Sweetspot: 6x10’ vs 60’

Training
1

Is there a big difference in adaptation doing 6x10’ of sweetspot vs one interval of 60’? I find sweetspot is just boring and at the same time “uncomfortable” for a lack of better word. I find that doing 10’ and a short rest of 30s or 1 minute is much easier to manage mentally. I can just start counting down the minutes to the rest and it makes it easy to complete, vs 50’ left, 40’ left…

It’s real sweetspot, hr at the end of the 60’ still being under threshold hr. I know that at threshold power the short rest would make it doable vs failing.

1 Like
2

They’re both really solid!

I’d say that the better workout is the one that you’ll consistently knock out with good quality.

I agree that those long intervals can be a bit much. :sweat_smile:

I’m sure that those really long intervals have a slightly different stimulus, but they are also designed for a different type of athlete. If you’re at the level where you’re getting 60-minute long intervals prescribed, you probably need those types of workouts to move the needle. For the rest of us, they might only add fatigue and result in higher rates of workout failure if we’re not prepared for them, though.

I’d recommend doing what the plan recommends. :upside_down_face:

3 Likes
3

For whatever reason I prefer longer single interval. I find my motivation and willingness to quit increases with changes.

1 Like
4

30s to 1 min break is going to have very minimal physiological difference. I could see the argument that mentally, the single rep and grinding it out without a break could have some value… but most climbs of that duration will have some relief at some point, even briefly.

Now if recovery gets to 5-10 min there’s a definite difference. But take your 30-60 seconds. As you mentioned it is a lot easier to manage when on the trainer!

8 Likes
5

Is this the unpopular opinions thread? :thinking:

8 Likes
6

Intensive vs. extensive.

Cyclists get stuck on long intervals for zone 4 (20-30 min, or 40+ min chunks), or medium intervals for zone 5 (3-8min). But, interval duration is just one variable – there’s also recovery interval and intensity of effort.

If you are working on holding a power level, that’s intensive. If you’re working on holding a power level for longer time, that’s extensive.

For someone who isn’t in condition to hold a 20min interval at 90% FTP, some intensive training is needed – they just need to work on hitting that power target. So for a 250 FTP, a less developed cyclist might do 2 sets of 4 x 5min on :30 rest at 90% FTP.

After the cyclist can hold the power, then the intervals can become extensive, stretching that 90% to 2 x 10min, then 3 x 15min, then 2 x 20min.

If one did 6 x 10, the rest intervals should be short – like 1 or 2 min.

The same works for zone 5. 8 x 1 min at 120% FTP on 1 min rest to hit the power, then start extended the intervals. 2min on, 2 min off, 3 min on, 3 min off, etc.

Extensive work can also be done lower in target power band to get more time in zone. Not really relevant for sweet spot – 90% is not a whole lot easier than 94%. But, for zone 5, one could do shorter intervals on short rest to rack up time in zone without letting HR drop much. For instance, 2 sets of 6 x 2:00 on :15 rest at 110%+ FTP would rack up 24min of zone 5, and give a little mental break from just doing 4 x 6min.

Or, one could do something like 1min @ 100%FTP on :15 coast would end up averaging 94% of FTP. So a crazy (or maybe not that crazy) session of 40 x :60 on :15 rest @ 100%FTP would be some intensive FTP work, but the work average would end up being sweet spot (and would be a pretty hard session!).

Track and swimming coaches have been using duration, intensity, and recovery variables to do extensive vs intensive work for a long time. We can steal a thing or two from them to get more variety in indoor training.

1 Like
7

Track and swimming coaches have been using duration, intensity, and recovery variables to do extensive vs intensive work for a long time. We can steal a thing or two from them to get more variety in indoor training.

I’m all about this! The same physiological rules apply. Short intervals (30s, 60s, etc.) are effective! Track athletes can attest!

1 Like
8

If one cannot do 20m at 90% of their threshold that would indicate an overly optimistic threshold.

5 Likes
9

Probably. It might also be poor aerobic fitness.

Also, Coggan noted that “about an hour” can actually cover a pretty wide range. I could hold my FTP for 75-80 minutes when I was really fit. I’ve seen two guys whose FTP was actually their 30-minute power (they also had pro-level w/kg for 5 sec, although they were Cat 3s). They had two training speeds – easy pedaling (or better yet, coasting in the draft) or full-on sprint. They had to baby step their aerobic fitness.

Xert’s FTP model is helpful – I don’t know TR’s AI FTP, but anything that is getting beyond “95% of 20min power” is in the right direction.

Someone who is pretty fast twitch might have some issues with fatigue resistance and aerobic fitness with 20min intervals when they first start working on their Base. Or, someone who is pretty untrained but also FT dominant.

Bell curve rules work great for the middle of the bell curve. Things can get interesting at the ends.

10

Even at the far end of the bell curve what I said applies, if one cannot hold a power that is significantly lower than their ftp (90%) for even 20m then they have an FTP that is too high.

3 Likes
11

Fatigue resistance also plays a role here. Say you have a sprinter or novice who can hold 90% of FTP for 20min, but might have problems then repeating that for a second 20min interval after 5min recovery. I’d maintain that “then their FTP is still too high” is not the be all, end all answer. Some athletes need shorter intervals to keep the power up while baby step building muscular endurance.

12

That is completely different though. My response was for someone being unable to do a single 20m intervals at 90%.

Someone with a short TTE might struggle to do 40m of work in a 45m window, 2x20 @90% with a 5m rest between them is a very different workout.

13

Exactly.

I wasn’t looking at 20min as a one-go. The context of the discussion was interval length, which assumes doing more than one. All good.

1 Like
14

That makes much more sense, completely agree there.

15

I’m interested what swimming training insights you think there are to share to cycling.

16

Swimmers train threshold and aerobic capacity (let’s not call it a “VO2 interval” – tons of different durations and intensities can elicit VO2), but they don’t do 2 x 20 or 5 x 5 all season long.

A swimmer might train threshold by doing 100s at their 1500m pace on :30 rest (or a bit less). 20 of those would accumulate time at HRs and lactate concentrations that would stimulate FTP development, without the boredom of 20min repeats, and by swimming closer to race speeds (if they were a 1500/400m freestyler, for example).

A set I did too many times in my life was to do 10 x 200 at my 200 split for a 400m, with :30 down to :15 rest between them. By those last 5 reps you were at VO2 max. But, you were swimming race speed and getting short breaks.

Unless you’re doing a race with a lot of 5-minute hills, 5 x 5 isn’t going to always mimic race conditions. Those moments you hit VO2 max during races are often when you have to hit several short surges in a row, and then the last one cooks you. So, both for a mental break but also to train “go back to the well", a cyclist could do something like 8 x 2:00 @ 115-120% with :30 breaks. 2 sets of that would be a productive VO2 session.

Similarly, unless you are a TT’er or in a long solo break, you probably don’t have many moments of riding for 20 or 30 minutes at threshold. As a TT’er and climber, I did plenty of 2 x 20s, 2 x 30s, HoP, etc.. But, in the winter I’d also do stuff like 20 x 1:00 at 110% on :15 coast/soft pedal. That ends up averaging about FTP, but it’s hitting the fast twitch muscles a little harder and doing something more like the variable efforts in a race.

I never did, not prescribed, these kinds of workouts outdoors. The trainer can be the drainer, too much isopower over the winter can dull you a bit, so I see “swimming sets” as another tool in the indoor training kit. I wouldn’t do all short duration, short rest, nor would I do all 2 x 20, 5 x 5, etc.

It’s all about working out the math – what power would you need to hit on the work intervals to end up averaging target for an isopower interval? A rider with a threshold of 300w, ok, they do 300w for 2min and coast for 15 sec. 300 x 8 = 2400. 2400/9 = 267. So, the average work is 89% FTP, the low end of sweet spot, but the rider is having to make threshold wattage, albeit in small chunks. Cut the rest down to :10, now the average is 92%. Cut it down to :05, now it’s straight threshold work. And if the rider could do a couple of workouts with those :05 rests, now maybe just go isopower for 20min at FTP.

Vary the stimulus.

1 Like