Weekly time in L3/L4 zones ?

[frenchyge]

Very diplomatic

Heh. I'm not saying he's wrong, but understand that while he says that, he probably does more L2/L3 work per week than your total ride time.

Weekly scheduling is the real challenge I find - to make sure I am ready for the 2X20 sessions and in turn ready for my race (either Sat or Sun)

That's a good part of why I'm doing a lot of L4 work over the off-season, contrary to what a lot of more experienced riders would suggest. With the rolling terrain here, a 20-min interval in L4 is nearly impossible outdoors, but easy to do on the trainer. Also, since I'm stuck indoors during the winter anyway, it just makes sense to me to be doing shorter, harder efforts now, rather than forcing myself to sit on that trainer for 4 hours a day riding slow.

I know that once the weather gets nice, my ride minutes are going to include a lot more longer L3 outdoor group rides and races, so I'm getting my work done a little early.

 

[RapDaddyo]

RDO's thoughts that only L4-L6 provide any real training benefit don't seem to be widely shared among the frequent posters here.

Just to be clear, what I believe is that L4-L6 minutes (assuming they are done at continuous durations appropriate to the level) have the most bang for the buck in terms of increasing sustainable power. I don't have anything against L1-L3 time, I just think they mainly contribute to increasing endurance and not sustainable power. And as frenchy points out, I log huge chunks of L1-L3 time -- I just discount its value toward the objective of increasing sustainable power. It's not that I am delusional. I know L4-L6 time is hard, fatiguing, requires intense concentration, and more. But, them's the hot coals we have to walk across to increase sustainable power. If we could tool around at L2-L3 and develop 400w of sustainable power, we'd all be in the TdF. I know this: if my L1-L3 time is getting in the way of my L4-L6 time in terms of consuming too much of my available training time or making me tired so I can't hit my power targets, the L1-L3 time is going to be jettisoned. I've said it before, we have one scarce resource, training time. The issue is how to use it most effectively for our targeted adaptations. If I had 4 hrs/wk to train, I'd ride 3 x 75-min sessions, with 3x20s w/ 5min rest intervals, full day off between rides. Training efficiency: 80%.

 

[palewin]

Great thread, because I was interested in exactly the question Peter Wright asked in his initial post, and I like RD's concept of training efficiency.
My first thought is that Peter initially understated his training load significantly, since subtracting his 75-80 minutes of L4 from his weekly totals of L4-L6 reveals that he is doing between 40-100 minutes of L5-L6 per week, which to me sounds like a lot at the higher intensities.
The only thing I thought I would add are some numbers from my CTS schedule for comparison. Immediate disclaimer: I'm making no claims how my CTS coach's approach to training compares with any other coach or schedule, just an assumption that as a USCF Expert coach he is competent. I'm in the middle week of a 3-week block of Tempo training, and so far the pattern has been to keep the weekly total around 10.5-11 hours, but up the volume of L4 each week. So this week ended up with 11 hours/TSS=739 spread over 5 riding days, 135 minutes of L4 intervals during the weekdays (typical days have been 2 or 3 x 15min) and a 3-hr Group Ride on Sunday. The GR ends up with lots of fairly short L4-L6 stretches, today's (using the FastFind in CP and only counting intervals of > 1min) added about 14 minutes of L4 and 18 minutes of L5, so for the week that's about 2 hr 45 min of L4-L6, training efficiency 25%.

 

[rmur17]

Just to be clear, what I believe is that L4-L6 minutes (assuming they are done at continuous durations appropriate to the level) have the most bang for the buck in terms of increasing sustainable power. I don't have anything against L1-L3 time, I just think they mainly contribute to increasing endurance and not sustainable power. And as frenchy points out, I log huge chunks of L1-L3 time -- I just discount its value toward the objective of increasing sustainable power. It's not that I am delusional. I know L4-L6 time is hard, fatiguing, requires intense concentration, and more. But, them's the hot coals we have to walk across to increase sustainable power. If we could tool around at L2-L3 and develop 400w of sustainable power, we'd all be in the TdF. I know this: if my L1-L3 time is getting in the way of my L4-L6 time in terms of consuming too much of my available training time or making me tired so I can't hit my power targets, the L1-L3 time is going to be jettisoned. I've said it before, we have one scarce resource, training time. The issue is how to use it most effectively for our targeted adaptations. If I had 4 hrs/wk to train, I'd ride 3 x 75-min sessions, with 3x20s w/ 5min rest intervals, full day off between rides. Training efficiency: 80%.

rdo,
I'm surprised by two basic things:
1. That you discount L3 work
2. That you count L6 work

when evaluating your training in terms of increasing sustainable power - which I interpret as FT. Maybe I misunderstand what you mean by "sustainable power". From everything I've read regular L6 work won't do much at all for FT.

Could you clarify?

rmur

 

[RapDaddyo]

My question is that I do not know how I will fit any more L4+ sessions into my Mon-Fri without starting to fall asleep at my desk.

So, what's the problem? Just kidding.

The 2 2 X 20 sessions and then ussually 2 more tempo L3 rides and one "easier" L2 ride - then a hard race. I am feeling it already at around 650TSS - more ?

Excluding the race (where you cannot control the time at power), you might want to take a hard look at your L2/L3 rides. Given that you are into the race season and that you are getting a lot of L3 time in your race, do you think you are getting the most "bang for the buck" with your L2/L3 workouts? What if you dropped one of the rides and did L5s for the other ride, with an IF not greater than a good high-L3 workout? Or, drop one of the rides and do more L4s in the other one? The basic question is, do you need more endurance (L2s & L3s) or do you need more sustainable power (L4-L6)? Just because you do L5s doesn't mean the ride has to be "hard." Look at your NP, IF and TSS values. I don't consider an L5 workout with an IF of .75-.80 to be a very hard workout. We can't get carried away with the labels. We have to look at the aggregate intensity -- NP, IF and TSS. Another way of putting it is, "Are you getting the most bang for the buck with your 650TSS points?"

 

[acoggan]

Weekly scheduling is the real challenge I find - to make sure I am ready for the 2X20 sessions and in turn ready for my race (either Sat or Sun)

Indeed, it can be very hard, if not almost impossible, to really build fitness while maintaining a regular schedule of racing...you're always either resting for one race or recovering for the next one, such that it is hard to squeeze much real training in between. You're only real options are:

1) train through some races, i.e., accept that you won't be fresh for them and that you won't perform as well as a result, and/or

2) build your fitness as high as possible before you begin racing for results, then just try to maintain from that point forward (which again is difficult to do, as you still tend to reach a peak and then see your fitness fade away).

 

[RapDaddyo]

rdo,
I'm surprised by two basic thing:
1. That you discount L3 or tooling around

I discount it for the purpose of increasing my sustainable power. Clearly, there is a fuzzy line between L3 and L4, so I don't want to get into hair splitting about the lines of demarcation. Let's say, mid-L3 vs. L4 time. I don't think the mid-L3 time will contribute much to an increase in my sustainable power. Mid-L3 work is ~83%FT vs. a minimum of 91%FT for L4. I think that 8%FT makes a big difference in terms of increasing sustainable power.

2. That you count L6 work

I don't consider L6s as a primary contributor to sustainable power, but because I work my intervals into the topography of my courses, I end up riding quite a few of my intervals at Andy's L6 intensity. Basically, anything short of ~5mins is done at 120%FT+ (because I do all of my intervals at 90% of my MP at a given duration). I'm only saying I count all of my L4-L6 minutes (done at the appropriate durations) as the core of my training time. When that number is too low, I know I'm not getting in enough high-quality minutes.

when evaluating your training in terms of increasing sustainable power - which I interpret as FT. Maybe I misunderstand what you mean by "sustainable power".

Yes, FT is my primary goal, but not my exclusive goal. That's because for any race I envision at the moment (I'm excluding track events because I don't have a track racing bike and because the nearest track is 4+ hrs away), my entire MP/duration curve matters. If the optimal TT pacing strategy calls for my 5min MP (e.g., a 1.4 mile 6% hill), I want the highest 5min MP I can have. So, I put a training focus on the entire MP/duration curve, but accept Andy's assertion that 1hr power is the best single measure of my sustainable power.

This entire discussion centers on one question. Where does one obtain the biggest increase in sustainable power as a function of available training time? I believe the answer is L4-L6, with L4 and L5 being of more value than L6. The L6 time is more because sometimes one doesn't have a choice (e.g., crit or RR) or because the optimal pacing strategy calls for L6 power.

 

[postal_bag]

Heh. I'm not saying he's wrong, but understand that while he says that, he probably does more L2/L3 work per week than your total ride time.

That's a good part of why I'm doing a lot of L4 work over the off-season, contrary to what a lot of more experienced riders would suggest. With the rolling terrain here, a 20-min interval in L4 is nearly impossible outdoors, but easy to do on the trainer. Also, since I'm stuck indoors during the winter anyway, it just makes sense to me to be doing shorter, harder efforts now, rather than forcing myself to sit on that trainer for 4 hours a day riding slow.

I know that once the weather gets nice, my ride minutes are going to include a lot more longer L3 outdoor group rides and races, so I'm getting my work done a little early.

I just logged ~4 hrs of L4 this week out of 7 hrs total on the bike. Last week I logged ~3 hrs out of 6.5 hrs total. I have been doing 90 min. rides at no less than 92% FT, several times per week. The thing I've found is that as long as I go well past 1 hr in duration, I am seeing improvments in FT.

In fact, today I did the last 30 min. of the 90 min. ride at 100% FT. That was after 60 min at 92%. I am going to stick with these 90 min. rides at least twice a week, 2x20's once a week for another month. Then I'll start the L5 stuff. I do some 1' on, 1' off and 30" on, 30" off stuff @ L6, but the recovery is L1 so it ends up being L4 time as well. So basically I am only riding L4 unless I'm doing a recovery ride, which is usually about an hour at ~52% FT.

 

[RapDaddyo]

I just logged ~4 hrs of L4 this week out of 7 hrs total on the bike. Last week I logged ~3 hrs out of 6.5 hrs total. I have been doing 90 min. rides at no less than 92% FT, several times per week. The thing I've found is that as long as I go well past 1 hr in duration, I am seeing improvments in FT.

In fact, today I did the last 30 min. of the 90 min. ride at 100% FT. That was after 60 min at 92%. I am going to stick with these 90 min. rides at least twice a week, 2x20's once a week for another month. Then I'll start the L5 stuff. I do some 1' on, 1' off and 30" on, 30" off stuff @ L6, but the recovery is L1 so it ends up being L4 time as well. So basically I am only riding L4 unless I'm doing a recovery ride, which is usually about an hour at ~52% FT.

What a fantastic use of available training time!

 

[frenchyge]

I do some 1' on, 1' off and 30" on, 30" off stuff @ L6, but the recovery is L1 so it ends up being L4 time as well. So basically I am only riding L4 unless I'm doing a recovery ride, which is usually about an hour at ~52% FT.

Personally, I wouldn't characterize a set of 1-min L6 intervals with 1-min rest as an L4 workout, even if the average power for the workout falls within L4.

 

[SolarEnergy]

I just logged ~4 hrs of L4 this week out of 7 hrs total on the bike. Last week I logged ~3 hrs out of 6.5 hrs total. I have been doing 90 min. rides at no less than 92% FT, several times per week. The thing I've found is that as long as I go well past 1 hr in duration, I am seeing improvments in FT.

In fact, today I did the last 30 min. of the 90 min. ride at 100% FT. That was after 60 min at 92%. I am going to stick with these 90 min. rides at least twice a week, 2x20's once a week for another month. Then I'll start the L5 stuff. I do some 1' on, 1' off and 30" on, 30" off stuff @ L6, but the recovery is L1 so it ends up being L4 time as well. So basically I am only riding L4 unless I'm doing a recovery ride, which is usually about an hour at ~52% FT.

That's pretty much what I have on the menu too.

Except that I am a bit late at the moment. I am doing 30 at 88%, and 60 at 92% (plus a wup & wdn). And I am also doing 1X30 slightly over FT once or twice a week.

 

[WarrenG]

Personally, I wouldn't characterize a set of 1-min L6 intervals with 1-min rest as an L4 workout, even if the average power for the workout falls within L4.

So true. The danger of looking at average power or NP for a ride segment is that it can underestimate or mislead you about what you really did. Do 4 or 5 1' intervals at say, 110-120% of TP and even if you coast during the rest periods you're training stress is certainly higher than "L4". Response to this training is somewhat different too. More fast fibers being utilized or at least stressed more, and probably developing certain enzymes more than at steady "L4".

 

[peterwright]

So, what's the problem? Just kidding.

Excluding the race (where you cannot control the time at power), you might want to take a hard look at your L2/L3 rides. Given that you are into the race season and that you are getting a lot of L3 time in your race, do you think you are getting the most "bang for the buck" with your L2/L3 workouts? What if you dropped one of the rides and did L5s for the other ride, with an IF not greater than a good high-L3 workout? Or, drop one of the rides and do more L4s in the other one? The basic question is, do you need more endurance (L2s & L3s) or do you need more sustainable power (L4-L6)? Just because you do L5s doesn't mean the ride has to be "hard." Look at your NP, IF and TSS values. I don't consider an L5 workout with an IF of .75-.80 to be a very hard workout. We can't get carried away with the labels. We have to look at the aggregate intensity -- NP, IF and TSS. Another way of putting it is, "Are you getting the most bang for the buck with your 650TSS points?"

Thanks all - great discussion and very thought provoking. I am up for adding more L4 by replacing the L3 tempo rides with L4. As I already do 2X20 twice a week on a long climb, what else can you suggest as a good quality but varied L4 workout ? I could then do 4 days of L4 with one rest or easy day L2 and then race (if I can still turn the pedals..)

 

[peterwright]

I just logged ~4 hrs of L4 this week out of 7 hrs total on the bike. Last week I logged ~3 hrs out of 6.5 hrs total. I have been doing 90 min. rides at no less than 92% FT, several times per week. The thing I've found is that as long as I go well past 1 hr in duration, I am seeing improvments in FT.

In fact, today I did the last 30 min. of the 90 min. ride at 100% FT. That was after 60 min at 92%. I am going to stick with these 90 min. rides at least twice a week, 2x20's once a week for another month. Then I'll start the L5 stuff. I do some 1' on, 1' off and 30" on, 30" off stuff @ L6, but the recovery is L1 so it ends up being L4 time as well. So basically I am only riding L4 unless I'm doing a recovery ride, which is usually about an hour at ~52% FT.

Hey Postal - great training !

Tell me - do you just go out on a rolling course and hammer it at 92%+ or do you have a way of breaking it up ?

What TSS score per ride ?

If you do this on consecutive days, do you find the power drops as you get tired through the week ?

Are you racing ?

Thanks

Peter

 

[RapDaddyo]

Thanks all - great discussion and very thought provoking. I am up for adding more L4 by replacing the L3 tempo rides with L4. As I already do 2X20 twice a week on a long climb, what else can you suggest as a good quality but varied L4 workout ? I could then do 4 days of L4 with one rest or easy day L2 and then race (if I can still turn the pedals..)

What sort of courses do you have available, in terms of natural interval opportunities (long climbs or long segments into the wind)? As to the L2 vs. rest day, for me there would be no decision required -- I would rest.

 

[peterwright]

What sort of courses do you have available, in terms of natural interval opportunities (long climbs or long segments into the wind)? As to the L2 vs. rest day, for me there would be no decision required -- I would rest.

Pretty much either hills or a rolling route with wind on way out - could certainly fit say 3 x 15 mins @ L4 into this route - might try it on Thurs after my Tues and Wed 2 x 20's.

Maybe the rest day is a good idea until I am strong enough to add another L4 day - 5 x L4 then rest then race

 

[RapDaddyo]

Pretty much either hills or a rolling route with wind on way out - could certainly fit say 3 x 15 mins @ L4 into this route - might try it on Thurs after my Tues and Wed 2 x 20's.

Maybe the rest day is a good idea until I am strong enough to add another L4 day - 5 x L4 then rest then race

Sounds like a plan. I like the 3x15s for variety. I do think such a plan is a more efficient use of available training time with respect to the objective of increasing sustainable power. Based on my experience (and others), I think you will see results. Good luck with it.

 

[peterwright]

Sounds like a plan. I like the 3x15s for variety. I do think such a plan is a more efficient use of available training time with respect to the objective of increasing sustainable power. Based on my experience (and others), I think you will see results. Good luck with it.

Thanks very much.

 

[SolarEnergy]

I may be wrong (cause I have never tried in on the bike), but 1' L5, flollowed by 1' rest L1, is a L5-6 workout.

It is the case in running, and it is the case in swimming.

 

[acoggan]

I may be wrong (cause I have never tried in on the bike), but 1' L5, flollowed by 1' rest L1, is a L5-6 workout.

It is the case in running, and it is the case in swimming.

Not if you're just cruising along at 110-120% of functional threshold power as Warren describes - then I don't know what it is. The intensity of each effort clearly isn't high enough to increase either neuromuscular power or anaerobic capacity, and the duration of each effort isn't long enough to really improve VO2max. If you kept the intensity above 70% of functional threshold power during the rest periods ((70+110)/2=90) then you could consider it a workout aimed at raising your lactate threshold/improving your metabolic fitness, but it is probably suboptimal for that even if you kept it up for longer than the 8-10 min he suggests. Finally, it can hardly be considered a very good specific "race prep" session, as not many races entail varying your intensity in such a rigid manner.