the season. The team played well throughout. Gigi had her first carry but ran mostly sideline to sideline than endzone to endzone. So she probably ran 40-50 yards to gain 3. The game was a challenge. It was a back and forth affair. The other team had the ball with 3 min to play right on our goal-line. We had been playing man defense most of the game and had been getting gashed on the edges. So for this goal line stand I switched us up to a spread out zone defense and the team responded really well. Holding a slim 19-18 lead the team was able to hold them through all 4 downs and secure the win with them right on the goal-line.

You know, I can't follow pro football, but I thought that grade-school football would be simpler. Apparently not! :) Congrats to G (and you) for the win!
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!






Top