Home Chat General Chat

go faster or longer?



  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    Flavadave wrote:

    What about the other end though? Oh jesus... I can't go 15hours without poop-poop!
    Actually ,i hadn't thought of that...oh god i feel so unprepared for ironman... and it's only a year away
  • jamewahjamewah Posts: 113
    I've arrived on this topic far too late but give you my opinion anyway. . .
    Sprints are good fun, you can do them frequently without too much downtime for recovery. HIM and full on Ironman (which would be a great accolade to have on any triathletes CV) take so much preparation, lengthy training sessions, plenty of rest, getting up at the crack of dawn to train before work, massages, mega bucks in entry fees, the possibilty of buying a new TT bike for the event etc etc etc.
    Nether the less I want to complete at least one before my time is up.

    I'm enjoyng the upgrades from Sprint's to OD then next stop HIM and then ultimately Ironman.
    Then what's next ? do a Hywell Davies and go double or even treble Ironman ?
    or go back to Sprints and start again ?

    god only knows where this Triathlon obsession will end . . . .
  • andyb99andyb99 Posts: 229
    Good point James, lets say like me you're ultimate goal is to go long whatever the finish time is (i want the tattoo....thats all) once its done where does that leave me?? i will never go double?? and i sort of feel like IM is something i will do once....but who knows...maybe i can then look at doing some abroad....still good goals....for the experience.

    so its done...where then??
  • I rekon hustler has it spot on... go long, then go long again... faster!

    Earlier on there was a fair bit of comparison between running a 1hour sprint and a 17 hour Ironman, but I think that has missed the point. Doing a 1 hour sprint puts you in the top few percent of finishers, and at London Tri would have won the race! Doing a 16:59.59IM puts you last. So sure, all else being equal a 1 hour sprint is considerably harder than a 17hour IM. If you want to compare like with like you have to ask what is harder running a 1 hour sprint or a 8:45 IM?I don't know which is harder and I suppose it comes down to personal psychology and physiology.

    For me, as an adequate university/club lightweight rower where usual races last between 6 and 8 minutes depending on the boat class, I have experienced the world of "sprinting" and know what it is like to go blind with effort in the middle of a race. In the world of tri I have only done one sprint race and my entire focus has been on going long, and again I have experienced the different types of pain you encounter. Honestly I couldn't tell you which is harder, both present a different set of challenges which appeal to different people. Respect to anyone who can honestly say they have pushed themselves to their own personal limits whether that be sprint or long.

    To answer the question in the title of the post... I would say that for me the challenges presented by pushing myself over IM distance are more tempting than sprints.

    Go longer faster!
  • There is no reason why you cant maintain speeds you do for the short races at long races.... obviously there will be a little drop off but you can limit that.

    Last year at the Long Distance World Champs I averaged 23.8mph on the bike. You would be hard pushed to do that at some sprint races!

    As I have said before, work towards going max out for IM distance:) I know ill be majorily disappointed if my IM bike leg was more than 5:30 Even on a tough course....and very disappointed if I couldnt then do the Marathon in sub 3:30.....

  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    hussler. wrote:

    As I have said before, work towards going max out for IM distance:) I know ill be majorily disappointed if my IM bike leg was more than 5:30 Even on a tough course....and very disappointed if I couldnt then do the Marathon in sub 3:30.....

    Sometimes I hate you like you wouldn't believe... it's pure jealousy but i still do...
  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    I should probably qualify that a bit, I am aiming for a 3h30 marathon next year, but so far i am struggling keeping the pace up enough beyond half mara distance...
  • As I have said before, work towards going max out for IM distance:) I know ill be majorily disappointed if my IM bike leg was more than 5:30 Even on a tough course....and very disappointed if I couldnt then do the Marathon in sub 3:30.....
    Very impressive... to go off on a slight tangent how do you approach training for going long?

    when you started out did you have a good base speed which you just tried to hold for longer and longer, or did you start by working up to being able to do the distance sowly and add the speed later.

    I ask because I'm thinking about planning next season and trying to design myself a programme that will get me going a wee bit quicker, mainly on the run but also on the bike! This year for my first IM i did a 6.17 bike and am looking to improve this by quite a bit, but I go for the low power/high cadence approach... 100rpm all the way
  • JulesJules Posts: 987
    agent_ti wrote:
    Intreresting post this one and some interesting comments.

    For me personally it is, and always has been about going long. Even before I did my first tri the intention was to go long. Now that I have done an IM, the aim is to go quicker in them (and hopefully no fractures before and torn tendons during!). For me, as much as I love triathlons, there is something about pushing yourself to the absolute limit that appeals to me. but of course this is all relative. While I may find it takes an IM to push myself to the absolute limit, for someone who is new to the sport, they may find that a sprint pushes them to the limit. And they should be applauded as much as anyone else for their acheievement, which could have been tougher for them than other distances for other people/

    But sprints, ODs and HIMs are all fantastic anyway, and even though I will base my season around IMs I will race at all other distances. Even though I won't specifically taper for these, the aim will still be to go as quick as I possibly can it whatever race I enter. This is how I feel about the sport, and in that respects I am an elitist, I want to go as fast as possible, and I want to win whatever the distance and I will do everything I can to do so (even though this is never going to happen!). But for those who are in it for the fun, who want to just go round and complete a race then good for them and go for it! That is the great thing about triathlon, its open to anyone, whether their aim is to win Hawii or get round their local sprint course. And we should all have as much admiration for everyone in the sport as the average Joe Blogg has when you say youre a triathlete
    I'm guessing a sprint tri specialist might take issue with some of this. Sprints are not just for those who are new to the sport or those just wanting to have fun.
  • I think the point is that you give the best you can in whatever distance you choose to do, if you gave it your all then people shouldn't look down on you if you came last anymore than if you came first. In fact if you cruise and do well then that is more worthy of condemnation in my opinion.

    I also think that you need to be careful before you write off those people doing a 17 hour iron man as just not having done enough training. Lots of people have personal reasons for it being a real struggle that aren't obvious at a glance, after all we all applauded CombatDwarf for his first HIM performance even if he did come last and who would knock the achievement of Moonshine's husband completing his first tri after having so many health problems? Just watch out that when you see someone crossing the line in what to you is a slow time that you give them the benefit of the doubt before being contemptuous of their performance.

    Sorry slightly grumpy post but if you guys see me walking a run section just remember that I've got a back injury and can't run before you write me off as lazy
  • andyb99andyb99 Posts: 229
    if you are the last across the line inside 17 hours at an IM then that is still a fantastic achievement full stop....lots of people dont make it so in simple terms you are not last!!!
  • danny_sdanny_s Posts: 235
    I like what Joe Friel said in that blog I posted. I understand the urge to conquer an IM distance, that is a huge achievement and being able to overcome that is not to be taken lightly.

    However, after you've done one, then what? You've met your goal which was probably a big accomplishment personally and athletically. Do you just do another, with a similar goal of 'just make the cutoff'? I think that the appeal of an IM is in large part due to its daunting, seemingly unsumountable distance involved. Once accomplished though, certainly it is a weak goal to say that for you next one you're going to just maintain your ability to cross the line. You'd need to either say your goal is to improve your time (get faster) or start doing just stupid long races with your double and triple IM or your 50 mile runs across a desert to have a new plateau to take it to. Changing the distance down and try to build a speedier base is an excellent thing, for anyone, of any physiology.

    Its a lot Ryan Hall like going from coming in 3rd in the Boston Marathon in 2:09:40, saying that he's going to stop distance running and working on his mile times for a year before returning to the marathon. Where's the glamour in running a fast mile these days? Its there because that is the key to him improving his 26.2mi time.
Sign In or Register to comment.