updating “uphill athlete”

  • Creator
  • #51679

    I’m about to reread “Uphill Athlete,” and I wonder if you would make any significant changes to the text if you were to write it today? I’m a middling athlete, at best, so I’m asking about possible changes to basic advice. Nothing fancy.

    thank you

    tom Rawls

  • Participant
    Shashi on #51721


    Based on all the responses from Scott Johnston on this forum and Podcast discussions, I doubt there are any changes to basic advice.

    Is there any particular topic on which you are looking for an update?

    rawls on #51722

    thank you for responding.

    no, i wasn’t looking anything in particular.

    LindsayTroy on #51723

    To add to what Shashi said, Training for the New Alpinism is sort of version 1.0 and Training for the Uphill Athlete is sort of version 2.0. Having read both, as far as I can tell, the main changes are clarifications/better explanations of key concepts, adaptations for more sports, and a better road map for how to implement the concepts into training.

    rawls on #51728

    sounds right. have read both, and “uphill” is my foundational text.

    i also keep track of what stephen seller, exercise phys, is posting about “polarized training.” he’s in Sweden. somehow arrived there from texas. he’s a cyclist.he has studied cyslists, x-country skiers. also rowers. he’s got data, ambrosia for obsessives. google is your friend. also twitter.

    take it slow-isn. go forever

    Anonymous on #53345

    Good news! The basics haven’t changed in decades. Anyone that says otherwise is probably selling something.

    rawls on #53352

    thanks for checking in and confirming.

    for me, doing the basics successfully would be a triumph!

    Marcel on #54234

    for the next version, you might consider to add the do-it-yourself AeT-test; at least in the german version, only the AnT-test is included, while the AeT-test is only available on this website.

    Anonymous on #54310

    Thanks, Marcel. I didn’t know about the difference. I’ll pass that on.

    Anonymous on #54326

    Marcel: It turns out the AeT drift test is not in any of the books. It requires a TP account, and Scott and Steve didn’t want to force anyone to use Training Peaks.

    As a workaround:

    Do the test as prescribed but instead of one 60-minute test interval, use two 30-minute intervals. If the terrain is consistent (flat or on a treadmill), you can divide the average HR of the second interval by the average HR of the first to get a drift estimate. Something like “1.09” would make for a 9% drift.

    Marcel on #54800

    Hi Scott,
    sorry for late reply.
    Thanks for the workaround. I found the artikels around the workaround on your webpage very useful and thought it might also make sense to add it in an upcoming version of the book.

    as far as a technical alternative to TP is converned: runalyze.com is an alternative which does the trick for free;-)

    juskojj on #54999

    i think the concepts and basics are dead on. in general the book is pretty technical which can be hard to digest so if they were to revise it my only recommend from someone who is “lay” (ie dummy) person in athletics and human physiology would be to write it so a high schooler can read and understand it, basically tone down the technical, give a good 10,000ft overview of why the gap between AeT and AnT are so important with regards to endurance. after reading quite a few posts on the forum there are so many questions when it comes to the drift test, explain it better give alternatives to achieving results beyond TP. also explain that the more training and longer training the faster the results, as in a podcast was explained someone who is doing 20hrs a week is going to see results in 3-4 months vs someone who is doing 5hrs week could take 6+ months. i’d also probably add some more explanations and examples for training plans ect…

    just my thoughts from someone coming from being completely out of shape and never done and structured training outside of high school sports.

    Anonymous on #55008

    Good feedback. Thanks for letting us know.

Viewing 12 replies - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.