Jeff Fejfar won Ultraman Florida in 2022. It was one of the greatest examples of exceptional athlete execution that I have personally been witness to. All three days of racing, Jeff was continually on point, present, and focused.

In the original post of this series, I gave an overview of how I came to develop my concept of the performance equation. As a reminder, that equation is:

Preparation + Opportunity + Execution = Performance

I followed the first post with two more that expanded upon the elements of preparation and opportunity which you can find below:

Performance Equation Part II: Preparation

Performance Equation Part III: Opportunity

If you have not read the previous posts, I would recommend doing so as we will now take a deeper dive into the third element of the performance equation: execution.

Execution

When discussing execution in the context of the performance equation, it might be tempting to see that variable as being overly weighted when observing the final outcome. This is quite understandable, and maybe even true in some ways, but I hope I have made a strong enough argument in the previous posts to establish that performance cannot occur in the absence of preparation and opportunity. In fact, while I have structured the components of performance into an equation for the sake of explanation, it could be just as easily described a series of steps such that:

Preparation -> Opportunity -> Execution -> Performance

So what exactly do I mean when I talk about execution in the context of the performance equation?

To begin, it starts with an athlete understanding what it is that they want to do in a competition.

Now this might seem obvious, but I have often found that many athletes may have a preference for the outcome they desire (e.g., win, podium, place,, etc.), but they have not fully developed a path/strategy/plan towards achieving that.

Wanting to win and developing a strategy (to execute) to win are not the same thing.

Keeping in mind the need for a winning strategy, think back to Bobby McGee’s 90/9/1 Principle. Bobby’s central point is the dearth of athletes that can consistently transfer their abilities and fitness they have showcased in their preparation when they compete.

In other words, most athletes train better than they race.

There can be many reasons for why this is the case, but I think a really important starting point is ensuring that an athlete has specific intentions and strategies that give tangible targets to be executed.

Couple things to think about here.

First, strategies within a competition can range from flexible to rigid, but the point is that they give the athlete an intention for them to follow.

For example, a runner in a distance race could have a goal to stick with the front pack through the first third of a race regardless of the pace that is set which could mean the athlete is running faster, slower, or exactly as they prefer. However, if the race goes out fast and the athlete backs off, they would have failed to execute their plan. Or if the race goes out slow and they take off because they got impatient, that would also suggest suboptimal execution.

On the other hand, this same runner could have a plan to run X pace through the first third of the race, which would mean that they plan to hit a specific time regardless of the tactics that are playing out around them. However, if they got caught up in an early fast pace and went through the first third too quickly, they would have failed to execute their plan, just as they would if they went through the first third too slowly because they did not want to run off the front.

In both of the examples above, one the biggest problems that occurs in the execution phase is not seeing a strategy through before determining its effectiveness.

This presents a confounding paradox because making adjustments while competing is certainly a valuable skill that successful athletes develop, but it’s also difficult to get to that stage when athletes hesitate to execute their plans from the start.

Second, sequential strategies can play a major role in the execution phase of performance.

Let’s imagine a swimmer that competes in the 200 Individual Medley, which consists of 50 meters of four strokes: butterfly, backstroke, breaststroke, and freestyle.

This same imaginary swimmer has a PR of 2:25 with splits of 35/37/40/33 (seconds) in each stroke and wants to lower their PR to 2:20 to qualify for a regional competition.

Based on the splits they have already seen in their 2:25 PR, the swimmer decides that they want to try and be more aggressive on the first 150 and swim 34/35/38, while banking on the ability to still hold 33 for the final free even though they will be under more fatigue.

Race day comes and the swimmer manages to hit all three splits on the first 150:

34 in the fly, 35 in back, 37 in the breast….

but the swimmer fades in the last 50 free and swims a 34, giving them a PR of 2:21, but still one second short of the regional qualifying goal time.

Now the athlete did fail to execute the last 50 in 33 seconds, but they did do everything they needed to do to put them in a position to where swimming 33 seconds would actually still matter to their plan.

This is an example of how sequential execution plays a role in performance and how successful execution in each phase of a competition unlocks the chances of the opportunity for success in the next stage.

+++

Staying Present

In addition to strategy development and sequential execution demands, athletes that are successful in the execution phase of performance are typically highly skilled at remaining present while performing. There are countless ways for the mind to get distracted from any task at hand, particularly while engaged in sport where a loss of focus, or misplacing one’s focus (e.g., how I feel as opposed to what I’m doing), can diminish one’s performance.

One common mainstream discussion often associated with this level of focus is achieving flow state. However, I often think that flow state often gets misused in performance discussion when it becomes a goal rather than an outcome and an observation after-the-fact. That’s because bringing attention to flow state makes achieving flow state nearly impossible.

In other words,

The first rule about flow state is you don’t talk about flow state.

Instead, I think of the association of flow state with high performance as a nearly perfect alignment of one’s skills and fitness and the challenges of the competition. Then, alongside this homeostatic state, time and effort may subsequently seem to disappear.

However, being in this perfect balance is not a given, nor do I think it is always required for high performance. Instead, I think what matters more is that athletes with superior execution skills are able to continually get themselves back into a present moment focus when their mind pulls them away.

So while they may or may not be a consistent flow state, they are able to more readily place them in the conditions that may result in it. Even when it is multiple times within one competition.

Basically, excellent execution encompasses being continually focused on the here and now.

+++

Finally, I want to finish with a concept that might be called something like:

Value-Driven Execution

That term is a work in progress, but the concept is something that I think about a lot, particularly in the realm of high performance endurance athletics.

When attempting to achieve high performance in endurance sports, it will often be required to undergo a level of discomfort to achieve it.

I believe the willingness to undergo that discomfort and continue to execute a race plan is enhanced when an athlete understands the values that drive them towards seeking excellence through their performance.

One of the beauties (at least, in my opinion) of high performance endurance athletics is that athletes are put into a position of (often) increasing discomfort and all they have to do to make it go away is stop (or even just slow down).

Just stop doing what you are doing and you’ll be comfortable again.

And yet, the greatest athletes are continually finding reasons to persevere in those conditions and making the choice to not back down.

This is execution at its finest.

And I believe that the athletes that can execute under (extreme) duress are driven by something deep within themselves.

Yesterday, I was having a conversation with a mentor of mine about the evolution of goal setting within an athlete’s career and he said something along the lines:

The goals will change, but the values remain.

While the context was slightly outside the scope of execution, I think it ties back nicely into this conversation as the concept applies equally.

The circumstances under which an athlete seeks to execute high performance will change and it is the values that drive them that will help them to continually succeed, grow, and progress.

+++

In the final part of this series, I will finish with some of ideas of what athletes can do in the aftermath of performances to help them reflect, assess, and learn.

Performance Equation Part IV: Execution

Performance Equation Part III: Opportunity