Aerobic condition / are we doing too much speedwork? - Page 2

Ahhh, this is the confusion though. Club riders rarely ride at the 'proper' intensity for very long, either hammering/racing up climbs, then noodling along chatting at such an easy pace that it's pointless (I know, I do it too). Otherwise some club runs turn into hammer sessions, almost all LT/anaerobic work. Tourers are in the first category, noodling along at very easy intensities without enough stimulus to raise LT. The inconsistency of the two groups is also a problem, many club riders riding just 2-3 times a week, tourers even less sometimes.

The kind of aerobic pace I'm referring to would be just below what's called 'Tempo'. Tempo is used to raise LT and is done in relatively short amounts, e.g. 1-3hours per week. So why can't long aerobic rides just beneath that intensity (and I mean, just beneath, maybe nothing more than 5-10 beats below) also raise LT?

TTer wrote, i reply >>

So, 2x15-30mins at 90-95% TT power is a very good workout for improving LT/VO2max.

But... this workout can only be completed 2x per week, becomes mentally taxing (something you might not look forward to week-in week-out), and needs good recovery (48hours until next session) between.

>>when you say 48-hrs to the next session, do you mean 48 hrs to the next set of these intervals, or 48-hrs to any session?

>>as regards the mentally taxing effort, i have some of the riders i coach do two, 10-mile TTs in the evening (e.g., club 10). This seems to help with regards to motivation


I know I become tired of doing these intervals, not looking forward to the hard effort every week in training (racing is different as you are more motivated).

>>there are various ways to make these more interesting: 10m TTs, uphill sessions, flat sessions on the road, and on the trainer. it's also important to note that if you are getting mentally exhausted from them (burnt out) then it's time to move on to some other session



How much more effective is the above compared to riding on average 1.5 to 2 hours per day at a decent aerobic pace. For me aerobic pace would be up to 155bpm (max is 194bpm) or around 200-230W. This kind of training is relatively easy, not as fatiguing as the intervals, but due to the long duration will it have a similar effect on LT.

>>it's probably best to stick with either power or HR to prescribe sessions -- there is some similarity between the two, but they're not directly comparable.



From what I've read I believe you need above-VO2max efforts to improve VO2max, but can only nudge up LT effectively by training beneath it (i.e. training longer near LT, short intervals above it don't seem to help??).

>>you can train VO2 max at close to VO2 max intensities and also lower intensities


So I guess this all boils down to what effect the two types of training effort have. They're both different, shorter intervals near TT pace, or longer aerobic rides tickling LT (LT as per ric's proper scientific definition of increase above 1mmol/l). Are they both as effective, but a trade-off of time/intensity?

>>you need to look at the big picture -- how much time do you have available, what your goals are, motivation, etc.

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

There's quite a large difference between LT efforts and VO2 max. For trained cyclists, most can ride at LT for ~ 1 - 3 hours, whilst, the upper limit for VO2max is going to about 10-minutes, depending on your pain threshold, fitness level, and motivation.

It's important to note, that both 2LAP and myself use the correct definition of lactate threshold, i.e., 1 mmol/L increase over exercise baseline level -- this is considerably below (e.g.) time trial effort, which some coaches use erroneously to describe LT.

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

Originally posted by Aztec
2Lap -- Wow, I couldn't be more confused (and I apologize for being dense).

>>Sorry I did ramble a bit, this is in addition to Rics post.

Do LT and VO2 max sessions differ by THAT much? Can you give specific examples for both (i.e., HR for a 190 bpm max)?

>>Yes they can differ a lot, the optimum VO2 max sessions are ridden at intesnities that elicit VO2 max and the optimum LT at intesities that elicit LT.

I did a max test earlier in the week my power at each differed quite a bit;
*VO2 max was 355 watts with HR 195
*LT 200 watts with HR 150

And you seem to be arguing for reducing distance work in favor of short, intense sessions. Do I at least understand that much correctly?

>>Yes you are correct, although less intesnse/longer duration sessions may lead to improvements these imporvements may not be at the optimal rate.

I'm very interested in this as I don't really enjoy sessions over an hour, and yet would love to be able to race next season (nothing crazy, just Cat4/5 and be in the pack).

>>There needs to be a balance. Why not encorporate time at powers/HRs at VO2 max or LT into a longer ride. You could for example do 40 minutes at LT over four sessions (i.e. 4 x 10 minutes) instead of a 1.5 hour interval session. I think its impossible to escape time at these intesities (particularly if you ride TT's), however your program could focus on more longer rides than someone like me (with limited time to train).

2LAP wrote:

I did a max test earlier in the week my power at each differed quite a bit;
*VO2 max was 355 watts with HR 195
*LT 200 watts with HR 150


2Lap, just curious: is the VO2 max power, the power from (e.g.) the final (mean) 60-secs of an incremental test to exhaustion (if so, what was the ramp rate). or is the power, the minimum required to elicit VO2 max?

I assume that the LT is a 1mmol increase?

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

Originally posted by TTer
Ahhh, this is the confusion though. Club riders rarely ride at the 'proper' intensity for very long, either hammering/racing up climbs, then noodling along chatting at such an easy pace that it's pointless (I know, I do it too). Otherwise some club runs turn into hammer sessions, almost all LT/anaerobic work. Tourers are in the first category, noodling along at very easy intensities without enough stimulus to raise LT. The inconsistency of the two groups is also a problem, many club riders riding just 2-3 times a week, tourers even less sometimes.

>>Sorry, perhaps a bad example. The point is that there aren't many riders that ride 'long and slow' in their training sessions or who complete very unstructured sessions that have good performances or high VO2 max/LT values.

The kind of aerobic pace I'm referring to would be just below what's called 'Tempo'. Tempo is used to raise LT and is done in relatively short amounts, e.g. 1-3hours per week. So why can't long aerobic rides just beneath that intensity (and I mean, just beneath, maybe nothing more than 5-10 beats below) also raise LT?

>>They could, but they wouldn't be as effective in terms of improvement or time. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be done, only that more intense sessions specificaly focusing on LT and VO2 max (as these limit performance) must be included. Efforts at these intesnities also allow you to experiance riding at racing pace.

>> A range of anaerobic sessions (e.g. maxiumal efforts of one minute) can also have an effect on VO2 max and LT (particularly in untrained people) so there is also an arguement the other way (i.e. for supra maximal efforts).

Hay Ric,

I'm a bit pants at the moment 'cos I'm 7 weeks into training a break of a few months due to work.

The 355 is the average power output over one minute, ramp rate 20 watts per minute. VO2 max was 64.5 ml.kg.min. I weigh 61 kg (1.72m) so power to weight was around 5.89 w/kg. Could lose about 2 kg, given some measurements using calipers.

LT was 1mmol increase recorded during a 'lactate profile test' prior to the ramp test, also visulay off a lactate to power plot. I reported the the last point at baseline (so it really falls between 200 and 220). 3 minute stages at 20 watt increases starting at 120 watts. Also used as a warm up for the ramp. Lactate and gas taken in the last minute of each stage.

Think I'm going to be working on my LT for the next 6 to 8 weeks, although in tests I seem to be able to hold a high % of power at VO2 max for a long time despite the low LT.

2Lap,

now a bit more curious :-)
what power meter did you test on?

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

You'll love this, I did it on a king cycle! I wasn't too interested in the 'watts' results, as I'm still using HR to train on and I can always jump on the kingcycle in the lab to do some 'watts' based training.

It was on one of those very hot days and we struggled to get the lab temperature down even though the air con was on! The fans had been borrowed by people for offices and I didn't have time to get them back. Not the best of data! But, not my study!!!

Doesn't the kingcycle over estimate power

Yes, it does over estimate -- which was the point of my question! as it stood, the original figures were indicative of ~ 2nd cat ability.

How much the Kingcycle overestimates by is usually at least 8%, and sometimes as high as 12%. Depends how old it is, condition of the bearings and the person calibrating the unit.

Over a short period of time, there'll be good correlation between readings, but over a long period of time, data is likely to be off.

No SRMs or PT at your lab?

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

No PT or SRM, bummer really!

I haven't trained consistantly for a few years now, completing around 4 months training and 2 months off training (as work dictates ). I was a good junior, but that was 5 whole years ago!!

__________________
www.cyclingforums.com

don't worry, i was an awful junior and i stopped being one in 1988.... or was it 87? so long ago now, i can't remember...

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

First post so be gentle!

I know I have to be really careful with any work at time trial pace or above. I find that sometimes as little as 3 weeks of high intensity work is sufficient to bring me to a peak. After this I tend to see little further improvement, and if I persist for many more weeks I start to lose performance (and mental freshness), independant of how much recovery time I leave between sessions.

I believe the real gains are made while doing a high volume of quality endurance rides and lactate threshold training over several months, although the improvement in performance is not fully realised until this work is 'tweaked' with a carefully controlled amount of high intensity work in the final weeks before a target.

The very quick adaptation to high intensity work feels great and can easily fool you into thinking that this is how you should train all the time. There seem to be a lot of studies showing how dramatic improvements are made by following an intense interval program for a number of weeks, but if you then made the subjects repeat the trial I'm sure they wouldn't see the same improvements, and then if you got them to repeat it a third time you'd probably have a lot of burned out athletes.

If you are severely limited in training time then theres obviously no point in spending that time at low intensities. But for real speed I've convinced myself that there is no substitute for doing long quality miles (preferably to power rather than HR), with focussed sessions at LT, and then using a carefully controlled period of high intensity as a catalyst so you hit peak form at the right time.

My 10 cents!

Mark

Ric, what kind of level are you at now, or have you been at? Did/do you road race or TT?

What's your VO2max (I assume you've had the opportunity to test in the lab) and what's your LT/VO2max power?

How has training gone for you since been a junior? Much success, or have you been too busy studying to dedicate time to training? Just interested to know your personal success.

Thanks for your post Mark. Welcome to the discussion!

I'm very much in agreement with you on this. I seem to thrive on the long aerobic rides, with power slowly rising over a number of months. Granted there are some natural intervals in these rides when hitting hills (even some VO2max stimulation?), but mostly it's endurance riding.

With TT pace and Vo2max (e.g. 5x6mins) intervals I tend to peak quickly and then the power and motiviation starts to slide. I noticed it this year. 270W was my 20min TT pace after "base" training, I raised it to 290W for 20mins during the "build" period. It didn't last too well though and started to wane in the 4-8 week part of "build", with 280-285W been the best I could do (was doing this 2x per week with just easy riding between). It could have been my training that was to blame, though my motivation was disappearing too quickly with the tough workouts.

Interesting in the original Hadd thread on running that he says that primarily slow-twitchers (muscle fibers) tend to thrive on the endurance whereas fast-twitchers do well with more intensity. Can this really be true Ric/2Lap from a physiological point of view? I though fast-twitch muscles were used in high-intensity efforts but tired quickly (ie. not suitable for a fast 25mile TT)?