It cracks me up that polarized threatens some people’s world view and they feel the need to attack it. Attacking the estimate of LT1 is just dumb. Inigo San Millan prescribes the talk test. Seiler says 65-70% of HRmax. It’s really not hard or need be that scientific to get in the ballpark of the right zone.
And other people, training by the coggin zones, seem to be able to find zone 2 just fine without a lactate meter.
It’s a “great article” only if you like being misinformed.
That’s a great question.
Personally, and this is only my opinion. This opinion is based on observing many athletes and some research done by Alan Couzens. I run a cycling club and one my best friends is a well qualified cycling coach. So, between us, we see a lot of varied athletes.
Assuming everything is equal. Each athletes nutrition, sleep, training distribution and general maintenance is on point. The single largest influence on improvement is volume.
I have never met a truly elite cyclist who has got there on 4hrs a week. NEVER. Not once. I do not think it is even possible. Maybe for Remco, but not for any normal human. Especially, a masters athlete.
I have met people who have maintained incredible fitness on tiny volume, but this was still based on years of extensive training, with at some point earlier, high volume.
It is my opinion that increasing your yearly volume is the single largest factor in long term improvement.
I have post my hierarchy of training importance in other threads. Unsurprisingly, it is not dissimilar to what most endurance coaches and exercise physiologists recommend.
They virtually all lead with volume then frequency (consistency).
It is actually a very simple experiment, increase your volume substantially, adjust your training distribution to reflect this higher volume, then monitor your results.
I would be surprised if implemented correctly, it didn’t result in significant improvement.
According to the scientific literature, all “thresholds” are highly correlated with each other.
I refuse to learn😂
Looking at “traditional” 6-zone FTP-based power as compared to polarized 3-zone power there’s a pretty clear delineation* going on based on %FTP. That is:
Polarized Z3 = 6-Zone zones 6, 5, and the top-end of zone 4
Polarized Z2 = Everything in between
Polarized Z1 = 6-Zone zones 1, 2 and the bottom-end of zone 3
*I am aware that 3-zone polarized training zones are not intended to be discovered via a traditional “FTP test”, but for most riders this is pretty good provided one is conservative. And by conservative, I mean really make sure you’re in the intended zone by either going a bit easier on the polarized Z1 stuff and a bit harder on the polarized Z3 stuff.
In the real world, it looks like this: on my Wahoo Elemnt Bolt, I set up 6 zone power and use the power zone field as follows:
How so? Cardiac drift occurs at all intensities.
Initially it seems bad, but the snippets are given without context. Coach Chad had a string of injuries and is planning a move that takes time and energy away from training. Without knowing the context, I think it is very hard to judge why he couldn’t get through the training block.
I happily live my life with someone who tells me that all the time. Must surely not be that bad indeed.
Nicely said.
Thanks for all the constructive debate in the forum.
As far as the video goes, we don’t agree with the interpretation of the studies and how TrainerRoad’s offering was represented. We’re going to cover all of this in-depth in the podcast next Thursday (not this Thursday, but the Thursday after that).
You better hold onto your deep dive hats.
Thanks for pointing out this. My plan is to gradually adopt more volume (endurance ride) into TR plan.
It means that there is something causing incompatibility between you and that particular plan.
Concur with this. I think this post increases my will to make a change, but I will keep caution and pay attention to my journey.
Looking forward your arguments next Thrusday. It’s really a chance for TR users to improve ourself as better cyclist.
I’ve been married to a publicist for over 10 years now. Call me more cynical than before that in regards to all the crazy shit that goes on behind the scenes.
Dylan’s vid was mediocre. I didn’t see anything that was overly controversial mentioned.
I have two questions in regards to this discussion.
Awesome, can’t wait. By the way, does the cake next to your avatar mean today is your birthday? In that case, Happy Birthday, Nate!
I think I’m 39 in Australia but not in Reno yet 
.
Last b-day… better make this year count 
Well, I’m in Japan, so that’s close enough! Congrats!
PS I’m turning 40 in 5 days. Imagine how I must feel! 
The temp here feels like 39c too!
Polarize training adopted a core concept of how to distribute the
training load. It adopted the magic ratio, i.e., 80/20 principle. Most
of your training should be at lower intensity. Only 20% of your
training load is located at high training zone.