Innovation has its costs

I found this news piece interesting, and my knee jerk reaction was to say that Sky was really dumb for making such a change. With further thought, though, I think it was a bad idea, or rather, I’m just not clear why Kerrison thought it was a good idea. The guy knows his shit when it comes to training, and I agree that cycling is too immersed in its “heritage”, but sometimes the logic of altitude training gets lost in the research.

Ultimately, Tim Kerrison seems to have forgotten one of the other key training principles, or perhaps he took it too closely to heart, specificity. He also may have blurred the lines between 3 week stage races and one day classics and the demands each requires. In the end, though, Sky’s failure may prove to be cycling’s gain. Why?

Innovation! Yes, this post has come full circle. But the fact is, you simply cannot do better than before, with out doing things differently. If you’ve read Steve Jobs’ autobio then you know that true, monumental innovation comes at a high price. Failure. It’s nearly impossible to breakout and try to go well beyond the norm if you only make tiny refinements. Keep that in mind the next time you want to make a big break through!

http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/04/news/road/with-no-podiums-is-skys-altitude-approach-to-the-classics-a-failure_281353

Written by

No Comments Yet.

Leave a Reply

Message