Lactate Testing - Data and Results

[DarthShivious]

Vo2max workouts - Time above 88% max Heart Rate

Putting this little table here so I can find it again in the future. Folks are welcome to copy, paste, use the numbers for whatever they are worth. Notes below on recovery times and RPE.

For VO2max workouts a metric we see utilized is time above 90% max heart rate. As a proxy. Since measuring VO2max requires special equipment it is difficult to determine if this type of work increases an individual’s VO2max. Regardless, there is interest in different workout structures, TiZ, time above 90% etc. I used time above 88% simply because 150 bpm is an easy number to work off of.

Notes

Inside my HR goes up higher than outside. That’s cooling or lack thereof. I also struggle on really hot race days (time trials). HR goes up fast and stays up.

Looking at the chart, it is pretty clear if one wants to simply accumulate time above 88-90% mHR, then longer time periods at 95-105% of MLSS (FTP) is a pretty good way to accumulate those minutes. A single 20 min effort in the 105% range is approximate to many of the common “VO2max” workouts.

I like 3 min higher power intervals and often choose 8 x 3 sets. 8 x 3 constant power holding 125-130% of MLSS gives about 10-11 min >90% Adding hot starts bumps that up to 16 min. Problem with 8x3 hot starts is it takes me a 2-3 days to recover well. Compared to 1-2 days for a hard 2 x 20 or 5 x 10

4 x 8 starts to accumulate a good amount of minutes in target range. 22:00 for the example shown. I find 4 x 8 inside at 105-110% extremely difficult. Outside not too bad. Recovery time is 2-3 days

Finally, if we only want minutes above 90%, go do FTP work and you’ll get there. Or at least I get there.

The 2 x 20 shown was a good day. I breezed through both at 106 and 102% 32 min above 90%

5 x 10 Inside (two different TR Antelope records) is pretty good at getting my HR up. Almost 40 min total time > 90%

Recovery time for a 2x20 or 5x10 is 1-2 days

W:R 1:1 for intervals up to about 5 min. 2:1 or other shorter recovery would increase time above 90% of course

Take Home - At least for me, if accumulating time above 90% mHR is the goal, looks best to just go ride at 95-105% of FTP and let the minutes enter then bank. Of course for racing or trail riding there are other power demands and trainings to consider and perhaps the higher power intervals provide extra bang for the buck there.

$0.02 There are other blogs and data sets out there better the this one so poke around if really interested in precise information.

[old_but_not_dead_yet]

Wouldn’t 88% of maximal HR only be about 80-85 of VO2max?

[DarthShivious]

@old_but_not_dead_yet

about

Really no agenda or hypothesis here. Just sharing HR data for different workouts to add to the noise. Since i’ve never measured my Vo2max, have no idea where I’m at and simply using the 90% mHR proxy.

If we accept that 90% of mHR is going to have a positive impact on VO2max and that time at 90% is a useful metric, then it may be of interest to see what workouts achieve that across a larger set of riders. Or not.

Some questions:

Are all minutes at >90% the same?

Does accumulating minutes >90% and at higher force (power) levels make a difference compared to >90 minutes at 90-100% FTP?

If yes, then how many minutes and at what frequency?

If >90% is a good proxy, then are the “vo2max” workouts in most of the canned training plans, which stop at about 6 x 3 min 120%, actually having the intended effect?

It’s a fun topic. Feel free to share your thoughts on effective VO2max training and blocks if you have thoughts or data to add.

FWIW, I’m seeing 4-5 min with a hot start as potential improvement over my go to 3 min jobbers. That time probably reflects on bike demands better too.

[old_but_not_dead_yet]

I don’t know where the 90% of max HR comes from, but isn’t that basically TT pace for many people? That doesn’t sound like a potent stimulus for VO2max to me.

[DarthShivious]

I don’t want to mis-attribute but there has been a focus on accumulating time above 90% mHR and associating that with Vo2max. Suspect it comes out of much of the polarized discussions and the effect that has on increasing VO2max and power at MLSS. Seiler has a review on some of that with nice charts – the 2009 paper.

That said, believe you are right and for “vo2max” should be looking at HR’s in the 95-100% zone. When I cut my data there are not many minutes in that region from the workouts shown above. The 8x3 hot starts and the 4x4 very hard would give about 8 min each 95-100% zone.

That doesn’t translate to the right training but thats the efforts that for me induce a 95-100% HR effort.

tnx

On edit - Yes, my TT efforts are generally going to quickly reach and stay at 93-95% mHR. During hot events I’ll get close to 100% toward the end.

[DarthShivious]

Yesterday’s test results and comparison of same power (+/- ability to hold constant target wattage on rollers).

The November 2019 test used 5 min time points. For yesterday, stretched that out to 7 min. Wanted to go longer with fewer sticks. Future tests will likely stay with the 7 min intervals.

For those following, enjoy.

[splash]

Interesting, was there a problem with the 10min point in November?

And this might be a pretty stupid question, but why has your steady state lactate dropped (from approx 10mmol to 8mmol)? I suppose the easy answer is your fitness improved, but I probably naively assumed that your steady state lactate level was some sort of physiological constant, and what would change was your power at that level.

[DarthShivious]

@splash

Interesting, was there a problem with the 10min point in November?

Not that I recall.

@splash

but why has your steady state lactate dropped

Likely neither test was spot on MLSS. Expect the prior test I was over by 5 (or more) watts and the latest one likely under by about 5 (or more).

The comparative numbers (improvement on lactate, RPE and HR at similar constant wattage) are nice and confirm how I’m feeling on road. But chasing a precise MLSS number is like chasing one’s tail. It requires repeat testing. If I was fully committed to the data set, would hop back on mid-week and repeat the trial holding 235 and see what happens. Maybe if it rains :-]

Am using this data mostly to learn the ups and downs and for fun and maybe save some others a bit of time if they decide to collect this sort of data. Based on the experience so far, I wouldn’t suggest worrying about lactate measures unless there is a specific reason or need to guide training. I’ve found it interesting but not necessary.

[splash]

Yeah, I can understand the scientific curiosity! And I actually think what you’re doing is interesting, because it shows what you can do at home.

[carytb]

I’m fascinated by this whole physiological thing as well and am thinking of getting a lactate meter as well just to satisfy my own curiosity. I assume that the Nov figures imply that as lactate was steadily rising that’s why you say you were slightly over MLSS. Given that the August figures are steady before riding slightly wouldn’t that imply that you were bang on with it.

[tshortt]

@DarthShivious or anyone else,

Happy to be “up threaded” if you guys have already covered it, but have you paid much attention to establishing AeT/LT1? Is the first uptick in the curve apparent in your testing?

Only asking because I assumed until now that this thread is more focused on MLSS.

[DarthShivious]

@tshortt

Is the first uptick in the curve apparent in your testing?

This was my last step test from April

[DarthShivious]

Couple more quick graphs since some folks are using the numbers.

The two LT step tests are December 2019 and April 2019.

Body weight relatively constant at 145 pounds. 50-55 age group. Male of average ability, Cat 3 packfill.

In addition to riding about 8 hours a week, I lift weights 2x per week and do core sessions 4-5 days a week.

The training between December and April was endurance focused. I was looking to move out TTE at MLSS, not necessarily push FTP (MLSS) up. About 8 hours a week riding and I was doing mostly LT1 rides plus about 10-12% of time at 90-100% MLSS (225w). Around April I started adding a VO2-Tuesday and pushing out those intervals. MLSS bumped up to maybe 230w (not significant) and my CP20min went up 10-15 watts and peaked at a solid 250w

My take was riding a lot of time in and around that LT1 number along with some threshold was very positive. I felt great, was riding longer and longer at higher average power and most importantly was enjoying the bike a lot and having fun. Never felt wrecked despite higher than historic average weekly TSS loads. Lost a very small amount of short term power (30s - 5 min) but with no focus on those durations was expected.

Into 2021, I will definitely double down on the LT1 + threshold work training concepts and will back off the SST and VO2 focused stuff.

Disclaimers: N=1. Not a controlled experiment. FWIW. YMMV. Random guy on web. Enjoy the numbers as you might and your training journey too!!!

[old_but_not_dead_yet]

Endurance exercise training is a beautiful thing, eh?

[tshortt]

@DarthShivious

into 2021, I will definitely double down on the LT1 + threshold work training concepts and will back

So the LT1 intensity is your lowest intensity? You’re not also doing base endurance rides at lower power?

[DarthShivious]

@tshortt

So the LT1 intensity is your lowest intensity? You’re not also doing base endurance rides at lower power?

Pretty much, yes. Made it a point to try and accumulate a lot of time in and around the LT1 power area. If I found myself on a longer ride dropping toward lazy pedaling (140-160w) I’d pick it up a touch. Conversely if I started to push a little harder (200-210w) I would back off.

Then on threshold days I would focus on longer intervals (30, 45, 60 min) sitting nicely in that 220-230w region.

For 2021 am thinking I’ll do this type of training for a good six months January - June. Likely with some supra-threshold work once a week or simply as part of longer rides.

I’m not suggesting any of this is optimized, but it seemed to work for me and coupled two goals of enjoying riding the bike with seeing a good level of fitness by the numbers. That’s good enough for me at present!!!

[tshortt]

@DarthShivious

I’m not suggesting any of this is optimized, but it seemed to work for me and coupled two goals of enjoying riding the bike with seeing a good level of fitness by the numbers. That’s good enough for me at present!!!

Not to mention sharing with random folks on the internet! Fun and educational. Thank you.

[DarthShivious]

Starting a new plan and getting ‘serious’ about bike fitness. Decided to do a quick step check to confirm what my legs and RPE were telling me.

Bad news, was a long winter and I absolutely lost interest in bike training due to snow and cold and lack of motivation. Started new plans a couple times and bailed after 2-3 rides. Simply lacked desire to do structured training…

Good news, had a blast lifting weights, gained some muscle and closed in on all time PRs for favorite lifts. Also rediscovered long hikes with wife which was good for us both.

This is the 5th or 6th home lactate test I’ve done since fall of 2019. Pretty much have my set-up dialed and feel that I’m getting good data sets.

The TL;DR… after achieving solid bike fitness during 2020, the last six months gave it all back. The numbers from this week are very similar to December of 2019 and significantly down from spring 2020.

But, that is OK. Gearing up training now that weather is breaking and it will come back.

For folks enjoying the thread so far, here are the latest datum:

---

---

Ride Profile from TR web app (Mac Beta).
Test performed on eMotion Rollers.
Test subject held watts as constant as possible (No erg mode).

Data Table

[Mark767]

How do you actually read this data and figure out LT1 and LT2 ?

[carytb]

I don’t know how @DarthShivious reads it but to my completely untrained eye I,d say LT1 180W and LT2 210W… Maybe?