The first podcast I heard Seiler say elite cyclists train polarized, so I guess he can talk out of both sides of his mouth,
Yeah I posted that a long time ago Pro/Elite training - #166 by bbarrera
So what? One of the first podcasts I heard Selier speak was within the last couple years. Think it was Fast Talk episode 51 or 54 and he claimed cyclists train polarized. Which is not true.
Seiler started Fast Talk episode 75 by saying he was a “put the hammer down, no pain no gain” guy and most of work on 80/20 was corrective for everything he did wrong for years. I find that interesting and explains why he often comes across as wanting to save us from ourselves.
This missionary zeal is something that annoys be big time. With him and the the Fast Talk guy. And yes, one time he says cyclists train polarized, the other time that they do not. He says training based on fixed thresholds is bad (95% of CP20) but recommends 90% of max HR as optimal intensity for his zone 3. And so much more conflicting output from him but he has his following.
On this new meeting abstract: “FatMax increased from 400W to 425W (6.25%);” This can’t be. This must be a typo.
2 Likes
There’s a reason this is a conference paper…methodology is questionable and, although interesting, findings from an n=1 study like this couldn’t be extrapolated.
Thanks for posting!
Let’s not forget that as world class/pro cyclists push their VT1/AeT towards their FTP, their Seiler Z2/no go zone shrinks. Most likely pro cyclists have a very narrow Z2 and are more like 2-zone athletes than 3-zone amateurs with giant Z2s. In other words, 80-85% HRmax is still probably Z1 for top pros.
2 Likes
I wonder if there are any studies regarding this. I mean, I’ve read it on the forum but I’ve never seen it anywhere else or heard Seiler or any other exercise physiologist talk about it.
Since you and others have said this several times now, I’m wondering on which data this is based.
Looking at the few studies out there and comparing it with what we see on Strava I don’t really see this to be the case.
The study by San Millan offers some great insights. 22 world tour pros (UAE):
FatMax zone - however we define it - goes up to ~300W. This will scale with weight but the standard deviation gives an idea of the spread.
They did not measure VT2 or so but from Strava we know what they put out on 20-30min efforts. Of course, this will scale with weight as well but what we see is something like 370 - 420W for many pros. This is already the FTP estimate.
~300W for the lower boundary, ~380W for the upper boundary may describe an average world tour pro quite well. Of course, these are just rough estimates but illustrate nicely that there is stil plenty of room for no-man’s land training. And I must say, these values fit well into the different sessions I see on Strava.
9 Likes
Do you have the study ref?
Thanks!
EDIT: Found it - here
and those points are why I posted it
what they really need to do is a similar training intervention with a larger sample group
1 Like
Only n=1 data — the host of Endurance Planet, Lucho, a marathoner/ultrarunner. I’m only guessing that if a marathoner can push his AeT very close to his LT then it’s probably also happening with other endurance athletes as well.
But what do I know, I don’t have access to every pro rider fitness test and blood work. And even if I did, it really wouldn’t help me with anything.
In other words, this statement
Is actually you extrapolating and presenting it as fact?
1 Like
Not sure if a statement which contains words such as ‘likely’ and ‘probably’ can be extruded as factual. But, people do all kinds of weird things. 
2 Likes
Using power alone, similar %'s to the standard textbook 3-Zone levels an average amateur might use?
I can parse the whole statement / 3 sentences like a lawyer if you like, or just simply say it started with a sentence based in fact, made a statement about shrinking z2 which may not matter from a practical POV, and followed by the two sentences above which in the context of the paragraph start to come off as fact.
1 Like
this is sort of ironic, Coggan repeats (or better repeated … got quite quiet around him) over and over again that FTP and the derived zones aren’t prescriptive.
it is ironic because Coggan and Seiler don’t like each other. Something that goes back to their times at Texas University. And I find it ironic that they use the same language for their stuff. And how both fail with it with us regular folks out there.
None of it, tone or otherwise, really bothers me. I rather try to remember to appreciate that they are putting their views out there and therefore are open to criticism: this goes equally for Seiler, Coggan and the Trainerroad guys. Whenever you take a position on something there will be times when you will be wrong and that’s pretty much just the way it is.
I digest, take the portions that are applicable to my context, and try not to get too heated.
3 Likes
Makes me a little crazy when coaches talk about building TSS when what they should be talking about is building stress progressively and changing stimulus rather than arbitrarily growing an arbitrary numerical value.
3 Likes
I thought that Seiler recommended 1 day of intensity and one extra long weekend ride for a 4 or 5 day per week training schedule. The rest of the days were filled in with more low intensity. That works out to 80:20 or 75:25.
The whole end of that podcast is very straight forward. And I love how simple it is. One hard interval session per week, one long ride per week. If you have more time, add another long ride. If you are very fit and have lots of time, maybe you can do two intervals days depending on the time of year.
I thought the description of Trevor Connor’s ‘black hole’ rider was a good message for people to hear. I think the biggest change for the black hole rider was more rest. One interval ride, one group ride and some easy riding (forced rest).
People try and make training too difficult.
4 Likes
I think the big message is not the percentage but minimum 1 long day, 1 interval day, and the rest is Z1 filler. And stay out of the black hole - no SST 3-4X per week. (And this is a compromise scenario, not what is ideal.)
When Connor talks about his 2x per week interval riders, we have to remember that he’s training racers. My guess is that the riders he coaches aren’t usually 6 hour a week types. And he’s leaving out the details of periodization. I’m sure Connor’s guys aren’t doing 2x per week intervals during base season.
I also seem to hear from Connor say 2X per week of intervals … “at the most”. If someone is riding 10-12 hours per week and doing 2X per week of Seiler 4x8min then it’s still 90/10 or 92/8.
3 Likes