That is good to know. I was recently playing with 3 different vo2 max models (hey, if there is software with exuberant amount of data and statistics - bring it on:)) and they are pretty close to each other. I have my curve pretty well filled (it lacks some data on short power, but they are not very far off, especially it is not my cup of tea), but when I was “simulating” my curve with fictional data, the difference in vo2 max was about 1-2÷ so not so tragic.
And I was asking because I am in quite similar situation to yours (as far I remember from other posts), where my FTP is very close (84% - like a pro-athlete but with a poor man VO2 max :P) to VO2 max and I am researching different methods to move that celling. Being completely new to cycling I know that I have some more room to grow but looking at my current numbers and estimating my GE my room to grow is dwindling, even after quite great response in 6 months (3.0 W/kg to 4.15W/kg) and my future as a good amateur is rather bleak
Sort of, yes. When I ramped up my training from 12 to >20hrs/week I rode almost exclusively 2.5months at base endurance (aka MAF). My CP6 (aka vo2max) went up quite significantly. However, this only occurred once when I ramped up the training and not during later phases of endurance building.
And this is what Dan Lorang just wrote a few days ago:
Based on the test results and the requirements for MTB marathon, we would recommend two approaches. The goal is to increase the VO2max with long rides (peripheral system) and with some hard intervals (central system).
In the end it probably depends on where you’re coming from and how much potential for improvement one has.
Here are my MAF results from the last 10 months extracted from Xert. I recovered from an April 2019 injury in mid-May and decided I would do virtually all my rides at high end MAF zone (180 less 61 add back 5 to 10 bpm). So I kept my HR under 130 bpm with the occasional surge in the Zwift rides. The comparative rides I selected were all over 2 hours, indoors on rollers with just steady riding, no stops, same environmental conditions. I don’t wear the HR strap too often so limited points recently.
date
Name
Duration
Distance
Average Power
Average Heart Rate
HR/PWR
04/05/2020
Haute Route Watopia Stage 3 (E)
2h 26m
73.43 km
222 W
124 bpm
55.9%
11/30/2019
UKZwifters 2 Hour Sportive (D)
2h 02m
83.89 km
217 W
125 bpm
57.6%
11/02/2019
UKZwifters 2 Hour Sportive (D)
2h 00m
81.84 km
224 W
134 bpm
59.8%
10/12/2019
UKZwifters 2 Hour Sportive (D)
2h 00m
83.41 km
220 W
127 bpm
57.7%
10/06/2019
Kiss Endurance Sportive (D)
2h 02m
85.11 km
213 W
124 bpm
58.2%
10/05/2019
Kiss Endurance Sportive (D)
2h 00m
84.34 km
221 W
127 bpm
57.5%
08/03/2019
ZHR Audax 100km (Ride) (C)
2h 34m
101.31 km
214 W
127 bpm
59.3%
07/20/2019
ZHR Audax 100km (Ride) (C)
2h 41m
101.04 km
204 W
125 bpm
61.3%
07/06/2019
ZHR Audax 100km (Ride) (C)
2h 34m
102.60 km
213 W
124 bpm
58.2%
06/30/2019
ZHR Audax 100km (Ride) (C)
2h 34m
101.46 km
208 W
125 bpm
60.1%
06/22/2019
ZHR Audax 100km (Ride) (C)
2h 45m
102.67 km
209 W
128 bpm
61.2%
You can see that my efficiency has improved over that time. I have not tested or tracked FTP or VO2max.
I averaged between 10 to 15 hours a week. Average around 12.
Typical week would be
Monday 30 min easy
Tuesday 1:30 to 2:00
Wednesday 1:30 to 2:00
Thursday 1:30 to 2:00
Friday 1:00 to 1:30
Saturday and Sunday 2 to 2.5 hours
Longest ride over that period 3.5 hours indoors
I basically rode on feel. Conversational pace, no gasping, etc. I knew the approximate power I should be at (190 to 210W) and based on how I felt that day, stayed in that range.
I might also add, that I never really feel tired or burnt out on these hours and when I am outside and need to push hard, my legs feel fresh and respond as well as they ever had. I recover well and go again the next day.
It is also refreshing not following a plan. I just plan on riding from 5 to 7 am most mornings after a 30 minute warm-up on the erg and if I can’t find an appropriate Zwift group to ride with, I just pick a route and go. Listen to podcasts or music. I have to focus a bit more on rollers than on a trainer which also helps the time go by.
Maybe I’m just physiologically weird, but if I followed the 180 - my age (53), I would be capped at ~42% - 45% of my FTP. As soon as I get on my trainer and start pedaling, my heart rate goes to ~40+%, no matter how easy I’m going.
I guess I have a hard time seeing how riding at ~42 - 45% of my current FTP is going to build fitness.
As a note, today, riding at sweet spot is about 155 bpm, up to 2x30, with ~2.3% aerobic decoupling.
Just another data point for the discussion (and perhaps validate your physiological weirdness)…I’m 50, at my MAF HR (130) I can hold 70-75% FTP for 20+ minutes.
I assume the MAFites would say that your result indicates and under trained aerobic system. Not sure if that’s the case, seems like there is a lot of variation in HR metrics. I have a friend the same age as me and his resting HR is similar, but his max is 20 beats higher than min. Pretty sure he’d be going backwards at this MAF HR.
Many years ago I was a avid mountain climber. While not elite, I found that I was climbing faster than roughly 80% of other climbers. I had many local climbs that I would time to gauge my fitness from year to year. Despite training very hard and consistently, my best times had remained steady for several years so I thought I had pretty much reached my genetic limit. Given that I was climbing faster than most other climbers, I was content with where I was at. I was ignorant of MAF at the time. However, upon purchasing my first HR monitor, I read some random book that advocated for endurance athletes to train at lower heart rates. I don’t even remember what book but it was long before I had ever heard of MAF. I decided to give it a go. I set an alarm on my HR monitor to go off whenever my HR exceeded my predetermined limit. The first month was absolutely miserable. I was climbing so incredibly slow. Yet that damn alarm kept going off over and over meaning I had to climb even slower. I was about to give up, but after the first month or so I began to see some improvement in my speed at those lower heart rates. The improvements were slow, but measurable. I was reaching the tops of my training climbs faster and faster, but with much less effort than before. 4-6 months later, I was setting new PR’s on those climbs. I had previously thought that to be impossible. Here is the real kicker. The new PR’s I was setting were being set at the lower heart rates! Once I added some intensity, I was blowing my old PRs out of the water.
I doubt that everyone would get the same results, and whether my results were sport specific or would apply across other endurance sports is debatable. Some important facts to keep in mind is that prior to my attempt at trying what people are now referring to as MAF, my training had been pretty much exclusively high intensity. I had no knowledge or instruction on how to train. I was always going as hard as I could. And that is why I decided to post this. If you are that person who has trained primarily at high intensities and you are not seeing improvements, it just might be something worth a try.
I did a polarized plan last summer, and was able to hold 72% of FTP at a heart rate of MAF + 5 for 3 hrs. Haven’t done that since, just now finishing up SSB 2. I’m in a bit of a quandry as to what to do next, my main event this summer was a cross country trip which isn’t happening.
I’ve seen similar improvements with just MAF training. Up until 6 months ago most of my sessions were at a high intensity (running, rowing and cycling). My biggest improvements have been with running as that’s currently my main focus, but from November - February last year I mainly rowed and I had some good results there as well.
I’ll likely do another FTP test soon, but with very limited cycling since September last year my aerobic pace has gone from around 70% of my FTP to between 85-90%. This has been a great eye opener for me and has made me realize that my aerobic system has never been fully developed over the years, hence why I’ve always felt like I’ve plateaued with these sports.
It’s definitely helped with my motivation and as others have mentioned it really limits the chance of injury or burnout.
Apologies if I’ve missed the conversation on this. I have worked my way through the thread, but my Wi-Fi keeps dropping out.
How much do people vary cadence whilst using Maff? And what’s your reasoning behind it?
Thanks
I feel it is important to add some strength training in the mix. I erg’d extensively Oct to Feb last year following a polarized/MAF approach. When it came to race the 2000m in Feb, I could tell my weakness was my leg strength and not my aerobic system. I was willing to pull harder, but my legs couldn’t do it.
I’m on rollers and my cadence for 90 to 95% of the ride would be at 90 rpm. I spin up to 100 once in a while and down to 80 every so often for no other reason than a bit of variety. Nothing really planned.
similar, I have two handfuls of workouts at 45% FTP (Lazy Mountain -1) and at 45% FTP my HR is 1-8bpm above the high-end of MAF HR range. However I have good aerobic endurance and can observe low decoupling on 2+ hour tempo rides and 1 hour threshold rides. And my HR at FATmax wattages is 20bpm higher than MAF HR.
For me, I usually only see MAF HR with low recovery rides (around 35-40% FTP or ~90W). Will see if things change over the next few months, I’ve been doing more zone 2 volume than in past and its going to get 90+ degrees hot for me afternoon workouts (unintentional heat training which increases plasma volume, usually lowers HR, and increases vo2max).
Therefore MAF HR for my cycling sets a very very low HR “floor” which I guess could be useful if I lacked discipline on recovery (zone 1) or possibly some “low aerobic” rides at low-end of zone 2. My plan is to continue using power, as I don’t have discipline issues.
Appreciate the discussion around MAF and I certainly see how it would be useful for some, and if I ever take up running again.
At 53, using the 180 formula I can get about 18 mins at 80% of my ftp (190, small female).
It really is just what your system gets used to.
I started using the 220 formula, but capping it just a little under in line with my Z2 HR. It lets me do some spin ups into anerobic power zone.
I’m hoping this along side low rpm will help build leg strength (plus strength work).
