Normatec inflating leg booties

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by ftf

You aren't going to train 100% if you feel like crap.

That's absolutely true. What's also true (and far more important) is that adaptation and recovery are not the same thing. "Recovered" generally means no longer feeling like crap and therefore able to go hard again.

The problem is that adaptation usually takes a bit longer than this. Ergo, simply making the crap feeling go away doesn't mean your body has actually had time to absorb the workload and make adaptations to be able to better handle that workload going forward.

The point is that these recovery tools don't do a thing to shorten the time it takes to actually improve from training - and if they make it easier to go hard again before the body has had time to supercompensate, then training is a waste of time, because at best you stay where you are and never improve.

What many never figure out is that it's a bit after you feel able to go hard again before you really should go hard again - if your goal is progress.

[oldpotatoe]

Originally Posted by Tandem Rider

And never lie down without the remote.

Little tongue in cheek, and if they ‘work’ for ya groovy but these have PT Barnum written all over them. IMHO of course.

[ftf]

Originally Posted by tommyrod74

That's absolutely true. What's also true (and far more important) is that adaptation and recovery are not the same thing. "Recovered" generally means no longer feeling like crap and therefore able to go hard again.

The problem is that adaptation usually takes a bit longer than this. Ergo, simply making the crap feeling go away doesn't mean your body has actually had time to absorb the workload and make adaptations to be able to better handle that workload going forward.

The point is that these recovery tools don't do a thing to shorten the time it takes to actually improve from training - and if they make it easier to go hard again before the body has had time to supercompensate, then training is a waste of time, because at best you stay where you are and never improve.

What many never figure out is that it's a bit after you feel able to go hard again before you really should go hard again - if your goal is progress.

Just out of curiosity, how many hours a week, should an elite rider (1/pro) should be riding in a block of training in your mind? Obviously the type of riding would matter, and what types of intervals one is doing, but just in general? I've been out of the game for a while now, maybe guys are riding less, and adapting more?

When I was racing, I would do very roughly 15/20/25/30, and rest and reset, in the hardest block of training. Back then I didn't do any recovery methods, unless I was in a stage race, and these boots didn't exist, or I didn't know about them, anyways, I'm inclined to believe with what I know and experienced, that I would have been better off with the boots, then with out the boots, as I was. At the very least my quality of life would have been improved.

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by ftf

Just out of curiosity, how many hours a week, should an elite rider (1/pro) should be riding in a block of training in your mind? Obviously the type of riding would matter, and what types of intervals one is doing, but just in general? I've been out of the game for a while now, maybe guys are riding less, and adapting more?

When I was racing, I would do very roughly 15/20/25/30, and rest and reset, in the hardest block of training. Back then I didn't do any recovery methods, unless I was in a stage race, and these boots didn't exist, or I didn't know about them, anyways, I'm inclined to believe with what I know and experienced, that I would have been better off with the boots, then with out the boots, as I was. At the very least my quality of life would have been improved.

I think it depends on a lot of things. Individual tolerance for training and ability to adapt would dictate a lot. Some people can handle big TSS and sustain a higher CTL (chronic training load) than others and still improve.

In a build phase you likely aren't racing all the time, and at a volume of 20-25 hours per week (with most elite athletes usually spending 85%+ of their hours at or near what we'd usually call Z1-Z2 or recovery/endurance pace, with the rest being very high intensity) you'd have enough recovery built in via the days between hard workouts, even though you were usually riding, to allow adaptation. The 15 hour week would allow for some extra recovery time and adaptation, in theory.

During the competitive phase, racing frequently, you'd be less concerned with adaptation - if you did the early season work and build correctly, most of the adaptation occurred then - and more with simply recovering enough to be able to race at the same level again. In that scenario, the Normatec boots would be of help, as would ice baths, etc. When you HAVE to race in 3 days, you have to speed recovery however possible.

I think the misapplication of these types of tools (including ibuprofen and other NSAID drugs) might occur with recreational athletes with no periodization to their training, assuming that all soreness and fatigue is negative, when it's actually a necessary part of the training process. This would lead them to train too hard too frequently (by allowing them to do so) and make little or no long-term progress.

ETA: I do think that modern methods of quantifying training load (like the advanced metrics iwn Training Peaks), along with very affordable and reliable power meters, have made it a lot easier to monitor these things. It's become easier to go beyond simply saying "12 hours per week" and instead "8800 kilojoules" or "780 TSS", which tell me far more as a coach and as an athlete. Not so much training fewer hours, but being more strategic in planning intensity when needed (and only when needed).

[ftf]

Originally Posted by tommyrod74

I think it depends on a lot of things. Individual tolerance for training and ability to adapt would dictate a lot. Some people can handle big TSS and sustain a higher CTL (chronic training load) than others and still improve.

In a build phase you likely aren't racing all the time, and at a volume of 20-25 hours per week (with most elite athletes usually spending 85%+ of their hours at or near what we'd usually call Z1-Z2 or recovery/endurance pace, with the rest being very high intensity) you'd have enough recovery built in via the days between hard workouts, even though you were usually riding, to allow adaptation. The 15 hour week would allow for some extra recovery time and adaptation, in theory.

During the competitive phase, racing frequently, you'd be less concerned with adaptation - if you did the early season work and build correctly, most of the adaptation occurred then - and more with simply recovering enough to be able to race at the same level again. In that scenario, the Normatec boots would be of help, as would ice baths, etc. When you HAVE to race in 3 days, you have to speed recovery however possible.

I think the misapplication of these types of tools (including ibuprofen and other NSAID drugs) might occur with recreational athletes with no periodization to their training, assuming that all soreness and fatigue is negative, when it's actually a necessary part of the training process. This would lead them to train too hard too frequently (by allowing them to do so) and make little or no long-term progress.

ETA: I do think that modern methods of quantifying training load (like the advanced metrics iwn Training Peaks), along with very affordable and reliable power meters, have made it a lot easier to monitor these things. It's become easier to go beyond simply saying "12 hours per week" and instead "8800 kilojoules" or "780 TSS", which tell me far more as a coach and as an athlete. Not so much training fewer hours, but being more strategic in planning intensity when needed (and only when needed).

The only reason I was using hours per week is simply because Kilojoules are highly variable, IE my 5 hour ride in Z2 might be 5000kj, and yours 3500kj, both in Z2 both 5 hours, simply because I put out more watts, and am a taller rider, or vice versa. It means nothing with out context.

Anyways, I think we are pretty much at an impasse.

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by ftf

The only reason I was using hours per week is simply because Kilojoules are highly variable, IE my 5 hour ride in Z2 might be 5000kj, and yours 3500kj, both in Z2 both 5 hours, simply because I put out more watts, and am a taller rider, or vice versa. It means nothing with out context.

Anyways, I think we are pretty much at an impasse.

None of these values mean a thing without context. Hours per week are actually far more variable (as you could, in theory, spend 12 hours a week in zone 2 or in zone 4 and those are very different weeks) than kJ, which at least tell you total work done. TSS is even less variable as it tells you training stress (relative to the individual's FTP).

I wasn't saying you didn't understand those terms. You had said above you'd been out of training/racing for a bit (and didn't specify how long) so I pointed out how those and other metrics help us more specifically determine training load and the need for recovery.

More directly addressing your initial question, in general, pro road guys I know well tend to train 10-25 hours a week, depending on time of year. I'd say they usually average somewhere around 17-20 hours. Some need more, some less. These are domestic/regional pro riders and high-level Cat 1 racers, not top national level guys. Crit specialists are toward the low end of the range, road racers (fewer of them, obviously) toward the upper end. MTB pro riders a bit less once in season as they are usually on the MTB more and tend to do a bit less volume.

I'm not sure why you felt we were at an impasse - I thought we were simply discussing recovery/adaptation. I don't disagree with anything you typed. My apologies if what I wrote was taken as argumentative.

[earlfoss]

I have the Normatec Air Relax boots, and I like them a lot. I think many people get this idea in their heads that they're supposed to be a magical thing when they're really not. I think of them more of a supportive tool than a magic bullet. I train, I coach, and I race a lot, and to me the boots are only one part of a bigger recovery activity plan. From my experience I think there are some states of the body that benefit more from the boots than others, and I use my own experience and self-awareness to decide when they're appropriate.

During periods of heavy training, I think the boots have helped me slow the decay in my ability to recover for the next day. Keep in mind that when you're neck deep in a hard training cycle, your ability to recover day to day lessens the deeper you are. You have to be aware of a lot of things off the bike to help your body recover as much as it can for the next day's work. The boots, dedication to good sleep habits, keeping glycogen stores topped off, stretching/meditating, maintaining good sodium and electrolyte levels, etc etc etc.

After the training cycle is complete it's important to continue these good habits as your body is repairing itself, and the "overcompensation effect" is in play. Supporting recover time with good health practices means you come out the other side of all that hard work with some measurable, sustainable gains. Good stuff!

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by earlfoss

I have the Normatec Air Relax boots, and I like them a lot. I think many people get this idea in their heads that they're supposed to be a magical thing when they're really not. I think of them more of a supportive tool than a magic bullet. I train, I coach, and I race a lot, and to me the boots are only one part of a bigger recovery activity plan. From my experience I think there are some states of the body that benefit more from the boots than others, and I use my own experience and self-awareness to decide when they're appropriate.

During periods of heavy training, I think the boots have helped me slow the decay in my ability to recover for the next day. Keep in mind that when you're neck deep in a hard training cycle, your ability to recover day to day lessens the deeper you are. You have to be aware of a lot of things off the bike to help your body recover as much as it can for the next day's work. The boots, dedication to good sleep habits, keeping glycogen stores topped off, stretching/meditating, maintaining good sodium and electrolyte levels, etc etc etc.

After the training cycle is complete it's important to continue these good habits as your body is repairing itself, and the "overcompensation effect" is in play. Supporting recover time with good health practices means you come out the other side of all that hard work with some measurable, sustainable gains. Good stuff!

That's a thoughtful approach to using them. Makes sense.

[Thomas Gerlach]

Originally Posted by tv_vt

Anybody else try these?

Yes, absolutely, I am sitting in a pair of compression boots although tonight it isn't Normatec. I switch up which ones I use on a regular basis for own testing, and tonight to answer a reader's question regarding decibel level.

Fwiw, while Normatec is expensive there are more affordable options like Air Relax. I wrote a short comparison of Normatec ($1495) vs Air Relax ($390) here that you may be interested in:

http://www.thomasgerlach.com/2016/08...ery-boots.html

And it is always concerning to fork over $1,500 and then have them break. It isn't the first time I have heard of a Normatec failure but I don't hear of them frequently and they are usually some of my professional peers who are really hard on their equipment both thru duration and traveling. Normatec has had a good track record with customer service and warranty and the new 2018 pulse comes with a longer warranty - now 2 years.

My own set has been rock solid and has many many hours. I thought I might have an issue with one boot but Normatec did some diagnostics on it and it turned out to be ok. I haven't had any issue with my Air Relax either.

If you are looking to save some $$$ give a serious look at Air Relax. They make a great unit at a very affordable price point and were originally intended for the medical market, Normatec has their own separate medical division unit too. Happy to answer any other questions you might have otherwise happy recovery

[Thomas Gerlach]

Originally Posted by pritchet74

With the new Pulse units out there you can get the last generation at a GREAT price. I have the NormaTec MPV model and I got it for $500 a few months ago.

If you want to shell out ~$1200 for the Pulse unit then do that - but I don't see the upside of having an internal battery as justifying the huge price difference.

Finally - one of the additional upsides is that laying down with the boots on gives you some time to just stop and relax - possibly meditate - which has also shown to help with recovery.

Fwiw there is actually a second generation Pulse out there now. The current 2018 Normatec is actually a second generation Pulse. The old Pulse (2015-2017) had a battery, that was never really discussed among other reviews I have seen, but anyway, the battery lost its charge. It was always on even when on in the background and lead to it not being charged when you thought it was. It was annoying for some users, myself included. None the less, the new 2018 Pulse, along with fixing the battery, also offers increased leg durability, and a new 2-year warranty (1 year)

I did a dedicated 2018 Normatec Gen 2 update review along with some testing on my legs and calf circumference and battery longevity here:

http://www.thomasgerlach.com/2018/07...9-Updated.html

Having sat in the old MVP I do much prefer the legs of the newer Normatec Pulse system. It is hard to say if the old legs had been stretched out from the previous Professional Triathlete (they weren't mine) and had many many hours or whether they fundamentally changed thru design. I'll have to ask Normatec that question myself as I don't know the answer.

But yes, they are great for relaxing (mediating) and they also force people to sit in one place and be still which for cyclists, runner, triathletes can be a good and sometimes challenging thing.

[Thomas Gerlach]

Originally Posted by Burnette

Those look neat!

For me it's hard to beat a cold bath right after a ride and recovery compression tights. I don't do the cold bath often, just if I feel like my legs suffered enough to cause excessive soreness.

After such a ride I immediately take a shower then fill the tub with cold water and sit in it for about fifteen minutes. Sometimes I throw in the fridge's ice bucket in there. Then I wear the recovery tights the rest of the day. I sleep with my legs somewhat elevated with two pillows underneath them too when I sleep.

You should really give the boots a try. I was a tights users, actually, I was a socks users well before that, but anyway, I was a tights user when they first came out. The original Zoot pair. I still use tights but they are very mild and more as a layer for warmth than anything. I found regular compression tights, that had some good compression were too hard to get into.

I still use socks for traveling, cars, airplanes, standing on feet all day, but the boots have been a very positive experience. Check out some of the more affordable options. A few others have mentioned Air Relax and I posted my own Air Relax vs Normatec review in a response above this.

You might be saying goodbye to those ice baths. I know myself, I much prefer a nice Epsom salt bath instead.

[Thomas Gerlach]

Originally Posted by tommyrod74

Well, the podcast was a lot more complicated than that As a coach, here were the salient points for me:

1) These "recovery aids" (Normatec, ice baths, foam rollers, ibuprofen, etc) might speed up the process of "feeling recovered" - reduce soreness, etc.

2) Trying to shortcut the recovery process with these things may actually short-circuit the adaptation process as mild inflammation and other unconfortable things about the post-training period seem to be key in signalling the body to adapt and become stronger (over-simplification for the purpose of being succinct).

3) Adaptation, not "legs feel better", is what you are trying to accomplish with training, and there is no known way to speed up THAT process.

I have even seen one downside to boots, it can make the legs feel a lot fresher but that doesn't mean the tendons, ligaments etc are ready to handle another load. It is just a n+1 of being hyperaware in this space but I had one overzealous person, possible exercise addiction, rave about the boots, rave about how fresh he felt and was running better and more and ever until he got injured. But by and large I really like this space but still love some foam rolling and soft-tissue tools too.

[Thomas Gerlach]

Originally Posted by tommyrod74

That's absolutely true. What's also true (and far more important) is that adaptation and recovery are not the same thing. "Recovered" generally means no longer feeling like crap and therefore able to go hard again.

The problem is that adaptation usually takes a bit longer than this. Ergo, simply making the crap feeling go away doesn't mean your body has actually had time to absorb the workload and make adaptations to be able to better handle that workload going forward.

The point is that these recovery tools don't do a thing to shorten the time it takes to actually improve from training - and if they make it easier to go hard again before the body has had time to supercompensate, then training is a waste of time, because at best you stay where you are and never improve.

What many never figure out is that it's a bit after you feel able to go hard again before you really should go hard again - if your goal is progress.

I think you are pretty spot on but I will add this tech comes from the medical device space, specifically lymphedema patients whose legs are swelling. There has also been research, showing things like lesions/ulcers not healing on patients and then finally improving with boots.

Now you can make the argument that these people are so sick and have such bad blood flow that those things couldn't heal, but I don't think it is a very large leap to suggest that maybe it can also help other tissues heal in normal, healthy people.

There was a study done on range of motion in athletes and compression boots having a positive effect. I never really thought much about range of motion as a cyclist (pro triathlete myself), but I do think about it a lot as a runner and swimmer. Although I could still make a counter-argument that maybe the range of motion, due to inflammation and swelling, is by design and without it can allow athletes back too soon with a false of sense of security. But in my experience boots have only been positive and I love them.

[Mikej]

Originally Posted by tommyrod74

Well, the podcast was a lot more complicated than that As a coach, here were the salient points for me:

1) These "recovery aids" (Normatec, ice baths, foam rollers, ibuprofen, etc) might speed up the process of "feeling recovered" - reduce soreness, etc.

2) Trying to shortcut the recovery process with these things may actually short-circuit the adaptation process as mild inflammation and other unconfortable things about the post-training period seem to be key in signalling the body to adapt and become stronger (over-simplification for the purpose of being succinct).

3) Adaptation, not "legs feel better", is what you are trying to accomplish with training, and there is no known way to speed up THAT process.

Interesting, kind of like taking advil / Tylenol may interfere?

[tommyrod74]

Originally Posted by Thomas Gerlach

I think you are pretty spot on but I will add this tech comes from the medical device space, specifically lymphedema patients whose legs are swelling. There has also been research, showing things like lesions/ulcers not healing on patients and then finally improving with boots.

Now you can make the argument that these people are so sick and have such bad blood flow that those things couldn't heal, but I don't think it is a very large leap to suggest that maybe it can also help other tissues heal in normal, healthy people.

There was a study done on range of motion in athletes and compression boots having a positive effect. I never really thought much about range of motion as a cyclist (pro triathlete myself), but I do think about it a lot as a runner and swimmer. Although I could still make a counter-argument that maybe the range of motion, due to inflammation and swelling, is by design and without it can allow athletes back too soon with a false of sense of security. But in my experience boots have only been positive and I love them.

I think that’s part of the concern, as well as the fact that the inflammation post-training is part of the signaling pathway to prompt adaptation. Again, if used correctly, probably a good tool. Many people (like the exercise addict referenced by the above poster) might misuse them to train hard more often than they should.