Block Training

whoawhoa said:

I don't see that as a magic bullet though. Hard work+recovery=fitness. Where's the magic?

My only exposure to Morris's specific plans are what you posted below, but that looked pretty darn easy to me. I promise this isn't a "I train harder than you" thing, because that's not a debate I would win with most people, and at the end of the day it doesn't really matter (because training is for people who suck:p).

Well yes, there isn't such a thing as magic now is there....it's all about work. But maybe that work can be arranged in such a way that would optimize recovery and supercompensation.

The plan from Morrisons book would produce good gains for many men on this forum. But for the more advanced man of course you need to make it tougher.

Try this for a tougher route. Short and sweat...but tough and effective.
L2 only to warm up and cool down and in the "tune up ride" for the hard group ride on day 7.

Ya... three easy days following the three hard days to allow your body to fully recover so it can get stronger.

Day 1 ....4 hour TOUGH group ride! Yes all year round.
Day 2.....60 minutes L4 non stop..then 30 min L3
Day 3.....3 X 20 L4..20 minutes L3
Day 4...1 hour recovery ride
Days 5...1 hour recovery ride
Day 6.....off
Day 7.....2 hour tune up ride for the hammering on the group ride the next day. Includes a couple 1 minute L5 efforts and a few sprints.

Here is a quote from Morris in regards to his L5 block training.

"Many of my new clients scoff at the low volume of this training, especially after coming off the endurance work in the previous weeks. Their flippant attitudes are quickly replaced by respect for those intervals as they quickly discover just how difficult it is to finish the workouts. "Do they have to be so hard" some clients ask. I respond by telling them that bike racing is difficult, and if they are unwilling to push themselves to complete these workouts then perhaps they are in the wrong sport!"

I have never blocked trained L5 but I will try it this Spring...I hope I don't give up after a couple weeks :o

RapDaddyo said:

Good, that was my intent. My post wasn't directed at anyone in particular, but was intended to distinguish between the different types of issues we have going on in this discussion. We have what I think are macro issues in a training plan (total volume, total high-intensity volume and allocation of high-intensity volume) and we have what I think are micro issues in a training plan (3on/2off vs. alternate days). I'm frankly not sure where to put the issue of focusing on one adaptation at a time vs. work on multiple adaptations simultaneously. I don't know if it is a macro issue or a micro issue because I am not aware of either scientific principles or empirical evidence in support of either of the two approaches (need help from Andy or Ric or biker-linz here). I'm not saying it doesn't matter. I'm saying I don't know if it matters.

Ok, your intent was well aimed. Now I've been thinking all day, what percentage of my overall training should be high intensity? Obviously this varies depending on time of year. Then of that L4+ work, how "should" that break down?

I imagine this now gets into several issues, one of which being that there are many ways to skin a cat. And what works for me may or may not work for you. But then I wonder, how much L4 should I be doing during an L5 block to maintain L4? Ditto with the reverse. How much L4+ should I do as a minimum to maintain?

I imagine this is the art part of the whole training = science + art thing. I'm not Picasso.

normZurawski said:

Ok, your intent was well aimed. Now I've been thinking all day, what percentage of my overall training should be high intensity? Obviously this varies depending on time of year. Then of that L4+ work, how "should" that break down?

I imagine this now gets into several issues, one of which being that there are many ways to skin a cat. And what works for me may or may not work for you. But then I wonder, how much L4 should I be doing during an L5 block to maintain L4? Ditto with the reverse. How much L4+ should I do as a minimum to maintain?

I imagine this is the art part of the whole training = science + art thing. I'm not Picasso.

I guess that's why good coaches make the big bucks.😉 In part because, as I said in another post somewhere, a training plan is out the window after the first set of performance tests. IOW, a plan is (or at least should be) continuously updated and adapted as a function of performance testing.

normZurawski said:

I imagine this is the art part of the whole training = science + art thing. I'm not Picasso.

Well I don't think it's that complicated.

What event are you preparing for? What's going to be the race pace and for what duration?

Say for instance your goal for the season involves reaching a FTP of 280w then you need to reach this target early enough in the preparation season. Fine, there comes your question. How much should I be doing?

I may suggest an other question. How much volume can you handle at race power (or targeted power) in a block? Or in a block containing some recovery in between? ATL will kick in at this power and it will lower your ability to train at this level.

Then the game becomes to recover enough to be able to continue improving, whilst training hard enough to increase working capacity, at targeted power.

So there aren't that many unknown here. First targeted power and targeted duration and then planning going backward.

whoawhoa said:

Well, sure. Either huge benefits or...huge tailspin. :eek:

By the way, what do you mean by "auto-adjusting?"

My understanding of the block approach (based on listening to several presentations by Dean Golich, as well as briefly discussing it with him a couple of times) is that you train hard until you see objective evidence that you've overreached (i.e., you can't generate the expected power), then you rest/recover until you're ready to go hard again. Thus, at least in theory somebody with extraordinary recuperative ability might ride hard four or even five days in a row, whereas another individual who does not recover as quickly might only string two hard workouts together. The training load is therefore automatically adapted to your ability to handle it, based on testing yourself every (hard) day ("training is testing, testing is training"😉.

acoggan said:

My understanding of the block approach (based on listening to several presentations by Dean Golich, as well as briefly discussing it with him a couple of times) is that you train hard until you see objective evidence that you've overreached (i.e., you can't generate the expected power), then you rest/recover until you're ready to go hard again. Thus, at least in theory somebody with extraordinary recuperative ability might ride hard four or even five days in a row, whereas another individual who does not recover as quickly might only string two hard workouts together. The training load is therefore automatically adapted to your ability to handle it, based on testing yourself every (hard) day ("training is testing, testing is training"😉.

.

I just got Morris's book and it's okay but I find it incomplete and too brief. It's almost as if he has deliberately been brief in hopes that you will visit his web site and buy some training.[img]cyclingforums.comrolleyes.gifOpen ↗[/img][img]cyclingforums.commad.gifOpen ↗[/img]
He seems to be giving general recommendations of training for 3 days followed by recovery time and then 2 days followed by recovery time in a repeating pattern. It makes more sense to push it until you cannot reach the power requirements for the given time and then take your recuperation days.[img]cyclingforums.comredface.gifOpen ↗[/img]

I wonder if Dean Golich has a book that includes this subject or if anyone else does? Dr Coggan do you know of any other books out there that cover this style of training?[img]cyclingforums.comconfused.gifOpen ↗[/img]

David Morris does say this much in the book.[img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img]
"One very important aspect of training is knowing just how hard to push before backing off and taking time to recover. If you push too much, you may become stale and run the risk of over training. Push too little and you will never reach your potential......The previous case offers a prime example of this point, as the rider was clearly capable of performing the prescibed work for four consecutive days, but by the fifth day he had exceeded his limit and would have been better served by using that day for recovery."

frenchyge said:

What are the thoughts on block training? Is it necessary to focus on one fitness aspect (LT, VO2, AC, etc.) at a time for several days in order to achieve sufficient stress for the body to overcompensate in its adaptation? If I'm training each fitness aspect for 1 week (for example) at a time, do the other fitness aspects lose their gains during the couple weeks before I get back to them? Do the answers differ between the different fitness aspects? Is there a 'right' amount of time to focus on each one? Is this all a bunch of mumbo-jumbo, and a typical week that encompasses visits to each fitness aspect is just as good an approach?

Discuss. 🙂

Firt off, I haven't made it through all 7 pages of replies--so sorry if I've missed something.

I think one theory *could* be that training in blocks could work more effectively by providing more stimulus on the same amount of work. Take the following two schedules:
Day 1 125TSS Day 2 125TSS Day 3 125TSS Day 4 25TSS

or

Day 1 150TSS Day 2 50TSS Day 3 150TSS Day 4 50TSS

With an identical workload, maybe it's possible that the first schedule results in a different recruitment pattern than the second, because of less complete recovery? Just a thought--so I won't be offended if anyone tears it apart. I'd be interested though to see a study of trained cyclists following those 2 protocols, to see if there would be any difference? (Dr. A, please get on that and report your findings--we're all curious here!).

For me, I regularly use block training (as far as training in multiple hard days), but for more practical reasons.

1) It's an easy way to overload, without going too far. Basically, if you've scheduled a 3 day block, and you can't hit a certain % of the prescribed power on day 3, you're then doing a 2 day block. If you hit the prescribed power on day 3, and there's not the usual amt. of degradation in power, you're now doing a 4 day block. It's a pretty convenient tool.

2) Specificity. Training elite domestic guys, there are a lost of 3-7 day stage races and omniums. Your first hard 4 consecutive days probably shouldn't be your first important race of the season.

Long ago, I realized that after a hard 5 day stage race, followed by 2 days of rest, performance can be quite good, which initially got me interested in the concept. So, whether or not my half-baked theory has any merit or not (I'm not even sure it does), I'll still continue to use it.

RipVanCommittee said:

Firt off, I haven't made it through all 7 pages of replies--so sorry if I've missed something.

I think one theory *could* be that training in blocks could work more effectively by providing more stimulus on the same amount of work. Take the following two schedules:
Day 1 125TSS Day 2 125TSS Day 3 125TSS Day 4 25TSS

or

Day 1 150TSS Day 2 50TSS Day 3 150TSS Day 4 50TSS

With an identical workload, maybe it's possible that the first schedule results in a different recruitment pattern than the second, because of less complete recovery? Just a thought--so I won't be offended if anyone tears it apart.

RIP..lol
🙂

It's not about incomplete recovery but rather a load over time mechanism.
For example doing 3 days in a row of L4 overloads that system in a very short period of time and more so than if you did L4 one day then L2 and then L4.
This causes a "greater" stimuli and "greater" adaption, PROVIDING recovery days are taken.

I see people potentially failing with this style of training because they will not take enough recovery days after each block. You MUST be in tune with your body with this style of training and be willing to train LESS then you did before, in total volume that is. Three days in a row of L4 or L5 followed by 2-3 days of recovery may look easy, and it is if you are just looking at time on the bike, but physiologically three days in a row of this type of training is quite the load I think.

"Not listening" to ones body would be a quick path to over training for sure. Maybe some guys can recover in 2 days after a three day block and maybe someone, with no other stressors in life, and with youth on his side, could even recovery with one day of rest, but I don't think that patern could continue for weeks.
More likely perhaps 2 days of recovery riding followed by a short L2 ride after a three day intense L4 or 5 block would be best in the long run.

The older and more experienced I get the more I think most guys do not progress as they want not because of lack of effort but because of lack of recovery. Many think it's all about the miles.

Quadsweep said:

.

I just got Morris's book and it's okay but I find it incomplete and too brief. It's almost as if he has deliberately been brief in hopes that you will visit his web site and buy some training.[img]cyclingforums.comrolleyes.gifOpen ↗[/img][img]cyclingforums.commad.gifOpen ↗[/img]
He seems to be giving general recommendations of training for 3 days followed by recovery time and then 2 days followed by recovery time in a repeating pattern. It makes more sense to push it until you cannot reach the power requirements for the given time and then take your recuperation days.[img]cyclingforums.comredface.gifOpen ↗[/img]

I wonder if Dean Golich has a book that includes this subject or if anyone else does? Dr Coggan do you know of any other books out there that cover this style of training?[img]cyclingforums.comconfused.gifOpen ↗[/img]

David Morris does say this much in the book.[img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img]
"One very important aspect of training is knowing just how hard to push before backing off and taking time to recover. If you push too much, you may become stale and run the risk of over training. Push too little and you will never reach your potential......The previous case offers a prime example of this point, as the rider was clearly capable of performing the prescibed work for four consecutive days, but by the fifth day he had exceeded his limit and would have been better served by using that day for recovery."

Sorry, Morris's book (which I have not read, BTW) is apparently the only one dealing with the concept.

FWIW, he (Morris) may not have been being deliberately cryptic, but instead was just trying to simplify the idea some to help explain it, and described only the 3/2 pattern because it's the most common.

Actually, thinking about it a bit more another explanation might be that he/they believe that block training works better because of the way trainng sessions are stacked one on top of the other, period (which is TiMan's perspective). The fact that the approach is (or should be) "auto adjusting" over the long term is really more my take on things. (Again, paraphrasing/reading between the lines of a few things Dean has told me.)

acoggan said:

Sorry, Morris's book (which I have not read, BTW) is apparently the only one dealing with the concept.

FWIW, he (Morris) may not have been being deliberately cryptic, but instead was just trying to simplify the idea some to help explain it, and described only the 3/2 pattern because it's the most common.

Actually, thinking about it a bit more another explanation might be that he/they believe that block training works better because of the way trainng sessions are stacked one on top of the other, period (which is TiMan's perspective). The fact that the approach is (or should be) "auto adjusting" over the long term is really more my take on things. (Again, paraphrasing/reading between the lines of a few things Dean has told me.)

If you don't mind clarifying Andy, can you explain how the training is 'auto-adjusting' in terms of choice of recovery period (1, 2, 3 or x days off for n days on)? I understand how the Golich system is self-limiting/auto-adjusting in terms of the number of work days you pile on top of each other. What I don't get is how the recovery days work in this schema to be auto-adjusting.

RipVanCommittee said:

With an identical workload, maybe it's possible that the first schedule results in a different recruitment pattern than the second, because of less complete recovery? Just a thought--so I won't be offended if anyone tears it apart. I'd be interested though to see a study of trained cyclists following those 2 protocols, to see if there would be any difference? (Dr. A, please get on that and report your findings--we're all curious here!).

I've tried to bait Dr. Coggan into interpreting Bente Pedersen's results about IL-6 and training in a glycogen-depleted state, but he's chosen to ignore me thus far. In the somewhat weird experiment, cyclists first did a one-legged cycling protocol on day 1, then two-legged work on day 2, the theory being that one leg would be relatively more glycogen-depleted than the other. They found that the "tired" leg expressed more IL-6 mRNA; other research from Pedersen's group suggests that IL-6 is an "exercise factor" responsible for many of the positive metabolic adaptations we make in response to training. These weren't trained cyclists, and the weird design (where one leg serves as a "control", rather than a different individual) might muddle more than it clarifies. Still, interesting stuff. See what Stephen Seiler's got to say about it. If you've got a few hours to kill, and are curious about some stuff that hasn't made its way into the mainstream of exercise physiology yet, check out the reprints page for Pedersen's group.

So, there you go. Maybe block training is a silver bullet after all 😉.

Roadie_scum said:

If you don't mind clarifying Andy, can you explain how the training is 'auto-adjusting' in terms of choice of recovery period (1, 2, 3 or x days off for n days on)? I understand how the Golich system is self-limiting/auto-adjusting in terms of the number of work days you pile on top of each other. What I don't get is how the recovery days work in this schema to be auto-adjusting.

First, let me reiterate that I, and not Dave Morris or Dean Golich, am the one responsible for emphasizing the potential advantage of the fact that block training (at least they way they do it) is "auto-adjusting".

That said, you're right, there's nothing in the approach that assures that someone has recovered just enough, but not too much, before starting another block. To do that you would need to, e.g., test performance every day, or at least towards the end of, each period of "regeneration training" (as the Germans like to call it), and only start a new block when your performance has recovered.

kmavm said:

I've tried to bait Dr. Coggan into interpreting Bente Pedersen's results about IL-6 and training in a glycogen-depleted state, but he's chosen to ignore me thus far.

That's because I think that it's simply too speculative to try to directly apply these results to the training of athletes. That is, while it is tempting to conclude that these results mean that block training should be more effective, the latter has yet to be demonstrated, and even should/when that be proven, it is still possible that other mechanisms are responsible.

SolarEnergy said:

What event are you preparing for? What's going to be the race pace and for what duration?

My "A" races are all off-road events. First event is a 12 hour race in early June. Then in late August there's a 24 hour event. 7 weeks later a 50k.

In between is assorted stuff, from 2-5 hours, on and off road. Given the first 2 target events I probably don't need a lot of L5 work. But I don't want to neglect it entirely. Obviously event distance is key here, but at the same time I don't want to burn matches by not having enough high intensity work. After the 24 hour event I'll probably just need to maintain event endurance but hammer the higher intensity stuff for 6 weeks or so.

normZurawski said:

My "A" races are all off-road events. First event is a 12 hour race in early June. Then in late August there's a 24 hour event. 7 weeks later a 50k.

What type of course? Is it relatively straight forward or very complex? Have you done these races already? How did things go?

How many years have you been racing? And for this type of event? Have you been using HR monitor (to later abandon this practice convinced that power would be the only way to go)?

normZurawski said:

In between is assorted stuff, from 2-5 hours, on and off road. Given the first 2 target events I probably don't need a lot of L5 work. But I don't want to neglect it entirely.

For sure glycogen pool is one of the most important constraint for this type of long event.

In 12 or 24 hours, you have plenty of time to bonk. In that sense, just about any type of training may improve this aspect, independend of the level (as long as your training is intense or long *enough* to cause a depletion).

Feeding is also a huge constraint.

And Oh(!), what about your injury record. Totally clear?

SolarEnergy said:

What type of course? Is it relatively straight forward or very complex? Have you done these races already? How did things go?

How many years have you been racing? And for this type of event? Have you been using HR monitor (to later abandon this practice convinced that power would be the only way to go)?

And Oh(!), what about your injury record. Totally clear?

12 hour course is rollers and flat, not bad. I did not do that race last year but I've ridden the loop before. The 24 race is pretty tough, 1500 feet vertical in less than 10 miles, technical. I did it last year for 8 hours and went to bed. I wasn't in it to compete the full 24. We had our first child last year so training time was at a premium. This past season was my 2nd year racing off-road. The 50k was brutal, harder than the 24 hour race I did for 8 hours. No injuries. I weighed just over 200 during the season. Currently just over 190, looking to drop 10 more for next season.

Without question, losing the 20 pounds from this season to next, as well as putting on more training hours of any kind will do wonders. I'm obviously trying to maxmize my wonders from 2006 to 2007. Like I said to RDO, no matter what plan I use in 2007, I'm sure it will work, because I will have ridden much more than this year, and obviously I'm much more educated about all this stuff. The main point of education being in the form of now realizing that a lot of my riding in previous years was at far too low of an intensity.

normZurawski said:

The main point of education being in the form of now realizing that a lot of my riding in previous years was at far too low of an intensity.

But how can you say that.

If your events last respectively 12 and 24 hours, I doubt that you can train at an intensity level that's too low (unless you are really going very slow). The thing though is that if you're to train a low intensity (which is still fairly specific relative to your race pace), then you need to pile enough miles to trigger this glycogen depletion I was refering too earlier.

normZurawski said:

12 hour course is rollers and flat, not bad. I did not do that race last year but I've ridden the loop before. The 24 race is pretty tough, 1500 feet vertical in less than 10 miles, technical.

Hmm... it's what I thought. I'd simply build up a well balanced program then.

normZurawski said:

No injuries. I weighed just over 200 during the season. Currently just over 190, looking to drop 10 more for next season.

How tall are you?

normZurawski said:

I did it last year for 8 hours and went to bed. I wasn't in it to compete the full 24. We had our first child last year so training time was at a premium. This past season was my 2nd year racing off-road. The 50k was brutal, harder than the 24 hour race I did for 8 hours.

Why was the 50k brutal? Do you feel you weren't prepared for it? What was this 50k about?

Quoted post said:

After the 24 hour event I'll probably just need to maintain event endurance but hammer the higher intensity stuff for 6 weeks or so.

Hmmm.. it's a complex situation. But I'd say if you want to perform this 50k, you'd better not taper too much for the 24h. Which one of these two events is the most important for you?

acoggan said:

My understanding of the block approach (based on listening to several presentations by Dean Golich, as well as briefly discussing it with him a couple of times) is that you train hard until you see objective evidence that you've overreached (i.e., you can't generate the expected power), then you rest/recover until you're ready to go hard again. Thus, at least in theory somebody with extraordinary recuperative ability might ride hard four or even five days in a row, whereas another individual who does not recover as quickly might only string two hard workouts together. The training load is therefore automatically adapted to your ability to handle it, based on testing yourself every (hard) day ("training is testing, testing is training"😉.

I think the other important thing to note--maybe more so than the differences among athletes, is the variability factor within each athlete; meaning, a rider who can often do 3 or 4 days on won't always be able to do successive blocks (depending on a number of factors).

Block training can be a useful tool, since "appropriate training load" often seems to be a moving target.

acoggan said:

First, let me reiterate that I, and not Dave Morris or Dean Golich, am the one responsible for emphasizing the potential advantage of the fact that block training (at least they way they do it) is "auto-adjusting".

That said, you're right, there's nothing in the approach that assures that someone has recovered just enough, but not too much, before starting another block. To do that you would need to, e.g., test performance every day, or at least towards the end of, each period of "regeneration training" (as the Germans like to call it), and only start a new block when your performance has recovered.

Thanks Andy. I understood it was you making the point, not Dave Morris or Dean Golich, but I guess it always pays to clarify responsibility for ideas. Perhaps the next step for the dedicated block trainers is to identify an appropriate TSB for various blocks, based on the desired length (number of days/number of intervals) and composition of the blocks (eg, higher for VO2max work than for L3/4).

SolarEnergy,

I was basically doing nothing but L2, maybe occasional L3. No intervals at all.

I am 5-11, medium-large build. Not an ideal biker frame, to be sure. Maybe more of a football player but, as Popeye says, I yam what I yam.

I hadn't trained enough for the 50k. The terrain was extremely technical and after the midway point I started to really hurt.

I agree that tapering too much for the 24 is not a good idea. For an event like that, I'm not sure a huge taper really does me a lot of good.

The 50k is probably more important right now. But time will tell.