I'm a huge fan of these charts. I have one on my refrigerator that I look at all the time. Thought I'd share the love with you all.
From the category archives:
Articles
Conventional wisdom and training practices have created a void between coaching of endurance sports and that of high-skill sports such as basketball and soccer.
Are these sports really so different in their demands and as such should the training be so different?
Triathletes invest significant time, money and effort to achieve personal best performances. Unfortunately, there are no laws to which one can adhere in order to guarantee peak performance. All too often, triathletes who have plateaued will add more volume or more intensity to their training, expecting that their efforts will be rewarded with better racing. All too often, many who follow this approach are disappointed upon crossing the finish line. Why does more training not guarantee better performance? The reason is that training induces both positive and negative effects on the body, such that only an optimum amount of properly scheduled training leads to improved performance. The goal is to find this optimum for each individual.
Engineers use mathematical models to design and optimize the performance of complex systems such as chemical plants and airplanes. Similarly, exercise scientists have developed mathematical models to optimize sport performance. While these models used to suffer from limited practicality outside laboratory studies, the advent of the power meter for cycling has spurred the development of new metrics of training dose, modifications to published models, and excellent software that renders the power of these models accessible to any triathlete. We believe that such models will eventually serve as a cornerstone tool for coaches and we seek to expose these models to the triathlon community by discussing their use from scientific and practical standpoints.
The promise of mathematical models of athletic training and performance
Imagine that you or your coach could design a training program that guaranteed peak performance for your goal race. Such guarantees are hard to come by, as the normal approach to training program design involves combining general knowledge from training textbooks, trial-and-error experimentation, and the experience of the coach and/or athlete. While this approach can work, much guesswork is still required and a more precise method is desired. Enter mathematical modeling. Mathematical models provide a quantitative framework for rational, systematic and objective design and analysis of training. Importantly, because the model inputs and parameters are based on your own training data, the models are specific to you, such that reliable quantitative prediction of performance is now possible.
The models: how they work
Most of the models used in modern scientific studies are based on the work of Eric Banister and his colleagues at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada. The models are typically referred to as “impulse-response models”, whereby daily training dose is the “impulse” (or input) and performance is the “response” (or output). The key underlying assumption of the models is that training induces both positive and negative effects, commonly known as fitness and fatigue, respectively. Performance, or one’s “form” on race day, is calculated as the balance between fitness and fatigue. As a coaching tool, the models are used to help design and schedule workouts such that an optimum of fitness and fatigue is achieved to maximize performance on the day of the goal race.
While the basic premise of these models has changed little in three decades, their practical utility has only recently been exploited largely due to the advent of the power meter for measuring power output during cycling. The power meter measures the true rate of work, such that exercise intensity can be precisely quantified regardless of the course or conditions. Dr. Andrew Coggan, an exercise scientist and competitive cyclist, developed a number of power-based metrics for quantifying training data. In particular, the training stress score (TSSTM) can serve as the input (or impulse) for the models. For the purpose of quantifying training, the TSS appears to be a much more useful metric than previously used heart-rate-based metrics and it has enjoyed widespread acceptance in the cycling and triathlon communities.
Two commercially available software packages make implementing these models easy and accessible for everyone. A version of the full impulse-response model is used in PhysFarm’s RaceDayTM software created by Dr. Philip Skiba, a physician, sports scientist, and triathlon coach. A simpler version of the model, called the Performance ManagerTM (PMC), was developed by Dr. Coggan and is featured in TrainingPeaks’ WKO+ software.
Both models have advantages and limitations. The model used in RaceDay is more powerful because it predicts performance in absolute terms (i.e., wattage that could be held on the bike during a race). However, much data is needed for the model calculations, which comes either from frequent (i.e., weekly) performance tests or data from hard workouts. The advantage of the PMC is its simplicity, but its biggest downfall is that performance is not predicted per se and it can be difficult to interpret the model outputs without previous data or experience as guidance. In both cases, diligent downloading of power meter or GPS data or tedious manual quantification of training data is required for either model to perform well.
Practical application of the PMC model
With this background in hand, we discuss applying these models to analyzing and predicting triathlon training and performance. Specifically, we present two case studies of athletes in which the PMC was used to analyze and plan their cycling training. In the discussion, we refer to the terms CTL, ATL, and TSB, which are the variables involved in the PMC calculations. CTL is the “chronic training load”, which is a term used to quantify one’s fitness, ATL is the “acute training load”, which quantifies one’s level of fatigue, and TSB is the “training stress balance”, which quantifies one’s freshness and equals the difference between CTL and ATL. The output of the model is “form”, which is defined as some combination of CTL (fitness) and TSB (freshness). There are no scientifically established values of CTL and TSB that predict whether one will have good form or not. Instead, one must find their own range of values that correspond to peak performances. This is done through analysis of previous training data and/or through iterative use of the model to plan their training for goal races.
Case 1: Half-Ironman triathlon training analysis and planning
The PMC can be used to analyze older training and performance data. In this case, a female athlete raced a half-Ironman distance triathlon before the PMC was available to the public. Her training data was extracted from her log and charted using the PMC (Figure 1). We have annotated a few of the underlying reasons for the trends in the CTL, ATL, and TSB curves. We can see that in the first three or so months of training that the data was inconsistently logged, such that ATL remained artificially low and the TSB remained high. By March, the chart features more irregular spikes, which reflects daily training doses. A short taper prior to a sprint race caused a spike in TSB and this was followed by heavier training into late April and May. During this time, the CTL rose in a gradual fashion and the ATL tended to stay high until race day.
Figure 1: PMC chart for a six month training block for a female triathlete leading up to her goal race of a half-Ironman distance triathlon.
In the race, the athlete had a good swim and ran close to her desired pace but had a subpar bike ride. In analyzing her race, if all we knew was that the swim and run were good but the bike was bad, then it would be logical to think that the athlete was properly tapered and had a bad day on the bike perhaps due to insufficient training or some other factor. The PMC tells a different story, however, in that the TSB was only +1.1 just prior to race day. Generally, one would hope for a higher TSB after a taper, implying that this athlete was insufficiently tapered for the bike portion of the event. Had the TSB been known before this race, her training could have been adjusted to rest her more in the last few weeks before her race. In addition, this TSB value indicates that for this athlete a TSB higher than +1.1 is probably necessary for optimal performance.
The athlete had another ‘A’ race in 4 months and this time the PMC was used to optimize her training and taper. In particular, the program was designed to achieve a TSB score ranging from +10 to +17 while maintaining a reasonable CTL. The athlete was limited to three bike workouts per week, so two of them emphasized intensity, with one of the workouts inducing a high ATL. In Figure 2, it can be seen that the training worked as the CTL steadily increased during the training block until about three weeks before the event, at which time the taper was started. Three weeks may seem lengthy for a half Ironman-distance taper, but for this athlete it was required to attain the desired TSB. Her final TSB before the race was 14.9, and not only did she have a PR bike split, she also ran a PR as well. Afterwards, the athlete commented that using the PMC was almost like cheating. Obviously, she had to do the work, but knowing how many TSS points to accumulate in each workout and during each week in order to precisely specify her taper duration greatly facilitated optimizing her training program.
Figure 2. PMC chart for the same female triathlete as in Figure 1 for a subsequent three month block of training leading to a half-Ironman distance triathlon.
A typical week for the half-Ironman athlete:
• Average weekly TSS: 217 points
• Maximum weekly TSS: 388 points in week 4
• Minimum weekly TSS: 121 two weeks before her race.
Typical weekly workouts:
• 1 ride each week that included a sustained climb of 20-40 minutes, which accumulated 125-225 TSS points.
• 1 longer ride between 2-3 hours, which typically accumulated 100-150 TSS points.
• 1 other ride each week either on the mountain bike or done as an easy recovery ride.
Case 2: Training program charting and performance prediction for an Ironman triathlete
In our second example, the PMC was used to plan an optimal training program for an Ironman triathlete. In this case, the training plan was devised for the 12 weeks leading into an IM distance race. The TSS was estimated for each workout and the model was calculated using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The planned program was structured to ensure a reasonably high CTL and high TSB by raceday. Thus, the athlete had the confidence that if the program was executed as planned, a peak performance would likely result. As the weeks progressed, the predicted output was compared with the actual PMC created in WKO+. On race day, the predicted TSB was within 1 point of the actual TSB, which was +25. During the race, the athlete rode a 5:21 bike split, which was a PR. We should also note that the athlete used the IF metric to pace his ride, which his power meter automatically provides, thus eliminating guesswork as to whether the ride was correctly paced. Therefore, quantifying training and pacing conferred substantial confidence to the athlete such that he could focus on achieving his goals.
Figure 3. PMC chart for a four month training block leading up to an Ironman triathlon.
A typical week for the Ironman athlete:
• Average weekly TSS: 470 points
• Maximum weekly TSS: 945 points, two weeks out
• Minimum weekly TSS: 153 points in week 3.
Typical weekly workouts:
• 1 ride each week of 4:30 or longer, which accumulated 200-300 TSS points.
• 1 ride each week with VO2max work, which usually accumulated 60-80 TSS points.
• 1 ride each week featuring big gear work, which usually accumulated 90-120 points.
Concluding remarks
Recent progress in the science of modeling training and performance, motivated largely by technological advances, is spurring a revolution in triathlon coaching and training planning. While these models cannot replace hard work (in fact, their utility depends on it!), they can indicate how much hard work to do and when to do it. In this way, quantitative models can inspire confidence that one’s hard work will lead to peak performance.
* Performance Manager and training stress score are trademarks of Peaksware, LLC.
* RaceDay is a trademark of PhysFarm Training Systems, LLC.
* Additional information, including further reading and a more technical discussion of the models, is available atwww.d3multisport.com.
Calculated Performance: Using Quantitative Models to Optimize Your Training
Dave Clarke and Michael Ricci
Dave Clarke is a M.Sc. in kinesiology, a Ph.D. in biological engineering and a top-tier age-group triathlete.
Michael Ricci is a Level 3 USAT coach and head coach and founder of D3 Multisport based in Boulder, Colorado.
-------------------
At ironguides we emphasize developing motor patterns in training, instead of the traditional focus on endurance development. We approach training this way to ensure specificity and reduce the risk of injury. The endurance element of training is still developed on the side - it’s just no longer the sole focus.
When I say motor pattern development I am talking about the brain’s control of movement. Every movement we make is controlled by the brain (motor). It must assign a portion (pattern) of our muscle fibres to perform the action we want, for example a pedal revolution in cycling.
[click to continue…]
When I say motor pattern development I am talking about the brain’s control of movement. Every movement we make is controlled by the brain (motor). It must assign a portion (pattern) of our muscle fibres to perform the action we want, for example a pedal revolution in cycling.
[click to continue…]
Ben Greenfield Explains The Difference Between Endurance Nation and the Rock Star Triathlete Academy
Recently, I was asked what the difference is between Endurance Nation and the Rock Star Triathlete Academy.
First of all, let me begin by saying that although we were aware of Endurance Nation when we created the Rock Star Triathlete Academy last year, our goal was not to replicate or copy that model, but rather to create something new that A) allowed coach Kerry Sullivan and I as trainers and triathletes to provide value and share our knowledge with others; B) gave people a fun way to learn the sport of triathlon or improve on their abilities; C) was an affordable add-on or alternative to private coaching (i.e. Dozens of dollars per month rather than hundreds of dollars per month).
The basic "30 second" elevator explanation of the Rock Star Triathlete Academy is this:
-provide triathlon training plans for all distances and abilities, with multimedia training content (articles, audios and videos), learning opportunities from industry experts and pros, unlimited forum interaction and weekly call-in Q&A's with triathlon coaches and nutritionists, brokered product discounts, and the ability for members to request content, guest interviews, training plans and educational features.
From our weekly coach Q&A's to our practical training videos and guest interviews, we are very focused on the *didactic* (or educational)
component of triathlon - almost like an online triathlon magazine that lets you flip through the pages and check out the training content, but also be coached by and have unlimited Q&A access to the editors. This is because Kerry and I both love to educate, and that is the primary goal of the Rock Star Triathlete Academy.
From what I understand, there are some overlapping attributes, but here are the primary differences I know of between the Rock Star Triathlete Academy and Endurance Nation:
-The Rock Star Triathlete Academy offers Sprint, Olympic, Half IM and IM distance training plans, advice and coaching, but Endurance Nation offers primarily Half IM and IM distance plans, advice, and coaching (I think).
-One of the Rock Star Triathlete Academy's primary weekly features is hosting guest coaches, industry experts, triathlon pros, etc. on a member-driven Q&A interview. It is not my understanding that this is a feature at Endurance Nation.
-I am not 100% sure, but I believe our bonus structures are different. For example, all our new members receive Holistic Fueling For Triathletes, Coach K's Triathlon Summit (and All the Triathlon Summit Bonus Materials), The Biology of Athletic Performance, etc.
-Our coaches are different (duh!). Since he has celiac's disease and I am a sports nutritionist, Kerry and I have a very strong focus on nutrition, so that is one unique aspect, and I find we are answering many nutrition questions on the forum and in our weekly Q&A's. We are also primarily focused on two different sports (Kerry is migrating to the Pro/ITU scene, whereas I am more on the Half IM/IM scene). As anyone who has had a coach knows, you want to make sure you connect with folks who are well suited to your personality and style. Of course, this is not to say the Endurance Nation coaches are not perfectly suited for different personalities and styles, and may I also say that I am very impressed with the knowledgebase and ability of Patrick McCrann and Rich Strauss, and I respect them both as triathlon coaches.
Finally, I noticed while responding to this question that the Endurance Nation logo has a five point star and the Rock Star Triathlete Academy ALSO has a five point star. To anyone who may be suspecting copycat is at play, this is actually complete coincidence, and as a matter of fact, I just noticed it today!
So in sum, both EN and RSTA focus on Quality over Junk Miles, but RSTA appeals to nearly a 50% base of Sprint and Olympic distance triathletes, with a strong focus on nutrition, a deep library of member bonuses, and different coaching personalities!
I hope that helps - gotta get back to work now: I'm creating a rock-solid training video that shows you how to prepare for your next race using Google Earth!
I've been doing a bit of forum posting and thinking about post-workout nutrition...I read an article over at Tri-Fuel. Here's what the article said:
What do you think is the most crucial time of a training session? Is it the first few minutes, the very end, the warm-up, or somewhere in the middle of your workout that is the most important? It may surprise you to know the most important time is the 30 minutes directly after your workout is finished.
The time from your warm-up to the conclusion of your workout is obviously important. Improper form, too low an intensity, too high an intensity, unsafe behavior, and other factors can ruin the effectiveness of a workout. But even if do all of that perfectly, you can still negate the benefits of a workout by not using the 30 minute window to replenish nutrients lost during your training session.
During a training session you are taxing your body and using up its energy stores (glycogen). Once your workout is finished, you must replenish what you lost in order for your body to begin the process of repair. In the 30 minutes immediately following your workout, your insulin sensitivity is at its highest and when your body is in this state, whatever nutrients you take in will be easily transported directly to your muscles, liver, and wherever else it is needed. You will suck it up like a sponge.
If you do not eat or drink the right things soon after your workout, the window of opportunity will close and it will take you much longer to replenish glycogen stores and other nutrients. This will dramatically increase the time it takes for you to recover from that workout, decrease the performance benefit of the workout, and affect your next workouts. The more recovery time between workouts, the fewer workouts you can do in a period of time. Fewer and lower quality workouts means less opportunity for fitness gains and slower race times. Can you see why post workout nutrition is so important?
Now you know why it’s important, but what should you eat or drink after a workout?
The three things you need to focus on replenishing after a workout are muscle glycogen, water, and electrolytes. To replace muscle glycogen, you should consume something with easy to digest carbohydrates, about 1 – 1.2 grams per pound of body weight. Simple to digest carbs include some fruits, sports drinks, white bread, simple sugar, etc.
To aid in the absorption rate of the glycogen and prevent muscle catabolism (breaking down muscle tissue for energy), 10-20 grams of easy to digest protein is ideal. Stick with whey protein for this, or even better, hydrolyzed whey, which is already pre digested and made for easy absorption. You can find whey protein at any nutrition store.
To replenish electrolytes, a sports drink is your best bet unless you are planning on eating a salty meal soon after your workout. Electrolyte is basically a fancy word for sodium or salt.
You should continue the carb, protein, electrolyte consumption every two hours or so until your next major meal. If I know I am eating an hour or two after my workout, I find that chocolate milk is a great post workout drink. It has sugar in the milk and the chocolate to replace muscle glycogen and protein in the milk to aid in absorption.
You can get away with a bad warm-up, bad form, or improper intensity to some extent and still have a good workout, but failing to consume proper nutrition can make your workout a waste of time, and in some cases, even damaging. Just remember the 30-minute window of opportunity and plan ahead to make sure you get proper nutrition in before the window closes.
So initially, here was my response:
The unfortunate fact is that I used to preach this all the time, and most nutritionist and coaches do, but the research on post-workout is wholly lacking when a pre-workout meal is present.
In other words, research on pre-workout meals in the absence of post-workout meals shows that insulin sensitivity, carbohydrate and amino acids in bloodstream are still peaking from the pre (and during) workout nutrition - thus eliminating a need for post-workout nutrition for any bouts that are not glycogen depleting.
Furthermore, contrary to what is stated in the article, the purpose of post-workout nutrition would not be to replenish glycogen stores (which are replenished within 6-8 hours just by you eating your normal meals), but rather to enhance protein uptake through the consumption of simple carbohydrates. However, very few of such carbohydrates are need (100-200 calories suffice), contrary to, for a 200lb man, the 800 calories of carbohydrate the article suggests!
Finally, electrolytes are not "sodium". They are the full range of minerals and electrical constituents necessary for neuromuscular contraction, including potassium, magnesium, chromium, etc. OK, my rant is done! Mostly a good article, but I just wanted to throw in my 2 cents to help folks out a bit.
After that, I received some questions about how and what *should* be eaten post-workout, after regular workouts, after distance workouts, etc...so I wanted to share with you my response to that.
First of all, let me begin by saying that David Warden will graciously be allowing me to guest host an episode of the Tri Talk podcast to discuss the post-workout feeding issue in more detail. So stay posted for that, along with some more talk about this on my podcast at http://www.bengreenfieldfitness.com.
An example of one of the first studies to investigate whether mixing carbohydrate and protein is better than having carbohydrate alone can be summarized as follows:
----------------------
Tarnopolsky, M. A., M. Bosman, J. R. MacDonald, D. Vandeputte, J. Martin, and B. D. Roy. Postexercise protein-carbohydrate and carbohydrate supplements increase muscle glycogen in men and women. J. Appl. Physiol. 83(6): 1877-1883, 1997.We have previously demonstrated that women did not increase intramuscular glycogen in response to an increased percent of dietary carbohydrate (CHO) (from 60 to 75% of energy intake) (M. A. Tarnopolsky, S. A. Atkinson, S. M. Phillips, and J. D. MacDougall. J. Appl. Physiol. 78: 1360-1368, 1995). CHO and CHO-protein (Pro) supplementation postexercise can potentiate glycogen resynthesis compared with placebo (K. M. Zawadzki, B. B. Yaspelkis, and J. L. Ivy. J. Appl. Physiol. 72: 1854-1859, 1992). We studied the effect of isoenergetic CHO and CHO-Pro-Fat supplements on muscle glycogen resynthesis in the first 4 h after endurance exercise (90 min at 65% peak O2 consumption) in trained endurance athletes (men, n = 8; women, tested in midfollicular phase, n = 8). Each subject completed three sequential trials separated by 3 wk; a supplement was provided immediately and 1-h postexercise: 1) CHO (0.75 g/kg) + Pro (0.1 g/kg) + Fat (0.02 g/kg), 2) CHO (1 g/kg), and 3) placebo (Pl; artificial sweetener). Subjects were given prepackaged, isoenergetic, isonitrogenous diets, individualized to their habitual diet, for the day before and during the exercise trial. During exercise, women oxidized more lipid than did men (P < 0.05). Both of the supplement trials resulted in greater postexercise glucose and insulin compared with Pl (P < 0.01), with no gender differences. Similarly, both of these trials resulted in increased glycogen resynthesis (37.2 vs. 24.6 mmol · kg dry muscle1 · h1, CHO vs. CHO-Pro-Fat, respectively) compared with Pl (7.5 mmol · kg dry muscle1 · h1; P < 0.001) with no gender differences. We conclude that postexercise CHO and CHO-Pro-Fat nutritional supplements can increase glycogen resynthesis to a greater extent than Pl for both men and women.
----------------------
This, and the studies that have been done since then (like this one that you geeks can read in full for free: http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/72/1/106), suggest primarily the reason that the carbohydrate will enhance protein uptake is due to the insulin response with the sugar intake. Insulin is an anabolic hormone that causes energy uptake and storage, and is essential to stimulate the uptake of amino acids. There is also a vice-versa effect - protein can act as a "chaperone" to assist with the carb absorption.
The rub is this: MOST folks aren't exercising hard enough or long enough to justify re-fueling when they already have enough amino acids and sugar on board from pre and during workout feeding.
You can figure out whether you need a post-workout meal pretty easily. Let's start by estimating about how much storage carbohydrate energy you have on board to start with. Your maximal carbohydrate storage is approximately 15 grams per kilogram of body weight [15 grams per 2.2 pounds]. So a 175-pound athlete could store up to 1200 grams of carbohydrate [4,800 calories]; enough energy to fuel high intensity exercise for quite some time.
So let's say this 175lb person eats a bowl of oatmeal with some peanut butter (~600 calories), then goes on a 2 hour bike ride at 600 calories per hour. They arrive home at a 600 calorie deficit. Meaning they have 4200 calories of storage carbohydrate STILL ON BOARD.
Now, they hear about this post-workout need, and rush off to eat so they can have a "good workout the next day", but is that really necessary. Let's look at how long it would take to replace glycogen, or storage carbohydrate.
Unfortunately, in the scientific literature, glycogen restoration rates are measured in funky units like glycosol per gram or mumol.g wet wt-1.h-1, or mmol/kg - tough to translate into actual real world numbers for us normal folks. But I'm going to try.
5mmol of glucose is 1 gram. Assuming the glycogen is cleanly broken down into glucose, then 5.5mmol of glycogen is 4 calories, since there's 4 calories in a gram. Post-exercise glycogen re-synthesis rates fall right around the 10mmol/kg/hr range, which is 4.5mmol/lb/hr, so for a 175lb individual, you looking at 785mmol/hr, which is 157g/hr, which is 630 calories per hour.
In other words, a conservative rate of glycogen re-synthesis for you is 630 calories per hour, for up to 2 hours after exercise. So why the heck would you be trying to replace glycogen stores by shoving 800 calories of carbohydrate down the hatch just 20-30 minutes after exercise?
Your goal after a typical workout should instead be to A) re-hydrate and B) elevate amino acids to limit muscle catabolism by consuming 0.25g protein per lb of body weight, with a small amount of sugar to elevate insulin levels. So, for example, the 175lb person could eat about 45g of protein power mixed into 100-200 calories carbohydrate (i.e. a couple bananas with a couple scoops whey protein).
What about for a more serious, glycogen depleting workout, like a 100 mile bike ride, followed by a run later in the day? That's when you can and should focus on maximizing carbohydrate restoration. Here's a good rule to follow based on research:
Simply multiply your weight in pounds by three. Divide the result by 16 to determine the number of grams of carbohydrate to eat every 15 minutes. Example: You weighs 175 pounds. 175 X 3 = 525. 525/16 = 33 grams or 132 calories of carbohydrate, which should be ingested every 15 minutes. And you do that for 4 hours.
Notice I said "based on research". If you're not a lab rat and can't mow through a bottle of Gatorade every 15 minutes for 4 hours, then just figure out way to creatively consume 2000 calories of about 25% protein, 75% carbohydrate in the 4 hours following your workout, and try and finish that eating about 2 hours before you start your next workout. I'll wager a bet that you can creatively figure out how to eat 2000 calories in 4 hours. And remember, that's for "Ironman style" two-a-day workouts, so it's mostly the pro triathlete that's going to be worrying about this.
OK, I'm done ranting! Here's where I do end with a shameless plug - you should read my book "Holistic Fueling For Ironman Triathletes" if you haven't yet - so you can learn how to eat lots of calories without destroying your body. It's free inside your member's area here at the Rock Star Triathlete Academy.
Also, leave a comment if you have questions or thoughts.
Okay so I’ve written on some pretty controversial subjects in the past and I’m sure you’re all thinking, Now he’s gone completely off his rocker! But hey. I mean, what’s life without a bit of controversy every now and then?
I’ve always tried to understand why I look and perform like I do (taking out the training aspect of course). Some days are great and some I’d rather not mention. Having done quite a bit of research I have managed to put together the short understandable version of what I have found.
Each race has characteristics that are better suited for a certain type of athlete. That's something important to keep in mind when planning your race season.
Performing well in a race always brings a personal satisfaction. You see all the dedication is paying off and you get excited to keep up with the hard work, which eventually (after YEARS of consistent training) brings you to your fullest potential as an athlete. At the same time, when a race does not go as planned you feel frustration when you don't understand why the event did not go according to plan, particularly as you have been so dedicated and disciplined with your training.
