In this episode of The Progress Theory, I’m joined by Monica, a mountain expedition doctor with years of experience supporting commercial teams in the Himalayas and beyond, to discuss what really makes the difference between staying healthy and getting into trouble in these environments. Monica has worked on multiple expeditions and now consults remotely with climbers around the world, bringing a rare practical insight not just into the medicine but into the psychology of challenging altitude.

The biggest lesson I’m taking away is that altitude physiology doesn’t care about your FTP or how lean you are. There’s a ceiling determined by genetics, individual response, and how carefully you acclimatise. Monica pointed out that, physiologically, virtually everyone starts to degrade above about 6,000 metres. There’s no further acclimatisation, your body is just existing. Some people can survive longer or perform better in these conditions, but this is mostly down to genetic predisposition and, in populations like the Sherpa, generations of adaptation to altitude. No amount of training can rewrite your basic physiological limits in low-oxygen environments.

Subscribe to my YouTube Channel → https://www.youtube.com/@theprogresstheory

This doesn’t mean fitness is irrelevant. It might even be critical for some things. Fit climbers have an easier time managing the long approaches, carrying loads, and handling days of uneven terrain. The less you have to exert yourself just to reach base camp, the less you stress your body, which in turn reduces the risk of altitude illness. But as Monica made clear, being fit doesn’t make you immune. In fact, overexertion, especially in people who aren’t accustomed to moving in the mountains, can increase your risk of developing high-altitude illness simply because you’re demanding more from your system at a time it’s under extra stress.

On the mountain, Monica separates fitness from the critical skill of acclimatisation. You can be supremely conditioned and still suffer serious altitude sickness if you ascend too quickly or ignore early symptoms. I found her point about concurrent illnesses (if you have a cold or any health issue) your risk rises sharply. On an 8,000-metre peak, that assumption could be fatal.

One of the more honest parts of our chat was when Monica admitted she personally acclimatises poorly, despite her years of mountain experience. She’s an example of someone who does everything “right” (fit, knowledgeable, prepared) yet can’t escape the limits of her own physiology. The takeaway for coaches and adventurous athletes is to prioritise self-awareness: know how your body responds, keep tabs on symptoms, and don’t let ego or sunk-cost thinking override the real risks of pressing on when things aren’t right.

So, if you’re planning an expedition, train well, yes, but remember that fitness is only part of the story. Navigating high altitude is as much about restraint, respect for your own limits, and good decision-making as it is about VO2 max.

The Progress Theory Podcast

Episode breakdown:
00:00 – The risks of extreme altitude and Monica’s background as an expedition doctor
03:28 – Common illnesses on expeditions and the realities of “glamorous” mountain medicine
04:46 – How Monica works with clients before and during expeditions
07:17 – Why doctors stay at base camp and the impact of altitude on decision-making
08:39 – What altitude does to the body: definitions and oxygen availability
10:26 – Adaptation limits above 6,000 metres and the variability in acclimatisation
12:16 – Genetics, cultural adaptation, and why some populations perform better at altitude
14:10 – Recognising and responding to high-altitude illnesses (AMS, HACE, HAPE)
18:28 – How quickly altitude illnesses can progress and the importance of self-awareness
20:14 – Managing motivation, communication and decision-making on expeditions
23:35 – Why Monica rarely faces dramatic resistance from clients
24:29 – Differences between commercial clients and professional athletes
28:22 – The distinction between elite performance and guided expedition support
30:24 – Using and not using supplemental oxygen: safety, ethics, and challenges
33:58 – Is Everest technical, or just high? What makes mountains dangerous
36:45 – How technical difficulty, fitness, and exertion affect risk at altitude
39:53 – Preparing physically and practically for mountaineering challenges
41:35 – The rise of extreme challenges and social media influence
42:11 – FKTs and what elite athletes actually need from doctors
44:29 – The reality of appetite, nutrition and fuelling at serious altitude
49:51 – Monica’s personal altitude symptoms and inter-individual differences
52:30 – Why even professionals sometimes turn around on major climbs
53:38 – Variability in individual response and the role of trip factors
55:51 – Why concurrent illness increases risk at altitude
57:07 – How to contact Monica and find out more about safe expeditions

Catch other episodes and subscribe for more insights into human performance.

Keep embracing creativity
Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi
Amazon USA 🇺🇸: https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2
Amazon Canada 🇨🇦: https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? Head to www.kult.media

Across my career, I’ve always been fascinated by how we prepare the body to perform in unfamiliar and extreme environments, whether that’s heat, cold, or, in this week’s case, high altitude. There’s a widespread belief that altitude training is a niche tool for Olympic hopefuls, or that only elite performers can benefit from it. But listening to James Barber, the Lead Performance Specialist at the Altitude Centre in London, made me question whether this framework is too limited.

In this episode of The Progress Theory, I’m joined by James to explore what it really takes to train for the kind of ultra-tough altitude events that used to be the preserve of professional mountaineers. Everest Base Camp marathons, rapid ascents of Kilimanjaro, and even skiing or base jumping from 8000-metre peaks. James’s experience is broad. He works with everyone from Premier League footballers to “everyday athletes” aiming for their first summit or charity expedition, to people wanting to push the absolute boundary of human performance in some truly wild environments.

For me, the strongest idea from this conversation is just how much individual variation there is in people’s tolerance and response to altitude, and how preparation strategies must reflect both the event and the person standing in front of you. James made it clear that most of his clients aren’t elite athletes. Around 70-75% come from a mountaineering context, and for many, it’s their first, and possibly only, major trek. The focus isn’t on chasing medals but on maximising their chance of reaching the top and, just as important, actually enjoying the experience. Testing is foundational because the variance in how people respond can be huge. Some may tolerate altitude relatively well while others struggle at relatively modest elevations. The Altitude Centre’s process is straightforward but crucial: establish a baseline through both passive and active tests (looking at how someone’s blood oxygen saturation and breathing respond in hypoxic conditions), then build a plan that escalates progressively.

Subscribe to my YouTube Channel → https://www.youtube.com/@theprogresstheory

For very high or especially rapid ascents (think trying to summit Everest in a week, or running up Kilimanjaro) the classic “spend more time at altitude” rule breaks down. James described the use of sleeping in hypoxic tents (for 7-8 weeks or more), layering in as much exposure as possible during the months leading up to an event, and, in rare cases, simulating altitudes well above 6500 metres in the controlled environment of a performance lab. The aim is to get the body as comfortable as possible at, say, base camp level, so the additional stress at the summit is a marginal push, not an outright shock. As James said, “If we can almost get their body to a point where it sees base camp as though they’re at sea level, then it’s as though they only have to gain another 3,000 meters rather than having to go all the way up.”

I appreciate James’s focus on individual context (time available, prior experience, underlying health) rather than chasing a one-size-fits-all “optimal” method. For many aiming at 5000-6000m events, a handful of weeks of exposure may be enough. For those with lower tolerance or loftier ambitions, more is both necessary and worthwhile. And it’s not just about enduring. It’s about maximising the chance you’ll enjoy these once-in-a-lifetime challenges.

In this episode, we explore:
00:00 – Is the appetite for extreme altitude challenges growing?
02:00 – James’s background and the Altitude Centre’s story
05:31 – Who trains at the Altitude Centre? From elite teams to first-time mountaineers
06:44 – Testing, training, and tailoring protocols for different ambitions
09:11 – Typical progression towards Everest and multi-year preparation
11:05 – Simulating altitude: equipment capabilities and limitations
13:19 – Why acclimatising for “summit” altitudes isn’t always the goal
16:12 – Measuring and interpreting physiological adaptation at altitude
17:29 – Red blood cells, sleep tents, and when additional adaptation is needed
18:57 – Rapid ascents (flash expeditions) and when the approach must change
21:07 – Recent and emerging extreme events: Everest in 7 days, high-altitude base jumps, world’s highest marathons
24:40 – Preparing for endurance races and marathons at high elevation
26:32 – Key differences between trekking and racing at altitude
28:24 – Designing and progressing altitude training plans
30:58 – Climbing with or without supplemental oxygen: does the strategy change?
32:49 – How soon to begin: timelines and customising pre-acclimatisation
34:13 – How to connect with James and the Altitude Centre

Catch other episodes of The Progress Theory and subscribe for more.

More podcast episodes

Keep embracing creativity
Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi
Amazon USA 🇺🇸: https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2
Amazon Canada 🇨🇦: https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? Head to www.kult.media

What’s the actual bottleneck holding back your conditioning? Are you working on the right thing?

When we talk about improving performance, whether in endurance, strength, or hybrid sport, it’s tempting to reach for the most visible metric or the latest tracking tool. But in reality, bodies are too complex for a single number or sensation to tell the story. In this episode of The Progress Theory, I’m joined by physiologist and CrossFit coach Evan Peikon to challenge one of the most persistent coaching mistakes: assuming the “limiter” athletes feel is the root cause of limited performance.

It’s easy to get convinced by groupthink, especially when athletes and coaches are surrounded by new data from wearables or are primed by the prevailing paradigm of “energy systems” training. But Evan reminded me that overemphasising what feels hardest during a test, or defaulting to traditional interval templates, often misses the real target.

Here’s why this distinction between apparent and actual limiter matters. We know from research (and endless practical experience) that an athlete’s rate limiter can be their muscular system, cardiovascular system, or respiratory system. The textbook energy systems model would have us believe you simply move sequentially from one to the next as intensity increases. But both real-world case studies and better technological measurement (think near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), for example) have shown this model’s limits.

Evan explained an example that’s become familiar in both CrossFit and endurance sport: athletes often believe their “muscular endurance” is holding them back because their arms or legs become fatigued first. In reality, what they’re feeling may be a compensation: their “strongest” system, not the limiting one. The actual limiter might be their ability to deliver oxygen to those muscles, or a respiratory issue, only revealed when you look deeper. “What you end up feeling when you’re doing a test of maximal endurance, the thing that you think limits you is actually typically your strongest system. The thing that’s really your limiter kicked out 5-10 minutes earlier, and you’ve been relying on compensation patterns to keep you going.”

Subscribe to my YouTube Channel → https://www.youtube.com/@theprogresstheory

Because of this, subjective feedback is a shaky foundation for programming. Athletes with a delivery limitation, those whose cardiovascular systems can’t keep pace, will often see performance plateau by bombing out on longer intervals or “getting pumped” in compound lifts when paired upper- and lower-body exercises challenge their ability to shift blood flow. Conversely, a “one-gear” athlete who can hold almost the same pace over 500m and 2km rows probably has a muscular utilisation limitation, and no amount of added zone 2 volume will fix that.

What does this mean for training? The simplest interval prescription, even using the same total work, but varying the speed curve across the interval, puts different stress on these systems. For a delivery-limited athlete, gradually ramping up pace allows the heart time to catch up, targeting the adaptation we’re after. For those who are respiratory limited, starting hard and letting pace drop keeps time spent at high VO2, where their adaptation needs most stimulus.

Programming becomes less about novelty or scientific complexity, and more about asking the right question: what system is actually holding the athlete back, and does the training session target that? Repeating sessions and tracking the physiological—and not just the performance—response allows us to nudge progress forward logically. Sometimes the next breakthrough is not about pushing harder, but about looking at the data more patiently, and being willing to question our own assumptions.

I wonder how often we’re letting an athlete’s compensation, not their constraint, dictate what we try to fix. What are your ways of testing the real limiter?

Subscribe to the Podcast

Episode breakdown:
00:00 The Return of Evan Peikon and New Paradigms
00:10:07 How Views on Energy Systems Have Shifted
00:15:48 What Are ‘Limiters’ and How Do We Spot Them?
00:26:56 Programming Intervals for Different Athlete Types
00:40:40 Practical Approaches Without Technology
00:51:02 Using NIRS Data to Inform Progression
00:58:54 Evan’s Next Steps and Where to Find Him

Catch other episodes and subscribe for more on coaching, physiology and the science-practice gap.

Keep embracing creativity
Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi
Amazon USA 🇺🇸: https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2
Amazon Canada 🇨🇦: https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? Head to www.kult.media

First of all, a huge congratulations to Fergus. Knowing how much work went into this project, and how much the charity means to him, it was incredible to see him finish despite the physical challenges and how much his body was clearly beginning to struggle in the latter half of the challenge. Watching him push through and still complete it was remarkable.

However, I wanted to put across my perspective on why I think Fergus completing this challenge is particularly impressive.

People will automatically hear “10 Ironman-distance triathlons in a row” and immediately recognise it as a massive challenge and rightly so. For many people, completing a single Ironman-distance triathlon is an enormous undertaking. The training volume required just to prepare for one is significant, so the sheer workload involved in completing 10 on 10 consecutive days is almost difficult to comprehend. The durability required from the body to tolerate that amount of repetitive stress is seriously impressive in itself.

But the aspect that makes this challenge even more impressive is the travel.

Because Fergus had to move between cities after each Ironman-distance effort, his ability to recover was severely compromised. He could easily have made the challenge more manageable by completing all 10 events in the same location. That still would have been unbelievably difficult. But adding the logistical demands of travelling around the UK elevates the challenge to another level entirely.

Subscribe to my YouTube Channel

And here’s why……

Firstly, Fergus had to travel between cities in an RV, which may sound appealing for a holiday, but is far less ideal when you are trying to recover from an Ironman-distance triathlon. Sleeping in a constantly changing environment, the cramped space, and the general noise and stress associated with travel all likely contributed to impaired recovery. On top of that, these factors would almost certainly have affected sleep quality and duration. And when recovery between events is already limited to less than 24 hours, sleep hygiene is vital.

Secondly, there will be serious disruption to both the digestive system and autonomic system. Travel can often induce gastrointestinal disruption, and when this is paired to a diet which is very different than usual because you are fueling a high-volume physical challenge, then this can be further disrupted. Persistent digestive stress can further feelings of fatigue, which in turn impacts the athlete’s ability to refuel and recover.

And thirdly, what exacerbates the reduced recovery is the fact that Fergus would have been recovering from multiple Ironman distance triathlons using an impaired ability to recover. In short, Fergus would have been trying to recover from an Ironman distance triathlon while still trying to recover from the previous Ironman distance triathlon in conditions which impair recovery. This is very dependent on the athlete, but physiological factors like cardiovascular and metabolic function, neuromuscular function, systemic inflammation and muscle damage can take anywhere between 2 and 18 days to return to baseline. This will likely be prolonged if your ability to recover is impaired.

So the fact Fergus completed this, the tenacity challenge, is truly remarkable when you really understand how limited his ability to recover was. Yes, 10 Ironman distance triathlons in a row is incredibly impressive. But to do it where logistics impair your ability to recover even further is what truly makes this impressive. I’m so happy for Fergus. I’m proud that all his hard work goes towards an amazing cause. You can still donate here: https://givestar.io/gs/project-tenacity

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

While Eliud Kipchoge previously ran under two hours in the INEOS 1:59 challenge, that performance occurred under highly controlled, non-competitive conditions. This new achievement represents a landmark moment in competitive sport.

Beyond its significance for human performance, the two-hour mark had long stood as an elusive threshold, one that athletes were approaching but could not quite surpass. Much like Roger Bannister’s sub-four-minute mile, it symbolised the limits of endurance running. And, much like the years after Bannister’s record breaking run, I expect we will see many athletes surpass two hours in the marathon over the coming years.

However, in research circles, an athlete breaking the two-hour mark in the marathon has long been predicted. Here are some interesting research papers which tell that story and suggest that, with recent advancements, athletes could get faster still.

This study by Professor Michael Joyner came out in 1991. The world record at the time was 2:06:50. This modelling paper predicted that the fastest time possible, using a model based on VO2 max, lactate threshold as a percentage of VO2 max, and running economy, is 1:57:58. This is a great paper, but obviously doesn’t take into account many factors, which we now know to be impactful for marathon performance. PMID: 2022559

Professor Joyner and colleagues followed his work with this paper in 2011, which discussed other factors which will likely influence who breaks the 2-hour marathon. This includes the rate at which marathon times have improved the preceding decades, exposure to high altitudes, running culture and genetic factors. PMID: 20689089

This is the first study to look at the energetic cost of using running shoes with a carbon plate, creating an improvement of 4% compared to traditional running shoes. We’ve seen huge mechanical advancement over the last decade due to technological advancements. It started here. PMID: 29143929

This paper used a non-linear limiting exponential model to predict when the sub-2 marathon will be achieved. They predicted May 2032, much later than when it happened. PMID: 30817713

This paper’s prediction was more accurate. They predicted that the 2-hour marathon would be broken in 2026. Impressive.

They also provide an overview of the athlete who would go on to break this record, including training history, age, nationality, and physiological determinants. PMID: 30104909

What will be the next sporting barrier that gets broken and changes our perception of what human performance can achieve?

Let me know

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

This creates an explosion of people on social media talking about it, describing the science behind it, and showing it used in practice. Unfortunately, much of this is misunderstood by most people, so it leads to a lot of wildly inaccurate recommendations and inaccurate science being pushed around.

Because of this, the once popular topic becomes the target of coaches on social media saying how it’s wrong, how it is being misused, and it is overhyped. After this, it then fades slowly into obscurity, and it is unclear whether the general population has become more knowledgeable about the topic at all.

It would seem that Zone 2 training has finally completed this cycle.

It grew in popularity as a method of training because many competing in CrossFit or functional fitness would only perform high-intensity training, which would then lead to certain physiological adaptations. For example, many CrossFit athletes were having a large gap between their lactate threshold and their lactate turn point because only training at high intensity meant that the body was used to using anaerobic pathways to provide energy for lower-intensity training. On top of that, social media influencers in the longevity space started discussing Zone 2 training and its importance for developing VO2 max and a strong aerobic base to improve longevity. Along with the popularity of hybrid training, this all sparked a huge explosion of everyone talking about Zone 2 training.

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel

Inevitably, this surge in Zone 2 training popularity was always going to come down. Strong advocates of Zone 2 training were trying to implement and use it inappropriately for everyone. For example, elite-level endurance athletes who cover huge mileages over the course of the week utilise a large amount of Zone 2 or low-intensity training for a large percentage of that volume. However, some were arguing that it should also be used by everyday athletes who only get to train around three to four hours a week.

As a result, much of the Zone 2 content you now see on social media is focused on criticising it. This, combined with the decline in popularity of Peter Attia and a growing recognition that the link between VO2 max and longevity is more relevant at a population level than within well-trained athletic samples, suggests that we may be seeing the final stages of this cycle.

I wonder what the next topic will be.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Hybrid training is more of a culture. This hybrid training culture has been developed due to many factors, but one of the key ones is that it was challenging the status quo in terms of what the human body is capable of. Originally, it was deemed not possible to be able to combine a strength sport and an endurance sport, because the training would cancel each other out. However, we know now that is clearly not the case. In order to prove this, many athletes attempted impressive hybrid goals, like the combination of a 250 kilo squat and a sub five-minute mile. These physical challenges, once never achieved by a human, have now become a hybrid bench mark which many hybrid athletes have achieved.

The culture of hybrid training has developed alongside the rapid growth of social media. Many hybrid athletes regularly share their training programs, performances, and physical challenges online, allowing audiences to follow both their preparation and results. In this way, hybrid training has benefited from the broader transformation of sport that social media has enabled. Traditionally, becoming a professional athlete required extensive training and selection through established pathways, such as professional teams, national governing bodies, or talent scouts who effectively acted as gatekeepers to elite sport.

Social media has altered this structure. While traditional professional athletes are paid primarily based on their competitive performance, hybrid athletes can now build full-time careers where success is determined not only by athletic performance but also by online visibility, audience engagement, and social reach. As a result, social media has created an alternative pathway in which athletes can sustain a career without necessarily progressing through conventional elite sporting systems.

To sustain this new career pathway as a hybrid athlete, individuals often structure their online content in one of two ways. First, they present their training and information in a highly relatable manner so that viewers feel that improved hybrid performance is achievable for them as well. Secondly, athletes may push hybrid performance goals to increasingly extreme levels in order to attract and maintain online attention.

Similar to the early development of hybrid training culture, athletes gained attention by creating novel challenges that combined endurance and strength in ways that had rarely been attempted and were often perceived as unrealistic or impossible. As this culture has matured, hybrid athletes are pursuing increasingly more extreme challenges to continue capturing audience interest. While these challenges may still aim to explore the limits of human performance, they also function as a way of maintaining visibility and expanding an online audience. As a result, some challenges are now being undertaken in particularly demanding environments, including high-altitude locations and conditions involving extreme temperatures, both hot and cold.

This is what I will be investigating in the next series of the Progress Theory Podcast. As challenges become more extreme, what training practices can we employ to improve human performance and increase the chance of success in these environments?

I can’t wait. Recording starts now so please subscribe to our Substack and Youtube channel for our upcoming news and episodes. Also, if you love Hybrid Training, check out all our current episodes for the best scientific and training information available.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

Creativity is often something that’s discussed within sport, but less so within exercise science. Exercise science, or more specifically in this case, towards generating training programs to improve human performance, are built on scientific principles which have been researched, and decisions are made in training programming in order to impose training stress over a long period of time to increase human adaptation.

This approach may sound quite rigid as it sticks to scientific rigour. However, this is why I think creativity and art is important to the training programming process.

Firstly, every coaching decision is based on contradictory advice. We may try and optimize our programming decisions based on research which supports X, Y, and Z. However, there will be other research which contradicts this, which is inevitable when there are so many factors you’re trying to control for. Art is knowing which decisions to make for that person in that exact specific time, knowing which research and experience to follow, and what to ignore.

Secondly, how do you know what works truly for that individual without experience of what doesn’t? Creativity is allowing for decisions to be made where there could be a chance of failure or no impact at all. Creativity gives you license to do that and gives you a better picture of what decisions to make in the future.

Thirdly, furthering on the point of experience, creativity is important when you’re reflecting back on years of worth of information coming from training sessions, data collected, wellness data collected etc. These data will tell a story of that athlete, made up of all that went right and wrong. Creativity will in turn tell the most exciting story and end up giving us the most valuable information of what to do and what not to do in the future.

Creativity is not about doing a load of random stuff in order to figure stuff out. Creativity allows for experimentation and rational decisions to help us figure things out in the future. Without it, we are limiting our knowledge and inhibiting our ability to produce art in the form of training programming.

If you like discussion on creativity in sport check out this conversation I had with S&C coach Tom Farrow

And if you want to learn more about programming for Hybrid Training check out my book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’. Amazon links below:

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 :https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Dr Phil Price

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

The body has many molecular brakes. Another example is myostatin. Myostatin is a myokine that inhibits muscle growth, and you can see the effect of a myostatin deficiency in pictures of bulls who look like they’ve been hitting the gym.

This Bull’s name is Beefy, probably.

The body wants to be efficient. The body has to produce energy in order to provide muscular contraction. The bigger the muscle fibre, the more energy is required. So the body doesn’t want to get too big, because it would then have to generate more energy for doing the same thing..

Now, that’s not to say these molecular brakes completely stop us from increasing muscle fibre size. These molecular breaks may be present and we can still improve both strength and endurance performance. They may play a small role in the interference effect but we can easily reduce their effect with appropriate strength and endurance training.

Subscribe to our YouTube

To answer the question - should athletes care? I’d argue approximately 90-95% of athletes, like your weekend warriors training who compete for fun, don’t need to. And for that last 5-10%? The elite athletes whose training volumes and intensities are very high and need to be very careful how they organise a training week, yes, a little. But this is just one other factor (like fatigue) they have to contend with when planning training.

If you want to know more about this topic then I’d definitely recommend checking this podcast episode I did with Professor Keith Baar.

And you can find more in my book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’.

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 :https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

Now it is better known that the combination of strength and endurance training, when managed appropriately, does not lead athletes getting weak, skinny and injured. However, the combination of certain strength and endurance training for specific hybrid goals may be more difficult to manage than others. Certainly not impossible, just more difficult / progress in both may be more gradual.

I’d say those sports are Olympic Weightlifting and Ironman distance triathlon.

Here’s why:

1. Fatigue inhibits high-velocity contractions.
   Obviously, with any hybrid programme, there’s going to be a level of fatigue that’s generated from all of the training within it. Research has shown that early muscle contraction can be inhibited due to fatigue, negatively affecting the first 100ms of contraction (D’Emanuele et al., 2021). This is very important because Olympic weightlifting requires high force outputs very quickly.. If fatigue is negatively affecting our ability to generate force very quickly, rather than our maximal force output, that means we have to be extra careful in managing fatigue so that it doesn’t negatively impact our progress in Olympic weightlifting too much.

2. Number two: fibre-type conversion.
   There have been studies, particularly looking at an endurance event like a marathon, showing that fibre types do tend to shift specific to the training stress placed upon them (Luden et al., 2011). In general, high volumes of endurance training can lead to a shift in fibre-type conversion of fast-twitch fibres towards slow-twitch fibres, or more importantly, type IIx fibres towards type IIa fibres, and type IIa fibres towards type I fibres. Now, there has been some work in concurrent training to show that this fibre-type conversion isn’t as simple when you do both strength and endurance training (Putnam et al., 2004), but the shift can still be there. This shift is very subtle, but it can still be impactful.

3. Huge training volumes make it hard to prioritise inter-session recovery.
   Throughout our training week, we will have key sessions that require us to be most fresh going into them, because they are particularly intense sessions intended for a high level of adaptation, and they often also need a sufficient amount of recovery after them. When you are doing two sports that require a lot of volume, it becomes more difficult to manage inter-session recovery. In other words, you require more training, so there’s less time to recover between sessions. This may be particularly problematic for Olympic weightlifting in comparison to something like powerlifting, where fatigue affecting speed of contraction is more of an issue.

   Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

4. Huge training volumes mean training load needs to be managed carefully.
   An Ironman distance requires a lot of training volume across three different disciplines, and then you’re adding Olympic weightlifting on top of that. Long-distance running and swimming involve repetitive forces on particular joints, especially the shoulder and the knee. In a similar vein, Olympic weightlifting requires a lot of volume practising the skill, which means exposure to high forces and large ranges of motion, particularly at the shoulder, knee, hip, and ankle. This is absolutely fine, but it does require very careful load management. Increasing volume too much in both olympic weightlifting and Ironman triathlon can lead to a spike in overall training load that the athlete may not tolerate very well, potentially leading to disruptive performance, or worse, injury.

Both Olympic weightlifting and Ironman Distance triathlon are great sports so I hope we see some great hybrid athletes in the future taking on this challenge.

If you want to know more about hybrid training get a copy of my book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’. Links below:

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 :https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

There were some quiet periods in 2025 as we were working on projects in the background ready for 2026 (me being off work due to concussion slowed things down, too). However, I am now excited to provide some teasers for what is to come in 2026.

We have a new space for filming content, podcast episodes and doing science. I want it to be a hybrid lab/studio. It looks great and although we are still installing some finishing touches, I can’t wait to fully utilise it in 2026. I’ll do an update post soon.

The research for book number two starts in 2026, so expect many awesome podcast episodes with some of the best minds and athletes in human performance. I won’t give away the book topic just yet, but it does build on my last book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’.

With more hybrid athletes taking on crazier physical challenges all over the world, this book will provide amazing stories, the science behind performance and training recommendations so that the reader has the tools to take on the world’s biggest challenges.

Make sure you subscribe to this newsletter and our Youtube channel as we’ll be documenting all of our research and training knowledge and make The Progress Theory the best resource for human performance.

In the meantime, if you haven’t read ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ yet make sure you grab a copy while there is still 40% off. Links below:

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 :https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

Sure, if that date coincides with a change in lifestyle, such as work is less busy, then sure, I get it. But not one that is linked to the calendar year.

Maybe that’s why so many people fail their new years resolutions.

Maybe they should have just started earlier.

Last night I gave a lecture for Omnia Performance on what books have influenced me the most in some of my decision making in my approach to hybrid training. One book in particular is ‘The Little Black Book of Training Wisdom’ by Professor Dan Cleather.

In it he discusses how training should be simple and principle-led.

Follow these principles and you should be able to create an effective hybrid training program.

That’s why the programming chapter in my book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ discusses a principle-led approach rather than having programs which readers can copy.

The Progress Theory Youtube

Stick to these principles and you can create your own program which is tailored to you and not constrained by specific sets and reps schemes and specific periodised structures.

This will make achieving your goals in 2026 much easier. It gives your approach the flexibility to stay consistent while also specific to your goals.

If you want to learn more then purchase your copy of The Science of Hybrid Training’ using the links below and find out how a principle-led approach can help your hybrid performance in 2026.

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 :https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

There’s only one study which has looked at between-session recovery time in concurrent training and that is by Robineau and colleagues in 2016.

They compared 5 groups over a 7 week intervention. 3 of those groups were concurrent training groups which differed by the amount of time they had between their strength and endurance sessions: 0 hours, 6 hours, and 24 hours. The other 2 groups were a strength training only group and a control group.

Strength in the half squat and bench press increased in all concurrent training groups, but was greater in the 6 hours and 24 hours groups, suggesting 6 hours was enough recovery between sessions to aid with strength development.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Strength at higher speeds, as demonstrated in an dynamometer at different angular speed, saw the greatest improvement in the 24hour training group, suggesting more recovery time might be needed for speed and power development.

So is 6 hours enough recovery time between training sessions. This study suggests it is for strength development, but more time may be needed for speed development.

Depending on your hybrid goals you can manipulate between-session recovery to ensure you get the right recovery for the training adaptation you’re aiming for for each training session.

Want to know more about Hybrid training? Check out my book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’.

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 :https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

While some people latched on to issues around spelling errors, poorly presented graphs etc there are key points about the scientific process that were highlighted but aren’t being discussed enough.

1. After the initial criticism I saw online after the Solomon Nelson youtube video was released really highlighted two things: a) Influencers really like to jump on a bandwagon to bring someone down. It’s like a sport to them. And b) A lot of people’s perception about what a PhD is and what it’s role is is wrong. As stated in the Dr Milo Wolf video, a PhD IS your apprenticeship towards becoming a research scientist. The idea that every PhD is the pinnacle of that research academic’s work is just not true, though for some research scientists this might end up being true. You’re in the learning phase of your academic career, further refining the research skills you learned during your undergraduate and postgraduate work in a huge investigative project. At the end of the PhD you (should) have the skills to further pursue science in your PhD area, or have the research skills to pursue science in another area. These critical skills can also be taken outside of academia, which many end up doing because they have interests elsewhere and because there are just not many research jobs around (and they often pay poorly).

2. Although spread out into several studies/chapters the actual content of the studies only equate to one cross-sectional study, which, in my opinion, only equates to the first study of a PhD or a Master’s thesis. Is this enough to satisfy the criteria of a doctoral investigation? No. Do I think Mike has ability to complete a PhD? Yeah, probably. But this thesis is not enough. According to Mike on his recent Instagram post this study only equated to 1/3 of his PhD, the other 2/3 coming from coaching and module work. This sounds like a great programme for someone looking to be a practitioner in S&C, but again, this is a MSc programme (certainly in the UK), not a PhD.

3. Your supervisors should only move you onto your final viva when they believe you and your document is ready to be defended. I don’t see how this happened with the thesis submitted in 2013 (The one Solomon reviewed). The way the results are presented is SO poor (regardless of the minor errors like spelling) and the written portions are very descriptive rather than providing a critique of the literature. It is up to the supervisors to provide support here. People are busy criticising Mike but is the reality that Mike has been neglected during his PhD programme? The supervisory team and the academic practices at the Uni should be held accountable here. (note: yes I have read the revised version on Mike’s google doc. It is much better but based on the story so far it is because it was corrected recently? Correct me if I am wrong).

4. If many of his studies used data from one data collection session, that’s fine. Put this in a methods chapter, which the later studies/chapters can refer to and then have study specific information in the methods section of those chapters. This would stop the copy/paste methods issue. The narrative of the thesis is very important and that needs to be reflected and presented in the document. Just shoving studies next to each other isn’t the point of a thesis. Your PhD document and how you write your studies up for publication are different.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

I hope social media moves on from this shitstorm soon. Science is a collaborative effort and should be accessible to all. It should also be held to specific standards to drive science forward and stop misinformation. Mistakes will happen and the transparency of highlighting these mistakes, acknowledging them and providing corrections is all part of the process. However, a PhD should never be used as a ‘I’m smarter than you so therefore I’m right’ form of gatekeeping.

We can all do better.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

Then you realise they advertise their perceived management of the chaos and life they lead in order to sell you something. A course. A mentorship. ‘Look what I’ve got. Want it? I’ll show you how’.

Is this opportunistic? Very. But I get that’s the norm these days.

One of the regular recommendations you see online is that you need to get up and train before your family wakes up. Win the day.

However, this is not achievable for many Dads, even for reasons that don’t include getting up early already for work.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

Firstly, they promote this as if it is the ultimate discipline and not doing this is holding you back. But this is not about discipline. Yeah that is important for getting up and being consistent, but the main reason a Dad could do this is because their partner is looking after their children at that time. They’re having to sort everything if the kids wake early. This is really difficult for them especially if you’ve got multiple young children and in many cases the supportive Dad thing to do is to not train and help with your family. If the Dad has to leave for work early then this might just be a normal dynamic for many families, but nevertheless, the partner is the unsung hero here and doesn’t get the flowers they deserve. It’s not your unwavering discipline, it’s your partner’s support.

Also, it also assumes that your children sleep through the night, or at least don’t wake frequently. Let’s use me and my family as an example. At the time of writing this my wife and I were up last night at 11pm, 12pm, 1am, 3am, and 3:30-5am. This has been the norm recently. Getting up before your family is difficult if your family is already up. So this David Goggins/Jocko Willink style of discipline may not be feasible, and another time of training, if any on bad days, is more appropriate.

So how do we solve this? Instagram is all about showing off the best bits so I can’t see influencers posting the difficult moments from family life. Dad’s shouldn’t be whipping out their phone to record the difficult moments anyway so I can understand why this isn’t shown in reels. However, more discussion on how to train around Dad life, and how it has its ups and downs, would be great to see. Influencers want to show authenticity, so stop faking it and discuss what it is really like.

The Progress Theory Podcast

Will this change? I can’t see this happening anytime soon as, unfortunately, there’s probably too much money to be made in this niche. However, I think this discussion will start to happen in some groups when some Dads see through the bullshit of some influencers and just want to work with those who are or who have been through navigating the busy, young children family life.

Would I like to train more? Sometimes. But, I want to train for health, my research, and to get my young boys interested in sport. My boys and my wife are the best thing in my life, so navigating a busy family life to find some training time is a privilege. I have the perfect life whether I get to train all the time or not. Sometimes you just need a change in perspective.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

Skeletal muscles are made up of slow-twitch (Type I) fibres and fast-twitch fibres. The fast-twitch group includes Type IIa and Type IIx fibres. Type I fibres are highly resistant to fatigue and are suited for endurance work. Type IIa fibres are fast but also more oxidative, making them a middle ground between endurance and strength and power. Type IIx fibres are the most explosive, capable of generating high force at high speeds, but they fatigue quickly and have low oxidative capacity (Schiaffino & Reggiani, 2011).

Research shows that endurance training tends to promote a shift from Type IIx towards Type IIa and sometimes towards Type I (Andersen & Aagaard, 2000). This is partly because endurance work increases mitochondrial biogenesis and oxidative enzymes, making the muscle more resistant to fatigue. In concurrent training, especially when endurance work is frequent or intense, this same shift can occur. One study on concurrent training found that after 12 weeks, participants saw an increase in Type IIa fibres at the expense of Type IIx (Häkkinen et al., 2003). This change was more pronounced in the concurrent training group than in the strength-only group.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel

The molecular explanation for this lies in gene expression. Endurance training activates pathways such as AMPK and PGC-1α, which encourage the muscle to develop more oxidative properties. This favours fibres like Type IIa and Type I, and as such the gene expression of fast twitch fibres shift in favour of fibres with more oxidative properties. This comes at the expense of type IIx fibres.

This does not mean that concurrent training will change all your explosive fibres. The changes are often subtle and influenced by how you schedule sessions, your training background, and recovery. For athletes who need to preserve Type IIx fibres for explosive performance, careful programming is essential. Strategies include increasing time between endurance and strength sessions, reducing unnecessary endurance volume, and ensuring explosive strength training is performed when fresh.

Check out our Podcast

In short, concurrent training can cause a gradual shift from Type IIx to Type IIa fibres, especially when endurance work is frequent or intense. This shift can improve endurance but may reduce peak explosive potential if not managed carefully.

If you enjoyed this newsletter make sure you subscribe for more human performance content.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

References

• Andersen, J. L., & Aagaard, P. (2000). Myosin heavy chain IIX overshoot in human skeletal muscle. Muscle & Nerve, 23(7), 1095–1104.

• Egan, B., & Zierath, J. R. (2013). Exercise metabolism and the molecular regulation of skeletal muscle adaptation. Cell Metabolism, 17(2), 162–184.

• Häkkinen, K., et al. (2003). Neuromuscular adaptations during concurrent strength and endurance training versus strength training. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 89(1), 42–52.

• Schiaffino, S., & Reggiani, C. (2011). Fibre types in mammalian skeletal muscles. Physiological Reviews, 91(4), 1447–1531.

In this episode of The Progress Theory, I am joined by physiologist, physiotherapist, and PhD candidate Jem Arnold (@jemarnold), whose research into Near Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS) is transforming how athletes monitor fatigue, recovery, and physiological adaptation.

From clinical work with elite cyclists to cutting-edge lab research, Jem shares how wearable NIRS technology provides insights into local muscle oxygenation, giving athletes and coaches a new tool to refine performance, tailor training, and manage effort like never before.

If you’re training for endurance, hybrid sports, or simply obsessed with understanding the science behind performance, this conversation will upgrade how you think about data, individual variability, and smart tech integration.

In this episode, we explore:

📡 What NIRS is and why it’s a game-changer in sport science

🧠 The link between arterial strain and quad oxygenation in cyclists

📊 How to interpret real-time deoxygenation signals during effort

🔄 Blending athlete feel with objective tech for personalised training

🧰 When to use gadgets—and when to step away from the data

Episode breakdown:

05:17 Iliac Artery Compression in Athletes

09:03 From Clinic to Lab: Jem’s Journey

11:28 Arterial Strain in Elite Cyclists

13:58 Rare Vascular Conditions in Endurance Sports

18:28 Muscle Oxygenation Limitations

22:04 Compensating to Sustain Performance

27:01 Understanding Metabolic Demands

30:33 Metabolic Limitations & Performance Plateaus

33:10 Steep Deoxygenation: A Red Flag

37:05 Device-Specific Oxygen Trends

40:04 Functional Oxygen Range in Athletes

44:04 Making NIRS Data Actionable

49:04 Balancing Power and SMO₂

52:53 Choosing the Right Tools

56:04 How Feedback Loops Shape Training

58:06 Interpreting Inconsistent Data

01:00:48 Sharing Ideas Through Blogging

The Progress Theory Podcast

Missed any of our last episodes? Find them where you get your podcasts and on Youtube. And make sure you subscribe to this Substack as I will giving updates on our next creative project.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 : https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

1. Define Where You Are on the Generalist/Hybrid Continuum

Not all hybrid athletes are the same. Some are generalists—training broadly to stay “ready for anything.” Others are specialists—pursuing peak performance in two distinct sports like powerlifting and triathlon.

Ask yourself:

Are you a generalist looking for variety and longevity?

Or are you aiming to push the limits in both strength and endurance?

This helps determine how aggressive your goals should be—and how much specificity your training needs.

2. Set Goals That Align With Your Lifestyle

Time, energy, and recovery resources vary wildly between people. You might want to run a sub-3-hour marathon and deadlift 250kg, but do you have the time to train like an elite hybrid athlete?

Be honest about your work hours, family commitments, sleep, and stress. Your goals should stretch you, but, and more importantly, they also need to be sustainable. Otherwise, you risk burnout, injury or just falling out of love with hybrid training.

Progress Theory Youtube Channel

3. Focus on Consistency, Not Just Intensity

Hybrid training is a long game. You’re trying to improve in two separate domains, which takes longer than focusing on one. Consistency always wins over intensity. Start with goals that help build sustainable habits:

✅ Consistent training frequency

✅ Slow, consistent progress week by week

✅ Consistently hitting training sessions with intent

These foundational targets allow you to build toward performance outcomes over time.

4. Make Goals Hybrid-Specific

Example: Run a sub-20-minute 5K and squat 1.5x bodyweight.

The key? Both targets must challenge you together, not in isolation. Consider how one might affect the other and plan your training accordingly.

5. Reassess Regularly and Move Along the Continuum

Your position on the hybrid-generalist continuum might shift over time and that’s okay. Life events, injuries, or changing interests might move you toward generalism or deeper into hybrid performance.

Reflect regularly:

1. Are your goals still exciting and realistic?

2. Is your training enhancing your lifestyle or draining it?

Adapt as needed.

Goal setting for hybrid athletes is more than a to-do list. It's about aligning your ambition with your capacity and building a lifestyle that allows you to thrive in multiple physical domains.

Whether you're training to lift, run, and live better, or chasing peak numbers on both ends of the performance spectrum, your goals are your compass. Make them count.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon

Amazon UK 🇬🇧: https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi

Amazon USA 🇺🇸 : https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2

Amazon Canada 🇨🇦 :https://a.co/d/g4HL37g

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

In this episode of The Progress Theory, I am joined by former GB fencer and now performance mindset coach Claire Bennett (@performbehappy), who shares her personal journey from elite sport to building a coaching practice that helps athletes and professionals unlock their full potential.

Claire opens up about the mental cost of perfectionism, the emotional fallout of stepping away from elite sport, and how adopting a growth mindset has helped her, and her clients, redefine success, self-worth, and performance.

Whether you’re a coach, competitor, or someone navigating high-pressure goals, this episode is a masterclass in mental performance.

The Progress Theory Podcast

In this episode, we explore:

🧠 Transitioning from elite athlete to mindset coach

🎯 Why perfectionism often limits high performers

🌱 How growth mindset reshapes failure and fear

💬 Anxiety, insecurity, and the hidden side of high achievement

🛠️ Practical mental strategies you can apply today

Episode breakdown:

00:50 Introduction

02:48 Life After Elite Sport

09:20 Athlete Self-Care and Self-Appreciation

12:02 Negative Perfectionism in Practice

15:41 Overcoming Perfectionism

17:20 Growth Mindset & Stepping Outside Your Comfort Zone

24:12 Understanding Anxiety Across Professions

28:18 Managing Insecurity

32:28 Practical Recommendations from a Performance Coach

The great episode keep coming. Check out all our other episodes for great content on human performance.

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon:

🇬🇧 UK – (https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi)

🇺🇸 USA – (https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2)

🇨🇦 Canada – (https://a.co/d/g4HL37g)

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media

We explore why long-standing records in jump sports like the triple jump remain unbroken, and what needs to change in training, research, and culture to elevate jumping to the next level.

Whether you’re a coach, athlete, or just interested in human performance, this episode will make you rethink everything you thought you knew about explosive movement.

In this episode, we explore:

🦵 Why plyometrics are critical for sports—and life longevity

📉 Why jump records are rarely broken (and why that matters)

🧬 How flawed definitions and research are holding athletes back

🏃‍♂️ What strength specificity and supramaximal loading really mean

🚀 The difference between power athletes and speed athletes—and how to train both

Love our podcasts? make sure you check out our other episodes on human performance

Keep embracing creativity

Dr Phil Price

Purchase our new book ‘The Science of Hybrid Training’ available from Amazon:

🇬🇧 UK – (https://amzn.eu/d/bD86gIi)

🇺🇸 USA – (https://a.co/d/j3cTnx2)

🇨🇦 Canada – (https://a.co/d/g4HL37g)

Kult Media - Innovative podcast production and content creation. Without them the show would not be possible. Thinking about starting your own podcast? head to www.kult.media