An hour at zone 3, is it useful?

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
iheartbianchi
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 1:09 am
spartacus wrote:
Fri Apr 16, 2021 12:50 am

Lmao sounds awful

It’s actually a good way to occupy yourself on an otherwise boring recovery ride. You’re getting performance gains largely for free without any residual fatigue. You also don’t have to go to the extremes I described. Simply breathing otherwise normally but holding your breath for 5 seconds after inhaling will get you halfway there.
I believe the protocol tested which yielded the maximum results was 20-25 minutes of this (with 30 second recovery), 2-4 days a week.

Would advise against doing it on crowded roads with cars or lots of other riders though, as you can lose concentration and get a bit light-headed.
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts

Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts

by Weenie


TobinHatesYou
Posts: 7625
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Oh I should be more clear. It’s inhale, half exhale, hold 5 seconds, exhale... and then repeat.

At least that’s my own prescription. I make no claim about it being optimal, but it minimizes the risk of getting light-headed or “seeing red.”

If that feels tough, just inhale/exhale normally once or twice in between.

Brokenladder
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2021 11:24 pm

by Brokenladder

So comparisons to running have been brought up a number of times in this thread. Like many here I suspect, I run a bit in addition to riding for its efficency, more pleasant in inclement weather, bone density benefits, and general ease (particularly on business travel). I also like to incorporate some running into my ~10 hours/week of training because it helps with my moving on the tennis court. I was doing two hour-long weekly trail runs. However, a lingering knee issue now cut that in half. Presently I run for 30-minutes and walk home 15 minutes... Should I consider the running as the "intensity" contribution to my weekly training? Even with a concerted effort to nose breathe to meter my effort, I still average just slightly below 80% of maximum heart rate (51-years old, somewhat undulating trails/routes)... I'd be curious to hear how others measure/consider other aerobic work (off the bike) in something of a polarized approach as has been discussed throughout this thread.

iheartbianchi
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

Assuming you are able to avoid injury, running is a good form of cross-training but generally cross-training in endurance sports is intended to add low intensity aerobic load as opposed to intensity, so it isn't common for cyclists to run, although runners often cycle or swim to add load.

A common mistake many cyclists (who are inexperienced runners) make when trying to run is too much intensity with poor form which leads to injuries of the hamstrings, IT band and achilles heel, as wel as various foot injuries.

You need a solid base of running to even begin thinking about picking up the pace to even threshold levels. If you're inexperienced, I am talking 6-7min/kilometer pace....it will feel like you are barely moving but you need months of this.

Also most runners have poor form. You should be running with: (1) 80-90 rpm, (2) slight forward lean and (3) midfoot strike. And avoid the common mistakes of failing to warmup, and don't do static stretching until after the run (do active warmup instead). And avoid clunky motion control shoes at all costs (these are marketing gimmicks).

There are many posts on triathlon forums of cyclists who have injured themselves trying to run and having to take weeks or months off.
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts

Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts

Toybota
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:16 pm

by Toybota

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:49 am
Thank you for sharing some great info.
What's your stance on stretching?
A lot of new science are proving that stretching doesn't add anything to cycling performance and it could even harm your it if done incorrectly.

iheartbianchi
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

That's not new science. Static stretching prior to exercise has been debunked like over 2 decades ago. It not only decreases power short term, but also can lead to injury. The only time stretching is appropriate is after you are properly warmed up and no longer need to exert power (ie after the workout).

Static stretching and most current forms of calisthenics were developed around WW1 over 100 years ago to train soldiers for war, before we had modern medicine. Shocking that physical education teachers still perpetuate this nonsense.

Watch Olympic runners or soccer players or basically any professional sports during their warmup routine. They don't stand in circles stretching. What they do are active warmups. Plyometrics are a good example.

Problem with cycling is our shoes...hard to get warmed up properly and do active stretching unless youre willing to stop after 10 minutes of easy pedaling to do the exercises. Also active warmup is less essential for longer distances with less intensity.

Do stretch afterwards though.
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts

Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts

Brokenladder
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2021 11:24 pm

by Brokenladder

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:49 am
Assuming you are able to avoid injury, running is a good form of cross-training but generally cross-training in endurance sports is intended to add low intensity aerobic load as opposed to intensity, so it isn't common for cyclists to run, although runners often cycle or swim to add load.


Ah.... That's an interesting point that I hadn't considered. I just run/ran for largely what I'll call "professional convenience" (i.e., easy to do at lunch from my office, easy to do from hotels when traveling). It also is/was a break from simply riding seven days a week--and probably like many of you I feel that I need to do "something" every day just for my sanity....

I fully do appreciate the prospect of injury on the inexperienced runner. While I never ran track, I'd like to think that I'm a reasonably efficient runner after all these years. That said I am presently struck with a little bit of is-the-game-worth-the-candle with running (due in some part to a wonky knee). I wonder if I'd be better off just fast hiking uphill/indoor rowing/doing strength work with the time. I live near a park with great trails, and I have a rowing machine in my house. Access to a pool is less convenient of course...

Not surprisingly the running doesn't feel great if I rode hard the day before. Again, to tie it back into the thread, I'm just looking to stay consistant with a polarized approach that yields a sustainable, reasonably fit existence! As such, I'm always interested to learn from others and what they've found to work....

Brokenladder
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2021 11:24 pm

by Brokenladder

Assuming you are able to avoid injury, running is a good form of cross-training but generally cross-training in endurance sports is intended to add low intensity aerobic load as opposed to intensity, so it isn't common for cyclists to run, although runners often cycle or swim to add load.
iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:49 am


Ah.... That's an interesting point that I hadn't considered. I just run/ran for largely what I'll call "professional convenience" (i.e., easy to do at lunch from my office, easy to do from hotels when traveling). It also is/was a break from simply riding seven days a week--probably like many of you I feel that I need to do "something" every day just for my sanity....

I fully do appreciate the prospect of injury on the inexperienced runner. While I never ran track, I'd like to think that I'm a reasonably efficient runner after all these years. That said I am presently struck with a little bit of is-the-game-worth-the-candle with running (due in some part to a wonky knee). I wonder if I'd be better off just fast hiking uphill/indoor rowing/doing strength work with the time. I live near a park with great trails, and I have a rowing machine in my house. Access to a pool is less convenient of course...

Not surprisingly the running doesn't feel great if I rode hard the day before. Again, to tie it back into the thread, I'm just looking to stay consistant with a polarized approach that yields a sustainable, reasonably fit existence! As such, I'm always interested to learn from others and what they've found to work....

iheartbianchi
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

Brokenladder wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 3:23 am

Ah.... That's an interesting point that I hadn't considered. I just run/ran for largely what I'll call "professional convenience" (i.e., easy to do at lunch from my office, easy to do from hotels when traveling). It also is/was a break from simply riding seven days a week--probably like many of you I feel that I need to do "something" every day just for my sanity....

I fully do appreciate the prospect of injury on the inexperienced runner. While I never ran track, I'd like to think that I'm a reasonably efficient runner after all these years. That said I am presently struck with a little bit of is-the-game-worth-the-candle with running (due in some part to a wonky knee). I wonder if I'd be better off just fast hiking uphill/indoor rowing/doing strength work with the time. I live near a park with great trails, and I have a rowing machine in my house. Access to a pool is less convenient of course...

Not surprisingly the running doesn't feel great if I rode hard the day before. Again, to tie it back into the thread, I'm just looking to stay consistant with a polarized approach that yields a sustainable, reasonably fit existence! As such, I'm always interested to learn from others and what they've found to work....
If you enjoy running and want to make it part of your "hobbies," then go for it. If you're purely looking for cross-training options, I think running should only be considered if you are confident you can avoid injury. If you want to avoid injury you need to do lots of core, and really focus on your form (fast cadence, short strides, mid-foot strike, slightly lean forward). And most importantly, go slow!
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts

Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts

User avatar
Tinea Pedis
Posts: 8582
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
Contact:

by Tinea Pedis

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Apr 18, 2021 4:49 am
Assuming you are able to avoid injury, running is a good form of cross-training but generally cross-training in endurance sports is intended to add low intensity aerobic load as opposed to intensity, so it isn't common for cyclists to run, although runners often cycle or swim to add load.

A common mistake many cyclists (who are inexperienced runners) make when trying to run is too much intensity with poor form which leads to injuries of the hamstrings, IT band and achilles heel, as wel as various foot injuries.

You need a solid base of running to even begin thinking about picking up the pace to even threshold levels. If you're inexperienced, I am talking 6-7min/kilometer pace....it will feel like you are barely moving but you need months of this.

Also most runners have poor form. You should be running with: (1) 80-90 rpm, (2) slight forward lean and (3) midfoot strike. And avoid the common mistakes of failing to warmup, and don't do static stretching until after the run (do active warmup instead). And avoid clunky motion control shoes at all costs (these are marketing gimmicks).

There are many posts on triathlon forums of cyclists who have injured themselves trying to run and having to take weeks or months off.
Everything you have said in this - and subsequent - posts I agree with...except the parts highlighted. Speaking as a podiatrist:

- heel strike or midfoot strike, go with whatever comes natural. There is no efficiency or injury prevention gain to be had by prescribing midfoot. It's like cadence, we all differ and self selected is best. Avoid injury by all the other means you noted. Not by altering from heel to midfoot strike.

- motion control shoes are not a marketing gimmick. Many people need them. However many who wear them do not. Get a good, in-person fit around shoes. Much can be done remote nowadays but something like this is still done best in person. I've gotten plenty of people out of shoes with excession pronation control. But still more than one or two into them who thought they were 'marketing'.

:beerchug:

iheartbianchi
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

Tinea Pedis wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 6:31 am
Everything you have said in this - and subsequent - posts I agree with...except the parts highlighted. Speaking as a podiatrist:

- heel strike or midfoot strike, go with whatever comes natural. There is no efficiency or injury prevention gain to be had by prescribing midfoot. It's like cadence, we all differ and self selected is best. Avoid injury by all the other means you noted. Not by altering from heel to midfoot strike.

- motion control shoes are not a marketing gimmick. Many people need them. However many who wear them do not. Get a good, in-person fit around shoes. Much can be done remote nowadays but something like this is still done best in person. I've gotten plenty of people out of shoes with excession pronation control. But still more than one or two into them who thought they were 'marketing'.

:beerchug:
Thanks for your views - my thinking has been, if you are using a heel strike or toe strike, I think you are very close to injury and these are symptomatic of a wider problem with your muscle balance and biomechanics that need to be remedied. In other words, I believe a midfoot strike is the natural result of a well balanced body (and if you're not well balance and are unintentionally heel striking, this is no good). Heel striking (symptomatic of lower cadence) results in much more "impact" or "force" having to be absorbed by your heel, ankles, knees, hips and spine, as opposed to mid foot striking. And it is almost impossible to heel strike if you have a 80-90rpm cadence.

I also believe human beings all have a natural evolved cadence that is similar across all humans (roughly 80-90rpm), much like dogs, cats or horses all share similar cadences within species. It is lifestyle factors and imbalances that cause us to deviate from our natural tendencies, and thus raise our risk of injury.

And the motion control shoe ties into the heel strike. If you are midfoot striking at 80-90rpm as is our natural state, a motion control shoe can actually hurt you due to heel drop or "over" control of your natural foot strike given that most motion control shoes have bulky heels which assumes a heel strike (I understand there is debate among podiatrist on this issue).

(I'm a pronator and I ran on racing flats or at most, a minimalist neutral shoe like the Adidas Adizero, doing 60-80 miles per week, only ever had 1 injury during an intense buildup to nationals when I was doing 4 interval sessions a week...so boggles my mind when I see people getting injured off of 10-20 miles a week!)

My views only.
Bianchi Oltre XR4
Celeste Matte
Campy SR 11spd mechanical
Bora Ultra 50 tubs
Viseon 5D / stock bits and parts

Bianchi Specialissima Pantani Edition
Campy R 12spd mechanical
Fulcrum Racing Speed 35 tubs
FSA / Deda bits and parts

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 7625
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Midfoot strike makes sense for distance running with minimal cushioning. Thankfully highly cushioned shoes exist for us heel-strikers.

User avatar
Tinea Pedis
Posts: 8582
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
Contact:

by Tinea Pedis

iheartbianchi wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 6:52 am
Tinea Pedis wrote:
Fri Apr 23, 2021 6:31 am
Everything you have said in this - and subsequent - posts I agree with...except the parts highlighted. Speaking as a podiatrist:

- heel strike or midfoot strike, go with whatever comes natural. There is no efficiency or injury prevention gain to be had by prescribing midfoot. It's like cadence, we all differ and self selected is best. Avoid injury by all the other means you noted. Not by altering from heel to midfoot strike.

- motion control shoes are not a marketing gimmick. Many people need them. However many who wear them do not. Get a good, in-person fit around shoes. Much can be done remote nowadays but something like this is still done best in person. I've gotten plenty of people out of shoes with excession pronation control. But still more than one or two into them who thought they were 'marketing'.

:beerchug:
Thanks for your views - my thinking has been, if you are using a heel strike or toe strike, I think you are very close to injury and these are symptomatic of a wider problem with your muscle balance and biomechanics that need to be remedied. In other words, I believe a midfoot strike is the natural result of a well balanced body (and if you're not well balance and are unintentionally heel striking, this is no good). Heel striking (symptomatic of lower cadence) results in much more "impact" or "force" having to be absorbed by your heel, ankles, knees, hips and spine, as opposed to mid foot striking. And it is almost impossible to heel strike if you have a 80-90rpm cadence.

I also believe human beings all have a natural evolved cadence that is similar across all humans (roughly 80-90rpm), much like dogs, cats or horses all share similar cadences within species. It is lifestyle factors and imbalances that cause us to deviate from our natural tendencies, and thus raise our risk of injury.

And the motion control shoe ties into the heel strike. If you are midfoot striking at 80-90rpm as is our natural state, a motion control shoe can actually hurt you due to heel drop or "over" control of your natural foot strike given that most motion control shoes have bulky heels which assumes a heel strike (I understand there is debate among podiatrist on this issue).

(I'm a pronator and I ran on racing flats or at most, a minimalist neutral shoe like the Adidas Adizero, doing 60-80 miles per week, only ever had 1 injury during an intense buildup to nationals when I was doing 4 interval sessions a week...so boggles my mind when I see people getting injured off of 10-20 miles a week!)

My views only.
While I appreciate your views - and you are totally welcome to them - you (ideally) need to disclamier that these are your views, not those of the science around this, before replying in a post like previously. As it was presented like it was from the point of view of where the science falls on this. Which, with all respect, it is not. The science is as mentioned
- heel strike or midfoot strike, go with whatever comes natural. There is no efficiency or injury prevention gain to be had by prescribing midfoot. It's like cadence, we all differ and self selected is best. Avoid injury by all the other means you noted. Not by altering from heel to midfoot strike.
Run how you like. This is the science.
Midfoot strike makes sense for distance running with minimal cushioning.
Even then if you don't have a midfoot with enough mobility you're joint to jam those midtarsal joints and it's not going to be much fun...


Apologies for the off topic. Actually came to see how 1hr at z3 had gone so many pages. Makes sense now :lol:

maxim809
Moderator
Posts: 516
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:28 am

by maxim809

As an absolute beginner to running and never having studied it deeply, this segue is leaving me hilariously lost and baffled. I'm just watching this debate play out and I have no idea which side to stand on, what to believe, or what is actually science.

All I know is that I sometimes go on runs, albeit poorly, and I do not think much about the activity or take it seriously like I do other hobbies.

Gives me a nice mirror to see what I (we) cyclists must look like when we debate Z3 vs Z2:Z4 from the perspective of novice or casual cyclists. Damn.

by Weenie


User avatar
Tinea Pedis
Posts: 8582
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
Contact:

by Tinea Pedis

Don't overthink it. Yes, there is good running technique. No, altering your contact phase is not break through some in the running world thought it would be.

Start slower than you might think. Build it gradually. The running world actually have a 'new' metric they're using to model the chances of injury (with respect to training load). Heard it explained in a podiatry seminar. They were taking it slowly as the concept was, conceringly, possibly hard for some practitioners to follow and fully grasp.

What was described was bacially a PMC, ALT, CTL and TSB. I sat there and lauhged with a mate - also a pod who rides. So there is some interesting carry over between the two.

Ultimately if you want 'science' go to credible sources. A cycling forum is probably more than a few rungs down on that list.

Post Reply