The Dark Side of IMAZ 2012

Here is the training summary for the year leading up to IMAZ

	2012
	Time	Distance
Swim	95:10:47	163
Bike	331:16:46	6,254
Run	152:55:15	1,089
Total	579:22:48	7,506
Average/week	12:35:43	163

And 2011

	2011
	Time	Distance
Swim	63:28:58	107
Bike	287:25:32	5,142
Run	139:12:20	930
Total	490:06:50	6,178
Average/week	10:39:17	134

Comparison

	Increase since 2011
	Time	% increase	Distance	% increase
Swim	31:41:49	50%	56	52%
Bike	43:51:14	15%	1,112	22%
Run	13:42:55	10%	159	17%
Total	89:15:58	18%	1,328	21%
Average/week	1:56:26	18%	29	21%

Result – Faster times

	Results			Return on additional time invested
Swim	0:01:08	1.9%		0.060%
Bike	0:29:27	8.6%		1.119%
Run	0:02:17	1.0%		0.043%

When you begin to look at a return on time invested.  It becomes obvious that I should pretty much stop swimming all together.  A 50% increase in time and distance results in a 1 minute improvement and I am already in the top 10 in my age group.

Running also looks somewhat fruitless (a 10% increase in time and a 17% increase in volume results in a 2 minute improvement.  I had the highest overall finish for someone that runs as slow as I do, and I "only" lost 6 places within my age group in this part of the race. 

Cycling looks on the surface like the shining star with and 8.6% improved result.  I invested an additional 43 hours and over 1,112 miles to cycling, for a 29 minute improvement.  The challenge comes in when you start to look at the power files.

Bike	Average	Norm	Cadence	Climbing (ft)	Time
2012	188	196	93	1602	5:11:21
2011	186	197	91	1186	5:40:32

The normalized power is lower in the faster ride (by 1) but functionally the same.  The good news is that I went 29 minutes faster with no change in output.  The bad news is that there was no change in output.  I raced exactly to my plan, so that was not the issue.  After training for 331 hours and cycling over 6,000 miles, I would expect there should be at least some increase in functional threshold power and ability to put down more watts on the bike. 

The short explanation for the improved time is that I bought a new bike and gear in March.  I bought a carbon fiber Cervelo P3 that is better fit to my body, an aero racing helmet and aero racing front wheel.  (I was fit by Joe Santos at Davis Wheel Works and this is a testament to his skill and expertise.)  This allowed me to stay more aerodynamic throughout the race as the bike is much more comfortable fit for my body than my old bike.  By my assessment, this counts for the vast majority (~22-23 minutes) of the improved time.  The rest could be attributed to more aggressive racing strategies.

Ultimately, if I need to cut another 55 minutes to qualify in my age group or 25 minutes if I wait until the next age group, I cannot “buy” my way into it and I am going to have to do something differently than I have done it thusfar.  I cannot afford to lose another 12 spots on the bike and hope to qualify.

My coach has suggested becoming a cyclist for an extended training cycle, and maybe even participating in some cycling races.  I think this could help.

We have another 5 weeks to figure out what the plan will be.  For now, I will be examining the season as a whole and trying to get a better understanding of what happened so I can avoid repeating it in the future.

Thanks again for taking the time.  I hope my analysis helps you better understand the sport and (Where applicable) improve your own performance.