Use fasted rides very sparingly…if at all. Lots of Z2 (in 5 or 7 zone model) too!
- For test he uses w/kg instead of absolute watts for steps. Longer steps; 10min.
- Zone 2 and 4 probably most important zones (zone 2/fatmax, zone 4/glycolytic training/vo2max
- If no lab test, listen/feel the sensations of breathing; the more you breath the more oxygen you need - higher metabolic stress
- Ftp? what it is 5min, 40min 60min?
- vo2max it is what it is
- eat carbs, don’t do carb restriction
3 Likes
This was interesting. He doesn’t seem interested in measures beyond LT1, Vo2max and the power curve.
Probably more important if your FTP is 400W rather than 200. Somebody who is sitting at say 350w at their Aerobic Threshold is burning through a lot of carbs no matter how fat adapted they are.
1 Like
Zones with quantity of [La] ?
2mmol for Z2 ?
1 Like
What a great thread. Thanks to all contributors. 
Did read everything from start to Nov 20, then did a quick scroll to the bottom. Will visit the rest later, since I bet it continues to be full of interesting references to papers and findings.
But I also see - and please correct me if the consensus shifted in the mean time between Nov 20 and now - that:
-
a) yes: sufficiently long endurance rides never where out of fashion and continues to be in fashion (rightly so) and all in the know just knew.
-
b) we keep re-inventing the wheel and try to pinpoint or deduct what a specific person (in this case ISM) said or meant (maybe in regard to a specific bla mmol/l value) but in the end it matters less than the individual response and genetics of an athlete. And failing to pinpoint that or deriving a mathematically model (because there exists no such model) we should rather apply the general idea and see how we ourselves react. Because (and that is my interpretation) just because ISM mentions 1.2 or whatever value for an effect or thought model he build for himself to explain the reactions of the athletes he has access to, doesn’t mean you or I should buy a lactate meter and shoot for 1.2 or whatever value (because our metabolism/muscle fiber distribution/lactate generation etc.) may differ. Go for the idea instead.
-
c) this idea is: ride at LT1 / AeT or exactly at the border of Coggan Zone 2/Zone 3. Which is ironically exactly the pace nearly everybody does. Why: that is because the often bemoaned fact by coaches, that when they prescribe a power range to ride at, most motivated and alpha-type athletes ride right up towards that upper range boundary. Which - if prescribed Zone 2 - is right the area which we talk here as the favorite area for ISM.
Another issue which often gets bemoaned by coaches and athletes is: the athlete which is confronted with a prescribed ride in Zone 2 range often complains this feels so slow compared to what he usually does. And the coaches and literature always bemoan, that every day joes ride too hard (leading into the also important adage: easy rides are too hard, hard rides are too easy). But - ironically: Going with ISM, every day joe did it right all along?
(Of course you have to know your dose and have an all around rounded training regimen without just oodling along. But - you see the concept, right?)
- d) So, where does that leave the really classic Zone 2 ride, where you should rightfully so not ride at the upper boundary but stay well in the mid of the Zone? Would that be just for the people with very low fatmax zones? Or would that be just for the pros, which have to observe their overall energy turnaround per week? I.e. Every day joe should ditch the low Zone 2 and go for Zone 2 / Zone 3 boundary? Again - just like always?
Nothing new under the sun… 
1 Like
For me and a nice block / experiment last season of 4-5 months. Doing extended rides at LT1 and adding in some hard rides, my power curve shifted up and out and lactate curve and MLSS followed. Extended meaning 2-3 hours with a focus on accumulating LT1 time. That is not “Easy” riding or all day pace riding and for me definitely requires focus.
Looking at my notes, my “hard” rides tended to be things like 3 x 15 at 95-100%, hours at 90-95% FTP, a ten mile time trial (20-22 min hard) or a stout group mountain bike ride. The dirt definitely adds VO2max type stress and I’m the oldest and slowest in our group so when I ride with the boys I’m really working hard.
After that block I switched to a more polarized approach with a dedicated VO2 day and a dedicated threshold day and others days just riding as I wanted to and without the LT1 focus. That seemed to produce more of a peak in the 20-30 min power but stopped seeing the more general increases in power curve and was more fatigue inducing.
Concluded that the LT1 work was effective and I would likely have been better off continuing to extend the first block for another 4-6 months to see what would have happened. Am planning to do that this year as we still won’t have any A-racing.
Without diving too deeply into semantics, I think the approach I used is consistent with what ISM is describing and what folks like Steve Neal are trying to do. It is not that far off from the FasCat 18 week sweetspot plans (except Frank obviously hawks the sweetspot part as its his thing and talks about “all day pace” instead of LT1).
Perhaps the interesting thing for this forum is this type of training pattern is different from the TR plans. The new polarized plans could be modified but I think got too tied up in the 4x8 / 2x16 / 105% Seiler stuff.
YMMV but the type of approach ISM is describing seems very effective even for a weekend Joe. I was honestly very surprised at how effective a lot of time at LT1 was at improving my fitness. Was only riding 8-10 hour weeks (+ coupled gym days for strength) and everything was trending the right way and it was fun.
5 Likes
And that is VERY important
3 Likes
Actually I don’t think that’s the case. I think the problem is not that “average Joe’s” train at a too high sustained Z2 pace, but rather that they just don’t train much in Z2 at all, rather fluctuate between Z3 or even Z4 for short climbs, then stop pedaling going downhill or noodle around in Z1 at the back of the group if it’s a group ride. Anyway, depends on the “average Joe’s” you know. I think for long endurance rides at steady power nobody would accidentally train in Z3. It just hurts too much (and I emphasize steady, so no breaks downhill etc.).
14 Likes
100% agree Anna.
I’ve literally never met an average Joe that rides too much LT1. Huegelreiter must live in some ideal endurance training nirvanaland. In this land everyone sits steady at LT1 while yodeling in the mountains…
Your description of the average Joe is absolutely spot on. I could open a million ride files from various friends/athletes and none, not one of them, would have a majority of time spent at LT1.
I’d like to add more detail on average Joe for prosperity…
Here’s average Joe’s training week.
Monday - Eats too much, doesn’t ride 
Tuesday - Smashes a short group ride, eats too much 
Wednesday - Smashes a short trainer session, eats too much 
Thursday - Smashes a group ride, the same one he/she always does, eats just a salad 
Friday - Is smashed, attempts to eat nothing, fails, drinks too much 
Saturday - Does longer smash festival group ride, doesn’t eat or drink enough on this ride because they are worried about, or are actually, getting fat from eating too much all day every other day, drinks too much 
Sunday - Smashed, rides Z1, eats too much 
Average Joe then buys a $10,000 Uber Turbo Nano Crystal Ceramic Graphene pulley wheel, because it’s 1 gram lighter and claims it’s 100w more efficient. It’s not…
Average Joe is still average.
Average Joe orders a burger… because he/she is still average 
15 Likes
Totally agree. One of my friends who I go out with regularly is obsessed with average speed and trying to keep it constant. So we go out out for a 4 hour steady ride which I interpret as keeping to Z2 as much as possible with constant pressure on the pedals. First incline and he’s off keeping his speed up because that’s how you train. On the downhill bits I’m streaking past him because a) I’m heavier b) I’m pedalling and c) he’s recovering from the uphill bits. It also drives him crazy that I’m yoyoing about all the time!
2 Likes
Your first part is very right and important. Hence my “(Of course you have to know your dose and have an all around rounded training regimen without just oodling along. But - you see the concept, right?)”
And in regard to what I laid out with said concept of nearly everybody rides Z2/Z3 - you indeed could make out two cohorts of “nearly everybody”. Those who aren’t aware of the value of constant pressure on the pedal and who surging happily up a hill (which - done right could be also just the right ingredient of a sound training regimen), then coasting, then just rolling.
And those who are. Who ride constant pressure, try to include very hilly terrain only for special sessions but otherwise stick to the plan (from a magazine or from their personal coach). They ride 2 hours. Or 3. Or whatever. And when prescribed Zone 2, they ride right up the upper range of it. And that isn’t a rare occurance - this is what I tried to say with giving the context with the bemoaning facts of coaches etc.
And - riding for hours on the boundary of Z2 to Z3 isn’t really hard. Maybe for someone who got socialized with consistent and planned training by TrainerRoad trainingplans, I don’t know. But for people with just a few years endurance training under the belt, it’s a pleasureful hard. Yes - we could argue that if done right, it will soon get hard once one reaches an adequate duration in regard to his capabilities. But that isn’t the point. The point is - Border Zone2/Zone 3 is exactly the region everybody is riding in a selfselected or strived for pace anyways. If not a special session prescription or the know to rack up time in Zone 2 (i.e. rather the middle or let’s face it - always at around 80 to 85 % towards Zone 3) has you make ride otherwise.
Again, Z2/Z3 doesn’t hurt. Not in any way, shape or form. It’s beginning to hurt if you are riding in the upper range of Z3, i.e. Sweetspot.
Damn, that is maybe not that far fetched of a description where I live. For the yodeling part you’d have to travel quite a wee bit more south. But “endurance training nirvanaland” could match my beloved home region with 70 % forest of the land area and lovely, lonely roads across it.
But - you, too, are missing my point. The point is not to put every sub-genre of average-joe-training-mishabits on a pedestal and saying they trained like ISM all along.
The point is: That seemingly all to elusive Z2 of ISM which in the course of this thread got identified as around Z2/Z3 is a region which would end up being ridden by an awful lot of athletes an awful lot of times. Either as a result of prescribed training sessions, followed to a ‘T’ by anal Alpha-Type Athletes riding 3 hours right at 200 Watts if their coach gives them a session of 3 hours Zone 2, ridden at around 160 to 200 Watts. Or as the weekend warrior (not in a bunch ride) going for his long ride of the week, ending up in a self-selected happy hard right at the same border range from Zone 2 to Zone 3.
For the weekend warrior, I don’t even think the happy hard Z2/Z3 is their biggest problem. It’s the whole package. They don’t do any intervals or progressions. It’s all group rides or happy/hard. Their VO2max never sees a workout. They also don’t do a regular long ride.
The other thing I’ve seen with club mates is inconsistency. The slightest dip in temperature and they bail on the group ride. They stop riding over the winter. They show up in the spring out of shape and off the back. They get into shape by July and then disappear again by September or October. They do the same year after year and never break through to a higher level of fitness.
2 Likes
I must be different, I would ride in low Z2 if there was no benefit for going harder. I guess I’m lazy .
I’d say Z3 for >5h straight is pretty uncomfortable.
7 Likes
Me too!
For comparative purposes: last week’s long ride was 4h at the lower end of Z2 (with <5% decoupling) and felt very easy. Today’s 4h ride was right at LT1 (measured in the lab) and was significantly “harder”, with decoupling observed after 2h30m. Fueling was the same for both.
No idea which was the more productive, but I know which one I would rather repeat.
3 Likes
Same here, almost always the second half of a zone 2 ride has lower HR than zone 1.
This is my observation too with my mates. One “long” ride per week around 2 hours (usually ends up being around .8 IF) and the rest of the week is 2-3 30-45 min HIT sessions. There’s ZERO endurance riding. These guy’s see a rise in lactate just from putting a leg over the bike.
1 Like
I’ve really struggled adopting longer steady distance rides on a consistent weekly basis into my schedule. Kids, family, etc prohibits me from a standing weekly 4-5 hour ride…it just isn’t reasonable. For those in a similar situation who have around 6-8 hrs per week to play with, tell me how your weeks look. It seems like 8 hours is the tipping point where it’s not quite long enough, but if one has an extra 2 hours to work with they could have a really productive week.
What I’m trying to do is work in a 2.5-3.5 hour ride EVERY weekend, and then if I’m lucky get a couple 1.5 hour rides in during the week along with 2 hard workouts. So something like this:
M: Intensity (SS, THR, VO2 depending on what point in the season I am) 60-90 min
T: 90-min at or close to LT1 (sometimes low tempo)
W: 60-min at or close to LT1
TH: OFF
F: Intensity (SS, THR, VO2 depending on what point in the season I am) 60-90 min
S: 2-3 hr at or close to LT1 (sometimes these rides have a couple 1-5 min efforts in them, nothing sustained)
S: Off
How can I improve upon this?
1 Like
Why sunday off?