Diving deep into coaching with the TrainingPeaks Performance Management Chart

1. Informed Decision Making with the
TrainingPeaks Performance
Management Chart
Andrew Simmons, USATF L2 - Endurance
Head Run Coach at Lifelong Endurance
Head Run Coach at Peak Performance Running

2. 2
Preface:
Let me start this off by saying that this case study review is intended to bring you into my
coaching world. This is more of a post-mortem on 3 different athlete’s training schedules on
what decisions were made, what I noticed, and where we had to make major decision points. I
reference TrainingPeaks metrics such as TSB, CTL, and ATL – I made this video to explain them
more efficiently: CTL, ATL, TSB
I’m excited to share this with you and hopefully you walk away with a few nuggets of
information.
About the Author:
I grew up in Kalamazoo, Michigan and attended
Western Michigan University completing a
Bachelor’s Degree in Engineering Management.
It was during my time at school I fell in love
with Endurance sports transforming from 218
pounds to my current weight of 145. I
completed Ironman Louisville in 2011, and
continued to pursue my passion of running
completing 30+ marathons by 2020. I started
coaching first out of a passion to help people I
continued to pursue greater education and
deeper knowledge that allowed me to drive
towards my mission. In pursuit of that mission,
I’ve built Peak Performance Running a youth running program for athletes ages 8 to
18 which moves alongside Lifelong Endurance. Lifelong Endurance is an adult
endurance coaching company serving athletes in pursuit of their best self. We offer
coaching for running, triathlon, cycling and strength training. Most importantly, we
help athletes understand the importance of how to take ownership of the final
outcome.

3. 3
Case Study #1 – 40-Year-Old, Male, Marathon – 5 + years of Running @ 65-75 MPW
The Athlete in Case Study #1 began a build-up on his own prior to coaching. I was hired during
his sickness to take over his build up to Boston. This was a new client that did not have zones
set. This client wasn’t great at pushing himself in workouts early on so his zones were in flux
until we got to about 4-5 weeks into the program. This athlete did great with a 3:1 Periodization
until we hit his weekly max of mileage and time he could commit given his lifestyle. We had to
move from building to optimizing the time we had. This was a planned plateau that required
me to first meet the need of hours/day/ week and then optimize workouts to fit in there. This
got especially challenging during weekdays near the end of the buildup. I optimized his
weekend time by making a 3rd
quality session with what I like to call RP Endurance runs.
Case Study #2 – 38-Year-old Male, First 50K – Multisport Background
The Athlete in Case Study #2 comes from a 5+ year in long-distance triathlon. I was brought in
to build the athlete to a challenging mountain 50K. Athlete has struggled in the past to be
consistent with training. Creating an adaptable training schedule was the highest priority.
Athlete has been known to sabotage training with seeking a “big day out” and then needing
multiple days off or working through niggles as a result of major stimulus. Consistent
communication, frequent schedule adjustments allowed the athlete to build fitness quickly
(transference from a great cycling base). I chose this schedule because we had built to a point
of a 22+ mile run and he turned it into a 26-mile run and as a result we lowered the stimulus,
avoided major injury and used a mistake and made it into a tool of his training.
Case Study #3 – 44-Year-old Female, First 100 Mile – Marathon background
The Athlete in Case Study #3 come from a 10+ year background in marathons and half-
marathons. I started working with this athlete after attempting her first 50 miler. She had
struggled throughout her prior training with numerous strength inefficiencies and was unable
to sustain much over 45MPW. What we found was that she needed slow and consistent blocks
of buildup. The early section was a trail related foot injury / fall and some significant recovery.
The build up here also reflects a slow consistent final build to race day. The athlete had another
minor injury in the weeks prior to the race while training at altitude so the peak is not as
dramatic. Lastly, this athlete preferred a 5-week (4 up, 1 down) schedule in the final 20 weeks.
We were able to end each week with a long event/ large stimulus.

4. 4
CASE 1 – 40yr, Male, Marathon
Break Down
A – Sickness and Return to Fitness
I was brought on to build the athlete to Boston and the first couple weeks were very gentle. He
was recovering from a nasty flu and we had to build up slow. Once I was able to get him to a
TSB of -10 I felt comfortable pushing him.
B – Knowing we need to update zones
Part psychologist/ part coach – I knew that by the time I hit -30TSB for such a light week I was
going to have to update his zones. I knew that this client was very focused on his data and not
exceptionally confident in his ability to perform. Regular communication let me know that the
training was going well. I used my judgement as a coach and in talking with the athlete to delay
our fitness test until Week 5. When you start to see TSB numbers consistently over -30 and they
aren’t exceptionally tired – you know that they are being over compensated for their training
stress (data is inflated due to poor zones).
C – Finally saying enough
I had the client complete a fitness test along with changing our strategy based on the fitness we
determined we were working with. We moved to bi-weekly RP Endurance Long Runs where we
run extended sections at or below marathon pace. This can be used as a way of increasing
weekly TSS as well as giving certain athletes another high aerobic fitness stimulus.
A
B
C
D E

5. 5
D – Maximize Load/ Taper
Working with the athlete, we maximized weekday runs to roughly 8 miles/ day and used the
weekends for Race Pace Endurance Runs which are used to inject pace and increase TSS load.
As the athlete transitions to taper, I like to create a linear transition over about 10 days
resulting in a +12 to +20 TSB.
E – Race Day Performance
When it comes to race day performance I am looking for the athlete to complete a marathon at
an intensity factor of .92-.94 this is often in line with what I see athlete perform in their RP
Endurance Runs (average for the RP portions of the runs) which also helps them from over
running their workouts and having a truly “comfortable” and manageable marathon pace.
Lastly, I like to see that the taper allows for enough recovery so that the race day performance
TSS is a large enough stimulus that it brings their CTL up to their highest peak in training. To me,
this is when they performed at their potential. This also assumes a traditional road marathon
course. Trail and Ultra distance races don’t always align to this principle.
Notes:
Knowing when enough is enough. It’s a skill to take an athlete to the next level, it’s another to
take them to their breaking point. In the final weeks of training, I really like to maintain and
take the pressure off the idea that these are the “hardest weeks you’ll have”. I like to give them
workouts that are within reach and are achievable. In the final 4 weeks, you should know the
athlete’s fitness and instead of building more fitness – build confidence. Create situational
workouts and help them work on weaknesses with pacing, nutrition, or hydration strategies.
Don’t let fitness be a question on race day!

6. 6
A – Cycling Focus/ Fitness in a different direction
A handful of runs but lots of cycling. When you’re restarting or starting with an athlete – I often
look at their CTL and if it’s heavy on cycling I cut the number mentally to about 75% to get their
“relative” running fitness. I set hard limits of -25 TSB when starting athletes. Projecting and
building an athlete schedule 3-5 weeks at a time will allow you to see how they will progress.
B – Be Aggressive / Watch your metrics
I knew I could get away with an aggressive +5- +7 CTL build up for the first month given the
athletes past history. It just required us to balance the athlete’s intuition with prior training
loads as well as secondarily setting maximums in TrainingPeaks. Athlete intuition and
communication always trump tech! Focus here was consistently monitoring fitness and trying
to adjust as easy runs get “over run” – meaning that easy runs move from an IF of .81-.84 and
start creeping up to .85-.89 for the same heart rate and slightly faster pace. Watching average
“easy run” metrics increase (pace, IF) and decrease (Heart Rate) simultaneously means you
need to adjust zones. Giving “extra credit” here means you will end up getting false or
misrepresented data.
C – Mistakes lead to minor injury
I knew this athlete was going to do it at some point! He went out for a planned 22 Mile run and
returned after 26 miles – wanting to see if he could PR because he “felt good”. The next day he
texted me and said his hamstrings were painful. I had him only do easy runs, rest, and bike for
about 2.5 weeks until there was minimal pain on his runs and he was able to complete strides
without any noticeable pain. I was able to maintain his “All Sports” CTL to his “Run” CTL which
helped us preserve fitness so he could return to a normal training volume and CTL without
considerable loss. Unless the athlete has a complete fracture or significant muscular tear or
injury – creative training and trading one stimulus for another is a great way to hold on to the
work you’ve done.
A B
C
D

7. 7
D – Planning for success
Leveraging the forecasting features of the PMC are crucial to determine how your proposed
training will impact your athlete’s CTL, TSB and ATL. This is a great way to write out a schedule
(plan Time and IF to get a planned TSS) with TSS for each workout to see forecasted future TSS
for your workouts. This is useful for up to a period of about 6-8 weeks. If you’re doing heavy
training or with a new athlete, integrate a regular zone test to ensure that you’re continuing to
plan with accurate data. This is a great way to plan out a taper, plan out a training camp, or
slowly build an athlete.
Notes:
Keeping a good look at their weekly data when planning is key to success. If you are planning
normal build ups and you’re not seeing the training response you would expect, check in on
their fitness – they have likely made a jump worth capturing.
I like to set hard limits with my runners and keep TSB to -30 at an absolute max. I will only keep
them in a place of -25 to -30 for 3 weeks at a time. I think of this like diving, eventually they
need to come back up for air! In off weeks, I like to bring them up to -10 and occasionally to 0
depending on what is going on in their world. Remember - Life stress impacts an athlete’s
ability to perform.
The biggest difference between beginners, amateurs, and elites is that beginners can’t handle
big training stimulus jumps of more than 1-2 CTL points per week. This is both physiological and
psychological. As athletes get more comfortable with training loads and progress their weekly
mileage you can build by 2-4 points for back to back weeks. You should really only build by 5-7
points if you’re working with extremely high-level athletes or planning a training camp this is
acceptable.
There is also a great argument for plateauing athletes occasionally and getting them to adapt to
the current level of stimulus. There is often a desire to “always be building” that can lead to
constant over reaching. I find that athletes enjoy nailing workouts and even giving them the
same workouts a few times in an 8-week period is a great confidence builder.

8. 8
A – Consistent Build- Controlling TSB
After a period of consistent mileage in the summer with minimal workouts, we used an 8-week
period to slowly build the athlete’s ability to manage Training Stress. The athlete definitely grew
a little bored but was consistently putting out 40-mile weeks with minimal efforts. This slow
build allowed for a build that allowed the athlete to fully absorb the training. Once we rolled
over 45 miles per week, we knew we’d made a big jump in her mental confidence. A big factor
in reaching over 45mpw was the addition of the Robust Runner strength program. While it isn’t
reflected here – we were adding in about 30-50 points of CTL of strength in this phase.
B – Major Check-In Event
A solid trail marathon after a light week of training allowed us to see where we needed to
continuing working. She was happy to report that she felt strong and was able to work through
the summer heat and humidity with a new nutrition and hydration plan. This big jump in CTL
was also a tipping point and created a decision point to continue building load and mileage. In
the past this athlete has struggled with hormonal imbalances that have significantly impacted
recovery and increased fatigue response.
C- Bigger Jumps in TSB, Taller Draw in CTL
The athlete had made a big jump in her ability to recover from big TSS bouts and was recovered
from “B” within 2 days with minimal soreness. This was a huge turning point from the prior 6
months as she felt like she had unlocked another level of fitness. We started implementing
more back to back long runs, focused on time on feet vs. mileage. The athlete lives in a very hot
and humid environment that didn’t allow us to as easily focus on pace and it was a better
mental accomplishment for the athlete to finish a “6 hour” weekend (4 hours, 2 Hours) than to
A B C D E

9. 9
try and run “X-Miles”. In speaking with the athlete, there was a greater sense of personal
accomplishment when she did longer runs for time and felt like progress was being made.
D- Handling Injury building to Final Long Run
D was our final check-in 50K and we once again hit personal bests with significant recovery.
Unfortunately, the following weekend the athlete took a bad fall lacerating her knee and over
extending a few tendons in her foot. This led to some initial issues with tendinopathy and
swelling. This was a major decision point as we had to decide whether to push for more training
stimulus or to try and lose as little as possible and simply try to plateau and absorb. The
tendinitis proved to be more significant in the weeks following the initial injury and we decided
it would be best to plateau and maintain. I could tell that the athlete was teetering on a tight-
line between wanting to push but she also knew her chance of seeing the finish line of her first
100-mile event would be out of question and therefore wasn’t worth the risk.
E – Taper Down for 100 Mile Race
At the starting point of E – the athlete pursued a week-long stint at altitude and numerous 4+
hour hikes as a final training week. The foot was able to manage the load and the combination
of steep climbs and high altitude, the athlete was able to squeak out a big final training week.
This was initially intended to be about 3 weeks out from race day. Unfortunately, the athlete
was notified that the event was canceled and we had to scramble to get her on a waiting list.
This wasn’t optimal and required us to strike a tough balance as the athlete was very ready to
begin taper. In communicating with the athlete, we decided to have one more regular week of
moderate training before tapering down. The goal was to take the pressure off the legs, let the
tendinitis heal and prepare mentally and physically for the event. We incorporated weekly
sports rehab appointments with dry needling, scraping, and massage to keep her body feeling
great. Leading into the event we had a goal TSB of +25 which we hit almost exactly.
Notes:
The athlete did great in her first 100-mile event. She leveraged a good bit of hiking in the night
time as she had no crew or pacers. The athlete completed her first 100-mile event solo and
leveraged great habits built over the summer staying on top of her nutrition and hydration.