Dimosthenis Gallis

04/09/2026

30/08/2026

Are we diagnosing “Overtraining Syndrome” far too easily?
Every tired athlete seems to be at risk of being labelled by himmself or and his coach overtrained.
For example,
Poor performance? Overtraining.
High fatigue? Overtraining.
Bad legs for a week? Overtraining.
But here’s the uncomfortable part:
A systematic review investigating Overtraining Syndrome (OTS) found zero studies that actually met the authors' criteria for objectively documenting and diagnosing true OTS. Zero.
So we should ask ourselves:
How often are we really seeing Overtraining Syndrome and how often are we simply seeing normal fatigue, overreaching, inadequate recovery, poor nutrition, lack of sleep, psychological stress, illness, or other factors?
True OTS is supposed to involve a prolonged suppression of performance despite recovery, together with psychological maladaptation. It is not simply being tired after a hard training block.
Maybe the word “overtraining” has become one of the most casually used terms in coaching.
Lets be clear, for sure that doesn't mean OTS doesn't exist.
It means that we should be much more careful before claiming that an athlete has it. Not every tired athlete is overtrained.
And perhaps the real question is this,
Are we sometimes diagnosing OTS simply because we don't have a better explanation for an athlete's fatigue and underperformance?

The link to the full systematic review is in the first comment.

11/08/2026

Training doesn't always need to be harder, newer or more complicated to be better.

Sometimes better training is about doing less and doing it better. One of the traps in endurance training is the belief that progress always requires something new, for example a different workout, more data, more complexity, more intensity.
I am convinced that the opposite is often true.
A few things are worth remembering:

Repeat key sessions. Familiar workouts give us something valuable: a real reference point. When the session is no longer a puzzle, we can focus on pacing, ex*****on and improvement.

Don’t recover because the calendar tells you to. A recovery week is not automatically needed just because three weeks have passed. Training load, sleep, work and life stress all matter. Recovery should respond to the athlete, not just the spreadsheet.

Don’t copy professionals blindly. A pro’s training is built around a very different context: years of training, enormous training volume, recovery as part of the job, and a specific physiology. Copying the session without copying the context makes little sense.

Make easy days genuinely easy. The temptation to turn every ride into a “productive” one is strong. But constantly riding in the middle can leave you too tired for quality work while providing little additional benefit.

Use data, don’t become a slave to it. Power, HR, HRV, sleep scores and readiness metrics are useful. But they are tools for understanding the athlete — not substitutes for understanding the athlete.

Perhaps the most effective training is not the training that looks the most impressive on Training Peaks.
It is the training that is simple enough to repeat, flexible enough to adapt, and hard enough when it needs to be hard.

More consistency.
Better ex*****on.
There is where a lot of progress happens.

D.G

29/06/2026

ℝ𝕖𝕤𝕡𝕠𝕟𝕕𝕖𝕣𝕤 𝕒𝕟𝕕 ℕ𝕠𝕟 ℝ𝕖𝕤𝕡𝕠𝕟𝕕𝕖𝕣𝕤

I don't believe there are many true non-responders. More often, there are slow responders and fast responders. If your training load is too low, you may simply not be providing enough stimulus to adapt.
The key question is: What training load do you need to respond?
For some athletes, it's more volume and for others, it's more intensity. For many, it's a combination of both. There is no universal answer, it depends on the individual.

Training doesn't happen in isolation. Don’t forget your sleep, nutrition, stress, recovery, and lifestyle all influence how well you adapt because context matters.

Every adaptation, more mitochondria, increased cardiac output, greater strength, or improved endurance, starts with a training signal. The body then responds by adapting. Genetics influence how quickly this happens, but everyone has the potential to improve.

The first requirement is consistency. Without it, adaptation is unlikely. However, doing the same thing forever eventually leads to stagnation. The challenge is knowing when to stay the course and when to change the stimulus.

A training diary can be one of your best tools. When progress slows, look back at your training, sleep, nutrition, and stress before making changes. Often, the answer is found there.

Remember, adaptation isn't linear. Some weeks you improve, some weeks you don't. The goal isn't to chase rapid progress, but to find the right training dose that allows you to improve consistently while staying healthy.

D.G

16/05/2026

The Psychology of Pain in Endurance Performance

Pain tolerance alone does not explain why elite endurance athletes perform differently.
Recent research on ultra-endurance athletes suggests something more nuanced:
elite performers do not necessarily feel less pain than others.
They often relate to it differently.
Studies on ultra-endurance athletes and pain coping show that elite performers tend to:
• Reframe pain instead of catastrophizing it
• Maintain a stronger sense of control under stress
• Use adaptive coping strategies instead of reactive ones
• Treat discomfort as information, not immediately as danger
Two concepts repeatedly appear in the literature:
→ Self-efficacy
(the belief that “I can handle this situation”)
→ Locus of control
(whether someone feels they can influence outcomes vs being controlled by external circumstances)
Athletes with a stronger internal locus of control tend to remain proactive under stress: adjust pacing, solve problems, regulate emotions, keep moving forward.
Interestingly, some studies suggest that maladaptive coping strategies correlate more strongly with dropout risk than pain itself.
In other words:
the interpretation of suffering may matter more than the suffering alone.
This applies far beyond sport.
Training, rehabilitation, leadership and high performance environments often reward the ability to regulate perception under stress — not simply “toughness.”
Some interesting papers/reviews on the topic:
• “Human Resilience and Pain Coping Strategies”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40676392/
• Springer review on resilience, self-efficacy & locus of control in ultra-endurance athletes
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-025-02277-4
• Review on locus of control and chronic pain coping
https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4426/12/2/232

“Pain is inevitable. Suffering is optional.”

A cliché perhaps — but psychologically, there may be more truth to it than we once thought.

The biopsychosocial paradigm contemplates the patient’s personality traits in physiotherapy treatments for chronic pain. Among these traits, the locus of control has a direct relationship with the person’s coping strategies in the face of their health problems. The objective of this systematic r...

04/04/2026

Training load isn’t just numbers—it’s exposure.What matters is not only what the athlete does (external load), but how the body responds to it (internal load). Performance, fatigue, and injury risk are driven by this interaction, not by metrics alone.Two key ideas:• Dose: the stress that actually reaches the athlete• Dose–response: how the athlete adapts (or fails to adapt) to that stressIf we only react to fatigue or injury after they appear, we’ve already missed the point. The real leverage is in shaping exposure—building tolerance, improving readiness, and reducing maladaptation before problems occur.Better coaching starts with better questions:How much? How hard? How often? And how is the athlete responding?

D.G

23/03/2026

Periodisation
is a hot topic this time of year. Traditionally, we think of structured progressions, building volume across the season, peaking for competition, and usually using 3:1 loading cycles with a recovery week. This model works well, especially for athletes with high training availability and flexibility.
But what happens when time is limited?
If an athlete consistently has, fo example, 6–8 hours per week and can tolerate that load without excessive fatigue, it may not make sense to artificially reduce training every fourth week. In these cases, a “flat” training approach (sometimes called a basic week) can be more effective.
Instead of chasing variability for its own sake, the goal becomes consistency. Repeating a sustainable weekly load allows for steady adaptation, better routine, and often fewer interruptions. Fitness doesn’t always come from big swings in load but sometimes it comes from showing up, week after week. Consistency.
Then, when life allows for extra time like holidays, lighter work periods or training camps you can introduce overload more organically. A temporary increase in volume can stimulate further adaptation, followed by appropriate recovery.
This shifts the focus from rigid planning to responsive coaching.
Recovery, in this model, becomes “on demand.” Rather than scheduling it every few weeks regardless of need, you adjust based on real signals: accumulating fatigue, declining performance, or simply mental burnout. Occasionally, a lighter week is still useful, especially after longer uninterrupted blocks, but it doesn’t have to follow a strict calendar.
For many athletes balancing work, family, and training, this approach is not only practical, it’s sustainable.
And in the long run, sustainability is what drives performance.

D,G

13/02/2026

Proud to join this expert team as Cycling Coach for the Triathlon Preparation Courses in Zurich.

09/02/2026

𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴

After watching one of my athletes deliver a strong finish in a bike race yesterday, it felt like the right moment to reflect on a topic that comes up often in coaching: balancing training with parenting.

Parenting and training, there is no perfect balance only good decisions made repeatedly.

Once you become a parent, the structure, predictability, and control you once had over your training largely disappear. What replaces them is complexity, uncertainty, and constant adaptation , a reality often underestimated in performance-focused environments.

A key shift is understanding the difference between finding time and making time. Parents rarely “find” time to train. Training happens only when it is intentionally planned and realistically integrated into daily life. That often means early mornings, shorter sessions, and accepting that not every workout will go as planned. This shift alone can reduce frustration and self-criticism.

Illness is another unavoidable factor. Children get sick. Parents get sick. Sleep is disrupted. Training plans are interrupted. Earlier in my coaching career, I was often too strict during these periods, especially with parent-athletes. I treated missed sessions as a discipline issue. Over time, I realised this approach was ineffective and unfair to them.

Progress in endurance sport is not defined by perfect weeks, but by consistency over long timeframes. Missing sessions does not erase months of work. Reacting poorly to interruptions usually does more damage than the interruption itself.

Guilt is perhaps the most challenging element. Some parents feel guilty when training takes time away from family; others feel guilty for not training “enough.” I once underestimated how heavy this mental load can be. Training is neither selfish nor obligatory ,it must fit within a broader life context.

Managing expectations is critical. Performance levels achieved before children may not be realistic in the short term, and that reflects a different life phase, not a lack of ambition. Fitness can be rebuilt. Relationships, health, and trust are far harder to restore once neglected. Experienced athletes learn to think in seasons rather than weeks.

Partner and family support plays a central role. Sustainable training rarely happens in isolation. It requires communication, planning, and flexibility. As a coach, I have learned that pushing harder is rarely the solution. Integration works better than confrontation.

Challenges do not disappear as children grow, they change. Infants disrupt sleep. School-age children fill calendars. Teenagers demand emotional energy. The answer is not more discipline, but smarter adaptation. Training methods must evolve alongside life circumstances.

From a coaching perspective, this is where experience matters. Designing an “ideal” program is easy. Designing one that survives real life is the real skill. Training does not need to be maximal to be effective, it needs to be repeatable.

For parent-athletes: struggling with training does not mean you are falling behind. Often, it means you are developing efficiency, patience, and perspective.

For coaches: context matters. Empathy is not optional.

Parenting and training are not opposing forces. They coexist. Some seasons allow for ambition; others call for restraint. In the long run, those who respect both processes tend to thrive.

D.G