rubiksoval

You straight made those numbers up, didn't you?? 105% for vo2? 110% for tabata-style?

Seriously, man.

WhyFi

If this is the intuitive workout plan that is the cycling software industry's worst nightmare, I think that they're sleeping pretty easy.

fstrnu

VO2:

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/p...aining-levels/

40/20:

https://roadcyclinguk.com/how-to/fit...on-jens-voigt/

fstrnu

OP updated with the following:

Edit - Here's another (mostly) good plan:

https://whatsonzwift.com/workouts/vo...ooster-program

...and another:

https://whatsonzwift.com/workouts/zf...aching-phase-1

rubiksoval

Thanks again for proving that you know very little about physiology or training methodology. You can't even steal other people's work correctly! Might want to go reread those articles, and then read some more.

Necessary study terms: vo2 max and Tabata.

Get back to me if you need some help understanding what it says.

rubiksoval

How's that for irony!

"Generic plans don't work, but here's a generic plan with generic training zones"

So you're promoting a generic plan that generically prescribes intervals at 110% while claiming it's vo2 max?

After you said vo2 max was at 105%?

When in actuality most trained road cyclist's vo2 max is closer to 115-130% ftp?

Okay then!

fstrnu

WhyFi

Nope.

fstrnu

Oh. I gathered from the following that you had no further questions:

rubiksoval

Ah, it hasn't vanished. They just haven't seen your silly response yet.

I understand perfectly. I understand that you don't understand what vo2 max workouts are about, and you certainly don't understand what a tabata workout is targeting. I understand that you parrot other people's ideas, even though you don't understand the underlying philosophies behind those, too. I understand all of that.

I also understand that, again, your entire premise is that people are idiots and don't think about their training. But ironically enough, your apparent solution is to offer up this behemoth of generic, color-coded confusion that people who actually do understand and implement proper training methodologies don't even understand.

Maybe that's your angle? Target people who don't know any better?

WhyFi

That's how you interpreted that? Yikes.

rubiksoval

Not a lot of reflection going on, huh?

in all seriousness, read back through this thread. People that have commented have been training at a higher-than-average level for a long time, and look at the lengths you've had to go through to simply showcase your most basic of premises. And they still don't make a lot of sense.

I'm genuinely flabbergasted that you think all of this is somehow easier or more "intuitive" than the plans offered on trainer road or other software platforms. Your charts are a mess and as I already pointed out, your workout monikers are outright wrong, both in name and description.

It seems more and more that you're looking to take on some "mentor" role, whether that be paid or not I still can't tell. But you've got to actually know your stuff before throwing this stuff out to people who take the subject matter seriously. It might fly with some newb who just bought their first bike, but at some point the ignorance is going to be called out. And you've demonstrated a lot of that so far. Might want to do a lot more reading before attempting to sell this stuff. I wasn't kidding about reading more Hunter Allen stuff, since you specifically mentioned him. From there lots of information is available on utilizing tools in WKO4 and other analysis programs. Your notion of mixed-intensities is another example of completely missing the mark, from both a theoretical perspective and the practical application (ANY group ride or race).

Anyway, four pages is too many for me in regards to this content. I'd say good luck, but, eh...

fstrnu

OP updated for clarity

WhyFi

Hilarious.

redlude97

now your title doesn't fit with how much you had to backtrack. Look most of us agree in general with what you say, the basis of training is interval repeats. But plenty of people have gotten plenty strong with mixed workouts like on TR as well as pretty much every cyclist who trains outside where terrain is varied. I dont think there is any research or much anecdotal evidence that it's totally detrimental to intervals that it's such a nightmare.

Carbonfiberboy 

Besides doing a lot more reading, I suggest the OP do a lot more riding, working up to something like a hilly double century event or Gran Fondo for instance. Or a crit or road race or hanging with the A group. Something that tests training in ways other than using the training itself as a test. Or just getting the weekly road mileage up over 150. There's a lot to be learned simply from that last thing. Riding well, fast, and long is the sought result, not higher FTP in an interval. That last is only one means to an end.

Hermes

As an investor / venture capitalist, I do not see what problem OP's solution (I am being kind in calling it a solution) is solving. What pain is he taking away from customers? Ease of use, better results (would help with a testimonial or third party report), lower cost, more intuitive, use on many software platforms, better mousetrap and etc. He claims his solution, interval repeats, is the cycling software industry's worst nightmare. What intellectual property is available on interval repeats? Why would I invest money to create a nightmare for someone else? If he is right but does not have IP protection, the other competitors will just copy and add his stuff to their platform and the nightmare is over.

This is a pass that does not make it past the first year associates screen. The title on the business plan kills the deal. Sorry. However, it is always good when people put "stuff" out there for critique. For that, I give a kudo.

fstrnu

What have I backtracked on? I thought I was doubling down. I know OP still needs work but is worse than I thought if backtracking is the impression.

Some training outside is a necessary evil. My comments are about structured training indoors. I may need to clarify that too but thought OK because this is indoor forum but in retrospect that is not enough.

fstrnu

Thanks for this. I sincerely believe what I am saying but clearly have some work to do with communicating it, especially to different audiences. I think your questions will help with this.

I believe that the effectiveness and accessibility of interval repeats can empower athletes to personalize their training in order to realize better results due to the principle of individualization.

I believe that personalizing a simpler approach will outperform complex approaches which are one-size-fits-all.

This is because athletes have different goals, fitness levels, schedules, problems, load/rate tolerances, power curves, potential for improvement, etc.

Additionally, free solutions exist in the form of publicly available training plans and free software like the Wahoo Fitness App and Golden Cheetah.

The challenge is to convince athletes of this in less than 30 seconds and develop a way to get them started quickly without having to think too much, at least initially.
Pain = Being lost and dependent on vendors to answer questions about how to workaround inevitable problems. Also pain in the wallet.

Also, it would be hard to find something easier to use than the Wahoo Fitness App. Get on the bike, perform your repeats, get off the bike. See above regarding better results.

Understanding your training by embracing interval repeats makes everything more intuitive. I'm still working on how to present this but am getting closer but am still struggling with how to make it more succinct for a busy audience.

The Wahoo Fitness App exports data in any format you need and also directly integrates with many platforms. It is also a better mousetrap in that it is reliable, keeps your technology footprint small, and keeps you out of support forums asking questions about how to workaround inflexible software. It also allows you to add/extend/split/combine/pyramid intervals in real time.
There IS no IP on interval repeats, which is awesome. IMO, there is also very little or no intellectual property on effective training. As far as I know, all the secrets are out there or at least they are certainly not hidden in generic plans. That's the crime I'm trying to prosecute; that athletes are blind to all this freely available information because of all the obfuscation and baloney being peddled by industry. Let's democratize all this and vendors can move on to true innovation if they want to buy a new bike every month with our money. Nothing would make me happier than vendors embracing interval repeats. Just imagine how much cool stuff could be built to help personalize and make training more responsive!

I'd offer to share a video I made recently on this privately with you but it's very long (35 minutes) so I'm working on summarizing and breaking it up into 30-90 second chunks which would be digestible and then hit athletes with some longer videos once they're interested.

fstrnu

OP has been re-written based on input. Thanks everyone!

rubiksoval

Input?! Don't blame anyone for that mess. You sound exactly like one of those people that stand on street corners and scream nonsense at anyone that passes by.

What a charlatan.

canklecat

Fartlek. I'm just gonna do fartleks.

Because it most closely resembles actual group rides.

And I like saying fartlek.

TV Fartlek.
When I was binge watching Orphan Black, fartlek closely followed Helena's pattern of mayhem and eating. Every time Helena maims or kills someone or gets a refund, I sprint. When she eats, I loafcycle.

Or watch Ocean's 11, the remake. Every time Brad Pitt eats, you sprint. Good workout because he's eating in every dang scene.

For a really brutal workout, watch reruns of NYPD Blue. Every time they do that shaky random pan-camera thing, sprint. Rest only when the camera work isn't nausea inducing.

Wattsup

Back to Sea Org with you!

fstrnu

Cycling SW sets a very low bar for self-coaching to exceed. A basic understanding of the following is all an athlete needs to handily beat results he will get with SW:

• Intensity, duration and frequency are programming variables that are manipulated
• Load monitoring is required to ensure coping with / adapting to program
• Load progression is required in order to continually challenge the body
• Training should be from general to specific which is typically long to short intervals with low to high intensity
• All SW does is progress time at intensity up to a practical limit and then increase intensity

Cyclists are more different than they are the same. You are better of just repeating the same three workouts and increasing power based on maximum sustainable intensity and status monitoring than you would be with any canned coach.

rubiksoval

Are you a shill for Zwift or Trainerroad or something? Seeking to drive customers toward those products by continually making up absurd, contrarian statements about them? A little reverse psychology guerrilla marketing tactic?

Intriguing!