I remember Stephen Seiler mentioned above 90-95% FTP, but he is usually vague and changes his view over time. He has gone from a three zone model to a two zone lately, more or less claiming anything above z1 (or Coggan z2) is to be considered hard.
My take is, considering that most coaches seem to recommend strength training to older athletes, is to do some work at shorter intervals at a really high power (>120%FTP) for a appropriate amount of minutes every now and then in addition to sweet spot and/or VO2max.
I totally believe that the TR plans are the fastest way to develop fitness, in general. It’s just that I’m not sure SSBMV is the way to go for older riders who have been training and racing for like 30 years.
It’d be awesome if they could comment on that sometime with something like “according to our data, if you are 50+, if you have been racing and training for over 10 years, and if you have 6-8 hours per week then “XXX” plan will improve your fitness the most efficient way”
Back in my late teens when I started riding I’m sure SSBMV would have made me faster than whatever I was doing back then.
Which is really funny because people that cite his work have been saying this for years (with the below/above being ~70 - 80%ftp, which seems to be LT1 for trained individuals.) Who would have thought it.
Funny how Fitzgerald etc came to this conclusion about Seilers work before he did. Well I guess it took a while as he’s (Seiler) not a coach or wasnt.
Some of us discussed it back in 2018-19, not sure which thread.
It definitely is way to much intensity for me. Burned out badly a couple of years ago and still haven’t fully recovered…in fact, the only plan that has brought some increase in FTP for me is the mid volume traditional base plan and to some extent the polarized plans. To bad Plan Builder keep pushing SST base.
Mid volume 1 may be ok but mid volume 2 is way to much intensity imo. It should be based on longer sweet spot workouts and not more intensity if I were to decide.
One of the issues I have is pretending that SS work is a substitute for long Z2 work. It’s just not. SS has a place in training, but to anchor a huge chunk of your training volume on it is a poor choice for most. I understand that TR is all about the time crunched athlete, but the idea that you have to have 15+ hours a week of Z2 to be beneficial is false, too.
I think TR should choose more tempo as opposed to this large volume of SS as a way of bridging the gap between limited time available and the ability to recover.
Luckily TR is highly adjustable. I just find it very odd that the science is pretty clear on HI sessions/week and what’s talked about on the podcast, then delivered in a plan.
I don’t think there needs to be a distinction between what’s considered HI training for masters versus younger riders, rather the consideration of how to design your annual training plan and how many harder rides you can absorb per week. The way I see it is, that sweet spot and above is considered high intensity. I think you could even make a case for tempo being HI if the intervals are long enough.
Certainly the distinction between SS, Th, VO2, anaerobic zones matter, but when you’re looking at the bigger picture its more about how often are you planning on putting your body and mind into a sympathetic state. 4 days a week? I repeat, yikes.
I’m kinda thinking maybe the data is on young people new to the sport and, for them, it bet it works really well. If you’re not young (like say under 40-50 or so), if you’re not new to the sport, I’m not sure what the data says. Might be wrong though…would love to know!
“maybe the data are on…”?? "“what the data say”?? (I’ve never understood this)
I am with you… but the reason I asked was that “high intensity” in research is almost always correlated with explosive events such as Olympic lifting, sprinting, etc. While I agree with you in that my personal definition of “intensity” includes both, I was curious on what “intensity” meant when referred to the study.
So is it that the older we get the more explosive exercises, such as lifting for power and sprinting are needed? Or does “high intensity” also include a range that includes long threshold intervals?
Personally I think well trained masters athletes have the training history to crank out long thresholds better than pure power. Which makes me think this is what they were referencing. But that’s why I asked to make sure.
Even better! Upper tempo-zone is considered to be sweet spot anyway so one could still call it Sweet Spot Base. Introducing a zone called Sweet Spot has caused a lot of confusion as it is a concept according to Dr. Coggan and not a zone. The concept of balancing training stress and fatigue in a sustainable way, in my interpretation.
About to turn 46 and I’ve done MV plans for 2 years and I’m about to start my 3rd year on HV plans. IMHO, MV plans are the worst TR has to offer. I feel so much better and have better results on HV. Whichever volume you choose, I strongly recommend changing Sundays to as much z2 as you have time for < 5 hours.
Thats one positive step closer to an overhaul of the “HV” plans. I’d strongly recommend a few other things, having gone in a different direction for the past 2 years. The more I think about it, your observation on MV is interesting and seemingly supported by TR pushing LV plus volume.
SS HV working well for me (started a plan in Sep for July 2023 (the rift iceland)). I’m at 4 9+ PL per week, and feeling really good progression (I can jump out of a 2h session, breaking power records for 20min + durations, and go on about my day normally).
I’m 39, and only started doing endurance work about 3 years ago (only did some weights before that).
So I just laid out the HV SSB plan, part 1 and 2 on my calendar, and it seems like a much more approachable way to train base on “limited” time, there’s even a tempo ride in there (although they get labeled as sweet spot). I guess the MV plan, in particular, sticks out as a bit much from my point of view.
Still, (for me), if I had 9 hours to train in a week, I think I’d still program it with more pure Z2.
I’m pretty sure long Z2 Sunday rides were in the old MV plans but nobody did them so they switched to the current configuration. The Z2 options are still mentioned in most of the weekly tips which nobody reads.