Percentage of your weekly hours to Z2 or other intensities?

I strongly say no.

Seems to be no consenus at all. Some think session distribution is important, some TiZ

Personally I am in the sessions camp, (as was Seiler last time I checked) it makes a lot more sense than TiZ, why?

Look at how you body responses and recovers from sessions with and without intensity, EPOC or stress on the autonomic nervous system etc…

Spliting distribution in to TiZ is totally nonsense without further context, well it can be dependent on how the TiZ is accumulated. Just looking at the TiZ only represents the stress of that work (that interval plus the next intervals), with no consideration of how TiZ was accumulated, the response, post interval stress, post workout stress and recovery needs, that is not how the body works / responds.

Regarding “Targeting”

IMO, training distribution ‘falls out’ of planning training to address the gaps from where you are to where you need to be.
Plan the sessions and the required recovery from those session for you based on your time restraints and training background. The distrubution will be what it will be.

Taking a generic distribution say 80/20 and planning sessions or TiZ based on these arbitrary numbers is totally backwards, it is not the starting point IMO, where does your goals, gaps to goals, training history, recovery needs, time availability, age, general health, life stress etc come into this? I’d suggest it doesn’t :wink:

Keep it simple, train hard, take as much recovery as you need until to can train hard again, on your hard days address the gaps from where you are to where you want to be. This requires experimenting or picking a plan that has already been designed to addresses your weaknesses and tweaking it for you based on how you respond.

Good Luck.

1 Like

Not sure what you mean by ignoring rest, rest isn’t a session, it’s the absence of one.

All depends on your definition of good what the others you ride with are doing and their history. Let’s say you do an hour at your FTP on your intensity day, the rest Z2 volume. Could you be a good time triallist for your age against the competition? It’s possible.

I just think rest days, off the bike, should be part of the equation for non-pro cyclists who don’t have the time to train full time. For those with careers limiting their time (“the time crunched athlete”), often a rest day is supplemented for a recovery ride following a hard workout, which for pros is part of the “80%.” I think it’s important to not ignore that. Recovery is part of training as much as sleep, nutrition and the training itself.

For the record, I think the 80-20ish (over a season) is pretty standard for endurance sports who train full time. I just think the equation needs to be tweaked for those on the bike part time.

1 Like

Totally agree, I always consider a day with no sessions (not that I personal have many, if any) as a session of Z1 as in reality most people end up doing other stuff than training like gardening, DIY, general chores, walking, shopping etc unless you lying around all day there is going to be periods of light Z1 or what can at least be considered light Z1.

1 Like

Fortunately during my career, my contracts were around 36 hours a week. Thus I was never time crunched. Cycle commuting got me 10 hours a week before you even consider training and the weekend. Plus my career started before the World Wide Web and I didn’t waste hours a week online back then, hours that could be spent on bike instead.

1 Like

This is a cool breakout where did you get this? What app provides this info?

1 Like, in the “Totals” section:

It’s a free site and you can also contribute to help him with his work.


It’s a great site, I’m on it as well. Highly customisable to suit preferences.


For some reason Intervals Icu only took in 13 weeks of data from my strava so the tail end of my CX season and Trad Base.

Does the fact that pyramidal is highlighted at the bottom indicate that I am training in a pyramidal style for the past 13 weeks?

If I switch to a 42 day range (which eliminates the workouts and racing of CX season, no power meter anyway) It looks like Trainer Road is doing a good job of the percentages.

I’ve never thought of it that way but you are totally correct; rest days should be included, good point.


I almost hesitate to open this can of worms, but how exactly would you consider or adjust based on those rest days in the count?

1 Like

If one is organising training by TiZ is, I would suggest measuring your whole life, 24hrs a day. Someone who is prone all day long except for their workouts would be considered differently to someone waiting tables all day long.

1 Like

It’s another polarised training thread, which can exactly hasn’t been opened? :sweat_smile:

I will go away now.

Seiler observed pro athletes and developed a message to advise average joes not to go out and run really hard every time. It was a good message.

I will go away really now.


I thought @crosshair (see his previous posting in this thread) made it clear why TIZ isn’t the best way to tackle polarized training already?

The way I see it is, within a 3-zone model, anything below LT1 is Z1? Then rest fits nicely into Z1. The important part is being fresh for your hard workouts. Most people could recover from 2 hard workouts a week, that leaves 5 days for easy training or couch surfing. Training is about fatigue management regardless of training philosophy. Pyramidal, polarized, sweetspot (the concept Coggan advocats, not the TR sweetspot zone) are just different ways to manage strain from training.

I think it is inaproriate to think of percentage and instead think time in pol z3 and just add as much easy training as you can recover from. Kirk Willet claimed in an old article, that I can’t find right now, that a weekly 50 minutes at or above threshold was his target time.

Edit: Giving it some thought it was probably Kraig Willet, not Kirk. The articles I’m thinking of are “raise the left” and “fill the right”. I couldn’t find the at the moment; they seem to have disappeared from the internet. I didn’t know that was even possible?! I think they where published in 2009 so :person_shrugging:

This is how Alistair and Johnny Brownlee have described their training in every podcast I’ve listened to them on for the last several years. Basically, be fresh to nail the Tuesday chain gang, be fresh to nail the track workout later in the week, then be fresh to nail one more hard ride or run. The rest was as hard or easy as necessary to allow freshness for those designated hard days.

Now, 5 days of couch surfing repeatedly doesn’t fall into anything other than weekend warrior training, which always leads to burnout. But I don’t believe that’s what you’re implying

1 Like

Below LT1 is optimal for certain adaptions. Miss out the low intensity and you’ll be missing out. It’s not just filler between high intensity workouts.


I’ve steered clear of much of this Z2, POL, blah… blah lately, but this is the first I remember seeing people mention trying to add in what’s NOT being done. Sure, recovery has it’s own considerations and all, but never heard it mixed into the percentages (80/20 and such) that are more about what you do for your actual “training time”.

I just giggle a bit every time one of these threads pops up and heads down the rabbit hole. Then we inevitably see comments along the lines of “It’s really simple…” as the basic claim of POL and Z2 focus. But the hair splitting and deep dives we see here seem to tell a different story :wink:


That is not what I was advocating either, rather add as much volume as you can recover from.

Started the zone 2 thing 6 months ago for both training and health (?) purposes after listening to Inigo. Have enjoyed a few other podcasts etc and am absolutely loving the training but the various threads on here all quickly disappear down the same argument hole and become very boring. Total turn off.