I can’t blame anyone for these for making these connections.
I say this as an Indurain fan and a fan of cycling for decades (I’m 55).
When you look at his career, you have to wonder. Sure he’s a great rider as all pros are but he didn’t win the Tour until 27 years old. For the first 8 years of his career, he had a few nice results but nothing major except Paris-Nice. Then he goes on to be the dominator at the Tour and in TTs. Usually the greats show their colors much earlier. If you look at the Not Normal analysis, some of his performances were “mutant”, right up there with Pantani, Armstrong, and Riis.
I actually applaud Indurain for getting out when he did. He didn’t keep coming back for 6 or 7. Plus Indurain was a super nice guy by all accounts. Had Armstrong been a nice guy and had he not returned from retirement he might still legitimately own his yellow jerseys.
Not listened to it yet but a clip of an interview with Matt Rendel
ITV Cycling (@itvcycling) Tweeted: The science of success #TDF2021
@mrendell spoke to Iñigo San Millán - exercise physiologist and coach of Tadej Pogačar - about the latest research on metabolomics and the physiology of top athletes
It makes me wonder if one can get the metabolomic testing and use it to inform training.
I get that ISM is a favorite here, I can see it clearly. I’m new to the sport, didn’t follow during the Lance years. I’ve been going back through, on other forums, and reading how people defended riders back then to compare how people are talking about it today.
It. All. Sounds. The. Same.
Back to ISM, he may indeed be one of the good guys. But for shits sake this is one of the most tone deaf interviews I’ve seen in a while. I get defending your guy. But to say this?
He hasn’t achieved those numbers because he has never been challenged. So he’s going slower than last year; the reality is the rest have nothing. Absolutely nothing. They can’t even attack. Within one minute, you have six, seven riders who can’t even attack each other. It is very strange.
My humble opinion is that the pace of all the stage races, the majority of all of the one-week stage races this year, has been faster than the first week of the Tour de France.
The Tour de France in fact has been one of the slowest first weeks, in comparison to the one-week stage races. And yet people are dead.
You only die [go flat out] when you are challenged and then you giveyour best numbers. Now, you only go at your threshold or a little bit above it. That is it. (about Tadej Pogačar)
So the other riders just suck. Cause Pogacar hasn’t even reached his best numbers like he did during training? Even though TdG said he had one of his best 20 min power outputs and was still dropped?
These guys need to get a better PR firm;
The stage to Tignes was ridiculous. When he [Pogačar] attacked, he attacked a little bit below his threshold, and he even decreased the pace significantly in the last one and a half kilometers. He was like, ‘fuckk, man, what is going on here? These guys can’t even follow me.
We already saw the time trial, that is where we asked, ‘wait, what is going on here?’ Tadej did a very good time trial, as expected. But wow,he put a whole world into the others. That is when we thought, ‘wait, something is wrong here.’ And sure, we saw that in the next days too.
Pogacar had to slow down?, Lol. It’s not that he’s going so fast…everyone else just sucks.
That’s your explanation?
I’ve enjoyed every stage of this tour. Been a blast to watch. Whatever they’re doing training wise, keep it up.
Please keep the TDF speculation and conversation to the speculation thread, not the ISM training thread.
You can discuss here should you so choose: Tour de France 2021 - Speculation and Gossip
Just had a quick google of it and I think we are some way off this filtering down and being available to us mere mortals.
Ok, thanks for pointing me over there. I’ll keep my posts better siloed going forward.
Assume this has been mentioned in one of the 960 posts in this thread, but I’ll ask anyway. I understand that finding VT1/LT1 w/o being lab tested or doing an INSCYD test can be between 70-80% of HRmax for most. It can also be different, I get that. But for those who don’t have access to a lab test we can figure 70-80% right?
Onto my question:
As one gets fitter, how do we account for that increase in fitness with regards to where our HR @ VT1/LT1 goes?
Today I do a VT1/LT1 endurance ride and my goal is keeping my HR within a range of 136-144 BPM and hope that my power falls around 175-195w (FTP is ~310w). I typically see this HR range coincide with this wattage range.
I know that my wattage @ VT1/LT1 will increase as I become fitter, but what happens to my heart rate @ VT1/LT1 as I gain fitness? Does it move in lockstep with the increase in watts?
I think once you are fairly well trained, your hr at LT1 should stay fairly consistent as you get fitter. So if you improve LT1 from 275w to 300w, you should have HR of 145bpm in both situations: ie, your body is working similarly hard for a greater power output.
likewise, you could also see a HR decrease at a certain power output, so 250w might go from 140bpm to 135pbm.
Interesting. But with threshold HR (LTHR) can actually increase as the watts at threshold increase. I do wonder if it’s the same at VT1/LT1.
good point. that was my understanding, and lines up well with my experience of improving LT1 anyway.
anecdotally if you look at McNulty’s strava (one of ISMs athletes), you can see he is cruising around at 130/135bpm at 280w or so. but he can still reach high HRs during efforts at or over FTP
I have lab data for many years. LT1 HR is pretty much the same throughout. Wattage changes. I even have some data from 25 years ago, LT1 HR (as I would define it these days) is pretty much the same. Max HR goes down, though.
That’s interesting. So, it’s constant, even though Max HR degrades with age.
I’m just guessing based on feel. FWIW, my MAP is ~430w @ 3min, but FTP has trended down the last couple of months.
Steve Neal has a good explanation of how he prescribes LT1 rides on the–cough Fast Talk cough–forum in a great ISM thread, and was talking to a user there whose FTP is close to mine and was advising he stay under 200w. So, I give myself a range of 175w (really easy Z2, maybe high Z1) to 195w (medio Z2) thinking this could be a good range. Generally, I ride closer to the 200w number.
Today I did 100min @ 201w average power with an average HR of 139 BPM. My VT1/LT1 range could likely go a little higher.
In this AMA on Zone 2, Peter Attia seems to be mostly using ISM’s principles. He describes it as low Z3 in a classic 5-zone model.
Anecdotally, I did my share of “ISM Z2” this winter based on the information shared in this thread. I set the intensity right at the limit of where I started to “feel” something in my legs. That happened to put me right around 75% of both FTP (215 / 285) and max HR (130 / 170).
And what about “summer HR” I have about 10-15 beats higher HR at the same power output in summer (higher temperature). Do I still need to focus on HR? My HR max is 195 and I’m trying to be around 140 on my endurance rides…
I have lactate data going back two years and power data going back four years (so not in same league as sryke lol ), my LT1 HR has been 128-130bpm the whole time.
You mention Steve, if you ask on “that other forum”, he has a little protocol you can use to get LT1 without using lactate, based on breath count (NOT talk test). Not sure if he will explain it outside of a consult though.
Whereas my LT1 HR has remained constant, my HR at balance point has gone up with fitness, which is expected. That’s not an ISM concept, but something I also use in concert with LT1 measure.
For the German speakers very interesting analysis of the San Millan’s publication including UAE team and Pogacar’s data (presumably). Some English also included.
I just scrubbed through the video and there is definitely also plenty of English to make it worth a look for us Yanks. Thanks @Skeggis