Home

(Un)known Finishes

Training with an unknown, but definite, finish.


Contents


Background

This past weekend (26 June 2021) I rode the Tour de Boerne, a 61-mile road ride in the Texas Hill Country. As the name of the region implies, it was fairly hilly with a total elevation gain of 3,700 ft (which is laughable to some, but significant to someone whose average ride gain is 500 ft). Riding a fixie didn't help either.

While the hills didn't help my legs or mind, the biggest problem I had was not knowing how far we were. I was blind on my bike, while my riding partner had his computer mounted on his stem, only calling out the remaining distance when I asked (once) or at a rest stop during conversation. This blindness led to me questioning my sanity of doing this on a fixie, to me telling myself there was only a few miles left until the pain was over.

The questions began somewhere around mile 10 and only got more frequent as the race progressed and I got closer to the finish. At the same time, I considered the value of not knowing when something is going to end—I call it unknown finish training (UFT)—and ways to integrate the concept into one's training.


Knowing

Four types of sessions will be discussed, each with an example: known unknowns (of which there are two), unknown unknowns, and known knowns:

It is, without a doubt, much easier to reach a known number than an unknown one. The athlete can focus on banging out the last few reps to reach the number, provided they know where they are. But what happens when you take the positional awareness away, leaving them in the dark with 1-99% of the total effort remaining?

It is plausible that athletes break down in the following order (faster to slower): UU, KU2, KU1, KK. That is, quitting is more likely when the effort is an UU and less likely when it's a KK. Plus, training harder sessions have stronger carryover effects to easier sessions, i.e., UU helps KU2 a large amount, but KU2 helps UU a small amount. The tendency to quit can be minimized using a few techniques that aren't revolutionary.

Training UUs is difficult, especially solo. First, the effort should tend to be longer, as the athlete is more likely to anticipate this and regulate their intensity accordingly. Longer is completely subjective according to both the athlete and sport, but should be long enough that it's a struggle regardless of training level or sport. Second, conditions must be placed on the athlete. No sandbagging. This is meant to be a difficult session, hence the minimum. These conditions can be maintained throughout the entire session, or implemented in a piecewise fashion, e.g., X kg for the first Y min, (X + 10) kg for the second Y min, etc until the session is over. If the piecewise increments are linear, the increments must be either 1) small, else a wall will be hit (no one can keep adding 10 kg every 20 min for an hour if they're really putting in work), or 2) small negative, to accommodate for fatigue setting in as the session progresses while still maintaining a respectable effort. These conditions and their progressions/regressions are preferably unknown to the athlete (making it the dreaded UUU!), but benefit is still reaped if the conditions are known. Other examples besides load include pace, time, work (calories), reps. Third, it is almost impossible to perform solo due to not knowing when the session will end or what it entails. The solution is using a training partner, especially one who knows the athlete's capabilities and limits, then designing the session for them. There can be some input from the athlete (what sport, on- and off-limit parameters, etc.), but again, the details are preferably unknown.

Training KU1s is less difficult than UUs, but almost as restrictive, as it requires a fixed distance or an external counter in the form of another person. In sports where personal counting has much greater variation (all distance-covering sports), some athletes may fare better or worse.

Training KU2s is slightly more difficult than KU1s, but still easier than UUs. Knowing the current position is almost meaningless, as the effort can be 10% done or 90% done—there's no telling. As mentioned in regards to UUs, the athlete still has "some idea of...the final number", but even then, doubt sets in as the duration increases: "When will it end?", "I thought I'd be finished by now", "Is it really going to be this long?"

KKs may seem like the easiest option of the four, but the difficulty still depends on the nature of the session. 3000 burpees in a day? Most would take whatever U(U/K) possible after knocking out 500 burpees and realizing there's still 2500 to go. Smolov sets? Brutal on the entire body and mind. However, all things equal, KKs are easier than any other session. Knowing how much is remaining before being able to stop provides energy unavailable in other sessions.


Benefits

Mental Toughness

Mental training must be implemented to make any significant progress, and unknown finish sessions provide it in heaping amounts. As I discuss in Mind-Numbing Training in regards to long, "boring" training sessions, the following is still applicable to UFT:

The athlete learns to deal with the voices in their head and burning in their body in moments like these, finding out what works for them and what doesn't, taking notes for future occurrences, as similar situations are bound to happen on the training journey.

Improving mental toughness has an obvious direct correlation with competitive ability.

Intensity Regulation

Many athletes have difficulty pacing themselves, regardless of the finish being known or not (but more so if the finish is known). They start out of the gates guns a blazin', realize their fatal mistake halfway through, eventually hobbling to the finish, physically and mentally drained. This can be attributed to overconfidence towards and/or underestimation of the effort: the athlete thinks they are better prepared than they actually are or the course is easier than it actually is. (Overconfidence and underestimation are very similar, but not identical.)

UFT encourages the intensity to be regulated throughout the effort since the athlete has no clue how much remains. Conserving energy is the best option to avoid the risk of going too hard too soon, but actually competing against others (or against previous bests) must also be considered. Choosing when to say "fuck it" and start to move is a matter of personal preference. Some athletes may be more calibrated in their counting abilities and choose to go sooner than others, while some may have lower risk tolerances and only opt in when they have to (e.g., will lose the race if they don't).


Suggestions

Add in one UFT session every 8-12 weeks. It can be aerobic (long) or aerobic/anaerobic (shorter) and must fall be a KU1, KU2, or UU.

A few ideas if no partner is available:


See Also