# Iñigo San Millán training model **URL:** \ **Category:** Training\ **Created:** [September 27, 2020, 7:37pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552 "2020-09-27T19:37:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 94
**Author:** ![AJS914](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@AJS914](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/AJS914)\ **Post date:** [January 1, 2026, 11:33pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1953 "2026-01-01T23:33:03Z")
> [@jz91](#): > > I’m resurrecting the doubt that perhaps ISM sits right at LT1 measured by lactate but the other approach might be on focussing on LBP or also low tempo and wasn’t sure if any new insight had emerged in the meantime. I think the ISM method is different - lower intensity and higher volume than Steve’s closer to sweet spot HR governed “tempo”. I think Steve is brilliant but I also suspect that all of his metabolic testing and LBP is pseudo science. I did Steve inspired training - a January-March build. I built out to 4x20minutes which was 2 hours on the trainer and a enough for me. (Yes, I know some guys build out to 4x30min or more.) I hit my highest numbers and felt like I had my best fitness ever in June after adding some intensity. Why does it work for lower volume athletes? I suspect that Steve’s methods are more akin to Nowegian lactate controlled training. In sum, it’s threshold training light but you can do more of it with the HR limiter or lactate control (Norwegian). And, I think it all comes down to training load - Steve’s method produces the highest sustainable training load for a low volume amateur. Remember that this started in his indoor cycling gym. He would not train an elite with 20 hours a week in this fashion (I don’t think). It would look more traditional. ---
**Author:** ![tshortt](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/tshortt/32/3100_2.png) [@tshortt](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/tshortt)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2026, 12:29am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1954 "2026-01-02T00:29:42Z")
> [@AJS914](#): > > And, I think it all comes down to training load - Steve’s method produces the highest sustainable training load for a low volume amateur. ☝ ---
**Author:** ![carytb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/carytb/32/23710_2.png) [@carytb](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/carytb)\ **Post date:** [January 2, 2026, 7:48am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1955 "2026-01-02T07:48:40Z")
Whilst Pog is an incredible talent, one of the reasons for him being on a completely different level at the moment to Remco and Jonas is how much training time the they have lost over the last 18 months or so due to injury and illness compared to him. At least for the Grand Tours that is. ---
**Author:** ![stino77](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f17d59/32.png) [@stino77](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/stino77)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 7:24am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1956 "2026-01-13T07:24:59Z")
From my personal view (experience)😄 ISM Z2 is just below LT1, and that would be very high Z2 for me. (210-215W) Steve Neal would be low Z3 for me (230-235W) Fatmax? Well, from the INSCYD tests I have done, it always gave me much lower intensity. Mostly between 155-165W. That is why I mostly not understand. This low fatmax compared to LT1. ---
**Author:** ![carytb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/carytb/32/23710_2.png) [@carytb](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/carytb)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 8:43am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1957 "2026-01-13T08:43:39Z")
> [@stino77](#): > > ISM Z2 is just below LT1, and that would be very high Z2 for me. (210-215W) > > Steve Neal would be low Z3 for me (230-235W) > > Fatmax? Well, from the INSCYD tests I have done, it always gave me much lower intensity. Mostly between 155-165W. > > That is why I mostly not understand. This low fatmax compared to LT1. I hope you don’t mind but I asked Chat gpt for an explanation. I’ve absolutely no idea whether its correct or a complete fabrication so please make of it what you will. Have a laugh or take note. ## Key point up front **Fatmax and LT1 are not supposed to coincide** , and in some athletes they can be **very far apart**. Your numbers suggest: - **High LT1** (good aerobic capacity, strong mitochondrial density) - **Relatively low Fatmax power** (fat oxidation peaks early, then drops sharply) That combination is _not_ contradictory — it reflects **how substrate use shifts** , not aerobic capability. * * * ## Why Fatmax can be much lower than LT1 ### 1. Fatmax = peak fat oxidation, not “aerobic threshold” Fatmax is the **power where absolute fat oxidation (g/min) is highest**, not where fat is still dominant. As intensity rises: - Fat oxidation initially increases - Then **carbohydrate use rises faster** - Fat oxidation **peaks and declines** , even though metabolism remains aerobic So: - LT1 = “still metabolically steady” - Fatmax = “sweet spot for burning the _most_ fat per minute” These are measuring **different things**. * * * ### 2. High carbohydrate reliance despite strong aerobic fitness In some endurance athletes: - Glycolytic flux ramps up early - PDH activation is strong - Carbohydrate oxidation displaces fat early This can happen with: - Long history of **high-intensity training** - Frequent **carbohydrate availability** - Strong sympathetic response to exercise - High type IIa fibre recruitment even at moderate powers Result: ➡ Fatmax occurs at **surprisingly low watts** ➡ LT1 remains **very high** * * * ### 3. INSCYD specifically tends to show lower Fatmax INSCYD often estimates Fatmax conservatively because: - It models fat oxidation based on **lactate kinetics** - Any early lactate rise suppresses modeled fat oxidation - Athletes with **steep lactate curves** get lower Fatmax outputs So if lactate begins rising even gently by 160–170 W: - Fatmax will be pushed **downward** - Even if physiologically fat use remains substantial above that This is a **known artifact** , not necessarily a flaw — just a modeling choice. * * * ### 4. High LT1 + low Fatmax often means “fat efficiency, not fat power” You can think of it this way: | Metric | What it reflects | | --- | --- | | Fatmax (W) | Where fat oxidation peaks | | LT1 (W) | How much power you can sustain aerobically | | Gap between them | How quickly carb metabolism dominates | A **large gap** often means: - Excellent aerobic machinery - But fat oxidation doesn’t scale well with intensity That does **not** mean poor endurance — it means **fuel preference shifts early**. * * * ## Why your Z2 confusion makes sense You’re intuitively spotting a real issue: - ISM Z2 just below LT1 → **210–215 W** - Steve Neal “low Z3” → **230–235 W** - Fatmax → **155–165 W** That feels wrong because people often assume: > “Z2 = fat burning” But in reality: - **Fat is still used above Fatmax** - It’s just no longer _maximal_ - Z2 can be predominantly aerobic **but carb-heavy** So Z2 ≠ Fatmax Z2 = _metabolic stability_, not substrate preference * * * ## When this pattern is common This exact profile is often seen in: - Highly trained cyclists - Riders with good FTP/LT1 but “carb-leaning” metabolism - Athletes coming from **threshold / VO₂-heavy blocks** - Riders who fuel aggressively (which isn’t wrong) * * * ## Practical implication (no advice, just interpretation) Such an athlete typically: - Can ride long and hard aerobically - Will burn more carbs than peers at the same %FTP - Benefits more from **fueling strategy** than from chasing Fatmax watts - Should not anchor endurance rides to Fatmax power alone Using Fatmax as a **training ceiling** here would underload the aerobic system. * * * ## Bottom line There is **no contradiction** in: - High LT1 (210–215 W) - Much lower Fatmax (155–165 W) They describe **different aspects of metabolism** , and the gap actually tells a _useful story_: > Aerobically strong, but fat oxidation peaks early as intensity rises. If you want, next we can: - Map this profile to **durability over 4–6 hours** - Explain why some pros show the same pattern - Or reconcile this with Seiler / ISM / Neal zone models without hand-waving ---
**Author:** ![stino77](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f17d59/32.png) [@stino77](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/stino77)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 11:03am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1958 "2026-01-13T11:03:41Z")
Hehe 😀 . Thx 😉 Maybe I just have too much fast twitch fibres type IIa. Also genetically more of an explosive athlete, rather then an endurance. But with lots of cycling already build some ok endurance fitness. But with an inefficient fat/carb engine under the hoods… ---
**Author:** ![GoLongThenGoHome](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/439d5e/32.png) [@GoLongThenGoHome](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/GoLongThenGoHome)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 1:33pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1959 "2026-01-13T13:33:44Z")
Oh god, please leave the AI chat crap in its box. Anyone wants to ask an AI, they can do it themselves, but no post it here in what should be a human to human forum. ---
**Author:** ![carytb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/carytb/32/23710_2.png) [@carytb](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/carytb)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 2:37pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1960 "2026-01-13T14:37:07Z")
😂😂😂 I’ll post what I want if it’s within the forum rules ---
**Author:** ![Twowkg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ce7236/32.png) [@Twowkg](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/Twowkg)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 3:03pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1961 "2026-01-13T15:03:58Z")
More absolutely useless ai slop. Yay. ---
**Author:** ![cnidos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/0ea827/32.png) [@cnidos](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/cnidos)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 5:36pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1962 "2026-01-13T17:36:03Z")
Already asked another user in this thread to stop copy-pasting AI spam. It’s not helpful or accurate unfortunately for this subject area. This is also a public discussion board. As a general rule, you will find other people are not interested in hearing about conversations you had with an LLM. Copy-pasting LLM answers into group discussions is generally not helpful for anyone, and is already viewed by many as a social taboo. ---
**Author:** ![carytb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/carytb/32/23710_2.png) [@carytb](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/carytb)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 6:03pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1963 "2026-01-13T18:03:51Z")
Well the person who asked the question didn’t seem to mind and hopefully was vaguely amused by it. So instead of advising me about social taboos perhaps you could point him in the right direction to satisfy his curiosity. ---
**Author:** ![cnidos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/0ea827/32.png) [@cnidos](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/cnidos)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2026, 6:17pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1964 "2026-01-13T18:17:42Z")
I’m glad you tried to answer their question. A more succinct answer though would have been something like “LT1 is not the same thing as fatmax.” That would have answered their question while also not also creating a 3-page long essay everyone else needed to try and read, or at least scroll through 😉 The main problem with these LLM copy-pastes are their length/verbosity, coupled with frequent inaccuracy. Nothing wrong with using them if you like. The problem is they clutter the conversation for others. You can get around that by summarizing it in your own words instead ☺ ---
**Author:** ![Worawut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/a587f6/32.png) [@Worawut](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/Worawut)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 12:11am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1965 "2026-01-14T00:11:03Z")
I have the same answer about Fatmax and LT1 from ChatGPT For my case I have 2 Fatmax ~170-180W / ~200-210W LT1 is around 240-250W now and the gap that is around 40W is good. (strong aerobic). Training now is focus on moving LT1. (By doing only 2-3 hours per week at 235-245W / 3 sessions and around one hour per session) other training is consolidate 2 days and recovery 2 days. I asked ChapGPT where is this method comes from. The answer is not clear but from his point of view as my coach. I will improve from this training in 4-6 weeks. (My LT1 will increase, if not it he will change the training) ---
**Author:** ![stino77](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f17d59/32.png) [@stino77](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/stino77)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 8:09am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1966 "2026-01-14T08:09:13Z")
LT1 can be improved by riding at LT1. In the Steve Neal topic you can also find some info about this… ---
**Author:** ![AJS914](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@AJS914](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/AJS914)\ **Post date:** [January 15, 2026, 7:19pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1967 "2026-01-15T19:19:57Z")
Steve Neal also prescribes a moderate carb diet to encourage fat max which I’m sure would be controversial in 2025 if he was a big name. (I say that with love. I used Steve’s methods to achieve my highest fitness ever in recent years but I don’t agree with all of his ideas.) ---
**Author:** ![Twowkg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ce7236/32.png) [@Twowkg](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/Twowkg)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2026, 4:33pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1969 "2026-01-20T16:33:52Z")
Do you have sources for either of these two images? ---
**Author:** ![carytb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/carytb/32/23710_2.png) [@carytb](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/carytb)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2026, 9:35pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1971 "2026-01-20T21:35:11Z")
It certainly has the look of it ---
**Author:** ![BCM](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/bcm/32/137631_2.png) [@BCM](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/BCM)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2026, 10:26pm UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1972 "2026-01-20T22:26:32Z")
Stop posting this AI Garbage. Seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Twowkg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ce7236/32.png) [@Twowkg](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/Twowkg)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2026, 12:59am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1974 "2026-01-21T00:59:57Z")
The irony. ---
**Author:** ![BCM](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/trainerroad/forum/user_avatar/www.trainerroad.com/bcm/32/137631_2.png) [@BCM](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/u/BCM)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2026, 1:22am UTC](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552/1975 "2026-01-21T01:22:25Z")
This has gotten out of hand. Time to start just flagging him. I’m not convinced he isn’t a bot. [Previous page](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552.md?page=93) [Next page](https://www.trainerroad.com/forum/t/inigo-san-millan-training-model/43552.md?page=95)