In 2020 I tried lower 128-134bpm HR target, and then this past year I’ve experienced greater fitness gains by going back to targeting 136-142bpm and shooting for an average of 138bpm on my endurance rides.
I’m just starting very low because I’m building volume up to average around 15hrs per week in base. Rather than try to add 25% volume AND do a lot at LT1/AeT, it makes sense to me to ramp volume at very low intensity first, then increase the intensity up. So Prep/Base 1 are all about building low intensity volume (with some short threshold work alongside it), Base 2 gets up to the average I want and introduces time at LT1/AeT… and then progress from there.
Hi !
I do lactate test to 3 juniors cyclist this afternoon.
My protocole was the San Millan protocol (2w/kg + 0.5w/kg every steps with intervals of 8min minimum).
There is a lot of difference in the results beetwen them.
The 3 have almost the same level but for one Z2 (baseline +0.5mmol) occurs at 72% of FTP (20’ test ×0.95) for the other one it’s 79% and for the last one it’s at 84% of FTP.
To the People who say “What % of FTP is Z2” there is not universal rule and very various beetwen everybody.
if you ride always at LT1 your base training and you have a body weight higher then 60kg and not super low capacitys you better have a overall pretty low volume or you are a machine of fueling.
Yes for all of them it is beetwen 77 and 82% of their maximal heart rate (maximal for reel not predicted !).
A few months ago I found a study (which I can no longer find XD) which suggested that 80% of HR Max in an athlete could be considered as his first threshold (LT1, VT1). However, some candidates (the most trained) in this study had a first threshold of 88% FC Max!
This is in agreement with the values found today in my athletes who at the cardiac level are below this first threshold as suggested by zone 2 of San Millan.
Thank you sir! That checks with the values I’ve been considering and from what I’ve read the range for %maxHR is narrower than %FTP, making it a little bit easier to (imprecisely) dial in without detailed testing. Hence my planned method for my personal base period based on maxHR and the values I’m opting for.
if my LT1 is at 79% maxHR it doesn’t leave a lot of room for Tempo riding. any idea’s what i should do going forward keeping in bounds of ISM philosophy?
I had a pretty good idea as I think it’s tied pretty closely to VT1. But use a step test and start well below where you think it. LT1 has been shifting to the right as I continue training.
For LT1? I’ve not seen that. He throws that out as his recommended 3-zone “zone 1” prescription, not the LT1 boundary from what I’ve seen. For whatever it’s worth, Seiler disciple Trevor Connor uses .78 x FTP and .85 x LTHR for zone 1/2 boundary (which should correlate to LT1). When I was playing around with various testing last year (not drawing lactate), I was hanging out around 77-79% of maxHR for LT1 (which also happens to correspond to 0.85 x LTHR for me).
If you’re riding capped at 83% maxHR for long interval periods, you’re meeting the intent of tempo work. As you get fitter, the power you’re putting out at that HR will become more and more Coggan-tempoish.
Maybe I’ve misunderstood all this time but I thought that Seiler’s zone 1/2 boundary was LT1. He’s always talking about the ‘first lactate threshold or turnpoint’.
Yes, that’s how I understand it too, however his prescription of 60-70% max HR is for rides below LT1. Seiler, from all I’ve seen, doesn’t get much into riding around or at LT1.
Recently he’s come around to “cyclists need to spend some time riding in zone 2”, but I haven’t seen where he talks about it beyond as an aside. Many coaches who follow polarized methods prescribe AeT/LT1 and into tempo riding. Haven’t seen where Seiler the physiologist talks about it much at all.
As mentioned, Trevor Connor is a polarized coach and his zone boundaries are above (pulled from his three-zone TiZ WKO chart).
As above Seiler wasn’t about riding near the zone boundaries. Give it a reasonable margin and you’ll know you aren’t working too hard on your easy sessions.
Remember when working out percentages LT1 will be higher when using the Ed Coyle definition (baseline + 0.5 mmol), which Clement32000 used.
My “inflection point” LT1 is about 5-bpm lower than my “+ 0.5 mmol” point.
Both are close enough as has been stated it’s not an exact science.
Heck, even 75% of CP gets me pretty close to the +0.5mmol version of LT1.
It’s also possible that some riders simply don’t have a baseline. You just jump on the bike and it’s high. The variability alone will be 0.5mmol.
I’m at a point where I think “today is a 115 day” (tired). When feeling good it’s “a 135 day”. No “interval-ization ” needed. Get in the ballpark of 135 bpm for most of the ride. Do that for a few days. Then cool the jets with 115 rides. Any progression comes from increased time in zone or overall volume.
