The Principle of Specificity (SAID): You Get What You Train For—Training Levels, Cross-Effects, and When to Specialize

Opening: The Athlete Who Trained Everything but Improved Nothing

I once coached an athlete who left a deep impression on me—let’s call him A-Hong. A-Hong was an office worker in Taipei, in his early forties, sitting in an office in Xinyi District all week, then heading to Yangmingshan and Fengguizui on weekends. When he came to me, he was frustrated because he was “clearly working hard”—training six days a week, packing in gym weight training, spinning, jogging, and swimming. Yet his Wuling climb time had been stuck for a full year, and his FTP (Functional Threshold Power) was plateaued at 210 watts.

I asked him to lay out his training logs for me, and once I saw them, I understood. His problem wasn’t a lack of effort—it was that he was working too hard in the wrong direction. He spread his limited time evenly across a bunch of stimuli that were barely related, even interfering with each other. The signals his body received were chaotic, so the responses it gave were vague and mediocre.

That day I told A-Hong something that is also the core of this article: “Your body is honest—you train for something, and it gives you exactly that. If you don’t train specifically, it won’t respond specifically.” Behind this statement lies one of the most fundamental yet most overlooked principles in sports science—the specificity principle, known in English as SAID (Specific Adaptations to Imposed Demands).

In this article, I want to walk you through SAID thoroughly: what it really is, the levels at which the body adapts, why “cross-training” isn’t as magical as you might think, and the most practical question—when should a regular rider start “specializing” so you don’t end up spinning your wheels for a year like A-Hong did.

What Is the SAID Specificity Principle?

The SAID principle is straightforward: the body produces specific adaptations in response to the specific demands you impose on it. Whatever stimulus you give it, that’s the direction it adjusts.

That sounds like common sense, but its implications are actually powerful. It means:

• If you want to climb faster, you need to train climbing (or at least a similar power-cadence-position combination), not just hammer flat roads.
• If you want to win a sprint at the end of a race, you need to train anaerobic sprinting, not just accumulate long-distance mileage.
• If you want to sit on the bike for four hours without a sore back or stiff neck, you need to train “postural muscular endurance in the riding position,” not just do bench presses in the gym.

There’s a classic discussion of this principle in exercise physiology. A review article published in a physiology journal, titled “Specificity of Training Adaptations: Time for a Rethink?” pointed out that training-induced adaptations are tightly bound to the movement patterns, frequency, and duration you use in training (source listed in the references at the end). In other words, the “transfer” of adaptations is conditional—when you train A, A improves the most, B gets a spillover benefit only if it closely resembles A, and C, which is nothing like A, gets almost nothing.

I often use an analogy with my athletes: the body is like a pragmatic accountant. It doesn’t invest in abilities it “might need later”—it only invests in what “you’ve been asking it to do recently.” If you haven’t sprinted in three months, it cuts the “budget” for sprinting capacity and shifts it to support the long-duration aerobic work you do every day. This isn’t laziness on the body’s part; it’s a smart energy-saving strategy inherent to living organisms.

Why Does “You Get What You Train For” Hold Physiologically?

Adaptations are specific because different stimuli activate different molecular signaling pathways. I don’t want to get too academic here, so let me put it in plain terms:

• Endurance stimuli (long duration, moderate-to-low intensity, high-repetition pedaling) mainly tell the cells: “I need more mitochondria, more capillaries, and better fat-burning capacity.” So the aerobic engine grows.
• Maximal strength stimuli (heavy loads, low reps) mainly tell the nervous system and muscles: “I need to produce more force per effort.” So neural recruitment efficiency and muscle fiber cross-sectional area improve.
• Anaerobic/sprint stimuli (very high intensity, short duration, heavy lactate accumulation) tell the body: “I need stronger anaerobic energy production and better lactate tolerance.”

These three signaling pathways aren’t just different—in some cases they antagonize each other. That’s the physiological root of the “cross-effect/interference effect” we’ll discuss later.

A Comparison of Adaptation Directions for Three Main Stimuli

To help you intuitively understand that “different stimuli lead to different outcomes,” I’ve organized the adaptation directions of the three main training stimuli into a comparison table. After reading it, you’ll see why haphazardly mixing them together often yields mediocre results across all three areas:

Training Stimulus	Typical Workout Profile	Primary Body Adaptations	Significance for Cycling Performance
Aerobic Endurance	Long-duration Z2, high mileage	Mitochondrial biogenesis, capillary density, improved fat utilization, increased stroke volume	Lasts longer, recovers faster, no slowdown on long distances
Threshold/VO2max	Threshold intervals, high-intensity intervals	Lactate clearance capacity, VO2max, high-intensity tolerance	Doesn’t blow up on climbs or when chasing the pack, holds race position
Maximal Strength	Heavy loads, low reps	Neural recruitment efficiency, muscle fiber cross-sectional area, tendon stiffness	Pedaling economy, instantaneous sprint output

The one sentence to remember from this table: whatever result you want in the rightmost column, do the workouts in the leftmost column of that row. If you want to win sprints but only ride Z2 all day, you’re working hard in the endurance row while expecting the results from the strength row—your body won’t give you that.

Let me add an important clarification: SAID is about “direction,” not about telling you to go to extremes. Real training is always “a main dish with a few side dishes”—you make the specific discipline your main course, but you still keep a small amount of other stimuli as sides (e.g., a climber keeps a bit of sprinting, an endurance rider keeps a bit of strength) so the body doesn’t regress in one capacity to the point of hurting overall performance. Specificity helps you decide “what the main dish is and what proportion it occupies”—it doesn’t mean clearing everything else off the plate.

The Six Levels of Training Specificity: It’s Not Just “Training Is Training”

Many people think specificity just means “training this sport vs. training that sport,” but specificity is actually multi-layered. Even within cycling, the specificity at different levels varies greatly. I’ve organized it into six levels, from broad to fine:

Level	Specificity Dimension	Example (Cycling)	Cost of Ignoring It
1	Energy System	Aerobic vs. anaerobic vs. phosphagen system	Train the wrong system, the engine needed for racing never gets built
2	Movement Pattern	Pedaling vs. running vs. swimming	No matter how strong you are at running, sport-specific strength on the bike is limited
3	Muscle Groups & Contraction Type	Concentric pedaling of quads, glutes	Bench pressing does almost nothing for climbing
4	Intensity Zone	Z2 aerobic vs. threshold vs. VO2max	Only riding Z2 won’t build the high-intensity tolerance needed for racing
5	Movement Speed/Cadence	High cadence vs. low cadence, big gear	Train only one cadence, lose speed when the rhythm changes
6	Context & Position	Climbing out of the saddle vs. flat TT position vs. descending corners	Strong on the trainer, a mess on the road

Let me walk through this table once with A-Hong’s example and you’ll get it. A-Hong’s problem was at levels 4 and 6: he piled up a lot of mileage (plenty of Z2 aerobic base), but he almost never did threshold or VO2max high-intensity workouts, and he rarely went to the actual mountains to ride at race pace in a race position. As a result, he became someone with “a decent aerobic base who blows up the moment a steep climb pushes the intensity up.” A long, sustained mid-to-high-intensity climb like Wuling hits exactly the levels he never trained.

The Finer the Level, the Closer to “What You Actually Want”

Here’s a practical key point: the higher levels (1, 2) of specificity are easier to benefit from via cross-training, while the lower levels (5, 6) can almost only be developed through the specific discipline itself.

For example: doing aerobic spinning in the gym can improve level 1’s “aerobic energy system,” which helps with outdoor riding. But if you want to improve level 6’s “shoulder and neck muscular endurance in a four-hour TT position,” sorry—you can only build that by actually lying on a time trial bike and grinding out four hours. There’s no shortcut and no substitute.

That’s why I often say: “Base capacity can be borrowed; sport-specific capacity can only be grown on your own.”

The Cross-Over Effect and Its Limits: Cross-Training Isn’t as Magical as You Think

“Cross-training” is often romanticized, as if training in A will automatically strengthen B. The reality is—the cross-over effect exists, but it has a clear ceiling, and it’s asymmetrical in direction.

Three Truths About the Cross-Over Effect

Truth One: The transfer of endurance across disciplines mainly happens at the central (cardiopulmonary) level, not so much at the peripheral (muscular) level.

Your heart, lungs, and blood circulation are the “shared” central engine. When you swim to build your cardiorespiratory fitness, this central adaptation can indeed partially carry over to cycling. But the peripheral stuff—mitochondrial density in the quadriceps specific to cycling, capillaryization, pedaling neuromuscular coordination—is local and movement-specific, and swimming barely trains it. So a strong swimmer who takes up cycling seriously for the first time will find, “My cardiorespiratory system feels fine, so why do my thighs blow up so quickly?”—this is a living example of central transfer happening while peripheral transfer doesn’t.

Truth Two: There’s an “interference effect” between strength and endurance, but it’s milder than people imagine.

People used to fear that “doing strength training and endurance training simultaneously would cancel each other out”—this is called the interference effect. Recent systematic reviews have clarified this further: with proper programming, concurrent strength and endurance training does not necessarily severely compromise hypertrophy and maximal strength (source at the end of the article). And there’s a cyclist-friendly finding—endurance training dominated by cycling interferes less with strength/hypertrophy than endurance training dominated by running, with one common explanation being that running’s eccentric contractions cause greater muscle damage.

What this means for us: cyclists who want to add some strength training in winter don’t need to panic about “canceling out.” As long as you don’t cram high-volume endurance and high-frequency strength training together, and don’t ride your legs to failure before lifting in the same session, the interference can mostly be kept within an acceptable range.

Truth Three: The cross-over effect is asymmetrical.

Training maximal strength often has positive benefits for endurance performance (especially cycling economy and sprinting), but conversely, doing lots of endurance training provides very limited help to your maximal strength—and may even slightly hinder it. So “using cycling to build strength” basically doesn’t work, while “using strength training to support cycling” is relatively viable.

Practical Management of the Interference Effect: Four Variables to Control

I’ve organized the key points for managing the interference effect into an operational table—these are the principles I actually reference when planning training:

Variable	High-Interference-Risk Approach (Avoid)	Low-Interference Approach (Recommended)
Time interval	Endurance + strength training back-to-back in the same session	Separate by ≥ 6 hours, or use different days
Order within session	Ride to exhaustion before lifting	If same day, prioritize the current primary goal first
Endurance modality	High volume of high-intensity running	Endurance dominated by cycling
Periodization	High volume of both strength and endurance year-round	Emphasize in phases: strength in off-season, specificity in race season

The Timing of Specialization: When Should You “Narrow Down”?

This is the question I get asked most: “Coach, should I keep training broadly, or just focus on cycling?”

My answer: It depends on which stage you’re at. Specialization isn’t about doing it as early as possible, nor as late as possible—it’s about narrowing down at the right time. There are two levels to discuss separately—“specialization across a training career” and “specialization within a single season’s periodization.”

Career-Level Specialization: Broad First, Then Specific

For people who are still building their foundation and have a young training age (I don’t mean chronological age, but years of serious, consistent training), I usually recommend broad first, then specific:

• Phase One (foundation, typically the first 1–2 years of consistent training): Develop a comprehensive physical base—aerobic foundation, basic strength, core stability, mobility, and varied pedaling cadences. Being broad at this point is a good thing, because you’re laying the foundation; the wider the foundation, the taller the building you can construct later. Doing some running, swimming, and strength training during this period is perfectly fine.
• Phase Two (narrowing, once the foundation is solid): When you already have a solid base and have confirmed your primary goal (for example, “I want to climb Wuling faster” or “I want to finish a triathlon”), it’s time to start tilting your training focus clearly toward the specific discipline, aligning those six levels of specificity layer by layer toward your goal.

A-hong’s problem was being stuck in Phase One and unable to get out. His foundation was actually sufficient, but he kept delaying the narrowing process and continued doing a bit of everything, so his specific ability never grew. The first thing I did for him was to cut half of the miscellaneous training, reduce spinning and swimming to maintenance frequency, and pour the freed-up time into “structured cycling workouts.”

I want to elaborate a bit on the details of A-hong’s transformation because it’s very representative. When we first started narrowing his training, A-hong was actually quite anxious. He asked me, “Coach, if I cut out swimming and jogging, won’t my fitness actually decline?” This is the fear almost everyone going through specialization has—as if doing less means losing out. I told him: “You’re not doing less; you’re concentrating the same amount of time into the places that will respond to your goals.”

In the first four weeks, we didn’t add more hard workouts—instead, we “cleared the field” first. We streamlined his chaotic six days into four days with clear purposes, with two genuine rest days. Many people don’t believe this, but A-hong’s change in the first month wasn’t getting stronger—it was becoming less fatigued. Because he had long been in a state of chronic fatigue from “training everything but never fully recovering,” his training quality was actually poor. After clearing the field, he could execute each key workout with a fresher body. Once quality went up, adaptation truly began to happen.

Over the following two months, we gradually stacked up threshold intervals and long real-road climbs. By mid-season, he reported back: “On the same climb up Fengguizui, I used to completely fall apart in the latter half; now I can maintain the pace and even accelerate slightly.”—This is the concrete response the body gives once specificity is aligned. He didn’t become “a person who can suffer more”; he became “a person who puts his effort in the right place.”

Season-Level Specialization: The Closer to Race Day, the More Specific

Within a single season’s periodization, specificity should gradually increase as race day approaches. This is one of the core logics of periodized training. I’ll use a common four-phase periodization as an example (using an amateur cyclist targeting a fall Wuling hill climb as the case):

Periodization Phase	Timing	Training Focus	Degree of Specificity
Base Phase	16–12 weeks before race	High volume Z2 aerobic, winter strength training, core	Low (broad)
Build Phase	12–6 weeks before race	Introduce threshold (FTP) workouts, long climbs	Medium
Specific Phase	6–2 weeks before race	Race-specific workouts simulating race intensity/gradient/duration	High (race-like)
Taper Phase	2–0 weeks before race	Reduce volume, maintain intensity, allow supercompensation	High but low volume

The key is the “specific phase”: your workouts here should resemble your target race as closely as possible. If your goal is a 1–2 hour long climb like Wuling, your specific workouts should be “continuous long climbs, maintaining near-race power and cadence, using the same position and gear ratios you’ll use in the race.” If your goal is a criterium with repeated accelerations and recoveries, your specific workouts should be lots of interval sprints and variable pacing—the two specific phases look completely different, because SAID tells us: you get what you train for.

Putting SAID into Practice: A Sample Weekly Schedule

Having covered all these principles, here’s a sample base-period weekly schedule I’d actually give to an amateur rider with “a solid foundation, targeting long climbs, and able to train 6–8 hours per week.” Note that this is just an example—an actual schedule must always be adjusted to the individual.

Day	Workout Content	Primary Specificity Level	Duration/Intensity Concept
Mon	Complete rest or walking	Recovery	—
Tue	Threshold intervals: 2–3 sets × 10–15 min near FTP	Level 4 (Threshold intensity)	~60–75 min
Wed	Z2 aerobic ride + 15 min core	Level 1 + Postural stability	~60 min
Thu	Strength training: heavy lower-body (squats, deadlifts, single-leg)	Level 3 (Strength)	~45–60 min
Fri	Recovery ride (very easy) or rest	Recovery	~30–45 min
Sat	Climbing-specific: real mountain roads, simulating race pace	Levels 4, 5, 6	~120–180 min
Sun	Long-distance Z2 endurance ride	Level 1	~120–180 min

Let me explain a few design principles specifically:

• Strength training is placed on Thursday, separated from Saturday’s climbing-specific session, to avoid interference effects dragging down both key workouts.
• Tuesday’s threshold session and Saturday’s specific session are the week’s two “hard” workouts, with Z2 and recovery rides as buffers in between.
• Core and posture work is woven into aerobic days, addressing that Level 6 “postural muscle endurance for long hours on the bike”—something many overlook, yet it’s what determines whether you fall apart after four hours.

Common Mistakes and Fixes

In all my years coaching athletes, I’ve found people step on the same specificity landmines with remarkable consistency. Here are the six most common ones.

Mistake 1: Feeling good about “total training volume” while training the wrong level

This is Ahong. Lots of time accumulated, lots of sweat, impressive Strava numbers—but it’s all piled into the same level he’s already maxed out (low-intensity aerobic), while the high-intensity and specific work that’s needed remains empty. Fix: Regularly ask yourself, “Are my recent workouts actually training the level where I’m weakest and that my race demands most?”

Mistake 2: Treating cross-training as a substitute for specific work

“I don’t have time to ride this week—an hour on the spin bike at the gym should be the same, right?”—No, it isn’t. Spinning can maintain your Level 1 aerobic base, but pedaling position, real-road variability, descending and cornering, and long-duration postural muscle endurance all go untrained. Fix: Position cross-training as “base maintenance” and “post-injury transition,” not as an equivalent replacement for specific sessions.

Mistake 3: Using the same schedule year-round

The body gradually adapts to a fixed stimulus to the point where “no further progress is required.” Without periodization across the year, specificity doesn’t increase as the season progresses, and performance naturally plateaus. Fix: Introduce periodization so specificity rises as race day approaches (refer back to the four-phase table above).

Mistake 4: Only training on the trainer, never on real roads

Power numbers on the trainer are impressive, but the moment you hit a climb, you’re fumbling. That’s because the trainer lacks Level 6 contextual specificity—road vibration, wind resistance, cornering, changing gradients, pacing decisions. Fix: The specific phase must include real-road sessions, especially on terrain similar to your target event (if you live in Taipei, make good use of Yangmingshan and Fengguizui; central and southern Taiwan have plenty of excellent long climbs).

Mistake 5: Avoiding strength training entirely out of fear of “getting heavy and slow”

Many endurance enthusiasts harbor an irrational fear of lifting weights. In reality, moderate maximal strength training benefits pedaling economy and sprinting, and the interference effect is relatively mild for cyclists. Fix: Schedule 1–2 heavy lower-body sessions per week in the off-season. Don’t be afraid.

Mistake 6: Misinterpreting “specificity” as “only cycling is allowed, nothing else”

This is the other extreme. Specificity doesn’t mean becoming a one-dimensional athlete with a weak core, poor mobility, and prone to injury from a simple fall. Fix: Make specific work the priority, but retain the necessary “general fitness” and “injury prevention” training (core, mobility, contralateral limb balance)—these are the foundation that supports long-term development of specific abilities.

Actionable Advice for Riders at Different Levels

The practical focus of the specificity principle differs by stage. Find where you fit.

If you’re a beginner (riding regularly < 1 year)

• Don’t rush into specialization. At this stage, build a broad base first: develop a consistent riding habit, establish your aerobic foundation, learn basic pedaling and shifting, and add some core and mobility work.
• Cross-training (brisk walking, swimming, light strength work) is a plus for you right now, because you’re still laying the foundation.
• Remember just one thing: first aim for “consistency without injury.” The fine-tuning of specificity comes later.

If you’re an intermediate (training regularly 1–3 years, with clear goals)

• Start narrowing. Identify your primary goal (long climbs? criteriums? long-distance?), and tilt your schedule toward the specificity levels that serve that direction.
• Introduce periodization, distinguishing base, build, specific, and taper phases.
• Target the level where you’re weakest and your race demands most—usually not your aerobic base, but threshold intensity or specific race context.

If you’re advanced (years of training, looking to break through a plateau)

• Plateaus often come from specificity that’s too narrow or stimulus that’s too fixed. Check whether you’ve been cycling through the same workouts for years.
• Use finer granularity to find the gaps: Is your cadence range too narrow? Is your tolerance for specific gradients insufficient? Does your postural muscle endurance collapse in the latter part of races?
• The art of tapering (reducing volume, maintaining intensity, nailing the timing of supercompensation) is often what separates riders at this stage.

In Practice: How to Self-Diagnose “Which Level Is Weakest”

Knowing there are six levels isn’t enough—the real skill lies in identifying the level where you’re weakest and your race demands most, then pouring your resources into it. Here are the diagnostic questions I commonly use with athletes; you can apply them to your own riding experience:

• When you “blow up” in a race or workout, what kind of blow-up is it? Is it your lungs giving out (possibly insufficient Level 4 high-intensity tolerance)? Or do your legs lock up first (possibly insufficient Level 3 specific strength or Level 1 local muscular endurance)? The two types of failure require completely different levels to address.
• Do you lose speed when the pace changes? If you can’t follow when the group surges, or you fall apart when the gradient steepens, it may be a narrow Level 5 cadence range—you’ve only trained one rhythm.
• Strong early, collapse late? If power drops in the latter half, it’s mostly an endurance or pacing issue; if your posture gives out—back pain, neck soreness—causing output to decline, that’s a Level 6 postural muscle endurance gap.
• Strong on the trainer, struggling on real roads? This is almost a textbook symptom of Level 6 contextual specificity, meaning what you lack is real-road experience, not engine size.

Once you’ve found the answer, the next six to eight weeks of training should be designed around that weakest level. This is far more effective than “just riding more.” As I often say, the wisdom of training isn’t in doing more, but in knowing exactly which piece needs to be filled right now.

A Local Note from Taiwan

Taiwan’s training environment has several distinctive features worth considering when applying SAID:

• Hot and humid climate: Summer afternoons are often muggy and rainy, so high-intensity specific sessions are best scheduled in the early morning. If your target event falls in the hot season, a degree of “heat acclimatization” is itself a form of specificity—no matter how well you train on an indoor trainer in an air-conditioned room, race-day heat tolerance is a different matter.
• Eating out and nutrition: Eating out is convenient in Taiwan, but refined carbohydrates, oil, and sodium tend to be high. For post-long-ride recovery meals, pay attention to the carbohydrate-to-protein ratio and electrolyte replenishment after heavy sweating. Individual needs vary, so consult a nutritionist when necessary.
• Choosing your terrain: In the north, Yangmingshan and Fengguizui, and in central and southern Taiwan, numerous long climbs, are excellent venues for specific climbing sessions. Riverside bike paths in urban areas suit Z2 aerobic and cadence work. Using the路段 most similar to your target event for your specific-phase schedule is the highest level of specificity.
• Healthcare access: Taiwan’s National Health Insurance makes medical care easily accessible. If you experience persistent joint pain, unusual chest tightness, dizziness, or prolonged fatigue that fails to resolve after training, do not push through with “specificity training”—seek medical evaluation promptly. Those with chronic conditions (such as hypertension, heart disease, or diabetes) must discuss with a physician and undergo individualized assessment before starting or adjusting a training plan; medication and exercise intensity need professional oversight.

FAQ

Q: I have very little time—only three sessions a week. Do I still need to worry about specificity?
A: The less time you have, the more important specificity becomes. With limited time, you can’t afford to spread your hours across levels unrelated to your goal. Three sessions precisely aimed at the level you need most will yield far more than six scattered sessions.

Q: So should I do strength training or not?
A: For the vast majority of riders, 1–2 lower-body strength sessions per week in the off-season are worth it, and the interference effect on riders is relatively mild. Just schedule them away from your key hard riding sessions—don’t cram them into the same session or back-to-back time slots.

Q: Is cross-training completely useless?
A: Not useless—it has a ceiling. It’s good for maintaining central cardiovascular fitness and as a substitute when injured or in bad weather, but it cannot replace low-level (movement patterns, cadence, positional) specific adaptations. Positioned correctly, cross-training is very valuable.

Q: If I train with specificity, will I become “good only at cycling and terrible at everything else”?
A: If you maintain basic core work, mobility, and general fitness, you usually won’t be terrible at anything—and your specific ability will clearly improve. Specificity is about where you place your “emphasis,” not “this is the only thing you’re allowed to do.”

Q: Can an indoor trainer (smart roller) completely replace riding outdoors?
A: A trainer can do levels 1–5 (aerobic, intensity, cadence, strength-oriented pedaling) very well—in fact, without traffic lights and descents, it’s easier to hold steady power. But it cannot train level 6, contextual specificity—real-road wind resistance, road vibration, cornering, changing gradients, pacing decisions, and the neck, shoulder, and lower-back load of prolonged outdoor positions. My advice: use the trainer heavily for high-efficiency intensity sessions during the week, but in the pre-race specific phase, you must return to real roads similar to your target event to refine the context. The two complement each other; it’s not an either/or choice.

Q: I commute by bike every day. Does that count as training? Can I get stronger from it?
A: Commuting is valuable for “maintaining base aerobic fitness” and “building consistency,” but its intensity, duration, and context usually don’t align with any race goal, so breaking through your performance ceiling through commuting alone is difficult. You can position commuting as “extra aerobic foundation and daily activity,” but to truly improve, you still need structured, specific key sessions.

Q: I’m older (50+). Does the specificity principle still apply?
A: Absolutely. The principle doesn’t change with age, but the proportion of “side dishes” needs adjustment. As you age, muscle loss (sarcopenia) and declining mobility require more proactive countermeasures, so even if you’re endurance-focused, it’s more advisable to keep regular strength and mobility work as side dishes. Recovery typically takes longer, so space your hard sessions further apart. If you have chronic conditions or take medication, discuss with your physician before starting.

Conclusion: Spend Your Limited Time Where It Pays You Back

Back to A-Hong. After we narrowed his training from “a bit of everything” to “structured, periodized, aimed at long climbs,” within about one season his FTP went from 210 W to nearly 250 W, and his Wuling climb time improved noticeably. What he did wasn’t “trying harder”—it was being more precise. He sent his body clear, consistent signals, and his body responded clearly and concretely.

That’s the most practical part of the SAID principle. It’s not some profound theory; it’s an honest mirror. It forces you to look at where you’re actually spending your time and whether what you’re asking your body to do is what you truly want to get better at.

If you feel stuck for a long time, take the six-level table, the interference-effect management table, and the periodization table from this article, and check them against your own training log item by item. You’ll likely find that the problem isn’t that you’re not working hard enough—it’s that your effort hasn’t yet been aimed at a direction that can truly respond.

Spend your limited time where it pays you back. Your body is honest—train for something, and that’s what you get.

Finally, here’s a three-step self-check checklist you can execute immediately, starting this week: First, write down one concrete goal you most want to achieve in the next three to six months (the more specific, the better—e.g., “finish in the front of my category at Wuling” rather than “get stronger”). Second, against the six-level table in this article, honestly circle the level where you’re currently weakest and that this goal needs most. Third, schedule at least one to two sessions per week specifically targeting that level, while maintaining your base, keeping necessary side dishes, and recovering well in the remaining time. Complete these three steps, and you’re already far ahead of most people who are “working hard but without direction.” The training road is long, but as long as your direction is right, every bit of investment counts. Your body will eventually honestly repay every ounce of your effort and persistence. May you pedal steadily and ride far on the goal you’ve chosen.

---

This article is educational content and does not replace individual diagnosis or treatment advice from a physician, physical therapist, or nutritionist.

References

• Specificity of training adaptation: time for a rethink? — https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2375570/
• The effects, mechanisms, and influencing factors of concurrent strength and endurance training with different sequences: a semi-systematic review — https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/sports-and-active-living/articles/10.3389/fspor.2025.1692399/full

Related Reading

• The SAID Principle: The First Principle of Training Adaptation
• Seasonalizing Power Training: Intensity Distribution from Base to Pre-Race
• The Evolution of Periodization Theory: Evidence and Practice from Linear, Block, to Daily Undulating
• Overload and Progression Principles: The First Law of Training Adaptation—Make Your Body Stronger, Not Injured