Recent Flo podcast with Steve Neal

thanks, that answered my question!

1 Like

I’m terrified :grimacing:

1 Like

ok, LOL, how about this one… playing fantasy football for the first time in 10 years and I don’t really follow the NFL. Despite that I’m doing pretty well in the league, but I’ve got the Panthers for defense and they have been a major suckage. Dropping them and picking up on waivers tonight, choices are: Dolphins, Falcons, Taxans, Jets, Bengals, Cardinals, Lions, or Colts. Heading out for a ride. Thanks in advance!

#1) Jets defense
#2) Lions
#3) Falcons/Dolphins … I could make arguments for either.

Good luck :football:

1 Like

Thanks, luck got better after dropping the Bears TE Kmet and picking up the Lions LaPorta. Go rookie go!

And for how long would you this. When would you change your schedule again, and to what?

I go by uniform colors, same as March Madness :smile:

Basically, yeah. I asked him one time what to do if I start to go up and can’t get it back down at tempo power, but that I have more time that day to ride. In retrospect his answer is obvious I guess but many of us were really splitting hairs about this stuff back then: keep riding, just lower your effort to Zone 2. :man_facepalming:

“then scaling”. I start with a big day and then scale down from there. Unlike @batwood14 (I think), it was pretty uncommon for me to stack days. Just never got to that point within 10-12hrs. My canonical week looked like what he posted, with different durations (see below). Steve would recommend stacking for some when time came.

For me, tempo was almost always followed by Zone 2 day with a power cap (not a HR cap). Steve would point out that most of his gym members and coached athletes had a finite set of hours per week (sound familiar), so this notion that you would do this many hours, then progress to more, wasn’t really a thing. You progress by adding more tempo until (ideally) your power at LBP reached a certain percentage of MAP (I don’t remember what it was).

My typical week was 3 x tempo session. First big session duration would be to whatever I had built up to, and then the other two using HR and breath. Every six weeks, lactate assessment. Then eventually didn’t bother with the lactate. I did not lift or do low cadence. I have hilly terrain so I get a lot of unstructured low(er) cadence so never felt the need. And I should lift. Really I should. :man_shrugging: :smile: :man_shrugging:

When I cheated I would do a 3 hr hard group ride. The next few days ride endurance or off, but never off for more than a single day unless I was sick, etc. So then fewer tempo rides that week.

Because this was all sub-threshold, I found kJ tracking and TSS to be lockstep.

RE: number of days, it’s important to note that the mentality of this training was fairly similar to “sweetspot as a concept”, not as an intensity, level, or zone. So your body told you how many days per week. Prescribing tempo was for everybody, but how much was individual. I never needed to take entire “rest weeks”, where you dial it down to Zone2 and rest all week (because you did a build). I would occasionally need about 3 days of Zone 2.

Because riding in this way can be monotonous, Steve was happy for me to go on a “mixed” ride outdoors, as long as overall it never got above LBP HR for too long. Endurance on the flats, tempo on the hills. Some things never change, do they old timers? :slight_smile:


This is a really key point. Totally agree.

1 Like

How did you figure out the power cap?

And thanks so much @tshortt @AJS914 and @batwood14 for all the insights here. I’m planning my fall/winter now and these tempo efforts seem like a great approach to mix things up a bit from prior years :grinning:

1 Like

Short answer: he just told me.

Conjecture by me: took a quick peek and a bunch of “Easy” rides are about .60 IF. “Conjecture” because he did not use FTP, so IF is based on that, etc. :man_shrugging:

1 Like

FWIW, I hit the fatigue wall after about 8 weeks of tempo training which forced a week off. For my next go around, I’ll just do an easy week every 3-4 weeks whether it feels like I need it or not.


Well that won’t work, I’m not even watching games! @batwood14 I grew up in Michigan, and in the 1970s we would have Thanksgiving and everyone said “the Lions are the biggest turkey on Thanksgiving.” So to commemorate, I made my first emotional decision and picked up the Lions D. And finally added a 2nd quarterback (Steelers Pickett), my second choice because my waiver position was 6th and somebody snagged my first choice (Packers Love). Sigh.

@tshortt Thanks for the other stuff. I’ve really not been able to see any difference between doing tempo by power or HR, but there are a lot of howevers (high fractional utilization, compressed HR zones, limited experiments, etc.) that impact my individuation. FWIW I literally can go from nothing to weekly 1x60-min tempo at 85-92% ftp. Last nights endurance ride was typical - first third around .68 IF, second third around .71 IF, last third .74 IF and my HR was super stable and negative decoupling. Doing four or five 120-240 minute endurance rides (with or w/o intervals) like that can (not always) take a toll as the week goes on, particularly when some of them have intervals. So I’ve learned to do one of those a week, 90-120 minutes, and the other workouts do the endurance portion by how I’m feeling.

Appreciate the info, its an interesting idea for a coach that doesn’t personally know / ride with an athlete. However I go back to The_Cog’s earlier point that LBP is yet another protocol for finding MLSS. I’m pretty darn happy with using WindWarrior-FTP-estimation™ which has served me well in helping to dish up (along with rpe) productive workouts for intensities under threshold.

I have a few questions about this:

  1. Is this only true in ERG mode? Or is this true in resistance mode as well?

  2. Is there a “multiple” that use you to quantify the strain (maybe the wrong term?) or fatigue you incur riding indoors vs. outdoors at an equal NP?

For instance, if two people ride for 60 mins at 90% FTP … and person #1 rides a 1x60 interval, and person #2 rides at 6x10 because they need the breaks … we all kind of “know” that person #1 had a harder workout and/or is more fit than rider #2 even though the TSS will be the same.

Similarly… if I do a Z2 ride 2hrs on the trainer (in resistance mode) with an NP of 200, and I do a 2hr outdoor Z2 ride with a NP of 200 … is the indoor ride x% harder in a way that is quantifiable for the purposes of calculating volume?

I’ve heard back-of-the napkin anecdotes in the past that posit “60 mins of riding indoors is equal to 90 mins of outside riding” etc., … but not sure what basis there is for that.

I asked this question on this forum last year and “everyone” said that the NP takes care of any delta and there is no difference.

But similar to the 90% work I reference above, it just feels like a two hour ride on the trainer is more taxing than a 2hr outdoor ride … I fell like I “know” that.

But I’m not sure I’m right. Or it might just be a distinction without a difference.

Whether you use erg mode or not is irrelevant. Indoor trainers essentially universally provide less inertial resistance than riding outdoors, resulting in lower force on the pedal at the same power output. (If anyone has served as the stoker on a tandem for a more powerful captain, it’s a similar effect. This is why some tandem teams offset the cranks slightly, so that the less powerful rider doesn’t feel as if the pedal is falling away from them.) Combine that with the lack of coasting, less variation in cadence, etc., and it’s like comparing inline skating to on-ice speed skating: similar motions using the same muscles, but at the end of the day, not really exactly the same sport.

Normalized power obviously doesn’t address the core issues above, so it isn’t really relevant to the conversation.


Thanks for the reply. I have so many more questions now, lol, but I’ll spare everyone the nonsense.

I’ll ask only one more question in a different way: you said that indoor cycling is “more demanding” … what makes it more demanding? Just the lack of ‘mini breaks’?

1 Like

My n=1 because I do a lot if indoor sessions I can compare the indoor/outdoor difference. And for me it is the different inertia like the_cog mentions, that is the major impact difference between the 2. A 2hour indoor sessions feels cardio wise the same, heart rate also, but my muscles ‘suffer’ more indoor then outdoor. And I think this is due to less micro pauses (outside more micro stops). And also the difference in inertia, forcing you indoor to ‘get over the pedal stroke’ more then outside.
I sometimes do 3-4hr rides indoor and it certainly more taxing on my hamstrings (and quads) then if I would do it outdoors. My FTP is also 10-15w less indoor (All values around and above FTP are much less indoor then outdoor). But in WKO5 this can be perfectly combined…

Thought I’d share these MAP and Aerobic Tests. For context, since my season finished, I’ve done around a month of mostly endurance and tempo training. says: 10% z1, 54% z2 and 33% z3 based off a 330W FTP.

MAP: 404W, 192bpm (although I’ve hit 203bpm and regularly see 198-199bpm at the end of races).

Aerobic Test: 304W @ 155bpm (aiming for 153-159bpm, “80-83%” of maxHR from MAP Test).

Aerobic-to-MAP Ratio: 75%.

Now, more tempo :slight_smile:

1 Like

A month of “mostly endurance and tempo” and you’ve got 33% z3-in-3zone-model?

Should’ve clarified: that’s in a 5-zone model. Minimal z4 or above

1 Like

yes, thats better!