coachsci.sdsu.edu/.../ultra40a.pdf
There is a method, which is referred to as the Rushall method which Michael Andrew uses.
Was wondering if you had any critique about this. If this sort of training is a good idea and what are the problems.
Would this also be good for longer events? Like the 400 IM?
Thanks!
The goggles with a perscription are WONDERFUL! I couldn't do this without them.
OK, that second time you did it with a target time of 34 was good. Rushall says don't count a faillure in the first 5 repeats. Your body is adjusting to the target time on the first five. I sometimes go all 32s in the first five but also go 33s and 32s more often. Of course if your target is 34 and you are going 37 in the first five that's no good.
Discounting any failures in the first five of the original set (when your target was 32) means your first failure was at #9! That is good. What you then want to do is push that first failure to #10 then to #11 etc. But even before you do that, I would use 33 as your target time and try it.
The goggles with a perscription are WONDERFUL! I couldn't do this without them.
OK, that second time you did it with a target time of 34 was good. Rushall says don't count a faillure in the first 5 repeats. Your body is adjusting to the target time on the first five. I sometimes go all 32s in the first five but also go 33s and 32s more often. Of course if your target is 34 and you are going 37 in the first five that's no good.
Discounting any failures in the first five of the original set (when your target was 32) means your first failure was at #9! That is good. What you then want to do is push that first failure to #10 then to #11 etc. But even before you do that, I would use 33 as your target time and try it.
