In threads where training philosophy comes up, discussions of TRIMPS and TSS and other training models occasionally intrude. These models are not very well known, and even more poorly understood, so probably SolarEnergy, qbrain and I are just talking to each other and killing threads in those conversations. In any case, I figured I would present a brief overview of what it is that we're talking about when this terminology starts showing up.
Best case, this will introduce these models to the subset of swimmers (or coaches) who would be interested enough to use them, but didn't previously know enough to do so.
Plus, even if you're not the type to be interested in quantifying your training, it can be useful to think about workouts in this general framework.
And, at the very least, this might serve as a place to discuss some of the details without worrying about driving those other threads too far off-topic.
Parents
Former Member
Thanks for the links.
I think the thing we're disagreeing on is the meaning of "fatigue". I don't think so. It just means a few things and so we just gotta be careful to apply the correct meaning to the correct context.
Not sure if you had read this short post when I first introduced it. Here just in case.... It's one of the best *short and understandable* explanation of what fatigue is. It was proposed by Coggan to describe everything he had to take into account to create a sound model:
Not only that, but the algorithm isn't really based on production and clearance rates of lactate at all (or at least not directly). It's like I told Kirk Willett the other day: the algorithm is intended to "track" numerous physiological responses, but none of them in particular. Changes in steady-state (or quasi-steady-state) blood lactate concentrations were simply used as a proxy to estimate the degree of curvature of numerous physiological and metabolic responses that respond in a non-linear fashion as a function of exercise intensity. This approach/logic (which is also the basis for TRIMP) is made possible by the fact that they all seem to follow a comparable pattern - that is, there is a high correlation between blood lactate levels and the rate of lactate release from exercising muscle, between the rate of lactate release and the rate of lactate production/accumulation, between the rate of lactate production/accumulation and the rate of glycogenolysis, between the rate of glycogenolysis and changes in muscle "energy charge" (e.g., (=)/), between muscle "energy charge" and the rate of glucose oxidation, between the rate of glucose oxidation and the rate of glucose uptake, between the rate of glucose uptake and the rate of glucose production, between changes in sympathetic nervous system activity (as indicated by changes in plasma norepinephrine and epinephrine) and changes in carbohydrate utilization, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. To focus excessively on blood lactate (e.g., on the pattern of accumulation during the "30/30" intervals that Billat has studied) is, quite simply, missing the point. (With apologies to RapDaddyo and frenchyge, because in all fairness there's really no reason to expect them to have realized this, unless perhaps they happen to be trained in exercise physiology.)
Thanks for the links.
I think the thing we're disagreeing on is the meaning of "fatigue". I don't think so. It just means a few things and so we just gotta be careful to apply the correct meaning to the correct context.
Not sure if you had read this short post when I first introduced it. Here just in case.... It's one of the best *short and understandable* explanation of what fatigue is. It was proposed by Coggan to describe everything he had to take into account to create a sound model:
Not only that, but the algorithm isn't really based on production and clearance rates of lactate at all (or at least not directly). It's like I told Kirk Willett the other day: the algorithm is intended to "track" numerous physiological responses, but none of them in particular. Changes in steady-state (or quasi-steady-state) blood lactate concentrations were simply used as a proxy to estimate the degree of curvature of numerous physiological and metabolic responses that respond in a non-linear fashion as a function of exercise intensity. This approach/logic (which is also the basis for TRIMP) is made possible by the fact that they all seem to follow a comparable pattern - that is, there is a high correlation between blood lactate levels and the rate of lactate release from exercising muscle, between the rate of lactate release and the rate of lactate production/accumulation, between the rate of lactate production/accumulation and the rate of glycogenolysis, between the rate of glycogenolysis and changes in muscle "energy charge" (e.g., (=)/), between muscle "energy charge" and the rate of glucose oxidation, between the rate of glucose oxidation and the rate of glucose uptake, between the rate of glucose uptake and the rate of glucose production, between changes in sympathetic nervous system activity (as indicated by changes in plasma norepinephrine and epinephrine) and changes in carbohydrate utilization, etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. To focus excessively on blood lactate (e.g., on the pattern of accumulation during the "30/30" intervals that Billat has studied) is, quite simply, missing the point. (With apologies to RapDaddyo and frenchyge, because in all fairness there's really no reason to expect them to have realized this, unless perhaps they happen to be trained in exercise physiology.)
