How fast is Gomez and the ITU circuit? (Page 2)

So, what dfoes MacMillan say they should be able to run a marathon in based on a 30:00 10K off the bike?  I'm going to go with 2:30 - 2:36.  Not bad for only running 60 mpw huh?  I'm sticking with the idea that the 1.2 million yards they swim per year helps just a little with that.

Originally posted by marcag

Originally posted by Left Brain So, what dfoes MacMillan say they should be able to run a marathon in based on a 30:00 10K off the bike?  I'm going to go with 2:30 - 2:36.  Not bad for only running 60 mpw huh?  I'm sticking with the idea that the 1.2 million yards they swim per year helps just a little with that.

I completely disagree. Their swimming volume has little to nothing to do with their run speed. Their run volume/lintensity has to do with their running.

This is starting to branch off into a debate that I've wanted to see.  LB has made the comment a few times that swimming a massive amount can help out with running to the point that even the average AG should consider forsaking their mileage in favor of swimming more.

I'm not saying he's right or wrong, but the question he asked me stuck with me.  He basically asked how much running would I need to do to knock even 10secs off my 5k compared to how much swimming to make my 750 swim faster.  In the act of training up my swim, how much overall fitness do I lose?  Of course I don't lose any, but do I lose run speed?

It's definitely a different approach that I found interesting at least.

The swimming is unlikely to help significantly with running standalone marathons, unfortunately. I would say that the aerobic capacity from swimming would definitely help with 5k-HM distances, where you do a lot of VO2-level intensity. But at the marathon distance, unless you've specifically trained the legs to handle that kind of distance, forget about it. 

The standalone marathon, even when raced to the max of your ability, is running significantly SLOWER than threshold pace, unlike 5k-10k, or even half-marathon (for the fast guys, at least.) You don't bonk out because you're so out of breath. You bonk out because your legs give up, even if you're breathing easy.

Your legs' ability to deal with the hammering of 26.2 miles is the limiter. Even amongst elites, while their overall aerobic baseline and speed is faster, their marathon performance is not limited by their aerobic capacity as it would be in 5k-HM. 

 As for triathletes trying to improve their sprint-oly-HIM times, I think it's completely reasonable and possible that one can have aerobic gains from swimming x-over to helping some with the running/cycling. 

Originally posted by marcag

Originally posted by Left Brain So, what dfoes MacMillan say they should be able to run a marathon in based on a 30:00 10K off the bike?  I'm going to go with 2:30 - 2:36.  Not bad for only running 60 mpw huh?  I'm sticking with the idea that the 1.2 million yards they swim per year helps just a little with that.

I completely disagree. Their swimming volume has little to nothing to do with their run speed. Their run volume/lintensity has to do with their running.

I know you do, but I think you are wroing.  The fact is, very few people actually do any high intensity swim training.  I would venture a guess that most AG triathletes swim less than 7500 per week.  To top it off, most people who do triathlon concentrate more on technique than swimmoing fast, and rightfully so for the overwhelming majority.  I'm talking about swimming that gets you 1,000,000 plus yards per year.  I'm talking about swimming that brings you to your aerobic threshold throughout the workout.  100's all out over and over......kick sets of 2500 - 3000 yards on 1:30.

I was advised very early on to get my kid (just starting with the idea that he wanted to do triathlon, a true beginner) into a high intensoty swim program and forget the running miles.  I was advised to find someone who would work with him on technique and building speed, and forget the long miles... "the engine will get built in the swimming" is what i was told.  It was contrary to everything I knew about running (yeah, I ran just a bit in my day).

The running mileage had been brought on very slowly.....and like I said, he has yet to run 30 miles in a week.....but he swims 30-40K religiously, and he does his drills and speed work religiously, and yeah, he runs some easy miles as well.  We're only 2.5 years in to what I was not sure was a good program, and the kid is running times that put him in the 2nd tier of high school elite runners.......with basically 3 track seasons to go.  I still don't think he runs enough.....but his times continue to drop.  Yeah, now that he is getting close to done growing his mileage is SLOWLY being advanced......but there is NO WAY IN HELL he could run the times he does without the swim work he does.  There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise.....I watch it.

There are others, on this board, who have drastically upped their swim volume and seen huge imporvements in ther run....fisherman and dmiller as examples.

60 mpw is not much running to hit sub 30:00 10K's.....but the Brownless do it with a good mix of high intensity running, high intensity swimming, and some easy miles.

Three years ago I would have been in your camp......not today.  Not with the amount of runnig injury I see at the AG level, coupled with some far less than mediocre swimming.  Speed is speed.....holding speed is endurance.  You can build a massive amount of endurance with swimming if done properly.

Again, LB, while you son is clearly an outstanding athlete, and super fast at running - 

He has yet to run a marathon. 

No doubt with proper training, he will also be a beast at the marathon, but there is no way he will hit his "mcmillan target' potential, say if you plug in his 5k/10k race time in and get the marathon estimate back, on his current low-mileage run training. 

He will still run faster than the vast majority of people, sure, because of clearly hugely advantageous genetics, but he would get CRUSHED by similarly genetically-equipped pure runners who ran the typical 70-100mpw compared to his triathlon training @ 30mpw running. 

Now, his training sounds spot-on for ITU and short-course racing, where your aerobic engine will be more of a limiter in most cases at that level. (You're not running so far that your legs completely give out.) So of course, building the engine, through swimming, would work for x-over to other sports to some degree. However, this strategy will not work as well for longer distances (HIM-marathon), and in particular, if you're talking full marathon, it will likely fail completely. Your sons marathon performance will almost all reflect his run training (with some bike x-over), but none of the swim training effect, as he will never go hard enough in the marathon to need that level of aerobic fitness. 

Originally posted by marcag

Originally posted by Left Brain

Originally posted by marcag

Originally posted by Left Brain So, what dfoes MacMillan say they should be able to run a marathon in based on a 30:00 10K off the bike?  I'm going to go with 2:30 - 2:36.  Not bad for only running 60 mpw huh?  I'm sticking with the idea that the 1.2 million yards they swim per year helps just a little with that.

I completely disagree. Their swimming volume has little to nothing to do with their run speed. Their run volume/lintensity has to do with their running.

I know you do, but I think you are wroing.  The fact is, very few people actually do any high intensity swim training.  I would venture a guess that most AG triathletes swim less than 7500 per week.  To top it off, most people who do triathlon concentrate more on technique than swimmoing fast, and rightfully so for the overwhelming majority.  I'm talking about swimming that gets you 1,000,000 plus yards per year.  I'm talking about swimming that brings you to your aerobic threshold throughout the workout.  100's all out over and over......kick sets of 2500 - 3000 yards on 1:30.

I was advised very early on to get my kid (just starting with the idea that he wanted to do triathlon, a true beginner) into a high intensoty swim program and forget the running miles.  I was advised to find someone who would work with him on technique and building speed, and forget the long miles... "the engine will get built in the swimming" is what i was told.  It was contrary to everything I knew about running (yeah, I ran just a bit in my day).

The running mileage had been brought on very slowly.....and like I said, he has yet to run 30 miles in a week.....but he swims 30-40K religiously, and he does his drills and speed work religiously, and yeah, he runs some easy miles as well.  We're only 2.5 years in to what I was not sure was a good program, and the kid is running times that put him in the 2nd tier of high school elite runners.......with basically 3 track seasons to go.  I still don't think he runs enough.....but his times continue to drop.  Yeah, now that he is getting close to done growing his mileage is SLOWLY being advanced......but there is NO WAY IN HELL he could run the times he does without the swim work he does.  There is nothing you can say to convince me otherwise.....I watch it.

There are others, on this board, who have drastically upped their swim volume and seen huge imporvements in ther run....fisherman and dmiller as examples.

60 mpw is not much running to hit sub 30:00 10K's.....but the Brownless do it with a good mix of high intensity running, high intensity swimming, and some easy miles.

Three years ago I would have been in your camp......not today.  Not with the amount of runnig injury I see at the AG level, coupled with some far less than mediocre swimming.  Speed is speed.....holding speed is endurance.  You can build a massive amount of endurance with swimming if done properly.

It's all a question of balance and where you are in your development. If you are swimming 7500yards per week (say 3hours) and running 60 miles per week (say 8 hours), you are off balance. Even more off balance if you are racing Oly or less. Gomez, as per Jason's post, sounds pretty balanced. Based on the numbers you have shown, JR is off balance, but I suspect there are VERY good reasons for him to be so off balance. But those reasons do not apply to AG triathletes. All 3 sports require intensity. If you are doing 7500 yds of slow swimming, you are not balancing your swim correctly. If you are riding in Z2 all the time, you are not balancing your bike correctly. You look at Jr and try to apply this to AG racing. I believe it is very different. That ton of hours Jr is putting into swimming, at the expense of the other sports is an investment. The right investment. He is going to develop into a draft legal elite triathlete. With no swim, he is doomed. With a bad swim, there is no bike or run, it's game over. He has to swim fast and to do so, should do a ton of swimming. It is the right thing for a 16 yo elite in developement. But it is not the right thing for a non drafting AG triathlete. Yes, even though he runs little and swim a ton he runs faster. That does not mean Joe AGer will. Fisherman and Dave have stated they do not know if it's the swimming that made them faster runners. They swam more, they ran more, they got faster at both. Many studies on specificity show it DOES NOT carry over. To become really good at something, swim, bike or run, there is a concept of efficiency. And there is only one way to build efficiency, it's to do the specificity of that sport. Cycling efficiency, ie the ability to generate X watts at a given VO2 level only comes with cycling. The ability to run at X m/s at a given VO2 level only comes with running. Swimming technique only comes with swimming. Cycling efficiency comes from a ton of cycling.

But they all build the engine, right?  I don't agree that the same type program won't work for AG'ers.....first, they don't swim.....second, they don't know how to run, and there are more effecient ways to learning to run better than "just run more" with the same problems.

Most people say that to run faster you have to run more.  The truth is, you have to run faster more.(since you used them, the Brownlee's are a great example)  I believe you can run faster by doing it more and save miles on your legs (help prevent injury), and build endurance, by swimming A LOT more.

It's funny.  My kid doesn't do the track workouts the other kids do.  He gets his workouts from a coach who takes into account all he is doing.  He runs much less and is MUCH faster than his teammates.....no matter what age.  The funny part is that the other kids say, "well, you do so much more swimming and biking and all we do is run".  Sure, they don't really understand everything he does, but they know he runs about 60% of the miles they are running, and they also know he runs a ton of fast intervals.

Much of what you posted makes perfect sense......but I can't be convinced there is no crossover benefit from very intense training.  And I can't be convinced that there is no benefit from the principles for AG triathletes......most of them don't have a clue how to train to be fast......so they just train longer, and waste a lot of time.

BUT....what we are talking about is triathlon.....and I don't believe the best way to a faster triathlon run is "just run more".  In fact, I think it's dead wrong. And for the record.....my kid IS racing similarly genetically equipped kids at the level he is at......he's not getting crushed by anyone.....not by a long shot.  They're running more., sometimes a lot more.....he's still there, and younger than almost all of them.

This has developed into a pretty interesting discussion. After Boston I'm heading into a big swim focus, we will see what happens to the run during that time

Again, we're talking circles around each other, but you are the one in error here.

Your EXACT quote from above:

"So, what dfoes MacMillan say they should be able to run a marathon in based on a 30:00 10K off the bike?  I'm going to go with 2:30 - 2:36.  Not bad for only running 60 mpw huh?  I'm sticking with the idea that the 1.2 million yards they swim per year helps just a little with that. "

So clearly you're talking about the marathon in that quote, which is what I responded to. Read my above post as to how I agree with your sons regimen for ITU-short course training, but for why it would NOT work for marathon training as you suggest above.

Yaz - it's hard to keep both your and marq's commments in my reply.  And I was referencing past discussions when talking about Brownlee's probable marathon time.  I think about this stuff a bunch, and I read a ton.....so if it seems like I'm in a circle reference to your comments I apologize......I suspect if we were face to face the discussion would be easier.

Yes, fair enough!

Yes, fair enough!

I personally don't care about the marathon quote.  That's a whole 'nother can of worms.  I'm more intrigued in how this would help with Sprint and/or Olympic training.

What I am interested in is how much more time can be put into swimming without hurting the bike or run AND give you an edge heading into T1. 

From the March total, I noticed that "JR" only ran 68% of the miles I did and bike 64% of my miles, and I considered March a light mileage month for me.  However, he swam 114,400 yds to my 34,469 (332%!).  Right now I'm biking about 5 hrs a week.  If shortening my long bike and adding another swim could benefit me that much, then that's worth investigating.  

How much time would it take you to double your swim yardage? (I don't know how fast you swim)

My time distribution last month was 10hr swimming, 20hr biking, 10 hr running.  In theory I could cut the bike time in half and double swimming, which would mean cutting the long ride short and putting that time towards the pool.  I've been thinking about it, and I could just make that ride more intense and get 3 hard rides a week.

Or I could move a combo of bike and run time.  It's unorthodox, but doable.

Thanks...all of your experiences are useful and I always learn something from them.

Here's another point of discussion, because clearly not everyone benefits in the same way from various activities.  How much do you kick on the swim?  My son kicks a ton while he swims and does a lot of kick sets at very high intensity.  He had a day with Mcgee a few weeks ago and he commented on my son's hip development, which he attributes much of his raw speed to.  My son believes it's from all of the kicking he does while swimming.  I know that often when someone is hurt they are given the advice to "water run" in order to keep some run fitness.  I wonder how much more of the swim can be transferred over to the run by someone who kicks a lot, and if that's the reason my kid seems to benefit greatly from more swim mileage?  I'm thinking out loud here.

From what I've seen, it depends on how well one is developed. Jr was quite fast from the get-go, but was also lower down on his potential as he hadn't be tremendously active. In such a person (lower on their potential), any activity will help improve others. The more advanced one becomes, the more specific the training needs to be to keep on going. The ITU distances brought up haven't really been disputed as being a reflection of what they might be doing and show a shift of swimming a bit less and adding in more running from what Jr is doing now.

Personally, I have not been able to tell if swimming has helped my running. I have more core stability, but that's the limit of what I can detect. My running is more advanced on my potential than my swimming is, or has been. There has been no detectable help with my biking, and it might get in the way at times as it's tougher to execute bike workouts. Progress on the bike has followed how well bike training has gone. If I can't get the strong workouts in or the volume, my progress stagnates or has even declined at times. I'm also way higher on my bike potential than either of the other two with some years of hard work and strong volume there.

I have seen some who added in just a bit of swimming to the couple runs that they were doing, and felt their running improve. They were very healthy, but not tremendously active. Not like me (or Jr).

Basically I don't think this is quite a one size fits all situation.