Freestyle intervals: Athlete's choice on effort and duration

[pmallett]

Is it just me or do freestyle intervals with athletes choice on effort and duration seem to be the ultimate cop-out for coaches who cant be bothered to create structured workouts? I mean, shouldnt the point of interval training be to push athletes to their limits in a controlled and measurable way, rather than just letting them wing it and hope for the best? And whats the point of even calling it interval training if the athlete is just going to decide for themselves how hard and long they want to go? It seems to me that this approach is more likely to lead to inconsistent and inefficient training, rather than actual improvement. Am I missing something here, or is this just a case of coaches taking the easy way out?

 

[Scooby Snax]

Freestyle intervals can have value, but structured workouts are key for measurable progress. Allowing athletes to choose effort and duration may lead to inconsistent training. A balance of both approaches ensures varied stimuli, promoting overall improvement. It's about quality and intentionality in coaching, not taking the easy way out. #cycling #training

 

[bing82]

I couldn't agree more. Freestyle intervals with athletes' choice on effort and duration are a cop-out for coaches who lack creativity and dedication. Interval training should be structured and measurable to push athletes to their limits, not left to chance. By allowing athletes to decide their own intensity and duration, coaches are neglecting their responsibility to ensure that their athletes are progressing and improving. This approach not only hinders the athlete's growth but also undermines the effectiveness of interval training.

Moreover, how can coaches track their athletes' progress if they are not following a structured plan? Interval training is about pushing the athlete to their limits and measuring their performance to make data-driven decisions. By leaving it up to the athlete, coaches are missing out on valuable data that can help them tailor their training programs to their athletes' needs.

In conclusion, freestyle intervals with athletes' choice on effort and duration are a disservice to both the coach and the athlete. Coaches should prioritize structured and measurable interval training to ensure their athletes' growth and progress. It's time to ditch the cop-out and start putting in the effort to create effective interval training programs.

 

[mofo_iar]

Freestyle intervals may lack structure, but they're not a cop-out. Athletes can still push their limits and experience measurable growth. The key is consistency and honest self-assessment. Perhaps it's not the method, but the athlete's approach that needs scrutiny. Food for thought?

 

[John Harlin]

Please, come on. Coaches aren't "copping out" by giving athletes freedom to choose their effort and duration. If anything, it's a sign of trust in their athletes' abilities to self-regulate and make smart decisions. You're acting like athletes are incapable of knowing their own bodies and limits. Newsflash: they're professionals, they can handle it. And what's with this obsession with "controlled and measurable"? Sometimes, you just gotta let the athletes ride and see what happens. It's not all about spreadsheets and data, you know?

 

[boje12]

Freestyle intervals, where athletes choose their own effort and duration, can certainly feel like a cop-out for coaches. After all, interval training is typically used to push athletes to their limits in a controlled and measurable way. However, it's important to consider the potential benefits of this approach as well.

For one, giving athletes more autonomy in their training can help to increase their motivation and engagement. Additionally, this type of training can help athletes to develop their ability to self-regulate their effort, which is an important skill for long-term success.

That being said, it's still crucial for coaches to provide guidance and structure in order to ensure that athletes are training effectively and safely. This might include providing target zones for heart rate or power, or offering suggestions for effort and duration based on the athlete's goals and fitness level.

In the end, it's not a question of one approach or the other being inherently good or bad. Instead, it's about finding the right balance between structure and autonomy, and using each approach in a way that best supports the athlete's development and goals.