Polarized training (PT)...Good for low volume rider?
#26
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
No, but the link to a study I posted earlier in the thread did show that PT benefited those with only 6 hrs a week. What I like about the article I just posted is that it's kind of like "PT by the numbers', a PT primer, a good explantion and suggestions on how to implement for a recreational cyclist. The author says that 10 hours a week is sufficient. In order to do 10 hours a week, I'd have to switch my easy indoor rides from 1 hour to 2 hours. Also, I liked how the author said that the 4x8 (2 min inbetween) intervals were the most effective for the "hard rides" in PT. I can barely hack the 1 hour easy rides indoors, they are so boring. To help, I just bought a 10" ipad. I think I can perch myself on the bike for 2 hours while watching a movie or a couple epsodes of Seinfeld. I have a 30 mile stretch of gravel that I enjoy riding once a week, I think I'll try working in two of them, and move up with a few 2 hour indoor easy rides from there.
I assume from your OP that you have a power meter and know your FTP. You should also be using an HRM. Remember that the 3-zone system was developed and polarized training formalized by reviewing the HR logs of Nordic skiers. They don't have power.
So: You should ride at a steady 70%-75% of your current FTP, or what you think it is, and at about a 90 cadence at least to start with. You want to observe your breathing, which should be slow and deep. You should be able to breathe through your nose. If you have to open your mouth, your power may be too high. Your HR after about a 1/2 hour conditioning period should not go up, rising HR during steady exercise is known as HR drift. Maybe 1-2 beats, no more. If you're getting drift, drop the power next time and ride at that lower power a few times before raising it again. OTOH, you don't want to go too easy, either. You should be near the upper limit w/r to breathing and HR drift.
You're trying to stimulate your aerobic system. As pointed out above, that involves some stress. If you can't make it 2 hours somewhere near that limiting power, stop when you get tired. Have at it again tomorrow. You might want to start at 1 hour and increase by 15' every week. OTOH if you can hit 2 hours right from the start, good for you.
While you're pedaling along at a steady power, you can work on smoothing your pedal stroke and trying to find a pedaling dynamic which decreases your HR at that steady power. You'll also find that what goes on between your ears will affect your HR even though power hasn't changed. You want to avoid that, keeping your HR as low as you can while holding that power. Concentrating on all that, plus not falling off my rollers, keeps me interested enough. I'm a geezer, so I listen to "classic" rock music, loud.
You can try pedaling at the same power with a lower cadence. You'll find that will also reduce your HR and breathing rate, meaning you could pedal at a higher power to get that same workout in that same zone, just more muscle strain. OTOH, one wants to maintain comfort at 90-95 cadence, so not too much of that.
I haven't been doing this, but my reading suggests doing a 5" all-out sprint every 20' of the "easy" rides. I might try that today, now that I'm thinking of it.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
Last edited by Carbonfiberboy; 01-07-21 at 02:05 PM.
#27
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Having just done a few months of the very training your are contemplating, those trainer or outdoor rides are not just perching yourself on the bike.
I assume from your OP that you have a power meter and know your FTP. You should also be using an HRM. Remember that the 3-zone system was developed and polarized training formalized by reviewing the HR logs of Nordic skiers. They don't have power.
So: You should ride at a steady 70%-75% of your current FTP, or what you think it is, and at about a 90 cadence at least to start with. You want to observe your breathing, which should be slow and deep. You should be able to breathe through your nose. If you have to open your mouth, your power may be too high. Your HR after about a 1/2 hour conditioning period should not go up, rising HR during steady exercise is known as HR drift. Maybe 1-2 beats, no more. If you're getting drift, drop the power next time and ride at that lower power a few times before raising it again. OTOH, you don't want to go too easy, either. You should be near the upper limit w/r to breathing and HR drift.
You're trying to stimulate your aerobic system. As pointed out above, that involves some stress. If you can't make it 2 hours somewhere near that limiting power, stop when you get tired. Have at it again tomorrow. You might want to start at 1 hour and increase by 15' every week. OTOH if you can hit 2 hours right from the start, good for you.
While you're pedaling along at a steady power, you can work on smoothing your pedal stroke and trying to find a pedaling dynamic which decreases your HR at that steady power. You'll also find that what goes on between your ears will affect your HR even though power hasn't changed. You want to avoid that, keeping your HR as low as you can while holding that power. Concentrating on all that, plus not falling off my rollers, keeps me interested enough. I'm a geezer, so I listen to "classic" rock music, loud.
You can try pedaling at the same power with a lower cadence. You'll find that will also reduce your HR and breathing rate, meaning you could pedal at a higher power to get that same workout in that same zone, just more muscle strain. OTOH, one wants to maintain comfort at 90-95 cadence, so not too much of that.
I assume from your OP that you have a power meter and know your FTP. You should also be using an HRM. Remember that the 3-zone system was developed and polarized training formalized by reviewing the HR logs of Nordic skiers. They don't have power.
So: You should ride at a steady 70%-75% of your current FTP, or what you think it is, and at about a 90 cadence at least to start with. You want to observe your breathing, which should be slow and deep. You should be able to breathe through your nose. If you have to open your mouth, your power may be too high. Your HR after about a 1/2 hour conditioning period should not go up, rising HR during steady exercise is known as HR drift. Maybe 1-2 beats, no more. If you're getting drift, drop the power next time and ride at that lower power a few times before raising it again. OTOH, you don't want to go too easy, either. You should be near the upper limit w/r to breathing and HR drift.
You're trying to stimulate your aerobic system. As pointed out above, that involves some stress. If you can't make it 2 hours somewhere near that limiting power, stop when you get tired. Have at it again tomorrow. You might want to start at 1 hour and increase by 15' every week. OTOH if you can hit 2 hours right from the start, good for you.
While you're pedaling along at a steady power, you can work on smoothing your pedal stroke and trying to find a pedaling dynamic which decreases your HR at that steady power. You'll also find that what goes on between your ears will affect your HR even though power hasn't changed. You want to avoid that, keeping your HR as low as you can while holding that power. Concentrating on all that, plus not falling off my rollers, keeps me interested enough. I'm a geezer, so I listen to "classic" rock music, loud.
You can try pedaling at the same power with a lower cadence. You'll find that will also reduce your HR and breathing rate, meaning you could pedal at a higher power to get that same workout in that same zone, just more muscle strain. OTOH, one wants to maintain comfort at 90-95 cadence, so not too much of that.
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
I found this interesting article. https://www.bikepartsreview.com/Pola...l#.X_PVBC9h3OQ
In addition, it's fairly common knowledge, and certainly well documented (letsrun.com has a massive treasure trove of information about this), that the really fast marathoners (like the 2:05 and below guys) are NOT doing polarized, but are specifically doing extended runs at marathon pace, and even up to 50k runs at sub-marathon pace. In fact, one of the biggest training "revolutions" of the past decades is pushing AeT pace to as close to AnT pace as possible for fueling concerns. So pretty much getting your zone 2 as high as possible with a lot of specific, targeted work.
It sounds like you really want to do polarized training, so might as well have a go with it. Whether or not you're getting 8 hours or t0 hours really isn't going to impact it one way of the other anymore than 8 hours versus 10 hours of a regular schedule would.
I do, however, 100% relate to your latter comment about it being super boring. Yes, it most definitely is tedious and monotonous as hell. It also neglects the training principle of reversibility to some extent, though if you want to work your way through some heinous max-aerobic/vo2 max slobber sessions all winter, that may mitigate some of that (though, ugh).
Likes For rubiksoval:
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
While you're pedaling along at a steady power, you can work on smoothing your pedal stroke and trying to find a pedaling dynamic which decreases your HR at that steady power. You'll also find that what goes on between your ears will affect your HR even though power hasn't changed. You want to avoid that, keeping your HR as low as you can while holding that power.
Oh, the fickleness of heart rate.
Likes For rubiksoval:
#30
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
All I have to do is notice that a rider has appeared in the distance in front of me. Bingo, the lion rises to his feet. Down boy, down boy.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#31
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
That article starts off with this premise that it's how elite athletes train, but then it references all of these sports and athletes that aren't cycling or cyclists. I mean, what?! That's kind of comical.
In addition, it's fairly common knowledge, and certainly well documented (letsrun.com has a massive treasure trove of information about this), that the really fast marathoners (like the 2:05 and below guys) are NOT doing polarized, but are specifically doing extended runs at marathon pace, and even up to 50k runs at sub-marathon pace. In fact, one of the biggest training "revolutions" of the past decades is pushing AeT pace to as close to AnT pace as possible for fueling concerns. So pretty much getting your zone 2 as high as possible with a lot of specific, targeted work.
It sounds like you really want to do polarized training, so might as well have a go with it. Whether or not you're getting 8 hours or t0 hours really isn't going to impact it one way of the other anymore than 8 hours versus 10 hours of a regular schedule would.
I do, however, 100% relate to your latter comment about it being super boring. Yes, it most definitely is tedious and monotonous as hell. It also neglects the training principle of reversibility to some extent, though if you want to work your way through some heinous max-aerobic/vo2 max slobber sessions all winter, that may mitigate some of that (though, ugh).
In addition, it's fairly common knowledge, and certainly well documented (letsrun.com has a massive treasure trove of information about this), that the really fast marathoners (like the 2:05 and below guys) are NOT doing polarized, but are specifically doing extended runs at marathon pace, and even up to 50k runs at sub-marathon pace. In fact, one of the biggest training "revolutions" of the past decades is pushing AeT pace to as close to AnT pace as possible for fueling concerns. So pretty much getting your zone 2 as high as possible with a lot of specific, targeted work.
It sounds like you really want to do polarized training, so might as well have a go with it. Whether or not you're getting 8 hours or t0 hours really isn't going to impact it one way of the other anymore than 8 hours versus 10 hours of a regular schedule would.
I do, however, 100% relate to your latter comment about it being super boring. Yes, it most definitely is tedious and monotonous as hell. It also neglects the training principle of reversibility to some extent, though if you want to work your way through some heinous max-aerobic/vo2 max slobber sessions all winter, that may mitigate some of that (though, ugh).
That bolded is something I'm interested in. So far nothing, but even after a few months, I'm just getting started. This smells like real long term stuff. Took the tandem out yesterday. Haven't been on it since May while trying to heal a saddle sore. Legs didn't have much - not much leg stress at 70% and 90 cadence. I'm going to try the much-derided low cadence work once a week. I can get 90% FTP at relatively low HRs. Not sure what cadence to use yet - want to work up to long intervals over the next 2 months, say 2 X 25 X 25. Won't do anything special for FTP, but might improve my ability to turn tandem cranks. I used to do thest at this time of year, back when I was strong. I'll finally start the Z3 (Z5) intervals next week.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#32
Version 7.0
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,128
Bikes: Too Many
Mentioned: 297 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1341 Post(s)
Liked 2,482 Times
in
1,457 Posts
I am training about 8 hours per week on a 4 session schedule. Included in the 8 hours is warmup and to an extent warm down. I still get a lot of z1 whether I want it or not but my focus is more about setting up structured workouts within that 8 hour window.
I started using power in 2008 and have used 3rd party coaches since 2007 and raced every year until the pandemic. I have over 12 years of training for racing power workouts from 4 different coaches based upon power. My focus has been on races versus FTP or polarized training or sweet spot. The coaches have provided the structure to support the goals constrained by my physical attributes.
I like to ride fast and find tooling around boring. However, constant power rides a 70% FTP are not easy at least for me.
If I were to add more time to my current schedule, I would add more endurance by adding another day and increasing my weekend endurance time and add more higher intensity interval sets. The power level for more endurance ideally would be higher z2 and lower z3. If I were going to train for an upcoming time trial, I would add more z4 10 minute + intervals. If the LA track were open, I would restart coaching.
I stopped using HR in 2008 when I got my PM and then later a coach that I used wanted HR so I put it back on. He used it to determine “head room” i.e. potential to increase FTP. And he liked 20 minute FTP power tests with a multiplier. So I gave it to him.
I have a new Garmin 830 that requires HR to spit out some hilarious metrics at the end of the ride, so I wear mine to have a good laugh when I turn off the Garmin. The Garmin collects HR data from my Apple Watch and other HR data and using a proprietary formula provides a performance factor that flashes at the beginning of the ride. So I may see a plus 4 to plus 6 or maybe nothing. I find that interesting but it does not seem to match my reality while riding. YMMV.
And hopefully, we will have this pandemic behind us and I can go back to using a coach and periodization against goals.
I think rubiksoval did a good job explaining polarized and I agree with his assessment especially, that one has to do enough intensity over time to generate adaptation. And the small studies that are constantly quoted along with GCN and whoever podcasts are interesting and generate ideas but I hardly consider them science to live by and probably not applicable to many athletes.
IMO, coaches with a track record of success and a large cadre of athletes offer the best route for training plans and skills based upon the available time.
TL : DR. I do not use polarized training but I do train about 8 hours per week.
I started using power in 2008 and have used 3rd party coaches since 2007 and raced every year until the pandemic. I have over 12 years of training for racing power workouts from 4 different coaches based upon power. My focus has been on races versus FTP or polarized training or sweet spot. The coaches have provided the structure to support the goals constrained by my physical attributes.
I like to ride fast and find tooling around boring. However, constant power rides a 70% FTP are not easy at least for me.
If I were to add more time to my current schedule, I would add more endurance by adding another day and increasing my weekend endurance time and add more higher intensity interval sets. The power level for more endurance ideally would be higher z2 and lower z3. If I were going to train for an upcoming time trial, I would add more z4 10 minute + intervals. If the LA track were open, I would restart coaching.
I stopped using HR in 2008 when I got my PM and then later a coach that I used wanted HR so I put it back on. He used it to determine “head room” i.e. potential to increase FTP. And he liked 20 minute FTP power tests with a multiplier. So I gave it to him.
I have a new Garmin 830 that requires HR to spit out some hilarious metrics at the end of the ride, so I wear mine to have a good laugh when I turn off the Garmin. The Garmin collects HR data from my Apple Watch and other HR data and using a proprietary formula provides a performance factor that flashes at the beginning of the ride. So I may see a plus 4 to plus 6 or maybe nothing. I find that interesting but it does not seem to match my reality while riding. YMMV.
And hopefully, we will have this pandemic behind us and I can go back to using a coach and periodization against goals.
I think rubiksoval did a good job explaining polarized and I agree with his assessment especially, that one has to do enough intensity over time to generate adaptation. And the small studies that are constantly quoted along with GCN and whoever podcasts are interesting and generate ideas but I hardly consider them science to live by and probably not applicable to many athletes.
IMO, coaches with a track record of success and a large cadre of athletes offer the best route for training plans and skills based upon the available time.
TL : DR. I do not use polarized training but I do train about 8 hours per week.
Likes For Hermes:
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
I don't understand your saying that this "neglects the training principle of reversibility to some extent." It seems to me that starting off with easy work and building on that is part of reversibility: https://www.sports-training-adviser....principle.html
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
Because there's a helluva difference between 80/20 division of sessions, and 80/20 division of time in zones.
#35
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
My understanding of PT is that there are two ways to make power: aerobic and anaerobic. The idea is to maximally train both those power sources, separately. Everything in between, the "zones," are simply varying mixes of those 2 power sources.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
Last edited by Carbonfiberboy; 01-08-21 at 07:33 PM.
#36
Senior Member
Except for very short all-out efforts, both aerobic and anaerobic metabolism contribute to power production.
#37
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
Yes. Is it possible to train aerobic with almost no anaerobic component? My reading says that PT trained elites produce almost no lactate below AeT, which might indicate that's true? OTOH we can't only train anaerobically, but we can train that metabolic contribution as hard as we can. The question in all this is what's the perfect mix of training? Lots of debate about that. It seems possible that the usual training of varying amounts in the various zones is simply another way of coming at that same problem, but with more history to it - and perhaps less chance of injury by adding in the anaerobic component more gradually, starting with zone 3, etc. It's also interesting that the PT anaerobic training is all relatively low end for that sort of thing, 105% FTP, no more. Whereas the usual zonal training would have us doing 3 X 3, 1 X 1, 30"/15", etc. at much higher proportions of AnT. I don't understand the logic. Perhaps no one does yet - so many studies out there now. But of course human studies are always flawed. So difficult to isolate the variables.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#38
Senior Member
Almost is not zero. Below AeT lactate barely rises above resting levels, but this is not because it isn’t being produced, but rather it is being metabolized at the same rate it is created. And that’s true for all humans, not just PT trained athletes.
Likes For asgelle:
#39
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Ok, so I solved my conundrum. I've decided to do pyramidal. Seems reasonable. I'll gradually work in more easy workouts as my butt gets used to being on that saddle for more than an hour.
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 877
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 528 Post(s)
Liked 230 Times
in
161 Posts
6-8 hours you can crank out 2 interval sessions and one long endurance ride and still get your 80-20. Most people wouldn't recommend more than 2 interval sessions a week anyway to non-pros.
#41
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
1 hour high
2 hours low
4 hours low
1 hour high.
2 hours low
4 hours low
off
It's still January and I'm aiming for June-July rides and events. I'm doing 1 day high, 3 days low steady state, 2 days low HR high muscle work pedaling drills or aerobic crosstrain, 6-8 hours/week total, including 40' dumbbells twice a week after riding - if I have the energy.
I'll probably start 2 days high in March. Of course this all is assuming that there are rides and events this summer, which is still quite doubtful. FUBAR takes a long time to turn around.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#44
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
I started this in September and did my first intervals 2 days ago. My standing resting HR this morning was 52. I've never seen that before. I could feel my atrial and ventricular beats. Emphasizing that's after intervals 2 days ago. Gotta have both ends of it. A heavy schedule of low end raised my resting HR, though I didn't get tired as long as I kept up with my carbs and sleep. I was surprised to see that it did take extra carbs to do that. I would have thought that increased fat burning would take care of the volume, but no, not at 75% it wouldn't, at least not in my bod..
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 877
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 528 Post(s)
Liked 230 Times
in
161 Posts
Sure? When I first came across 80-20 it was I believe about runners and they had the hours in each zone displayed. Looked very much like time spent in certain zones.
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 877
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 528 Post(s)
Liked 230 Times
in
161 Posts
The 80/20 balance thing has folks interpreting it in several ways. The most common is 4 days low, 1 day high. I've seen it as a time in zone thing which IME&O is undoable: not enough low end to support that much Z5 volume.. I've also seen the following, which is a mix of those ideas, but more the young racer program:
1 hour high
2 hours low
4 hours low
1 hour high.
2 hours low
4 hours low
off
It's still January and I'm aiming for June-July rides and events. I'm doing 1 day high, 3 days low steady state, 2 days low HR high muscle work pedaling drills or aerobic crosstrain, 6-8 hours/week total, including 40' dumbbells twice a week after riding - if I have the energy.
I'll probably start 2 days high in March. Of course this all is assuming that there are rides and events this summer, which is still quite doubtful. FUBAR takes a long time to turn around.
1 hour high
2 hours low
4 hours low
1 hour high.
2 hours low
4 hours low
off
It's still January and I'm aiming for June-July rides and events. I'm doing 1 day high, 3 days low steady state, 2 days low HR high muscle work pedaling drills or aerobic crosstrain, 6-8 hours/week total, including 40' dumbbells twice a week after riding - if I have the energy.
I'll probably start 2 days high in March. Of course this all is assuming that there are rides and events this summer, which is still quite doubtful. FUBAR takes a long time to turn around.
Doing 5 sessions a week and just 1 HIIT seems foolish. If you do less than 10 hours a week it is far better to make two session intense rather than stick to 80-20. I guess if in those 4 low sessions you have the time to really go long it might be different.
#48
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,538
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3890 Post(s)
Liked 1,939 Times
in
1,384 Posts
I see. Well personally I always do 2 HIIT sessions a week anyway and one long ride. Anything on top is bonus. In the summer maybe a very easy ride on Monday instead of complete rest. Maybe zone 2 on Wednesday instead of rest. Friday usually is always rest with Sunday the long ride. Saturday then would be a mix. long-ish ride with some climbing that comes along the route.
Doing 5 sessions a week and just 1 HIIT seems foolish. If you do less than 10 hours a week it is far better to make two session intense rather than stick to 80-20. I guess if in those 4 low sessions you have the time to really go long it might be different.
Doing 5 sessions a week and just 1 HIIT seems foolish. If you do less than 10 hours a week it is far better to make two session intense rather than stick to 80-20. I guess if in those 4 low sessions you have the time to really go long it might be different.
Sunday has always been my hard day. In a couple months, I should be strong enough to get back back to doing 4-hour hilly Sunday rides with Z5 climbs, hard enough that I can't get off the bike or walk properly at the end of the ride. The rest of the week, moderate rides and pedaling drills, with weights after the moderate rides a couple days. No weights Friday or Saturday, moderate ride Friday, Saturday off, Monday usually a 3-7 hour zone 1 hike in the mountains, then back to pedaling drills on Tuesday. The Monday hike is my secret weapon. I had not recognized it as part of PT. Looks like we might have a good snowshoe day this coming Monday.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
Likes For Carbonfiberboy:
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 877
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 528 Post(s)
Liked 230 Times
in
161 Posts
See my sig. Thing is, I'm getting good results, better than I have for years. I'm trying to go back to what I did many years ago, when I first got strong (for me), but perhaps with more of a PT structure to it. I find that continually recovering from daily rides is a good stressor which helps me recover during long rides. That means that I have to do enough each day to make recovering an issue, but not so much that I don't. The PT part is doing more time and less intensity on those daily rides. Obviously the necessary amount of training necessary to do that will vary with each rider. Pros need 20-24 hrs., I need 8-13, more is better but depends on the PNW weather.
Sunday has always been my hard day. In a couple months, I should be strong enough to get back back to doing 4-hour hilly Sunday rides with Z5 climbs, hard enough that I can't get off the bike or walk properly at the end of the ride. The rest of the week, moderate rides and pedaling drills, with weights after the moderate rides a couple days. No weights Friday or Saturday, moderate ride Friday, Saturday off, Monday usually a 3-7 hour zone 1 hike in the mountains, then back to pedaling drills on Tuesday. The Monday hike is my secret weapon. I had not recognized it as part of PT. Looks like we might have a good snowshoe day this coming Monday.
Sunday has always been my hard day. In a couple months, I should be strong enough to get back back to doing 4-hour hilly Sunday rides with Z5 climbs, hard enough that I can't get off the bike or walk properly at the end of the ride. The rest of the week, moderate rides and pedaling drills, with weights after the moderate rides a couple days. No weights Friday or Saturday, moderate ride Friday, Saturday off, Monday usually a 3-7 hour zone 1 hike in the mountains, then back to pedaling drills on Tuesday. The Monday hike is my secret weapon. I had not recognized it as part of PT. Looks like we might have a good snowshoe day this coming Monday.
That was my point, if you do 8-13 hours I can see that doing more Z2 will work. But if you just do 5-8 hours I am certain having two intense sessions will be a lot more beneficial.
Likes For ZHVelo:
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 338 Post(s)
Liked 408 Times
in
252 Posts
The intended way to interpret 80/20 split is split of sessions, but it does bear in mind that the studied athletes were elite ones who often did two in a day. So, if you're doing 10-15 training sessions per week, then it's perfectly sensible to do 2-3 hard sessions and rest easy ones. I don't think any serious coach or Dr. Seiler would suggest that if you do three sessions per week that you only do intensity every second week, that'd be just silly.
For the time crunched rider, I feel it makes more sense to retain 2 intense rides per week and one longer easy ride per week as a sort of minimum barebones training plan and cut away the easy ones; treat 80/20 more as a guideline to aspire to - if you can throw in extra rides or runs, then do them easy.
Personally, I try to do two hard sessions in a week, depending where I am in my training one of those might be actually a threshold session or I might only do one hard session during the week, and the weekend long ride I'll often throw in a 45 minutes to a hour and something at 90-ish%, which makes for about two-three rides with some intensity in a week, and I'll do three-four more easy rides or runs which are strictly zone 1. Not quite the 80/20 split in terms of sessions although approaching it in terms of time in zone, but that's about what is practical with only 6 rides/runs per week. If I could cram in more training (and without feeling overly tired when I do), more of it would be at Z1, though.
For the time crunched rider, I feel it makes more sense to retain 2 intense rides per week and one longer easy ride per week as a sort of minimum barebones training plan and cut away the easy ones; treat 80/20 more as a guideline to aspire to - if you can throw in extra rides or runs, then do them easy.
Personally, I try to do two hard sessions in a week, depending where I am in my training one of those might be actually a threshold session or I might only do one hard session during the week, and the weekend long ride I'll often throw in a 45 minutes to a hour and something at 90-ish%, which makes for about two-three rides with some intensity in a week, and I'll do three-four more easy rides or runs which are strictly zone 1. Not quite the 80/20 split in terms of sessions although approaching it in terms of time in zone, but that's about what is practical with only 6 rides/runs per week. If I could cram in more training (and without feeling overly tired when I do), more of it would be at Z1, though.
Last edited by Branko D; 01-28-21 at 01:37 AM.