Author Topic: Base training  (Read 152289 times)

Re: Base training
« Reply #2025 on: November 10, 2020, 04:27:31 pm »
Week 5 of sweet spot base finished today probably going to take a few weeks off before moving on to base 2 but it’s keeping occupied on the dark mid week nights and I’m still getting out with er in doors once over the weekend as well .

Don’t take too long off or any fitness gains will just ebb away before you restart.

simonp

  • Omnomnomnipotent.
Re: Base training
« Reply #2026 on: November 10, 2020, 04:42:13 pm »
I try to stay vaguely in the right zone. I don’t try to follow the power target closely. Picking a flat route is a good idea for this. I had a couple of proper climbs yesterday and went well above target. I’d have probably fallen over riding at 160 Watts. I can ride the same roads over and over but it starts to get repetitive.  I’ve been told in the past that going above threshold on climbs can cause you to stay out of fat burning for some time afterwards so you lose some of the adaptations you would otherwise have got.

I'm finding it does depend on the roads.  Today I had to go into town for something so it was a bit stop and start.  My average power was where it should be but there were more zeros and higher powered intervals.  It was maybe more like sweet spot intervals than Z2. 

Yesterday was Richmond Park where I can pedal most of the time, so my average power was a bit higher than it should be, but I would have spent less time at high power than today

Overall I'm enjoying Trad Base, but I do worry that it isn't doing much for me.  For an audax rider, it's not that hard to ride for two hours per day in zone 2 so it can't be stressing my system very much.  I feel I should be pushing harder to make it a challenge, and I could push quite a bit harder without affecting my ability to do the same the next day.  But I'll stick with it and see what happens.

Last year, I didn't do a lot of cycling base over winter, because of the rowing, so I spent the summer doing long steady miles as that seemed specific to PBP (plus the qualifiers of course). I had a fitness test in the summer that suggested I did have a very good aerobic base, so I could run on fat at higher power than in previous years, but my lactate threshold* wasn't particularly high. So I think the long steady miles did do something - but they don't do everything. Traditional Base II brings in threshold work, and tempo work, as well as short neuromuscular sprints. III brings in sweet spot as well. There's no VO2max work.

* Actually, there are two lactate thresholds. When people talk about Lactate Threshold they are talking about LT2. LT1 is when lactic acid production starts to rise as intensity rises, and this point is what is mainly being shifted by traditional base training. I would not be surprised if my LT2 dropped during the first phase of Traditional base as the first phase has no intensity whatsoever.




Re: Base training
« Reply #2027 on: November 10, 2020, 06:19:21 pm »
there is also increasing discussion of AeT the aerobic threshold and training at just below that.  I quite like Phil Maffetones ideas (even if you don't like his equation) and his views on how a very well adapted person will be pushing their aerobic threshold much closer to the LT than the average.

There is a very interesting book called the uphill athlete by Kilian Jornet and a couple of other people which goes into this in great detail.  Well worth a read.

Re: Base training
« Reply #2028 on: November 10, 2020, 07:12:13 pm »
Polarized is about majority of training below LT1 and some above LT2 with nothing between LT1 and LT2.

Re: Base training
« Reply #2029 on: November 10, 2020, 07:25:52 pm »
Polarized is about majority of training below LT1 and some above LT2 with nothing between LT1 and LT2.

It is this ratio which seems to get people confused and how much you "need" the higher intensity.  There are a couple of interesting real world type studies looking at training data on thousands of individuals both elite and amateur now showing that the more base miles you run at zone 1-2 HR the faster you are in the race irrespective of anything else,

Re: Base training
« Reply #2030 on: November 11, 2020, 09:50:51 am »
Polarized is about majority of training below LT1 and some above LT2 with nothing between LT1 and LT2.

It is this ratio which seems to get people confused and how much you "need" the higher intensity.  There are a couple of interesting real world type studies looking at training data on thousands of individuals both elite and amateur now showing that the more base miles you run at zone 1-2 HR the faster you are in the race irrespective of anything else,
Does that apply to short races that are high intensity almost all the time (eg CX)?
I'm assuming that polarised and Z1-2 training is basically for people with the time to do a lot of miles at zone 1-2? I don't see how it can give enough stimulus if you are restricted to a few hours a week.

simonp

  • Omnomnomnipotent.
Re: Base training
« Reply #2031 on: November 11, 2020, 11:32:06 am »
Polarized is about majority of training below LT1 and some above LT2 with nothing between LT1 and LT2.

It is this ratio which seems to get people confused and how much you "need" the higher intensity.  There are a couple of interesting real world type studies looking at training data on thousands of individuals both elite and amateur now showing that the more base miles you run at zone 1-2 HR the faster you are in the race irrespective of anything else,
Does that apply to short races that are high intensity almost all the time (eg CX)?
I'm assuming that polarised and Z1-2 training is basically for people with the time to do a lot of miles at zone 1-2? I don't see how it can give enough stimulus if you are restricted to a few hours a week.

So there are a few things I was mulling over about polarized training recently:

1. It's pushed a lot in rowing. The standard distance is 2,000m. A top level athlete is looking at under 6 minutes. Which happens to be specific to Z3 under the Seiler polarized training model, but it's not specific to most cycling events, which are longer duration.

2. Traditional base type training as exemplified in the TR plans is not polarized training, it's pyramidal. This approach has been seen in some studies to give better results for cyclists than polarized.

3. The sweet spot base approach is pretty much the inverse of the polarized. A lot of the work is done in the areas specifically avoided by polarized training.

4. Matt Fitzgerald has written about the time vs intensity trade-off and he argues that even at 4h a week, polarized wins.

I went to an interesting talk about rowing training recently where polarized was advocated (guy giving the talk was Tony Larkman). He recently won the British Virtual Indoor Rowing Championships in the 50-54 age group, with a 6.19 time. That's faster than anyone I know of in our club, best in my 4+ we were winning regattas in is 6:34, and he was under 30.

Having said those things, my best overall fitness results have come from following TR sweet-spot based plans in 2016. I got less fit, I think, during the times when I was doing the most rowing, because I had less structure, and less time available (due to the travelling involved in going to a rowing club - particularly the insistence from the coach on doing land training at the club). I also had a break in training due to injury and illness late 2017-early 2018. During the 2018 regattas season, I struggled to do much time on the bike because I was always so tired. We did win at 4 regional regattas so it was probably worth it.


Re: Base training
« Reply #2032 on: November 11, 2020, 12:09:43 pm »
There's a fundamental problem I have with training that contains a lot of Z1/Z2 work, like Maffetone or some Polarized programs I've seen on Training Peaks, and that is - the volumes required to make it work are huge, and I just don't want to ride at that pace, for that long.

Re: Base training
« Reply #2033 on: November 11, 2020, 04:31:58 pm »
I wouldn’t say 10 hours a week for polarized was huge.

fboab

  • It's a fecking serious business, riding a bike
Re: Base training
« Reply #2034 on: November 11, 2020, 04:49:50 pm »
Yebbut if you're doing it at zone 1 it feels like 30.
TSS is not Total Sex Score, Chris!

Re: Base training
« Reply #2035 on: November 11, 2020, 07:55:37 pm »
I’m doing all my road miles each week on 79” fixed.  It’s pretty much impossible to stay in zone 1.

Re: Base training
« Reply #2036 on: November 11, 2020, 08:00:07 pm »
I’m doing all my road miles each week on 79” fixed.  It’s pretty much impose to stay in zone 1.

Given I can't stay in zone 2 on 10-speed, I'd agree with that.

Re: Base training
« Reply #2037 on: November 11, 2020, 08:02:48 pm »
So I'm struggling to stay in zone 2 power, but my heart rate is staying low, mostly zone 1 or 2,and only very really dipping into zone 3.

Where power and heart rate zones conflict, what does it mean?

Re: Base training
« Reply #2038 on: November 11, 2020, 08:12:56 pm »
Yebbut if you're doing it at zone 1 it feels like 30.

Yeah but low intensity for polarized includes Z2 if you are referring to the five zone HR scale. You don’t have to stick to Z1.

simonp

  • Omnomnomnipotent.
Re: Base training
« Reply #2039 on: November 12, 2020, 01:01:08 am »
So I'm struggling to stay in zone 2 power, but my heart rate is staying low, mostly zone 1 or 2,and only very really dipping into zone 3.

Where power and heart rate zones conflict, what does it mean?

Do you know your maximum HR from a test or are you using 220-age? It could be your MHR is lower than the formula. In my case it’s the other way around and my LTHR was suggested by my Garmin to be 174. 220-age for me is 172 so that would suggest a far lower LTHR.

Re: Base training
« Reply #2040 on: November 12, 2020, 06:44:25 am »
I got to 171 on a ramp test in August.  That's slightly higher than 220-age for me too (167). 



Re: Base training
« Reply #2041 on: November 12, 2020, 08:23:30 am »
Week 5 of sweet spot base finished today probably going to take a few weeks off before moving on to base 2 but it’s keeping occupied on the dark mid week nights and I’m still getting out with er in doors once over the weekend as well .

Don’t take too long off or any fitness gains will just ebb away before you restart.

I’m on week 6 (recovery week) but better get back on it next week then  :thumbsup:
Will start sweet spot base low volume 2 after that’s finished around Xmas I’m interested in doing some polarized stuff I’m not sure how this will be possible while riding the many ramps of the Peak District though unless I smash it up every steep hill  ::-)

Pedal Castro

  • so talented I can run with scissors - ouch!
    • Two beers or not two beers...
Re: Base training
« Reply #2042 on: November 12, 2020, 10:03:10 am »
The key tenet of polarised training though is that a session is either high or low, so if a ride has hard hill efforts in it's a Seiler Z3 ride irrespective of the 4h Z1 work. The concept is only one ride in 5 should have the hard efforts in.

I tend to follow a more pyramid winter programme, so last month was 48h Z1, 14h Z2 (tempo), and only 1h Z3. Yesterday's 6h ride only had 2s of Z3, probably at the crest of a hill as my riding partner was a little too exuberant early on and I didn't want to lose sight of her as I was navigating!

Re: Base training
« Reply #2043 on: November 13, 2020, 02:09:43 pm »
So I'm struggling to stay in zone 2 power, but my heart rate is staying low, mostly zone 1 or 2,and only very really dipping into zone 3.

Where power and heart rate zones conflict, what does it mean?

This may not be of interest for anyone else but I had another thought when I was out this morning.  A few years ago I got a Powertap PowerCal, which is a heart rate meter that estimates power based on changes in heart rate.  DC Rainmaker and others said that it gave quite good estimations over long periods.  Given I mainly wanted it for pacing audaxes rather than doing short intervals, it seemed like a good option and, for the most part, it is.

Most people report it being fairly well calibrated but, when I use mine, it gives power figures that are about 25%, or 30W, lower than other power meters do.  Putting that together with my heart rate and power zones not aligning suggests that I've got an odd heart rate profile.  Perhaps if I used the PowerCal again, it would have the zones lining up. 

Anyone else found this, ie HR and power zones a long way out of alignment?  I'll do some more research and report if I find anything. 

simonp

  • Omnomnomnipotent.
Re: Base training
« Reply #2044 on: November 14, 2020, 08:20:50 pm »
So this was what was in store for me today:



I've not averaged that many Watts for 2h30 for more than 5 years. Feeling pretty jaded now.

Tomorrow's due to be 3h z2. Fortunately the forecast has cleared a bit and there's a window in the morning where it looks like it will be dry. 75km route planned.

simonp

  • Omnomnomnipotent.
Re: Base training
« Reply #2045 on: November 16, 2020, 02:03:34 pm »
I found some steep hills. Not so z2.

simonp

  • Omnomnomnipotent.
Re: Base training
« Reply #2046 on: November 24, 2020, 11:20:53 pm »
So, 7 weeks into TB HV, after restarting due to a bad back, I think it's giving good results. My heart rate is significantly lower in comparable workouts; sweet spot feels really easy; I've set Strava PRs on a few climbs on Sunday.

I've not yet had the all clear for maximal effort from the cardiologist. So unless that changes, it's no ramp test. Currently FTP is set at 240W. 264W still caused some muscle burn (but it was low cadence work, so maybe exaggerating the issue). I didn't notice anything at 252W on the same drill. So FTP is probably up a fair bit, and I can probably add 5-10W at the end of this cycle before the final 4-week block of the TB plan without being over-optimistic.


Re: Base training
« Reply #2047 on: November 25, 2020, 08:57:43 am »
That sounds really impressive. How much have you built up to high volume over the years - were you on medium or high (when including rowing) last year?

Re: Base training
« Reply #2048 on: November 25, 2020, 10:11:57 am »
Well done!

I'm now in week 4 (ie the rest week) of TB HV, so I'm about to finish my first block.  I've enjoyed it, but the mild weather has helped.  I've been feeling good but am looking forward to the ramp test on Monday for an objective assessment of where I am.

The forecast is for it to get a bit colder next week and, as I've been going out around 6am, I'm not sure that the next block would be as much fun.  I was toying with the idea of flipping to Build for the run in to Christmas.  I don't need to decide until Tuesday morning!

simonp

  • Omnomnomnipotent.
Re: Base training
« Reply #2049 on: November 25, 2020, 11:13:37 am »
That sounds really impressive. How much have you built up to high volume over the years - were you on medium or high (when including rowing) last year?

I was doing medium volume TR plans, and the rowing, last year. I got my FTP to 248W last year but I was suffering a bit from burn-out. I did lots of volume after stepping back from rowing but it was too late to fit in a build/speciality cycle so I had no top-end.

This year I was doing SS-based MV plans up until September, when the palpitations started. I was making progress, but it was taxing.

I have 2h30 z2 to do this evening... what fun!