I currently make a HIIT Block with exclusively minute-intervals. I found that 2 min rest it not a real problem, it “only” need ti adjust the power properly. 1% to much can be crucial. It need really intensity discipline when it feels easy and its self paced.
For me ISO-Effort let to 91% “HFmax” , if I take the highest HR seen in the last CX season as HFmax.
And of course this is hard, but with longer rests and slightly higher intensity is is hard as well.
A little bit strange phenomenon on HR happened from time
to time. You can see a drop of HR in 4. interval, even if power remains stable. https://www.strava.com/activities/2438887910/laps
I have no idea why this happened.
But in the block I make either 4 or 3 time 8, depending how recovered i feel. One the first day I made 4x8 and after a rest another 3x8.
To a big extent is also a mental thing or as Seiler says meditation. Only 2 min rest can also help here, no to much time to think about exhaustion ;(
If you look at the other numbers, it was about 106% of their 40 minute TT avg power. Although if the standard deviation is 5% that means the results were as much as +/- 10% throughout the 8 minute cohort. So as well, the HR mean was ~84-92%, and peak was ~87-95% Assuming that 95% of the population is within 2SD of the mean. So there is going to be a lot of individual differences, but to add on what @bbarrera mentioned. So much of what Seiler preaches is that you should always have something left in the tank when you’re done, otherwise you’ll muck up your consistency which is the base level of his hierarchy of endurance training needs. He’s also talked about going too hard and doing hero workouts as examples of what he’s done wrong in the past.
I think the problem may be, in part that the ramp test or 20 min test doesn’t correlate very well with a true 1 hr power. Below Is my run at Lamarck during SSB2  but 4 x 8 at 240-245 seems reasonable. I’ll give it a go next hard indoor day to get a feel for it.
Nothing new here, just was thinking about the numbers and what I’ve done in training and had a couple minutes to type.
Over roughly 8-12 week time period I did twice a week hard 2-hour workouts, but unstructured and more threshold/over-under. Definitely not 4x8. And then dosed it with a century every 4 weeks. Got a nice bump in FTP.
Agree with you, looks tough and the best I could muster is 2 hard workouts a week and maybe 2 or 3 low-intensity rides at 40%. Keep wanting to try it, not ready so I’m here talking about it instead LOL!
105% – I would think that almost everyone should be able to do 4x8min w/2min or more of rest. This is effectively your 20min FTP test power, yet you do not have to hold it for 20 consecutive minutes. Thus, if you cannot complete 4x8min at 105% w/rest intervals, then perhaps your FTP is set too high
As has been observed, maybe 105% of hour power which is whereabouts Seiler’s subjects reached (or as the table below shows, 105-6% of their power at 4mmol lactate). But I don’t think anyone yet has done it off their ramp test number, not with 2min rests, and anyway if they did they’d almost certainly be well over the HR of Seiler’s subjects.
Feel free to put your money where your mouth is though…
This sounds like a sensible way of achieving Seiler’s aims - I’ve just started listening to this podcast so will be paying attention.
@bbarrera A further bit of info re: HR, I found a table which shows the average heart rate at the end of each interval. It gives a bit more insight into the effort level, with the first interval reaching 88% HRpeak, the second getting towards 91, the third 92.5, and the final interval over 94, allowing for variation between subjects. So it seems to be very much about measuring effort but still getting pretty tough in interval 4.
Is there any way to fit in Seiler intervals on a build plan or is it just out of the question totally? Thinking the threshold workouts in the 3rd week might work as you have a recovery week coming up.
Xert has lots of Seiler workouts, can just use their workout player. Eg.
There’s really not much different from the 8 min protocol tested here and the last two threshold workouts in ssb2. Darwin and lamarck are 4x10 at a slightly lower target but something I’ve picked up from these interviews is we shouldn’t split hairs on the details if the outcome is so similar. Overall rpe and minutes in traditional zone 4 should be roughly equivalent. As chad has said ssb2 is where many people see their biggest ftp gains.
Ramp test was 17th September. Started to fade a little on the 3rd interval. I don’t actually think that my heart rate was that high or high enough for what everyone is talking about it needs to be for the benefit.
Was feeling stronger another time so did it with 5 minutes rest followed by some sweetspot.
Sounds like that’s in the very tough but not impossible range - although I think you’ve said in the past you’re in the minority of people for whom the ramp test underestimates FTP?
I think these HR guidelines from Seiler need to be adjusted based on athlete profile.
For example, my cardio system is my limiter. My last interval on Lamarck averaged 95% - it’s not my legs that get tired, it’s my cardio system reaching its limit that constrains me.
If I was to hold my “VO2max” intervals to max 90-92%, I dont think I’d be pushing my body as hard a I “think” a VO2max interval should feel… but maybe that’s Steve Neal’s point…
Not sure if I’ve said before but yeah haven’t tested in a while as I just go by feel now and increase incrementally.
Perhaps at that time my Ftp was a bit higher, not sure as I have ignored low test results in the past and continued with my workouts based on my Ftp assessment without issue.
I think the idea of only 2 mins recovery is that you don’t recover fully and therefore get up to the desired VO2 range quicker and hence spend longer in it on each subsequent interval
Sure, but I just don’t see that being an issue for an 8 minute interval, especially when they seem to focus on the latter half for the HR evaluation.
Based on comments here, and my own test back last October, I see the short recoveries as more detrimental than beneficial. I like at least 2:1 or 1:1 and still hit the HR targets. But for those that can make them work, more power to you
Have just had a look at the only time I tried doing something similar (I’ve not done it since because it was a deeply unpleasant experience!)
I thought I’d start off with 6 minute work intervals and 2.5min rest ones starting of at 111% of ftp. My thoughts were to see how it went and go on from that. My results were
1st Hit 90% HRmax after 4.5 mins at 111%
2nd Hit 90% HRmax at 2 mins @ 111%
3rd hit 90% HRmax at 2 mins @ 108%
4th hit 90% HRmax at 2 mins @105%
Interestingly my heart rate only drifted up by about 3 beats to a max 165 during a couple of the intervals. I’m not sure what that means if anything though.
once again, we shouldn’t split hairs, accumulating minutes is the goal, but it also has to be repeatable. Whether or not that means shorter and building up to longer intervals, or starting with longer rest intervals and dropping them down after some experience. In my experience, dropping rest down is probably best since the more I recover the longer it takes to get my HR back up to target. We shouldn’t get too hung up in the details as that can be a bit of noise since everyone has different abilities and potential.
