Coach Carter

I’ve said on previous blog posts that one of the key skills a coach needs is to manage athlete expectations. Early season is a prime example of when this skill is called upon. My riders are now a few weeks into racing – whilst the very first races are approached with a degree of acceptance, as the weeks go by, expectations increase – expectations that are often not matched by form....or weather for that matter!!

In part, this is a consequence of deciding to take a scientific approach to performance. Understandably, riders look to other riders to measure their form. Scientific training means a choice is being made to follow a periodised year: this means you’re starting out of the blocks relatively slower than riders not on this route: shortfall number 1. A few weeks in – riders are beginning to build to the season’s peaks: the nature of the structured training often means that the ramp is considerable – so riders are racing whilst under the fatiguing effects of high intensity training: shortfall number 2. Ever tried to ‘PB’ in a week you have performed multiple interval sessions? It CAN happen, but you certainly wouldn’t plan that to peak for your big race – so why do we expect to pull a performance out of the bag week in, week out? In contrast, the approach to the season taken by ‘old school’ riders means they start with good performances. That might appear desirable – but it explains why I have a history of working with riders who ‘come good’ later in the year...other riders are burning out, having attempted to hold their race form ALL year around.

On the whole my athletes buy in to the explanation of not being able to hold form week in, week out over a season that might last 7 months. However, even the most committed to the cause get confidence wobbles. A lot of the time, it comes back to me via training diary comments or phone call chats “but surely I should be better than this time last year?” I can completely understand that questioning. Dedicate yourself to performance improvement by taking up coaching, and its not unrealistic to expect improvement – but just like guarding against expecting week in, week out ‘PBs’, we must be cautious in expecting a year on year improvement in form at comparable times of the year. Even if we raced the same event, against the same people, under the same weather conditions, its a dangerous comparison to make.

Firstly, the human body is not a machine – there are many complicated ‘rhythms’ that the body follows. Female athletes are probably more aware of this than men given a pretty obvious monthly cycle. But men and women alike are subject to biological variation. Research in this area has shown ~3% variation in physiology even under the tightest of experimental control: put that into power output terms, and an athlete capable of holding 300W for a 10 mile time trial is looking at a range of 290 to 300W. A 20W swing in races over consecutive races might feel like a dramatic loss / improvement in fitness – but happily / sadly (depending on the direction!) this is just the body’s natural ups and downs. As an athlete / coach team, all we can do is maximise the possibility of controlling the controllables e.g. diet and freshness.

A second factor is again related to the human body’s unpredictable nature – even if we gave the same athlete the same training leading up to the race season year after year, the training effect won't likely be the same. A rider in their first year of training will respond differently to the programme 5 years on – simply because they have had 4 years of training in the intervening time. Endurance training is always in the system – like a bank account, the payments in will always exist on the statement, even if you have made multiple transactions since. The proof of this is seen in pro riders who come back quickly post injury (or after leaving retirement to make a comeback). A negative effect of this increased training history is that it might subtly change a rider’s profile. Years of endurance training might alter our muscle fibre type profile, or hormone responses, or ability to burn fat / carbohydrates as fuel. End result = increase sustainability of intensity. Unfortunately, these 'benefits' might negatively impact the ability to hit top end powers: does year in year training mean we should expect the upping of our VO₂max interval power for example? Research doesn't have the answers yet, but at the very least it suggests we cannot be sure of the timescales of improving fitness to the point that we look back at a session performed in April each year and see x watts improvement.

A third factor for consideration – the training response is not a linear function. In other words, there is not a simple dose – response relationship. In its simplest form, twice as much training does not make you twice as fit. Periodisation relies on building fitness in layers – you step through each stage building the body’s machinery needed for the next layer of adaptation. An example of this can be seen when riders may have come through a period of endurance capacity building (commonly after a lot of zone 3 work). This is a type of training I have a lot of success applying to riders – its not uncommon to see 20W added to people’s profiles. However, we have to stop the extrapolation of this 20W being ADDED to race fitness – not straight away at least. We still have to develop the machinery for race level performance: what the extra 20W may have done is increase the height of the athlete’s potential – but it says nothing about the speed they will get to their desired race level. Some athletes speak of 'tipping points' - despite feeling fitter, the proof does not materialise in powers, heart rates or anything tangible. Then, out of no-where, a step increase in performance occurs.

A fourth and related factor is the shape of the training plan and consequent ramp in training stress, and subsequent form emergence. When a coach has worked with a rider for a number of years, often a decision is made to change the season build / approach in some way. There may have been a mutual feeling that to hit a new peak, and an attempt is made to change the athlete’s fundamental physiology. I have a few athletes highly pre-disposed to fantastic endurance: lots of slow twitch fibres, good ability to burn fat, high fatigue resistance. If these athletes want to go faster however, building in a traditional way might not ever see a big enough shift. An experimental approach might be trying something very extreme. Because its an unknown, we don’t know the timescale needed to bring a shift in the physiology to fruition. We don’t even have guarantees it will work. In fact, in the short term we might expect DECREASES in form - since we aren’t working on the physiology that a) they are naturally pre-built with i.e. fatigue will be high impacting more negatively on any race performances and b) the sessions probably aren’t targeting a physiology that is related to race performance e.g. sprint work in riders aiming for an event lasting one hour.

Reading the above could appear like a list of excuses the coach / sport scientist has up their sleeves to protect from disappointment. However, I sense enough people go through these moments in the desert and come through safely the other side to be confident that in the long term, changes WILL occur, and occur in a magnitude that is worth the short term dips. Sporting performance can be a roller coaster. Here are a few suggestions to help you ride the ups and downs:

• Go in to a race with clear objectives - know the 'why' behind the race: is the goal more about preparation than outcome? What is the definition of a successful race?
• After the race analyse the race performance based upon your pre-race objectives, and these objectives alone. Don't be tempted to shift the goal posts and change the markers of success - this is tough, especially if others around you are setting PBs!
• Let the immediate post race dust settle, and then take time to reflect on the good aspects, and those that could be improved. The distance from the immediacy of the race is important, as it helps reduce the emotion and increase the rational.
• Consider what other impacting influences there might have been - what is going on in your life right now: work, relationship, social etc? If you could have the past week again, what would you change, what would you keep?

The key is having faith in the process, and to keep thinking about the bigger picture. Just like a Doctor would tell you to complete the course of anti-biotics, so we should reserve judgement on whether training is working AT the point you are trying to peak. This takes a lot of patience and trust. It also takes acceptance. As an athlete, I experienced my very own 'Damascus moment' when I learnt to be easier on myself, to accept that the performance I had just given (whether in training or in racing) was the best I could have given at that moment in time. Its easy to think "if only I had..." but you didn't.....so best to accept it, move on and just learn from the experience.

After a very disappointing race in the National 10 mile Champs one year, my then team mate Tim Lawson of Science in Sport said to me "Helen, you are only as good as your next race". Its a statement that gave me a lot of positivity as I prepared for the National 25 mile champs 2 weeks later. It allowed me to move on from a 'bad' performance. It can also keep your feet on the ground after a 'good' performance. I often use this statement with my athletes, but also with my own coaching work - it helps me stay grounded no matter the ups and downs I experience in performance week to week.

I'll finish by introducing this poem by Rudyard Kipling - appropriately, this is placed above the entrance to Centre Court at the All England Tennis Club. I think it sums up nicely how to ride the roller coaster...