Yeah, I gotchya. 
He’s targeting maximal FATox, but it’s not INSCYD FatMax. It’s not that intensity. It’s not mid-Zone 2 (Coggan). That’s been part of the confusion as well. It’s on Peter Attia’s podcast that he mentions the lactate values. That’s what I meant.
@AJS914 sryke posted the tables I’m referring to here:
Harder than you want to, or have been.
Not so hard that you can’t do it for at least a couple of hours both days.
IOW, APB.
Lactate testing is a hot mess in a dumpster fire.
So this is exactly what i mean about the “what’s old is new again” comment. I thought sryke took some issue with it but then modified the comment. His point that this is an advance is well taken, but i think his analogy (cars now vs. cars 100 years ago) overstates that case.
If you look at it as an advancement in the understanding of cellular metabolism and the mechanisms and how they relate to exercise, it’s big. If you look at the training recommendations that result, it feels very much like an incremental development.
I’m not convinced that it is a development or advancement at all.
So a comment on this, i think sweet spot is too high. I know there’s some question about exactly how hard is hard but in other contexts, dr san millan says that zone 2 is hard enough that you’re working (pressure on the pedals) but not so hard that you can’t talk the whole time. I read this as meaning, not that you can say the whole pledge ofa llegiance three times without breathing, but that you can generally talk without too much effort or your breathing becoming ragged. So i think this means it’s pegged right around AeT. You’re using fat and glycogen but your type II-A fibers are not getting involved yet. sweetspot is higher than that, no?
Yes I think you are spot on.
Sweetspot (90% FTP) is higher than what ISM calls zone 2. Looking at the lactate levels he suggest (1.3-1.8mmol) For me it works out at 80-87% FTP.
I’ve just done a ride there trying this pace out.
90 mins outdoor, with 60 mins straight at my target of 200-230w.
Av was 208w, pulse av 128bpm, 0.2%hr drift
I was not hanging about. 21.6mph av.
Does this look about right?
I have also just looked at my inscyd fat/carb combustion chart the cross over point is at 200w.
Who’s sweet spot?
Overton uses 84-97% of FTP.
TP uses 88-93%.
Coggan calls it mostly a concept, not a specific intensity.
Right exactly, it’s a concept. And as a concept, it would include IIA fibers right? I thought the whole point was to train those fibers to work more oxidatively
I bet this is right. See if you can do it again tomorrow (provided you refueled correctly) and if you can, i’d bet it’s bang-on.
I already did these kind of rides at least once a week. On Tuesday I did about two and half hours with my heart rate pegged just below 150 based on the talk test, which gets me average power of about 195. It’s high, but my max is about 205 so not that high. When i pause for even 20 seconds (downhills, stoplights) it falls back down to below 115, suggesting to me that i wasn’t overdoing it.
The next day (wednesday) I felt good enough to slam some vo2max intervals.
Then today, more of the endurance plus, pegged in the 140s (decided to be a bit more conservative), again about two and a half hours, not much drift.
What i’m doing is unsophisticated but i think i am hitting at least pretty close to the spot, and if i can do that without going over, I don’t see why not to do it.
It’s funny that he pushes the lactate tests because i thought he said on teh Peter A. podcast that heart rate and lactate are closely related. If that’s true, why not just use the one that everyone arleady has access to (i.e. heart rate)?
why is that, btw? Do you view this as, just a different way of describing concepts previously described by people like Lydiard?
I don’t know, i think frameworks ARE important . . .
Regardless of how it is defined, you don’t have to train at sweet spot to recruit your IIa fibres.
Right but i feel like you’re reminding me that not all rectangles are squares, whereas i’m saying that all squares are rectangles.
in other words, if you are training at sweetspot then you ARE using the IIAs, right?
at least that’s what i always thought, based on the idea that it’s your maximal zone for inter-type II conversion (provided that is in fact true)
Because there’s no such thing as a magic training intensity - not even Lydiard’s best aerobic pace.
haha sorry i don’t know what i’m missing here. who is saying that there’s a magic training intensity?
but okay understood, i certainly don’t disagree with this. i’m just not sure who’s arguing the other side.
Based on EMG, you don’t start recruiting type II fibers until close to FTP.
OTOH, biochemical data indicates that you recruit them even during low intensity exercise.
So, it’s unclear.
interesting.
ISM. Or at least that is how many here are interpreting his comments.
Ah. Okay.
I don’t see it that way (i.e. as magic bullet). I see it as an improvement in the understanding of the “why” of certain aspects of endurance training, which lets us (i) train at an intensity that we pretty much already used to train at but with greater confidence and precision and (ii) make better decisions about training balance, progression etc.
I view training philosophies, recommendations etc. through two tenets: First, when a coach says to train a certain way, I assume there is a reasonable basis why they are saying that (i.e., they’ve seen it work). But two, that even the best coaches are often wrong about WHY something works. And if you’re wrong about why somethign works, you can employ it at the wrong times, or with respect to the wrong athletes, even if the recommendation does work much of the time.
Ergo anything that helps better understand the “why” is useful far beyond the specific recommendations or training methodology in question because it helps you make sense of all the other often competing or even contradictory philosophies that are floating around. There’s chaff but there’s also plenty of wheat.
okay i’ll stop derailing this thread now, sorry
interesting. Do you get substantial heart rate drift at that wattage?
because my talk test (could also make it a nose-breathing test) puts me at more like 70ish percent of FTP.
lol or maybe i’m just not that aerobically fit