4x4 / 4x8 / 4x16 - a simple training schedule for an Ironman

Hi!

I would like to hear some good opinions to an idea of a training schedule I’d like to try out. As a run-injured triathlete with my second child coming up soon, I need a very simple training schedule to follow to build bike performance for an Ironman 2026. My main focus will be consistency and having time over for family. The original plan was to train for sub10 2025, but my wife got pregnant and I deferred my entry to 2026. Not optimal, but the entry fee is too expensive to let pass.

Therefore, Id like to do 2-3 interval sessions on the trainer each week inspired by Seilers famous study. 4x4, 4x8 and 4x16. Naturally, I would argue they will hit v02, threshold and tempo/sweetspot depending on the rest between intervals. Although I am aware that was not the original purpose of that specific study.

I could therefore do all three session each week, or, i could divide it into blocks. One v02 block, one threshold and one sweetspot. The blocktraining would be the same workout all 3 sessions each week. I would do a 3 week on 1 week off because otherwise I am fried due to sleep deprivation and life stress.

I am sure someone has tried this out, but I am yet to find that person and read about their experience. Have you tried it? What can be improved?

//Ludvig

I am going to answer your question indirectly and take you on a tangent :slight_smile: Having a baby or small kid is stressful. Worse sleep… So poor sleep and intensity with high volume training is a receipt for injury and illness. 2-3 interval sessions a week on the bike + swimming and running is a sure way to get injured. Now some people can pull that off but not most but since you have faced running injuries already it seems you are in the riskier camp.

Have you read Mark Allen’s forward in Maffetone’s book? He was in injured / destroyed Iron man until he started focusing on low intensity.

https://www.amazon.com/Big-Book-Endurance-Training-Racing/dp/1616080655/

Doing work greater than your FTP the primary benefit is anaerobic and you can only progress anaerobically for about 8-16 weeks. So sure in Seliers 12 week study, VO2max+easy beat sweet spot, and it is great for a simple plan to stay in biking shape and be healthy all year round but it’s not a proven yearly training plan, especially not for a Ironman.

So hard VO2max is typically something best kept for the last couple months before your event, and even then it is a long TT is constant power (mostly) and below FTP so anaerobic is not a big benefit. Dr Seiler specifically says 1 of these per week, but that is an entirely other tangent.

Read that Maffetone book. The other great benefit is you will not be so drained with low intensity so you will have more energy for the family and you increase the odds of finishing.

You sound like someone with a nature to over do it, so just providing my 2 cents :slight_smile:

2 Likes

3 x VO2 a week is not the way to prepare for an Ironman…
Get in as much time as possible at lower intensities. If you have less then 90 min, do tempo or threshold intervals, not VO2 or anaerobic which you will not use during Ironman. Time moving at lower intensity and progressively longer intervals at race pace is what you need to do.

1 Like

I appreciate your answer, and I certainly agree with your comment. I think there is a lot of sensible take aways from your answer and is exactly the type of discussion I am looking for. It is hard to figure out life-balance. For example I am pretty sure sleep deprivation was the reason for my run injury as I had never been injured pre-baby. This is still more on a theoretical level and I am trying to figure out a simple structure of a week with standardized quality workouts that can be repeated over time. Basically, I dont want to overcomplicate things. Therefore I appreciate your input!

However, I am not sure that my key reasoning came across correctly. This is how I would specify the workouts.

4x4 = v02, over FTP work 105-120% of FTP
4x8 = threshold, 95 - 100% of FTP
4x16 = subthreshold/sweetspot, 80-90% of FTP.

1 of each per week, would be 1 v02, 1 threshold, 1 sweet spot. Quite similar to Trainerdays time crunched power plan.

Periodized in a 12week block of 3w/1w, that would be 1 v02 block(4x4), 1 threshold block(4x8) and 1 sweetspot block(4x16). In a block structure, I imagine 3 sessions of 4x8 would be the hardest weeks. Maybe 2 per week would be more reasonable structured this way?

These are two different ways of training different types of intensity structured either 1 per week or in 3w blocks. Of course they would have to be followed up by a ironman-specific block prior to the event.

I would guess that mark allen had 20-30h available to do base endurance, I probably have 7-9h.

Well, that is one way to think about it. But over 1year prior to an event, don’t you think there are reasons to think deeper about it? V02max is still a pretty good predictor for endurance performance.

I’ve tried the 4x4 and 4x8 variants although with more rest than the Seiler study.

Data from the actual study is below:

See the Power 4mM or Power 40-min time trial lines. This is more like an Hour of Power than a ramp test or 20 minute test FTP.

Seiler recommends you self-pace and go at an effort where you can finish all 4 intervals.

I held back a bit in the 4x4 I tried, but gave the 4x8s a more honest effort and found them hard. My experience is at the end of this thread:

Keep in mind that I’m not a very capable cyclist so I don’t know if my results are even worth posting. Your mileage may vary.

Dave

Oh that is more sensible :slight_smile: And for sure Mark Allen was training 20+ But realize part of his success is because he can handle a lot more training stress than most people.

So we are talking about balancing stress and recovery. Mark Allen is genetically gifted and sleeping 10+ hours a night. So for him doing 20-30, might be similar to you doing 7-10 hours of training if you are sleeping less than 7 hours a night. If you can sleep 8+ hours a night then you likely have more flexibility.

I am 100% sure their is a correlation between stress and injury in most cases and lack of sleep is very stressful especially combined with intensity in training. So it’s always a combination of things, sleep just being a major factor for many people but diet can have a major effect as well. One option is to become an expert in HRV or minimum sleeping HR to you can make sure you are not digging a hole. My minimum sleeping HR (MSHR) (apple watch or garmin) is about 41-42 bpm, normal well rested is 43-44 and stressed is 46-50. So I skip all intensity and long efforts when I get to 47bpm+ until it comes back down. I can see even my diet affects my MSHR.

Just realize VO2max efforts are not what improve your VO2max. All training increases your VO2max as it is primarily a function of aerobic improvement and running/cycling/swimming economy. So not sure how good of base you have now but think in terms of base, build, peak. Base you could spend 6-months doing purely low intensity making sure your body is very well recovered and very prepared for 6 months of increasingly harder and harder efforts.

Many people will go crazy not doing any intensity each week. That might be you :slight_smile: So in this case the intensity is not the driver of aerobic fitness but about feeling you are getting or staying in some level of fitness, which is a function of your anaerobic capacity, which does not help your IM goal at all. You will gain aerobic fitness with intensity too, but what exact combination of intensity will drive aerobic fitness for you is impossible to know. Generally HIIT is proven when doing very minimal training. I think overall the workouts you are suggesting sound fine as well but you should ease into them.

When doing high intensity the main benefit is as I said and MedCD said for race specific anaerobic goals but you don’t need this aspect at all for such a long event that does not have any sprinting needs. The other reason is when you are doing say less than 5 hours a week of training just to stay in shape.

Periodization
Think of each phase as preparation for the next phase. If you have never completed an Ironman I would forget about target time for the first one and focus on finishing before the cutoff time. You increase your odds of success significantly adding an optimistic time clouds your mind in just enjoying your training and staying healthy/safe. Again at this point prioritize life and health over finishing time. The last 2-4 months before the event you can think about finishing time but even that runs a much bigger risk than just focusing on finishing.

So your peak period should be about 2 months before your event (do efforts as specific to your event at you can, target pace intervals). The build period should last about 4 months. So for the next 6 months it can be 100% base period so this is about preparing your body for build and peak. I would say the most critical element you can do is 1 long effort each week. Long ride, long run, longish swim… Those don’t need any intensity at all. I realize long is likely difficult with family commitments. Maybe 1 long run, alternating on weeks with one long ride and fitting in the swim how you can.

Recovery based training
So I am saying base the amount of intensity on how good you are at your recovery and only dial up the intensity later after you have a really solid base and are recovering very well. If you sleep 8+ and have a low stress life and eating very high quality then ok, you can handle more, but if you are falling short in recovery cut down the intensity. So in a simplified form, you can say your 10 hour goal is directly related to your recovery not to your training.

1 Like

This is interesting. I don’t understand what it is saying at all :slight_smile: What is the line with 40min TT mean? Also 40min effort is still ~8min of anaerobic (26%) where a 10 hour event .1% anaerobic so we can’t really correlate the benefit of this to an IM. Can you link to this study?

Totally with you on this. Elite athletes doing the very hard Vo2 sessions on regular schedule, are those who have build a large base over several years. And they’re not doing them year round. They do those hard sessions in the peak phase and can sustain them thanks to their large base fitness.
Remember that Seiler nuanced the meaning of ‘hard sessions’ and is no longer advocating only LIT and HIIT. That was modified to LIT for anything under LT1 and ‘hard’ for anything above that. And still only 1 out of 5 sessions goes into that bucket of ‘hard’.
I advocated before that even a session around LT1, can be a hard session, if you make it long enough.
As you say, all training improves VO2max, but enough time in lower intensity, moves the whole curve up, while short hard efforts (HIIT) mainly improve the shorter duration part of the curve and do very little for the longer duration.
And that’s why I said to get in as much time as possible while mixing it up with higher intensity if less then 90 min of time is available. The mix of that will work the whole curve up while avoiding injury and high fatigue. If you have the time to ride 3+ hours, do it and keep effort low enough to properly recover for your next session. If you find yourself with 4 hours of available time but your legs are to heavy to do them (because of a too long and heavy session the day before), you will gain less.

1 Like

I mistyped 40 km time trial not minutes. I’ll look for the study later.

These percent ftps are basically hour of power.

Dave

We can all do 40km in 40min here can’t we? :slight_smile:

The 40 km time trial and 4mM lactate powers are almost the same.

Make no mistake the study intervals are very hard see the Borg scale.

Dave

1 Like

The study is here:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51543724_Adaptations_to_aerobic_interval_training_Interactive_effects_of_exercise_intensity_and_total_work_duration

What was the intervention?

image

Results:

Researcher’s comments:

image

image

image

I’ll follow up with some of my personal commentary in a follow up post.

Dave

[quote=“Alex, post:8, topic:59447, full:true”]
Also 40min effort is still ~8min of anaerobic (26%) where a 10 hour event .1% anaerobic[/quote]

I don’t know if you believe in the PD curve from WK05 or not, but I have a trial with their software currently and this is what they say for me for 40 minutes for my all-time data.

Again, I’m obviously a recreational only cyclist and do not claim to have any particular talent, but it is saying I have 3% anaerobic contribution after 40 minutes which is after my TTE per their curve. That is a long way from 26%.

Dave

So I was doing bad math/logic… meaning you could do 8 minutes of anaerobic exercise in 40 minutes or possibly more but anaerobic intervals are still primarily aerobic. 3% is low but closer to reality then 26% :slight_smile: I knew in my head that anaerobic contributes a small amount but distracted by math I was confused.

Thanks for sharing.

Hi Ludvig,

Congrats on becoming a father again, and deep respect for your Iron man lifestyle.

There isn’t much to say other than to emphasize again that the Iron man is a pure aerobic effort. You could periodically mix in in some/ a high intensity interval session, but your main focus should be aerobic training.

You say you want to keep things simple. I don’t think it can be simpler than just riding zone 2 whenever you can. Mix in a high-intensity effort once a week. It is a good way to build power and avoid boredom, but many athletes rely solely on zone 2 to achieve good results. However, there are very few athletes who do Iron man races on just vo2max sessions.

For any Iron man race every zone 2 hour counts.

Another possibility I would advice you to consider is doing a half iron man if you really can’t free up enough time to train.

Have fun, Coach Robert

Interesting article on the need (or not) for VO2 training:

1 Like

That guy is interesting. He only talks about himself like he is more athlete than coach and he does not back up any of his claims but at the same time he says really good stuff and explains his ideas in a really nice format. It’s really great when top athletes explain that they do things what we consider the right way to approach training.
Thanks for sharing.

This is actually more of the direction I would like to take TrainerDay assessments/evaluations. Giving people a clear story as to why they fit into a specific categorization and why it makes sense to more metabolic/base training.

1 Like