“Am I fit?”

It is an important question, but it is only one piece of the puzzle.

Performance comes from the interaction of three things. Fitness, form, and freshness. They are related, but they are not interchangeable. Understanding the difference helps explain why some athletes produce breakthrough performances while others carry good fitness around for months without ever expressing it. Let’s unpack these variables this week.

Fitness

Fitness is what we spend months trying to build.

It is the foundation. Bigger aerobic engines, stronger muscles, improved movement economy, better technical skill, greater durability. Every quality that raises your ceiling belongs here.

The problem is that fitness develops slowly. There are no shortcuts.

Most training sessions do not make you dramatically fitter on their own. They simply add another brick to the wall.

This is why consistency wins.

Form

Form is fitness that has been organized toward a specific goal.

As competition approaches, training begins to change. General fitness gives way to race-specific work. Long intervals become race pace efforts. Long runs become workouts that resemble the demands of the event. Open water swimmers spend more time in open water. Triathletes learn how to run well after riding.

The goal is no longer to become generally fitter.

The goal is to direct the fitness you have already built toward the task in front of you.

An athlete can become fitter during this phase, but specificity becomes the priority.

Freshness

Freshness is what allows fitness and form to finally show themselves.

This is where tapering earns its reputation. You can read more about tapering here:

Fatigue is gradually removed while fitness is largely maintained. The work has already been done. Now the body has an opportunity to absorb it.

Freshness is more than rested legs.

It is physical readiness paired with psychological readiness. Your body feels capable. Your confidence grows because training has gone well. You begin looking forward to competing rather than simply hoping to survive it.

When fitness, form, and freshness align, personal best performances become possible.

The hole is never the goal

There is a belief that the deeper the hole, the greater the adaptation.

Reality is usually less exciting.

If you dig so deep that you need weeks to recover, you have also sacrificed weeks of quality training. Sessions become survival exercises instead of opportunities to improve.

As a general rule, I do not want an athlete to be more than about ten days away from their best self.

That does not mean they should feel amazing every day. Training should create fatigue. There will be hard blocks where legs feel heavy and motivation fluctuates. The key is that the athlete is never buried so deeply that a week and a half of deep recovery is required before they resemble themselves again. Note that this is different than continuing some easy training or a lower volume block. This is more referring to needing multiple days off due to feelings of malaise, extreme fatigue, or continued poor performance.

Fitness grows best when quality work can continue.

Small peaks along the way

Many athletes think freshness only belongs on race day.

I disagree.

Throughout a training cycle, there should be small glimpses of what is coming.

A key threshold workout feels easier than expected. Race pace suddenly feels sustainable. The final repetitions of an important session come together beautifully.

Those moments are valuable because they provide feedback. They remind both coach and athlete that the training is moving in the right direction.

The complete picture may not appear until the goal race, but you should occasionally see pieces of it during training.

Those small victories build confidence while confirming that fatigue is being managed appropriately.

When Fitness, Form, and Freshness interact as intended, the athlete can arrive knowing the work has been done, the event-specific preparation is complete, and enough fatigue has been removed for your ability to finally show itself.

That is where months of training become one memorable performance.

Want your own memorable performance? We have a new application at Elite Edge for prospective athletes. Hit the link HERE for more or shoot us a message at the email below!

One uploads it with the comment, “That was hard! I thought I was going to die!!!”

The other writes, “Felt good.”

Which athlete had the harder day? The answer is: you don’t know.

In fact, if you’ve never coached either athlete before, you probably know almost nothing.

The words themselves tell only a small part of the story. One athlete may naturally express every difficult workout with dramatic flair, while another barely says a word regardless of how challenging the session was. One might call an appropriately difficult threshold workout “death” while another reserves any negative comments for the rare occasions when something is genuinely wrong.

If a coach takes those comments at face value, it becomes easy to make the wrong decision. You may back off when the athlete simply needed reassurance, or push forward when the athlete was quietly trying to tell you they were struggling.

That is why one of the most valuable coaching skills is learning how to read the athlete in front of you.

Calibrating around what?

Humans are far too unpredictable to treat training like machine learning. There is a careful mix of physiology, psychology and emotional intelligence required to get an athlete to reach his or her potential.

Let’s look at an example to illustrate the importance:

One of my athletes has a habit.

Nearly every hard track session or long run gets the same review.

“Death!”

“So hard!”

“Never again!”

If I looked only at those comments, I’d think the training was too much.

But after working together for years, I know much of this is light hearted expression. Races typically go well. There are often no indicators of poor recovery. There is genuine excitement for the hard sessions despite some hemming and hawing. Thus, the comments afterward are not necessarily a red flag.

Of course, that doesn’t mean I ignore them. If performance started falling off, recovery changed, or the comments became different in tone or frequency, we’d dig deeper. Context still matters and I have calibrated my sense of what to expect based on typical workout performance and athlete personality. To get the important information sometimes I have to reel this athlete back in a bit.

I have another athlete who is almost the opposite.

Most workouts receive some version of “Yep. Felt good.”

That’s it. No long explanation. No dramatic descriptions. Just enough to let me know the workout got done.

Does that mean those sessions are easier or that my job is easier than the previous case? Not at all. That’s simply how this athlete communicates. Sometimes I am having to prod a bit to get the details I need to know.

If I interpreted their comments using the same scale, I would probably make poor decisions for both.

Developing with the athlete

Coaching relationships are not created on day one. They take time.

The first few weeks or months are about learning each other. I learn what “hard” means to you, what a bad workout actually looks like, and how you respond to life stress, travel, poor sleep, and big training weeks.

You learn how I coach, what questions I’ll ask, and that you don’t have to tell me what you think I want to hear.

Over time, those conversations become more valuable because they’re interpreted through years of shared experience rather than a single comment in TrainingPeaks.

There is value in setting expectations early. Every coach has a philosophy, a communication style, and certain principles that shape how they approach training. But I also think the best coaching relationships leave room for adaptation.

The goal isn’t for the athlete to conform completely to the coach, nor for the coach to simply accommodate every preference. We need to create a shared language that might be a different dialect for Athlete A and Athlete B. From there, the experience is truly individualized and that is not because the workouts were a secret sauce but rather because the conversation around the body of work was more accurate because everyone is on the same page.

Through months and years of listening, observing, and building a shared language, the calibration process becomes more refined. This is where the individualized, one-on-one coaching model truly shines.

Most athletes and coaches understand that training plans should evolve based on feedback. But you can’t make those decisions with confidence unless you first understand what that feedback actually means.

If you're ready to build that kind of coaching relationship, I'd love to help → See our new application HERE or shoot an email to the address below

Taking one step at a time is less exciting, but it is reliable. Barring a catastrophe, you’ll probably reach the top.

Pursuing a big goal in endurance sport isn’t much different.

The more beginners I work with, the more convinced I become that coaching begins with accepting reality. There is always an athlete standing in front of you with a vision of where they want to go, but their current capabilities often sit a long way from that destination. The problem is pretending they are already somewhere they aren’t.

You can’t coach the athlete you hope they’ll become. You have to coach the athlete who is standing in front of you today.

There is a surprising amount of hubris in the endurance world. We celebrate how much we train, how hard we train, and how quickly we want to improve. What receives far less attention is the humility required from both coach and athlete to draw a line in the sand and say, this is where we start.

This week, we’ll explore why the next logical step is almost always the right one so that you don’t bust your teeth out taking three steps at a time.

Why do we like to skip steps?

Goals are exciting and they should be…or else you should find a new goal. But at the beginning of a training program, if the goal is a stretch, you may not look like the version of the person you are trying to become. So we force it to try to become that person without thinking about how it needs to happen.

We add distance because the goal requires distance. We add intensity because fast athletes train fast. We copy the workouts of people who are already where we want to be. From the outside, this can look like ambition and commitment. Sometimes it is. But it can also be an unwillingness to accept our present capabilities.

Have a look at this article from April on training for a result you have not built:

Comparison makes this worse. We rarely compare ourselves to someone at the same stage of development. We compare ourselves to the finished product. We see the weekly mileage, the long workouts, and the impressive splits without seeing the years of preparation that made them tolerable.

There is also a simple psychological appeal to doing more. Hard training feels productive and restraint can feel like hesitation. Taking the next logical step may seem too small to matter, while taking three steps at once feels like evidence that we are serious.

As a coach, I have to make the hard sell that starting small does not necessarily mean thinking smaller.

Assessing reality

Long-term goals inspire the daily work and athletes naturally want to train full steam ahead for the finish line. Coaches have to train the obstacle standing between the athlete and the finish line.

That means asking a simple question:

What is the current limitation?

Until that question is answered, writing a training plan is little more than guesswork. Today’s limitations determine today’s training. Let’s look at a timely example:

The next logical step often feels too small. It may be another week of run-walk intervals, another month of easy aerobic work, or another training block focused on basic strength instead of flashy workouts. But those “small” steps are often the very reason bigger steps become possible later.

The fastest way to reach a distant goal is almost always to first solve the problem that’s directly in front of you.

So instead of asking, “What do I need to do to reach my goal?” try asking:

“What do I need to do today to earn the next step?”

That’s not always an easy question to answer on your own. We’re often too close to our own training to objectively identify what’s actually holding us back. Sometimes the most valuable thing a coach provides isn’t motivation or accountability but perspective. They help you identify the next adaptation that matters most, so your energy is spent moving forward instead of simply working harder.

In the end, reaching the top of the staircase is about taking the right step, over and over again, until there aren’t any steps left to climb.

Need someone to help you to the top of the staircase? Elite Edge has a new application HERE for prospective athletes. Let’s get you on YOUR path.

No two athletes are exactly alike, and there is rarely a single “correct” way to help someone reach their goals. Effective coaching is less about following a predetermined formula and more about identifying an athlete’s limiting factors, applying sound training principles, and continually adjusting based on how they respond.

This week, I want to highlight one of my athletes at Elite Edge Sport and Performance, Kristjan Backman.

Kristjan is a lifelong swimmer who has continued to post impressive performances in Masters competition at 57 years old. Despite his experience in the pool, he had been unable to reach several long-standing goals in the 400 and 1500 freestyle through his own training. Like many experienced athletes, the challenge was not a lack of work ethic or knowledge. It was determining which aspects of his preparation were preventing him from taking the next step.

Recently, Kristjan delivered breakthrough performances in both events, achieving the goals he had been chasing. In this case study, we’ll examine the process behind those performances, the limitations we set out to address, how the training evolved over time, and what these results suggest about the next stage of his development as a swimmer.

Athlete Profile

When Kristjan started, several themes quickly emerged. I also admired how he knew what many of these were but was honest that he could not seem to figure it out. A good set of ground rules were already being established with clear goals and aims.

• Primary performance goals

  • 400 freestyle: 4:40

  • 1500 freestyle: 19:30

• A clear mental and physical ceiling

  • Kristjan consistently described 1:12 per 100 meters as a pace that felt “terminal.” He could touch that speed, but he could not sustain it for meaningful training or racing. He also mentioned many times how a 400-type effort did not feel “safe” to put himself through. We had to get him more comfortable with operating at the edges of his physiology.

• Limited top-end speed

  • One of his personal goals was to break 30 seconds for 50 meters freestyle, believing that improving his speed reserve could positively influence his middle-distance events.

• Recovery practices needed refinement

  • Like many experienced athletes, Kristian had a tendency to train too hard on days that should have been easy. At 57, appropriate recovery had become an increasingly important component of continued improvement.

• History of shoulder irritation

  • If training volume and intensity accumulated without appropriate management, shoulder discomfort would often emerge, limiting training consistency.

What we changed

Once we identified Kristian’s primary limitations, the objective was not to overhaul everything. It was to make a handful of targeted changes that addressed the underlying problems while allowing him to remain healthy and consistent.

1. A structured strength program

Strength training became a priority during the first two to three months of coaching before gradually taking a smaller role as swim-specific training increased.

The objective was not to build muscle for the sake of building muscle. Rather, it was to improve force production, maintain posture as fatigue accumulated, and increase the reserve available for racing. As the competition season approached, the emphasis naturally shifted toward expressing those qualities in the water.

2. Learning to stay composed at race pace

One of Kristjan’s biggest limitations was his inability to remain relaxed once the pace approached his target race speed.

Rather than relying heavily on long intervals at goal pace, many of our quality sessions consisted of 50s, 75s, or 100s performed at a prescribed pace with relatively short recoveries. You can sometimes fool yourself with 50s and 100s whe nthe rest interval is long. After several repetitions, we would include a longer recovery before repeating the process. We will look at some example sets in the results section.

This allowed him to accumulate a meaningful amount of work at race speed while repeatedly practicing efficient movement under increasing physiological stress. Longer repetitions, such as 200s at 400-meter pace or 400s at 1500-meter pace, were used much more sparingly as checkpoints rather than staples of the program.

3. The right intensity at the right time

Like many experienced athletes, Kristjan initially had a tendency to let aerobic days drift into moderate intensity.

To help monitor this, many easy swims concluded with a single fast 50-meter effort. If he could not produce a quality sprint after an aerobic session, it was often a sign that the main set had been too demanding.

This happened more than once early in the process.

As Kristjan became more disciplined on his aerobic days, those finishing sprints improved, and so did the quality of the subsequent hard sessions.

4. Standardizing the warm-up

Hard training days followed a consistent warm-up progression.

This served two purposes. First, it prepared Kristjan for the work ahead. More importantly, it created a reliable benchmark for how he felt each day. Because the warm-up remained relatively unchanged, deviations in perceived effort or pace became meaningful pieces of information rather than random fluctuations.

Consistency in the process made it much easier to decide when to push forward, when to adjust a session, and when fatigue was beginning to accumulate.

How Did He Respond?

Block 1: Establishing a baseline

The first six weeks were primarily about adaptation.

Strength training was a completely new stimulus, so we expected some growing pains. During this period, the training revolved around one key 400-meter pace session each week while the remainder of the week emphasized aerobic development and recovery.

It quickly became apparent that Kristian’s limiting factor was not necessarily his ability to work hard, but his ability to recover from working hard.

On two separate occasions, he “failed” one of the key sessions and jokingly replied, “You win,” after seeing what was prescribed. Rather than lowering the expectations, I started questioning whether his recovery between quality sessions was sufficient. My suspicion was that his easy days simply weren’t easy enough.

After six weeks, we tested fitness in competition.

• 400 freestyle: 4:54

• 1500 freestyle: 19:38

Neither swim represented the ultimate goal, nor were they expected to. Instead, they served as benchmarks.

The 400 was two seconds faster than anything he had swum earlier that year, and perhaps more importantly, Kristian remarked that “there was some left in the tank.” That comment suggested we were moving in the right direction.

Block 2: Evidence of adaptation

Momentum accelerated over the next six weeks.

We scheduled three racing opportunities (two 400 freestyles and one planned 1500) and one of the biggest indicators of progress wasn’t found in a race result. It was found in a workout.

Earlier in block 1, Kristian attempted the following set:

The goal was to consistently hold 35-36 seconds on the 50s.

On March 23, he remarked that he’d rather have the interval on :50 instead of :45, and he was unable to maintain the required pace on the second half of the ladder.

Rather than changing the workout, we stayed the course.

Six weeks later, on May 23, he completed the same set exactly as prescribed.

To me, this represented much more than simply surviving a difficult session. It was objective evidence that his ability to recover between efforts had improved. I suspect one of the biggest contributors was finally keeping the aerobic days appropriately easy.

Not every workout showed the same success.

A race-simulation session remained a challenge:

The expectation was approximately 1:09-1:10 for each 100 and 2:22-2:23 for the 200.

Kristian opened well with 1:08 and 2:25, but followed with a 1:14, producing a similar outcome in the second round.

His summary afterward?

“Loved the workout—failed it though.”

That assessment was fair. The capacity to repeatedly sustain race pace over longer distances simply wasn’t there yet. Interestingly, the races reflected exactly what we observed in training.

Kristian swam 4:48 on two occasions separated by just two weeks, matching what the simulation workouts predicted.

There was another encouraging sign, however.

Following one of those races, he swam 29.82 in the 50 freestyle—his first time breaking the 30-second barrier and one of the goals we established from the very beginning. Improving his speed reserve appeared to be paying dividends.

Life circumstances prevented the planned 1500 during this block, so we shifted our attention toward continuing the process.

Block 3: Putting It together

By the final training block, Kristian had settled into an excellent rhythm.

When we revisited the same race-simulation workout that had exposed his limitations several weeks earlier, the difference was striking.

This time he completed the set successfully, swimming 2:21 and 2:23 on the middle 200s while maintaining his performance on the closing 100s. The weakness that had been obvious earlier in the season had largely disappeared.

After several more weeks of consistent work, it was time to race.

The results:

• 400 freestyle: 4:43

• 1500 freestyle: 19:24

The 1500 goal had officially been achieved.

The 400 fell just short of the original 4:40 objective, but represented an 11-second improvement from his initial benchmark and one of the strongest performances of his Masters career.

Kristian’s season is a good reminder that breakthroughs rarely come from a single workout or secret training method. They are the product of identifying the right limitations, applying appropriate stress, recovering from that stress, and allowing enough time for adaptation to occur. Over the course of several months, we saw objective improvements in training sessions, race simulations, sprint speed, and ultimately race performance. While the 1500-meter goal has now been achieved, the original 4:40 target in the 400 freestyle remains. Fortunately, that goal no longer feels like a distant aspiration but rather the logical next step.

For now, training will take a back seat. Kristian is spending the remainder of the summer traveling and enjoying time with his family, which means training will be more about maintenance than progression. That is perfectly appropriate. One of the benefits of building a durable athlete is that life can take priority without feeling like everything has been lost. When the time is right, we’ll return to more focused training with a much clearer understanding of what moves the needle. We know the direction we need to go. The biggest lever left to pull is simply allowing more time for consistent work and adaptation to do what they always do.

Did this story resonate with you? If so, Elite Edge Sport and Performance might be able to offer a similar experience. Reach out today!

I hear this from time to time when working with runners, triathletes, and even recreational fitness enthusiasts.

My first response is usually a question.

How do you know?

What are you comparing yourself to? A professional runner? Someone on Instagram? A slow-motion video of your last interval?

More importantly, how do you know that changing your form would actually improve your performance?

Human movement is remarkably variable. There is no single “perfect” running stride, and many highly successful runners move in ways that look very different from one another. There is room for individual differences.

Instead of obsessing over how your stride looks, it may be more productive to think about the qualities that allow you to express good mechanics in the first place.

• Strength

• Stamina

• Speed

These are the foundations. When they improve, your body often begins to organize itself more efficiently without forcing every movement into an idealized template.

Several months ago, I published the article below where I discussed how different body systems adapt on different timelines.

Looking back, that idea was really the beginning of this series. When you appreciate those timelines, you begin to understand the anatomy of making progress—not just in running, but in endurance sport as a whole.

Before we can talk about maintaining good mechanics, though, we have to build the systems that make those mechanics possible.

That is where this week’s discussion begins.

Poor form often is not showing up in the first mile. It is fatigue that slowly erodes the qualities supporting that form.

The shoulders tighten. Ground contact lengthens. Cadence drifts. Posture collapses. The stride that felt effortless at mile two becomes expensive at mile twelve. In many cases, your form is probably better than you think but your ability to maintain it when fatigue arrives is the real limiting factor.

There are certainly things that could be nitpicked about my running form in this photo above. This was taken just a few strides from the finish line of a 5K race five years ago. I set a personal best that day.

Could slightly better form have been the difference between my previous PR and that performance? Could it have contributed to the many personal records I’ve run since?

Maybe.

I’m skeptical that it was the primary reason.

Instead, I think the bigger contributor was the work I put into improving the machinery that drives performance in the first place. Stronger muscles. A larger aerobic engine. Better fatigue resistance. More speed.

As those qualities improved, so did my running economy. And as my running economy improved, I was able to sustain a higher average velocity over the race distance.

Rather than viewing running form as something to be endlessly corrected, I think it is often more useful to view it as an expression of function. Build a stronger, more capable athlete, and better movement frequently follows.

Strength

With each foot strike, your body has a fraction of a second to accept load, store elastic energy, and propel you forward again. The stronger and stiffer the system is, the less “effort” that process requires relative to your maximum capacity.

This is why strength training has repeatedly been shown to improve running economy, even when VO₂max remains unchanged1.

Strength also gives you options.

It allows you to maintain posture late in a race. It helps resist excessive hip drop. It improves force transfer through the trunk and lower extremity. It reduces the amount of movement that is simply wasted.

Notice what we are doing here.

We are building a body that is capable of moving better. And, for what it is worth, a body that moves better may also be at less risk for injury which is where some of the value for strength training with respect to injury reduction may lie.

Stamina

Fatigue changes what your body is capable of producing and the movement pattern defined as your “form” becomes more expensive when fatigue sets in.

When most people hear the word stamina, they immediately think of the heart and lungs. Those certainly matter, but stamina extends well beyond your aerobic engine. Your muscles, tendons, connective tissue, and nervous system all need the capacity to repeat thousands of nearly identical contractions without a meaningful drop in performance. This goes for any endurance sport.

The athlete who preserves their mechanics the longest is often the one who finishes the strongest. This is one reason long days, threshold days, speed days and consistent weekly volume are so valuable. It is a package deal and they all interact to teach the body to continue producing efficient movement long after fatigue begins to accumulate.

Speed

At first glance, speed may seem like the least important quality for an endurance athlete, but speed changes the equation and is also relative to the distance being covered.

Imagine two runners racing a 5K at the exact same pace. One has spent years developing top-end speed through strides, hill sprints, intervals, and general athletic development. The other has done almost exclusively easy mileage.

Although they are moving at the same velocity, the race represents a smaller percentage of the first runner’s maximum capability.

When your ceiling is higher, race pace becomes more comfortable. You spend less time recruiting your highest-threshold motor units, you produce force more economically, and you delay the fatigue that slowly erodes movement quality.

This is one reason speed work benefits athletes well beyond the duration of the intervals themselves. It both helps teach you to go faster and it expands your performance reserve.

A larger reserve allows you to move with greater confidence, better coordination, and less relative effort across a wide range of paces. See the article below to understand that a bit more:

• Strength → Can you produce enough force?

• Stamina → Can you keep producing it under fatigue?

• Speed → Can you make race pace a smaller fraction of your overall capacity?

When you look at endurance performance through this lens, form begins to make a little more sense.

Ask: "What qualities am I missing that prevent me from holding good mechanics?"

In many cases, improved form in endurance sports is simply what efficient movement looks like when strength, stamina, and speed have all been developed together.

How realistic it is, however, is a different conversation.

For professional athletes, this is largely a given. Their lives are built around sport, and sometimes they have to gut it out long after a season has reached its expiration date.

For competitive amateurs, things look different, and as a result, there are usually only a handful of months at a time in a year when training can truly become a major focus. That is not a flaw. In many cases, it can actually work to your advantage.

The bigger question is what happens during the less focused periods. When sport is no longer the primary priority, how do you avoid losing everything you have worked to build?

We look to answer that this week.

Before we get into the details, one thing should be clear: if you need time completely away from sport, take it.

This article is not an argument that you should always be training. If your mental, physical, financial, or personal priorities require more attention, make sure your actions reflect those priorities. Sport should support your life, not compete with it.

More often than not, however, we simply find ourselves without a formal goal. There isn’t a race on the calendar or a training block demanding our full attention. In those moments, trying to maintain peak fitness year-round often leaves athletes mentally flat by the time meaningful goals do emerge (they will).

There is an ebb and flow to balancing ambition and longevity. Learning when to push and when to simply maintain is a skill in itself.

That brings us to the idea of base fitness.

Not the endless high-volume “base season” many athletes imagine, but the level of fitness and skill that allows you to ramp back up without feeling like you’re starting from scratch.

What does that actually require?

What defines your base?

A BASE-ic definition

There are many definitions of base training, but the most effective use of your time is going to be with focusing on foundational skills.

I like to look at this from three angles:

• Raw strength

• Speed/coordination

• Aerobic development

An athlete who keeps these three qualities alive maintains athleticism.

That matters because the body doesn’t rebuild every quality at the same rate. Aerobic fitness often returns surprisingly quickly. Raw strength follows. The qualities that tend to disappear fastest, and often determine how “rusty” you feel, are movement skill, coordination, and tissue tolerance.

The goal, then, is not to stay race-ready all year but to keep these three pillars from drifting too far.

The three pillars explained

Raw strength

Think of strength as the chassis that supports everything else.

During a race build, lifting often gets reduced to maintenance. During periods when racing is not the priority, however, the weight room becomes an opportunity rather than an obligation.

You don’t need complicated programming.

A couple of challenging sessions each week built around squats or split squats, hip hinges, presses, rows or pull-ups, and trunk stability is enough to preserve—and often improve—the foundation you’ll rely on later.

Speed and coordination

Your nervous system benefits from regular reminders of how to move quickly.

For runners, that might be strides or short hill sprints. Cyclists can include a few high-cadence surges or brief accelerations. Swimmers can sprinkle in stroke drills and short sprints.

The volume is tiny but these small reminders help preserve efficiency so that higher-intensity training feels familiar instead of foreign when your next focused block begins. You’re opening up pathways you’ll need later rather than smashing yourself with max effort work.

Aerobic development

Finally, keep the aerobic engine idling. This doesn’t require massive weekly volume. It simply means maintaining enough consistent work that your cardiovascular system and your tissues never become strangers to endurance.

For multisport athletes, that may mean trimming swim and bike volume while keeping a few regular runs each week. Running places unique demands on bones, tendons, and muscles, making long layoffs more costly than many athletes realize.

For runners, three or four relaxed runs each week paired with strength training is often enough to maintain a surprisingly robust platform for future progress.

The objective is maintaining enough momentum that your next training block begins with acceleration instead of reconstruction.

Putting it into practice

When life shifts your attention elsewhere, resist the urge to think in terms of all or nothing.

Instead, ask yourself three questions:

• Am I keeping some strength in my routine?

• Am I reminding my body how to move fast?

• Am I doing enough aerobic work that rebuilding won’t feel like starting over?

The answers do not need to be perfect. They simply need to be “yes” more often than “no.”

Some seasons of life will allow you to chase breakthroughs. Others will ask you to simply hold the line. Both are valuable.

Remember, the goal isn’t to stay in peak shape all year long. Peak fitness is temporary by design.

The goal is to preserve enough of your foundation that when the next opportunity arrives, and it will, you can spend your energy building toward something new instead of rebuilding what you already had.

Most injury rehabilitation programs do a good job addressing the injured tissue. They focus on reducing pain, restoring mobility, rebuilding strength, and checking the boxes needed for discharge.

What many programs don’t provide is a clear roadmap for returning to the activity itself which is arguably the most important phase of recovery.

Instead, the process often becomes an asynchronous mess of communication between coach, athlete, and physical therapist. The athlete is left in the middle, “testing out” whether the injury is ready for more running, more riding, or more training. A good day builds confidence. A bad day creates doubt. Progress becomes reactive rather than purposeful.

So why not create a program that bridges that gap? One that provides the return-to-sport progression, the targeted interventions, the communication between all parties, and the coaching needed to reduce the likelihood of the issue returning in the future. That’s exactly what we built at Elite Edge.

Maybe you’re not fully sold on a program like that, and that’s okay.

This week, I want to explore one of the most common mistakes athletes make when returning from injury: confusing testing with training.

Most athletes would never build fitness by randomly jumping into hard workouts and hoping for the best. They follow a plan, progress workloads, manage recovery, and train with intention.

Yet when it comes to returning from injury, many abandon those same principles and simply test things out, hoping the body responds favorably.

Your return to sport deserves the same structure, progression, and purpose as the training that got you there in the first place.

Define the terms: Trying vs. Training

Trying rests on the assumption that you need to prove something.

To be clear, you do need to prove that you can tolerate increasing amounts of your sport again. The problem is that many athletes struggle to separate small, purposeful exposures from normal training.

Instead of walking away from a successful 20-minute run with minimal pain, they decide to do a 5-mile easy run as a “test.” Or they choose a hilly route just to see if the leg, ankle, knee, or calf is ready.

This approach is like throwing darts at a board rather than following a map.

All you’re really doing is collecting information. More often than not, that information tells you that you’re not ready for that amount of load yet. Occasionally you’ll surprise yourself and do fine. In those cases, perhaps the injury was less limiting than you thought.

But for athletes stuck in the cycle of recurring pain and failed comebacks, trying usually creates more questions than answers. You have to build your way back with repeated exposures to the task. You do not prove your way back to fitness.

This is where training comes in

Training rests on the assumption that there is a plan.

The goal is not simply to tolerate activity, but rather adaptation.

That may look like planning a 20-minute run, feeling fantastic, and stopping at 20 minutes anyway. Throw your hands up and declare victory.

Why?

Because tomorrow you can come back and do it again. Instead of chasing 60 minutes and spending the next week recovering, or worse, aggravating the injury. You’ve accumulated a successful exposure that moves you forward.

Ironically, athletes who embrace this approach often end up doing more total work because successful returns are built by stringing together productive days, not heroic ones.

Let’s have a look at an example

Why do we resort to trying?

Trying and testing offers something that training cannot: the illusion of certainty.

We fear losing fitness. We want reassurance. We compare ourselves to healthy athletes on social media and convince ourselves that we should already be further along. Unfortunately, readiness is rarely discovered in one dramatic moment. It is built gradually through repeated successful exposures.

A note on uncertainty—

No coach, therapist, or training plan can guarantee that tomorrow’s run will feel perfect. Symptoms may fluctuate. Setbacks may occur. Progress is rarely linear.

Trying leaves you reacting to whatever happens. Training gives you a progression, a rationale, and a next step regardless of what happens.

When an athlete is constantly testing an injury, a good day often leads to doing too much, while a bad day can lead to unnecessary fear and inactivity.

When an athlete follows a structured progression, both good days and bad days provide useful information. The plan can be adjusted. Workloads can be modified. Progress can continue.

There is still uncertainty but also foresight. Instead of seeking certainty, use your plan to help manage uncertainty.

To the finish line

Your return to sport is not a one-shot fitness test that you need to pass. It is a process of rebuilding capacity, confidence, and consistency. Instead of asking whether your body can handle today’s workout, ask what today’s workout can do to prepare your body for the next one.

That is exactly how we approach injury recovery at Elite Edge through our ReBUILD® Program.

“This 5K is your marathon.”

That may seem like a silly phrase, especially for some who are experienced in the world of endurance, but it was exactly what I told my mom a few years ago when we got her on a plan to do her first 5K. At age 62, she ran 29:10, and prior to training for it, she had never formally exercised a day in her life.

There are many people in that same boat. They want to commit to a goal, but have never been active. They know exercise is healthy and good, but starting from zero is hard. Something like a marathon seems awesome but daunting…and wholly unrealistic to happen in the short term.

Running itself is no special task. If you try it and do not enjoy it, move on. I will not push you to be a runner. But if you get into it and start to like how it feels, it can be a fantastic activity to enjoy.

So much so that you might be keen to give a 5K a proper go. Not just finishing, but going at full effort for the entirety. With no formal background in exercise, the gap between nothing and a hard 5K needs to be considered. Especially for someone who is pushing 50, 60, or even 70 years old.

The following plan is designed for someone who has spent no time intentionally exercising. This will get you off the couch, on your feet, and into running if that is your goal.

There are a lot of benefits, physical and mental, when we operate a nudge above the recommended activity guidelines. That is some serious value.

The program

Three phases make up the overall plan

1. Building habits

2. Run:Walk

3. Sustained run

You are going to want to budget yourself 4-5 months of training time to appropriately build a cardiovascular and muscular engine fit to handle a 5K best effort. That may seem like a long time for such a short event, but when exercise is absent from your lifetime curriculum vitae, this time course is essential to development. Don’t rush it.

Phase I: Building habits

Phase I begins by finding a way to get out the door every morning or evening. Commit to getting out for a 30-60 min walk every day for 30 days. This is not a leisure walk, but rather walking with intent. Power walking as it were.

While this is a conservative approach, the shock of running right away on day one can be either discouraging or damaging. If you can complete this first phase unscathed, you are ready to commit to more.

The physiology behind this phase is not the focus. You are merely setting up a trial run framework to see if you can stick to a stated goal for more than a few weeks.

Phase II: Run:Walk

The rubber meets the road in Phase II. It is time to start running. Most of the activity duration is going to be spent walking initially, but toward the end of the phase there are some substantial run portions. Some guidelines for the running portions:

• Nothing faster than a conversation pace. Might be a trot.

• Think “light on feet”

• Open and close every session with walking. Never ripping it out of the gates.

Budget yourself 8 weeks for the following:

Phase III: Sustained (and higher speed)

The finale of the program is not a long phase, but rather it ties up some loose ends. Covering the full distance of a race of this caliber before the big day is both safe and a confidence boost. I would not necessarily say the same about a full marathon.

This is also a good opportunity to open up the stride a few times to understand what pushing feels like. With completion as the goal, the meat of the work was done in Phase II to safely get you to this point.

Week 4 of this phase is Race Week!

Parting thoughts

While this plan has detail and is progressive, it is reasonable to assume your mileage may vary. There may be days where you cannot get out the door or days where the body tells you it should be a walking day instead of a running day. Lean into these feelings and listen.

Switching some days around is how some of the best athletes keep the ball rolling. The same idea can work for you.

There is nothing about this program that is flashy. When you commit to showing up each day for a long period of time, nothing special is required. This is why Phase I is crucial to your success. Do not skip that phase.

You’ll understand what I mean when you are crossing the finish line of your first 5K.

These shifts are often exciting:
A new job. A move. Starting medical school. Having kids.

But even positive change creates tension because something has to give.

The focus may no longer be high performance. At least not in the way you previously defined it and that’s where many athletes struggle.

This week, we’re looking at a simple framework for finding your first win when the tides shift. Because contrary to what many athletes believe, winning can change. In fact, redefining it may be exactly what allows you to keep moving forward.

Grab a pen. Grab some paper. We are cutting right to the chase. You need to get writing down the following:

What is winning?

A reframe is often needed.

No, this is not settling, coping or giving up on ambition.

But if your definition of winning only includes standing on the highest podiums, then your life must be organized in a way that supports that pursuit.

And sometimes, at least for a season, it can’t be.

That reality can feel uncomfortable because endurance athletes are wired to chase progression. We like metrics moving upward. Faster splits. Bigger volume. Better results. But life does not always move in a straight line. Sometimes winning is no longer about maximizing performance. Sometimes it is about protecting consistency, health, relationships, or your long-term connection to the sport itself.

Winning might look different now:

• Training three days per week consistently instead of six inconsistently

• Sleeping enough instead of squeezing in one more workout

• Keeping movement in your life during a demanding season at work

• Showing up healthy instead of chronically exhausted

• Maintaining fitness instead of chasing peak fitness

The definition changes before progress can continue.

And ironically, athletes who can adapt their definition of winning are often the ones who stay in the sport long enough to thrive again later, perhaps winning in a more objective and binary sense where you win or don’t win a specific event.

How can I make this happen?

There are always variables outside your control.

Your work or school schedule.
Your kids waking up at night.
Financial stress.
A move across the country.
A body that no longer tolerates endless volume the way it once did.

But there are still things within your control:

• Your effort

• Your consistency

• Your willingness to adapt

• Your ability to stay emotionally engaged even when training looks different

This is where many athletes get stuck because they spend so much energy mourning the perfect training setup they used to have that they fail to maximize the reality in front of them.

The athlete who cannot train 18 hours anymore often convinces themselves that anything less is meaningless even if it is 6, 10, 12 hours done well.

But it’s not about the hours, it is what you do with them. The meaningful training compounds. Intentional work compounds.

A season of adjusted expectations does not erase years of fitness and experience. If it does, you never had that fitness to begin with.

The question becomes:
“How do I make the best version of this season possible?”

Not:
“How do I recreate a season of life that no longer exists?”

Who needs to be involved?

This is where a coach, spouse, family, friends, or support system become invaluable.

Endurance athletes often pride themselves on independence. We convince ourselves we can simply grind harder and figure it out alone. However, the major life transitions usually require communication, support, and honesty.

Sometimes the most important thing you can do is clearly communicate expectations:

• What training time matters most to you

• What flexibility is needed

• What your priorities currently are

• What support you may need from others

A coach can help remove emotional decision-making and create realistic structure.

We do this at Elite Edge and it is is often where the biggest breakthroughs happen. Not necessarily through doing more, but through helping athletes identify what matters most in the season they are currently in. Clear priorities, intentional training, honest assessment, and a plan that fits real life instead of fighting against it.

A spouse or partner often needs clarity just as much as you do. Resentment builds quickly when training expectations are assumed instead of discussed.

And sometimes support simply means having people around you who understand that your goals still matter even if they look different than before.

What is going to prevent me from getting there?

Most athletes immediately answer: time.

And while time constraints are real, they can be an advantage. When time is unlimited, athletes often waste energy on “more” instead of “better.” More miles. More sessions. More junk volume that feels productive but carries little purpose. Limited time forces clarity.

You begin asking better questions:

• What actually moves the needle?

• What sessions matter most?

• What recovery habits can no longer be ignored?

• Where am I wasting energy mentally or physically?

And beyond time, there are often other barriers:

• Ego

• Fear of losing fitness

• Comparison to former versions of yourself

• The inability to separate identity from performance

These are often harder to confront than a busy schedule because you are afraid less says something about who you are…in a bad way. While less may not be ideal, learning how to adapt without abandoning yourself may be one of the most important endurance skills there is.

Life has a way of forcing us to reevaluate what success actually means. Seasons change. Priorities shift. Time becomes limited. Sometimes the strongest thing an athlete can do is adapt instead of resist. Sometimes that win you need involves building a version of the sport that can evolve with your life instead of competing against it.

It’s a fair question. I’ve spent a large portion of my life in endurance sport, and at certain points competed at a fairly high level. Relative to the general population, maybe you could say I became “good” at it.

But the older I get, the more I realize that “good” is incredibly subjective. In reality, there are only a handful of people in any sport who are truly exceptional. The rest of us exist somewhere on a massive spectrum of ability, genetics, opportunity, and persistence.

What impresses me most now is not necessarily absolute performance, but the magnitude of improvement. Honestly, I’m often far more inspired by and interested in the person who goes from the couch to a 2:30 marathon over the course of ten years than by the semi-elite athlete who was naturally gifted from the beginning and can seemingly succeed no matter what they do.

Raw ability and genetics explain more than many people want to admit. But they are not the whole story. The far more interesting question is what someone does with the hand they were dealt.

“Good” depends on the room you’re standing in

Sport has a way of constantly recalibrating your definition of good. The faster you get, the more you realize how many levels exist above you.

That is one of the healthiest things sport can teach you. Ability is contextual. “Good” depends entirely on who you compare yourself to and what environment you are standing in.

To the general population, qualifying for Boston might seem extraordinary. At a competitive local running club, it may be fairly common. At the professional level, it is not even part of the conversation. None of those perspectives are wrong. They just reflect different standards and different populations.

The danger comes when people talk about athletic success as though it is binary as if someone is either talented or untalented, fast or slow, elite or average. In reality, performance exists on an enormous spectrum. The gap between a recreational athlete and a regional elite athlete can be massive. The gap between a regional elite athlete and the truly world class is often even larger.

Genetics matter more than people want to admit

The fitness industry sometimes ignores this reality completely. Every day you see some version of: “Buy my program and you’ll be strong like a bull,” or “Follow these five steps and unlock elite performance.”

Maybe. Maybe not.

People are uncomfortable talking about genetics because it feels unfair, discouraging, or somehow anti-hard work. But pretending biology does not matter helps nobody. Genetics influence far more than just how someone looks without a shirt on. They shape VO2 max, tendon stiffness, body composition, movement economy, recovery capacity, psychological traits, injury resilience, and even how well someone tolerates training monotony.

At some point, nearly every athlete runs into a limiter. For one person it is aerobic capacity. For another it is durability. Someone else may have incredible physiology but lack the psychological wiring to consistently handle discomfort, repetition, or risk. Non-training constraints matter too. Finances, work schedules, family responsibilities, stress, access to coaching, and opportunity all influence performance far more than people acknowledge.

Genetics determine ceilings far more than they determine growth. Most people can improve dramatically relative to their starting point. But improvement is not an infinite game. Eventually, biology places boundaries around what is realistically possible.

I actually think there is something freeing about acknowledging that. Once you stop believing that every limitation is a personal failure, you can redirect your energy toward maximizing the traits you do have instead of obsessing over the ones you do not.

The irony is that accepting your limitations often allows you to improve more. You stop chasing fantasy outcomes and start training with realism. And over long periods of time, those qualities matter far more than motivational slogans ever will.

Improvement is a meaningful metric

What impresses me most is not necessarily where someone finishes. It is how far they traveled to get there.

I am not talking about the athlete who ignores every warning sign, trains recklessly, and mistakes stubbornness for commitment. Plenty of people work hard. Plenty of people suffer. Neither guarantees progress.

What I admire is the athlete who steadily evolves over the course of several seasons.

The person who starts as a sedentary adult and, ten years later, qualifies for Boston. The teenager who struggles to make a varsity roster and gradually develops into a collegiate athlete. I’ve worked with folks like this and none of those outcomes happen because someone found the perfect training plan or discovered a secret workout. They happen because improvement compounds when you have guidance across years and can stay in the game. Over time, the athlete becomes capable of things that once seemed impossible.

That process is what makes sport so fascinating. The finish line is only a snapshot. The real story is the years of adaptation that came before it.

And that brings us back to the original question: how does someone become truly good at something?

The answer is usually less exciting than people want it to be. Talent matters. Opportunity matters. Coaching matters. But regardless of where someone ultimately ends up, meaningful athletic development almost always takes a long time.

Starting early is a big lever to pull

If there is one advantage that consistently shows up among high-level athletes, it is time.

When people ask how someone became elite, they are often looking for a breakthrough moment. The answer, however, is usually much less glamorous. Most elite athletes simply have years and years of accumulated development behind them.

That does not mean they all started as prodigies. Many did not. But they started early enough to allow thousands of training sessions, competitions, mistakes, adjustments, and adaptations to compound over time.

This is one reason why reaching an elite level is so difficult. Regardless of genetics, there are very few shortcuts. The physiological adaptations, the technical skills, and the mental skills all take time.

Can an adult who starts a sport later in life become remarkably good? Absolutely. It happens all the time. But the clock is one variable that nobody gets to ignore. A twenty-five-year-old beginner is not just competing against other people’s talent. They are competing against ten or fifteen years of accumulated experience.

This is not meant to be discouraging and maybe it is even liberating.

Most of us are never going to find out how close we could have come to our absolute genetic ceiling. We start too late. But that does not make the pursuit any less worthwhile.

In some ways, I think we ask the wrong question.

“How did you get so good?” sounds simple, but it leaves out most of the story.

A better set of questions might be: Where did you start? How long have you been doing this? Who helped you along the way? How much have you improved relative to your baseline?

Those questions provide context. They acknowledge that performance is rarely the product of a single factor. They remind us that every athlete is operating with a different combination of physiology, opportunities, resources, support systems, and years of accumulated experience.

When viewed through that lens, athletic achievement becomes much more interesting. Instead of comparing outcomes alone, we begin to appreciate trajectories because let’s be honest, not everyone can become elite. Not everyone can maximize their genetic potential. But nearly everyone can become substantially better than they once were. In the end, that transformation is often more meaningful than the outcome itself.

Each opportunity reinforces what I believe to be true: sustainable progress is built through thoughtful decisions made consistently over time.

I was recently featured in a Q&A with discussing the balance between ambition and longevity in sport. We explored how athletes can pursue meaningful goals while preserving the ability to enjoy training and competition five, ten, or even fifteen years from now.

Too often, athletes are forced to choose between performance and durability. In reality, the best long-term outcomes come from respecting both.

When we build sustainable habits and commit to long-term development, sport becomes one of the greatest gifts we can give ourselves. The rewards continue to compound year after year.

If you have a few minutes, I’d be grateful if you gave the article a read. I’d also love to hear your thoughts in the comments. What resonated with you? Where have you struggled to balance ambition with longevity in your own athletic journey?

Learn. Apply. Continue forward.

— Max

The MENTOR Magazine

Mental Performance Q&A: Injury Recovery, Breakthroughs, and Sustainable Sport

Whether you're a longtime reader of The Mentor Magazine or you're discovering us for the first time, we're glad to have you here. We had an incredible conversation with Max Stoneking and wanted to share it with our community. This conversation lives right at the intersection of sport and mental performance…

Read more

3 months ago · 7 likes · The MENTOR Magazine and Max Stoneking PT, DPT

Leave a comment

Yet we routinely see athletes fall short despite doing solid work. So what gives? Is this you?

In my experience, misaligned expectations ruin more races than insufficient training.

Sometimes athletes set goals that are wildly ambitious relative to the work they’ve done. Other times they walk into a race expecting less than what they’re actually capable of. Both can be equally damaging.

This week, I want to share a simple exercise I use with every athlete to help establish realistic race expectations long before the starting gun goes off. You can use it too.

The workflow

1. Put the ball in their court

Well in advance of the race, I ask a simple question:

“What do you think is a realistic result for this race?”

I don’t provide suggestions. I don’t lead the witness. I want to know what they believe.

A finishing time. A placing. A pacing strategy. Whatever the outcome measure is, I want them to commit to an answer first. The response itself is useful, but what comes next is where the real value lies.

2. Show the evidence

Once they provide their answer, I make my own assessment privately and then I push back.

Regardless of whether I agree with them or not, I ask the same question:

“What evidence from your training log supports that outcome?”

Now the athlete has to build a case.

Which workouts, long days, race simulations support this result? Objective data is nice. We cannot skew the facts.

“Oh you’re fitter than that, bud! Don’t worry about those sessions!”

Bullshit. The body of work you create with your training is the signal. They are the clearest window we have into current fitness. Not perfect, but far more reliable than hope, hype, or what you were capable of three years ago.

If you end up with a race result that is dramatically better than anything you demonstrated in training, the ability was probably there all along. Some days present themselves as miracles, but those days are rare. More often than not, race day simply reveals the fitness you've already built.

3a. When the evidence is there

Sometimes an athlete absolutely nails it. They connect the dots between training and performance.

In these cases, the athlete isn’t guessing. They’ve developed a clear understanding of their capabilities because they’ve been paying attention to the process.

The athlete has already done the work of aligning expectations with reality.

3b. When the evidence isn’t there

Other times, the athlete starts scrambling.

They want the 16-minute 5K and maybe want to impress their coach by being ambitious, but when asked to provide evidence, there isn’t much to point to.

On the flip side, some athletes undersell themselves.

They’ll propose a conservative goal only to discover that several months of consistent training have been painting a much more positive picture than they realized.

So, what do we do?

I cannot just berate the athlete. We have to do something that builds the athlete up.

When there is a mismatch, we work together to develop a race plan that fits the work that has been completed.

If you’re four to six weeks away from a race, there are not going to be massive physiological changes that suddenly transform a pie-in-the-sky goal into reality.

This is one reason I recommend doing this exercise well before race week. Don’t spring it on yourself the night before the event.

Give yourself enough time to digest the answer and build a race strategy around it. Work with what you have.

As coaches, we shouldn’t simply hand athletes a target and tell them what to believe. We need to help them develop agency. You can read more about that process here:

We need them to become active participants who defend their expectations with evidence, thereby becoming more invested in the outcome. They begin to understand why certain workouts matter. They learn how to evaluate their own readiness.

That’s a valuable skill long after a single race is over.

“I like not being micromanaged, but being checked in on is a great nudge.”

That line came from an Elite Edge athlete during a recent feedback survey, and it stuck with me.

It captures something important about effective coaching: athletes want guidance and accountability, but they also want ownership of the process. The best coaching relationships are rarely authoritarian. They function more like a collaboration built on trust, communication, and shared investment.

Teaching first, then stepping back

A coach should take every opportunity to educate the athlete on the why behind the training. The structure, the purpose, and the long-term intent.

An informed athlete develops better awareness, better decision-making, and ultimately more independence. Over time, good coaching should create more autonomy, not less.

That process does not always begin with full freedom. Newer athletes often need more structure and direction early on. The flywheel takes time to turn. But as experience grows, so should the athlete’s ability to interpret training, communicate effectively, and participate in decision-making.

At some point, the coach shifts from controlling every detail to observing, refining, and guiding development as it unfolds.

There is always uncertainty

One of the most important things a coach can admit is this: There is always some uncertainty.

No coach has perfect answers. Training is rarely linear, and even well-designed plans sometimes miss the mark. The best we can do is make informed decisions with the information available and continue adjusting as new feedback comes in.

That process belongs to both athlete and coach.

As the athlete learns through training and experience, the coach learns too. About the athlete, about the response to training, and about what works best in the real world rather than just on paper.

Input matters

I cannot feel what the athlete feels.

I can relate through my own training and racing experience, but I cannot fully understand another person’s fatigue, motivation, stress, or life demands. Likewise, I may appreciate the push and pull of balancing training with career and family responsibilities, but every athlete’s situation is still unique. That is why communication matters so much.

Athletes need space to voice concerns, ask questions, and give honest feedback about what they are experiencing physically and mentally. Sometimes that means asking for an off day. Other times it means wanting to push harder or take on more.

I have had athletes strongly advocate for increasing volume or intensity, sometimes to the point of disagreement. Early in my coaching journey, I probably leaned too hard into the “coach knows best” mindset in those moments.

Over time, I have learned to pause and ask a better question:

What is the athlete actually telling me here?

Sometimes the desire to train harder reflects motivation, confidence, or a psychological need for ownership in the process. And when that input is thoughtfully integrated into the plan, the athlete often becomes even more engaged and invested.

Agency matters.

Athletes who develop the ability to critique training, recognize patterns, and communicate meaningful observations tend to improve faster over the long run. The coach’s role is not to eliminate athlete input, but to help refine and interpret it during both success and failure.

My athlete feedback survey continues to prove it’s worth. Feedback is often a good reminder that sometimes the best thing a coach can do is step back just enough to let the athlete take ownership while still providing the steady presence and guidance that keeps progress moving forward.

But there is also a broader acceptance of this mindset within endurance sports, to the point that real injuries are often viewed as “part of the deal” rather than a serious warning sign that something needs to change.

This week, we’ll look at whether injury should be normalized at all, where the line exists between a flare-up and a true injury, and how athletes may be able to stay out of trouble in the first place.

If you train hard with meaningful performance goals season after season, there will be times when your body pushes back. None of us are invincible. A sore hamstring, a nagging knee, a tender ankle are often early signals that you may be getting close to the edge.

Most of the time, these issues do not completely derail training. A short period of reduced volume, better recovery, or a few days off can often calm things down. In many ways, that is normal. But it is still worthy of attention, because when athletes repeatedly ignore these warning signs, true injuries eventually arrive like a hammer — and that is when progress really takes a hit.

Somewhere along the way, endurance culture began treating this progression as heroic. Pushing past the warning signs became admirable. Training through actual injury became proof of toughness. Even limping through sessions or forcing your way to a start line is often celebrated more than making the mature decision to back off and listen to the body.

Then, when the inevitable breakdown happens and races are missed, the response is usually sympathy rather than honest reflection about the decisions that led there.

I can say this confidently because I have made these mistakes myself. I have ignored warning signs. I have trained through things I should not have. And as a physical therapist, I also spend much of my professional life helping people avoid making the same mistake for the second, third, or fourth time.

The bottom line is simple: your body gives you free feedback every day about how it is tolerating training. You can choose to listen or not. I do not believe recurring injury is normal, necessary, or something endurance athletes should simply accept as “part of the sport.”

That does not mean training should be soft or overly cautious. It means athletes need to learn when to adjust the sails before you turn yourself into a piece of driftwood.

Let’s clear up some of your burning questions:

“My _____ hurts. What do I do?”

Pain does not always mean you need to panic. Sometimes you are simply sore, fatigued, or experiencing a temporary flare-up that needs monitoring rather than a complete overhaul of your training plan.

Other times, you are dealing with a true injury and continuing to push through it may put your health, season, or long-term progress at risk.

The challenge for many athletes is learning the difference between normal training discomfort and a legitimate warning sign. The article below goes into more detail on how to identify what you may actually be dealing with.

Can I keep training?

Once you identify the likely source and contributing factors behind an issue, you can begin building a plan to keep moving forward without digging yourself into a deeper hole.

In many cases, athletes can continue training in some capacity while injured. The key is understanding how to modify load, intensity, frequency, and recovery so the body can calm down while fitness is maintained.

The article below breaks down several important principles for training through injury intelligently rather than emotionally.

“How do I keep this from coming back?”

This is ultimately the most important question.

Working with a physical therapist and ideally one who understands endurance athletes and the demands of the sport can be an invaluable investment in your long-term health and performance.

The ReBUILD® Program through Elite Edge Coaching has helped numerous athletes go from injured and frustrated to healthy and competitive again. The goal is not simply getting athletes out of pain, but helping them understand why they broke down in the first place so the cycle does not continue. You can get started on your path HERE.

If formal coaching or rehab is not something you are looking for right now, the article below is a great starting point. It is the first in a three-part series focused on returning from injury and staying out of trouble long term.

Injury should not be viewed as a badge of honor, a personality trait, or an unavoidable cost of chasing performance. Yes, hard training comes with aches, fatigue, and occasional setbacks. That is part of pushing limits. But there is a major difference between respecting the stress of training and blindly normalizing breakdown after breakdown.

The athletes who stay healthy long term are usually the ones willing to listen early, adjust intelligently, recover appropriately, and think beyond a single workout or race.

Your body is constantly giving feedback about what it can and cannot tolerate. The question is whether you are paying attention before it is forced to make the decision for you.

• Put a lot of force into the ground

• Spend very little time on the ground

It’s a skill. And it’s something you can train.

At the core, this comes down to producing force quickly. That’s where plyometrics come in.

Most runners sprinkle in a few jumps or skips and call it good. And sure, a small dose can help. But if you actually want that work to carry over to make you faster, you need to zoom out.

Plyometrics don’t create force. They express it.

Effective plyometrics are a conversion of strength into power.
If you don’t have the strength, there’s nothing to convert.

That’s where a lot of runners get stuck, especially high school athletes and adult recreational runners. They go straight to plyos without building a real strength base. Different populations, same limitation.

The upside? There’s a lot of room for these folks (probably you) to improve. Build the foundation first, and now the speed work actually does something.

This week, I’ll show you how I think when developing athletes in this way. I use a derivation of a progression model inspired by Tudor Bompa as well as some ideas from Olympic XC skier/coach, Jim Galanes that takes you from general strength to high-velocity power. This ultimately translates into faster, more efficient running. It’s a simple framework you can run across your season so your strength work actually translates when it matters.

The one thing that needs to be clear right off the bat is that this progression does not yield immediate results in practice.

Do we see key improvements along the way? Yes.
Will you get faster from the start to the end of a season if it’s done right? Likely so.

But expecting major jumps in your running performance in just a few weeks isn’t realistic. This is a longer game. You have to commit to this across multiple seasons and start looking at progress season to season. That’s an important nuance, and one most runners miss.

Now let’s look at how to do this:

For endurance athletes, I generally break this progression into four main buckets:

1. Build tissue tolerance and general strength

2. Develop maximal force production

3. Convert strength into power

4. Maintaining through the season

Could you blend some of these together? Sure. Training is never perfectly clean in the real world. But having a general roadmap matters, especially for runners who have never consistently trained these qualities before.

Let’s start with the foundation.

1. General prep (4-6 weeks)

Goal: Build tissue tolerance and movement quality

• Low–moderate load strength work

• High reps, controlled tempo (2-3 sets, 8-12 reps per set)

• General coordination, basic movement patterns

• Intro-level plyos (low amplitude: skips, hops, jump rope)

You gotta learn how to move! This is your “don’t get hurt + learn to use your body” phase.

2. Max strength development (4-6 weeks)

Goal: Increase force-producing capacity

• Heavier lifts (relative to athlete level)

• Lower reps, longer rest, heavier loads (3-4 sets, 3-5 reps per set)

• Still controlled, but intent to move weight

You’re raising the ceiling of force production. If you can’t produce force slowly, you won’t produce it quickly. This is the missing piece for a lot of high school + adult recreational athletes.

Important note: This may be a nice time to cap run volume or intensity at a manageable level. You cannot be going hammer and tongs in all areas of training at once. Layering is a nice way to train when you are looking at developing specific attributes.

3. Conversion to power (4-6 weeks)

Goal: Turn strength into usable, fast force

• Plyometrics become more central

• Jump variations, bounds, short ground contacts

• Olympic lift derivatives (if appropriate)

• Med ball work

This is where strength becomes speed. Now the athlete actually has something to “convert.” You’ll be able to start to channel your focus toward your run workouts and long runs now that this type of work is less fatiguing and more complementary to your program. This may come in at a time where you are starting your “build” toward a race.

One important note on plyometrics:

Plyometrics are not conditioning. More is not better here, and fatigue is not the goal.

The purpose of plyometric training is to improve how quickly and efficiently you can produce force into the ground. Once contacts get sloppy, ground contact times get long, or you’re simply grinding through fatigue, you’re no longer really training power. You’re just tired and jumping.

Most endurance athletes honestly need less plyometric volume than they think. A handful of high-quality contacts performed with intent will usually carry over better than marathon jump circuits done to exhaustion.

Think crisp, reactive, and coordinated.

What do I do with my weight lifting?

Good question, you may keep a similar scheme to Phase 2, but now the weight is lowered and the weight is moved with speed and intent to reflect the emphasis of the block.

4. Maintenance (In-Season)

Goal: Maintain the qualities you built leading into your competitive season

You still need to keep the lights on with strength and plyometric work, but the dose should come down.

For most endurance athletes, 1–2 sessions per week is plenty during this phase. The goal is not to introduce anything new from the max strength or power phases. The goal is simply to maintain the qualities you already built.

At this stage, volume becomes the enemy.

You are primarily chasing neural recruitment and maintaining coordination, stiffness, and force production without creating unnecessary fatigue.

The overall structure may still resemble the power phase, but now you strip away anything nonessential in favor of preserving energy for the thing that matters most: Performance.

Do you want to make this work for you but not sure how to start?

Get working with me at Elite Edge TODAY! Hit the photo below for more info:

Build the strength. Convert it to power. Maintain it consistently.

Do that over multiple seasons and you give yourself a much better chance of becoming a faster, more durable, and more efficient runner.

That’s the long game. And in endurance sports, the long game usually wins.

But nothing quite compares to those final workouts before race day.

They should feel easy. The volume is down. The legs are supposedly fresh. Fitness is already built. And yet, this is often when things feel the hardest.

So what’s going on?

This week, we’ll break down the expectations effect. Why that last key session can feel disproportionately difficult, what’s actually happening physiologically and psychologically, and whether that penultimate workout deserves any real interpretation at all.

Expectation vs. Perception: when “should feel easy” backfires

There’s a subtle trap built into the final week: you stop asking “How does this feel?” and start asking “Does this match how I think it should feel?”. That’s a problem.

You go into that last workout expecting smooth, light, controlled effort. So when it doesn’t feel that way you register the discrepancy. And discrepancy creates doubt.

Same pace. Same effort. Different interpretation.

I’ll see this all the time:

• Early in a training block: “That was solid.”

• Race week: “That felt harder than it should have…”

Nothing changed except the expectation.

What you’re experiencing is a prediction error. Your brain had a script for how it was supposed to feel, and when reality doesn’t match the script, it flags it as a problem even when it’s not.

It feels harder because you’re measuring it against an unrealistic internal standard.

A personal example

I recently raced a half marathon and came away with my first PR at any distance in almost three years. A pretty special day.

If you looked at my training, though, you would not call it perfect. So I do not mean to include an example as a means of telling you I have it all figured out.

But there is a story in my workouts leading in. One that reinforces how the body of work matters far more than the final session before race day.

Over the 10 weeks leading into the race (1:15 on the day, about 3:32 per km), here is what that looked like:

• 20K progressive run building from easy into goal half marathon effort. Closed with 3:33 and 3:32 for the final 2 kms. Controlled. Confident.

• 4 x 1K (200 jog) on the track. A dud. Scrapped at four reps, struggling to hit 3:36s. Just did not have it. Session readiness was not there.

• 5 x 1K (200 jog) the next week. Same setup, completely different outcome. 3:31s across, much more controlled. That is how it goes.

• 5 x 1200 (200 jog) sitting in the 4:11 to 4:14 range. More evidence that 3:30 to 3:33 per km was well within reach.

• Local 5K race with the goal of controlled execution, essentially the first half of a 10K effort. 16:57, felt smooth, and more importantly, felt like there was another gear if needed.

• 4 x 2K (300 jog) about 10 days later, averaging about 7:00 per rep. Flat course, good rhythm. In hindsight, probably a touch aggressive, but I am not losing sleep over it.

And then came the one that should have felt easy:

• 1 x 5K at race effort, one week out.
  17:36.

On paper, fine. In my head, not what I expected.

It felt harder than it should have. I went in expecting smooth, controlled, almost automatic, and instead got effort that felt a little too high, a little too forced.

This is exactly the trap.

If I had isolated that one session, I could have easily convinced myself something was off. That I was not ready. That I had missed. But I have been down that road enough times to know better.

Because when you zoom out, the answer is obvious:

The 20K progression
The 1K sessions, both the bad and the good
The 1200s
The 2Ks
The 5K race

That is the signal. So I showed up on race day trusting the entire body of work, not one imperfect session at the end of it. And overall, I know that I can be better in all areas of the training to go even faster if that is what I want to do.

Should you even interpret the final workout?

Short answer: not really. At least not the way most people do. The mistake is treating that last session like a test, not a touchpoint.

You’re not trying to prove fitness. You’re reminding your body what race rhythm feels like.

When athletes over-interpret this workout, they tend to do one of two things:

• Chase a feeling that isn’t there → force the pace → dig unnecessary fatigue

• Panic when it doesn’t feel perfect → carry doubt into race day

Neither helps.

A better framework:

• Did you hit the general structure? Good.

• Did you touch race pace (even if it felt a little off)? Good.

• Did you finish without digging a hole? Perfect.

That’s it.

I’ll tell athletes this all the time: if you need your final workout to prove you’re ready, you’re already in trouble. The proof was in the last 6–8 weeks, not the last 7 days. The race, the training, the effort all matters to you. I know this. It is normal to care about the stakes of your athletic endeavors.

But save yourself some mental stress by understanding the expectation effect. You simply have to trust the work.

“I suffered for 10 hours.”
“I gutted it out all day.”
“That race was nothing but pain.”

It sounds tough and heroic.

It’s also not true. At least not in the way that actually matters.

Because in any endurance race, whether it’s a 5K or an Ironman there’s a very specific moment where the race actually begins.

And it doesn’t last all day.

The truth: you only get a small window at the limit

At some point in every race, you make THE decision.

Not a pacing adjustment.
Not a fueling call.

THE decision.

You push your chips to the middle of the table and say:

“From here on out, we’re not backing off.”

That is the moment when restraint flips into commitment and real suffering begins.

Before that?

You might be working hard. You might be uncomfortable. But somehow the body is tolerating this. Your mind is still somewhat sharp, the legs are feeling fine, the breathing is labored but regulated. When trained to do so and experienced in racing conditions, the body and mind work together to manage effort so you can keep going without detonating.

That’s not the same as riding the absolute edge.

The “20 minutes” reality check

If you had to put a number on it, most athletes can only tolerate that true, seething, teeth-gritting limit for a relatively short window. Call it ~20 minutes.

But don’t get hung up on the number. What matters is the quality of the effort.

This is the space where:

• Your breathing is no longer controlled but forced

• Your thoughts simplify to survival-level cues

• The internal dialogue shifts from strategy to “just don’t let up”

• There’s a real possibility you might not make it to the finish at that intensity

This is not Ironman discomfort or a hard tempo.

This is the final miles of a marathon, the surge at the end of a sprint tri, the grip on the reigns you make for perhaps the entirety of a 5K.

So what is the difference between this and the long suffering you may endure in a 10+ hour race?

What you’re doing for most of the day is operating at a durable, submaximal discomfort you’ve trained for.

It’s steady. It’s still controlled. It’s metabolically sustainable unless you are bonking which indicates you are actually not even anywhere near your limit because you can’t even hit the output necessary to do it.

Hard? Yes. And it’s not the same as pushing your chips in. Perhaps it is a different skill entirely. What we are talking about is hitting the point where the effort is there, the physical output is there, and there is no way in hell you are making it multiple hours in this state…and if you experience this early on in something like a marathon or Ironman or the like, your day is going to end pretty soon.

If I cannot extend this sacred 20 minutes, what do I do?

Good training and preparedness won’t necessarily make the race easier. But it will help you delay this level of suffering so that you can CHOOSE when you go hell bent for leather.

Your fitness determines how you arrive at this turning point and absolutely helps you conduct yourself so that you can leverage these 15, 20, 30 minutes. Like I said, the number is a metaphor for that even the limit has a limit.

Developing this fitness requires exposing your body to variety of intensities in training so that you are not a one trick pony. See the article below on Range and Reserve to learn more about how to level up your versatility so that you can make that choice to go hammer and tongs.

You must know that it is always going to be a gamble, but that is what makes some athletes great. There is no exit strategy once you hit this point, but if you go there and it pays off you win more than just a medal. It opens the door to opportunity in future races knowing how and when to take it to eleven.

Parting shot

Every race has a moment where it stops being about fitness and starts being about decision. You won’t live there long. Operating on the extreme end of anything is unsustainable. But that’s the point. It is your chance to play with fire and see if you got it right. And when you learn how to play this way, it adds a layer to your Training and Racing IQ.

Many beginner endurance athletes approach training this way under the impression that simply accumulating miles will automatically lead to improvement. And to be honest, it’s a pretty sound approach for a while.

You may go a full season or two where showing up is the primary driver of progress. Compounding volume builds durability. It raises your ceiling in a very real way.

But there’s a second factor that starts to matter more as you develop: versatility. This is what begins to separate steady improvement from breakthrough performance (I know you’re looking for that breakthrough)

This week, we’ll look at the idea of Range and Reserve, and why this might be one of the rare cases where it actually does make sense to copy the elites. Elites may have more fitness than you, but they also can access a wide range of gears in speed, pace, power and you have access to that luxury too when you focus in the right places.

What do we mean by “Range”?

Before we go any further, we need to define what we’re actually talking about.

“Range” isn’t just about being able to run fast or go long. Most athletes can do one of those reasonably well.

Range is the ability to competently access a wide spectrum of speeds.

Not just touching them once in a while, but owning them. To the point where you can perform reasonably well in a 5K or a marathon without a significant program overhaul.

At one end, you’ve got:

• Short, fast efforts

• High cadence, high power

• Neuromuscular demand

At the other:

• Aerobic efficiency

• Durability

• The ability to sit on a pace for hours

If you always live in the middle ground, grinding out somewhat easy effort, you will absolutely become good at that somewhat easy effort. This may be plenty to deliver a respectable marathon or Ironman.

As I have said in the past, your first long distance race will not necessarily have a race pace but rather be a challenge to sustain easy pace for as long as possible. But if you want to keep improving, that easy pace needs to demand less of you and you will need to look to both ends of the spectrum as well as the middle ground from time to time.

How do we do this? That’s where developing Reserve comes in.

What do we mean by “Reserve”?

If range is the spectrum of speeds you can access, reserve is how much of yourself you have to spend at any given pace.

It’s the difference between working at your limit and working well below it.

Two athletes can run the exact same marathon pace. One is locked in, managing fatigue from mile one. The other looks controlled, relaxed, almost like they’re holding something back.

Reserve is what allows race pace to feel sustainable instead of fragile. At the end of the day, you can only sustain what you have trained to sustain. You don’t just dream up a pace and go.

Key point—

Reserve is built by expanding your range.

When you improve your top-end speed:

• Submaximal paces become less taxing

• Your stride becomes more economical

• You spend less energy to produce the same output

When you develop the lower end:

• You delay fatigue

• You improve durability

• You extend how long you can sit at a given effort

Put those together, and something powerful happens: The pace that used to define your limit becomes something you can control. And I know you love being in control.

Building Range and creating Reserve

Athletes can overcomplicate this.

Building range doesn’t require blowing up your program or suddenly training like a middle-distance runner. In fact, if you’re preparing for a marathon or Ironman, most of your training should still look… pretty familiar.

We’re not replacing the middle but rather expanding around it.

Here’s how I like to approach it with athletes:

1. Keep the middle, but stop living there exclusively

Your aerobic work still matters. A lot.

• Easy volume

• Long runs/rides

• Some steady/tempo work

That’s your foundation. That’s what allows you to show up consistently and absorb training.

But once that base is in place, doing more of the same gives you diminishing returns.

So instead of asking:

“How can I add more volume?”

Start asking:

“Where am I not training?”

2. Touch speed frequently (without making it a big deal)

This is the lowest hanging fruit.

You don’t need brutal track sessions to build range. Speed is a skill that you can dabble with. You just need consistent exposure to faster paces.

Simple ways to do it:

• Strides 2–3x/week (15–25 seconds, full recovery)

• Short hill sprints (8–12 seconds, powerful, not exhausting)

• Fast segments at the end of easy runs

These don’t create much fatigue, but they:

• Improve neuromuscular coordination

• Reinforce mechanics

• Keep your top-end from disappearing

Think of this as keeping the lights on for your speed.

3. Integrate, don’t isolate

This is probably the biggest thing I emphasize with athletes.

You don’t need:

• A “speed phase”

• Then an “endurance phase”

• Then hope it all comes together

Instead, we keep small doses of everything in the program year-round.

• Touch speed weekly

• Maintain aerobic volume

• Periodically challenge the top end

Because range isn’t something you build once.

It’s something you maintain.

The key is dosage: You do not need hard VO2max intervals every single week. Similarly, you do not need a long run every single week. This is why I am an advocate of expanding your timelines such as the suggestion in article below. Look at the body of work you accumulate every 21, 28, 45 days, for example.

4. The gut check

A simple way to know if this is working:

• Does your easy pace feel easier at the same heart rate?

• Does tempo feel more controlled instead of fragile?

• Can you change gears late in a session or race?

If the answer is yes, you’re building reserve.

If everything still feels like a grind, maybe you need to give your range focus some more time.

At some point, progress demands more than just showing up and logging miles. It demands range. And when you build range, you create reserve.

That’s what allows race pace to feel controlled instead of costly. That’s what gives you options late in a race instead of forcing you to hang on.

Early on, improvement is obvious. Run more, get fitter. Lift, get stronger. Eat better, feel better. The inputs and outputs are tightly connected, and progress feels predictable.

Then it stops. Not completely, but enough to notice. The easy gains are gone, and what remains is smaller, less reliable, and often harder to explain.

This is where the last 5% lives.

This is where things get uncertain and that can be uncomfortable. This week, hopefully I can ease your mind when it comes to being detail-oriented in your athletic endeavors.

In coaching, we’re trained to look for cause and effect.

If an athlete improves, we want to know why and we want to replicate it. The athlete does too. We build systems around this idea: that progress is something we can engineer. And we can, but the closer someone gets to their ceiling, the harder that becomes.

The margin for improvement shrinks, so progress may need to look different.

An athlete adds a second threshold session each week and runs a personal best.

Was it the extra session? Or the accumulation of the previous six months? Or the mental boost from feeling they did “more”? (yes this is a thing). Or maybe it was just chance (crap, that is possible too).

We want clean answers. We rarely get them.

This is the paradox of the last 5%. The interventions become more precise,
but our certainty about them often decreases and there’s a tendency here to go in one of two directions.

The first is overconfidence.

We convince ourselves that this was the thing. The cold plunge. The exact interval. The new drill. We anchor to it, prescribe it, and build narratives around it because certainty feels better than ambiguity. That also happens to have a nice sales pitch.

The second is dismissal.

We throw our hands up and say none of it matters. That it’s all noise. All placebo. All random.

But that’s not quite right either because something is happening. The athlete who believes in the extra 10 minutes of work might train with a little more intent.
or buy into the plan with less hesitation.

That belief changes behavior.
That behavior changes exposure.
And over time, repeated exposure to something “good” can change outcomes.

So even if the intervention isn’t directly responsible in a physiological sense, it may still matter.

And sometimes, it is physiological.

At the highest levels, small differences in stimulus can create real adaptation:

• A slightly more specific session can improve durability at race pace.

• A marginal gain in strength can shift load tolerance just enough.

• A subtle change in volume can tip the balance between stagnation and progression.

But these effects are small. And you also need to ask whether you are even at this level. These effects are highly dependent on context.

Thus, coaching becomes more about judgement.

Not just what to do, but when to do it.
Not just what works, but what’s worth trying.

Because in the last 5%, you’re making bets. Educated ones, hopefully. Informed by experience, pattern recognition, and physiology.

These can be a part of a successful process but not the guarantee of it. For you, it is more likely about the body of work you have assembled.

• A good mix of hard/easy training

• Sound recovery habits

• Stable mood and stable physical performance

• Good relationships with friends, family, colleagues outside of training

The hope is that this body of work enables you to create something more than a race time by doing the activity you enjoy most. If that body is failing, the wheels fall off, and the 5% conversation is entirely useless.

The last 5% is uncomfortable because it is immaterial. You cannot really put a finger on it and maybe that is why you should treat it like the last 5%.

“If I get around to it, it would be nice to have.”

Maybe it is a privilege to get to the level where it may matter to focus in this narrow space. It means you have set up a nice body of work and that is where many people fall short.

There’s a similar illusion with respect to goal setting: the belief that if you choose a goal time and start training like that’s your current level, your body will adapt its way into the performance.

But training doesn’t respond to ambition. It responds to constraints. And when those constraints are ignored, more work—or faster work—just becomes more noise.

An issue with fixed-outcome plans

This idea could not be better captured than by a recent inquiry I received for coaching. The athlete was interested in purchasing my “sub 1:30 half marathon plan.”

First off, my coaching service does not offer any pre-made plans of any kind, so that was off the table. It’s not in the business model. But the assumption from this athlete was that he could purchase a 12-minute PR (his current level was a 1:42).

This isn’t to rag on this individual. It’s actually quite common to assume there is a specific set of pre-programmed inputs that guarantee a result. It feels like there should be a clear formula, but in reality, we usually only recognize the “right” inputs in hindsight, after the work is already done.

The way you get from 1:42 to 1:30 isn’t by training like a 1:30 runner on day one. It’s by executing a program that acknowledges you are 12 minutes away from the goal.

You have to build the 1:30 runner.

The mistake is not in the goal but rather in the approach. When you force inputs, two things generally happen:

1. You break down

2. You accumulate junk fatigue that blunts adaptation

And those two things happen, you don’t always get faster. You are just busy. You have to think more logically about it.

Your body doesn’t care what your goal is because it adapts to what it can recover from. Progress happens when training stress sits right at the edge of your current capacity and not miles beyond it.

So the real question is less of

“What does a 1:30 plan look like?”

and more of:

“What is the next version of me capable of absorbing?”

That’s the athlete you need to train and it is how I approach coaching. Some athletes view this as a punishment but it is not. It is a rational approach to getting you to your goal more efficiently, when the time is right, and in a way that allows you maybe to even go beyond your goal.

Building the 1:30 Athlete

Most athletes do not jump from 1:42 to 1:30 in a short amount of time. If they do, the original 1:42 was likely a blunder in execution on race day.

A more realistic first step is bringing that time down to 1:38–1:40. That can often happen within a few months and usually doesn’t require radical changes in programming.

From there, you’ve raised your level and that permits you to continue pushing adaptations toward the 1:35 range.

But this process is rarely linear. Life gets in the way. Fatigue accumulates. Sometimes the body simply needs a break.

At each level, you also need to identify the rate-limiting factor holding you back.

Maybe the answer is more volume.
Maybe it’s improving your training IQ.
Maybe it’s something as simple as a more favorable race course.

Each step expands your constraints, because training is a constraint-based system. The goal is to keep channeling inputs in the right direction.

When you look back, it may appear like a clean progression as if there was always a clear path.

But that clarity only exists in hindsight.

Training with the future in mind is often an act of faith, guided by data, feel, and experience.

Thinking about goals

Keep the goal. It is central to structuring the path to progress and building something you are proud of. But you cannot train like you are already there.

Instead:

• Anchor your training to current ability

• Progress constraints gradually

• Let performance emerge instead of being forced

You don’t execute your way into a 1:30 half marathon.

You have to become the athlete who can run 1:30 and it often involves taking steps to get there so that you don’t make the assumption you can pick up a plan and start doing it like you can with picking up a magazine and find a cool article on page 50.

This is the framework I use with every athlete I coach. Assessing where you are, identifying what’s limiting you, and progressing training in a way that actually leads to long-term performance.

If that approach resonates, you can get involved with my coaching by clicking the photo below.