i did my first bike/run-repeats last weekend and i think it was beneficial. its a pretty efficient way to get a feel for switching from running to biking (T1) and then biking to running (T2). it was also a really time effective way to get a really hard run and a really hard bike in.
i understand what your saying though, in a sport where “specificity” is preached, bike/run/bike doesn’t seem all that practical, unless you’re riding your bike home after the race.
Dave Scott’s Olympic Tri training session (TraingPeaks) has a bike / run / bike brick session in it.
Is there any purpose other than “introducing” you to bricks?
I’ve done plenty bike / runs and don’t want to waste time unless it’s serving a purpose biking a second time after a bike / run.
Words of wisdom?
Words of wisdom? That’s pretty easy. If Dave Scott (6x Ironman Kona champion among many other accolades) recommends something as a part of a training plan, it won’t “waste time.”
Maybe a bad choice of words.
I just figure he might (in writing the plan for everyone) “introduce” athletes to a brick by doing a Bike / Run / Bike for some reason.
It’s a very short distance but I was thinking maybe it’s to “shock” the muscles a bit & therefore part of the training plan as a conditioning tool rather than just slowly introducing the “brick”.
While my buddy was thinking maybe to just stick with a long brick as this was just to introduce folks to doing bricks …
Curious to see what tangible benefit this might have if any.
Doing a 10 mile ride to a 7.7 mile trail run race then 10 mile ride home tomorrow. People ride to the gym and ride home or ride to the track to run then ride home sell the time.
You get miles in, which is why I’m doing it tomorrow, how is that ever a waste of time?
OK- my point is …
If I have a 3 hr block of time, is it more beneficial (training wise) to:
Ride a longer ride and then run afterwards or …
Ride a shorter ride, run, and then ride short again afterwards?