A vote for sweet-spot training

[Pendejo]

I've been competing in and training for 5K and 10K time trials for the past six years. I've experimented with different training regimens, and after making lots of progress the first year or two there has been improvement but not as much as I had hoped or expected. Early this year a paved bike "path" was opened up near me which for the first time allowed me to put my head down and pound out uninterrupted miles in the sweet-spot range (the roads where I live don't allow that). I had my first race today since February (the racing season here in Florida is during "winter") and my performance has really improved (as measured by average speed, and placement relative to racing "buddies" in my bracket).

Also interesting is that as I've gotten better, my time trial cadence has gone from around 90 down to the low 80s (and a bigger gear, of course). I wonder if any of you have also noticed an increase or decrease in your cadence as you've improved?

 

[tonyzackery]

A definite increase in comfortable cadence for a given power output for me. I would guesstimate an increase to low 90s from the low 80s.

Pertaining to your title, I'm not a proponent of SST training as I see it as "in-between" training that facilitates neither the adaptations I'm after (getting faster) nor easy enough to allow for active recovery. I'm not trying to start a debate, just saying I wouldn't cast my vote for SST...Let's agree to disagree...

 

[daveryanwyoming]

....I had my first race today since February (the racing season here in Florida is during "winter") and my performance has really improved (as measured by average speed, and placement relative to racing "buddies" in my bracket).....

You're scarin' me Pende' next thing ya know folks will be sayin' Lydiard actually had a pretty good grasp on this stuff. Thaz crazy talk

Good job on your recent racing, keep it up!

-Dave
P.S. I tend to time trial at faster cadences (95-105 rpm typically on flat courses) but sometimes I just feel great turning over a big gear at 80-85rpm on a flat fast course. I haven't tracked it to fitness but sometimes that big gear just feels right.

 

[Pendejo]

A definite increase in comfortable cadence for a given power output for me. I would guesstimate an increase to low 90s from the low 80s.

Pertaining to your title, I'm not a proponent of SST training as I see it as "in-between" training that facilitates neither the adaptations I'm after (getting faster) nor easy enough to allow for active recovery. I'm not trying to start a debate, just saying I wouldn't cast my vote for SST...Let's agree to disagree...

I understand what you're saying, Tony, and I used to have the same opinion. Many members of this forum are SST advocates, as you probably know. But I didn't have the opportunity to really try it out until this new bike path opened. I used to do one-mile intervals (and sometimes two-mile intervals) as quick as I could, and end each one in a big hurt. I'm sure that kind of training helped some, but what I realize now is that those fast intervals gave me no practice whatever in reaching a rhythm that could be sustained for a 5 or 10K TT. That's what this sweet-spot training is now giving me. And I can feel (and measure) the difference it's made. (I still do intervals, but mostly 2 or 2 1/2 miles long.)

Also, I need to point out that I don't use a heart-rate monitor. My sweet-spot is where I'm hurting but it's a hurt that I can sustain for about twelve miles. I'm pretty sure it would fall within the parameters of 90% max heart rate. And as the months go by, my average speed for that twelve miles is increasing, and I think that's directly transferable to time-trial performance.

So I think I've found my own best training strategy, finally, but it certainly might not be someone else's. That's part of what makes this sport so interesting. There is no definitive "how to" manual. What you do is listen to others, read, experiment, put it all in your mental blender and see what comes out. And then probably change it next year!

 

[tonyzackery]

P., As I see you are, I too am a strong advocate of doing whatever's working for you. The most important and ubiquitous training rule I've learned in my 2 1/2 years of road bike riding/racing is the individuality of training adaptations. There is no "one training size that fits all". Just because something is working for me doesn't mean it will work for someone else, and vice versa. I'm happy to hear you've found something that works for you.

90% of max heart rate and you consider that your SST?! You're a pretty tough dude!

 

[swampy1970]

I've been competing in and training for 5K and 10K time trials for the past six years. I've experimented with different training regimens, and after making lots of progress the first year or two there has been improvement but not as much as I had hoped or expected. Early this year a paved bike "path" was opened up near me which for the first time allowed me to put my head down and pound out uninterrupted miles in the sweet-spot range (the roads where I live don't allow that). I had my first race today since February (the racing season here in Florida is during "winter") and my performance has really improved (as measured by average speed, and placement relative to racing "buddies" in my bracket).

Also interesting is that as I've gotten better, my time trial cadence has gone from around 90 down to the low 80s (and a bigger gear, of course). I wonder if any of you have also noticed an increase or decrease in your cadence as you've improved?

Just out of curiosity, have you tested different cadences (ie different gears) at a given power for the duration of the event? I noticed that for time trials over 25 miles that a lower cadence (in the low 80's) helped. Given that the events after 25miles were typically 30, 50 and 100 miles then a lower cadence was helpful...

... however, despite how much harder it seemed to be, I always went faster if I kept the cadence between 85 and 90.

Just for the record, I'd hate doing a 5k time trial. After doing a couple of 1K efforts I swore that 10 miles would be the shortest I'd ever do in a time trail. F##king horrible.

 

[Pendejo]

Just out of curiosity, have you tested different cadences (ie different gears) at a given power for the duration of the event? I noticed that for time trials over 25 miles that a lower cadence (in the low 80's) helped. Given that the events after 25miles were typically 30, 50 and 100 miles then a lower cadence was helpful...

... however, despite how much harder it seemed to be, I always went faster if I kept the cadence between 85 and 90.

Just for the record, I'd hate doing a 5k time trial. After doing a couple of 1K efforts I swore that 10 miles would be the shortest I'd ever do in a time trail. F##king horrible.

Swampy, I don't use a powermeter so I can't perform the test you suggest. I have just found that after about six months of sweet-spot training as my average speed has gone up, my "natural" cadence has gone down. Before the new bike path opened up, I used to try to keep my cadence at around 90, thinking that was best for me. But it looks now like I was fighting my own physiology. Now a cadence of 90 feels to me like I'm using up heartbeats just "spinning my wheels," instead of tapping into the extra power that's waiting there.

Yes, the 5K hurts bad. The first half of the race you're building up to that point of maximum hurt, and the second half you're just trying to hang on. I compete in the Senior Games (for mummies over 50) and there are qualifying regional races, then the state finals, then the nationals. And in each, first they run the 5K TT, then about thirty minutes later the 10K TT. And most all the competitors do both. I've found that I can only give 100% effort in one race a day, and I usually pick the 5K to do that (I've always seemed to be better at hurting like hell for a shorter time than hurting more moderately for a longer time - which is probably why I didn't get married until I was 48).

 

[dkrenik]

Should remember that SST is not necessarily strictly defined as a "zone" or range of intensities. I find it helpful to think of it more as a type of training that will allow me to accumulate the greatest amount of training training stress/fitness over a given amount of time.

Having said that, a training regimen for someone looking to accumulate training stress over a period of a week would probably look significantly different than one for someone looking to accumulate training stress over a period of 3 months. Also, to tonyzackery's point, folks will most likely respond differently. That's where experimentation fits in: see what works for ya.

Dave

 

[jsirabella]

Great Work! I hope you keep improving and hit your future goals.

-js

I've been competing in and training for 5K and 10K time trials for the past six years. I've experimented with different training regimens, and after making lots of progress the first year or two there has been improvement but not as much as I had hoped or expected. Early this year a paved bike "path" was opened up near me which for the first time allowed me to put my head down and pound out uninterrupted miles in the sweet-spot range (the roads where I live don't allow that). I had my first race today since February (the racing season here in Florida is during "winter") and my performance has really improved (as measured by average speed, and placement relative to racing "buddies" in my bracket).

Also interesting is that as I've gotten better, my time trial cadence has gone from around 90 down to the low 80s (and a bigger gear, of course). I wonder if any of you have also noticed an increase or decrease in your cadence as you've improved?

 

[fergie]

Great work Pendejo

I have found the same thing focusing on doing conditioning work at "best aerobic pace" in relation to the amount of time I have to train. Call it SST or Lydiard training it works. I am focused on a 3000m pursuit on the track so my efforts are pretty short like 60-90mins.

Back when I was focused on road racing the efforts were spread over 3-4hrs and I found I have power to burn over these durations in races.

One of my big observations from coaching riders at all levels from the range of cycling events is that speed is very easy to develop so I can go from good aerobic power to peak event specific power very quickly. 1-4 weeks depending on the event and the rider.

I don't like to do steady pace efforts so tend to vary the tempo like 1min around FTP and 1min below or choosing an undulating training route. But 90% of threshold heart rate sounds pretty good.

 

[swampy1970]

Swampy, I don't use a powermeter so I can't perform the test you suggest. I have just found that after about six months of sweet-spot training as my average speed has gone up, my "natural" cadence has gone down. Before the new bike path opened up, I used to try to keep my cadence at around 90, thinking that was best for me. But it looks now like I was fighting my own physiology. Now a cadence of 90 feels to me like I'm using up heartbeats just "spinning my wheels," instead of tapping into the extra power that's waiting there.

If you can find a small circuit or even a section of the new bike path that's got some easily identifiable 'markers' you could use that and run back-to-back-to-back-to-back tests using different cadences. It may take several tests over a couple of days to see if there really is any differences and to get enough data points to validate what you think about your cadence.

Without a powermeter or heartrate monitor it's not quite as easy but like anything else, it aint impossible.

 

[Simone@Italy]

Great work Pendejo

I have found the same thing focusing on doing conditioning work at "best aerobic pace" in relation to the amount of time I have to train. Call it SST or Lydiard training it works. I am focused on a 3000m pursuit on the track so my efforts are pretty short like 60-90mins.

60-90mins for a 3000m pursuit?

 

[fergie]

60-90mins for a 3000m pursuit?

Is my average ride time in the sweet spot. To help with my conditioning before I tackle more pursuit specific work.

 

[swampy1970]

I am focused on a 3000m pursuit on the track so my efforts are pretty short like 60-90mins.

Have you ever had a diskwheel crack from being in the starting gates so long? .... and you can't even pedal backwards either. Bummer.

 

[Pendejo]

...One of my big observations from coaching riders at all levels from the range of cycling events is that speed is very easy to develop so I can go from good aerobic power to peak event specific power very quickly. 1-4 weeks depending on the event and the rider...

That's very interesting. So, taking myself as an example, I have an "off-season" of about eight months, then I have a bunch of 5K and 10K TTs over the next several months. This year, during the off-season, I concentrated on moderately paced distance rides and frequent sweet-spot rides of twenty minutes. I reduced my interval training to about once every week or two. About a month before my first TT I started doing more intervals in place of sweet-spot rides. Would you say that there is no point at all to doing any intervals during the off-season, and just save them for the months or so leading up to the first TT?

 

[fergie]

Would you say that there is no point at all to doing any intervals during the off-season, and just save them for the months or so leading up to the first TT?

I do 3-4 week conditioning blocks mixed with a 1 week speed block where I do some racing, time trials or event specific intervals to stay in touch with my pursuit power. I don't have the luxury of an indoor track near so have no idea just how I will go on race day. At this years Nats it was over 15sec faster for 3km than my speed at regionals (factoring in the differences in tracks, time was actually 28sec faster).

Sweet spot training is pretty much what Lydiard intended. Not long slow distance as many people mistakenly believe. Best aerobic pace for the duration you have available.

 

[Pendejo]

I do 3-4 week conditioning blocks mixed with a 1 week speed block where I do some racing, time trials or event specific intervals to stay in touch with my pursuit power. I don't have the luxury of an indoor track near so have no idea just how I will go on race day. At this years Nats it was over 15sec faster for 3km than my speed at regionals (factoring in the differences in tracks, time was actually 28sec faster).

Sweet spot training is pretty much what Lydiard intended. Not long slow distance as many people mistakenly believe. Best aerobic pace for the duration you have available.

Thanks, Fergie. It's helpful to know that you don't abandon speed work entirely during the off-season. And I like your quote, "Best aerobic pace for the duration you have available." What I aim for in my sweet-spot rides is the upper limit of controlled pain, just short of uncontrolled pain. Though that description is not scientific, I'm confident it comes pretty close to what you're describing. And I imagine most people in this forum recognize the distinction.

 

[fergie]

Have you ever had a diskwheel crack from being in the starting gates so long? .... and you can't even pedal backwards either. Bummer.

Starting gates hold the seatpost not the wheel. Some track disc wheels are not designed for braking.

I can pedal backwards for about 10meteres. Our mechanic can probably go round the block.