I've been one of the people who thought LSD training was silly until reading this article: http://home.hia.no/%7Estephens/timecors.htm
The basic question in my mind had always been "Ok, I can ride fast in September but then I'm supposed to ride slow all winter and that'll help me build up to be fast again in March. Why would that be better than just riding fast all winter?" I understand the arguments about burnout, etc., but frankly I don't train enough for that to become an issue, so I've always discounted the LSD idea.
Is the rationale behind LSD that year-on-year improvments in VO2max and LT plateau after 3-4 years of training and the only way to improve beyond that is through gains in physiological efficiency (just to head-off the comments about pedalling style, cadence, etc, note that the article is talking about muscle/metabolic efficiency rather than efficient technique in the cycling section)? Can anyone confirm or refute the assertions of that article?
http://home.hia.no/~stephens/timecors.htm
The basic question in my mind had always been "Ok, I can ride fast in September but then I'm supposed to ride slow all winter and that'll help me build up to be fast again in March. Why would that be better than just riding fast all winter?" I understand the arguments about burnout, etc., but frankly I don't train enough for that to become an issue, so I've always discounted the LSD idea.
Is the rationale behind LSD that year-on-year improvments in VO2max and LT plateau after 3-4 years of training and the only way to improve beyond that is through gains in physiological efficiency (just to head-off the comments about pedalling style, cadence, etc, note that the article is talking about muscle/metabolic efficiency rather than efficient technique in the cycling section)? Can anyone confirm or refute the assertions of that article?
http://home.hia.no/~stephens/timecors.htm