It should probably only be the goal for your long ride.
The shorter Z1 rides will effectively still be productive if you stay in Z1 by increasing the mitochondria.
One ‘simple’ question, 60 posts in less then 3 days… Things can get complex very fast 
But I like this discussions because we all learn from it.
Discussion and sharing ideas and experience…I agree with that.
Do you think watching aerobic decoupling might be an useful metric to watch in steady workouts ?
Thanks
I believe that decoupling is a good metric to use, but of course I also believe its difficult to follow accurately whilst training. I try but invariable I’m wrong.
I’ve also watched a number of videos from both gentlemen. The items that caught my attention
Combining those 2 points above, keep in mind that the goal is to deplete your muscle glycogen stores. This is what causes most of the adaptation to increase aerobic metabolism. This is also the reason why you get decoupling because the lower that glycogen, the more lactate is produced. Your HR is coupled to the pH of your blood and lactate contributes to acidity so as you get more depleted glycogen, lactate goes up and so does your HR which results in the decoupling as you still push the same watts but now for a higher HR.
As you produce more lactate, your skeletal muscle also further increases glucose uptake. This means less glucose for the brain and hence the hunger signal. If you would go into higher intensity, the catabolic hormones will make sure more energy is made available. After a high intensity session, that creates an excess in energy which defeats the effect your looking after with low intensity. I have done higher intensity for example when going up a hill and I can see afterwards that it inverted the decoupling. They’ve also mentioned, going up a hill you still stick to your HR so yes you may go very slow but speed is not the goal.
So as to intensity, I stick to the HR zone right below the 2mmol lactate
For how long, that depends on your glycogen level in both muscle and liver so fasted or fed does make a difference. I do my training before eating and usually I get my hunger feeling after about 2 hours. I ride on water, no energy supplement during the ride.
Aerobic metabolism will improve over time but since your HR is coupled to the pH, you keep targeting that HR zone as your watt will increase (slowly). The 2mmol is the point where a surplus is created so pushing that level always creates adaptation to try and lower that surplus at that intensity.
Hello, speaking of decoupling, I did this Z2 session this morning.
It was getting harder toward the end and Garmin condition status was poor (doh) but the decoupling was not that bad accoridng to intervals.icu, so I guess I could have pushed longer to see if it raises further and get a little notch up in the cardiac drift ?
(btw by measuring lactate and feel I have a quite good idea that it’s top of Z2 here)
Thank you for this @Sven_Braem, it is very clear and succinct. I notice that I also get some inverted decoupling so now I understand why.
there are Connect IQ datafields if you are a Garmin user
Yes, I use it one IQ app when on the road, which one are you thinking of?
I think you’ll find that Stephen Seiler talks duration not sessions. But yes, he doesn’t say its set in cement but 80/20 is a rough guide.
Look up Youtube video “From polarized to individually optimized training in 5 steps” where he uses Olav Tuftes and Ingrid Christiansens training regimes as an example. There are also other videos where he uses Marit Bjørgans training diary, which is also based on duration.
In other videos where he talks duration is HIT intervals and the difference in a 4X5 contra 30X15.
BUT; this wasn’t the point of my initial post. Which was (in a nutshell) does LIT go over into to being a HIT session over time as Sleamaker & Browning seem to suggest? EG. Yesterday I did a 90 minute LIT session on the turbo trainer at the higher end of zone 1 (dark green) in a 3 zone model, that would be Zone 2 in the 5 zone model.
After about 70-75 minutes I started to feel the burn in my thighs. So the question is, still; is Sleamaker & Browning correct? Should I have stopped at eg 65 minutes to keep the session in LIT?
I’m no expert but I would say the answer to your question is no.
The session itself is not high intensity. You’re just not conditioned to ride those watts for that long, so you’re only efficient at those watts for 75 minutes.
The session was not nor will ever be HIT.
Continue at those watts for 4 hours total and your HR will be high, decoupling percentage will be high, your legs will be killing you and you’ll be shattered at the end. That still doesn’t make it a HIT session.
So, no, you need not have stopped at 65 minutes in order to keep the session in LIT
How have you determining your zones?
Have you had a formal “lab” test, eg. blood lactate or a metabolic cart , or are you estimating based on a field test?
What is your zone 1 in % of HR.
@Stephen_Humlen-Grins is this what you are referring to in the book?
They call level 1 the overdistance workouts, at low intensity, but can be moderate- to high-stress session. Stress and Intensity are different terms, and shouldn’t be confused.
source: Serious Training for Endurance Athletes - Rob Sleamaker, Ray Browning - Google Books
Do regular Max HR tests and use the Sleamaker & Browning HR model. Have a lactate test lined up within the next few weeks. I have the equipment but want someone who does it at our local Sports colle
Yes, but watch this Seiler video and see if this is where the confusion is arising.
It’s always better to listen to more than one source, so give this a listen.
I find Tim explains Load, Stress and Stain.
Ignore the WKO5 part of the webinar, but rather listen to the terminology.
Will listen. I’m always open to input…probably why I get confused 
nice HRmax for a pensioner !
Thanks, lucky with genes I think. 
Hi,
Could you please share this sheet?
Tks,
