That was my understanding, was just wondering where the 30mins was coming from, surely it’s just dependant on how quickly the lactate is cleared (i.e. a combination of how much excess lactate is produced and how quickly you clear it)
And all those 3 will give u different values. All very sensitive to protocol, and there’s no scientific consensus. 
1 Like
Sh!t, I have moved to a 3 day week after hearing two Triathlon podcasts on the subject. A three day week makes it really hard to fit this all in.
Agreed, and CP can be significantly different. FTP and MLSS might be equivalent depending on one’s, way / understanding / assessment of FTP.
However given the wider context and discussion it is fair enough to put them in the sames bucket. Yes/No?
OK, They aren’t the same thing or equivalent which is how it reads, but it is wording, I’m taking the main intention of the message (hopefully correctly)
1 Like
Getting lost in the details and missing the big picture. There is a boundary between stable and unstable physiology. Full stop. I’m an average Joe and can easily find it in a field test. It’s not that complicated. And this is the point I’ve decided to stop posting about it.
5 Likes
Does he really say this? Ride 3-4 days per week @ tempo. The talk test doesn’t put you at tempo IMO.
Yet, we see Pogacar doing 15-20 minute threshold intervals up mountain passes.
I agree that he is interesting. But the ideas aren’t that new or revolutionary. Selling zone 2 in a shrowd of lactate just makes it mysterious and complicated for the normal person IMO. Yet on the other hand, just do the talk test.
But is he?
or is that how we are viewing / assessing it?
1 Like
Agree. But (and perhaps I missed it further up), but what does that have to do with Zone2/low(er)-intensity? The stable/non-stable divide is most definitely a thing, and regardless of how it’s derived there is general consensus (scientifically, with CP, and less formally with FTP or even “gorilla on your back” feel) that below a certain point your physiology is more predictable, less erratic, and stable than above that point.
The range of intensities below that cutoff is so wide that for coaching purposes it’s not useful. For example, .55 - .90 FTP is laughable. Why even have a power meter?
Besides what has been pointed out as to why there are so many posts on this, it is this huge and vague range of possible acceptable and productive intensities that leads to all the discussion, confusion, and second guessing. It is where we spend most of our time as endurance athletes. Until now, I’ve never understood why it got LESS discussion than upper thresholds. They’re easy to figure out, comparatively speaking.
6 Likes
He is forced to give some sort of recommendation for the average Joe. But his zone prescriptions are certainly different. For sure not using any silly %’s.
ISM is so influential and different that some other Pro pelotón coaches use his style. Although the hey day of his ideas there was like 5yrs ago.
Maybe. In a lot of cases it is an artifact of the training process where you become adept at the numbers you are prescribed.
Speaking of previous high Zone 2 folks, wonder how Jonathan Vaughters would train his tour riders these days?
1 Like
But again, the divide is so wide that you can’t really discover any threshold with quantitative techniques. Can you point me to a reference that refutes the null hypothesis the it’s a continuum?
Beating a dead horse… seems like they are just going for likes and views at this point.
1 Like
Three a days
I saw him doing it in videos. He obviously has to do that as it’s race specific for a mountain top finish. We’ve also seen McNulty doing similar efforts on climbs (Strava). ISM is his coach.
thread drift LOL. However I’m in the power analytics camp. Therefore I use “FTP” to compare power at my perceived lower aerobic threshold (power at my “all day” HR). Over 3 years it has gone up, from 60% ftp to currently around 72% ftp. Roughly.
2 Likes
Power meters must be silly too!
Which other coaches? AFAICT, most other pro peloton coaches are an enigma. We have no idea who most of them are or how they train their riders.
Sorry, my point was we see it as threshold, but maybe that wasn’t what he was doing in the ISM world. Who’s lense are we looking through, maybe the same and it’s all marketing.
It’s not at all useless for training, and picking your Z2 number based on predicted zones has been well established as “doing it wrong”
FTP is FTP and Z2 is Z2…
Sorry this “ftp for vanity” doesn’t exist here on Tue/Wed/Thur worlds in heavy winds. For everyone.
Flatland is sustained power land. Ok, I guess ftp is vanity for the guys out front, the guys my size that can go 330-380+W for 40-50 minutes, and doing 220-280W tractor pulls on 3+ hour group rides. For the rest of us, ftp basically predicts when we get dropped.
And TTs.
1 Like