So another interesting perspective around this is people suggesting zone 2 for mitochondria… which is peripheral. But in reality the trend most people see from low hr training is increased central heart/lung compared to peripheral, stroke volume is the biggest benefactor, is my guess/belief. Now I assume it is doing both, possibly delays in peripheral and possibly a bigger benefit for central. I don’t think any studies have touched on this stuff that I have seen.
1 Like
Also think about this, within your age group, what if most of them are doing 10 hours a week on the bike… Do you think you should be as strong as them doing 5, obviously with the right genetics you might be similar but it would be hard to do even the right training to make up for this gap… Just too many variables out of our control or things we are not willing to change/sacrifice, so better to be the best version of you within your limits.
2 Likes
Thanks again. I don’t look at intervals.icu data as being of any particular significance just a curiosity mostly.
“Comparison is the thief of joy” rings true and I try to avoid that.
I’m mostly in my own little world just trying to stay resilient and able to complete my bread and butter outdoor rides feeling good afterwards.
If there’s about 12 weeks left until riding outside again that’s a lot of trainer time and I’d like to use it wisely: 1) have fun, 2) not incur significant fatigue, 3) move the fitness needle if possible. 1 and 2 are the priorities though
Dave
1 Like
You and I are the same… We can dream we will magically become fast without the willingness to do what it takes… but experiment within our own constraints to figure out how to beat the system… 
I agree, it’s super fun and I look around too.
2 Likes
And then Kobe comes along…
1 Like
We kid a lot and I do enjoy it…
but if I’m being honest I am fast and ride my bike a ton – at least by my standards.
If I tell the average person I routinely go for 3 hr Saturday rides they think I’m insane.
I mostly ride with Jessica and my nose is in the wind 95% of the time to make her ride easier.
It is easy to get bogged down by Strava, forums, etc… where there are super performers but almost anyone who cares enough to consistently ride has already gotten so far.
Dave
1 Like
The Time Crunched Cyclist podcast has a recent episode titled “How Quickly Can Aerobic Training Make You Fast?”
Pulford and Cusick cover some interesting ground quite well, e.g.
-
why training takes ~6 weeks to have a noticeably beneficial effect
-
that aerobic capacity takes a long time to build and is quick to drop away when training stops
-
how aerobic training contributes to VO2 improvement (and why, therefore, Zone 5 / VO2 workouts can be missed from a training plan for a while as long as sufficient aerobic training volume is being done)
This video appears to be part of a series with Cusick. The other two up there so far are
- How quickly can FTP training yield big gains
- How quickly can VO2 max increase in cyclists
I haven’t looked at those two yet.
The problem with both of those questions is how do you measure them? Both are highly affected by the testing protocol. Also, I believe that the 42/7 from PMC or TrainingPeaks or Coggin or whoever seems like a reasonable default. While I’m not in love with CTL in general, I’m a huge fan of TSB. So I think this 42-day estimation is reasonable. It’s 42 days going up and 42 days going down. I think when you’re talking about FTP tests and VO2 max tests, those are highly dependent on recent training, more so than your aerobic function.
I’m responding to what you wrote, not what’s in the video. I’ll watch the video soon.
1 Like
You are pretty much heading to where the video heads.
The balance between sufficient stimulation to continue development and the recovery from (or assimilation of) the work done previously.
There is a bit of a nonsense (imo) segment where Puflord talks of a 0 CTL starting point leading to a plateau, something like 12 - 14 weeks later, if only Z2 work is undertaken.
There would be flattening of the CTL line of course, but I do not believe that corresponds to lack of progress from properly executed Z2 training from that point on. Especially given the 0 CTL start point.
Like all of these videos, you could not build a successful training plan based on just this one. But it does make a few useful points quite well.
The way it covers varying cadence work was nicely done (imo), that starts around the 41 minute mark.
The forum generally disagreed with me before, but especially among cyclists with questionable recovery I think there’s something to “polarized” style training where most riding is below LT1 and you add targeted zone 3/zone 2 training based off your specific goals.
I’m not saying textbook polarized or pyramidal, but intensity frequency and workout design that is sustainable for the individual athlete.
Dave
1 Like
I think the key word there Dave is sustainable. Consistency really is king.
If an athlete is doing rides that are so hard that they prevent her from properly completing her next planned ride, that is not good for consistency.
If it happens rarely, it is probably insignificant. But the more often a hard ride interrupts her plan, the more it needs thinking about.
She either needs to plan so that those hard rides are better accommodated, or dial them down a bit, so that she can stay consistent: make her plan, as you say, sustainable.
1 Like
If the forum includes me, I would not disagree with that but I would say as a year round plan its not best for performance but for general health and reasonable performance. Its perfect for someone that wants a plan without a plan. So my disagreeing depends on the specific details of the discussion.
1 Like
Of course, you run the show here but you are still part of the forum.
That answer makes sense.
Dave
I don’t run the show… I am just the happy slave to all you guys
1 Like
I have now watched both of these videos and I say they are worth a look if you are interested in the topic.
The answers, subject to a lot of “it depends” are about 6-8 weeks for FTP training and about 3-6 weeks for VO2
So there are many approaches to this, performance first , fitness first and health first at the top level… As I mentioned many times, Andrea believes the future of performance puts a stronger emphasis on health but each one of these primary goals has a very different strategy to how you train.
Most racers are a performance first approach. Many 20 to 40 non racers might be fitness first, and 40+ many people switch to health first. Obviously lots of exceptions to all of this, just overly generalizing.
Clearly defining your primary goal among these three is the first step and changes everything. Convincing performance first they should consider health first is difficult or impossible and is hard to see any elite athletes doing this so its uncharted territory other than broken athletes like Mark Allen was. Older runners and triathletes being prime subjects.
I try to nudge people to incorporating more health in their focus but still people will do what they want, and no reason to rock that boat, this is all more healthy then the couch so have fun, do what makes sense for your goals.
1 Like
Alex,
What specifically do you recommend from a health focus?
Given cycling isn’t load bearing and only uses the lower half there are better activities, but it is a lot of fun!
I don’t find weight lifting very fun, but it is probably the most important thing to do for health in my opinion.
My hot take of the day is that cycling beyond X hours probably starts to have a negative health implication compared to more reasonable amounts of time.
Dave
Read Maffetone, he provides the best advice to health focused training. We are building a new app that should launch soon that is about guiding people to fitness with a health focus. You will hear about it. It’s not prescriptive of what to do yet, more just big picture.
You are absolutely right that balancing training stress with life stress is critical, too much is a bad idea, just like too little. If you sleep amazing, young, no stress, then much more training stress is possible and reasonable. As those factors change so should your training. You are right cyclists should do some form of strength training. I would say 10 to 15 minutes a week of kettlebell swing and 10 minutes or so of pushups is a good goal, start with much less. A bit more diversity and volume would be good, but that is simple, quick, and very effective and cheap.
Along with aerobic (which cycling is great for), strength, balance and flexbility are in there somewhere
so yoga, or something like that?
Here is Bryan Johnson’s blueprint exercise page
I think the fundamentals behind what Bryan is suggesting are good but the specifics need fine tuning for the individual. I see a few minutes a week of strength training is the low hanging fruit. Rowing machines, swimming, yoga… fantastic. Stretching itself seems is a bit more complicated discussion/advice so yoga seems to be the simplest single word advice for stretching and might be the best overall. I have other stretching thoughts for those too lazy to go to yoga…
The biggest thing to get more “fit” whatever that means, is don’t do only a single sport…. just cycling is not perfect but far better than just the desk… which my ratio at the moment is far out of whack…