[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on June 19, 2019 at 2:45 am · in reply to: Tapering and Acclimation… #23696

If you want to perform as well as possible at the IM I think that is a very bad plan. 5 days won’t be enough to see any altitude benefit when racing at low elevation and you won’t taper well.
Also 5 days without swimming and cycling is not a good idea right before the race.

How do you plan to structure the 3-week taper, what is your current training load and what is your goal time? I have never done a long distance tri but short and mid distance to a relatively high level in the past (sub 2h olympic and 4:18 hilly 70.3). Personally, I would only really taper off the running for maybe 10-14 days and keep the cycling and swimming relatively normal right until the last 4-5 days. Since long distance is not really about speed you don’t need much sharpening. With a very long taper the risk of the body shutting too far down is quite high. If you are using trainingspeaks and have some experience with tapering using the PMC I thing that can be a good tool. For me I feel quite bad for 3-4 days when I start tapeing of a high training load and then need 2 days training (short with relatively high intensity) right before the race to get a good feeling back.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on June 3, 2019 at 9:09 am · in reply to: How low is reasonable for AeT? #22845

the way I read it I think the error is including the warm-up in the Pa:Hr number from trainingspeaks. Try recording the first 20 minutes of the run as a separate activity and then start the “test” as a new one. Also pick a relatively flat route and run for 40-60 Minutes at a constant pace which feels relatively easy for you (the description of the 110 one sounds about right).

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on March 13, 2019 at 5:55 am · in reply to: How to convince partners that weight matters? #18157

So many good skis these days to choose from.
Edit to add: the trend is toward lighter gear. Nobody is asking for heavier skis or boots. Damper and stiffer, perhaps, but not heavier.

true skis got lighter with similar performance and nobody really wishes that his skis were heaver while performing the same BUT…
– wider (up to a point) skis better is most snow conditions –> heavier
– longer than 160cm race ski is better for most people >175cm –> heavier
– damper –> heavier
– overly stiff carbon ski aren’t nice so good stiff skis are on the heavier side. But I actually prefer a slightly softer ski for most skimounteneering.

I think my point is don’t sacrifice performance (and fun skiing) by saving weight in the ski. Rather buy a lighter binding and a fast skin 😉

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on March 7, 2019 at 9:12 am · in reply to: How to convince partners that weight matters? #17726

what objectives and what gear does he/do you currently use?
for climbing, like in Steves examples, the reasoning for lighter pack=better is quite straight forward.

But when it comes to skiing objectives I think it gets a bit more complex. I tour both with people who have too heavy gear at times as well as people who can’t see the point of not bringing skimo raceskis all the time. I gravitate more towards touring with the first group.

Personally, I have 3-4 pairs of touring skis that I regularly use but some of my partners have just one all-round pair which obviously results in more compromises. As long as no-one shows up with 120mm skis and frame bindings for a long tour I am normally fine. If I know I am fitter I will generally bring heavier skis since I prefer them downhill. If the others bring raceskis I will still be on my Backland UL 85. If they prefer to go faster then fuck them. They should have just brought real skis. But no waiting on the downhill 😉 (somewhat joking)

I really like light gear and have convinced a couple of people of the benefits (which shouldn’t be too hard) but also the success of an objective should not solely depend on whether you have a 1500g ski or an 800g ski. Scott’s point 100% stands for racing or FKT-type of objectives but for touring objectives, I personally think maximising performance by lighter gear shouldn’t always be the goal. I think being fit and having homogeneous partners with similar ideas for objectives is more important. I just find challenging tour done in 10h (with heavier skis) compared to 8h (with ultra-light gear) but with better skiing more fun.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on February 27, 2019 at 1:57 am · in reply to: Recovery vs Zone 1 replacement #17026

@Jan I personally don’t associate added weight with basic aerobic sessions. What is the purpose of the 2.5h relatively flat walking with a heavy pack? That sounds quite miserable to be honest.

Regarding the intensity, the way I understand it is that with just 5 hours a week you probably want most of it in zone2 and not much zone1 to get the most effect for your time.
If you were doing >20h a week than all zone2 would become too much from a recovery standpoint so some of it needs to be zone1. Also the fitter you get the higher zone2 becomes which adds additional stress.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on February 19, 2019 at 8:43 am · in reply to: Mountaineering + Triathlon Training #16831

@MZ How good is your swimming technique? If you are capable of doing solid 4-6k sessions in the pool than the fitness gains can be substantial. But then again at that level you wouldn’t worry about swimming more than maybe 1-2x a week the month before the race if you just want to finish. Making technical gains in swimming is very hard (or impossible) to do over just 6 Month with limited time. To get to a decent level I would count on needing to swim consistently 4-6x a week for 2-3 years. But just finishing the swim in a wetsuit doesn’t really need that level of proficiency.
That is probably also where Scott Sempler is coming from by rejection swimming for fitness gains.
And keep in mind that the cross-training effects really only matter once the specific training is close to maxed out. For example, 10h running (with vert) would obviously be better for a mountaineer than 5h running and 5h swimming but if 5h running is all someone can handle then 5+”any amount of swimming” might be better than just 5h running.

Why do you spend time on the trainer? If you just want to get a short session in then a 1h run will help you more than 1h on the trainer (both for the triathlon and for your mountain goals). In your situation, I would focus more on doing somewhat regular long-rides outside once spring comes around (to also learn actual bike handling skills!). Way more fun and I feel longer rides are actually a good stimulus for mountaineering without breaking to body down as much as long trailrunning. You could also combine it with some trailrunning by commuting to/from the trail by bike. Maybe also have a go at the Longs Peak Duathlon.

From personal experience, I can definitely say that I agree with the other people that it is not possible to combine triathlon and mountaineering goals on a high level but it sound like that you also came to that conclusion already.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on November 30, 2018 at 10:13 am · in reply to: AeT Test for Zone 1 and 2 determine – what I am doing wrong #15039

I obviously meant: “…unlike the top of Zone 2 and Zone 3” and not zone 4.

Just to add. Similarly to Zone 1/2 you don’t need to stress about the zone 4 to zone 5 transition point either since heart rate isn’t really a good measure at those intensities anymore but just go my feel and interval duration.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on November 30, 2018 at 10:03 am · in reply to: AeT Test for Zone 1 and 2 determine – what I am doing wrong #15037

the top of zone 1 is just not really that important as a physical marker, unlike the top of Zone 2 and Zone 4. I think the rule of thumb is roughly top of Zone 1 = top of Zone 2 – 20.
If you are not super well trained just aim for zone 2 and forget about zone 1. That becomes more important for people that are doing so much zone 2 training that it becomes too hard for them so they do a mix of zone 1 and zone 2.
Also don’t stress the exact transition point of zone 2 to 3 too much. I feel like, and please Scott correct me if I am wrong, that +-5 bpm is close enough for the purpose of everyday training. Maybe you want to go more precise from time to time to track improvement but that will be influenced by the state of recovery, time of day and stuff like that also.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on October 15, 2018 at 2:57 am · in reply to: ARCing during iceclimbing prep #13963

Thanks Scott for your reply.

Wow a couple of sessions a week was more than I expected. In that regard how should the intensity exactly be for those sessions. So far I did between 40 and 60 minutes of climbing time during the sessions (split up into 10-20 minute blocs with short rest in between) and definitely feel it for 1-2 days afterwards. So not quite comparable with running aerobic training yet where I would feel back to normal after maybe 8-12h for a 60 minutes sessions Z2 run. Maybe I just need some more time to adapt. At the moment I just try to not get too pumped and take rest as needed to keep the intensity low.

In your ARC article for indoor climbing you suggest sessions of 2-3 times 30 minutes with 30 minutes rest. For indoor climbing where you have to switch for belays that makes total sense but am I right to assume that shorter rests are better when traversing on one’s own? So maybe 2-3 times 30 minutes with only 10 minutes in between? Or maybe even 60-90 minutes straight with resting/shaking on the wall?

I was already looking into that training plan. I definitely have to re-read some chapters in your book first before planning the training in more detail. My plan is to start more focused strength training roughly in the beginning/middle of November as I feel like I do need some more conditioning before. Am I right to assume that this strength training plan start with the base phase right away without a transition phase?

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on August 27, 2018 at 9:08 am · in reply to: Ski, Climb, Run in the PNW: Annual Planning? #12287

I don’t have a great answer for you regarding the planning. Actually, quite the opposite as I am struggling with much the same. So I will be following the topic closely.

I feel like combining skiing and running together isn’t that hard, especially if you keep up some running all winter. For me the closest skitouring is 45-60 Minutes away so I have to keep running a bit during the week anyway but I feel that serves me well come late spring when the closest snow is more like 2h away and I start focusing more on running. Actually, I often feel like I am running best coming right out of the skitouring season with good fitness and not too much running fatigue in my legs.

Fitting climbing into the mix is much harder for me personally. But hopefully I will figure that out soon too. The upcoming winter I plan to go bouldering more regularly (2-3/week) for shorter sessions (45-75 minutes) to keep a baseline up.

I feel like keeping a good bit of specifically in all sports is critical to keep up a decent base level of performance through the year and trying to maximise cross-training.

Being so fit that the planned tours are all “easy” like Sam says might sound good in theory but doing more challenging stuff is always more fun so I just try to be flexible and expect to mess up sometimes and overreach a bit too far and having to take a step back and reassess.
But I guess it has a lot to do with priorities. I, for example, would be willing to go for a mountaineering epic the week before my A trailrunning race even if that means I might only have 90% on the day of the race.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on November 22, 2017 at 4:09 am · in reply to: GPS Watches #6780

if you don’t need navigation maybe check out the Garmin Viviactive HR.

It is quite cheap, has barometric altitude and an optical wrist HR measurement (not as accurate as a strap so not ideal for intervals but for me good enough to get a general idea of the intensity during long outing where I wouldn’t want to wear a strap).

Works well for me and I wear it as an everyday casual watch as well.

In any case the best watch reviews are on DC Rainmaker.

[jakob.melchior]

jakob.melchior on May 31, 2017 at 2:02 am · in reply to: How big should I dream? #5040

@Roger I’d say dream big but also put the necessary steps in motion to make it a goal instead of a dream. But it seems like you are doing that already.

I am in a somewhat similar situation in aiming for the Eiger NF (within the next 2-3 years). Just with a big aerobic base after 15 years of competitive endurance sports and with less commitments (no kids).

Since the endurance part is only part of the alpine preparation I am now focusing more on the technical skills. For me it is a bit of logistical challenge to find enough (fast)partners to log the milage.
In am also based in Switzerland (Zürich) and always like to do tours with people who are training seriously as well. If you (or other people reading this) are interested in doing some D-TD climbs let me know (jakob(dot)melchior(at)gmx(dot)de )

good luck and how is the training going so far?