The two more probable scenarios are a) that I have a misunderstanding and that in the process of questioning I'll figure out and correct it, or Most probable (based on the little that I know about you). The decision of not using a model is still pretty sound. Any good coach can easily live without them obviously. I did not use such a model in prep for the 50/100/200 fly. Although I will in prep for the 1500.
Already I see that as others have pointed out a component of this is training to enable you to do the training that will improve performance rather than training to directly improve performance. That's the idea. You use the model to monitor your Base development, then you use it to assist you in designing the appropriate anaerobic capacity development program, which will cost you some of the Base. Then, later in the season, you use it one more time to assist you in tapering for your Sprinting Day, or Racing Weekend (as opposed to your sprint event). You got to have the fitness to perform at your best in all events, which is very often more than one. Glycogen levels are the main bottleneck to this. A single 200 all out will probably deplete it by more than 50%. So Base built earlier in the season, whilst not having a direct impact on one's ability to perform one single 100m, may have an impact on one's ability to perform a 100, followed by a relay swim, followed by a 50fly etc.....
All in all, I don't mind being wrong, I just want to know what exactly I'm wrong about so I can be right next time. This is why I love Andy's text which I quoted earlier, and where he ends with some apologies to the two members having gotten the physiological aspects of his concept wrong. It's impossible to be right, unless like he says, you previously got trained in exercise physiology.
And just accepting that people who are smarter and more knowledgeable than I am think I'm wrong doesn't move my understanding forward. They are in no way smarter than any of us, it's just that physiology is their specialty and that most of the flaws we mere mortals can think of in criticizing their models, they thought about them too.
The two more probable scenarios are a) that I have a misunderstanding and that in the process of questioning I'll figure out and correct it, or Most probable (based on the little that I know about you). The decision of not using a model is still pretty sound. Any good coach can easily live without them obviously. I did not use such a model in prep for the 50/100/200 fly. Although I will in prep for the 1500.
Already I see that as others have pointed out a component of this is training to enable you to do the training that will improve performance rather than training to directly improve performance. That's the idea. You use the model to monitor your Base development, then you use it to assist you in designing the appropriate anaerobic capacity development program, which will cost you some of the Base. Then, later in the season, you use it one more time to assist you in tapering for your Sprinting Day, or Racing Weekend (as opposed to your sprint event). You got to have the fitness to perform at your best in all events, which is very often more than one. Glycogen levels are the main bottleneck to this. A single 200 all out will probably deplete it by more than 50%. So Base built earlier in the season, whilst not having a direct impact on one's ability to perform one single 100m, may have an impact on one's ability to perform a 100, followed by a relay swim, followed by a 50fly etc.....
All in all, I don't mind being wrong, I just want to know what exactly I'm wrong about so I can be right next time. This is why I love Andy's text which I quoted earlier, and where he ends with some apologies to the two members having gotten the physiological aspects of his concept wrong. It's impossible to be right, unless like he says, you previously got trained in exercise physiology.
And just accepting that people who are smarter and more knowledgeable than I am think I'm wrong doesn't move my understanding forward. They are in no way smarter than any of us, it's just that physiology is their specialty and that most of the flaws we mere mortals can think of in criticizing their models, they thought about them too.
