Watched a recent Jesse Coyle video reacting to a Norcal Cycling 2 video " Training to Double my FTP (Cycling Coach Reacts)" and he really seemed to focus on the point that the goal was unrealistic, especially with the rider taking 2 days off per week.
My goal this season was to get at least 6h/wk with around 4 days per week on the training and maybe up to 8-10h on weeks I do some outdoor riding as well.
I could choose workout alternates to increase the length of a lot of my SS and Threshold workouts to increase my volume but this would reduce the IF/intensity of the workouts if choosing at the same PL. I feel if I took less rest days I wouldnāt have the ability to complete higher intensity training sessions, might need to choose lower level alternates due to fatigue.
Would this emphasis on volume over intensity pay off more in the long term?
My goal is less lofty than doubling my FTP for this year, I would like to add 22 to my FTP by August (218 to 240), which would bring me ~4.2 W/kg even if I put on ~0.75 kg in the process. By spring 2024 I would like to be around 260w ftp, which would put me ~4.5w/kg and give me the ability to do Z2 (65%) at 169W, which I hope would help a lot with my durability and ability to hold on, on the flats and long rides.
Even with a more realistic goal though, I do want to better understand the volume vs intensity thing more.
Why not the prescribed workout e.g. 1hr sweetspot/whatever then add an extended cooldown at low Z2 e.g. 60% and see how you feel, that way you get the extra volume and keep your rest days for rest.
This is a safe way of adding volume. Unless you are making serious mistakes in the fundamentals like sleeping and eating you should be able to handle a few extra hours @ Z2 on a 6-10hr week.
Basically if you are doing 6 hours when you have time and wherewithal for 10 you are leaving fitness on the table.
Thatās because you have a longer period at lower intensity. Itās misguided thinking similar to those who cut the cool-down short because that will produce a higher normalised power and hence IF for the session.
Rather than picking longer SS workouts (which is also an effective stimulus if youāre increasing TiZ) Iād suggest just tacking on the additional 30-60min before, or after, the original workout.
Yes, volume is king.
ETA: I see I was way behind the replies of the same. Iād suggest, if you know youāre going to be able to do say 120min instead of 60, or 90mim, then the consensus seems to be that doing the Z2 as extended warm up is the most effective way. I almost exclusively do it in the cool down due to just adding on as much as I can and not knowing when the session will precisely run to.
I tell you what, on a complete tangent, Iāve found it such a massively more enjoyable experience the last few years not giving a if people see how much training Iām doing.
It used to be such a chore listening to people telling you theyād done 90min when you know theyād done four hours. Or if I said I rode straight to the race, instead of admitting I had ridden 90km there .
These days Iām just happy to be training hard and prefer picking up as much knowledge as I can. Helping if I can.
Ever notice you canāt sort on time? Strava average speed doping on āthe rideā is real for some. LOL
Number 1 is a mid 60s retired dude and has 12.5 hours so far, without weekend riding. Number 2 is 22 or 23 and has 11.7 hours, number 3 is 25 and has 11.8 hours, etc., etc. Last few weeks those twenty somethings are putting down 20 hour weeks, and same for some in 30s and 40s. That 60 something retired dude was doing it last year
My Strava is private by default. Itās funny how my followers didnāt appreciate the difficulty of my indoor workouts. They stay private now. The rides that tend to be visible are the Z2 outdoor rides. They probably think Iām slow when most of their rides I see are tempo with bursts much higher. Then we ride together when Iām not on a training outing ā¦
So if by reducing rest days, increasing weekly volume I find myself needing to drop the PL of my intensity workouts (SS, Thr, VO2) is this fine in the longterm?
I want to increase my volume but at some point I expect I will hit the point where fatigue is effecting my ability to perform intensity.
As an example I am in the last week of Trad Base LV Block III and in the 2nd week of this block I rated my end of the week Tempo workout as āHardā, which prompted a struggle survey, I blamed training fatigue (the threshold and 2 SS workouts that came during the week) so it dropped the PLs of my SS workouts the next week (by ~2) which made it easier to do my long Tempo workout at the end of the 3rd week.
I feel that already by doing extra Z2 workouts and adding volume to the ends of scheduled rides to get at least 6 hours a week per week (only did 272h in 2022), it is affecting my ability to ākeep upā with the PL increases and workouts, if I boost even more to say hit 8hā¦ It will likely reduce the PL I can do for intensity work even further and for longerā¦
I donāt push indoor workouts to Strava mostly as a way to track my outdoor miles separate from my weekly total. That said, our club leader board is mostly indoor riders with inflated āspeed,ā āelevationā and āmilesā on zwift. But when you look at the time it tells the real story.
My indoor and outdoor rides come through Garmin Connect. From there they are pushed to Strava. I donāt think GC has a setting to only push one or the other.
Yeah I think this is my thing, as a newer rider with less than a year of structured training, I feel while the ceiling can be moved, I have been bumping into it already. Iām guessing it will pay off in the long term though if I can stick with it and stay consistent, for the most part it does almost seem like of the local fast guys, the more kms they are putting in each year the faster they are.
if people see how much training Iām doing.
