Actually there are thousands of people on Maffetone’s FB group saying it works but most are runners and cyclists don’t trust runners 
I saw a few cyclists on Reddit saying they tried it and it worked. I tried it and it worked as a runner so I fall into that untrustworthy category Also I am so slow, I am not sure anyone would qualify if as working. But yes, I got seriously healthy, I did not get sick for 4 years.
I am doing a “big” Z2 push now, but it’s very mixed activities, most not clearly measurable from a maf test perspective. Also, a lot of weight training now too, so that might screw up my Z2 progress.
Look at this extreme guy that does lots of Zone 2 (This Allan Thrall is pretty smart too)
Also, if you ever decide you want to become Goggins
You should read these guys book below. This guy Jonathan here is one of the smartest coaches/sport scientists I have ever read or talked to. Their company very successfully gets guys to pass the test to become Swat and military elite. So they make seriously bad ass guys more bad ass. When I talked to him on the phone, he told me, “You know my #1 rule is for new guys coming to my program? If you are not going to get good at Zone 2 you can go home now.”
But… When a friend posted something on Reddit asking about Zone 2, to a big cycling group I could still feel the primary belief was “Zwift Races and TR sweet spot.” So even though there are a bunch of us here than understand, it’s obviously very far from a main stream belief.
My regular slow ‘run’ is 6 km at a pace of 9:30 per km. I’s a very slow jog keeping my HR around 115-118 bpm.
And it’s only since about 3 months because before it was more a power walk around the same pace. But I wasn’t able to jog at that low HR. Since i could no longer increase speed while power walking and my HR dropped further, I started jogging/walking. But there is clear improvement, slowly but steadily.
Yes, that was the experience I had as well. Had to mostly walk in the beginning. I eventually got to 8:15 @ 130 back then and 6:55 marathon pace. The interesting thing was I could run a less than 100 bpm at about 10:30 at the peak of my Maffetone period. I did lots of days of 100bpm just as an experiment and also because my wife was slower than me at low HR running.
Now I am 9:30/km for 3k at 120-123 bpm but I am only running about two 20 minute sessions a week but doing lots of other stuff too (rucking, biking…). I don’t even track everything and just watch my HR often without tracking. So I am very close to you. I need to train a bit more to catch up to you
To me this says you might be able to use a Ketosis acetone measuring device to measure fat burn
I get to enjoy the treadmill stress test with the ventilator tapes to my face every year for because my cardiologist is a sadist. Having done both that and ekg one I think the ventilator one is a better prediction and if you can talk you are
Aerobic because burning sugar needs a lot of o2. With my bias toward older athletes it’s always better to be low than a smug too high. When are getting the best results from work outs in this order of value: aerobic, anaerobic, vo2max, threshold, sweet spot, tempo
I prescribe almost no sweet spot and let tempo happen only out doors
The rest is 60% aerobic 15 anaerobic, 10% v02max, 10%, threshold 5% over 18 week block. Sometimes if someone is an aerobic mess I will give them 3 weeks of only aerobic + threshold to break them down but that depends on their mental strength which has to be high 3setd of 9x9 at threhold is something only the really strong can handle at the brain gate. That’s basically an ftp race hiding as interval training
For the most part too much threshold and sweet spot leads to frustration for the rider and failed workouts
I rarely do anything higher then over-unders during training. Just because I find it to taxing. I will go all out on outdoor group rides. Must be a motivation issue.
Starting winter base now. Lots of aerobic running (jogging, 5-6 times a week, 45-60 min per session walking my dog), 2 or 3 LIT indoor rides (70-120 min) and one tempo ride. This will be my routine for the whole winter, only the tempo ride will evolve to sweetspot, threshold, over-under.
Must say that I don’t race and my main goals for the season are all long days in the saddle. 8-10 hours, 200-260km, one absolutely flat in the NL and 2 others on rolling terrain.
Hi all
Long time user of indoor training. Past 5 or so years, proponent of the PoL model. Which has kind of organically adjusted to me, keeping with principals.
A few years back I really struggled to understand the LT1 defined area and even to this day have numerous notes, with numerous calculations all alluding to the correct and golden number( I went so far down the rabbit hole)
Anyhow, unlike most athletes, (safe to say pro athletes have coaches to save them from OTS) I needed to evaluate my life and overindulgence of training and look at holism as a constant. It came following indicators of a developing myopathy and as aforementioned, OTS. Despite what the forums suggest, I would argue it’s fairly easy to send an amateur down there. When you consider, the psychological, cognitive and physical toil of work, life and fitness.
I digress, I started using HRV as a proxy for understanding my recovery. And although this worked reasonably well, I struggled to maintain a’just right’ approach.
I alluded to HRV, found Whoop and immediately got rid and found Marco Altini and HRV4training (still use to this day)
Marco had really done a lot of good quality work in HRV and indeed has had some links with Dr Seiler. Which has led to him developing HRV logger. Very basic experimental app but has allowed to develop
Updated view on HRV analysis during exercise and DFA alpha 1
I have found with HRVlogger, a Polar H10 has given me a confident area to aim for my LT1.
I can’t say this will work for everyone, but for me, it’s saved a fair load of hassle.
Loads of information out there and dare I say it, maybe a few more papers that might debunk the very thing I’m explaining.
Hope it helps a little. 
It has been awhile since I’ve read up on MAF, so correct me if I’m wrong.
MAF was designed around runners. And your running HR is going to be higher than your cycling HR for the same zone. I was told/read somewhere to -10 all of my HR zones when comparing running and cycling.
If you’re using regular MAF to determine cycling zones should it not start with -10 in the calculations?
My aerobic zone for running is 120-130. For the same effort cycling it’s usually 108-118.
We had a second discussion around this but the general concensous is maybe in a sport you train more in, you could have a different MAF HR for a sport you don’t train as much in. Maffetone trained triathletes and never set a different target HR for different sports.
Here is our other discussion on this.
So I would guess everyone is a bit different in different sports, I would think monitoring your breadth and ability to talk during the activities might paint a clearer picture if you have a noticeable difference.
This is all so complicated without much agreement from the experts.
Perhaps a more pragmatic approach is to ride at an intensity that allows you to ride the next day without excess fatigue.
I’ve liked the Jack base workouts, they are achieving this objective plus they import nicely into Zwift.
Dave
There is multiple objectives with Zone 2 training and I agree, most people would do just fine using CJ plans/workouts. As I always say do what is most enjoyable for you and there is a good chance it will produce the best results. If you happen to be a podium finisher, then you might need that few percent extra of improvement. My belief is guys/gals that over train very often and/or ultra distance guys can gain the most benefit from low HR Z2.
You might be able to monitor HRV and see rest HRV do a workout check HRV the next morning and if you slept well and everything is on track and HRV is similar then you might be right. If you are doing less than 6 hours a week it’s probably a lot less important, but different people are different for their personal threshold. I enjoy Z2 HR stuff, and don’t recover very well so it gives me freedom to do more. It’s pretty important to me that it really maxes out around that Z2 threshold.
I think there’s a lot to the idea of having fun as the primary objective. It is easy to get caught up in “optimal” training, but most of us aren’t at the level where it matters when you take a step back and think about it.
Dave
Yes, I am 200% in agreement with this. Optimized training can be fun to a point, but when you have to trade off between one choice and another that you are not sure on, pick the fun one And any doubt on consistency pick fun.
So I had a long discussion with Andrea about this. So they have tested between 10-20k different cyclists (mostly elites/pros but some more regular people as well) for both lactate and RQ. Two different tests with different protocols. He has all the data. They don’t test cyclists for LT1 but they do for runners They have RQ for the whole ramp test.
So I recorded this discussion all on video podcast style but not sure how presentable it is I will review it and maybe I can publish big or small parts of it
Anyway. So here are some points that might be interesting to you and others.
-
They use IAT (individualized anaerobic threshold) Rather than being LT2=4.0 it’s LT2=baseline + 3. For most of their testing this is more like 3.8-3.9 mmol/l. He is going to send me an article about IAT.
-
He says tests are significantly affected by protocol. So some lab doing 1 minute steps of 25w is noticeably different than 2m steps of 5% for example. Meaning that how Maffetone and San Milan actually do the test affects the results. They do lactate tests based on how their manufacture recommends which is 10 minute steps of 50w (I think). They take blood at 5m and 9:50m of each step.
-
He agrees with San Milan that for top riders VT1 is right below the point of breathing hard, and this is likely because they are around 80% of max HR (he did not know exact figure). For those of us closer to 65-70% it seems likely to be below this hard breathing point. This can be primary difference between Maffetone and San Milan although I would think Maffetone should have pointed this out since he worked with both.
-
For a pro to change 10bpm (or zone) takes a significant effort and they can do it very predictably. Meaning they just increase intensity and bam, power and HR lock into that new intensity level. None pros can predictably go in and out from one zone to another. Me I just lift my hands of the bars and I change zones
-
LT2 and VT2 are not at the same place in just about any athletes the only ones that it is close is world class TT racers. Otherwise for most pros it’s about a 20-25w difference. So we could assume that is about a 5-7% difference in most people but he is not sure on lower level athletes. They actually prescribe VT2 for some training and LT2 for other kinds of training.
He is going to analyze a bunch of their test data related to this and going to see if he if he finds any other observations or clarifications to this.
I would still like to listen to that 
IAT is what I meant when talking about the lactate levels. Gordo Byrn uses +1 mmol compared to baseline for LT1 and +4 mmol for LT2.
I’ m sure protocol is an important factor but I’m not immediately looking for a standardized thing. I plan to repeat a slow protocol once I get my lactate meter and use the curve shifting to track progress.
As you will surely know by now, my interest in LT2 is very limited because for interval workouts I use the PDC to define a starting intensity and then I just build on that.
Low intensity and sustained tempo is done on HR targets.
Regarding point 3: This is one point where I’m tempted to disagree with Seiler. The statistical analysis done on the data for pro’s, can’t simply be transferred to amateurs. In my opinion all three (Maffetone, San-Milan and Seiler) have some good points but there is still more research to be done, especially on different levels of non-pro’s.
And for HR zones, I’m one of those weirdo’s, that will almost always see my HR go down at same Power after 35-50 minutes of low intensity. And it’s not only HR, because I objectively feel and record the same for Breathing frequency/depth and RPE. It’s usually a difference of 5-7 bpm lower. I wonder if anything will show up in lactate levels…
I think you mean +3 for LT2 or else it would be close to 5 mmol. Yes, I think for personal testing it’s an incredible device and you don’t care what everyone else’s standard is just to find your own and see how it changes. So I am not trying to convince you not to get it. I really want you to get it… TrainerDay is on the path that I will afford one in the next year or so as well I no longer have a job and it’s 100% TD now which is fun but temporarily a little stressful living on less income. Looking at the growth curve and my savings, I should not be stressed at all
And you have tried everything maffetone suggested? Have you seen clear MAF test improvement over a long period? My drift definitely went away while running z2 for a long time. Maybe it took me a year of 98% mostly fasted z2, I don’t remember exactly how long it took though.
Haven’t seen the clear improvement yet but I always do my workouts late in the evening, not fasted. With drift, in my case, the drift is downwards for the first 30-50 min when cycling, then it stabilizes and upward drift is in my case only showing after about 3 hours. I’m not sure if you spotted that correctly in my post.
For running, things are similar but faster. I will see downward drift during the first 20-30 min and upward drift after 70-80 min.
Given all that, I tend to suspect that I underestimate my AeT. But when I go higher, I clearly feel all symptoms that are considered to be above Aet. I can’t figure this out yet…
What I do know for sure is that consistent LIT during the winter months, brings me at the start of the outdoor season in a pretty good condition compared to fellow club members.
You say downward and upward, I don’t know if we are talking about power or HR, more drift and less drift? Or HR going down?.. So I guess as @ratz said minimize pre-ride carbs would be next best to being fasted and ideally no pre-ride protein. Give yourself as much time as possible between eating and riding. Secondly do Maffetone’s warmups that are very slow increase in HR over first 12-15 minutes. I personally don’t think there is such a thing as doing Zone 2 too low. Meaning my target was 130 and I clearly saw improvement from 100 days in a row of 20-30 minutes of running most days and 70% of my days around 100-105. This was in after 2 years of doing maffetone. My resting HR came way down even with these very low intensities. Maffetone suggests most people are doing too high not too low if they are not seeing improvement.
But yes it sounds like you are getting the main benefit you need which is feeling strong in the spring And if you are not trying to kill it on 6 - 8 hour rides than cardiac drift might not be that important. I have a friend that is big carb guy and rides 3 times a week at 6 hours plus mostly zone 2 power and he has a lot of cardiac drift. He is not a monster performance cyclist but just likes his long rides.
That’s what I almost always see at the beginning of low intensity workouts (AFTER a slow 10-15 min warmup!). Same power or pace, HR goes down then stabilizes and HR drifts up in the last quarter of looong workouts. On the regular shorter workouts, I increase power/pace to keep HR in the high MAF zone all while breathing and RPE are mostly equal.
Sounds like me ;-). Little explosiveness, struggling hard in crits but able to go really long, when others are deteriorating due to the length of the effort. But my cardiac drift is rather low, even on 8 hour rides. Looks like I’m born to do Ultra’s