Good point. I mixed up the values with my current 229w FTP (with pending change after this recovery week 
) that is the 3.5w/kg. As of my main seasons, I usually float around 3.8w/kg while I have officially touched 4w/kg a couple of times. 
3 Likes
Back in my day, we trained on heavy tyres, box section wheels, and round tubes, we dreeeeamed of 32km/h 
.
6 Likes
As someone who does both types of blocks, I can definitely see Allen’s point, too. Although I’d formulate it as “Consistency is more important than intensity distribution, and having fun while training keeps you consistent. Pick whichever approach you enjoy more. Allen thinks most people will enjoy sweet spot more, and he bases that on his experience coaching athletes across decades.”
Polarized blocks have definitely been bitter medicine for me: good for my fitness, but HARD. However, if for some of you a polarized training plan is more fun, it might be better for you.
This.
Consistency is king, and if you enjoy a polarized approach more, then clearly, you should mainly stick to that.
Also, neither is an option, too, and you can mix-and-match polarized with other forms of base and build training.
A lot of flat places have tons of wind as there are no barriers for wind to move. When I ride close to the coast, I usually have wind in one direction (typically either moving towards the coast or from the ocean inlands).
Still, my spidey senses were triggered much like Allen’s: if you are 70+ years old and do IF 0.60–0.65 rides at 20 mph (32 km/h), you are either really strong or your are BSing (= overinflating your numbers) or not riding in your zone.
You’d need a 300 W FTP to make that a IF=0.65 ride, and that’s an outstanding FTP for a 70-year-old. An IF of 0.72 seems too high for an outdoor endurance ride. At least I try not to exceed 0.65 when riding outdoors, and I typically land around 0.63. Especially if I were 70, I probably wouldn’t want to push the IF into the 70s.
1 Like
Woah I’m not 70 
don’t rush me thru my sixties LOL. Consistently doing a good bit more than 0.65 IF on outdoor Two Hour Tuesday endurance rides on 8-12 hours/week. A few weeks ago did .63 on a 6 hour endurance ride, and .65 the following weekend on a 4 hour ride. And .67 on a 200 mile double century almost 6 years ago. Good thing you aren’t my coach! 
1 Like
I like tempo
~ Ken M
3 Likes
Maybe just base how hard you train on your lactate level:
Which goes back to definition of what is Z2 and are you going by HR or power? Z2 can be higher intensity if you take the top of it to be LT1 which can be trained and be closer to LT2. Plus we have the indoor / outdoor ftp discussion. Maybe their indoor ftp is 270W but maybe it’s 300W outdoors
1 Like
In the end for most people the b3est Trainingplan and modality is the one they are able to stick to. And for most there is probably place for all the modalities over the course of the Season, A VO2 block will probably look pretty polarized while a Base or Sweetspot Base block may look way more Pyramidal and then there maybe are even some phases where it looks like threshhold…
Honestly getting dogmatic about that doesn’t seem worth it. During the outdoor riding season I like polarized a lot, because I can just take easy slow rides and enjoy the outside and I also enjoy doing hard hill repeats and similar stuff… But if you like doing Group rides and Tempo rides go for it it’s better then trying to adhere to a strict plan and falling off the wagon because you loose all motivation after a few weeks or months.
4 Likes
Which in the UK and parts of USA can be year round.
1 Like
I pace most outdoor Z2 rides purely by heart rate, but they always come out to an IF of around 0.60–0.63. (I don’t do this for any deep sports scientific reason, I just find pacing outdoor endurance rides by heart rate much easier and much more relaxing than going off of power.)
2 Likes
Given what you wrote in this thread, I thought you were aiming lower than that when training. (Evidently, you can push higher on long rides, but this incurs more fatigue.)
Indeed which is an anecdote for n=1.
So close but not quite 20 mph
I think the point people were making was that if their Z2 locally is slow, then their Z3 isn’t going to be much faster and equally boring?
2 Likes
And in the (Android) app, which I didn’t notice previously (but that could be a observation fail on my part). Ironically enough given all the grief about 3 workouts/ TR plans being too hard, my lv sustained power build plan saying swap the weekend sweet spot for a longer easier endurance ride this week if you want!
2 Likes
same, picked up a FasCat jersey two weeks ago and thought the same 
did you read the part about my experience with performance when pushing 72-75% on my 2 hour endurance rides? For me, pacing by HR just pushes IF higher. Except when the conditions allow riding at erg-like steady power. Example: Where did you workout (ride, run, etc) OUTSIDE today? (2023) - #97 by WindWarrior and average HR was 12bpm lower than ‘outside erg’ at 72-75% ftp. Checkout the amount of time at tempo and threshold, but HR was really low.
Anyone wanting better training advice would be well served to spend more time following a few well established coaches that have experience training actual athletes. Coaches that have reviewed a lot of data and set zones using HR only, HR and lactate testing, and HR and power based testing.
I’m with this guy:
Healthy and smart takeaways my fellow 2xl-er
1 Like
Power zones based on arbitrary percentages of ftp are borderline meaningless.
1 Like
That sounds sensible, achievable, repeatable, enjoyable, and sustainable. Must be wrong, then.
9 Likes
Make them your own.