NSO’s have adopted the concepts of LTAD and are in verious degrees of progress in distributing sport specific material. Many NSOs collaborated on the project. CCC opted to develop material unilaterally. We have similar experiences as Petr and Marty.

So when CCC distributed their LTAD materials a few years later (in paper form only), we were interested in providing it to our club coaches. However, the CCC LTAD material as it stands now, is verbatum what Canadian Sport for Life published years earlier, with a few picture changes. It is rebranded with skiing logos, but contains no ski specific material or unique thought. The content is valid but is far less sports specific than other NSOs like Biathlon, Wrestling, Swimming etc.

Maybe there is something available from CCC, but our club has never received it and nothing as forecoming when we requested it.

I qagree with the point that Marty is trying to make that if this really is an LTAD to show us “what it takes to be an international skier” then the numbers in the graph are way to low. Having a 15 year old doing only 400 hours and a 19 year old doing only 600 is not what top international skiers are doing. You don’t have to use Petter Northug as an example – take a look at Alex Harvey. He was doing way more hours than 600 in his last year as a junior.

The question is this: are we creating a path to follow that will lead to top international results or not? This graph may work for “ordinary” skiers but one of the qualities that a top international skier must have is that they can handle high levels of training volume and load. There was a great article lately in the Globe and Mail about Ryder Hesjedahl who just finished 7th at the Tour de France. In it they talked about his ability to train with high loads and not get sick or hurt.

Are we worried about burning kids out as juniors? For sure, higher loads will have a higher attrition rate, but this is going to happen anyways. As one international coach said to me years ago when I asked him why his skiers were training so much as juniors “we might as well find out now if they can handle the load rather than 5 years from now. It will save us a lot of time and money.”

I am not suggesting a huge increase in hours, but I know that even in the 1980′s the Finns were recommending 500 hrs for a 15 yr old and 700 hrs for a 19 yr old – regardless of gender. This seemed to be a common number with many other nations at the time. There is no reason that I know of that a female cannot handle the same training load at these ages. The only reason for them to do less volume is that they are doing more intensity because their race distances are shorter. This difference of 100 hours a year from 15 to 19 years is 500 hours in total over the 5 years. That is a lot to give up to another skier and it will take years before things even out, if they ever do.

The LTAD is a step forward – the question is whether we want to show our skiers the middle, safe path or the higher path that may be too hard for some. I believe that the majority of international athletes are training more than this and that we need to do more. If our skiers are behind in training load when they become seniors it will be very hard for them to catch up. We do not have the $ for support or the social values to support very many U23 athletes that are behind in training and results. Most will leave the sport for school or other things way before they catch up.

Of course, volume is only one aspect of training. I know that James will address the other important areas in future articles. We all fall into the trap of equating hours to performance. If this were the case then we should just mail in the hours that our skiers do and the one who does the most will win. It is not just how much you do, but how and when and what you do are just as important. And that is just the physiology of training loads, it doesn’t deal with the psychological, technical or tactical demands of the sport.

Complements to CCC for finally coming forward with information regarding the ever so important training hours progression necessary to become a successful international skier at all levels. When the LTAD booklet came forth a few years ago I read it thoroughly and found a few holes that I brought to Georgia Manhard’s and Stephen Barrette’s attention. I was essentially stonewalled by the both of them.

Now I do have some feedback concerning the above article, and hopefully–a discussion will ensue with other members of the Canadian coaching fraternity. As I think the LTAD when put together missed the chance or sidestepped much of the international coaching expertise, acumen and experiences in Canada that ex-coaches like Jack Sasseville, Laurent Roux, Lyle Wilson, Bjorger Petterson, Toni Scheier and others would have offered to making a better and more complete LTAD.

My first point is the lack of references to the importance of the coach/skier relationship in bringing about the best possible outcome for the skier in developing their training program. Especially in the beginning, when the coach will be able to make recommendations that will fit the skiers needs at that time. I think that the coaching relationship has to be very repetitive in it’s re-enforcement. Skier focused—coach driven, as the old saying goes.

My next point has to do with the paragraph with the comments concerning male and female development, as I find the the paragraph contradictory from the starting comments to the finishing comments. Saying that there is “no good evidence to support the idea that men and women cannot handle similar training loads” and then the last sentence saying, ” All of the information points to the fact that male and female skiers should be considered individually …” What gives here?? This tells me there is a need for individual charts.

This brings up more discussion on why male and female skiers do need to be considered individually. Men and women should never be compared as skiers or athletes, even if you want to get into the maturation process and insinuate that with the women being more mature then their like aged men in the middle teens, this is way to general a statement, and definitely does not lead to those training adjustments. Your final statement in that paragraph helps to clean this up. Women and men are different and there are all kinds of considerations that differentiate them. I was on the WC Committee that modernized the racing distances and course criteria and we were very cognizant of the fact of selecting all these numbers, so they (men and women) couldn’t be compared. We took into account some of these differences; women have smaller hearts and lungs, less muscle mass, carry more fat and the angulation of the femurs coming out of the pelvis will not let them run or ski as fast as men. Again, another reason for a separate training hours chart for both sexes.

I think the “30 minutes of continuous activity” does not constitute a work out! This number should be open to discussion—I feel it has to be a at least 60 minutes–15 mins for warm-up, 30 mins of training and 15 mins for warm down. The 30 minute concept leads the skier to bad workout habits for starters.

A couple of other comments—these charts and there numbers are very critical to the future success of xc racing in this country. There have been too many coaches and skiers who have not had a clue, over the past 20 years as to what a training year constitutes and will now put us into what the internationals have known for years. In my mind, this is the one step in the equation we can take to give more younger skiers the right start to let them realize their full potential. Not getting to the end and finding out that they were hooped right from the beginning because they were behind dramatically in hours.

I think we have proven for a long time that we know how to train, its just that we weren’t doing enough of it right from the start of each skiers career.
Next thought for discussion—15 years of age in my estimation is the throw down year—you have to be into a program, you have to have a educated/certified coach helping you with that program, and be real close to saying this is my sport and my life. Make this decision when you are 17 or 18 years and you are behind in training development by 900 to a 2000 hrs, already!!!—hours that you will never make up. Any compromise, and I mean any, and you have lost the way to finding out who you could have been.

The world’s top skier right now, Petter Northug, was at 750 hours his last year as a junior and as a 24 year old will do over 900 hrs this year. If you want to beat the best—a good start is to be on an even training hour base with him.

Too many Canadians and Americans over the years haven’t had this information when they needed it–in the beginning!! We lost a lot of good skier for that reason.

Looking forward to the next essay.

Petr Jakl