I think I hear less about Lake Huron than any of the
Great Lakes. Ontario gets a bit of the shaft, but not
like Huron. I am speaking from the lowest of the lower
48 so I cannot relate to how often it gets spoken
about in the Midwest and Northeast. I am only
commenting as to what I hear on the news, weather
channel, etc.

You can educate yourself on the Great Lakes here:



I am not really sure where I am going with this, but
here it goes...

There is a constant debate on training
philosophies/protocols on Gordo's forum (I mean debate
as a collective description, not simply a reference to
one specific thread).

Now, the reason I have been a frequent visitor and
commentor on his forum is because of the quality of
discussions and debates/arguments. However, my
tolerance for some of the discussions goes up and down
at times. This is likely a reflection of my own level
fatigue. The more annoyed I get, the more I have to
stay away from such discussions, as they fill my
overreached mind with bad mojo. The harder you train,
the more you need to be away from like-minded
individuals during your recovery. You need to be
having light-hearted discussions about rainbows and
lollypops. You surely don't need to take part in
arguments that involve LT,FT,AT,AeT,Vo2,MLSS, blah,
blah, blah.

The fact of the matter is that when you are tired you
just cannot think like you need to. You would (or at
least I would) probably lack the sharpness to
articulate any valid points and would probably end up
with something as convincing as "just because."

Anyways, off tangent... ...There are several groups of
individuals that take part in these arguments/debates.
There are those with exercise physiology backgrounds
(or careers) that go with what science has proven.
Another group of folks have had success by simply
racing and training on their own and they can actually
be subdivided into two groups:

1)those that have learned firsthand what works for
them, but are still willing to learn from exercise
phys folks; and

2)those that have learned firsthand what works from
them and take less stock in what the exercise phys
folks suggest.

Then, in come the new folks. The fresh, innocent minds
that thought they were just having fun and then they
see a thread with 10,000 views that argues back and
forth over how to train properly

I never followed any triathlon forums until I had been
training and racing for nearly three years. I think
this was a serious blessing because my foundation in
the sport was driven by adventure. I certainly never
really had a lot of knowledge about training protocols
in the beginning, but I did have a desire to see what
I was capable of from day-to-day. Eventually I started
reading books, internet sites, exercise phys papers,
etc. I even slanted my college papers in my final
three semesters so that I could read more on these
topics despite studying history and poli sci.

In the beginning, a new triathlete needs to just get
out the door. They need to know that this is something
they enjoy and that its ok to train unbalanced,
without purpose, without heart rate monitors or mile
splits. Eventually structure will take its place in
your training and you will begin to find a new purpose
behind your choice of

Training for fun is fun. Training to win is fun. You
don't need to start with both, but I imagine that the
"fun is fun" folks will stick around longer when the
"training to win" part gets really tough.

Enjoy yourself.


Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around