I completed VO2 Max Long #4 tonight. This is 4 x 4 minute intervals at 108%.
I completed a Joe Friel style 30-minute long form FTP test last week so I’m confident in what power I can hold, but haven’t done any Zone 5 stuff in a while.
I found the workout tough but doable. I may stick with these once a week in addition to zone 2, but I think I would go back to VO2 Max Long #2 (4 x 3 minutes) and work up from there.
The suprathreshold intervals are good for mental toughness.
There’s a good article below on Seiler 4 x 8 minute intervals, I’m not at that level yet but it suggest you should each 90% of max HR during the last interval. These 4 X4s brought me to 89% during the last interval.
Nice job!!! I like this training plan in general. Meaning slowly building up VO2max intervals and zone 2 the rest of the week. It’s healthier and smarter polarization from my perspective.
I disagree with the statement “you should reach 90%” this is very wrong information This appears to be the case of a study where N=1.
Doing anaerobic work is a combination of FTP (CP) and W’ (anaerobic work capacity). Unless you are factoring your W’ into these interval targets (time or intensity) their is no way different athletes will arrive at the same maximum HR or breaking point. Still I see nothing wrong with this approach to training but if you can’t ever get to 4 X 8 at 100+X% and/or your not at 90% HR don’t think it is lack of mental will power or ability, it’s just a different physical athlete power profile.
If you do a 2-3 minute max average power test and get accurate CP and W’ data then we could more accurately figure out where you are likely to break down and a closer evaluation of what you should be able to do. Although factoring where that will be on the HR scale is another factor that is indeterminant and I know of no clear way to calculate that but I could ask Andrea what he thinks.
Actually that is ok. I realize your interpretation or usage was slightly affecting my “wrong” statement. You are doing CJ, Fixed 108% and varying length (CJ style).
This is the problem with trying to follow their model of fixed length 4X8 with CJ fixed intensity (mostly). As long as you adjust the intensity to get your HR to the target HR of 90% that is likely fine.
So for some people might be 4X8 might be 102% to reach 90% at the end for others might be 108% of FTP. So you either need to adjust the duration or the intensity of the intervals to keep yourself at a reasonable target. This was my point.
So the other thing will be that different people can handle different peak sustained HR values, but that’s likely to be between 85-95% for a 4X8. So you could do 4X8 now but probably at 102% or something and slowly increase that intensity (target watts) over time.
So in the end you can keep doing it like you are but as the length gets longer you might need to adjust the intensity to keep you at that 90% target but even that is slightly arbitrary but at the end of a peak phase should be pushing close to failure for maximum results. (for a shorter period of time).
Anyway your plan is fine you will find out if you “make it” or not just realize you might not get to 108% at 4X8 due to your own physical make up. Maybe it will be 102%, but I guess it is likely to be closer to 105%+ with your accurate FTP test. Could even be more.
I think your points are right. Regardless, 4 x 8 minutes are beyond where I personally want to go.
I’m going to ride zone 2 the rest of the week and then go back to VO2 Max Long #2 or #3 next Tuesday and start to build up from there.
Once it is warm enough outside I will probably stop high intensity rides on the trainer, that will probably be early March. I only expect to reach VO2 Max Long workouts #8 before moving on so those will cap at 5 minute intervals, plenty hard enough for me.
You are welcome. Yes, this is it. Meaning varying length or intensity are both good solutions. We prefer length variability more so than intensity but their is no science or any proven facts on what is better higher intensity or lower VO2max intervals… I would say that level of detail is very much “it depends.” 8 minute even at threshold is rather intense other than outdoors trying to drop your friend on a climb or a race…
So best bet is to find what is the most fun or least un-fun which sounds like you are currently in a great place and if the incremental CJ increases come without too much suffering that will be optimum.
Doing research and experimenting with different intervals is a great way to get better.
Since yesterday was my birthday, I’m a little late in the discussion, but I agree with everything Alex has said.
I never advise anyone to do more than 4 or 5 minutes of VO2max. It doesn’t make sense to me. The only exception to that rule is when you have a race you really want to win with a deciding climb where 8 minutes are long enough to create a big gap and get you over the climb at the same time.
Otherwise it makes more sense to me to do either threshold (so a little less) or a “real” VO2max with a higher intensity.
Research suggests that shorter VO2max intervals make it easier to maintain good power throughout the interval and, therefore, more effective.
Rest is another factor to account for. A 4x8 workout will need a lot more recovery time than a 4x4.
I always tell my clients that enough is enough and not every workout should bring you to the limit.
What that limit is, is very personal. Like I started: you are doing great, experimenting like this and finding out what you can do.
I do invite you to experiment in a different direction. Now that you have found what your limit is (5-minute intervals) try to find the minimum you need to do to create the same level of fitness.
Look at your recovery speed. Maybe a 4-minute interval is already enough.
I plan workouts like this at the end of a period as a test and to develop the mental toughness you already mentioned.
You know what is interesting is that is what I find recently. In younger years it felt like my cardiovascular system or breathing hard would usually be my failure and now my legs always feel weak first. Maybe some kind of decrease in mitochondria or something.
But I think you are right in that HIIT will hit my lungs… but it seems that balance has shifted a lot recently but I never really thought about this until now. Something interesting to research. Maybe finding optimal intensity that fatigues both your legs and lungs at the same time?
It’s complicated, but likely yes, mitochondrial function may decline faster than the heart’s ability to move oxygen in many individuals during aging. However, this is not a universally applicable rule, and many factors contribute to the variability in how aging impacts different bodily systems.
I don’t think 108% is hard enough for the CVD system to fail, I think this would be a muscular fatigue failure for most people, I’m not a physiologist though.
It just doesn’t produce fish out of water breathing like you’d get at 120%.
Research has already been done on this topic. It is a total package, too: from age 35 and up, the body produces less and less on different levels. The amino acid Arginine, for instance. You need this for the blood vessels to get wider. Therefore, it plays a key role in recovery.
Often, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy. As we get older, we tend to take it a little less seriously. Been there and done that. Recognize that feeling!? Not just on the training side but on the nutrition side as well.
Last week I rode the Drenthe200. It is a brutal mtb race during wintertime. Depending on the weather, there are 25 to 60 km of axl deep mud to plow through. When I told my parents I enlisted for this race, they said: should you still do that at your age?
But, hé, we love what we do, right?
And you are right, Dave: that last 12% is so much harder.
Picking this back up after a winter of not having a firm plan, I’ve mostly been doing whatever struck me that day.
But, anyways I’ve found that threshold style training usually ends up with a feeling of fatigue. I’m interested in the 80/20 by sessions concept and think it could work to have less fatigue while still slowly making some progress.
I tried Seiler style 4x4 intervals again this time using 110% of FTP/erg mode and 4 minutes on/4 minutes off plan.
I tested FTP about 2 months ago using the Joe Friel style 30 minute test. Historically I’ve had a LTHR of about 169 and this time it came out at 168 so I think it was a valid test.
I know the real Seiler intervals are ~ 118% with only 2 minute rest, but I think that would bury me and I wouldn’t be able to sleep. My goal is to have some challenge, but I don’t want high fatigue / poor sleep / etc…
I think FTP may have gone up slightly, but I haven’t wanted to test it again.
So destroying your sleep with intensity, this sounds like me I am of the belief that we can still improve our “work capacity” and improve this intensity/sleep problem, meaning get our bodies capable of handling more intensity. I feel this is a bit of uncharted territory especially in the endurance space and not well understood or at least agreed upon as to how… My belief is it is mostly about the basics, minimize all stress, sleep well, eat well and lots of true zone 2, slowly increasing intensity volume… Their are “experts” talking about this and I partially think it stretches our beliefs/understanding around polarized training.
I personally would not put a lot of faith in Dr Seiler’s version of Polarized as being the only way or even the the best way to optimize training. It’s just one way that is better than 4 days a week of sweet spot but that’s it, nothing more and even then I would say there are cases when 4 days a week of sweet spot might be better (total guess). We don’t know that Seiler’s polarized is better than any other well founded training strategies and very few elite athletes train with that exact prescription. The biggest benefit I see is that it is dead simple and it is effective. I read Dr Seiler’s daughters version of polarized training and it is nothing like he suggests, it was like 2-3 days a week of intensity
Anyway, I am not against your plan or his plan, one thing I do believe is it is not ideal for building work capacity, work capacity overlaps CTL, but I would say CTL tends to have a bias towards volume and work capacity includes or might even focus on the ability to handle more intensity. Work capacity is popular in strength training realm.
Anyway, long theoretical discussion without answering your question. But as an aging athlete, it is something I am very passionate about. I have read a few books, articles and YT videos discussing this stuff but a really good one is a book called “Squat everyday.” This obviously goes against all popular advice but I am a believer in this concept.
Anyway. My learning about HR vs Power is it is highly individual and so hard to say good or bad but to me it looks optimal but I also believe if you want to follow seiler it should be suffering but you can just slowly build it up from there until by the end of 8 weeks or so you can’t complete it ) But Seiler seems to see this as more year round training or let’s just say I have not seen him discuss periodization. I might be missing something. I have not paid attention to his latest discussions.
Yes, I like your/his idea too of one hard day per week and I also believe this is a good way to create reasonable performance. I was on a tangent related to intensity/sleep… I have proven to myself work capacity can be increased in strength training and I also believe in endurance at some level but not seen others talking about it.
You are doing great research on yourself. Keep that up. I’m not really into the Seiler method. It is to straightforward.
I think variation is key. It will motivate you more. Variation in all sorts. Length of the interval, number of reps, sets, intensity, etc.
In the beginning, this seems like a hard workout. This concept is build for a machine like body that always performs the same.
In reality our performance peaks and dips. Not only due to training, but because a circadian rhythm, temperature, sleep cycles, work-private-balance, etc.
From this point of view your training needs to go up and down as well. I coach a client who is a financial controller. The peak load of his job is at the end of each quarter. So I make sure his schedule isn’t peaking at the same time. He wouldn’t have the time to put in the training, and this period would be double stressful.
The same goes for some clients who work on a rotating schedule. I ask them when they are the fittest and adjust their schedule so they don’t ride a hard training after a hard shift.
But it is the same for any other rider. Yesterday I did one minute intervals in zone 5. Next week I’ll be doing 1:30 and the week after 2’.
The 4 minute blocks will come in two months, just before my goal: a 200km mtb race.
Training like this will make you sleep better, keep you motivated and brings you good results with ‘minimal’ efforts.
Though I could understand if you want to keep it simple and ride the same intervals all year. I would still build it up to 4 minutes.
As I mentioned last week I’m working through 1 ride of intensity along with traditional zone 2 / base training.
I tried an easier version of the Seiler 4x8. I only used 100% of FTP work the work portions and used 3 minutes of rest instead of 2.
Last week I tried a version of the 4x4’s at 110% of FTP.
FTP in both instances is from a January 30-minute continuous effort as given by Joe Friel where an average of the full 30 minutes is used for the FTP and an average of the last 20 minutes is used for LTHR.
I found the 4x8 in this instance to be slightly harder than the 4x4. My max HR did not go as high, highest reading 87% of max for 4x8 and 88% of max for 4x4, but there was more muscular fatigue in the 4x8.
The real deal intervals are as hard as you can go for the work period and you only get 2 minutes of rest. The results from that study are below. You can see the real deal intervals are considerably tougher than what I did, but I don’t think I could have completed the work at this level of difficulty so that is moot.
I concluded that my FTP from the 30 minute test is likely ~ 5W too high so I changed that and increased the intensity by 2% in the 3rd and 4th intervals. I’ll make that the starting intensity next time.
Nice job!!! I am doing very minimal intensity now trying to build up volume quickly for my race in 5 weeks but I would like to try this as well at some point just to see how it feels/works. Maybe after this race.
This appears to be the case of a study where N=1.
