I don’t know about that. I got a smart trainer earlier this year and have run all my workouts in erg mode and I’ve found it really useful in actually holding a steady power level which appears to have been very beneficial now I’m out on the road. I seem to be able to hold power now more consistently for longer periods.
I’d like to keep ERG mode out of this discussion. It really has nothing to do with the context of the training zones that is the focus of this thread.
We already have a thread focused on ERG (and non-ERG) use that covers the wide range of considerations quite well. Please continue any ERG related discussion in that thread.
1 Like
listening to the podcast now… almost 8 minutes of intro. Insane.
Back in Nov/Dec I pre-ordered the 3rd edition of “Training and Racing with a Power Meter” and received my copy a week or two ago. Will update this post with my notes after listening.
my notes:
Fast Talk ep. 72
- almost 8-min intro, like watching a 3-minute TV commercial break then saying “I want more” and switching channels for another 3-minute TV commercial break. SERIOUSLY WTF?
- Coggan: zone based training originates with Heart Rate Monitoring
- Coggan: for cycling with power I prefer to use the word “levels” to differentiate from earlier heartrate-based training zones
- training in zones/levels should be taken as guidelines, don’t take exact targets as gospel
*** after 33 minutes its feeling like a huge waste of my time, and the guests time ***
- blah blah blah
- Seiler: (paraphrasing) recreational cyclists have no intensity control, they need green/yellow/red. Once they get that control, it is ok to get more nuanced.
- blah blah blah
Summary:
- why so little time on iLevels? Back to WKO4 videos on YouTube…
- would never accept invite from Fast Talk again, if I was Coggan/Allen/McGregor
- I’m tired of hearing about polarized training, its quickly gone from gospel (“that’s how pros train”), to sheepishly admitting cycling pros train pyramidal, to being told on this podcast I can’t control myself. Ok.
3 Likes
The overall point–that strict adherence to zones/levels can be counter-productive–is a good one. Trevor uses this podcast as an opportunity to criticize athletes. “‘I’m going for a zone 2 ride.’ Well, what does that mean?” Trevor, we all know what that person is saying. The other coaches identify these zones as an easy way of communicating with athletes as to how to perform workouts, and Trevor seems to only want to use it as a way of suggesting athletes don’t understand what performing a ride within a power zone means. But that’s not an athlete’s job! It’s great that a lot of us want to learn more about this, but the point of these zones is to make training easy, by following a coach’s plan or a TR plan. The takeaway should be that athletes shouldn’t worry about hitting power targets so precisely; Trevor’s point is that the athletes are stupid for trying to do so.
2 Likes
Totally agree.
- If Trevor would drop the hypercritical examples from his shtick, and simply focus on pure education, it would be so much better.
- His continued criticism and condescending attitude is so disappointing and beyond tired at this point. I have lost track of how many times he has taken that tone in the nearly half-dozen or more shows covering training from various angles.
- Then there is his repeated effort to get validation from the show’s guests, that his training direction and instructions to his athletes is justified and “right”.
As you mention, the knowledge of athletes runs a wide range.
- Some (like many here) have a super deep knowledge about the background and reasoning to all of this training junk. That is great, but is not a requirement for someone to get appropriate training direction.
- Others couldn’t find their FTP on a Zone chart, and that is totally fine. Their use of a coach to give that direction and review, is all that should be required for them to get targets. That communication of specific numeric targets or zone/level designations is the crux of the whole discussion.
- Then there are likely a large number somewhere in the middle of those above. They have some info from reading, research or instruction via tools like TR. They are probably self-coached to a varying degree, and use these tools to learn and adjust their training to get the best they can from the combination.
This whole discussion is about:
- COMMUNICATION: Pick a training model and related system, and work that on your own or with whomever you choose to include.
- RECOGNITION: That there are more fuzzy distinctions between any of the areas within any model. Be happy to work around and close to the desired goal, but keep in mind that the hard fixation on precise values can distract from the real goal.
2 Likes
I agree with that point - and that point was also made by the Training and Racing book authors/coaches. Might stir up a hornets nest with forum members that are a little OCD with precisely hitting indoor training targets.
1 Like
Having been coached by Trevor in the past, i’ll chime in to give you some context of his “I’m going for a Zone 2 ride” schtick. Trevor’s primarily interested in the athlete training specific physiological systems. Whether that’s a Zone 2, Level X, who cares. What he’s getting at is that people arbitrarily “go for a Zone 2” ride without really understanding what physiological system they are stressing for that ride.
Trevor’s approach is not exclusively polarized by any means, while he has been a strong advocate for it. He is primarily focused on stressing physiological systems and moreso in approaching each week of training by your ability to recover. Weeks are planned with the intent to stress specific physiological systems and having the athlete achieve a specific recovery “RPE” at the end of the week.
It’s sometimes pretty complicated but overall he does know what he’s talking about and he can come across a bit too strict as a result of academic mindset. He wants you to understand why you’re doing this. If you don’t, then he can tag you as being an ignorant Fred who just thinks going for a Zone 2 ride is going to improve your race results.
I wish I could work with him again, but I moved to Europe and it got too challenging to keep it up.
4 Likes
- That right there is my biggest problem with him and the associated superiority complex that is all too prevalent in cycling.
- It’s completely unnecessary and does nothing but inflate egos at the expense of others.
- Not everyone has or needs the same level of knowledge and understanding to take part in, and even gain benefits from, this massive world of training.
- Looking down on someone with less (or even an incorrect) understanding is something I can’t tolerate. Either ignore it, or work to educate them if you think it is a worthwhile goal.
- Admittedly, Trevor is doing this and has some good contributions and perspective. But that can be done without the repeated ‘bad’ examples.
There is a massive difference from being self-deprecating examples and associated learnings and take aways presented by the TR crew vs the external and critical examples most often shared by Trevor. He has touched on a few of his issues. But the majority shared in the FT casts are other riders, and have a hint (much more at times) of the roadie complex that stinks to me.
I don’t disagree that a level of tolerance and welcomeness to the cycling world would be always better if more of us were less roadie elitetist.
I will point out that Trevor is not an asshole nor is he ignorant. He means very well and has high expectations that people training to race are taking it seriously to learn the why of what they are doing. 
1 Like
I think it’s a bit unfair to blam TC for the way the podcast went. Deffo not one of their best. I think the guests played their part.
Came across as a bit of a love in between all 3, slightly pathetic really.
Too many different types of people. Either get an academic on and talk about their point of over, or a coach or an excersise physiologist or an athlete. Just all a bit messy.
Training really seems to be getting more and more complex. But it’s simple. Either train for a final sprint, a time trial or a long endurance ride. Cycling is very much an aerobic event, we would all improve by training this system primarily.
2 Likes