My resting lactate was 0.5mmol
Every zone 2 workout gives me a reading between 1.3mmol - 1.5mmol.
They also talk about Z2. Not performance specific, but at least both aimed at cycling performance at certain points in their lives. Attia mentions that his Z2 was 275W and FTP 310W, if I remember correctly.
It would be interesting to see your lactate curve together with power data if you’ve got it.
He still uses fixed lactate number of 2 mmol for LT1… come on peter
Late to the convo here and this may be dead but thought I’d chime in.
This seems far more relevant to most folks on here and to the deep focus of the discussions Peter and ISM have.
The focus is on shifting the body into maximal fat oxidation (not medical just what made sense to me). This helps train the body to utilize fat and build mitochondria. By training in this area with high volume, it seems that you can can slowly push up the speed at which this lactate level occurs at.
This means it’ll be completely subjective and a higher power/speed for elites and pros than mortals who mostly ride for fun.
ISM strongly reinforces HR as being very important. I think this throws cyclists off because “power is king” and “watts are watts” (he says this on the first podcast. His point is that, paraphrasing here, “yes but how did the body get there”. He’s concerned with what’s going on metabolically to create mechanical energy. If you’re CHO dependent you will need to eat more and produces more lactate.
This is why the “time crunched cyclist” approach year round might not work for some.
It’s also worth nothing that it sounds like ISM recommends 2-3 phases. An 8-12 week phase of building aerobic endurance up before laying on the capacity, threshold, vo2 max work, and the performing season.
Can you provide a reference for this?
But the question is. What is best? Say you can ride 12-15h a week and you want to build aerobic base. Would you do this in 60-70% FTP Z2 sessions. Or is it better to ride 8-10h a week at (or around) LT1?
I would definitely not aim for LT1 riding, it would att quite a lot of fatigue, instead aim for doing maybe 1-2 rides a week with LT1 intervals, like 2x30, 2x45min or such.
So to answer your question, aim for Z2 session. I do 3 sessions a week which are just easy Z2 rides, one interval with LT1 intervals, then one with LT2.
I just recently tested again and got new zones, hence quite “chill” sessions so far 
Example week for me with LT1 intervals and LT2 intervals:
Ok, that looks very nice. I also have some commutes. My idea was a kind of same approach like you. Longer rides Z2, maybe 1 or 2 LT1 and one harder session.
Yeah, I think the key is to not overdo it. LT1 still adds some fatigue!
I feel that I perfectly balance the intensity with this type of weekly approach with intervals
Is your LT1 about 80% FTP?
Yes. Around 80%
I can’t find which part of what podcast it’s from but he says something along the lines of “4x/week in preseason”, which I would assume is around 8-12 weeks, “2x/week when beginning more threshold, v02 max work, and 1-2x/week in season”.
I think that is very generic and open ended tho.
I would say that depends on your numbers and your body. This is where testing, a plan, and a coach come into place. In lieu of that, experimentation (at the cost of self detriment) is probably the best answer.
If you’re time-constrained, I think it depends on what your goals are. If you can’t do as much in a week, I would imagine having longer phases (12-16 week “base”) could make up for the time but idk.
You really have to listen to your body and use what you have to determine this I think. I think knowing your Max HR (with a field test if possible), having a well functioning HR strap, listening to your body and following the guidelines of “being able to hold a conversation while the other person can tell you’re working out but not interrupting the conversation” is a good way to tell.
Watch these couple of minutes: 201 - Deep dive back into Zone 2 Training | Iñigo San-Millán, Ph.D. & Peter Attia, M.D. - YouTube
Don’t know if you asked me or the other guy, but yeah, mine is around 245w for LT1 and 300w for LT2!
Zone 2 training is super interesting to me and something I have started a few weeks ago since getting a road bike. I mainly ride mtb and just hammer, I have used training road in the past two winters so no shortage of going hard. Big shortage of going easy and I am excited to work on this weakness and see what happens. One thing I have already noticed, I have been riding more, 6-8 hrs to 8-10 hrs and recovering better. I still do at least 1 hard mtb ride a week which is about 20-25min spin to the trails and then hammering trails and treating them like intervals.
Volume is king. The aerobic energy system benefits from being put to use for longer and longer durations, so if your goal is primarily aerobic adaptations, duration trumps intensity (as long as you’re doing some work). There are benefits of riding at/near LT1 and those are more specific to being able to hold a higher “all day power”, but it will incur more fatigue. Like all things, it’s a balance between work/fatigue and adaptation.
In my opinion, you’d be better off doing a 12-15h week at 60-65% vs an 8-10h week at LT1 if your goal is to build a strong aerobic base. Again, volume is king.
Are you talking 60-65% of
I go so far that I only care about my W/kg at LT1. I want to spend my time on all-day rides, and that inherently means low blood lactate, so below LT1. My training is focused on pushing LT1 higher and higher. Getting a lactate test has been really helpful for this. FTP does not factor into my training, except for estimating fatigue with TSS (so I guess at my FTP for fatigue purposes). I do get some training for high blood lactate when I hit high gradients on my mtb. Based on talking to coaches, it sounds like many people can push their LT1 to decent levels if they spend the years at high volume and low intensity (it takes a long time to develop the mitochondria, the capillaries, and the oxidative fibers), and know their LT1 via lactate testing (since you can’t guess LT1 from an anchor point like FTP — the zone models are wildly inaccurate for individual predictions and could easily put you in zone 3).