Awesome! Thank you 
!
Personally, I only find La testing useful for setting and monitoring LT1/AeT (~210W for you). This is the only prescriptive takeaway for me.
1 Like
I think this is overly vague. There may be other definitions but you can clearly say that both FTP and LT2 represent the maximal lactate steady state.
In this case it is 260-270.
Ramp tests (which is what trainerroad uses for its machine learning) are known to overestimate FTP in riders that are heavily anaerobic. But lactate tests are also inherently inaccurate.
This could all easily account for a difference of 260 - 310.
Edit: if anything LT1 is the poorly defined entity with some claiming it isn’t even a threshold. Not everyone’s lactate curve looks like that.
If you could have a 2 zone model it would be above MLSS and below MLSS.
In terms of what zones you are aiming for - it doesn’t matter below FTP.
Training at precisely LT1 is not going to magically confer certain benefits and it will still result in a lot of fatigue if you do it for long enough.
Train according to what your goal is and train as hard as you can whilst it is still sustainable over a long period of time. If you aim to do 10 hours of LT1 a week you will likely cook yourself very quickly.
You mean LT2?
There was a period of time where people would do a lactate test to define LT1 and then in training accumulate hours at that level of effort. The idea was to go hard enough for a stimulus which would produce gains and at a level which was repeatable and not too fatiguing. Personally, I had positive results from training using LT1 as a guide for endurance rides.
2 Likes
I am not sure what part of my comment you are referring to. LT2 is pretty well defined - you go over it then you will not be able to sustain a metabolic steady state (heart rate, lactate, VO2, RPE). Some people also define it as FTP, or MLSS.
Hey!
I just moved away from having a coach, but still got a lot of lactate strips and training is going well, so was hoping to do some LT1 lactate testing, just to dial that in.
I’ve had great success with doing one LT1 session each week during base season in the previous years.
I’ve previously had LT1 set at around 240-250w.
Here you can see progression from January last year, 250w feels quite easy now, whereas before it started to feel challenging.
I usually do there types of LT1 sessions with one 20min, one 15min, then one 10min, a little bit higher each one.
Below you can see pulse at the same watts one year apart. I usually set my LT1 at around 175bpm, as this is where it’s been “capped” each year. Lap 8 is this year, and lap 9 is last year.
So, to my question, would the ramp below be suitable, if I am guesstimating that my LT1 is around 260w?
There is nothing special about training at LT1 though, unless you believe the fat utilisation stuff that currently has no scientific evidence to back it up*. And training at LT1 for long periods of time (say 10 hours and over per week for several weeks) will be VERY fatiguing for a lot of people.
*also LT1 often doesn’t align with fatmax.
Conversely, it might not be a bad idea depending on context. But I agree there is no magic and no magic zones and no magic ratio of efforts. Over time, I’ve experimented with many different approaches to training. Most of my programming over the years was forced structure mostly by available time and not by what would have been better. Ironically, now that I have much more time to train, I’m old enough to not care and have taken to riding for enjoyment and not competition.
When using the LT1 data, I wasn’t focused on fatmax, zone 2 or any of those ideas. I was interested in LT1 and moving it rightward toward MLSS. and having a good estimation of MLSS. At the time, doing those things, and incorporating it into my training plan was useful for me.
Not making any claims using terms like best, optimal or other types of hyperbole because there very well could have been a better idea (program) that I didn’t try or know about. I did find the programming I used during that period to be effective. Had one of my best seasons in terms of performance at events. Critically, I also very much enjoyed the training time and work I was putting into it.
I’ve come to believe that science is behind best practices. At this point in my cycling, I tend toward things that work rather than worrying about why they work. But I could be wrong on that approach
Agree that any level and amount of training can be fatiguing. Lots of variables to monitor and adjust as one progresses.
2 Likes
It’s definitely a good idea if you are training for an event where your target pace is around LT1. But I personally think it is too fatiguing if you want to properly do your interval sessions hard enough.
1 Like
Don’t forget that this test was likely done with a very different power meter than what you use at home. If you could train with the power meter at the lab, I’d say it could be really useful to train with those zones specifically, but since you can’t, you’ll have to use this data to adjust your training at home with your own power meter.
You could use the HR and RPE data to sort of calibrate those figures to your setup at home to see where your numbers align with your own power meter.
If 280 watts brings you to 181 bpm at home, then there could be a 7% discrepancy between your PM and the one at the lab. Of course, these things aren’t static and it will take some time to get things in order, but in my opinion, that’s the best move with this data. Don’t copy and paste it into your training at home, but rather apply the findings (HR, RPE, etc. in relation to LT1, LT2, etc.) to your home setup.
2 Likes
Make sense - but “Unfortunaly” the test was made at home.
luckily that means i can do it again after the next block which is the plan to do so.
Seems like i have been a little under the weather and the following days i were a bit sick, so i will see after my SS block
1 Like
Yeah, one day to the next can make a major difference if you’re not 100% on both days (often we’re not).
Best of luck with your training! 
Did a shorter test today just until above LT1, since I really enjoy doing longer LT1 sessions, and wanted to see possible refinements since last time.
Data Summary:
| Power (W) | Blood Lactate (mMol) |
|---|---|
| Right before | 1.4 |
| Base (20 min) | 0.9 |
| 190W | 1.0 |
| 210W | 1.3 |
| 230W | 1.0 |
| 250W | 1.7 |
| 270W | 3.0 |
| 290W | – |
Based on RPE and previous tests, I would probably say that my LT1 would be around 260w?
Any thoughts on that?
Thanks! 
For the definition of LT1 being +1 mM from baseline that sounds good.
The way I would use this data in my training is to look where the lactate started to accumulate. Which would be 240-250 watts. If I wanted a power level which would be productive but not accumulate excess fatigue and be repeatable, I’d start accumulating time in the 250 +/- range. How much time and how much load to accumulate at different levels is individualized of course. But that’s how I ended up using similar data. Over time, my goal was to push the start of accumulation closer to FTP. Of course also hoped FTP (MLSS) would go up too.
Two-cents and all that.
Looks like your training is going well so keep on pushing!!
1 Like
That makes sense, thanks for the tips!
Maybe it would be worth starting and doing some longer intervals at 250w, such as 3x30min, rather than push into the 260w territory.
If it helps, I did 7min at each level, measured lactate at 6min30s. 30min warmup.
Is there anything that can be deducted from the 3 mMol at 270w? Would it be low tempo? My threshold is currently set at 320w. Haven’t done lactate testing for threshold in a long time.
Solid test with good time period at each level. Assume heart rate responded as you would expect along with RPE? Looks like good data. I also used to see pre-test lactate higher than 1mM and then with a good easy warm-up it dropped to 1mM +/- when in good shape.
Personally, I wouldn’t make anything of the 3 mMol at 270w. Everyone is different, but I would typically see lactate start to rise and then just keep going. When I would do a proper MLSS test, my lactate at MLSS was in the 7-8 mMol range. Was never able to make much out of the slope or shape of the curve between when lactate started to accumulate (call that LT1) and then where it sat at MLSS.
What happened for me, and how I used the lactate data, was to set my endurance and tempo levels a bit below and a bit above LT1. I wasn’t maniacal about only riding a specific zone, but would use that data in hopes of going hard enough but not too hard during endurance. During say base building phase for description. When I added threshold work on top of that and continued to use the LT1 type data to shape endurance rides the results were good.
MLSS data, I must admit it wasn’t too helpful. It basically correlated to my power only FTP testing and to my RPE sensations. So in a way the MLSS testing confirmed that I likely had a good FTP number and RPE sensations. But overall didn’t impact my training.
Depending on where you are in training, perhaps use the data to shape your endurance rides for a few months. Then come back and test again and see where you are. I had pretty good luck using LT1 type info to shape my endurance rides and base builds then adding threshold on top to polish the race condition. Was all basic stuff but I took some confidence in seeing the lactate correlate with the power and RPE as I trained.
Good luck!
1 Like
Thanks! Have done a few of these when I was using a coach, but felt a bit lost now with the numbers once I had to figure it out myself. So thanks for the help!
Yeah, HR is exactly where I want it to be. My LT1 HR has pretty much been capped at 175bpm (207 is max), and at 270w I was going to 178 BPM ish, but at 250w I was at 168 BPM in a quite warm room.
So LT1 at 260w seems spot on with BPM and RPE
Thats the plan, LT1 training has been a great boost for me since I am quite intesity sensitive. So anything at threshold or above I keep at once a week tops (average around 12 hours a week now during winter).
Some good thoughts there Nice to just validate the numbers a bit.
7 weeks until we go to Calpe for a month of training, so perfect time to keep at the base building.
Thanks for the help!
1 Like