Thanks for the information, guys! I was rather refering to the set preset zones, but I was not aware of this Preset menu, which makes it all clear and transparent.
I have the feeling though, that Joe Friels LT1 estimation is way too high. A friend of mine also confirmed this in his case. But sure, I cannot prove that this is statistically representative for the big mass - it is just a feeling.
Did some of you check that with your personal LT1, in case you did conduct an DFA-alpha1 or a blood lactate test?
How about the Threshold, base, polarized classification, are these affected by the definitions of the zones? I assume these are independent from the zones and solely based on the boundaries that were mentioned by @Mike_Lauder above?
I find ep. 54 of the FastTalkLabs podcoast super clear and informative about the polarized training approach:
Stephen states the LT1 and LT2 are roughly around 70%± and 90%± , respectively, and this is quite well in line with my estimations. How about adding Stephen’s 3-zone model to the preset selection?
I am aware that these are all ranges and there is still a significant benefit if I am in that specific zone. Nevertheless, I find the lower LT1 threshold very critical if I would like to follow the polarized training approach - better stay well below that threshold than touching/exceeding it. Stephen has emphasized this multiple times in the FastTalkLab episodes.
Gerald, that 80/20 usually discarts Tempo and Super Treshold work. In terms of Long HIIT like 4 min, based by the HR, I can’t reach the values that 80/20 says
Also note that this is for Eliete and Well-Trained Athletes! As Dr San-Millán and Alan Couzens recently pointed out, it’s all dependant on the state of a person’s metabolic health.
Nor should you. 80/20 is based on sessions per year not time in zone. When using TIZ it’s more like <10% HIT for elite athletes with a very well established base over many years.
80/20 as described by Dr Seiler doesn’t discard Tempo, it’s just used appropriately and counts as time above LT1.
After originally starting this thread, I think I’m going to conclude that an over-emphasis on training intensity distribution has led most of us astray. This is not the most important question - how training is distributed (after the fact) but what is important to do on any day.
There is no such thing as a universally optimal training scheme or distribution. What is optimal is what is needed for an athlete, on one day, in a particular microcycle, within the larger context of their goals.
I’m talking about the HR values not the TiZ values, ahahaha! But yeah, never forget that 80/20 is sessions!
What I was trying to say is that for me, the 80/20 HR zones are high. Usally, in my zone 5 intervals with 4 min long, I never reach what they “prescribe”. For me they prescribe 189+ HR, I Usually go for 185,6,7… But this was when I haven’t got my powermeter.
I didn’t knew! Thanks Howie! I have a friend and rival at the same time and he does máx 2 min Vo2 Máx. He usually do short shots as he calls it.
He does like:
8x 1min vo2máx, 1’30s recovery
Thanks for a great collection of links!
Especially the first one is a must-listen for all those people misinterpretting what Seiler is trying to make us understand. Those people should stop laying out TID, TIZ interpretations and stop advocating that any work in Z2 is wrong and whatever other bulshit is hitting us almost daily.
Listen carefull to this podcast and what Seiler is telling us. It bassicaly says that the most efficient training is something so simple that you don’t even need a training plan. Be consistent and do 4 training sessions below AeT before doing one above AeT. And when you do that hard session, make a combination of intensity/duration that is challenging. Depending on the training phase you’re in, that can be VO2, but it could just as well be Tempo or Treshold. Hell, it can even be an extremely long endurance session during your initial base phase!
But I guess people don’t like “simple”…
The only thing wrong about this system is the 80/20 name. That leaves to much room for interpretation. It should be called 4 easy/1 hard session and leave out any guess regarding duration of that hard session. If you experience it as a hard session, it WAS a hard session. So now take the time to recover from that hard session, not by lying on the couch but by doing 4 easy sessions and make sure you’re ready to go hard again after that. The best way to ensure you keep up the consistency, is doing enough low intensity.
@MedTechCD, you’re welcome. Agreed, the convo in the first link is one of the very best. And yes, the basics are very simple, but the mind continually looks for and creates complicated. That’s not to advocate reductionism either. Clarity is so simple that it appears boring so people run right by it and miss its depth.
I agree with all that you said!
I’m doing like
Monday: Easy (45m to 1:30h)
Tuesday: Efforts (2 to 2:30h)
Wednesday: Endurance (2:30 to 3h)
Thursday: Easy (45m to 1:30h)
Friday: Endurance or Efforts ( at least 3h with or without efforts)
Saturday: Long Endurance (with efforts if I didn’t did on Friday) (3:30 to 5h)
Sunday: Passive Rest
Depends on your history and how you built up to that total load. If you feel good and have no problems doing the efforts, I would think you’re coping well. 12-15 hrs a week is quite a bit but not an exception for an experienced athlete. Just keep listening to your body and throw in a rest week on regular bases.
I usually do 3 week on 1 week off. I started 8 years ago, moreless. 3 years with training with low volume overall, and now 2/3 years with more volume and 2 efforts a week.
On base I do Tempo and Sweetspot, Build some FTP and weeks before races start with vo2máx. Then I continue my competing calendar with 1 effort FTP another vo2 max in a normal week.
There’s a well known (and respected) coach, with his own podcast, where he mentions the 80/20 principle. The example given is a 25 hour week, and they (there are two on the show) say that 20% = 5h of intensity; which many know is a lot.
Instead, the intensity would more than like be 2.5-3h as there is recovery between intervals would be at low intensity. So the TIZ is closer to 90%/10%, which Seiler also mentions when he explained what 80/20 is when looking at TIZ.
Yes, 90/10 TIZ for a healthy, well-trained athlete with many years of foundation work. For anyone else the TIZ ratio is closer to 95% Z1/5% Z2-Z3 (3 zone model). Dr. Seiler has pointed this out several times as well. For a beginner, metabolically unhealthy individual, or for someone suffering/recovering from any kind of illness or injury then the ratio is closer to 99%/1%.
