I have always leant towards the 4 week block - 3 week build 1 week recovery (as a younger bloke in mid 20's) but my understanding is that a 3 week block - 2 week build 1 week recovery is often preferred for older athletes who may need more recovery time between the stresses of each 2 week build.

I am sure there are examples of pro athletes who use both the 4 week and 3 week blocks depending on the time of year, and obviously manipulate them differently. I am guessing in a 3 week block, there would be more quality and intensity than would be in a 4 week block, and hence the recovery comes sooner to help training adaptations? So as an example, maybe the base phase has 4 week blocks and the specific race prep might have 3 week blocks?

I also wonder if through trial and error, some people have worked out they adapt better if they overload heavily with more bouts of recovery (3 week block), rather than a steadier sustained load but less recovery (4 week block)? So 3 week blocks may be better for some than others. Perhaps depending on a person's life situation e.g. shiftworkers or whatever, it means a 3 week cycle may work better than 4, because in the end, a program that allows someone to be more consistent in their training should lead to better performances. Maybe someone might use a 3 week block to help train then taper for repetitive races close together?

I have fired off many questions/suggestions/maybes etc, so I am happy to hear other people's opinions :)

Cheers, Ben.

Last year I did the 3 week on, 1 week off. It seemed to work really well. But that was during ski season and so the recovery week, just helped me get through the season without burning myself out. I tend more to the "less" recovery approach, but that is because I still really need to build a base so taking a lot of recovery weeks probably wouldn't really benefit me much. I think if you have two really really hard weeks, then I could see following that with a recovery week. I am not doing that, so I don't find I need as much recovery. I take them more based on lifestyle cues. Ie. holidays, illness, family visits etc. Have you experimented with both approaches? How do you feel with the two cycles? What is your opinion about them?

A question I'm considering right now as well. I'm a 51yo AGr who continued with some light training, mostly running over the last 3 months. On Dec 26th I began a base phase block and am at the end of the 3rd week. I haven't been doing any high intensity on purpose, though I have pushed myself a few times on the bike and in the pool. On a 3 on, 1 off block, my body is looking forward to a planned easy week next week; my body has been sore this week. I knew after a 10-12 week layoff I would experience this, but now I'm considering altering my plan to 2 on, 1 off blocks. As suggested above I think I might be able to gain more by giving my body rest more often. BTW, with the exception of the year I trained for Ironman with the help of a coach who built my plan, this is the first time I have ever planned my year, and I'm really liking being more engaged in my training rather than just winging it. Guess I could get away with that back when I was younger, but now I've got to take care of the old body.

Vinny,

I would put it as a four week block, there is no such thing as a week off:

Week 1 - Easy in intensity or volume 5 - 9 hours
Week 2 - Increase in the above 7 - 11 hours
Week 3 - Hard either intensity or volume or both 9 - 16 hours
Week 4 - Recovery, Rest and Test, usually a 4 hour week, includes swim test either 400m or 1000m best effort, 2.4km run best effort, 20 minute power test.

Each Block is designed to be progressive working back from the A races:

Block 1 Prep
Block 2,3,4,5 Base
Blocks 6-8 Build
Taper 1st A race

The advantage with this method is that it is progressive without overloading, Each block I will increase the volume or intensity, it must be harder than the previous block. I am usually tired by the end of the hard week, but week 4 gives the body a good chance to rest, test yourself and set your zones for the next block. The temptation is to go too hard in the easy week, but it has to be a build. No planned rest days in the first three weeks, but usually have Sat of week 1 off, but from then on every day.

I have trained only once for IM distance (2005) and I followed a training plan very similar of what robmathews66 described For week 3 it was hard to put the top 16 hours but i averaged 14hours. I did not injured and was fresh for IM race.

Rob,
When I refer to the week off I actually mean a recovery week as you are 100% right, there is no such thing as a week off! I also assume vinnie means the same thing rather than literally a week off and i also agree, provided they are not overly taxing, short tests during recovery week can help gauge how your training is going before tackling the next block.
Cheers, Ben

I have done both over the years, but because of my age ( I turned 50 this year), I am starting this season with a 2 and 1 plan in place. I am heading into the recovery week this week and it feels right.
I think one more week and I would really be dragging at the end.

But heck...I am old, so that is what works for me:)

I'm sensitive to the recovery issues (and getting more sensitive to it with each passing year), but a 2+1 plan just doesn't let me ramp things up enough if I'm staying anywhere near the 10% rule. I tend to be better off using a 3+1 approach, and using smaller steps up in volume each week.

My goal is always a 3 week build followed by a recovery week. Usually life gets in the way after 2 weeks, or even one week, and I end up with an unscheduled "recovery" week.

This leads to an entirely different topic. Athletes will vary on how well they respond to different training methods. However, the biggest separation may be due to everything we do outside of training. If you can organize you life to 1. make healthy choices 2. train consistently 3. rest 4. lower stress ... then you'll probably be one of the first people in your AG across the line even if you try to screw up your training methods.

i was under the impression that the pros were on longer cycles, like up to 6 wks prior to a recovery week. (i do not have a citation, just a poor memory, sorry)

In my opinion, the "need" to schedule a recovery week is a sign of poor scheduling. When a weekly training schedule is done correctly, Monday works with Tuesday works with Wednesday...back around to Sunday. Volume, intensity, and frequency are all appropriate, everything just fits and there isn't a need for a recovery week.

Maybe a couple light days or the odd day off now but that's it.

--

Rich,

I don't agree with you but each to their own.

You can not just keep increasing your training load week in week out unless you want to burn out or become injured. A similar analogy would be for climbing and the effects of altitude, very few people would manage to climb from 3000m - 7/8000 without acclimatizing (climb high sleep low). This allows the body a chance to adapt to the altitude and develop more red blood cells. A good training block is no different to get to the heights you will still need to give your body a chance to acclimatize to the stresses that you are asking it to perform and to increase the work load it will need a chance to recover and rest.

My opinion.

Hi Rob,
I think we are talking about the same/similar things. Here's how it's usually done:

A book says do 3 on, 1 off, 2 on, 1 off, etc.
The same book uses volume as the primary tool to manipulate/manage training stress across a week, but it doesn't talk about how to build out an effective weekly training template. By this, I mean one where Monday works with Tuesday works with Wednesday, etc. So...

The athlete trains with a not-so-great weekly training template. They increase the training volume weekly as their tool to increase training load. Near the end of Week 3 they are begging for the week to end so they can have the recovery week. In that recovery week they drop or significantly dial down some key sessions, like bike and/or run tempo sessions, the length of their long bike and long run, etc.

Notes on this above:

* Because they haven't built out an effective training week, one that builds recovery into the training week itself, they go from session to session carrying a lot of fatigue which at some point significantly decreases the effectiveness of individual sessions. That is, by that third week they are often just going through the motions.

* If in your recovery week you eliminate your key workouts, significantly dial down the length of your long bike and long run, you've effectively compromised 25% of these sessions for the month (ie, 3 on, 1 off scenario).

* If you do it right (I can't stress enough the importance of this weekly training template), you're hitting every session in weeks 1-3. In that fourth week you might take Monday off, roll some stuff around, decrease a bit here and there and you're ready to get back it by Wednesday. More importantly, you don't miss/compromise your key sessions and long bike/long run that week, not incurring the opportunity cost of that 25% above.

*Related to this, you should give yourself permission to take a day off or significantly dial down a session anytime you feel you need to, regardless of where/when you're "supposed" to. IOW, train in real time, don't follow a training schedule into a brick wall.

* More frequently, however, this 3/1 scenario allows to you get sloppy in that 3wks. That is by week 3 you've dug yourself into a hole, you "need" that recovery week, and the recovery week, because it is a week, allows you to get away with digging yourself into another 3wk hole :-) You don't manage your training and recovery in real time because, hey, I gets a recovery week in 2wks, right?

--

As someone who has tried many different training schedules in the years, including the standard 3 on, 1 off for many years, and a year of Crossfit Endurance (NO "off" time, continual high intensity) and variations on the above, this is the first year I'm training with an Endurance Nation plan. So I'm experiencing exactly what Rich is talking about above with the rest days built into the training cycle.

For myself, I'm finding it to be a nice compromise between the volume-loading schedules where, as he says, by the end of week 3 your body is begging for recovery, and the Crossfit Endurance which had lots of great intensity but was just crazy-stupid - not nearly enough recovery.

I've done 3 months so far on the EN plan with no scheduled "recovery weeks" and I find that with their plan, the recovery days are well integrated into the schedule and I always start each week feeling relatively fresh. I don't feel like I'm in a hole, and I'm able to push the intensity appropriately during the workouts that call for it. Being that I'm always looking for a smarter way to train, I plan on using EN for my entire season this year, and seeing how it works for me. I'm a great personal guinea pig because with many years under my belt, I know very well how the traditional plans have worked out for me.

Overall, I haven't ever had problems on a 3 on, 1 off type of plan. I've been able to train injury free, and have generally placed in AG or OA Women in most of my races. I've never tried a 2-on, 1-off approach. I'm hoping that the EN plan will allow me to take my training to another level, especially with regards to running, my weakest sport. So far I am very impressed with the way their plans work.

I really think it depends on the athlete and their lifestyle. For example I don't seem to need recovery weeks during tri season, unless I have had a difficult race. However in what is normally an off season for most, the emphasis on my training changes because I am involved in a lot of winter sports. I didn't plan a recovery week this time around, and now we are a couple of weeks into January and I need a serious nap. The intensity has caught up with me, so I am taking a recovery week.