My guess is the TR crew have significantly more data than these studies could ever produce showing the effectiveness of sweet spot training in their subscriber base. We’re expected to believe that a 12 person sample study proves that polarized > sweet spot training. There just isn’t enough there to convince me to move off sweet spot to polarized.
7 Likes
This is worth a read
3 Likes
Maybe. But at this point that’s vaporware.
I do remember Nate saying something to the effect that the only definitive conclusion they could draw from their data is that ppl “who are faster”? “have higher FTP”? or ?? … are the ppl who just do more.
Sounds about right.
But that was, like, last year. So it might have changed 
1 Like
Since when is sweet spot a TID??
My biggest question after looking at this question for a year or so, is how to periodize a polarized model. I’ve only really seen it in short blocks, or in Seiler’s stuff with nordic skiers. I haven’t seen a year-long cyclist model with data. Start with 1 hard day a week with longer intervals, and progress to 2 or 3 days with harder but shorter intervals (say 2 x 16 up to 5 x 4?)
I can see (and have done) it in a block, but don’t know how to structure an overall program with it.
2 Likes
First step, stop thinking in blocks. It’s the outcome (at a high level) of what you do annually (or sufficiently long timeframes). Intensity distribution is not the input.
To the extent the range of sweet spot is inside Zone2 (in the 3 zone model), I guess you could u could use it that way.
How i see it, do whatever makes you faster, if you hit a platou, change it up so you introduce different stimulus. SS is still making me faster so I’ll keep at it if I hit the wall I’ll change it up maybe try polarized, doesn’t have to be one or another 
2 Likes
As with most things in training, it depends.
One really needs to know their end goal and apply the appropriate training. I only know my n=1 and the difference between 5, 10, and 20 hours of riding have different results. As does riding SST or THR or POL training systems.
I also think, in general, we’ve kind of lost sight of what each type of training accomplishes; all TSS isn’t created equally, remember. There shouldn’t be a ‘vs’ in any method, just as there are no replacements for each intensity.
1 Like
Wow - would be 125bpm for me so I see what you mean about slooooow! Not sure how practical that would even be for me around here as I’d be walking up a lot of my usual routes.
Thanks for the reply.
Yer the z1 rides need to be slow to the hills, like super slow! I figured out I’m in a similar place with my target zones.
But still need consistent pressure in the pedals to avoid too much coasting, important on downhill sections. Careful route planning to help with that the whole way around. And I definitely can’t do an endurance ride in a group because, well then it never stays easy!!!
2 Likes
I guess Trainingpeaks or Strava have this data. TR is narrowed to their plans, so there is maybe not much data to compare different systems.
4 Likes
I had thought the generalized formula was find your HR Max - HR Resting range, take 65% of that, and add it to your HR Resting to get your HR cap. For example my max HR is 200, resting is 50, so I get (200 - 50) * 0.65 = 97.5, add back the 50 and I get ~148 HR for my cap. This makes more sense to me, and line up well with a 180 bpm threshold, so that 30 beat range is Seiler’s Z2. Using the 65% of HR max I’d be down at 130, which seems like way too large a gap.
3 Likes
People need to remember the tid for seliers studies were hr based, not power or pace. In practice, many elites train in what is considered threshold and get their hr around 90% of max.
If you measure hr, you can see that distribution as well. For me I’m doing a traditional base period with time at lt1 (traditional z2) as my intensity.
1 Like
If you do enough SST that Z2 dominates, that would be a threshold TID.
They’re also session-based, not time-based.
As a MTBer I’m subscribed to Dylan’s channel for entertainment. However, I wouldn’t consider him an experienced coach or researcher. Yes he is an accomplished athlete, but has limited experience outside of N=1. His “review” of the science is a joke. Furthermore, anyone that points to specific “scientific” studies (ignoring others) that support their POV and agenda are sus. The video seemed like a dig on TR and an add for his personal coaching. There appears to be a conflict of interest.
That being said, there is certainly a lot of evidence of the success of Polarized training and it is an active debate. Which is good, because it’s another method of getting faster. Whether it is better than SS training based on how many hours you have/willing to put in is still “it depends”. The likely outcome on which is better will probably be different depending on the persons’ physiology, genetics, experience, training hours, goals, etc. Concluding that if one training method isn’t working, it’s worth trying the alternative.
As my N=1 experience I did mid volume plans with TR the previous 2 years and am currently nearing the end of SSB HV this off season. So far, I am getting amazing results with SSB HV and am enjoying HV over MV. Personally, I feel SSB MV has too much intensity.
14 Likes
Yeah people forget he is pretty young and doesn’t have a ton of experience as a coach compared to others. He’s a strong athlete no doubt, but that doesn’t mean his videos are the gold standard on training.
1 Like
He was a CTS coach and probably had access to all of their data and knowledge base. If he had questions he could probably communicate with senior level coaches or even Chris Carmichael. So I’d say he has more than an N=1 experience given he has probably coached and continues to coach way more athletes than any of us.
15 Likes
To be fair whenever Dylan uses studies to try and show ___ he will typically also show studies that contradict the point he’s trying to make, and his videos usually end with something like “it really depends” which while vague, doesn’t really scream bias. IMO he’s one of the more interesting and tolerable guys to listen to, though regurgitation of studies and jargon don’t appeal to me personally and I like the more laid back approach that Tyler Pearce takes in his videos.
9 Likes