No need to apologise, but whoever wrote it should!
5 year old forum post.....
5 year old forum post...
Bugger.. didn't see that.
Will stop posting rubbish. You've certainly got me thinking with your posts. I don't want to do junk zone 2 rides if it's not going to benefit me next season or I could be doing other workouts with my time
We seem to be straying in to training for the road? I think mtb has a different requirement for more max effort situations. Horses for courses depending on what time you have available.
I think mtb has a different requirement for more max effort situations
Based on what?
Road training is pretty universally used to improve MTB fitness
It was on the Carmichael MTB dvd and it seemed to agree with some of my experience. On road I tend to need long periods of sustained effort whilst on trails much more on off type power required. The efforts I think on mtb tend to be shorter. If Im on a down hill bit I maybe even resting so to speak out of the saddle then faced with a short up hill I need to hit maximum power really quick. Sort of burst.
Are you meaning MTB v's Road [i]cycling[/i] or racing? Certainly my experience is that road racing has a lot more visits to maximal intensity levels.
Road racing has more peaks and troughs in effort, it goes mental for a bit, then tends to ease off.
MTB (XC at least) racing is hard from the go with no respite. Crits are more like MTB races. IME few descents actually offer a chance to rest in an MTB race!
I'd say there's a lot of crossover. If you want to be a good MTB racer it's worth doing a bit on the MTB, but I think it's fair to say that road based training is what works for most.
Just to throw the cat amongst the pigeons
from Joe's [url= http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2011/11/early-base-zone-2-intensity.html ]blog[/url]
On that blog from Joe himself:
[i]It is confusing. There are _many_ ways to train. None of which is right for everyone despite what you may read. Every training method has advantages and disadvantages. Your challenge as a self-coached athlete is to find a methodology that works for you
[/i]
Volume is great if you can get it. There is some recent literature that supports a place for a blend of low intensity high volume with high intensity work too. But unless you can do a lot of hours then you are going to be much better off doing tempo I reckon. The question is- do you want to do 6 hours a week or 20? I am feeling some benefits from volume. I believe my recovery rate seems better than it has been. I am yet to see how this translates into FTP gains later on in my plan. I def know of impressive guys who have done well on both ends of the intensity spectrum. The thing they share is consistency and focus in their training. This is all for testing but I am sure the same holds true on the mtb.
Every training method has advantages and disadvantages. Your challenge as a self-coached athlete is to find a methodology that works for you
agreed and agree depends on how much time you have. I dont doubt the science but I can fit in 6-7 hours training a week so for me its more intensity and a couple 3 hour rides a month.
from idave's former collegue
Base training is training that improves threshold power.Pretty much anything that keeps you riding, motivated, includes efforts at all intensities, with the majority of work up to and including threshold power levels is base.
Tooling about at recovery / low end power levels all the time really is a wasted opportunity IMO. OK for a week or two for a break and some fun, or if you've had a long break and are restarting.
And for those who are indoors a lot in the winter, heck, up the ante on the trainer so you don't have to spend so much time on the turbo for good effect.
I've read a few books about training zones over the last few months including Joe Frills, Guy Andrwes and John Metcalfe's. This is what i've learnt:
Zone 1 (50-60%)- Great for active recovery. These sessions (no more than 30mins long) get the blood pumping to your legs that which aids repair and recovery following hard training sessions. Target HR should be 55%. Can actually be more beneficial than complete rest.
Zone 2 (60-70%) - Good for building an endurance base. Encourages your body to use fat as primary fuel for energy. As you body get's more efficient you will find you ride faster for the same level of effort. The training impact of this zone is relatively low so you can do more of them. The efficiency gains also make you faster when training in the higher zones. Feels slow to train in this zone to begin with but you WILL get faster. In terms of hours spent training, the majority will be in this zone.
Zone 3 (70-80%) - No mans land. Some training in this zone is beneficial but you are riding too fast to build your aerobic base but too slow to develop your V02MAX and lactate threshold. The result of spending too much time in this zone is that you’ll get home feeling tired but not have really improved your fitness. You will deplete your glycogen stores making it much harder to train in harder zones on following days. Useful during periodisation in a macro training cycle.
Zone 4 (80-90%). Hard training zone where you will really start to push what you are capable of to realise training adaptions. It is here where you will be training at or about your Lactic Acid threshold. Training just above your LT will mean you can go harder to longer as your performance improves as your tolerance to the accumulation of LT will increase. Much of this will be achieved via use of intervals although this will be considered average race pace for many (but perhaps not for marathons where that level would be unsustainable). The training impact of this zone is very high and rest or active recovery is essential to avoid over-trainng.
Zone 5 (90-100%) Maximal effort. Can only be sustained for very short periods of time (for most of us). Perhaps up to 5 mins max. Good level to aim for when doing sprint intervals say 30seconds to one minute. Training at this level of intensity should be done infrequently or as part of a meso-cycler prior to racing season transition.
A word on Zones.
There does seem to be a lot of debate on the zones to train in. I've used those recommended by Polar but both the British Cycling (developed by Peter Keen) and Australian Cycling federation recommend slightly different zones (see below). Note these are all based on MaxHR and do not factor in your resting HR (e.g. Karvonen method).
British
Z1 60-65%
Z2 65-75%
Z3 75-62%
Z4 82-89%
Z5 89-94%
Z6 94-100%
Australian
Z1 60-65%
Z2 65-75%
Z3 75-84%
Z4 85-91%
Z5 91-100%
What they all seem to agree on is that training routinely between 75-85% is counter productive for the reasons given in the definition of Zone 3 above. The rule seems to be mix low (z1) moderate (Z2) and hard (z4/5) sessions per week. Making sure you get good rest and are eating and hydrating well. Every third or fourth week it essential to schedule an easy week to avoid long term accumulation of fatigue (aka overtraining). At best your performance will plateau but most likely diminish.
Also of benefit is using a system to rate your training load. More advanced Garmin and Sunto HR monitors do this with Training Effect score. Polar has training impact or you can calculate it yourself using the TRIMP methord (Google it). This objectively lets you see how hard your sessions were so you can schedule easier sessions or complete rest days.
I'd also highly recommend Sage Rounteee books, the Athletes guide to Recovery. Less is indeed more.
The free on line Polar diary automatically calculates it as you up load data and gives you a good graph to help with trend analysis. Not bad for a freebie. Was what made me go polar in the end. I use polar zones just easier to remember 🙂
[url= http://joetoprocycling.com/dont-be-an-idiot-base-training-101/ ]http://joetoprocycling.com/dont-be-an-idiot-base-training-101/[/url]
I'm not going to quote all of nemtbroute's post, but I could never train to those zones, in fact, I've never really found any HR zones that do work for me. The only thing I've really found is riding around 90% MHR was roughly equivalent to a slightly-sub FTP interval, which definitely helped before I had a power meter.
I think I just have a naturally fast HR, and all my zones are shifted 'upwards'. A reasonably conservative estimate of my max is 200, not seen higher for a while, but a lot of my riding is Zone 4 as defined above (40.7% of my riding over the last 28 days has been 160-180bpm), but that's about 220W, which is only about 75% FTP. If I do 20 minute efforts at 95% of FTP, my HR is about 90% of max, as above. I can happily do three 20 minute efforts in a ride at that pace, I'd certainly say this doesn't apply:
Training at this level of intensity should be done infrequently or as part of a meso-cycler prior to racing season transition.
I can still chat comfortably at 170bpm, and have previously averaged over 190 for 2 hours.
I also think from the Z5 blurb above that HR is useless for 30 second intervals - it'll take more than half of that to 'catch up', for 30 second intervals flat out is the way!
IMO Zone 2 training should be used to supplement other training, i.e. when your legs are too tired to do more intense training, but rested enough to do less intense training, because, after all, it is still beneficial. It makes your body more efficient and gives you an opportunity to work on other aspects such as pedaling technique. I wouldn't worry about how far you ride, but how long for, I'd aim for at least 2.5 hours of quality riding in Z2, but don't take it as far as walking up hills to stay in zone, that's just plain boring. You'll get faster and if you're faster in Z2 you're faster in Z3 and so, so on, just to a lesser extent.
If I started training in Z4, 5, 6 only, I'd be wanting to give up come March, not gearing up for the big training blocks, training requires moderation.
A word on zones; basing them on your maximum heart rate is a little stupid, as everyone has a large variance in fitness, and using zones based upon LT is vary more specific to each individual and therefore leads to the desired adaptions brought about by training.
I also think from the Z5 blurb above that HR is useless for 30 second intervals - it'll take more than half of that to 'catch up', for 30 second intervals flat out is the way!
Yes, very true. My heart rate will peak at 200+ halfway through the rest when I do 40 sec flat out sprints! Hence the reason my zones don't include a HR value just power value for my 6th zone. So it's just as hard as I can.
I don't think any of this is an exact science, what works for one person may not work for another. I have to say I was always skeptical of the zone 2 theor, i always did most of my traning in zone 3 or 4. However, from my experience when I did train in those zones for months at a time fatigue caught up with me and I suffered from overtraining. When I switched down to easier zone 2 traning mixed with intervals and active recovery days I started to smash my personal bests. There was one hill I could only average a 9mph average up, now I can average 14mph which is a massive improvement for me.
Agree with you HR monitors next to useless for zone 5 traning because of the lag. You just have to go flat out as long as you can!
If you are traning at such a high intensity be carefully, it may not be sustainable over the months ahead. Illness, injury and chronic fatigue are highly likkey. I have a friend who is on the Swedish Olympic ski team. She has had to take a year out due to the effects of training at high intensity over a long period of time. It's a common trap many athletes fall into. Overtranng signs to look ou for include:-
1. Declne in performance
2. Heavy lifeless feeling in legs
3. Raised resting heart rate (5bpm higher, slightly unrested, 10bpm higher very fatigued)
4. Swollen lymph nodes
5. Frequent illness
6. Slow healing
7. Disturbed sleep
8. Bad mood
9. Clumsiness
10. Irritable
11. Loss of motivation
12. Loss of concentration
nemtbroutes
I performed my first Z2 ride today, after starting this thread, and although not at the dizzy heights of some (i i've met/know of NJEE20 *waves*) I found I really enjoyed my ride today. Its my first year of training for racing, I'm not young and I'm restricted on time as i have professional career, family etc, but I just wanted to raise my MTB to new heights.
I've been involved in sports before at a younger age, and what you say is true -going back to todays ride it was a revolution as I relaxed physically, mentally and really enjoyed it. More so than I have before, and so much so thats I'm keen as mustard to get out on the MTB tomorrow, and not so physically knackered as I used to be.
I've definitely learned that Z2 training is a place to be for rest, motivation and off-season training, and definitely a place to be to enjoy riding - yet still stay fit.
I'll keep it going until early Jan, then I'll ramp up to race pace for my first event in late Feb, going back to Z2 immediately after as recovery and then ramping again to the next event and see how I get on.
Not every ride has to be a traumatic stress-fest, is what I'm saying I guess.
**waves back**
You've definitely got to enjoy training, first and foremost. I'd say I don't actually do that much training, I do a reasonable amount of riding, and always use a power meter on the road, but tend to use it more for retrospective analysis than I do for very targeted training!
