An hour at zone 3, is it useful?

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
iheartbianchi
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

Simple yet beautiful - I like it! :thumbup:
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


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



jasjas
Posts: 428
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:15 am

by jasjas

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 9:54 am
The question isn't whether or how much time you spent at an average number of X watts. You're still framing it in terms of Zones.

It's how much time you spent specifically at Vo2max intensities. Power is output. Intensity is a measure of physiological factors. You need both to approximate maximal aerobic power.

RPE may or may not predict Vo2max intensities. People use RPE tests from a rested starting position to estimate Vo2max, with varying degrees of success and accuracy, which vary widely once we get to higher levels of RPE. Thats different from applying RPE during a race, since obviously you are not starting from rest.

Ok, then let's look at HR. Looks pretty high in those screenshots. But is that by itself accurate? There is something called HR lag. Is this crippling? Not by itself no, since HR lag (on the way up at least) is quick to adjust. So that depends on the specific effort. Look at your power. It decreases throught the "interval" (10% difference between 1 minute and 5 minute) but your HR stays high - are you operating at maximal aerobic power throughout the 5 minutes then? Why does your HR stay high despite power going down? Is this HR lag? The answer is this has nothing to do with aerobic power. Interesting isn't it, that HR stays high while power goes down...but it's similar to how HR stays high while you are resting after an interval or lifting weights. Youre not doing work but it stays high...which is why we don't count rest as Vo2max work during intervals although HR and RPE remain high during rest.

So what then is the representation of Vo2max intensity level? This is the question. And after you have figured this out, then we can determine whether or not any of those numbers actually represent any work done at maximal aerobic power.
You are confusing me even more now.... i ve never read so many conflicting arguments from one poster on any subject ever.

Alex/RST/Devinci/Tapeworm/KW.... i could all follow but not this.

kaptanpedal
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 6:10 pm

by kaptanpedal

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 9:22 am
kaptanpedal wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 8:44 am

if you don't know, look for the information first. It is out there. Coggan never worked for TP. Like never. Training zones was not new as well. He created his zones based on ftp naturally. He did not "invent" zones or the 7 zone training system. They are just zones, not a training system. TP or anyone else can create and sell programs based on these zones.
This is very relevant, I would say this fact is the essence of the subject.
This is factually incorrect. TrainingPeaks has stated numerous times it works with Dr. Andy Coggan. At the very least, Coggan licenses his reserach and power zones to TrainingPeaks, and consults for TrainingPeaks "university."

How is that incorrect when he never worked for TP. Licensing metrics and training them is providing a service, not working at there. Do you even think for a second before making these statements?
Tinea Pedis wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 9:38 am

Totally open to hearing how this was not the case. What was seen in the screen cap did indeed show the collective TIZ for the ride. However that time in z5 (and above) was nearly all collected within the two vo2 max intervals (seen below). Rest of the race was taken easily enough, with the intent to again hit the 'climbs' again at full vo2. Race specificity of this kind of work also a consideration (but not main goal of the workout).
I was not referring to this particular ride. I was just responding to IHBs nonsense rant on non-existing TiZ metrics.

iheartbianchi
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

What is there to be confused about?

He's looking at a segment where he kept his HR (and presumably RPE) high, but his power kept dropping. That's not how maximal aerobic power (Vo2Max) works - that's why I initially said (before looking at his power numbers) that his FTP setting may be too low - it's highly implausible that he maintained Vo2Max intensity for those durations, and looking at the power data, he of course didn't. The laws of thermodynamics don't change because you're racing.

The guy saying look at RPE was just weird when you have the power output data in front of you. The power output was on a clear steep decline during the effort, so he clearly was not at maximal aerobic capacity.

To Tinea Pedis:

Let me give you some coaching (I don't charge, don't worry). What you did in that 5 minute segment is, you started way too hard. You went anaerobic, oxygen debt. You also fried your muscles. You went too deep too hard. Also, your blood lactate spiked. Of course your body quickly forced you to slow down. That's why your power went down consistently and sharply during the effort. But your heart is still pounding. Your RPE is still high. That's because your body is working overtime to cool itself, clear lactate and recover from oxygen debt and flush excess Co2 from your costly initial anaerobic overpacing. You also fried more muscle fibers than you should have so you have fewer muscle fibers to recruit for aerobic work and you are no longer capable of producing maximal aerobic power. You're squarely doing a lactate threshold effort for much of that 5 minutes, while expending excess energy to recover from your initial overpacing. If I had to guess, I'd say you spent at most a handful of seconds at 95-100% Vo2Max. You accelerated too quickly to anaerobic, and deccelerated too quickly, zooming past Vo2Max. It took me 2 seconds to realize this when I saw your power.

If you had started a Vo2Max interval repetition in this manner, I would have had you stop immediately and rest for 10 minutes before starting over. Or possibly scrapping the day altogether and converting to an LT day. That's why you ALWAYS gradually accelerate INTO a Vo2Max effort. Not rapdily decelerate out of Vo2Max...

I'm happy to give you more insights for free if you would like.
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

FatLadAtTheBack
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2021 9:15 pm

by FatLadAtTheBack

I've got no idea what anyone's arguing about anymore in this thread and by now I'm too afraid to ask 🤣

iheartbianchi
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

FatLadAtTheBack wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 5:43 pm
I've got no idea what anyone's arguing about anymore in this thread and by now I'm too afraid to ask 🤣
The argument started off with whether or not races are viable substitutes for Vo2Max intervals in terms of doing work at Vo2Max intensities. We went on a whole bunch of tangents. The only thing we have agreed on so far:

-Relying on traditional power zones for Vo2Max work is stupid
-TP's new iLevels is pretty neat

:beerchug:
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: 10564
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 5:52 am
TobinHatesYou wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 5:48 am
You still don’t get it. None of us care that much about that much specificity...it’s not about spending time at VO2max or any other zone. All I care about is holding onto wheels (and also making aggressive moves) because I race and I do “racey” rides. I care about being able to do X watts for Y minutes + all the other variables that contribute to speed. So forget about zones, iLevels or metabolic processes...we’re doing what makes us go fast and having fun.

For us Zones. Don’t. Matter. We don’t do structure.

But yeah keep peddling VO2max based workouts as the magic mushroom to people who aren’t even going to get their VO2max tested. That’ll help. That’ll keep people in the right headspace and they won’t burn out...
And yet TP posted his Times in Zone during a Zwift Race, posting the below:

"I did the Bologna WTRL race. Easy enough to the base each time, vo2 all the way up. Twice. Session done. Vo2 box ticked.

Two very distinct vo2 bouts."

I think YOU don't get it.

Yes, so did I, because in a general sense we are spending roughly that amount of time around VO2max (actual VO2max in ml/[kg/]min.) The exact number of seconds might not be quite right, but I seriously don’t care. I want to win races and what I lack is practice (or killer instinct.)

kaptanpedal
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2018 6:10 pm

by kaptanpedal

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 4:27 pm

Let me give you some coaching (I don't charge, don't worry). What you did in that 5 minute segment is, you started way too hard. You went anaerobic, oxygen debt. You also fried your muscles. You went too deep too hard. Also, your blood lactate spiked. Of course your body quickly forced you to slow down. That's why your power went down consistently and sharply during the effort. But your heart is still pounding. Your RPE is still high. That's because your body is working overtime to cool itself, clear lactate and recover from oxygen debt and flush excess Co2 from your costly initial anaerobic overpacing. You also fried more muscle fibers than you should have so you have fewer muscle fibers to recruit for aerobic work and you are no longer capable of producing maximal aerobic power. You're squarely doing a lactate threshold effort for much of that 5 minutes, while expending excess energy to recover from your initial overpacing. If I had to guess, I'd say you spent at most a handful of seconds at 95-100% Vo2Max. You accelerated too quickly to anaerobic, and deccelerated too quickly, zooming past Vo2Max. It took me 2 seconds to realize this when I saw your power.
That is very close to what I do for lactate clearance training. I do not go max at the beginning though, around my 5-6 min best power (would say my power @vo2max) and for 2 mins. I do not know about frying the muscles but all the other things happen. I probably reach a max aerobic state towards the end of this 2 mins and fall back to my so called LT or ehem, ftp. Hold it there until I feel like I reached an steady state. Usually happens when my HR falls back to my usual level for a long, well paced effort at LT. Happens around 6-10 minutes.
Rest for 4 minutes, repeat 4-6 times. On weekends ride 190-200w until 5 hours is completed. 100grs of carbs per hour. Job done.

no zones, no tiz, no nonsense. Powermeter, HR and simple concepts are used to max value. Of course I would like to do lactate clearance improvement training on long climbs but we don't have the mountains nor the winter weather to allow that. So this is the time crunched indoor shortcut.

AeroObsessive
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:42 am

by AeroObsessive

iheartbianchi wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 4:27 pm
What is there to be confused about?

He's looking at a segment where he kept his HR (and presumably RPE) high, but his power kept dropping. That's not how maximal aerobic power (Vo2Max) works - that's why I initially said (before looking at his power numbers) that his FTP setting may be too low - it's highly implausible that he maintained Vo2Max intensity for those durations, and looking at the power data, he of course didn't. The laws of thermodynamics don't change because you're racing.

The guy saying look at RPE was just weird when you have the power output data in front of you. The power output was on a clear steep decline during the effort, so he clearly was not at maximal aerobic capacity.

To Tinea Pedis:

Let me give you some coaching (I don't charge, don't worry). What you did in that 5 minute segment is, you started way too hard. You went anaerobic, oxygen debt. You also fried your muscles. You went too deep too hard. Also, your blood lactate spiked. Of course your body quickly forced you to slow down. That's why your power went down consistently and sharply during the effort. But your heart is still pounding. Your RPE is still high. That's because your body is working overtime to cool itself, clear lactate and recover from oxygen debt and flush excess Co2 from your costly initial anaerobic overpacing. You also fried more muscle fibers than you should have so you have fewer muscle fibers to recruit for aerobic work and you are no longer capable of producing maximal aerobic power. You're squarely doing a lactate threshold effort for much of that 5 minutes, while expending excess energy to recover from your initial overpacing. If I had to guess, I'd say you spent at most a handful of seconds at 95-100% Vo2Max. You accelerated too quickly to anaerobic, and deccelerated too quickly, zooming past Vo2Max. It took me 2 seconds to realize this when I saw your power.

If you had started a Vo2Max interval repetition in this manner, I would have had you stop immediately and rest for 10 minutes before starting over. Or possibly scrapping the day altogether and converting to an LT day. That's why you ALWAYS gradually accelerate INTO a Vo2Max effort. Not rapdily decelerate out of Vo2Max...

I'm happy to give you more insights for free if you would like.
Well this is an...interesting take. Maximal aerobic power and vo2max, whilst similar, are NOT the same.

You are describing MAP training, not vo2max.

Given the duration of the effort posted and the RPE I would say that VO2max has been worked. Only other metric I would like to see would be cadence.

Power trending down, HR looks to be high, RPE through the roof, I would hazard a guess that for VO2max, this has been worked. If it was done twice, that would be a fair amount of time for the given effort to elicit stress.

Short of being on a cart, we cannot be sure, but the signs are there. High cadence would be a way to ensure that there was sufficient cardiac preload during the effort.

AeroObsessive
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2018 7:42 am

by AeroObsessive

jasjas wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 2:49 pm
You are confusing me even more now.... i ve never read so many conflicting arguments from one poster on any subject ever.

Alex/RST/Devinci/Tapeworm/KW.... i could all follow but not this.
IHB is confusion personified.

FWIW, I am the poster formally known as Tapeworm :thumbup:

User avatar
Tinea Pedis
Posts: 8599
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
Contact:

by Tinea Pedis

AeroObsessive wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:31 pm
IHB is confusion personified.
With yet another strawman, comparing the race to a structured vo2 max. Which I have repeated, on so so many occasions, is not a 1:1 replacment. Point being It's close enough and comes with all the mental benefits to get someone through.

I did like the condescending reply though. And the dismisal of the second effort. And thinking MAP is vo2. What a carry on. Mute is glorious (until folks quote him).

And as a completely unscientific n=3 case study, myself (one of the three), one athlete I coach and one athlete/coach I bounce ideas off - we have all seen breakthroughs in power using vo2 max workouts. A combo of Zwift and the (pleasing to some ears) dedicated sessions. No mental fatigue. Riders chomping at the bit to get on the bike. All time PBs being hit. All done with an intent to follow what is considered best practice by coaches who know a whole lot more than me and it appears to be going rather well.
None of this is, of course, scientific validation. The multiple of anecdote might be data but that's still not the highest level. Only I will always maintain having a motivated and engaged athlete is a large part of results. Which is where all this began. Honestly sorry to those that I derailed the thread for.

iheartbianchi
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

Tinea Pedis wrote:
Mon Sep 06, 2021 1:26 am

Point being It's close enough and comes with all the mental benefits to get someone through.
No buddy, it's not close enough. You proved that with your screenshots - you spent little to no time at Vo2Max intensities (and you did not produce maximal aerobic power - slightly different concept since this is a measure of output at peak O2 consumption, and not merely O2 consumption, explained further below) during your segments.
Tinea Pedis wrote:
Mon Sep 06, 2021 1:26 am

I did like the condescending reply though. And the dismisal of the second effort. And thinking MAP is vo2. What a carry on. Mute is glorious (until folks quote him).
Vo2Max = aerobic capacity, or more technically, maximal oxygen consumption. But just like MaxHR, it is merely a snapshot of a physioliogical measure, which is meaningless in training unless we tie it to a measure of output. That's why we speak in terms of intensity, or work. That's why I referred to maximal aerobic power in that context, which is your peak oxygen consumption during a specific period of exercise (and not just a snapshot that is Vo2Max). You exertion level during your 5 minute segment was not at peak oxygen consumption for aerobic metabolism, and as a result the intensity of your output (i.e., power) was also lower. To simplify, we say, your 5 minute segment was not at maximal aerobic power, or to further simply, you were not at Vo2Max intensities. To be clear, when we say "intensity" we don't mean how you feel, the expression on your face, your attitude or mindset...we are talking about output ("distribution of intensites...").

You're probably confusing Vo2Max (as a snapshot of cardiac output and arteriovenous oxygen) with the output at Vo2Max for a given duration of exercise. Your snapshot of Vo2Max, e.g., 70ml/kg/min, is irrelevant during any period of exercise. In training, nobody cares about the amount of oxygen your body consumed during 5 minutes, or your maximal oxygen consumption - we care about what this means in terms of the power or work your body was able to produce aerobically. Based on my napkin math, you were at around 85% of Vo2Max intensity for most of that segment - this is not the appropriate intensity level for Vo2Max work, but squarely an LT effort. Not to mention the initial anaerobic portion which did nothing but hurt you.

Don't get so defensive - it's not condescension to point out you are looking at your data wrong, and coming to incorrect conclusions. If anyone has been condescening, rude, look around you at your friends who have done nothing but post insults for 5 pages running. Just be mature and consider that you've been looking at it the wrong way, change your approach if needed and carry on. Stubbornly trying to justify your approach only hurts you. I have nothing to gain or lose from you continuing to do lactate threshold riding thinking you're doing Vo2Max training. I'm just here trying to help you.
Last edited by iheartbianchi on Mon Sep 06, 2021 8:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
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: 10564
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

FFS

iheartbianchi
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2019 9:17 am

by iheartbianchi

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Mon Sep 06, 2021 8:10 am
FFS
The man needs help, and you're not helping. :noidea: Why are you even here? If you find entertainment in insults, you can DM me or create a new thread. His power output is good - he could be faster once he realizes he's been completely neglecting Vo2Max work. Help him get faster. Be a friend. Don't be a troll.

Or maybe you're rivals and you're trying to make him slow :shock: Just a joke, don't take it seriously.
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


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



jasjas
Posts: 428
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 10:15 am

by jasjas

AeroObsessive wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 10:31 pm
jasjas wrote:
Sun Sep 05, 2021 2:49 pm
You are confusing me even more now.... i ve never read so many conflicting arguments from one poster on any subject ever.

Alex/RST/Devinci/Tapeworm/KW.... i could all follow but not this.
IHB is confusion personified.

FWIW, I am the poster formally known as Tapeworm :thumbup:
Ah!

Hi! always liked your posts :beerchug:

Post Reply