Thanks for the explanations and workouts examples.
I’ve never seen 10"/20" intervals before. Can you explain more the rationale behind this type of intervals, and if there is some published research behind this? Are they targeting a specific part of the VO2 components?
Sure @ChrisDe. You would use a 10/20 format (Type 1 HIIT) in the context where you wanted to target the aerobic oxidative system but keep anaerobic glycolytic and neuromuscular load lowish. This is published in our book (including over a thousand references) Science and Application of High-Intensity Interval Training; Solutions to the Programming Puzzle. This type of format is used often in the team sport context where players need to keep the aerobic stimulus topped up but recover between matches. A blog version of our HIIT Types is here for reference. But no issues using these same principles in endurance cycling and running contexts.
2 Likes
That is really interesting: thank you!
1 Like
That seems especially pertinent. I do well with long z2 rides, but longer threshold intervals are absolutely what I struggle with and struggle to recover from. SS and VO2 stuff is actually ok, but the 2x20 @100% type work I find hard. And it’s not simply an incorrectly set FTP, as the SS and VO2 stuff is as expected in terms of HR and RPE.
Hmm… food for thought!
1 Like
I’m glad you are sharing your knowledge here. Looking forward to testing your app after the holidays! 
1 Like
Any time! Love the TR Forum 
1 Like
sorry @plaursen, I’m pushing my luck here, but…
Would you expect the ‘hybrid’ phenotype to cope reasonably well ‘either side’ of threshold (i.e. tempo-sweetspot and VO2 workouts feel ok (and don’t seem disproportionately fatiguing), but long threshold/just suprathreshold intervals feel very hard and seem to be a bear for recovery?
As so often is the case @RecoveryRide, it depends. No one model will explain all occurrences but certainly this model is helpful. Dajo Sanders blog in pro cyclists here fyi. But generally to your question, yes mostly. Hybrid will cope much better than twitchies, but not as well as diesels. But diesels won’t have the same punch as hybrids or twitchies. This is why profiling for teams is so critical so that you put the right people in the right places at the right time.
3 Likes
I think I fit into this bucket. Short intervals are very easy for me but long ones are very hard and can disrupt my sleep.
I do need to build my sustained efforts though. Does this mean that short intervals are less valuable?
3 Likes
There’s a lot here to think about, and I don’t want to derail the thread wholly, but the implications of some of what @plaursen is suggesting (I think - I may well have misinterpreted) are significant, in that certain athletes may see better gains/recovery from very different interval types. Obviously, the only true way to know if it works for you is to try.
I may well sign up for the free trial and see what Athletica prescribes me, especially in terms of intervals, purely out of curiousity.
1 Like
Apologies if this has already been said and it may not be the question you were asking.
I find it hard to accept the premise that your thinking seems to be built on. Having a clear understanding on what constitutes progression over time is one thing, but having training so controlled? I wonder if that approach and the mindset that likes that, could be limiting in races.
Overall interesting contribution to this thread. Thanks!
Your recent remarks with regard to phenotypes reminded me of this episode where this was put in the context of VlaMax:
(But it seems that the VlaMax concept has lost its momentum for now…any thoughts about this?)
“For an athlete with a high VlaMax I would recommend the following design of a VO2max session: 5x7mins of 40/20s.”
“For an athlete with a low VlaMax I would recommend the following design of a VO2max session: 1.5-2min @ VO2max power + 7-9mins @ maximum lactate steady state intensity, which is repeated 3-4 times.”
2 Likes
Scott, it’s not clear to whom you are responding. If to me, my answer would be that I’m a novice rider, looking to get stronger especially over longish distances, and that I only ride events I feel will be fun, interesting, and challenging.
I don’t race: cycling is purely a really fun way for me to be faster and healthier. Hence, training can be anything that gradually allows me to ride at higher average power for longer distances. And structure really helps me to be more consistent.
2 Likes
If I’m honest, I don’t understand VlaMax. It sounds like they are trying to do an estimate of anaerobic glycolytic metabolism derived from power output? I’m just not entirely sure if that is even possible to know or even guess from a power output measure?
2 Likes
This is the first mainstream article I’ve seen that criticizes VLAmax though they present multiple sides.
I fall on the “it’s BS” side. It was a model that was commercialized and sold as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Since then a lot of coaches have quietly dropped it without making any public statements because of the politics. A few coaches and physiologists have publicly said it’s BS (search twitter). Of course, some coaches still sell it as it generates revenue and business.
Other than the pretty charts and the report, I don’t think one is getting anything that couldn’t be sussed out with other analytic software.
3 Likes
Note that the post to our free course on the science and application of the anaerobic speed and power reserve was flagged and hidden by the TR community. I guess no further learning gets to happen within these walls? 
@plaursen welcome to the club! Look, it’s their forum, they can moderate it however they want.
Have you ever heard of the ‘Streisand Effect’? 
I’ve posted peer reviewed research on this forum that was censured. Don’t sweat it. The forum can still be a fun place. I’m gonna give that free course a look. I’m sure I can google it.
2 Likes
For sure. You can imagine the twenty-something employee moderator who’d have no idea of the value to their end-users and simply sees it as competing interest. But whatever.
Yep - if you search ‘athlete profiling primer’ it comes up.
1 Like
That doesn’t read to me like TR mods hid it, rather that forum members flagged it as being too much of an ad and not enough of a “discussion” contribution.
This community has a pretty low tolerance for self-promotion; and even if sometimes valuable content may get missed because of that, honestly I’m happier that way overall. Keeps the forum a much nicer place to hang out.
3 Likes
Hey!
@AgingCannon is correct in saying that we didn’t actually flag it. The system automatically hid it.
But I’ll use this as an opportunity to make sure there is understanding on why we strictly moderate promotional posts. Hosting affiliate links presents a slippery slope, whereby hosting, we open the door to a lot of ‘spam’ that may not be legit.
We want the forum to be a place for learning and building community. We have SO MUCH to learn from one another!! By keeping a strict policy on promotional posts, we preserve this space as somewhere we can go to learn and build community without the potential interference of ulterior motives.
I’m sure you can imagine how difficult it would be to manage if we had to decipher through the intentions of every post that could be considered promotional. While I don’t doubt you have good intentions, it is in the best interest of all of our forum users that we hold all of our athletes to the guidelines we outline here: FAQ - TrainerRoad.
I hope that clears things up for you.
Cheers, Sarah
2 Likes