And minimum of 60/60 sec intervals. Leaving out Billat’s short intervals and latest 30/15 stuff
Also:
The initial fitness level of the subjects had to fall within the range of untrained/sedentary to recreationally active
Now that we know what the best interval is for out of shape people, what’s the best interval type for a trained competitor or elite/pro athlete?
That is the advantage of meta-analysis: it helps to overcome the limitations of only studying a handful of people.
So you think that their hearts are somehow are different, such that they respond differently to training?
This meta-analysis compared intervals <30 seconds, 30 seconds to 2 minutes, or >2 minutes, in healthy subjects. Only the longer intervals resulted in a significantly larger increase in VO2max when compared to moderate intensity continuous exercise. (Shorter intervals were effective in patients, though.)
Finally, according to Coogan on one of Frank Overton’s recent podcasts, this study is still the all-time champ for group mean increase in VO2max: +44% in just 10 weeks! It used 5 minute long intervals, with 2 minute rest periods at a low intensity in between.
2 Likes
I can only see the abstract for those studies. For both it doesn’t mention the resistance used, as in %age of FTP or lactate threshold, only that it elicits VO2max. The latter abstract also doesn’t mention how much of the five minute intervals was spent at or very close to VO2max or the regression of the time at which it was reached as each interval progressed.
According to yourself:
and
The protocol followed in that study is precisely what you say won’t work regarding recovery intervals and VO2max, i.e. low intensity for a long period.
Also from the piece you linked “VO2max Trainability …” which isn’t just an abstract, my emphasis.
Subjects had to be trained on either a cycle ergometer or by running with a minimum work: relief ratio of 1 min on:1 min off.
Due to the heterogeneity of training programs in the various studies we felt it was critical for the “work” period of the exercise sessions to be at intensities that were likely at least 80–85% of VO2max or higher.
There’s a dual use of the term VO2max here - physiologically it’s a precise point beyond which, no matter how much more oxygen you inhale your body is unable to use it. In training terms it’s a range in which you obtain most of the benefits of exercising at your true physiological point without actually being there.
VO2max is held to be around 120% of an individual’s FTP for the majority of people. VO2max response begins at around 89% of MHR (and obviously increases as you rise towards MHR and your actual physiological VO2max) so any regimen that causes your HR to enter that range is benefiting your VO2Max response.
There’s a hysteresis or lag in your HR so you tend to have the first 30-60 seconds of a recovery interval still in the zone of the preceding work interval, similarly when starting the next work interval there’s a lag until your HR catches up with the work being done.
If I look at my data from a recent VO2max workout such as Kaiser +2 which is three sets of three by 3 minutes on at 118%, four minutes off at 40%. So that’s supposedly 27 minutes in the VO2max range. My power (I’ve a dumb wheel on trainer so awkward not to stray when the target is close to a boundary) is 22m4s in Z5 (VO2max) and 6m56s in Z6 (anaerobic), a total of 29 minutes. My HR was in Z4 for 13m50s, 5m48s in Z5 and 3m28s in Z6, a total of 23m6s in the required zones.
Would you say that’s effective or not? If not then how would you make it more so whilst still ensuring workout compliance and completion?
2 Likes
You’re right. 334 test subject over the period of 40+ years is far more than “a handful of people”.
Yup.
Off to carbo load, got a big day of both long and short Easter egg hunt intervals tomorrow.
1 Like
Well I certainly didn’t intend for my thread to be a battleground for the merits of short vs long interval lengths! I don’t doubt there’s probably less benefit in 1min on 1min off efforts, but there’s a huge psychological component to working through a progression like I have. And I believe with these repeats the recoveries are just long enough to be able to attack again without getting you totally recovered, which is why the last effort(s) can be a challenge because there’s a lot of accumulated time.
Anyhow, I did Kaiser on Thursday and it finally broke me, I made it 4 out of 6 intervals (I had done 6 3min intervals with Hurd-1 on Tuesday). Going back to my sweet spot home after a recovery week lol
3 Likes
I don’t think scientists are tuned into the notion of % of FTP, etc., just yet. So, when they write “5 minutes at 100% of VO2max”, I assume that they just had subjects wailing away at whatever intensity they could handle, and got on with it. In any case, clearly whatever they did worked, to get such big increases. If I were you, I’d at least try the same thing. I do.
% of FTP is fine for prescribing exercise plans, but probably wouldn’t be accurate enough for data collection for small group studies. There is too much variation between individuals in terms of LT relative to their VO2 capabilities. I think Harsh Reality - You OVER test on FTPs (support group) is a good illustration of that.
They tend to use other methods such as the difference at the LT and VO2peak. So they might look at Δ40%, or Δ50%, where the power output of the participant is 40% or 50% of the difference between LT and VO2peak. That way you can ensure the participants are undertaking comparable efforts.
They’re tough…but J actually enjoyed more and had better success with them both over under workouts, AND the longer VO2 interval workouts.
@old_but_not_dead_yet just for you (not really 
) recently did some 30:30s searching for repeatable power and safe road (and how to setup my bike computer). Looked at % VO2max estimates in WKO5:
the first 30-sec interval was about 125% FTP, and the last one was about 170%.
And same but with 1-min intervals on another recent “searching for repeatable power” ride:
My walk away was that repeatable power was about 350-360W which is about 144%-148% FTP. Pretty close to full gas, those were hard. Could have done a 5th interval on the second set but was starting to get worried about getting to the bike shop (arrived at 5:58pm). Anyways that was close to 10-minutes above 90% (modeled) VO2max. Looks like a good starting point for me, on the way to increasing it up to 15-20 minutes of work above 90% thru a combination of more intervals/sets and longer intervals.
Not going to debate the accuracy of VO2max estimates in WKO5. Over the last 90-days I’ve fed the model with pretty good data - a lot of max/near-max efforts from 1-sec to 50-minutes.
File that into “for what its worth” from this journeyman searching for the fountain of youth
Well this got pretty technical pretty quickly! Can I ask a related question, that I’m hoping some of you will have a view on from your experience of TR workouts?
I’m finding the VO2Max workouts [as designated on TR - specifically underover thresholds Bluebell, Spencer, Bashful and Bashful +2 [eeek] incredibly difficult to get all the way through without extending the rest periods once I get through about 60% of the intervals. Heart rate isn’t coming down as far later into them and I’m obviously hitting VO2Max more quickly - all as per the plan, literally.
But I am finding the under-over threshold workouts such as Mary Austin, Carpathian Peak, Fang Mountain, Avalanche Spire much more manageable, even easy - to the extent that I was able to add 3% to the last one. Is this to be expected?
From the discussion here, it seems that VO2Max and FTP are so different that I shouldn’t really be too worried about repeatedly failing to complete the VO2s if the threshold workouts are going well [my aim is mountainous [late] summer rides, so sustained FTP is more important to me so I can enjoy those] - but I’m curious if there is a good explanation for my inability on the VO2s that I could address.
For example, should I potentially consider weights to increase the power I can put out for the shorter spells? Or is it that I’m just older - 43 - and will likely perform better on threshold rides, even in a carefully built program like the TR one?
For what it’s worth, the VO2Max intervals see me having to hold on at a HR of 172 by the time I’m failiing. Any thoughts or comments would be welcome.
People sometimes forget that what is best for sustained fitness gains, we shouldn’t always be using the greatest stimulus.
Also, with high power intervals, the shorter duration ones may be less of a stress on your vo2 capabilities, but are training the other systems that will eventually allow you to do those longer and then provide a greater stimulus in the end.
1 Like
So 150% of FTP during the work intervals to end up at 90% of estimated VO2max. Think most people here go “pretty much full gas” during short intervals, the way you did? It doesn’t seem like it, at least based on what I have read. Instead, people seem to mistakenly believe that they are training near VO2max any time they go over 105% of FTP, even for really short periods.
I would say that if your goal is to increase your VO2max, then do intervals that result in a heart really close to maximum, and that don’t rely on excessive cardiac drift to get there. That is what always worked for me (VO2max >80 before I gave up racing).
Without a gas exchange test finding your ‘actual’ vO2 max is hard to impossible. Just let her rip tater chip.
I have a progression that I’m starting this week that is starting at 3x7" and is going to work the durations shorter while keeping the TiZ same/longer through a 2-3 week block.
Lots of ways to get it done.
1 Like
For vo2 you need your heart needs to pretty close to max to clear the lactic from the muscle. The way to do them is to actually set off at just around or slight over threshold to bring the heart rate up then start to increase the power in the second third. Then just try to hold on, also having a focal point can be a great target and can help. Where if you set off way to hard the legs get binged up with lactic and because the heart isn’t beating fast enough and the legs go dont be stupid I’m not doing, until I get some oxygen. So the harder your heart can beat the more oxygen is be put through the blood and the more lactic is getting cleared
1 Like
80 is world class man! Were you an actual pro or just pretending to be one on the internet.
1 Like
Indeed. A quick search gives:
Sebastian Coe - 77
Peter Sagan - 84.0
Chris Froome - 84.6
Mathieu Van der Pol - 89.0
And some guy called Armstrong @ 85.0
1 Like