Obviously the ultimate purpose of the training has to be considered but for [i]most[/i] riders there's no need for lots of level 2.
Been [i]thinking[/i] a lot about training recently as currently doing some very unstructured stuff. Went to a Q&A session with some pros last week and they were saying that the idea of slow winter base training is seen as quite out dated these days, which makes me wander if the Joe Friel book is somewhat out of line with modern thinking (I haven't read it yet and have been leant an older copy so maybe I'm being unfair...) - any opinions?
Read this the other day
[url= http://biketechreview.com/performance/supply/47-base-a-new-definition ]Base: A New Definition [/url]
LSD, (Long Slow Distance), training is what Pro's do, as Pro's have the time available for this type of training.
Us lot, who work 40+ hours a week, can not replicate Pro style training, therefore we need to adapt it to fit our 8, 10, 12 hours a week training schedules.
That said I did a lot of technique work in Zone 2 last winter, one leg drils etc, this worked well and killed time whilst it snowed for 3 months.
So what's the current thinking for someone with say, 12 hours a week, to train for a 24 solo or 7 day stage event next summer?
In the past I've followed the base/build/peak cycle, but when time was limited this year I kind of skipped the base part and spent 10 weeks on the Chris Carmichael time-crunched cyclist plan.
I have heard the theories for both approaches so I'm interested in some views.
Obviously the ultimate purpose of the training has to be considered but for most riders there's no need for lots of level 2.
care to elaborate further (or do i have to pay for some expert idave advice/insight 😉
it's so easy to get caught up in all the advice and guidance out there and trying to do the right thing. I know everyone is different and each person responds differently to training.
Agree with the new base approach above and that is my experience to. There is no easy short cut. Physiological adaptation for power and VO2 only happens when the body is stressed above its normal level. There is also more to endurance than training. I should mention good diet and rest are also needed. I hit the trails regularly throughout the winter to keep my skill level but not for training. Better weather sees me doing more on trails and setting some micro goals along the way. Events normally, 12 hour solo, 100km+ CX or enduros. These help to build the psychological strength and knowledge you need to go big. Also allows you to practice eating and drinking. I would also suggest that you train in your event clothes and boots. All this together can have a tremendous boost to your ability level.
Hours at zone 2 give very few exclusive fitness gains - you can get fitter/faster, in less time with a different approach. Even training to be efficient at fat burning can be achieved by certain interval sessions at certain times.
IMO many coaches prescribe zone 2 as it fills time in a schedule and makes it look like they're earning their fee's. I'd rather make efficient use of a clients time, but of course some can't see that I've saved them x hours per week. They think that paying for training means there should be lots of training rather than the minimum effective amount which is closer to my approach.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the idea of Z2 training to ride in you fat burning zone and over time you will naturally get faster/ stronger within this zone therefore being able to ride faster for longer and eliminating the chance of going into you sugar burning zones too early as tempo increases? Also doesn't this reduce the gap between Z2 and you LT zone?
I may have missed the point and be talking complete horlicks!
therefore being able to ride faster for longer and eliminating the chance of going into you sugar burning zones too early as tempo increases?
What if tempo is high at the start of whatever event it is you're describing?
As for a 'lactate threshold', it was discredited in the 80's when I was a mere student. Can't believe it's still being thrown around.
There is a threshold and it's 'causes' are numerous - including psychological factors.
Interesting read - started thinking about HR zone training as I've just returned to racing after a year off with a busted collar bone. Never really thought about training certain zones, just went for a ride - but would really like to improve for next season.
I don't think I would find it physically possible to ride at zone 2.... I did the 4hr rd1 BM on sunday - I went out far to fast (for me), ended up with severe cramps after about 2.5hrs of averaging zone 4.5 and spent the next 2hrs in lots of pain - is this my lactic threashold then?
Does anyone fancy spending 5 mins looking at my garmin trace and recommending me what I need to work on?
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/131322194
I've just ordered the Joe Friel book to get a better understanding
beej your plan is correct. But why compress it? Start your base now. You can then enter the build phase at a much higher level and so step up to peak at a higher level that way you will achieve a higher level fitness. I try to maintain a good base all year. In all stages your always trying to build, rest build. But see my comments about a holistic approach.
DT From post its your LT. Essential you were working at or over your LT. Once in the sugar burn zone you consume water and energy faster than your body can usefully replace it and lactic acid builds up leading to your cramps. Slowing slightly and raising your LT will combat this problem. Your LT, depending on how you measure will be a % or bpm of your MHR. I use % as its easier to remember. 70% - 80% Zone 3 80% - 90% Zone 4. My LTs about 80 - 85% depending on tiredness. On long enduros I use electrolyte drinks, carbo food and salt sandwiches to combat cramps - works for me and its a favourite 🙂 Also steady warm up and down helps. You started out way too fast for your fitness level and hit near your maximum HR is first 10 mins then went down hill. P.S I know that area well 🙂
As for a 'lactate threshold', it was discredited in the 80's when I was a mere student. Can't believe it's still being thrown around.
It's more than thrown around.
In what way has it been discredited?
There are many theories. I started out on the LSD plan but I have turned to the dark side as I see more benefit for shorter time spent training.
I think training should be driven by goals or your plans will just not make sense. For most effect you need to measure and monitor and adapt plans based on performance results. That to me seems obvious? There are many factors that go in to gaining superior performance as I mentioned. Not just the adoption of a single theory of everything for that refer to Steven Hawking 😉
i've found a really effective way to get into the fat burning zone (or rather train your body to burn fuel more effectivley) is to train on an empty stomach - first thing in the morning for a couple of hours is idea
i tried this on gut instinct (pun intended) many years ago when i used to race xc, i was forever getting the bonk - and this approach really worked well
as an aside, i read that Pro roadies are increasingly doing these sessions*
* but as a disclaimer - what works for me, may not work for you
Winter base miles? It's only when you have bonked so hard you forget the way home that you know you've had a good session
[url= http://twitter.com/MTFU_Training ]http://twitter.com/MTFU_Training[/url]
Thanks for the feedback PB - yep knew I went out too fast, got carried away at the start - only my second race in as many years so I haven't got the right race thinking yet - I just hate letting people past when I know I can go faster even if going faster means I suffer badly later on.
Takes real willpower to pace yourself properly. I have the garmin beep at me angrily when the HR goes over 180 - still haven't learnt!
P_B - I started my first base period this week, things are slightly complicated by my main goal being mid August - previously I've done 3 months base/ 2 months build then a 2 week peak. I've put an "A" race in for the start of April as well so that I don't spend then next 5 months just doing base work.
Current weekly plan is 2 weights sessions (strength), some low power sprints for leg speed, single/dominant leg work for technique and a couple of zone 2-3 rides of 2-3 hours each.
DT78 - This/last year (2011) for Training I basically rode/re rode the distances on MTB that I was racing ie 50k etc using Endomondo to record / improve my times.
Doing that repetitively I established my own average KPH for the ride, lopped off 1kmh for the race and rode at that pace (about 16kph this year) for the first half of the race.
I then upped the average 1kph for the third 25%, then went as fast as I could finish for the last 25k.
I picked up loads of places at the end. I was given this advice and it worked for me, my highest result was a 2.25 50k and 4th place.
It depends whose riding of course - same strategy at the Gorrick 50 left me in 33rd - although in thats case I like to think places 1-32 were Team Torq riders.... 🙂
TBH though there are other factors - at the Gorrick which was very dry, I got beaten up by the trail and felt very uncomfortable on my HT and should have taken a FS, my third lap was aweful, based on the fact I was beaten to death, rather than aerobically exhausted.
Note, I didnt use a Road bike this year, or start training for events until about 27 December last year so I consider my performance to be "not bad" considering. Road bikes to me are a new concept only 3 months or so old....
Received my Joe Friel book at lunch time. Is it a training book that need to be rear all the way through to gain an understanding or one that you pick parts of to suit your needs?
The threshold is not a lactate threshold, nor an 'anaerobic' threshold. It's simply an intensity threshold the level of which and causes of which vary daily. And the actual definition in terms of trying to establish 'where' it is isn't clear. If you base it on a 30 minute test, what's the relevance to a sportive? If you base it on a one hour value, what's the relevance to a 24?
Is it a training book that need to be rear all the way through to gain an understanding or one that you pick parts of to suit your needs?
I read mine cover to cover, (its an easy and quick read if you've got prior knowledge of training principles), then when back and re-read the more interesting bits and started to piece together a plan.
The threshold is not a lactate threshold
By this do you mean you don't use lactate threshold or don't believe there is one?
(i am a little confused by your statement)
The threshold is not a lactate threshold, nor an 'anaerobic' threshold. It's simply an intensity threshold the level of which and causes of which vary daily
So would training for threshold be more suited to the type of racing you'll be doing and the hardest possible scenario? i.e. if its for hour long closed circuit road racing then that would be your training goal?
What I mean is that levels of lactate in the blood are not a good indicator that you're at an intensity (threshold) that you can sustain when you ride. Exercising muscle doesn't just switch from one fuel to another or from oxygen dependent metabolism to non-oxygen dependent. It's a big messy flow and flux with many contributing factors. The most important role of lactate during exercise is fuel. It's not the bogeyman.
Any coach who dresses up their service in psuedo-science is misleading themselves about how the complexity of how the body operates under physical stress. We know much less about it than we don't know.
Hours at zone 2 give very few exclusive fitness gains - you can get fitter/faster, in less time with a different approach. Even training to be efficient at fat burning can be achieved by certain interval sessions at certain times.IMO many coaches prescribe zone 2 as it fills time in a schedule and makes it look like they're earning their fee's. I'd rather make efficient use of a clients time, but of course some can't see that I've saved them x hours per week. They think that paying for training means there should be lots of training rather than the minimum effective amount which is closer to my approach.
I agree with this (I am a distance runner and only cycle a bit) but from a running point of view IMO there are only trivial benefits to be had by running "easy" (probably in the Z2 range although similar effort when running often translates into a slightly higher HR) these benefits may be weight loss and small benefits to cardiovascular fitness. However they are outweighed by the greater risk of injury/illness and the additional tireness detracting from performance enhancing sessions.
beej - we have the same plan! 🙂 Just keep stepping up in each phase, rest move up.
DT78 in trans alps this year we went out slow and was well down the field on day one. But each day we moved up the field. We werent getting better - they were getting worse and expending energy faster than than they could afford. Allowed us to put in some attacks later on in the week gaining quite a few places.
Agree with you idave. Whats its use? Well for me I look at it as a measure of potential performance. For example two riders are going up the same hill at the same intensity level realtive to their own fitness the one with the higher intensity or threshold level will get to the top first ie he puts down more power for the same physical effort or intensity. So to go further faster I need a higher threshold. Works the same on 12 - 24 hour solo or multi day events when its extremly important. Knowing where the threshold is also allows to manage your enegry levels and stay below that threshold on attacks or steep ups etc. On big multi day or solo I manage the race based on my HRM zones.
Training empty? Well weight is ok so no need to fat burn in my case. I find I snack 24/7. Whilst mainataining a low overal weight is helpful to go really hard I must fuel and without it your risk lowering your immune system. I rate fuel, sleep and rcovery as important as time in the saddle. It all has to be managed within the time available.
Training to be efficient at fat burning and losing fat are two different things PB.
What I mean is that levels of lactate in the blood are not a good indicator that you're at an intensity (threshold) that you can sustain when you ride
Turning it around though, would you agree they are a good indicator of a level that is [u]not[/u] sustainable?
I'm not sure that running training can be applied to cycling though.
Running is much harder on the body than cycling so increased volume carries a far greater risk of injury in running than cycling. I doubt even full time runners won't be putting in the same hours as full time riders.
No because our individual threshold is variable and complex and just having a certain lactate level in the blood doesn't mean you're going to grind to a halt on a certain day with a certain diet and mindset. For example, I sustained 185 hr for 2 hours when my laboratory set 'lactate' threshold was supposed to be 172.
to go back to OP i don't think anyone answered
answer yesNow, either theres something wrong with me, or Zone 2 is really, really slow
think irrespective of how you calculate max HR or use lactate threshold one good thing about using a HRM will do is tell you that often or not you are working too hard when in recovery or fatburning - doesn't feel like exercise or training but is doing what it is supposed to do - that is irrespective of whether or not it is the most effective training program - that has sort of got covered
but in theory if your lab lactate threshold was 180 (no other differences) then on that day you would have been able to sustain 185 hr for longer than the 2 hours?
I think people will use whatever programme/method/latest thing they feel most comfortable with or easiest to live with.
FWIW, I "feel" like I've had some good progress using the Friel approach & I like riding my bike, so if I didn't ride at "Zone 2" a lot of the time I'd be pretty burnt out. I also enjoy a lot of road riding & there's no way I could sustain a Zone 4/5 effort for 4 hrs on the road. Can hold that effort for that long in an mtb race though, because of the amount of time you have to recover on decsents & when you're stuck behind slower riders.
Running is much harder on the body than cycling so increased volume carries a far greater risk of injury in running than cycling. I doubt even full time runners won't be putting in the same hours as full time riders
I agree however you will still be displacing "worthwhile" training with "less useful" training as there will still be effort involved. If the effort involved is so low as to not impact on "worthwhile" training then the only reason you should be doing it is because its fun as it will have only trivial training benefit IMO.
antigee - Member
to go back to OP i don't think anyone answeredNow, either theres something wrong with me, or Zone 2 is really, really slow
answer yesthink irrespective of how you calculate max HR or use lactate threshold one good thing about using a HRM will do is tell you that often or not you are working too hard when in recovery or fatburning - doesn't feel like exercise or training but is doing what it is supposed to do - that is irrespective of whether or not it is the most effective training program - that has sort of got covered
Excellent.
To summarise then, based on Mr Friels general advice and the opinion in here, with the three rides / 8 hours I have available to me it seems that the best I can do is mix up the intensity. Basically, more slower rides to build base in winter with a few intervals, and more higher intensity rides as I get towards racing season.
I was this year until recently doing:
Ride 1) High Intensity MTB 30k
Ride 2) High Intesity Road 50-70k
Ride 3) Social MTB going hard where possible 50k
Ride 4) (when possible) High Intensity Night ride MTB 40k
For winter this might be
Ride 1) High Intensity MTB 30k
Ride 2) Low Intesity Road 50-70k
Ride 3) Social -ease off and relax - MTB 50k
Plus 2 x weights sessions p/w time allowing.
Seem appropriate?
Been reading this thread with interest.
FWIW, I "feel" like I've had some good progress using the Friel approach & I like riding my bike, so if I didn't ride at "Zone 2" a lot of the time I'd be pretty burnt out. I also enjoy a lot of road riding & there's no way I could sustain a Zone 4/5 effort for 4 hrs on the road. Can hold that effort for that long in an mtb race though, because of the amount of time you have to recover on decsents & when you're stuck behind slower riders.
I know we are all different, but i hardly ever do zone 2 (ok never) and as a newbie to racing this year, i could sustain zone 5/6 for road racing, and even training rides where i'm being pushed. I'm particularly interested in the link trickydisco posted - i seem to have been training like that over last winter and this season rather than the zone 1-2 type stuff.
Cut and paste king today 🙂
There are only two heart rates you need to worry about especially for cycling:
1. Aerobic Maximum 180-Age+5
2. Lactate ThresholdRace surges and sprinting is best trained for in club races. Sprint interval training by yourself is a waste of time and ineffective.
Train to these 2 heart rates and you will reach peak performance from season to season and stay there for years and years without wearing out from anaerobic stress, guaranteed.
Avoid the traditional heart rate zones, especially Zone 2 and part of Zone 3 as this will place you in "no man's land" and just make you tired and slower over the years.
This is a brief reply as there is an art in how to train at these two heart rates but oh so effective.
You really only have three zones not four and definitely not six. By training as I have outlined you don't need to know your maximum heart rate. There are other reasons for not knowing your MHR too but that is another subject.
I should maybe add that personally I do a lot of long steady road rides but only because I have the time and I like riding my bike - I don't believe I [i]need[/i] to though 😀
Agreed you have to train right. Doing it right is raising your aerobic maximum speed over several months at your 180-Age+5 heart rate. And increasing your time at your lactate threshold until you can ride most of the race at your LT.For aerobic max training, the aim is to increase your speed while maintaining your maximum aerobic heart rate.
Starting out with your aerobic training you may be riding a particular route let's say in a 70 gear inch at aerobic max and two months later you are riding the same route under the same conditions in a 87 gear inch. You have increased your speed but not your HR. Aerobic training is more than just building capillaries but also raising your aerobic speed.
You gain this increased aerobic speed by riding or running to your Max Aerobic HR and hold it for 5, 10, 15 minutes and then drop your HR back 20 beats only for recovery. Repeat like you would for traditional interval training. For a 2 hour ride, you may repeat this process seven times. For a 7 hour ride 20 times would be ample. It will appear slow at first but be patient as the results are awesome.
With good aerobic max speed when you race you will remain aerobic for longer than your competitors who haven't raised their aerobic speed and only build an aerobic base instead. Tricky, eh!
When a race starts getting fast with surges or hard hill efforts or chasing down a pack, breaking away from the bunch, or just staying with a fast group, you now need a high anaerobic threshold so lactate doesn't build up in your system too quickly.
Note training more than 5 beats below your LT is a compete waste of time, a place 90% of athletes seem to frequent. (I am writing an ebook on this subject and the dangers of training in no manâ??s land heart rate zone).
Apart from aerobic max training, I train right on my LT and test it every 6 weeks using the average function on my HR monitor. I take my average over a 40 minute undulating course after a 45 minute warm up.
Raise your LT the same as raising your aerobic maximum. Hold your LT for 5 minutes with good recovery inbetween efforts. Over the weeks, build up 10 minutes a session until you reach your target. Obtaining a 2 hour LT takes some training. After 3 weeks, make sure you take a week off from LT training altogether and back to aerobic training only.
For a 20k race or time trial it won't take long to build a 30 minute LT, but you do need a very big aerobic system from which to launch your lactate training otherwise it won't work.
My only other tip for cyclists is to spin at 90 cadence even big gears. Anything slower and you struggle grinding the miles out at the wrong HR and you risk muscle damage and upsetting (straining) your internal organs. Some track cyclists when road racing will spin much faster but they are use to it through muscle memory. You'll find 90 cadence is hard at first until your body adjusts and sadly most people give up too early. Master spinning and you will reap big dividends.
tricky, where is that from and when was it written/published?
trickydisco - Member
Cut and paste king todayThere are only two heart rates you need to worry about especially for cycling:
1. Aerobic Maximum 180-Age+5
2. Lactate ThresholdRace surges and sprinting is best trained for in club races. Sprint interval training by yourself is a waste of time and ineffective.
Train to these 2 heart rates and you will reach peak performance from season to season and stay there for years and years without wearing out from anaerobic stress, guaranteed.
Avoid the traditional heart rate zones, especially Zone 2 and part of Zone 3 as this will place you in "no man's land" and just make you tired and slower over the years.
This is a brief reply as there is an art in how to train at these two heart rates but oh so effective.
You really only have three zones not four and definitely not six. By training as I have outlined you don't need to know your maximum heart rate. There are other reasons for not knowing your MHR too but that is another subject.
Why believe any of that when the 1st part about maximum HR is completley false!
Why believe any of that when the 1st part about maximum HR is completley false!
It doesn't say maximum HR.
tricky, where is that from and when was it written/published?
Some geezer Called Rod from this site
http://www.pponline.co.uk/forum/talk-performance/heart-rate-zones
Sorry.. just thought it was interesting what he was saying
