Empirical Cycling Podcast

This episode deconstructs a recent study showing unexpectedly low reliability of individual training responses in people undertaking the exact same training program twice. We go down several avenues of reasoning for why this might be the case, apply these lessons to trained cyclists, and answer your listener questions.

We talk about the summer slump that many cyclists experience, where it can originate from, how to think about maintenance to balance event demands with training and more fun, unstructured riding, and how goals and expectations can come into play. We also answer your listener questions.

We delve into the recent large scale replication project in sport and exercise studies, their methods and findings. Then we try to understand why it found the results that it did in light of known statistical phenomena, similar findings from other research fields, and why an apparent replication crisis depends on how you already view and interpret published literature. Plus your listener questions.

We reveal our process for dealing with the uncertainty inherent in training and racing by keeping the FO in the scientific method of FAFO. After addressing whether or not probabilities are even real and the role of subjective experience, we look at some examples of uncertainty and predictions in testing, training, and racing, how reliable and accurate that data and performance models may be, and the process of improving our confidence in their ability to guide a training program. We also discuss incorporating peer-reviewed literature as well as anecdata, and the ultimate value of coaching or self-coaching experience.

We discuss planning race preparation and how it differs from a general aerobic build, periodization considerations, B vs A priority races, adjusting approach based on feedback, differences with low and high training age, and reorienting goals along the way. We also answer your listener questions.