I'm planning on resting for a meet in Feb. As usual, I'm wondering what taper to use, how much to rest, etc. I don't feel like I've really hit on the "one" plan that works for me.
I know everyone has their own approach to taper and may taper for between 1-4 weeks. In every taper plan I've seen, the yardage always drops off gradually. Has anyone ever tried a "drop dead" taper? One where you continue to exercise at your regular level and then, say 7 days before the big meet, you precipitously drop the yardage down to 1500 or so with very little sprinting? Thoughts?
I'm wondering if this type of taper might work for me, as I feel (possibly falsely) like I lose conditioning if I taper too long.
Somewhat recent work by Inigo Mujika has compelling evidence showing that an exponential taper that drops by 35 to 55% each day is better than a simple drop taper or linear decrease in yardage taper.
The huge problem I have with a statement like this is that it is using yardage as the (only) metric of training volume. Most tapers have a completely distinct "flavor" than in-season training. Of course, it is harder to measure (cumulative) intensity level and so yardage is often used as a proxy measure.
I have not looked up the abstracts -- I'll do so when I have some time -- so I apologize if I'm doing the author a disservice. But even so, such work tends to get "boiled down" to a statement like this that will oversimplify or overgeneralize the author's data/conclusions.
Somewhat recent work by Inigo Mujika has compelling evidence showing that an exponential taper that drops by 35 to 55% each day is better than a simple drop taper or linear decrease in yardage taper.
The huge problem I have with a statement like this is that it is using yardage as the (only) metric of training volume. Most tapers have a completely distinct "flavor" than in-season training. Of course, it is harder to measure (cumulative) intensity level and so yardage is often used as a proxy measure.
I have not looked up the abstracts -- I'll do so when I have some time -- so I apologize if I'm doing the author a disservice. But even so, such work tends to get "boiled down" to a statement like this that will oversimplify or overgeneralize the author's data/conclusions.
