As a general, personal training philosophy, “whatever we hate the most, we need to do more of.”
4 Likes
I stay seated but I think it depends on the rider. Imagine how you would respond to an attack during a race & mimic that during the workout.
1 Like
I’d say no single workout is any better than another. It the progression over time that adds fitness. If you can complete a given workout then I’d suggest trying to either do a little bit more intensity or extend the intervals a little or even tag on additional intervals. The name of the game is stressing the body so it adapts and comes back stronger. Repeating a workout you can already do might still cause enough stress to create adaptation or you may need to make small changes to continue to stress the body. But any one workout is not “better” than another in the same “family” to make any difference in the short term.
1 Like
I created the HS versions first, but think the HS-1 versions may be better. Less hard start and higher steady power I think are more aligned with the intent of vo2max work.
2 Likes
I’m not sure if i asked this question in this thread or somewhere else, but does someone know is there a “minimum dose” for vo2max session you should aim for? 10min TiZ or more? Does 3x3min nothing for me? How do i know? Should i aim for at least 15min TiZ? Is there research like this?
Wouldn’t that depend on how fit you are, how hard you go, how often you do such training, how such workouts fit into your overall plan, etc.?
Another study, ahead of print : Superior Physiological Adaptations After a Microcycle of Short Intervals Versus Long Intervals in Cyclists - PubMed
Quelle surprise: who’s the lead author?
ETA. Different results in this study, which was carried out for much longer (i.e., 3 workouts per week for 8 weeks vs. just 5 workouts).
The %’s of HRMax used in this study are really weird…85% is THR?..I could do 5 hours at that pace. Maybe it’s a running thing, idk.
More likely to be related to how LT is defined. There’s only a zillion such criteria.
ETA. 85% of HRmax would be about 80% of VO2max, which is pretty normal.
This lil calculation doesn’t even come close for me:
191 bpm x 0.85 = 162 bpm … which is basically mid-high tempo.
Partially the same reason that using 75% of ramp test power doesn’t work well for everyone. People simply vary in how close their FTP is to their VO2max. That tends to be counterbalanced by the fact that the ability to work over VO2max usually goes the other way, but still.
On average, FTP of trained cyclists is about 80% of VO2max, which corresponds to about 85% of HRmax.
FWIW, I used to TT at a HR of 171-172 bpm, when my max HR was 181 bpm.
Is this mostly genetics?. I believe so. I seem to be in this category. I recently did 27 min at 180bpm, my max is 191 bpm. I don’t train these efforts very often and I haven’t trained for that long in general.
IIRC this is also the study where they’re doing 15/15’s and “resting” at 70% during the 15s recoveries? The participant’s hearts must adjust much quicker than mine. 
I’m at 92% 177/191…is there any significance to this ratio?
2 Likes
Depends on your goals. Some would claim that if your FTP is really close to your VO2max, you should concentrate on raising your “ceiling”. Personally, though, I have found it better to just train for performance.
2 Likes
I have nothing to do with average people. Here also LTHR 90% of max. And with me the most people here.
174/190. (91.5% and i actually got this by holding it for an hour) I find that between doing ftp work and vo2max work actually my HR difference tends to be extremely minimal.
1 Like
Lucky you. Seems like half the people I deal with on a daily basis are average or below.
1 Like