I may have just read the worst bit of journalism by Andrew Hood of VeloNews.  I typically respect Mr. Hood’s articles and thoughts, but this article is downright nonsensical.  I don’t know what’s worse – that someone wrote this or that someone got paid to write it.  Or that I read it. 

The article in questions is titled “Opinion:  Six reasons we should trust Valverde” and refers to his vein of incredible form even as he is now 37 years old.  I’m going to shred it piece by piece and insert my own thoughts, comments and questions along the way.  Enjoy! 

[AH]: Hot off his third-career Ardennes double, Alejandro Valverde is like a fine Spanish wine that just keeps getting better with age. In 26 race days so far this year, he’s only finished out of the top-20 once, and won a WorldTour-leading 11 stages and races along the way. That’s downright Merckxian by any measure. 

While Valverde’s domination is celebrated in Spain — the Spanish dailyMARCA gave Valverde a full-page spread Tuesday to celebrate his 37th birthday — more than a few might be rolling their eyes. You could almost hear the collective groan on social media when Valverde powered to victory Sunday at Liège-Bastogne-Liège. To some, Valverde’s run seems too good to be true. 

[Coach Nate]: That collective groan you’re hearing, Andrew, is that Valverde is arguably racing stronger now than he did pre-ban.  In order to not think something is amiss, one would have to believe in the erroneous supposition that the pro peloton is cleaner than ever before.  It’s not. 
 
More than half of Valverde’s career wins have occurred since his doping ban – roughly 40 pre-ban and 60 post-ban.  In fact, he won a stage of the 2012 Tour Down Under, his first race back after serving the ban.  When he should have been stale and anything but race ready.  Right. 
 
By any measure, he is more successful post-doping ban.   

[AH]: There’s an expression in Spain that seems to fit the moment — “No se puede poner la mano en el fuego por nadie” — that roughly translates to, “Don’t put your hand in the fire for anyone.” 

Yet rather than blindly thrusting our collective hands into the fire, perhaps it’s better to step back at arm’s length, and look at things contextually. Just how “amazing” was Valverde’s spring? Here are some talking points: 

1. Age advantage 
The first thing to cause skepticism is Valverde’s age. He turned 37 this week, an age when cyclists often retire. So how is Valverde better than ever at his age? A few things to consider: Valverde has never suffered a serious crash or major injury throughout his career, and his two-year stop for the Puerto ban actually gave his body a break from the day-in, day-out rigors of racing. When he returned in 2012, he said he felt like he had a second chance on life. Remember, Joop Zoetemelk won the world title at 38. And while younger riders are succeeding in today’s peloton, 2017 seems to be season of the 30-something winners. Three of the four monuments this spring were won by riders in their 30s (except Michal Kwiatkowski, 26, at Milano-Sanremo), with Greg Van Avermaet at 31 and Philippe Gilbert at 34. Sure, Valverde is old, but veteran riders will also tell you they know how to train, how to recover, and how to get the most out of their bodies. 

[Coach Nate]:  How to unpack this concisely?  Firstly, Hood compares Valverde to another known doper who also got popped, Zoetemelk.  Secondly, I seem to recall Valverde abandoning races due to crashes or mishaps.  One in particular was whacking his knee into his handlebars which inflamed his knee and caused him to miss a bit of time.  Of greater interest would be the small periods of missed racing due to mystery illness or injury.  As we know all too well, when riders are suddenly pulled off their race programs, it can be an indication that they are still glowing and, thus, do not want to risk getting popped in an in-race drug test.  Not always, but more often than people either realize or want to admit. 

Third, Hood does not have the pedigree of a life-long, national and world class athlete.  The older we get, the slower we get.  The first to go is power, yet Valverde seems to have plenty of it in the one-day races he’s dominating. 

[AH]: 2. Focus on strengths 
With that age comes the wisdom of knowing his strengths. Valverde’s schedule is packed with races he knows he can win. In fact, he tries to win nearly ever race he starts (another reason why he’s always hovering in the top 10). The three stage races he won this spring -- Ruta del Sol, Volta a Catalunya, and Vuelta al Pais Vasco— were packed with stages that suit his style of racing. The short, punchy climbs, the undulating time trials, and mid-range mountaintop finales of the week-long Spanish tours are where Valverde thrives. And the Ardennes are simply an extension of Valverde’s favored terrain. Valverde isn’t blowing the wheels off everyone at Ronde van Vlaanderen; he sticks to what he knows. 

[Coach Nate]:  Valverde’s racing program hasn’t changed that much over the years.  It’s not like he used to do the Cobbled Classics; he’s always done the Ardennes Classics.  He’s also excelled at short stage races; he doesn’t skip them if they support his key race goals – typically the Ardennes Classics and the Tour.  He’s always stuck to what he knows. 

[AH]:  3. Spring peak 
If Valverde was winning everywhere, all the time, then it might be time to hack into his UCI medical files — but he’s not. Valverde targeted an early season peak in March and April, and prepared for the Ardennes classics just like the cobble-bashers do for the northern classics. And now he’s taking a break before returning to the Tour de France as a helper for Nairo Quintana in July, with an eye on possibly targeting the overall in the Vuelta a España. You don’t see Valverde trying to win over the bumpy cobbles at Paris-Roubaix, and he’s given up on the Tour de France, because he knows the longer climbs and time trials are too much for him. This spring was to Valverde what July is to Chris Froome. 

[Coach Nate]:  This argument might be the most nonsensical.  Did Lance try to win everything?  Did Indurain?  Has any rider after about the mid-80s with the retirement of the Badger tried to win everything?  With the expansion of pro teams, pro riders and sophistication around PED programs, specialization had to occur.  Just like in track, just like in swimming, just like in triathlon -- just like in any sport with a multitude of distances.  Speaking of triathlon, triathletes used to compete in and win at all distances until the Olympic movement started gaining steam in the mid-90s.  Then, specialization came front-and-center.  It didn’t stop athletes from competing at all distances, but it kept them from being competitive for the podium at any distance almost unanimously.  At some point in a sport’s evolution, athletes have to choose the types of races on which they want to focus and excel. 

[AH]:  4. Team support 
Another major factor in Valverde’s amazing spring run is how well Movistar is riding to support him in both stage races and one-day classics. Movistar is among the few teams deep enough with talent and budget to rival Team Sky across the calendar. Other teams might have an equally stacked squad or even a bigger star, but unless those two elements line up on the day — team support coupled with an on-form captain — it’s very hard to win solely on pure talent. Look at Peter Sagan, clearly the most gifted rider in the peloton: This spring he came away with only one major victory, in part because he didn’t have the team support like Van Avermaet and Valverde enjoyed. Movistar has the horsepower to control the race on the flats, and then the climbers to keep Valverde enveloped inside a protective cocoon. You didn’t even see Valverde at Flèche Wallonne until the final 150 meters of the Mur de Huy because he was being towed at the front of the peloton. And it was same story at Liège, where he finally was forced to move with 500m to go when Dan Martin (Quick-Step) attacked. If Valverde wasn’t on Movistar, he wouldn’t be winning nearly as much. 

[Coach Nate]:  I agree that a strong team is critical to maximizing the success of the protected rider, and the team itself in the event the protected rider is having an off day, crashes, has a rash of mechanicals, etc.  While dramatically presented, I’ll concede this as a very valid point.
 
[AH]:  5. Calculation beats panache 
People often remark about how much they like Valverde’s aggressive racing style, which baffles me. As Valverde’s gained more experience, he’s become more surgical and less of a risk-taker. Earlier in his career, he would make aggressive, crowd-pleasing attacks, often to the dismay of his sport directors and teammates. As he’s grown wiser, he knows where and when to attack to win, and in today’s peloton, that usually means playing a waiting game. And when he finally reached an elusive Tour de France podium in 2015, Valverde didn’t attack once. All he did was follow wheels all the way to Paris to finish third overall. Valverde wins a lot because he has the experience to know when to move in just about every race he starts. 

[Coach Nate]:  I’ve been watching and following cycling since the mid-80s.  Valverde has largely been one of the most boring and predictable riders in the peloton.  He has lost quite a few key races – and I’ll go so far as to say more than one World Champion title – due to his non-attacking nature.  Especially post-ban.  He can be too surgical for his own good, waiting for others to close down dangerous breaks and being towed to the line so he can unleash his lethal kick in the closing couple hundred meters.  But, if he’s got to get himself there, forget about it.   

[AH]:  6. Winning big — but not that big 
And finally, all of Valverde’s victories this spring seem to pass the “sniff test.” There hasn’t been one victory that seems so outrageous to challenge our sense of propriety. It’s not as if he attacked solo from La Redoute to win Liège or won the Vuelta al País Vasco by five minutes. In fact, he won Ruta del Sol by one second, and the Basque Country tour by 17 seconds, each time ahead of Alberto Contador (Trek-Segafredo), another successful 30-something. The Catalunya victory was at a more comfortable 1:03 (also ahead of Contador) despite Movistar being penalized in the team time trial. And in the Ardennes, Valverde’s wins came with lethal, perfectly timed finishing attacks.
 
[Coach Nate]:  This is a ludicrous assertion.  In this day and age, a rider would be completely moronic to destroy the competition at every whim.  This isn’t about gambling with losing by leaving it too late.  In a race, you know how to read other athletes.  You hear their breath rates compared to your own; you see their body language; how relaxed or twisted their faces get; you see how much sweat is crusted on their kits; how easily and smoothly they’re pedaling; how they react or stop reacting to bursts or gaps opening in front of them; and so on.  These and other outputs are taken in throughout the entire race and leads to late race-defining moments.  Winning is calculated on so many levels and, guaranteed, one of those levels is “How easy do I make this look?”  Our egos drive us to bludgeon the competition.  But, if we’ve got something to hide, like PED use, then the athletes must make their victories look real to avoid the OOC (out of competition) scrutiny they would surely be under if they won with ease. 

And lest we forget the facial language.  The recent sprint finish in Stage 5 of the Tour of the Alps comes to mind.  Thibaut Pinot sprints to the stage win, mouth agape, digging for every precious watt he can find to cross the line first.  Brent Bookwalter is similarly anguished as he fights for second place.  But, Geraint Thomas, overall GC winner and third on the stage?  Face relaxed, mouth closed.  That shit ain’t right.  But, imagine if he took the massive gains from the super secret South African training he did and applied them to that stage.  He would have made a mockery of it all. 

And, to be clear, I do believe athletes can win clean.  I believe in Pinot.  He’s the most transparent pro cyclist I’ve come across, in that he has published his historical power data starting all the way back in his junior cycling years.  He’s not hiding his progression from anyone.  Hard to say that about the vast majority of his peers. 

No transparency equates to a metric shit ton of scrutiny and lack of trust.  Full stop. 

[AH]:  So how does it all add up? 
To get our heads around Valverde, two things must be considered: First, it must be acknowledged that Valverde served a two-year ban, and while we might not know the when and the where (Valverde never made a tell-all confession), the DNA-linked bag that was part of the Operation Puerto booty helps us guess the how. And since he returned to the peloton, he’s also been subject to the same battery of doping controls that the entire peloton faces, and even more so, because he wins so frequently. If we don’t accept the effectiveness and deterrence of the anti-doping apparatus, then the peloton still has a very serious problem. 

[Coach Nate]:  Quite the straw man argument.  It's doesn't "all add up."  What about those 2 years away from cycling?  Valverde was training like a monster, the reports go, putting in more hours and miles than ever before.  He wasn’t part of the Whereabouts program, so who the hell knows what he did while serving his ban.  Since he clearly was a doper, it is more than reasonable to assume he doped to the gills during his ban and continued progressing.  It’s also reasonable to assume that, with help, he fine-tuned his doping protocol to minimize the risk of glowing during tests.  Two years is an eternity of time to perfect the art of undetectable doping.  To think he leisurely – and cleanly – spun the pedals during his ban is downright asinine. 

[AH]:  There’s another factor that’s just as important. Valverde is one of those rare outliers of cycling talent — the one percent of the one-percenters. Valverde is like Messi slamming home the winning goal, or like LeBron James dribbling his way out of a fix. Valverde seems born to race a bike, and this spring he’s hit the absolute peak of his powers. He’s not coming out of the blue. These are all races he’s won and challenged for victory, year-in and year-out, with a big target on his back and pressure that comes with being a favorite. 

[Coach Nate]:  I agree, Valverde is a huge talent.  No question, clean or not.  However, on an even playing field, he wouldn’t win as much as he does.  There are too many factors in a sport that doesn’t simply come down to brute force or raw endurance at a steady state effort. 

[AH]: Would he risk doping? Who knows, but the fallout would be incalculable. Not only would he banned for life and see his reputation in tatters, but it would likely sink his entire team (we don’t know the details of Movistar’s sponsorship deal, but most contracts have an escape clause for doping cases). And it would be a massive blow for the credibility that cycling has slowing clawed back over the past decade. While there are still doping cases, and there’s no question that some teams and riders push the ethical line — look no further than the TUE scandal brewing in the UK right now — there hasn’t been a major, full-blown doping scandal involving a big star or major team in nearly a decade. 

[Coach Nate]:  By asking a question that is definitively unanswerable by anyone other than Valverde (and maybe those within his inner circle), Hood tries to create a defensible position for his silly assertions.  This paragraph comes across as an apology to the peloton for all those who “don’t believe in miracles.”  Based on everything Hood states in this one paragraph, the general public is plain ignorant for not given the vast majority of the peloton the benefit of the doubt that they are, in fact, clean.  “While there are still doping cases” serves to minimize the deep-rooted problem of PEDs that is woven into the very fabric of not only cycling, but of quite literally all sports.  “Some teams and riders push the ethical line” is another doozy.  What’s ethical about cheating?  It’s bullshit like this article that propagates omerta and provides (in this case) pro cyclists a Get Out of Jail Free card.  The hypocrisy is stunning. 

[AH]:  There are plenty of tests to prove a rider is doping, but until there is a test to prove that they are not, well, the only fair thing to do is accept and cheer the victories equally across the peloton. I’m not sticking my hands in the fire for anyone, but I’m not going to throw anyone into a bonfire, either. 

[Coach Nate]:  Yes, this is one approach.  Just bury your head in the sand, shrug your shoulders and enjoy the spectacle.  Nothing wrong with that.  But coupling that approach with ignorance is downright unprofessional for a journalist covering a given sport.   

For to believe Valverde is winning clean you must believe one of four things:  (1) the entire peloton is clean, or all those placing in the top 20 are clean and it’s only the lower-level pros who are doping; (2) the 6-10% advantage Valverde is no longer getting because he’s racing clean is instead being realized through all of his post-ban revelatory epiphanies mentioned in Hood’s article; (3) Valverde has indeed found the Fountain of Youth and is cheating Father Time in a way that no clean athlete can; or (4) unless an athlete fails a doping test, he or she must be clean. 

To say that we need to accept things the way they are with a smile and an “oh, well” is shameful.  Really, it is.  Journalists are taught to ask “Why?” again and again and again until they get to the nub of the argument.  But for myriad reasons, they’re too afraid to go beyond the first layer of the answer.  They’d rather get the useless soundbite than find the beating heart of the story.  The world needs more like Paul Kimmage. 

Valverde is more successful now than before his ban.  This is irrefutable.  The peloton is not any cleaner.  Watts/kg values are creeping ever so close to the days when unchecked EPO use was running rampant through the peloton, yet somehow that’s being done cleanly now?  No chance.  Not one-in-a-trillion.  We’re not seeing a clean “one percent of one percent” athlete winning.  We’re seeing a known doper who is still a doper winning.  He just happens to be extremely talented to boot.  Just like the other 200-ish riders he competes against on any given day. 
​
Happy Training, 
Coach Nate ​

​Anti-doping in sports in an interesting and multi-faceted topic.  While the decision to dope or not is an easy one, the machinations behind it are neither simple nor straightforward.  At the individual level, team level, sporting level and anti-doping agency level, we're looking at quite the spider web which influences what stances athletes take, or don't take, every day.

A funny and fairly entertaining this is occurring this Winter.  Back in early-February, I got an alert from Strava that one of my KOMs had been stolen.  It was a KOM I didn’t even realize I had, on a nearly-hour stretch starting on the flats of northeast Boulder, before giving way to rollers and a gradual climb before ultimately finishing up a roughly 7-minute kicker averaging about 10% most of the way.  It’s actually a fantastic challenge because of its increasing difficulty. 
 
In any event, I get notified that the KOM is no longer mine.  What’s funny is that I didn’t even know I owned that KOM.  Yet, when I got the alert, I was intrigued and so investigated.  My KOM time was just under an hour in duration.  The rider who blasted it set a new marker of just under 56 minutes.  I looked at the comparative splits, did some calculations in my head and figured I could snatch it back fairly easily, because my sub-hour PR was within the context of a fairly massive ride where speed was not of the essence nor the focus. 
 
Two weeks later, on a fairly calm Saturday morning, I clipped in and set out to regain my KOM.  Given I’d be looking at somewhere close to 55 minutes, I knew what zone of watts I wanted to maintain in order to not blow up too early.  I didn’t know how fast I could go, so I didn’t focus on actual time.  What I did do is take some mental time checks along the way so that if I didn’t steal the KOM back, I would at least have laid down some mental markers as guideposts along the way.  It was a cold and wet morning, but little wind; not perfect conditions but serviceable.  I hit that final 7-minute (or so) steep stretch feeling strong and still in control, despite the mounting fatigue.  I looked at my computer and saw an elapsed time of 44:45.  Not only was I going to regain the KOM, I was going to slaughter it.  At the top, I stopped the clock at 51:32.  My total ride was about 3.5 hours, so when I got home, I proudly uploaded the file to Strava, verified the KOM and patted myself on the back. 
 
The following week, I get another alert of the KOM being stolen, by the same rider.  He set a new marker of 49:57. Wow!  I thought back to my 51:32 and started dissecting it, wondering how I could pull 95 seconds out of it.  All I could come up with was “warmer weather and drier roads.”  I started dissecting my ride, thinking of where I eased off to keep my HR down and wondering if I needed to keep my HR in check as much as I did.  How much faster could I go if I had an average HR another 5 beats higher?  10 beats higher?  Could I let my HR rise that much without blowing up before hitting that final steep section?  Because if you’re already blown there – and I have been many a time in 25 years of riding the roads of Boulder County – you lose minutes, not seconds.  But, given the new KOM titled his ride, “That Didn’t Last Long, Your Turn,” I knew it was game on.   
 
Not one to shy away from the gauntlet being thrown down, a week after my 51:32, I set out again to see what I could do.  The weather was beautiful, though I was dealing with a slight headwind for most of the ride.  It would be in my face any time I was heading west (most of the ride), but not be a factor on the few stretches to the north as I wound my way to the mouth of Lefthand Canyon to start the longer second half of the route when all the climbing begins.  I would give myself until the mouth of the canyon, do a time check and compare it to the previous weekend’s split, and then determine whether or not to pull the plug.  If I was behind, then the wind would be too much of a negative factor; I’d abort and live to fight another day.  
 
As I clipped in and warmed up during the roughly 30-minute ride out to the start of the KOM route, my legs felt amazing.  It was go time and I started out more aggressively than the previous weekend from the first pedal stroke.  Watts were up, but so was HR.  The legs were ticking over like a metronome, and I knew in the opening minutes that my HR would give out before my legs did.  The flats were fast; the rollers felt like mole hills even into the quite noticeable headwind.  I turned north for the final stretch of rollers before the left hand turn into Lefthand Canyon knowing I was well ahead of the previous weekend’s effort.  I hit the mouth of the canyon in 21:30, a full 3:20 faster than a week prior.  I was absolutely flying.  But, I was feeling it, too.  The subconscious physical checks were telling me I was OK, but that if the wind didn’t relent, then I would be losing time with each turn of the pedals and could lose all of that hard-earned time in the bank.  In calm conditions, I was heading for about a 47:30.  But I wasn’t sure if I could do it. 
 
Lefthand Canyon is a mostly gradual climb before it climbs above about 7,500ft, averaging about 4.5%.  On a fairly calm day, it’s a big ring climb when the effort is about pumping out the watts.  Turning left and starting to climb up Lefthand, the wind wasn’t too bad.  I felt it, but it was calmer than I expected.  I passed the first mile marker in just under 3 minutes and hit the second mile marker in 6-flat.  Still flying.  But, here’s where the wind kicked up, as the residential area of the canyon gives way to the more exposed, funnel-like canyon.  The wind slapped me square in the face.  I looked down and saw that I was nearly my ceiling with my HR; if I kept it where it was at, then I’d be lighting the fuse and hit the point of no return.  It was either fully commit or continue to hedge my effort.  I calculated I had about 18 minutes left, did another check of my legs, my HR, the overall sensations I was feeling, and decided to fully commit. 
 
I’m not going to lie.  The rest of the climb turned into more and more of a struggle.  Every time I needed some sort of reprieve, the road would wind straight back into a headwind.  The quads were turning to cinder blocks.  Despite being on the limit and most definitely tipped into the red, I was still motoring in the big ring.  As I hit the final left turn to start that final 7-minute steeper stretch to the top of the KOM, my body felt torched.  I figured I’d be pedaling squares and that it would take me nearly 8 minutes – which is all the time I had if I wanted to earn back the KOM.  I had lost a big portion of my time cushion from the bottom of the canyon.  The initial pitches are the steepest, about 12-14% and it’s easy to push the watts too high too soon.  I purposely held back the first 2:30, until I hit a flat switchback, a very slight reprieve before another steep ramp.  Then, it was all about digging deep and ignoring every muscle telling me to back off.  Cresting the top, I hit my split button – 49:13. 
 
The rest of the ride, I was pretty wrecked.  Battling the wind had taken more out of me than I anticipated, so the next 2.5 hours were a bit miserable.  My guess is the KOM will be stolen yet again. The conditions for a record attempt were less than ideal, so I know I can go faster.  But, I’m not sure when I will focus on this KOM again if it’s not taken from me.  Ultimately, I don’t care about the KOM.  This is more about the challenge and finding ways to do something better and better and better.  I had thought 51:32 was pretty damn fast.  Yet, a week later, I bested that by 2:19; not an insignificant amount of time.  In calmer conditions, I think sub-48 is very reasonable.  So why not if the mood strikes in a couple months? 
 
I tell this story because it typifies the process of improvement.  Most athletes just complete their workouts according to the parameters.  They check the box that they held a certain duration at a certain training zone.  Done and done.  While this can certainly lead to improvement, it also leaves some percentage of improvement on the table.  When you complete a key workout, do you analyze the results?  I don’t mean “the numbers”, but rather how the workout went.  Did you start intervals out too aggressively and then die?  Did you start too conservatively and have too much left in the tank at the end?  If you felt you nailed it, how can you uncover areas to tweak and, thus, improve yet more?  Can you improve technique, or up your cadence (swimming, biking or running) or slow it down, can you fuel better or hydrate more, do you need to ease off the throttle at the midpoint to catch your breath before recommitting to the effort?  And so on and on and on. 
 
The process of improvement is not linear and improvement can come from myriad things.  If you stop asking, “How can I get better?  How can I continue to improve?” then also ask yourself “Why?”  Why are you dedicating so much time and energy to getting better, if you’re not willing to fully commit to the process of improvement?  When you fully commit, that’s when you will break down barriers and hit new levels of performance of which at one time you only dreamed?   
 
Yesterday, hitting 49:13 I had no idea how I could have gone even a second faster.  Yet, I know when the time comes that I will dissect the effort myriad ways and determine how to better attack it so I hit the top of the KOM faster still.  At some point, I won’t be able to do it faster; I concede this.  I’m just not there.  Yet. 
 
Happy Training, 
Coach Nate ​

"Focus on what you can do, not what you can't."  Or, as I prefer, control the controllables.  

Here we are at Easter, and some of the athletes have reached out to me with some worrisome reports about some health and injury issues they are coping with, and already resigning themselves to a poor racing season.  They ask me if their seasons are salvageable or should they just start looking to 2018 already.  Whether it's a lagging sickness or a niggling injury, a few weeks of reduced activity or inactivity is causing these athletes to consider pulling the ripcord on racing in 2017.  

My first thought here is, "2018?  2017 has barely begun!"  Sure, a Fall/Winter of preparation may have been compromised to a certain degree, but this in no way creates a situation where the athlete needs to already throw in the towel on this season of racing.  The thought is that given a big volume of training time has been lost, there's no way to "make it up."  Which, at this point of the year, is completely untrue!  There is plenty of time to get fitness back on track and to be ready for mid- to late-season racing. 

The athletes ORION Training Systems work with don't focus on "base miles" or winters of big volume.  Rather, we use what is typically the cold of the year to reduce volume, increase intensity and keep the body opened up.  This is a fantastic foundation on which to build up volume as key races start coming into focus.  For example, now is the time OTS triathletes are starting to increase volume for late-June to early-August 70.3 and Ironman racing.  OTS cyclists are now starting to extend weekend rides and incorporate short, race simulation group rides mid-week.  And our runners are graduating from shorter speedwork sessions into more race-specific sessions tailored toward a peak in the coming months.  In other words, we are on the cusp of increasing volume now because the longer days and warmer temps naturally allow for this.  There is little -- very little -- benefit to spending countless hours on the indoor bike trainer during the off-season.  It's neither necessary nor beneficial.

Worrying that you are "unfit" to compete in a Summer long-distance race of any kind because you missed some key training time in the Fall/Winter is a fairly useless hand-wringing exercise.  Go back to the top of this post -- control the controllables.  You cannot control the fact that you missed training time -- for whatever reason and for whatever the duration.  What you can control is what you do from this day forward to positively impact your preparation.

We all go through rough patches.  It's part-and-parcel with being an endurance athlete wishing to compete.  If you missed some key training this past Fall/Winter, but were still able to complete between one- to two-thirds of your scheduled volume, then you're in a good place!  You have not ruined your ability to have a successful race season.  There is no reason to write off 2017.  Instead, thing of this -- the extra downtime has left your body all the fresher so now you will be able to push it a little bit more and a little bit more than if you already had many months of accumulated pounding and fatigue.  Focus forward and get excited for a great Spring and Summer of fantastic training and great race experiences!

Happy Training,
Coach Nate

​Spring.  The time of year when we get hints of Summer’s warm weather.  Despite Spring temps generally being milder than during the Summer months, the sharp 20-30 degrees uptick from Winter can still be a shocker to the system.  70 degrees F / 20 degrees C can feel like 90 / 30 when we have yet to acclimate to the rising temps. When competing in cycling, running or triathlon, especially in the Spring and early-Summer, heat can be a major factor in determining how well – or how poorly – you actually do in your races.

Here’s an example.  Spring Break just occurred.  Did you go hit a tropical beach somewhere?  If the beach was hotter and more humid than back home, you probably felt like you were baking in the sun.  I went to Costa Rica with my family.  It was in the low-80s, but it felt so much hotter because it had been in the 50s back in Boulder.  But, come Summer, the low-80s will be pretty comfortable.  I also recall feeling a bit “thick” and lethargic the first few days there as my body fought to acclimate.  Now, think about having to race in that very same heat and humidity a few days after your arrival. Many of us from Northern climates are unprepared for the heat at popular early-season IRONMAN events in either subtropical or even Central European regions. Heat is a determining factor that impacts both training and racing, but it is also one you can account for and proactively address.

Some people acclimate very easily to the heat (or, conversely, to the cold).  Most of us do not.  Quite a bit of this has to do with genealogy and physiology, yet can still be influenced.  Heat not only impairs performance, but it could lead to complications, such as heat exhaustion or, worse, heat stroke. In any race, you’ll swim when it’s cooler and the water will also provide a cooling effect.  But, as your races progress, especially 70.3 and 140.6 distances, you will eventually reach the point where you feel like you’re baking in the oven as both temperatures and humidity rise throughout the day.

Why is dealing with the heat important?  The body is actually pretty inefficient at dissipating heat.  In order to lower your core body temperature, blood is pulled to the surface (this is why your skin turns beet red).  Yet, with less blood available for the working muscles, your heart has to pump harder in order to provide the muscles with the O2 they need to perform.  Which in turn raises your core temp further.  It can become a nasty feedback loop.  It takes a lot of energy to cool the body down, so you will be burning through your energy stores at an accelerated rate.

With higher heart rate, you will also experience an increase in blood lactate concentration.  Couple this with dehydration and you will have even lower blood volume available and your blood will also be thicker and, thus, harder for the heart to pump.  So, there are two options:  1) slow down in order to keep your HR in check; or 2) increase your HR in order to maintain your current output.  It’s a fine line, and one that needs to constantly be monitored to avoid heat-related maladies.

Acclimating to the heat improves the body’s ability to exercise in higher temperatures. For most endurance athletes, training for key events starts early in the year, in the cool Fall or dead of Winter cold. This does not simulate anything close to race day conditions.  For example, I did a climbing ride that gained about 8,000ft of vertical.  I did this ride twice in the Winter when the temps peaked in the 50s and the rides went great.  On this more recent occasion, the temps peaked in the mid-70s and it was my first ride “in the heat” of the Spring.  The ride started out fantastic; really strong.  But, let’s just say that the back half was a complete and utter death march.  As the day heated up, so did my body and my performance shut down.  Ugh.

With that in mind, here are a couple training strategies to consider:

• Extra Layers.  You can force heat simulation by adding an extra layer or two of clothing during training.  One example is wearing a trash bag underneath your cycling jersey, or wearing tights and turtleneck during a run.  If you shoot for about 10 training sessions over the course of 2-3 weeks, you will force the body to become more efficient at dissipating heat.  The first few sessions will probably be pretty darn uncomfortable, so start with shorter, less intense workouts before graduating up to more intense or longer ones.  And be sure to maximize your rehydration strategy both directly after these workouts as well as throughout the rest of the day.
• Artificial Heat.  Another way to acclimate to the heat is to artificially increase the ambient temperature around you.  One example of this is spending time in a sauna or steam room.  Another is driving with the windows up and heater blasting when you would rather have the windows down.  This approach raises your core body temperature, which will allow for greater heat adaptation.  Rather than do this in tandem with the approach of training with more layers on, instead incorporate these heat sessions in the closing several weeks before your key race.  Start with 10-15 minutes per session and gradually increase to 20-30 minutes.  3-4 times per week is plenty. 

At the end of this, you should both feel more comfortable in the heat and be able to perform better in it.  Specifically, here are the benefits you will come to experience:

• Increased blood flow to muscles, heart and skin
• Improvements in fluid balance and cardiovascular stability
• Enhanced sweat capacity
• Less glycogen use
• Lower HR at the same perceived effort and, thus, lower lactate buildup

Ideally, you will want to start your heat acclimation 3-4 weeks before your key event in the heat, and then stop it the final 7-10 days.  You will be adding some big stressors to your routine that will drain you to a greater degree than to which you’re accustomed.  Backing off in the final week-plus will allow your body and energy to bounce back but without devaluing the acclimation you just realized.
 
Follow this advice and you will toe the line with greater confidence and the ability to perform at a higher level.
​
Happy Training,
Coach Nate

​Tragedy will hit all of us at some point in life.  How do we process it?  How do we come back from it and get back on track with our sporting goals?  Just how important is sport in the face of tragedy?  We'll dive into this and more in this video.