Benefits of "In Zone" Time?

[Porkyboy]

Hi

I'm just wondering if anyone can point me in the direction of any evidence or even hints which will help me anwer a question.

Clearly if you want to bring about certain physiological adaptations you need to spend time training at an intensity which will bring about those adaptations, that's straightforward enough.

My problem is that as we all know spending a lot of time working at say L4 is hard graft and readily leads to fatigue which then requires more rest if overtraining is to be avoided.

The general advice and wisdom seems to be that say L4 work is often broken down into 20 minute segments and typically this is what I do. So, along with many others, I might do the usual 2x20 L4 session giving me 40 minutes of the appropriate training stimulus and a certain level of resultant fatigue.

Has any work been done on say doing shorter but a greater number of L4 efforts during a session which might result in a lower resulting fatigue level but a higher length of time working at that intensity? Say, 3x15 or 4x15 instead of 2x20

I'm just curious as to what work might have been done in the past and whether a higher number of shorter efforts have been shown to deliver similar training adaptations. I'm sure this has all been tried before but I've not really been able to find anything which has looked at this in detail.

Thanks.

PBUK

 

[wiredued]

This is some what related http://www.cyclingforums.com/t-431231-15-1&highlight=price+admission.html paying the "price of admission" was a good way to look at the first 8 minutes.

Hi

I'm just wondering if anyone can point me in the direction of any evidence or even hints which will help me anwer a question.

Clearly if you want to bring about certain physiological adaptations you need to spend time training at an intensity which will bring about those adaptations, that's straightforward enough.

My problem is that as we all know spending a lot of time working at say L4 is hard graft and readily leads to fatigue which then requires more rest if overtraining is to be avoided.

The general advice and wisdom seems to be that say L4 work is often broken down into 20 minute segments and typically this is what I do. So, along with many others, I might do the usual 2x20 L4 session giving me 40 minutes of the appropriate training stimulus and a certain level of resultant fatigue.

Has any work been done on say doing shorter but a greater number of L4 efforts during a session which might result in a lower resulting fatigue level but a higher length of time working at that intensity? Say, 3x15 or 4x15 instead of 2x20

I'm just curious as to what work might have been done in the past and whether a higher number of shorter efforts have been shown to deliver similar training adaptations. I'm sure this has all been tried before but I've not really been able to find anything which has looked at this in detail.

Thanks.

PBUK

 

[swampy1970]

Hi

I'm just wondering if anyone can point me in the direction of any evidence or even hints which will help me anwer a question.

Clearly if you want to bring about certain physiological adaptations you need to spend time training at an intensity which will bring about those adaptations, that's straightforward enough.

My problem is that as we all know spending a lot of time working at say L4 is hard graft and readily leads to fatigue which then requires more rest if overtraining is to be avoided.

The general advice and wisdom seems to be that say L4 work is often broken down into 20 minute segments and typically this is what I do. So, along with many others, I might do the usual 2x20 L4 session giving me 40 minutes of the appropriate training stimulus and a certain level of resultant fatigue.

Has any work been done on say doing shorter but a greater number of L4 efforts during a session which might result in a lower resulting fatigue level but a higher length of time working at that intensity? Say, 3x15 or 4x15 instead of 2x20

I'm just curious as to what work might have been done in the past and whether a higher number of shorter efforts have been shown to deliver similar training adaptations. I'm sure this has all been tried before but I've not really been able to find anything which has looked at this in detail.

Thanks.

PBUK

If you're getting to fatigued from 3x20 then you're likely doing them a little too hard. You should feel pretty beat when done and you'll be feeling it the day after but it should be causing true overtraining issues unless there's something else going on (like you're only getting 5 hours of kip a night, long hours in a physical job etc) Back off 10 watts and see how that feels.

Unless it's mid season and you're after 4 to 8 weeks of adding that final 'spring' to your step with some high quality/high intensity short interval work then I wouldn't start making too many reps per hour. Keep it down to 2 or 3 and work accordingly. Keep the pedals turning and the drinks a flowin' (not the beer... )