I was following a HIIT program x 2 years (returning to the sport after a 20 year gap) but after several over training/over reaching episodes I wanted to quit. I was not getting better and in-fact was falling behind. Depressed and frustrated but soon stumbled upon polarized training. Needless to say it saved my cycling life! I'm improving all the time (slowly), fatigue remains manageable and life is good. I use group rides for my HIT sessions but otherwise stay in Zone 1-2.
Yeah I was in the same spot. Then discovered Phil Maffetone and Dr Peter Attia. Zone 2 training seems to be best. I've improved so much since realizing most time should be in this zone.
I’m in the exact opposite place. Group rides for me now are my casual zone 1 rides, while my indoor seasons are now my high intensity zone rides. Group rides tend to be hit or miss wrt power levels, and more often than not a miss.
Any type of interval training should only be done by advanced athletes who has done at least 2 years of consistent training. 1st year with focus on frequency, 2nd on distance/time.
@@viktorvaldemar you are not wrong but if you really have the discipline/will to do it, there's no reason why you shouldn't speed up your progress doing proper training in your beginner years
I'm no expert but I've been training seriously for about 2 years straight now. I've found that you cannot neglect any one part of cycling unless you're OK with losing that strength. We obviously need base miles for the endurance aspect of the sport. We need high end training in order to build actual power in our legs. We ALSO need sweet spot/threshold/VO2 max training to train our legs for those sustained efforts. How much time we devote to each is maybe the million dollar question? I also approach training from a racing perspective. I'm not training to keep up with a group ride, I train to win races.
So true. It's good to mix it up. According to Dr. Peter Attia and Phil Maffatone, zone 2 training seems to be the most beneficial that helps on both ends of the spectrum. I've noticed training in that zone has helped me significantly with higher intensities training.
@@aamirnagaria2189 Again, I'm not expert. That being said, I think the 80/20 approach has been the most beneficial for me. So 80% of my time is spent doing zone 2 (6 zone model) and 20% is spent doing higher intensities (sweet spot and higher). So if you start in the off season, the 20% portion of your training progresses from sweet spot to threshold to VO2 max to 1 minute power as you get into the heart of the season. In my experience, these 'zones' build on each other. I need say 6-8 weeks of sweet spot before I can get into threshold efforts. I need the same amount of time doing threshold before I can start focusing on 5 minute Vo2 max efforts. You get the idea. Your training in-season should be more specific to your actual demands, but the aforementioned progression should put you in a pretty powerful place.
Just create a list of exercises, from 5 second to one hour. Say, fifteen levels. Do those every 2- 3 weeks. You don't do them all in one day. distribute at reasonable intervals. A long ride once every one to two weeks. Don't neglect a long fasted ride starting in the morning at least once a month, for metabolic adjustment to burn fat and protein. And a couple threshold rides a month on a mtb to put down power across rough terrain. Isolated leg work,.high/low cadence. seated and standing, drops / hoods. Just create a systematic list, and cover it. And then bias it for your favorite events - a bit more sprint for sprinters, a bit more climb for climbers.. No rider who doesn't do grand tours needs longer than a five day training block about every 3 weeks. So, just train and rest. Heavy focus on riding efficiently by riding at a fixed wattage and focusing on smooth pedal stroke and low perceived exertion. And spends lots of time on the drops under meaningful power, because thats what racing is. Also, cap hours to 10 a week, unless you are gonna do stage racing, in which case, model a training block after the stage race.
> We ALSO need sweet spot/threshold/VO2 max training to train our legs for those sustained efforts That's not what the science suggests though. The papers quoted in this presentation suggest that polarized training leads to better outcomes at threshold despite having no training at that intensity.
I really liked this discussion. I have been running, swimming, cycling and lifting weights for many years. I do not compete but do track my cycling and physiologic responses with XERT, GARMIN products and WHOOP. Retired I have all the time I need to focus on these things and at the age of 64 seek improvement. Listening to this I was interested to see that the rides that I do mostly fall within a polarized style per XERT. I do very little intentional training focus in cycling because of traffic and lights and all those things that are hard to control with the exception that I can do sprints off of stops and surges for top end stress. I experimented on myself with lifting to increase strength whilst limiting riding in order to build structure over this winter and then backing off weights and ramping up cycling related stresses in the spring since COVID keeps me out of the gym and pool. My XERT power curve did not suffer at the high end over last year and I pretty much picked up where I left off it appears.
the best training method worked for me, after trying threshold, hiit and polarization based methods is this: RACE & REST. different than other methods, i felt much comfortable in real race paces, and much endurable too. now i explain my method: In the RACE day, the mission is to do our best simulated race which will resemble the details of the real race you're preparing yourself for. (like the length, elevation blah blah) So you gotta create a "race route". Then, as it is a race in some ways, you gotta find an opponent/s. It can be the virtual PR partner from Garmin of that race route segment or you can find a frenemy who is AT LEAST as good as you for the simulated race (the second one is the BEST way for simulated race training for better gains on race technique, like drafting, breakaway etc). Then you will prep a day before, your bike, tire pressures, electrolites and all stuff just like you do bfore your race. you gonna eat well and balanced before the challange just the same as you do bfore the real race. and you MUST go as full gas as possible in the race training. aim is a new pr or to pass your real partner/s. simply, you're racing! Warning: you'll get dropped many times. Never feel afraid. Just challenge again and again. And you'll see the real gain. In the REST period (duration depends on your fitness level) do only 1h Z1/Z2 rest ride. NEVER exceed. focus on high cadence. This period can be from one day to three days between race trainings. Do not exceed 3 days, or your fitness may not be any better. Repeat. In each racing training, try to create a new route, which means your body will not be able to adapt to the grade profile time to time and get lazy. You want to make sure your legs are at least 90% fresh right before race training. Otherwise, you will not produce desired stimulation on the muscles. Stop this regime at least 3 days before the event you are preparing for, but keep on easy and short rest rides until the day comes.
Unless I'm missing something... I've had a look through that Stöggl and Sperlich paper. The training group for polarised averaged 106 hours of training over the period Vs only 66 hours for the group using the HIIT program. Doesn't seem like a very fair test. I appreciate doing just high intensity sessions you can't physically do as much volume. However, the polarised training did 14 high intensity sessions (per week) but the HIIT program only did 3 more at 17 sessions. Coupled with all the extra work polarised did at low intensity. I don't see how you could expect anything other than polarised would come out on top.
That's really the basis of POL. You are racking up big TSS (I know not all TSS is the same) / hours with very little impact to the body. You take all those hours at Zone2, and it makes the body extremely efficient at handling everything in sport. It also keeps the athletes lean (think watts / kg).
@Steve King From everything I've read, pol can be done down to 8-10 hours. If you are time crunched, SST programs like trainer road may be more beneficial.
polarized training sounds like how most teenagers do it naturally i remember when i had a bicycle, i liked to go out and use it for errands, like taking it slowly and not exerting myself and with a few minutes of high cadence and high speed burst, then return to relaxed pedaling and i think most teens do most of their playing like this does this means that polarized training is the natural way of how most juveniles do to grow stronger? while medium intensity seems to be done by adults and usually isnt fun and pleasant
Great point but sadly it is too psychological for getting people talking around it. I agree with you a 100%. I had the same experience and observations.
I guess it could come from the caveman times: first walking and tracking the animals for a longer time, and then short bursts of chase/hunting, and then bringin the food home, cooking and recovering. Would make sense why it works, but I have no science to back it up. Just a thought that I though while reading your comment.
That's not polarized training. In polarized training your slow rides are entirely slow. Endurance runners will literally walk up a hill to keep their heart rate down on a low intensity day. On the intensity days, they go close to all out.
Having followed "The Truth About Training" since the 1970's, it's going to be interesting to see you do the same kind of video in 10 years from now... What proved efficient in the 70's, 80's and so on, hasnt really changed that much. The buzz-word change, but the workout remains.
I agree with you...the basics....the golden rules are pretty much the same but we are talking about how to maximise gains: so maybe it's the details that change
I agree also - I started out in the 1980s and based my programs on Critical Power and later Critical Speed. But in essence nothing has changed very much except a more recent move into more HI sessions. But some folk have read the material and determined that the HI is more important than the LI, but in truth, the LI is what builds what I call the ínfrastructure on which the benefits of HI can be mounted. I also think that too few take the fundamental muscle fiber type dominance into account in the overall picture.
@@enidginn8986 true. Too many are not however interested in training (of course they still want to be fast and win races ;)) and are trying to have fun, therfore the topic of body types won't appeal to them. I am a mesomorph and am struggling to find a good way to train, that would leverage my conditioning and waste lesser my time found things that are counter to my bio-type.
@@Northwindbreeze What is your sport? Specialty within that sport? Where are you aiming? How committed are you? These are the important questions IMVHO. I am confident that if all of these questions are answered, and the commitment is in place, that you can go wherever you want to go. As long as your body type does not limit you in your activity (as say a heavy person trying to perform well at gymnastics), the sky should be the limit.
I have always wondered about this. I think this is the correct way to train. I feel that the other training avenues are feeding off the Zwift training plans, TrainerRoad, TrainingPeaks and etc. An 80/20 training program is very simple, Zwift, TR, etc need it to be complicated to be able to monetize their training plans. Compare Matt Fitgerald 80-20 plan against a TrainerRoad plan.
It’s not what they aim for. Not to say they are not trainers, just cyclists sharing tips in a mode everyone can understand, even non-cyclists. That’s why its called Global Cycling Network and not Cycling Science.
Oh my God... this is super massive useful video with a lot of information being compressed into one. Currently, I'm doing high volume low intensity training with only 1 Hiit / week. Your training calculator might be very helpful for me because I got a bit trouble in time management...thanks
This is really good and it shows no one training principle rules all. It also shows the needs of a pro are far different than the training needs of a novice or even avid cyclist.
Wow... so have you looked at how this applies post-covid? Or more specifically, for gradually escaping the gooey mess of long covid lung inflammation and tachycardia? I used to be a happy non-competitivs cyclist who treated hills as my zone 5 opportunities, but now after slightly more than 2 years post-covid... riding up small hills is just starting to become feasible again. Reading or listening to training response theory has seemingly helped a lot. So thank you for your coherent and pragmatic advice!
I just wanted to comment that Dr Seiler and his polarized method recommended that its not worth going much above 108% of threshold or 90% of max Heart rate. Its simply too taxing for not much gain. The ultimate question is these studies are taking on 6-8 weeks in duration. So we see benefits for that timeline. But is this advisable for 52 weeks a year? Probably not. But of high value to do on an 8 week build to bump some fitness. Id like to hear your thoughts!
You got the point! Lot of people dont. Need to look at the big picture. Polarized could be the best before racing season to get those very hard efforts done before racing. But what about after racing season or before that polarized period... a lot of "depends" questions here. Best idea to mix it up for personal goals.
To add to that comment. 108%? We’re not talking 60 seconds. His findings stated 4x8 minutes at 108% ftp or 90% of heart rate max. With only 2 minutes rest. I’m pretty darn sure this will get your 4mmol. So time at intensity is the critical aspect. I do believe most athletes would need to work up to 108% for 4x8minutes. That’s tough stuff. If it’s not, Your zones are probably not accurate.
Thanks Tom Bell. I appreciate your feedback. I do believe in a blend and gradual transition into specific blocks with multiple types of focus throughout a season. Of course dependent on athletes goals and adjusting based on individual ability levels. Thanks for your thoughts.
@@jtriathletejtj Well for example, In july my 20min power was 240Watts (which was in the best case scenario a 228Watts ftp), meanwhile my 5min power was 350Watts. 108% of my ftp (246Watts ? ) would have been way too easy for 8min interval.
@collax Wow your 5min power is absolutely huge, especially compared to FTP and 20min power. Must be your strength as of now, i think. Is your 1min power high too by any chance?
Nice one Alex. One thing to note in the Stöggl & Sperlich study is that they primarily used the incremental VO2max ramp protocol to evaluate the effects of the 4 training interventions. VO2peak is just one of the many factors determining success in endurance sport. We know that performance at and around your LT and how well you can operate at that fraction of VO2peak is also important. This study did not evaluate one of the gold standards of a cycling performance test which is the 40K TT. I would prefer if this study was replicated/expanded by the same authors to include additional performance outcomes before we pin-down precisely what TIDs are optimal. Thoughts?
I’m curious as to how effective cardiovascular endurance will help with a sport like Rugby League. It’s 80 minutes of fairly constant low level running with sporadic hits of intense sprinting and grappling. How would these zones fit into someone who needs to have the ability to perform very high intensity hits of energy ?
Hi, great video. I have a question though - aren't the results affected by total hours? You can see in table 1 (15:22) the groups differ. You can also see in THR group there are no high intensity sessions included. What about SweetSpot model which include also fair amount of VO2Max and Anaerobic sessions?
Hi Sahal, I love your comment as it shows you are reading this critically! Yes absolutely there are flaws in some of these primary studies mainly 1. exercise total hours should be controlled, but isnt always 2. exercise history should be equal in each group using at the least a matching procedure and ideally a "wash out" pre-training period 3. the order of the blocks should be randomized. Having said that some researchers do take these into account and overall evidence is fairly consistent......BUT the field is still in evolution so do expect further developments and lessons in this area. Finally regarding sweetspot I cannot find any scientific papers using randomization on it? Can you (I mean as distinct from threshold per se)?
@@Fastfitnesstips Thanks a lot for the quick answer :) Unfortunately I don't have access to the research. I am just a regular amateur cyclict with inclination to understand what I am actually doing :) I train using TrainerRoad and they structure the training plans by mostly relying on SweetSpot workouts with addition of some work near Threshold (Under-Overs), VO2Max, Sprints as well as sessions in Zones 1-2. I try to extend cooldowns to 5-10 minutes more (Zone 1). It adds up in time. This approach works for me but maybe there is better way. It would be great to know if there is an scientific proof which approach is actually the best.
@@sahalidis This is notoriously hard to answer in a study. "the best" program is going to depend on your limiters, strengths, adaptation rate, recovery rate, detraining rate, sleep, diet, available time etc... It is very difficult to control these variables. I would say, if you are improving, keep milking it until it doesn't work any more. Your training should not be static, what works one year may not work the next and some changes may need to be made to continue optimal progress.
Cycling is mostly aerobic unless you're JUST a short distance track sprinter. This means your cardiovascular system plays the biggest role in performance and since this system is working it's hardest around 70% of max HR, that is where you should spend the majority of time. Then occasionally you can 'test' your systems progression by going all out, maybe once a week or twice if you're young (under 30). This can be a race which will truly stretch your system. Once you have raced you'll realise you can't really go that hard in training and trying to do so will simply burn you out.
Your TIZ calculator returns efficiencies Polarized 80/20 ‘Above average’ and HVLI ‘Well above average’. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? (30’ test LTHR 175 bpm; 3:45 hr/week, 2 days off)
Do you really answer what "normal" people with 6-10 hrs to spend training, should do? Should they do more like 50-50 or 60-40(versus 80-20) to get the most out of their time? Maybe periodizing from 80-20 to 70-30 and 60-40(during a 3-5 months offseason) or something similar? Polarized model.
Sadly there isn't one answer, because it depends on the person's history, but in terms of how much around 13% HIIT might be the best (th-cam.com/video/ZXNOF8LzZTE/w-d-xo.html) however your periodized polarized model looks good, a bit like this? (th-cam.com/video/ZXNOF8LzZTE/w-d-xo.html)
You do not really have to think in advance of the %. Basically you have your 2 intervals training per week (depending on your distance it might be 3 but you take off your long distance then) and the rest are easy. So whether you have 6 or 15 hours to train, basically you do the same time of high intensity, you just add your easy volume for whatever time you have left in your week. That being said , the less you trained the closer to 50/50 you'll get, but you do not have to try to fit these numbers, it is just a tendency that you can observe.
Great information! It's extremely hard and stressful to follow a polarized plan the whole year because of the HIIT and I find it a recipe for burning out your body and mind. What I find it to work the best for me at the end of my season I take some time off the bike not just for the body, but also the mind, usually 2 to 3 weeks then follow by 4 to 6 weeks of strength training and low endurance ride mostly recreational then build your base from 3 to 4 months including lots of sweet spot and a little HIIT the finals 2 weeks and then I polarized my training the rest of the season with 2 HIIT a week and the rest of the time in zone 2. I train 8 to 12 hours a week.
Thanks for this great presentation. One thing I'm struggling to understand though is why your suggested polarized workouts have any tempo and threshold training at all when the papers you quote earlier in the presentation suggest that the best way to improve tempo and threshold efforts is to not train them at all, and instead train endurance and VO2Max
Great Video , I've always thought time in Zone seems the most logical way to go , so if we seperate Heart rate and Power how much time in a week should a cyclist spend Vo2 max and above in both Power and Heart rate , sometimes i'll have spent a total of 45mins with my HR 90-95% through accumilated fatique with my power being nowhere near Vo2 Max , alternativley I've done Vo2 max intervals with my Heart rate well below 90% because they are too short , perhaps i should be doing them at 130% or for longer or pre-exhausting etc etc , anyway i'm not sure what is too much or too little at 58yrs old.
Thank you for this great video. I was wondering whether I misunderstood from Stephen Seilers videos that he does not consider TIZ as the basis for polarization, but rather the number of session. I believe he mentions in that video that this is a widespread misconception, but I might have misinterpreted that. Any comment ?
Hello. I really enjoyed this video, and it's changed the way I think about training. Thank you. But I wonder whether the same rules of thumb around Easy/Moderate/Max polarisation applies to older folk who are interested in retaining what they have rather than striving to improve? I'm in my early 70s so would you advise the same 80/0/20 % distribution as for older "athletes" like me? Thanks.
Thank you for such an informative video. I'm currently doing a Threshold plan and it is very taxing. I have also mistaken Threshold zone as high intensity, because I always do it at 15 mins or longer duration. I have always thought that the best way to improve FTP for a time crunched cyclist is to do as much threshold and sweetspot as possible ,with 1 long ride. "Any how, I'm still confused about the advantage and disadvantage of normal 80:20 and the stöggl and sperlich 80:20. I have used the helpful excel sheet provided."
I want to apply this to cross country running to improve my backpacking performance. I'm backpacking 500-1000 miles a year but that's only 3 months of the year. I'm starting to train with RUN/WALK/RUB cross country. I'm 66 and just started hiking three years ago. I train on a trail that's an 8 mile loop and need to figure out how much time to spend at different HR zones. I'm now just doing 8 miles as fast as I can once a week and doing 16 miles in zone 2-3. I'm up and down hills (1500 feet of Elevation gain in 8 miles) so I cannot stay in one zone all the time but I can take it easy going up some of the hills or I can go to zone 5 for a minute or two every so often but just running up them as fast as I can . . . Trying to figure this out. It's hard to do a lot of zone 1-2 except on the down hills and it's easy to do the middle and high zones because trails lend themselves to those zones.
I just started a polarized base phase on Trainer Road, and what I am getting is 80% of Zone 1 and Zone 2 (in a 6 zone model) and 1 day of threshold with intervals of 16 minutes at 105% FTP. Is this what you recommend not to do when you say not to do "based miles and just threshold"?
Ive got a question regarding the polarized training method. Following the 80-20. For a person that has 6 hours a week thats 72 minutes of vo2 max, done in 2 days thats 36 mins of time in zone. For a person with 12 hours available is it double? 18 hour triple? I find it too much work to fit in a week
Is there a breakdown of what training plan the individual subjects were on in figure 12 at 16:36? It would be interesting to see if a particular plan caused big gains for some but also big losses for others. Or if certain plans just gave mediocre results for everyone. Thanks.
Damn, it is alot for a beginner to process. I did sweestpot with Trainerroad last winter and sure my ftp went up but i stilled sucked at longer rides compared to my mates. So this winter i am going for 3 months of zone 1 (55-75%) in your video and then after that mabey some polarized training blocks? I really feel that i lack a solid base. But what do i know... Anyhow, nice video, very intresting! 👍
This winter, try a combination of z1/z2 (base) with z4/z5 intervals whilst slowly increasing your TSS (the calculator might help you). Having a motivational target like zwift races or anything your enjoy on the bike is also important!
Love this video! I have found, when you only train indoor on a program like TrainerRoad, it never accommodates for Up and Down terrain and most importantly CdA. Which makes your “base” training from TrainerRoad good but not real world. If you follow something like this video points out, IMO, you would be better for outdoor rides.
I am a powerlfiter, so I squat and deadlift twice per week and do good emphasis on leg training on those days. I want to maintain my muscle mass and strength as much as possible while also gaining endurance on the bike. What would you suggest for me? A lot of Zone 1 and 2 (of the 6 or 7 zone model)? Since I already do 1 minute long sets in de gym (for hamstrings, glutes and especially quads) where I completely empty my legs for that moment? I also do some supersets where I get out of breath quite a bit. I always believed this had some positive impact on my VO2max. I mainly want to increase my long effort sustainable power output (>6h) since I am going on a cycling journey where we will cycle 6+ hours a day at low intensity. What kind of training split dop you suggest given the 6 or 7 zone model given that I can train maximally 8 hours per week on the bike, but probably more like 6 hours?
Interesting video, and the calculator is a great idea, thanks. But having reviewed both Stoggl/Sperlich studies, I can't figure out where you are getting a 70/8/22 time-in-zone breakdown from?
I wouldn't worry, all TIZ figures have been recalculated from scratch for the end goal, an effective training plan with the ability to control TIZ or have an algorithm work it out: see shop.cyclingapps.net/adaptive-cycling-plan/
What happens if you plateau on the polarized approach, does it happen? I know most workout regime causes athletes to need a change after about 6-8 weeks, does this also hold true for 80/20? Is the 80/20 training type best year round?
If you train by heart rate at or close to LT 1 , after consistent time your power will start moving up. It took me 12 weeks to go from 180 watts to 215 at my LT1.
Regardless you will have to program some form of progressive overload. Even with polarised training. Polarised training a a training philosophy. Not a hard program.
you'll crash and burn from the lack of energy. if you want to raise your lactic acid resistance/threshold then you have to train your body to deal with it. that's the thinking about riding at sweetspot because you are training your body to work at the threshold and thus adapt to the stress.
I usually did: Monday=Recovery training; tuesday=day off; wednesday= sweet spot; thursday=zwift race or Vo2 max training outside; friday= recovery training; saturday/sunday= very long ride with everything a bit and the other day mostly z2. Every 4-5 weeks a recovery week with less volume and mostly z2. Got my 20 min FTP to 320W@67 kg from nothing in 2 years. Now I feel like a hit a plateu in the last month. Any reccomondations?
hmm that's a pretty good routine! have you got your historical data in strava? if so, sync it with intervals.icu using this invite: fft.tips/icu ; and i will have a look for you.
@@Fastfitnesstips Yes I have all on strava. I synced it. I hope it worked :D However, I wasnt very consistend in the last weeks and I got a powermeter for outside just 2 months ago. Before that I did the intense stuff on my Elite Direto on Zwift.
@@wavemusic11 very happy to hear such things :) was a lot of work to get there and there is still plenty room for improvement. Also you will improve a lot!!
@@raphaeltiziani7476 thanks for the motivation. Mind sharing how many hours you train a week? I've just finished 6 weeks of sweetspot base from trainerroad. It really focus almost 90% on sweetspot and threshold over unders. Very minimal zone 1/2 endurance cycling. Kinda burnout from this.
hi, good q! Like all things in training, if you want to make a change, do so gradually. Adding huge amounts of HITT or even base is not going to work, so keep an eye on the TSS per week and build it up slowly. Second rotate in adequate rest, not just rest days but relatively low volume blocks. Third when doing base, make sure they are keeping in z1/z2 most of the time. Fourth when doing HITT/VO2max try and find a workout that is least unpleasant for that person.
This is a massive over-simplification that draws over heavily on Seiler. The reality is that athletes at the elite level use periodised training meaning that the intensity distribution varies massively throughout the season as they move through base build and race prep phases.
agreed, all these short term studies can tell is us the best strategy for peaking, which we know polarized training is best for. but in reality over the long term athletes perform better when periodizing base, pyramidal and polarized training strategies.
Polarised is quite ill defined in a sense. Is it training days 20:80? Is it time in zone 20:80? Apparently if you really count “time on zone” for elite athletes, it is close to 10:90.
HIIT consume energy and resource stored in muscle to deliver burst of energy, unfortunately at a low system efficiency state. As a result some muscle get permanent damaged, trash and our body recycle those back into same or other parts of our body as situation calls for. After damage is done and if soon our body received relevant nutritional food, during sleep, it will reconstruct for those loss muscle with more muscle. Hence body building. Body builders don’t do aerobics all day long, but they do HITT all day long, from one muscle or group to the next. That makes cyclists the leg muscle but body builders. Those new muscles also benefit cyclists performance in a broad range of demand from aerobic, endurance, up slope and through final approach.
Just using your calculator to schedule out a weekly polarized schedule using Time In Zone... I'm only doing ~4hr/4workout per week at this point... I have found that 80% of Zone 1 (3 zone model) comes from warmup, cool down & interval recovery... with only one dedicated endurance workout. Question: Does it matter that zone 1 is split up all over the place like that... e.g. Coggan has indicated that threshold intervals should be at least 7mins long to get the physiological benefit... anything like that for zone 1?
No there is no rule that z1 z2 or z3 be concentrated in any particular grouping, the total TSS or HRtrimp (load) will be dominant. So you will be fine. Just try and follow the basic rules of training: consistency/ rest / overload / variation
I am defenitly not smart enough to understand even half of everything you said. Just the zones alone are confusing. What I have learned is that I should do way more low intensity training. I'm used to doing not much trainging, and when I train it's in the zone that you would try to avoid if you are doing polarised training.
Really informative fairly new to cycling and really appreciate the time and effort put in to this. When doing a 'harder'/ Zone 6 interval session. After warm-up, cooldown, Z1 between sets and Z1 between bursts, I probably only achieve 30-40% of the workout in Z6. I have a feeling it is going to be very tough to ensure 20% of my total riding is Z5/6. Are two interval sessions after a rest day per week adequate? Or should Z5/6 be mixed in to the Z1/2 rides on days following interval sessions to bump up to the 20% overall?
The most basic rule of training is to make sure your overall volume (and yes load too) is manageable vs your recent history (this is called TSB or "fatigue" in analytic tools); assuming this is ok, and you are aiming for a 80:20 plan then 80:20 is basically the average for the week (not necessarily one session or even one day).....so in your example if you are at 85:15 in the week so far, yes you can add another high intensity session to average out at 80:20 by the end of the week. btw, if you can only manage 30% in z6 but this is your best effort, thats fine, you have found your current limit, its something to work on over time (but 30% z6 is a lot!)
This debate is endlessly frustrating for normal people that just want to improve their heart and cardiovascular health. I keep finding more studies showing superior cardiac improvements from >90% HIIT versus 70% steady state. Heart chamber dilation (left ventricular eccentric hypertrophy) is frequently given as the main argument for Zone 2 saying that supposedly the heart chambers cannot fill entirely above Zone 2. But many HIIT studies mention even chamber size as increasing more from HIIT. What intensity distribution do you recommend for optimally increasing heart chamber size and stroke volume? Why do you think the latest HIIT studies show superior results even for LV eccentric hypertrophy?
I want to do an Ironman next year, found my limiter to be tte after 4 h or so no matter what I eat, figure It would be best to train unsexy (Mark Allen definition = fasted and low intensity) until building up starts, which is 28 weeks. In these I would do mostly polarized. Would you agree, any remarks? Great vid by the way!
Time to exhaustion is not fixed but very much a reflection of 1 your power curve (TTE really extends a lot with good training) 2. good nutrition 3. correct pacing 4. motivation. You can get a lot of insights into exhaustion using our bonking calc fft.tips/bonk. Feel free to contact me for more details personalized advice.
If the 80:20 plan give a score of Superior/slightly inefficient, and Sweetspot skewed training give Superior/average efficiency. Should I do Sweetspot?
"Efficiency" in the plan does not necessary equate to gains, it just means that tss / per min is high. To find the best plan for you, use fft.tips/tpp as this will match a number of variables to the likely optimal approach
I typed in my data on the website; and find that it would really hard to hit any of the V02 benchmarks year round with the polarized model. I think that incorporating the 80/20 plan closer to race time is good, but not sustainable year round unless you just want to ride
Hi Peter are you saying that the polarized model is too easy or too hard? The idea is basically you don't ride at or close to vo2 max regularly all year around on its own, but you can combine vo2 max with other HIT session and and ease off a bit in the winter and also cut back on threshold and sweetspot...making more room for low intensity and the high intensity (which is modest)
@@Fastfitnesstips Yeah for example my ftp is 317; I am doing a 15 hour week and the suggested training volume is at 1 hour and 8 minutes at vo2 and 34 min at 120% +; just seems bonkers. Also doing 9 hours at z1 is equally maddening. The rest of the schematics seem feasible tho. (ss/tempo/endurance)
(a) Any method based on HR estimation alone is going to be inaccurate. (b) I don't think there are any studies on this method (c) As I understand it, Maffetone method is low intensity *only*. This will not work if you goal if anything except long endurance rides (d) polarized has been studied but multiple independent groups and whilst it is not a panacea it is evidence based
Nice graphs and PDF files but I find that your video lacks specificity for each athlete ! Training for gran fondo, crits or TT is not the same. As a long distance triathlete, I must spent time in the so called grey area/zone 2 since it's the specificity of my sport.
Another great video. I did SS on TT followed by more specific plan for a total of 16 weeks and my frp went from 235 to 278 at 159 lbs. At some point you platau. I train for 24h TT with 410 miles being my best. What training would you suggest. Obviously I need to maintain SS for long durations and is not really about climbing or sprints . Thanks in advance
OK, you are talking about training a specialist type of ultra event...24hr TT. I have just coached a top 5 finisher in the British 24hr TT and the plan we used was a build phase of progressive TSS increase focusses on long rides at the power predicted from the power curve for that ride, then after some months a switch to a heavy periodized (cyclical) approach with polarized 1 to 2 weeks interspersed by a very long threshold ride. This approach is designed to boost then hold the threshold for a long time....until event day (without burning out). if you need more help let me know.
@@Fastfitnesstips thanks a bunch. Perhaps I need more info. Currently FTP at 255 after some losses during 65h finish at Paris Brest Paris . Doing world 24h TT in 3 weeks. Am I waiting my time with SS? A bit late for gains now and it's rather specific for the upcoming event. I just wonder how should I approach next season. My big goal will be Silver State 508 and Transcontinental. Can u get more in depth on the specific time and zones spent in order to get where I need to ?
@@s-ultracycling can you email me on coaching@fastfitness.tips and i will try and look at this for you. But no you are not wasting time in SS but you need to combine it with other workouts.
So the polarized training study you referenced, it doesn't specify what the protocol was for the POL HIIT sessions. Was is 4x4 with 3 min rest like the HIIT group, or something different?
From the Stoggle2014 paper.....The POL included three blocks, each lasting 3 weeks: 2 weeks of high volume and intensity training followed by 1 week of recovery. The high volume and intensity week included six sessions with two 60 min HIIT sessions, two 150-240 min long duration LOW sessions (duration according to training mode: cycling, running or roller skiing), which included six to eight maximal sprints of 5 s separated by at least 20 min, and two 90 min LOW sessions. The recovery week included one 60 min HIIT session, one 120-180 min LOW session and one 90 min LOW session. Regarding the HIIT session, yes it included a 4 × 4 min at 90-95% of HRpeak with 3 min active recovery and a 15 min cool-down at 75% HRpeak
is there any advantage to doing say 2 rides a week that are 4-5 hours long , compared to 3 rides that are 3 hours long? ...all done in zone 1 on the 3 zone model
Yes, especially if the 3x shorter rides are higher intensity. BUT let's assume the TSS for both comparisons are the same, then there is still a small advantage of three over two rides per week.
How do i determine what I've been doing for the past year? Wko5 or what? I like the idea of making a tiz plan but then how i take that histogram of time in zone and then convert it into a series of workouts sounds like something that involves more time than i have to invest in making a plan
Hi regarding making a plan from these zones, we have already done that, just tell me what plan you are interested in (eg www.trainingpeaks.com/my-training-plans/fastfitnestips). regarding reviewing the year, I suggest doing it week-by-week, for example intervals.icu will give you a weekly zone summary.
@@Fastfitnesstips thanks, I think I might try one of those but.. i have one question on the concept of, "bad to do all base intensity and bad to do all high intensity". During the summer i might do 10 hours/week but a lot of it is unstructured with racing with only maybe 2 structured workouts/week.. and in the winter i end up doing more high intensity structured workouts but much less hours of training volume so that in the end, I have almost the same amount of time in high intensity zones in summer and winter but much LESS time in base zones during the winter. I don't see how this kind of winter plan would cause me to get burnt out. a 4 hour/week plan like this might be 50% active recovery/endurance, 25% tempo/FTP, 15% VO2 max, and 10% anaerobic.. this isn't really polarized training but at the same time I don't see this sort of winter plan as being likely to cause burnout. Quite on the contrary, if I were to ramp up the base training time such that i was closer to an 80/20 polarized idea, I would need to up my active recovery/endurance zone time by about 4 hours to make it an 8 hour/week winter training plan which could be more likely to cause burnout since i never see a reduction in my weekly training volume hours from summer to winter.
@@isaacyoung1868 the answer depends if your races are all high intensity or not. In terms of efficiency for different plans vs time the model did seem to consider time allocated per day. So while maybe on low hours HIIT won't wear you out, it may not be the most efficient option, is my reading. I also train different in off season and build to A race. Having said that my volume is growing year on year till my off season this year is in line with my mid season previously. I guess you would use the model for a given training phase to fine tune what the most efficient option might be. For me, I might take the 80/20 and apply it to a weekly plan.
So, does that mean that you wouldn't recommend the trainerroad sweet spot base high volume plan? It heavily emphasizes SST sessions with 8 to 10 hours of indoor training per week over 12 weeks.
Trainerroads argument is that sst training is much more effective for time crunched athletes since zone 1 sessions need to be quite long to have any positive impact on performance.
I cannot say without seeing it in detail, with the intensity x duration.....plus it depends on the individual, BUT in general any plan with more threshold/sweetspot than either low intensity or high intensity is not going to be very efficient for most people according to nearly every study in endurance sports. However some threshold WITH base and HIIT is usually fine. (ps all I can see about TR plan is www.trainerroad.com/all-cycling-training-plans#sweet-spot-base which is very vague)
@@valelantin1991 I think threshold (z2 seiler) and HIIT (z3 seiler) but no HVLI (zone 1 seiler) *could work* as a strong training stimulus that might appeal to time crunched athletes......but it would be a recipe for burnout unless that athlete loved those sessions. I guess as a temporary measure then yes. That said, I have never seen a study on that particular combination!
Thanks for your answer and my apologies for my late response, I recently rediscovered your excellent video. :-) Those trainerroad plans are very, very sweet spot heavy. For example: The high volume sweet spot base plan (its purpose is to build a big aerobic base) averages 9-10 hours per week and consists of 5 (!) Sweet spot sessions (60-120 minutes each) and one base ride at around 65 % of FTP per week. In my opinion, this is really intense for base phase (their base plans cover 12 weeks). After struggling through one of those base plans I continued with 8 weeks of their "build phase" plans. Those are even harder...usually 2 sessions at around 65% of ftp, 3 sweet spot workouts and 1 or 2 VO2max sessions per week averaging around 9,5 hours per week...I am not a coach, but to me it seems that the trainerroad concept of hurting yourself for a really long period of time (12 weeks base + 8 weeks build + 8 weeks speciality) won't lead to "stable" performance gains over the long term. Maybe one can boost race fitness over 4 weeks with such a program, but in the long run this just HAS to lead to burn out, right?^^ It just contradicts everything science says. :-D
Very interesting takeaways here! Still wondering about the +20% of efforts in Zone 3 though (aka above treshold). I am training for a Marathon and if I say I run 8 hours a week that means I should run 96 minutes above treshold. That sounds extremly hard, especially as one should do those kind of speeds in intervall sessions. I always went with a good amount of tempo/treshold running and thought this is a great workout for all kinds of distances from 10k to the Marathon. What do u think?
Fartlek? (Not dedicated interval sessions, but Z3 incorporated into your usual long runs), 12 minutes of Z3 in every hour of your running doesn't sound that bad ;) th-cam.com/video/e3PzUqfb0wo/w-d-xo.html
Ranking is now.......Incredibly efficient Super-efficient Very-efficient Well above average Above average Average efficiency Below average Slightly inefficient Very inefficient Very very inefficient Horribly inefficient
I attempted the polarized model over the last two years. 80% easy/20% vo2max or more. But I'm not sure it is the best model for a time crunched amateur w 10 to 15 hours/week. Maybe sweetspot at least once a week is not such a bad thing
Hi. I did 2 club ride per week and I'm very busy with my work and can only spend 2x 1hr on my trainer. Can the polarized training still benefit me or should I focus more on sweet spot and high intensity if I only have 2x 1hr on trainer? Thank you.
capture your data to strava, then sync with intervals.icu (its free) then it will give you a weekly summary of your zones and time-in-zone.....then you will know what you are currently doing. If you have less HIIT than sweetspot or threshold, then you have a problem and need to adjust. BUT yes low volume doesnt mean you cannot be polarized.
I think 2 hours of HIT is plenty so long as you don't injure yourself, which you won't if you have a bicycle trainer. Runners and CrossFiters are insanely prone to injury. Do you have a heart rate monitor? If you don't, stop right there and get a cheapo wrist mounted one, because without the HR monitor you won't ever know what zone you're in. Spin your heart rate up to 160-180 or whatever is nearly your threshold, then spin gently down to 80-100, do this 5-10 times. Done. That won't take more than ten to twenty minutes.
@@ironmantooltime There's numerous articles showing how effective HIT is, but with a BIG caveat. Don't injure yourself. Obviously you can't injure yourself on a bicycle, but you can easily do so while running. You may be surprised at how quickly your heart rate goes down to barely pumping. Astonished even.
lactate values is one of the things that - for cycling - is completely off in literature in my opinion. the average lactate value at ftp/maxlass is 5-7 mmol/L for cycling in my opinion. mine is more like 7-8 mmol/L.
nice video, in your calculator when i enter 330w ftp and 80:20 plan with 2 hrs per day, it says i should do 36 mins per week > @399w thats an absolutly crazy amount of "sprint" training...
OK thanks for your comment, but I can see why you are confused. First, this tool is not a training prescription it more an analysis tool ie description of what works in the literature....if you want our recommendation then go here: fft.tips/tpp. Next you say that 36min of 120min (30%) is crazy amount of "sprint". You are confusing high intensity with sprint (=z6), high intensity is actually z5 AND z6 (where v02 max =z5). In fact research present at the Training Peaks Endurance Coaching Summit last month (2019) showed up to 40% can be high intensity during race season!
Good video! Doesn’t the Coggan model have 7 zones? ...think you’re missing AWC Anerobic Work Capacity... zone 6... zone 7 is Neuromuscular power.. no? I think a much better method of tracking volume is in TSS (training stress score)... rather than hours or miles etc... it track the the physiological stress (time and intensity) and when you look at training through that lens and using PMC model it’s very apparent as you increase volume greater proportion of low intensity is not a choice it’s a physiological necessity... you are literally only physically able to do so much intensity and if you want greater volume more of HAS to come from lower intensity... What would be very interesting is studies that tested if you have 5hrs a week to train... 10hr... 15hr... 20.. 25... what is the best mix of [CORRECTION: intensity] would be... my hypothesis would be that as volume increases a greater proportion will/has to actually come from low intensity
TSS isn't a solution that works for everything, I think you need to combine it with IF. I have experienced this with my speed skating. A 1500m is only a 2 minute effort, so low TSS and high IF. But I always feel much more fatigued for the rest of the day in comparison with a 100k ride which is high TSS and low IF.
SvennyS well TSS kinda has IF built in... it is kinda the total physiological stress for a ride... so it’s kinda sorta measure of IF times so many hrs so yeah for sure... example: if I do a ~1hr AWC z6 workout = about 70TSS... 100km group ride usually ~50TSS per hour... so ~150TSS. so the chronic fatigue will be take more of a hit from the lower intensity group ride... BUT agree there are some things that TSS doesn’t capture... my legs could be WAY more stiff day after AWC day... doesn’t help you one bit with the optimum mix of actual workouts that you need to do for your goal... all it gives you is.. whatever you’re doing... this is what it’s costing you physiological... how much acute and chronic fatigue (ATL, CTL respectively).. TSS is great for managing how to ramp your volume to not over train... TSS also correlated with adaptation so tells you how much benefit from your training... as long as you’ve got the right mix of intensities for your goal...
Sure but if curious email me which days you ride and which days you rest (totaling 4hrs) and I'll send you a free personalized training plan of POL Vs other styles
Interesting video, clearly you have the data, but when I consider low intensity training, I would never target Zone 1 (Coggan) as I always consider these to be junk miles, all the advice I have ever read for low intensity suggests that you should target Zone 2, and upper Zone 2 at that but here you are suggesting spending most of your time in Z1?
The threshold vs polarised study you highlighted is quite misleading. I don’t know anyone in the real world who does 0 minutes in z3 in a 3 zone model. Of course the polarised training with 20% in z3 would be return better results when compared with training that has 0% in z3! A sweetspot plan with 0 time in z3 and a sweetspot plan with 1 z3 workout per week cannot even be compared. These studies also do not consider block periodisation where perhaps aerobic and muscular endurance is worked for a block, then shifting to a more polarised model with hiit training for a block, then returning again. Training should be tailored to individuals, not based on studies that exclude so many variables. For example I did a 3 week sweetspot block and rose my FTP by 5%, noticed my power test showed my FTP was 83% of power at vo2max, so I did a block of vo2max to lift the ceiling and my FTP rose by another 5% in another 3 weeks.
Have to disagree STRONGLY with you saying that you can use heart rate... you cannot use HR because the time all the higher intensity intervals > threshold are to short to use HR as a guide or track those intervals.. See in Sheet you changed the highest zone to zone6(&7) but still call in neuromuscular power... I have to say imho you chose wrong... if I had to choose one it would have been Anaerobic Work Capacity and Coggan calls zone 6.. that's because the VAST majority of that range is AWC and because zone 7 what Coggan actually calls "Neuromuscular" doesn't have a defined intensity (just as hard as you can go.. full on sprint) and intervals in that zone last only 5-10 seconds so could only hope to contribute max 2-3 minutes in a week... and is more like practice than training... it's the 'one of these zones that not like the other'
I agree its difficult to use just HR because of HR lag and drift, but it can still be more helpful than nothing at all (assuming no power meter). But if someone was training purely on HR I would simplify zones into the Seiler three zone system and prescribe training in a slightly different way to power meter based training.
Great video, thanks for doing that. This hole confusing area needed some clarification, which you provided. Now could you PLEASE do another to clarify what the best high intensity workouts are. The low intensity workouts are pretty straight forward, but not so for the high intensity.... Thanks!
@@wagvice1 Ah you mean what style of HIIT workout? true, we don't go into that here.....one for the future! *my current preference is V02 max intervals)
@@davidbest5413 Not from what can tell... there is no menu option to request on Sheets for Ipad Pro. However, there was an option in the Windows version as a drop down in "View Only" button.
Please follow my blog on cyclingapps.net or fft.tips/patreon for exclusives and for coaching its fastfitness.tips ♥
Where are your sources? i wanna read the tables u showed us
I was following a HIIT program x 2 years (returning to the sport after a 20 year gap) but after several over training/over reaching episodes I wanted to quit. I was not getting better and in-fact was falling behind. Depressed and frustrated but soon stumbled upon polarized training. Needless to say it saved my cycling life! I'm improving all the time (slowly), fatigue remains manageable and life is good. I use group rides for my HIT sessions but otherwise stay in Zone 1-2.
Yeah I was in the same spot. Then discovered Phil Maffetone and Dr Peter Attia. Zone 2 training seems to be best. I've improved so much since realizing most time should be in this zone.
I’m in the exact opposite place. Group rides for me now are my casual zone 1 rides, while my indoor seasons are now my high intensity zone rides.
Group rides tend to be hit or miss wrt power levels, and more often than not a miss.
Any type of interval training should only be done by advanced athletes who has done at least 2 years of consistent training. 1st year with focus on frequency, 2nd on distance/time.
@@viktorvaldemar you are not wrong but if you really have the discipline/will to do it, there's no reason why you shouldn't speed up your progress doing proper training in your beginner years
@@viktorvaldemar why?
I'm no expert but I've been training seriously for about 2 years straight now. I've found that you cannot neglect any one part of cycling unless you're OK with losing that strength. We obviously need base miles for the endurance aspect of the sport. We need high end training in order to build actual power in our legs. We ALSO need sweet spot/threshold/VO2 max training to train our legs for those sustained efforts. How much time we devote to each is maybe the million dollar question? I also approach training from a racing perspective. I'm not training to keep up with a group ride, I train to win races.
So how are you training exactly? Can you please share some details?
So true. It's good to mix it up. According to Dr. Peter Attia and Phil Maffatone, zone 2 training seems to be the most beneficial that helps on both ends of the spectrum. I've noticed training in that zone has helped me significantly with higher intensities training.
@@aamirnagaria2189 Again, I'm not expert. That being said, I think the 80/20 approach has been the most beneficial for me. So 80% of my time is spent doing zone 2 (6 zone model) and 20% is spent doing higher intensities (sweet spot and higher). So if you start in the off season, the 20% portion of your training progresses from sweet spot to threshold to VO2 max to 1 minute power as you get into the heart of the season. In my experience, these 'zones' build on each other. I need say 6-8 weeks of sweet spot before I can get into threshold efforts. I need the same amount of time doing threshold before I can start focusing on 5 minute Vo2 max efforts. You get the idea. Your training in-season should be more specific to your actual demands, but the aforementioned progression should put you in a pretty powerful place.
Just create a list of exercises, from 5 second to one hour. Say, fifteen levels. Do those every 2- 3 weeks. You don't do them all in one day. distribute at reasonable intervals. A long ride once every one to two weeks. Don't neglect a long fasted ride starting in the morning at least once a month, for metabolic adjustment to burn fat and protein. And a couple threshold rides a month on a mtb to put down power across rough terrain. Isolated leg work,.high/low cadence. seated and standing, drops / hoods. Just create a systematic list, and cover it. And then bias it for your favorite events - a bit more sprint for sprinters, a bit more climb for climbers.. No rider who doesn't do grand tours needs longer than a five day training block about every 3 weeks. So, just train and rest. Heavy focus on riding efficiently by riding at a fixed wattage and focusing on smooth pedal stroke and low perceived exertion. And spends lots of time on the drops under meaningful power, because thats what racing is. Also, cap hours to 10 a week, unless you are gonna do stage racing, in which case, model a training block after the stage race.
> We ALSO need sweet spot/threshold/VO2 max training to train our legs for those sustained efforts
That's not what the science suggests though. The papers quoted in this presentation suggest that polarized training leads to better outcomes at threshold despite having no training at that intensity.
I really liked this discussion. I have been running, swimming, cycling and lifting weights for many years. I do not compete but do track my cycling and physiologic responses with XERT, GARMIN products and WHOOP. Retired I have all the time I need to focus on these things and at the age of 64 seek improvement. Listening to this I was interested to see that the rides that I do mostly fall within a polarized style per XERT. I do very little intentional training focus in cycling because of traffic and lights and all those things that are hard to control with the exception that I can do sprints off of stops and surges for top end stress. I experimented on myself with lifting to increase strength whilst limiting riding in order to build structure over this winter and then backing off weights and ramping up cycling related stresses in the spring since COVID keeps me out of the gym and pool. My XERT power curve did not suffer at the high end over last year and I pretty much picked up where I left off it appears.
I am so thankful for all the work you put in these videos Alex. I'm a beginning cyclist and your videos have helped me tremendously!
Wonderful Robert, I am pleased to have helped you!
the best training method worked for me, after trying threshold, hiit and polarization based methods is this: RACE & REST. different than other methods, i felt much comfortable in real race paces, and much endurable too.
now i explain my method:
In the RACE day, the mission is to do our best simulated race which will resemble the details of the real race you're preparing yourself for. (like the length, elevation blah blah) So you gotta create a "race route". Then, as it is a race in some ways, you gotta find an opponent/s. It can be the virtual PR partner from Garmin of that race route segment or you can find a frenemy who is AT LEAST as good as you for the simulated race (the second one is the BEST way for simulated race training for better gains on race technique, like drafting, breakaway etc). Then you will prep a day before, your bike, tire pressures, electrolites and all stuff just like you do bfore your race. you gonna eat well and balanced before the challange just the same as you do bfore the real race. and you MUST go as full gas as possible in the race training. aim is a new pr or to pass your real partner/s. simply, you're racing! Warning: you'll get dropped many times. Never feel afraid. Just challenge again and again. And you'll see the real gain.
In the REST period (duration depends on your fitness level) do only 1h Z1/Z2 rest ride. NEVER exceed. focus on high cadence. This period can be from one day to three days between race trainings. Do not exceed 3 days, or your fitness may not be any better.
Repeat.
In each racing training, try to create a new route, which means your body will not be able to adapt to the grade profile time to time and get lazy.
You want to make sure your legs are at least 90% fresh right before race training. Otherwise, you will not produce desired stimulation on the muscles.
Stop this regime at least 3 days before the event you are preparing for, but keep on easy and short rest rides until the day comes.
I love your method of "race and rest" the only problem is you have to find the right races all year around as just the right level.
Ok but you (all together) race at Z4(and little Z5/6) and Z4 is “Z2” in polarized zone... do you agree??
You did some homework there! Cheers, fab!
Unless I'm missing something... I've had a look through that Stöggl and Sperlich paper. The training group for polarised averaged 106 hours of training over the period Vs only 66 hours for the group using the HIIT program. Doesn't seem like a very fair test. I appreciate doing just high intensity sessions you can't physically do as much volume.
However, the polarised training did 14 high intensity sessions (per week) but the HIIT program only did 3 more at 17 sessions. Coupled with all the extra work polarised did at low intensity. I don't see how you could expect anything other than polarised would come out on top.
So basically the Pol group was HIIT with a couple less sessions + a bunch of Z2?
That's really the basis of POL. You are racking up big TSS (I know not all TSS is the same) / hours with very little impact to the body. You take all those hours at Zone2, and it makes the body extremely efficient at handling everything in sport. It also keeps the athletes lean (think watts / kg).
@Steve King From everything I've read, pol can be done down to 8-10 hours. If you are time crunched, SST programs like trainer road may be more beneficial.
polarized training sounds like how most teenagers do it naturally
i remember when i had a bicycle, i liked to go out and use it for errands, like taking it slowly and not exerting myself
and with a few minutes of high cadence and high speed burst, then return to relaxed pedaling
and i think most teens do most of their playing like this
does this means that polarized training is the natural way of how most juveniles do to grow stronger?
while medium intensity seems to be done by adults and usually isnt fun and pleasant
Great point but sadly it is too psychological for getting people talking around it. I agree with you a 100%. I had the same experience and observations.
I guess it could come from the caveman times: first walking and tracking the animals for a longer time, and then short bursts of chase/hunting, and then bringin the food home, cooking and recovering. Would make sense why it works, but I have no science to back it up. Just a thought that I though while reading your comment.
That's not polarized training. In polarized training your slow rides are entirely slow. Endurance runners will literally walk up a hill to keep their heart rate down on a low intensity day. On the intensity days, they go close to all out.
Having followed "The Truth About Training" since the 1970's, it's going to be interesting to see you do the same kind of video in 10 years from now...
What proved efficient in the 70's, 80's and so on, hasnt really changed that much.
The buzz-word change, but the workout remains.
I agree with you...the basics....the golden rules are pretty much the same but we are talking about how to maximise gains: so maybe it's the details that change
The data is improved, hrm, power
I agree also - I started out in the 1980s and based my programs on Critical Power and later Critical Speed. But in essence nothing has changed very much except a more recent move into more HI sessions. But some folk have read the material and determined that the HI is more important than the LI, but in truth, the LI is what builds what I call the ínfrastructure on which the benefits of HI can be mounted. I also think that too few take the fundamental muscle fiber type dominance into account in the overall picture.
@@enidginn8986 true. Too many are not however interested in training (of course they still want to be fast and win races ;)) and are trying to have fun, therfore the topic of body types won't appeal to them.
I am a mesomorph and am struggling to find a good way to train, that would leverage my conditioning and waste lesser my time found things that are counter to my bio-type.
@@Northwindbreeze What is your sport? Specialty within that sport? Where are you aiming? How committed are you? These are the important questions IMVHO. I am confident that if all of these questions are answered, and the commitment is in place, that you can go wherever you want to go. As long as your body type does not limit you in your activity (as say a heavy person trying to perform well at gymnastics), the sky should be the limit.
Idk how I haven't found this channel before, but u have a new subscriber my friend
We are flying under the radar! please share our channel or this video; cheers!
I have always wondered about this. I think this is the correct way to train. I feel that the other training avenues are feeding off the Zwift training plans, TrainerRoad, TrainingPeaks and etc. An 80/20 training program is very simple, Zwift, TR, etc need it to be complicated to be able to monetize their training plans. Compare Matt Fitgerald 80-20 plan against a TrainerRoad plan.
Hmm, not sure how this popped up but i been looking for material like this. Awesome.
What a good video! People at gcn should up the level of "science" in their videos and treat viewers as intelligent beings like you do :D
GCN has a vastly different aim and audience
GCN is for making money, not necessarily educating people to a high (ish) level about their own fitness.
It’s not what they aim for. Not to say they are not trainers, just cyclists sharing tips in a mode everyone can understand, even non-cyclists. That’s why its called Global Cycling Network and not Cycling Science.
Oh my God... this is super massive useful video with a lot of information being compressed into one. Currently, I'm doing high volume low intensity training with only 1 Hiit / week. Your training calculator might be very helpful for me because I got a bit trouble in time management...thanks
How's this approach working for you? You're essentially doing polarized right now, no?
This is really good and it shows no one training principle rules all. It also shows the needs of a pro are far different than the training needs of a novice or even avid cyclist.
This is amazing, thank you for the content
Wow... so have you looked at how this applies post-covid? Or more specifically, for gradually escaping the gooey mess of long covid lung inflammation and tachycardia? I used to be a happy non-competitivs cyclist who treated hills as my zone 5 opportunities, but now after slightly more than 2 years post-covid... riding up small hills is just starting to become feasible again. Reading or listening to training response theory has seemingly helped a lot. So thank you for your coherent and pragmatic advice!
Thank you so much for your time to share such invaluable information.
I just wanted to comment that Dr Seiler and his polarized method recommended that its not worth going much above 108% of threshold or 90% of max Heart rate. Its simply too taxing for not much gain. The ultimate question is these studies are taking on 6-8 weeks in duration. So we see benefits for that timeline. But is this advisable for 52 weeks a year? Probably not. But of high value to do on an 8 week build to bump some fitness. Id like to hear your thoughts!
You got the point! Lot of people dont. Need to look at the big picture. Polarized could be the best before racing season to get those very hard efforts done before racing. But what about after racing season or before that polarized period... a lot of "depends" questions here. Best idea to mix it up for personal goals.
To add to that comment. 108%? We’re not talking 60 seconds. His findings stated 4x8 minutes at 108% ftp or 90% of heart rate max. With only 2 minutes rest. I’m pretty darn sure this will get your 4mmol. So time at intensity is the critical aspect. I do believe most athletes would need to work up to 108% for 4x8minutes. That’s tough stuff. If it’s not, Your zones are probably not accurate.
Thanks Tom Bell. I appreciate your feedback. I do believe in a blend and gradual transition into specific blocks with multiple types of focus throughout a season. Of course dependent on athletes goals and adjusting based on individual ability levels. Thanks for your thoughts.
@@jtriathletejtj Well for example, In july my 20min power was 240Watts (which was in the best case scenario a 228Watts ftp), meanwhile my 5min power was 350Watts. 108% of my ftp (246Watts ? ) would have been way too easy for 8min interval.
@collax Wow your 5min power is absolutely huge, especially compared to FTP and 20min power. Must be your strength as of now, i think. Is your 1min power high too by any chance?
Great video. Awesome references. Keep up the good work and thank you for the calculator!
Nice one Alex. One thing to note in the Stöggl & Sperlich study is that they primarily used the incremental VO2max ramp protocol to evaluate the effects of the 4 training interventions. VO2peak is just one of the many factors determining success in endurance sport. We know that performance at and around your LT and how well you can operate at that fraction of VO2peak is also important. This study did not evaluate one of the gold standards of a cycling performance test which is the 40K TT. I would prefer if this study was replicated/expanded by the same authors to include additional performance outcomes before we pin-down precisely what TIDs are optimal. Thoughts?
Very good points, let's hope this study is replicated along lines that you suggest!
I didn't know you could directly map VT1 to LT1 and VT2 to LT2 like you are showing at 6:00. Are you are this is correct? Thanks
I’m curious as to how effective cardiovascular endurance will help with a sport like Rugby League. It’s 80 minutes of fairly constant low level running with sporadic hits of intense sprinting and grappling. How would these zones fit into someone who needs to have the ability to perform very high intensity hits of energy ?
Great work guys! Thanks a lot for the info!
HIIT & Threshold are session types you can employ in polarised training. So I’m not sure how you can compare them.
Hi, great video. I have a question though - aren't the results affected by total hours? You can see in table 1 (15:22) the groups differ. You can also see in THR group there are no high intensity sessions included. What about SweetSpot model which include also fair amount of VO2Max and Anaerobic sessions?
Hi Sahal, I love your comment as it shows you are reading this critically! Yes absolutely there are flaws in some of these primary studies mainly 1. exercise total hours should be controlled, but isnt always 2. exercise history should be equal in each group using at the least a matching procedure and ideally a "wash out" pre-training period 3. the order of the blocks should be randomized. Having said that some researchers do take these into account and overall evidence is fairly consistent......BUT the field is still in evolution so do expect further developments and lessons in this area. Finally regarding sweetspot I cannot find any scientific papers using randomization on it? Can you (I mean as distinct from threshold per se)?
@@Fastfitnesstips Thanks a lot for the quick answer :) Unfortunately I don't have access to the research. I am just a regular amateur cyclict with inclination to understand what I am actually doing :) I train using TrainerRoad and they structure the training plans by mostly relying on SweetSpot workouts with addition of some work near Threshold (Under-Overs), VO2Max, Sprints as well as sessions in Zones 1-2. I try to extend cooldowns to 5-10 minutes more (Zone 1). It adds up in time. This approach works for me but maybe there is better way. It would be great to know if there is an scientific proof which approach is actually the best.
@@sahalidis This is notoriously hard to answer in a study. "the best" program is going to depend on your limiters, strengths, adaptation rate, recovery rate, detraining rate, sleep, diet, available time etc... It is very difficult to control these variables. I would say, if you are improving, keep milking it until it doesn't work any more. Your training should not be static, what works one year may not work the next and some changes may need to be made to continue optimal progress.
Cycling is mostly aerobic unless you're JUST a short distance track sprinter. This means your cardiovascular system plays the biggest role in performance and since this system is working it's hardest around 70% of max HR, that is where you should spend the majority of time. Then occasionally you can 'test' your systems progression by going all out, maybe once a week or twice if you're young (under 30). This can be a race which will truly stretch your system. Once you have raced you'll realise you can't really go that hard in training and trying to do so will simply burn you out.
Your TIZ calculator returns efficiencies Polarized 80/20 ‘Above average’ and HVLI ‘Well above average’. Shouldn’t it be the other way around? (30’ test LTHR 175 bpm; 3:45 hr/week, 2 days off)
Do you really answer what "normal" people with 6-10 hrs to spend training, should do? Should they do more like 50-50 or 60-40(versus 80-20) to get the most out of their time? Maybe periodizing from 80-20 to 70-30 and 60-40(during a 3-5 months offseason) or something similar? Polarized model.
Sadly there isn't one answer, because it depends on the person's history, but in terms of how much around 13% HIIT might be the best (th-cam.com/video/ZXNOF8LzZTE/w-d-xo.html) however your periodized polarized model looks good, a bit like this? (th-cam.com/video/ZXNOF8LzZTE/w-d-xo.html)
You do not really have to think in advance of the %. Basically you have your 2 intervals training per week (depending on your distance it might be 3 but you take off your long distance then) and the rest are easy. So whether you have 6 or 15 hours to train, basically you do the same time of high intensity, you just add your easy volume for whatever time you have left in your week. That being said , the less you trained the closer to 50/50 you'll get, but you do not have to try to fit these numbers, it is just a tendency that you can observe.
Great information! It's extremely hard and stressful to follow a polarized plan the whole year because of the HIIT and I find it a recipe for burning out your body and mind. What I find it to work the best for me at the end of my season I take some time off the bike not just for the body, but also the mind, usually 2 to 3 weeks then follow by 4 to 6 weeks of strength training and low endurance ride mostly recreational then build your base from 3 to 4 months including lots of sweet spot and a little HIIT the finals 2 weeks and then I polarized my training the rest of the season with 2 HIIT a week and the rest of the time in zone 2. I train 8 to 12 hours a week.
This is fantastic. Thank you.
Amazing insight, thank you!
Thank you for the calculator. Unfortunately something is wrong with it. It is stuck on tid 78 10 12.
Great stuff!!! Thank u
Thanks for this great presentation. One thing I'm struggling to understand though is why your suggested polarized workouts have any tempo and threshold training at all when the papers you quote earlier in the presentation suggest that the best way to improve tempo and threshold efforts is to not train them at all, and instead train endurance and VO2Max
Can you refer the fist paper mentioned at 03:00?
very good video. Thanks!
Great Video , I've always thought time in Zone seems the most logical way to go , so if we seperate Heart rate and Power how much time in a week should a cyclist spend Vo2 max and above in both Power and Heart rate , sometimes i'll have spent a total of 45mins with my HR 90-95% through accumilated fatique with my power being nowhere near Vo2 Max , alternativley I've done Vo2 max intervals with my Heart rate well below 90% because they are too short , perhaps i should be doing them at 130% or for longer or pre-exhausting etc etc , anyway i'm not sure what is too much or too little at 58yrs old.
Thank you for this great video. I was wondering whether I misunderstood from Stephen Seilers videos that he does not consider TIZ as the basis for polarization, but rather the number of session. I believe he mentions in that video that this is a widespread misconception, but I might have misinterpreted that. Any comment ?
Hello. I really enjoyed this video, and it's changed the way I think about training. Thank you. But I wonder whether the same rules of thumb around Easy/Moderate/Max polarisation applies to older folk who are interested in retaining what they have rather than striving to improve? I'm in my early 70s so would you advise the same 80/0/20 % distribution as for older "athletes" like me? Thanks.
I'm very interested in learning how polarized training would work in say 6 month periodized training plan
Thank you for such an informative video. I'm currently doing a Threshold plan and it is very taxing. I have also mistaken Threshold zone as high intensity, because I always do it at 15 mins or longer duration. I have always thought that the best way to improve FTP for a time crunched cyclist is to do as much threshold and sweetspot as possible ,with 1 long ride. "Any how, I'm still confused about the advantage and disadvantage of normal 80:20 and the stöggl and sperlich 80:20. I have used the helpful excel sheet provided."
I want to apply this to cross country running to improve my backpacking performance. I'm backpacking 500-1000 miles a year but that's only 3 months of the year. I'm starting to train with RUN/WALK/RUB cross country. I'm 66 and just started hiking three years ago. I train on a trail that's an 8 mile loop and need to figure out how much time to spend at different HR zones. I'm now just doing 8 miles as fast as I can once a week and doing 16 miles in zone 2-3. I'm up and down hills (1500 feet of Elevation gain in 8 miles) so I cannot stay in one zone all the time but I can take it easy going up some of the hills or I can go to zone 5 for a minute or two every so often but just running up them as fast as I can . . . Trying to figure this out. It's hard to do a lot of zone 1-2 except on the down hills and it's easy to do the middle and high zones because trails lend themselves to those zones.
What are your views on MAF training by Dr Phil Maffetone?
I just started a polarized base phase on Trainer Road, and what I am getting is 80% of Zone 1 and Zone 2 (in a 6 zone model) and 1 day of threshold with intervals of 16 minutes at 105% FTP. Is this what you recommend not to do when you say not to do "based miles and just threshold"?
Ive got a question regarding the polarized training method. Following the 80-20. For a person that has 6 hours a week thats 72 minutes of vo2 max, done in 2 days thats 36 mins of time in zone. For a person with 12 hours available is it double? 18 hour triple? I find it too much work to fit in a week
I end up cycling in zone 3 and 4 just to keep up. Should I find different cycling companions.
Is there a breakdown of what training plan the individual subjects were on in figure 12 at 16:36? It would be interesting to see if a particular plan caused big gains for some but also big losses for others. Or if certain plans just gave mediocre results for everyone. Thanks.
Damn, it is alot for a beginner to process. I did sweestpot with Trainerroad last winter and sure my ftp went up but i stilled sucked at longer rides compared to my mates. So this winter i am going for 3 months of zone 1 (55-75%) in your video and then after that mabey some polarized training blocks? I really feel that i lack a solid base. But what do i know... Anyhow, nice video, very intresting! 👍
This winter, try a combination of z1/z2 (base) with z4/z5 intervals whilst slowly increasing your TSS (the calculator might help you). Having a motivational target like zwift races or anything your enjoy on the bike is also important!
Love this video! I have found, when you only train indoor on a program like TrainerRoad, it never accommodates for Up and Down terrain and most importantly CdA. Which makes your “base” training from TrainerRoad good but not real world. If you follow something like this video points out, IMO, you would be better for outdoor rides.
I am a powerlfiter, so I squat and deadlift twice per week and do good emphasis on leg training on those days. I want to maintain my muscle mass and strength as much as possible while also gaining endurance on the bike. What would you suggest for me? A lot of Zone 1 and 2 (of the 6 or 7 zone model)? Since I already do 1 minute long sets in de gym (for hamstrings, glutes and especially quads) where I completely empty my legs for that moment? I also do some supersets where I get out of breath quite a bit. I always believed this had some positive impact on my VO2max.
I mainly want to increase my long effort sustainable power output (>6h) since I am going on a cycling journey where we will cycle 6+ hours a day at low intensity.
What kind of training split dop you suggest given the 6 or 7 zone model given that I can train maximally 8 hours per week on the bike, but probably more like 6 hours?
Who Do You Leson2 U GOOD.
Interesting video, and the calculator is a great idea, thanks. But having reviewed both Stoggl/Sperlich studies, I can't figure out where you are getting a 70/8/22 time-in-zone breakdown from?
I wouldn't worry, all TIZ figures have been recalculated from scratch for the end goal, an effective training plan with the ability to control TIZ or have an algorithm work it out: see shop.cyclingapps.net/adaptive-cycling-plan/
Gave like before I saw it...this is the topic I like
What happens if you plateau on the polarized approach, does it happen? I know most workout regime causes athletes to need a change after about 6-8 weeks, does this also hold true for 80/20? Is the 80/20 training type best year round?
If you train by heart rate at or close to LT 1 , after consistent time your power will start moving up.
It took me 12 weeks to go from 180 watts to 215 at my LT1.
Regardless you will have to program some form of progressive overload. Even with polarised training.
Polarised training a a training philosophy. Not a hard program.
@@damon123jones how are you doing with your training? Got again a higher FTP?
During your 12 weeks did you spebd any time doing HIIT or gray zone? Thx
If lactic acid is produced from high carbs intake, will I increase my lactic acid threshold if I eat very low carbs
you'll crash and burn from the lack of energy. if you want to raise your lactic acid resistance/threshold then you have to train your body to deal with it. that's the thinking about riding at sweetspot because you are training your body to work at the threshold and thus adapt to the stress.
I usually did: Monday=Recovery training; tuesday=day off; wednesday= sweet spot; thursday=zwift race or Vo2 max training outside; friday= recovery training; saturday/sunday= very long ride with everything a bit and the other day mostly z2. Every 4-5 weeks a recovery week with less volume and mostly z2. Got my 20 min FTP to 320W@67 kg from nothing in 2 years. Now I feel like a hit a plateu in the last month. Any reccomondations?
hmm that's a pretty good routine! have you got your historical data in strava? if so, sync it with intervals.icu using this invite: fft.tips/icu ; and i will have a look for you.
@@Fastfitnesstips Yes I have all on strava. I synced it. I hope it worked :D However, I wasnt very consistend in the last weeks and I got a powermeter for outside just 2 months ago. Before that I did the intense stuff on my Elite Direto on Zwift.
Same weight as u but ftp now is only 150W. You are an inspiration!
@@wavemusic11 very happy to hear such things :) was a lot of work to get there and there is still plenty room for improvement.
Also you will improve a lot!!
@@raphaeltiziani7476 thanks for the motivation. Mind sharing how many hours you train a week? I've just finished 6 weeks of sweetspot base from trainerroad. It really focus almost 90% on sweetspot and threshold over unders. Very minimal zone 1/2 endurance cycling. Kinda burnout from this.
Great piece. Thanks. You are right with beginners not coping with polarised model well. What’s your take on helping them adapt?
hi, good q! Like all things in training, if you want to make a change, do so gradually. Adding huge amounts of HITT or even base is not going to work, so keep an eye on the TSS per week and build it up slowly. Second rotate in adequate rest, not just rest days but relatively low volume blocks. Third when doing base, make sure they are keeping in z1/z2 most of the time. Fourth when doing HITT/VO2max try and find a workout that is least unpleasant for that person.
Outstanding video how do I get your spreadsheet
www.Cyclingapps.net/calculators is a good start, or the video description!
Unsure how time crunched is shorthand for easily bored
This is a massive over-simplification that draws over heavily on Seiler. The reality is that athletes at the elite level use periodised training meaning that the intensity distribution varies massively throughout the season as they move through base build and race prep phases.
agreed, all these short term studies can tell is us the best strategy for peaking, which we know polarized training is best for. but in reality over the long term athletes perform better when periodizing base, pyramidal and polarized training strategies.
Thanks, rhis explains a lot
Polarised is quite ill defined in a sense. Is it training days 20:80? Is it time in zone 20:80?
Apparently if you really count “time on zone” for elite athletes, it is close to 10:90.
HIIT consume energy and resource stored in muscle to deliver burst of energy, unfortunately at a low system efficiency state. As a result some muscle get permanent damaged, trash and our body recycle those back into same or other parts of our body as situation calls for. After damage is done and if soon our body received relevant nutritional food, during sleep, it will reconstruct for those loss muscle with more muscle. Hence body building. Body builders don’t do aerobics all day long, but they do HITT all day long, from one muscle or group to the next. That makes cyclists the leg muscle but body builders. Those new muscles also benefit cyclists performance in a broad range of demand from aerobic, endurance, up slope and through final approach.
Just using your calculator to schedule out a weekly polarized schedule using Time In Zone... I'm only doing ~4hr/4workout per week at this point... I have found that 80% of Zone 1 (3 zone model) comes from warmup, cool down & interval recovery... with only one dedicated endurance workout.
Question: Does it matter that zone 1 is split up all over the place like that... e.g. Coggan has indicated that threshold intervals should be at least 7mins long to get the physiological benefit... anything like that for zone 1?
No there is no rule that z1 z2 or z3 be concentrated in any particular grouping, the total TSS or HRtrimp (load) will be dominant. So you will be fine. Just try and follow the basic rules of training: consistency/ rest / overload / variation
I am defenitly not smart enough to understand even half of everything you said. Just the zones alone are confusing.
What I have learned is that I should do way more low intensity training. I'm used to doing not much trainging, and when I train it's in the zone that you would try to avoid if you are doing polarised training.
Really informative fairly new to cycling and really appreciate the time and effort put in to this.
When doing a 'harder'/ Zone 6 interval session. After warm-up, cooldown, Z1 between sets and Z1 between bursts, I probably only achieve 30-40% of the workout in Z6.
I have a feeling it is going to be very tough to ensure 20% of my total riding is Z5/6. Are two interval sessions after a rest day per week adequate? Or should Z5/6 be mixed in to the Z1/2 rides on days following interval sessions to bump up to the 20% overall?
The most basic rule of training is to make sure your overall volume (and yes load too) is manageable vs your recent history (this is called TSB or "fatigue" in analytic tools); assuming this is ok, and you are aiming for a 80:20 plan then 80:20 is basically the average for the week (not necessarily one session or even one day).....so in your example if you are at 85:15 in the week so far, yes you can add another high intensity session to average out at 80:20 by the end of the week. btw, if you can only manage 30% in z6 but this is your best effort, thats fine, you have found your current limit, its something to work on over time (but 30% z6 is a lot!)
This debate is endlessly frustrating for normal people that just want to improve their heart and cardiovascular health. I keep finding more studies showing superior cardiac improvements from >90% HIIT versus 70% steady state. Heart chamber dilation (left ventricular eccentric hypertrophy) is frequently given as the main argument for Zone 2 saying that supposedly the heart chambers cannot fill entirely above Zone 2. But many HIIT studies mention even chamber size as increasing more from HIIT.
What intensity distribution do you recommend for optimally increasing heart chamber size and stroke volume?
Why do you think the latest HIIT studies show superior results even for LV eccentric hypertrophy?
I gave you a like, already subscribed, I shared the video, and I still feel like it is not enough.
Thanks a lot.
You are my fantasy viewer! 😂
I want to do an Ironman next year, found my limiter to be tte after 4 h or so no matter what I eat, figure It would be best to train unsexy (Mark Allen definition = fasted and low intensity) until building up starts, which is 28 weeks. In these I would do mostly polarized. Would you agree, any remarks? Great vid by the way!
Time to exhaustion is not fixed but very much a reflection of 1 your power curve (TTE really extends a lot with good training) 2. good nutrition 3. correct pacing 4. motivation. You can get a lot of insights into exhaustion using our bonking calc fft.tips/bonk. Feel free to contact me for more details personalized advice.
If the 80:20 plan give a score of Superior/slightly inefficient, and Sweetspot skewed training give Superior/average efficiency. Should I do Sweetspot?
"Efficiency" in the plan does not necessary equate to gains, it just means that tss / per min is high. To find the best plan for you, use fft.tips/tpp as this will match a number of variables to the likely optimal approach
@@Fastfitnesstips Thank you
I typed in my data on the website; and find that it would really hard to hit any of the V02 benchmarks year round with the polarized model. I think that incorporating the 80/20 plan closer to race time is good, but not sustainable year round unless you just want to ride
Hi Peter are you saying that the polarized model is too easy or too hard? The idea is basically you don't ride at or close to vo2 max regularly all year around on its own, but you can combine vo2 max with other HIT session and and ease off a bit in the winter and also cut back on threshold and sweetspot...making more room for low intensity and the high intensity (which is modest)
@@Fastfitnesstips Yeah for example my ftp is 317; I am doing a 15 hour week and the suggested training volume is at 1 hour and 8 minutes at vo2 and 34 min at 120% +; just seems bonkers. Also doing 9 hours at z1 is equally maddening. The rest of the schematics seem feasible tho. (ss/tempo/endurance)
@@petervlad6289 can you send me a screenshot to info@faatfitness.tips and I can look in more detail
EXCELLENT!
How does Maffetone method training compare to polarized training?
(a) Any method based on HR estimation alone is going to be inaccurate. (b) I don't think there are any studies on this method (c) As I understand it, Maffetone method is low intensity *only*. This will not work if you goal if anything except long endurance rides (d) polarized has been studied but multiple independent groups and whilst it is not a panacea it is evidence based
What is the best way to work Seiler's zones with the more traditional Coggan zones in terms o FTP percentage
Use fft.tips/tiz if that doesnt work for you let me know
@@Fastfitnesstips Thank you I really appreciate it
what is better super-efficient or superior, in terms of adjectives?
One is absolute, the other is relative ;)
Nice graphs and PDF files but I find that your video lacks specificity for each athlete ! Training for gran fondo, crits or TT is not the same. As a long distance triathlete, I must spent time in the so called grey area/zone 2 since it's the specificity of my sport.
Very true, this is not a universal training plan calculator/video its really about how to understand and categorize time-in-zone
Another great video. I did SS on TT followed by more specific plan for a total of 16 weeks and my frp went from 235 to 278 at 159 lbs. At some point you platau. I train for 24h TT with 410 miles being my best. What training would you suggest. Obviously I need to maintain SS for long durations and is not really about climbing or sprints . Thanks in advance
OK, you are talking about training a specialist type of ultra event...24hr TT. I have just coached a top 5 finisher in the British 24hr TT and the plan we used was a build phase of progressive TSS increase focusses on long rides at the power predicted from the power curve for that ride, then after some months a switch to a heavy periodized (cyclical) approach with polarized 1 to 2 weeks interspersed by a very long threshold ride. This approach is designed to boost then hold the threshold for a long time....until event day (without burning out). if you need more help let me know.
@@Fastfitnesstips thanks a bunch. Perhaps I need more info. Currently FTP at 255 after some losses during 65h finish at Paris Brest Paris . Doing world 24h TT in 3 weeks. Am I waiting my time with SS? A bit late for gains now and it's rather specific for the upcoming event. I just wonder how should I approach next season. My big goal will be Silver State 508 and Transcontinental. Can u get more in depth on the specific time and zones spent in order to get where I need to ?
@@Fastfitnesstips Your answer was actually spot on. I just need to design my own plan bases on your suggestion. Make perfect sense.
@@s-ultracycling can you email me on coaching@fastfitness.tips and i will try and look at this for you. But no you are not wasting time in SS but you need to combine it with other workouts.
Sorry. On iPhone 8 Google Sheets. Nothing seems to get out of View only. I was able to edit fields in ur other doc.
So the polarized training study you referenced, it doesn't specify what the protocol was for the POL HIIT sessions. Was is 4x4 with 3 min rest like the HIIT group, or something different?
From the Stoggle2014 paper.....The POL included three blocks, each lasting 3 weeks: 2 weeks of
high volume and intensity training followed by 1 week of recovery. The high volume and intensity week included six
sessions with two 60 min HIIT sessions, two 150-240 min long duration LOW sessions (duration according to training mode: cycling, running or roller skiing), which included six to eight
maximal sprints of 5 s separated by at least 20 min, and two 90 min LOW sessions. The recovery week included one 60 min HIIT session, one 120-180 min LOW session and one 90 min LOW session. Regarding the HIIT session, yes it included a 4 × 4 min at 90-95% of HRpeak with 3 min active recovery and a 15 min cool-down at 75% HRpeak
Sounds like someone has been listening to velonews podcasts! (especially the Dr Seiler episodes)
Do you have a link? I have heard quite a few dr seiler podcasts...but mainly on scientific triathlon and flo cycling.
is there any advantage to doing say 2 rides a week that are 4-5 hours long , compared to 3 rides that are 3 hours long? ...all done in zone 1 on the 3 zone model
Yes, especially if the 3x shorter rides are higher intensity. BUT let's assume the TSS for both comparisons are the same, then there is still a small advantage of three over two rides per week.
@@Fastfitnesstips are there certain adaptations that you primary get from only doing longer rides (4-5 hours)?
How do i determine what I've been doing for the past year? Wko5 or what? I like the idea of making a tiz plan but then how i take that histogram of time in zone and then convert it into a series of workouts sounds like something that involves more time than i have to invest in making a plan
Hi regarding making a plan from these zones, we have already done that, just tell me what plan you are interested in (eg www.trainingpeaks.com/my-training-plans/fastfitnestips). regarding reviewing the year, I suggest doing it week-by-week, for example intervals.icu will give you a weekly zone summary.
@@Fastfitnesstips thanks, I think I might try one of those but.. i have one question on the concept of, "bad to do all base intensity and bad to do all high intensity". During the summer i might do 10 hours/week but a lot of it is unstructured with racing with only maybe 2 structured workouts/week.. and in the winter i end up doing more high intensity structured workouts but much less hours of training volume so that in the end, I have almost the same amount of time in high intensity zones in summer and winter but much LESS time in base zones during the winter. I don't see how this kind of winter plan would cause me to get burnt out. a 4 hour/week plan like this might be 50% active recovery/endurance, 25% tempo/FTP, 15% VO2 max, and 10% anaerobic.. this isn't really polarized training but at the same time I don't see this sort of winter plan as being likely to cause burnout. Quite on the contrary, if I were to ramp up the base training time such that i was closer to an 80/20 polarized idea, I would need to up my active recovery/endurance zone time by about 4 hours to make it an 8 hour/week winter training plan which could be more likely to cause burnout since i never see a reduction in my weekly training volume hours from summer to winter.
@@isaacyoung1868 the answer depends if your races are all high intensity or not. In terms of efficiency for different plans vs time the model did seem to consider time allocated per day. So while maybe on low hours HIIT won't wear you out, it may not be the most efficient option, is my reading. I also train different in off season and build to A race. Having said that my volume is growing year on year till my off season this year is in line with my mid season previously.
I guess you would use the model for a given training phase to fine tune what the most efficient option might be. For me, I might take the 80/20 and apply it to a weekly plan.
So, does that mean that you wouldn't recommend the trainerroad sweet spot base high volume plan? It heavily emphasizes SST sessions with 8 to 10 hours of indoor training per week over 12 weeks.
Trainerroads argument is that sst training is much more effective for time crunched athletes since zone 1 sessions need to be quite long to have any positive impact on performance.
I cannot say without seeing it in detail, with the intensity x duration.....plus it depends on the individual, BUT in general any plan with more threshold/sweetspot than either low intensity or high intensity is not going to be very efficient for most people according to nearly every study in endurance sports. However some threshold WITH base and HIIT is usually fine. (ps all I can see about TR plan is www.trainerroad.com/all-cycling-training-plans#sweet-spot-base which is very vague)
@@valelantin1991 I think threshold (z2 seiler) and HIIT (z3 seiler) but no HVLI (zone 1 seiler) *could work* as a strong training stimulus that might appeal to time crunched athletes......but it would be a recipe for burnout unless that athlete loved those sessions. I guess as a temporary measure then yes. That said, I have never seen a study on that particular combination!
Thanks for your answer and my apologies for my late response, I recently rediscovered your excellent video. :-) Those trainerroad plans are very, very sweet spot heavy. For example: The high volume sweet spot base plan (its purpose is to build a big aerobic base) averages 9-10 hours per week and consists of 5 (!) Sweet spot sessions (60-120 minutes each) and one base ride at around 65 % of FTP per week. In my opinion, this is really intense for base phase (their base plans cover 12 weeks). After struggling through one of those base plans I continued with 8 weeks of their "build phase" plans. Those are even harder...usually 2 sessions at around 65% of ftp, 3 sweet spot workouts and 1 or 2 VO2max sessions per week averaging around 9,5 hours per week...I am not a coach, but to me it seems that the trainerroad concept of hurting yourself for a really long period of time (12 weeks base + 8 weeks build + 8 weeks speciality) won't lead to "stable" performance gains over the long term. Maybe one can boost race fitness over 4 weeks with such a program, but in the long run this just HAS to lead to burn out, right?^^ It just contradicts everything science says. :-D
Very interesting takeaways here! Still wondering about the +20% of efforts in Zone 3 though (aka above treshold). I am training for a Marathon and if I say I run 8 hours a week that means I should run 96 minutes above treshold. That sounds extremly hard, especially as one should do those kind of speeds in intervall sessions. I always went with a good amount of tempo/treshold running and thought this is a great workout for all kinds of distances from 10k to the Marathon. What do u think?
Fartlek? (Not dedicated interval sessions, but Z3 incorporated into your usual long runs), 12 minutes of Z3 in every hour of your running doesn't sound that bad ;) th-cam.com/video/e3PzUqfb0wo/w-d-xo.html
Question: in the calculator, you get efficiency estimates. But how do they compare? I.e., is slightly efficient better than above average?
Ranking is now.......Incredibly efficient
Super-efficient
Very-efficient
Well above average
Above average
Average efficiency
Below average
Slightly inefficient
Very inefficient
Very very inefficient
Horribly inefficient
I attempted the polarized model over the last two years. 80% easy/20% vo2max or more. But I'm not sure it is the best model for a time crunched amateur w 10 to 15 hours/week. Maybe sweetspot at least once a week is not such a bad thing
Good feedback.....I agree it doesn't suit everyone especially if done very strictly.
Hi. I did 2 club ride per week and I'm very busy with my work and can only spend 2x 1hr on my trainer. Can the polarized training still benefit me or should I focus more on sweet spot and high intensity if I only have 2x 1hr on trainer?
Thank you.
capture your data to strava, then sync with intervals.icu (its free) then it will give you a weekly summary of your zones and time-in-zone.....then you will know what you are currently doing. If you have less HIIT than sweetspot or threshold, then you have a problem and need to adjust. BUT yes low volume doesnt mean you cannot be polarized.
I think 2 hours of HIT is plenty so long as you don't injure yourself, which you won't if you have a bicycle trainer. Runners and CrossFiters are insanely prone to injury.
Do you have a heart rate monitor? If you don't, stop right there and get a cheapo wrist mounted one, because without the HR monitor you won't ever know what zone you're in.
Spin your heart rate up to 160-180 or whatever is nearly your threshold, then spin gently down to 80-100, do this 5-10 times. Done.
That won't take more than ten to twenty minutes.
@@langhamp8912 haha if my hr is at 180 it's not getting back to 100 any time soon. 5-10 times?? Nooooo.
@@Fastfitnesstips intervals.icu is GOLDEN! Thanks!!! 😎😎😎
@@ironmantooltime There's numerous articles showing how effective HIT is, but with a BIG caveat. Don't injure yourself. Obviously you can't injure yourself on a bicycle, but you can easily do so while running.
You may be surprised at how quickly your heart rate goes down to barely pumping. Astonished even.
thanks per video! How do I get the kilometers per week spreadsheet?
Do you mean fft.tips/icu ?
lactate values is one of the things that - for cycling - is completely off in literature in my opinion. the average lactate value at ftp/maxlass is 5-7 mmol/L for cycling in my opinion. mine is more like 7-8 mmol/L.
FTP is a load of bs. Train by lactate if you have a chance to measure and analyze.
nice video, in your calculator when i enter 330w ftp and 80:20 plan with 2 hrs per day, it says i should do 36 mins per week > @399w thats an absolutly crazy amount of "sprint" training...
OK thanks for your comment, but I can see why you are confused. First, this tool is not a training prescription it more an analysis tool ie description of what works in the literature....if you want our recommendation then go here: fft.tips/tpp. Next you say that 36min of 120min (30%) is crazy amount of "sprint". You are confusing high intensity with sprint (=z6), high intensity is actually z5 AND z6 (where v02 max =z5). In fact research present at the Training Peaks Endurance Coaching Summit last month (2019) showed up to 40% can be high intensity during race season!
@@Fastfitnesstips it says 36 mins per week between 399w and 1650w... that cant be right.. thats not what dr seilers research shows.
@@velo1337 at 330w FTP....it actually says 349.5w (106%) to 1650w (max 1sec power).....but what do you think Seilers z3 should be??
the 48 min between 350w and 399w is right tho (on a 10hr per week training regime)
@@velo1337.....Change the training plan (drop down) if you don't like the distribution
Good video!
Doesn’t the Coggan model have 7 zones? ...think you’re missing AWC Anerobic Work Capacity... zone 6... zone 7 is Neuromuscular power.. no?
I think a much better method of tracking volume is in TSS (training stress score)... rather than hours or miles etc... it track the the physiological stress (time and intensity) and when you look at training through that lens and using PMC model it’s very apparent as you increase volume greater proportion of low intensity is not a choice it’s a physiological necessity... you are literally only physically able to do so much intensity and if you want greater volume more of HAS to come from lower intensity...
What would be very interesting is studies that tested if you have 5hrs a week to train... 10hr... 15hr... 20.. 25... what is the best mix of [CORRECTION: intensity] would be... my hypothesis would be that as volume increases a greater proportion will/has to actually come from low intensity
TSS isn't a solution that works for everything, I think you need to combine it with IF. I have experienced this with my speed skating. A 1500m is only a 2 minute effort, so low TSS and high IF. But I always feel much more fatigued for the rest of the day in comparison with a 100k ride which is high TSS and low IF.
SvennyS well TSS kinda has IF built in... it is kinda the total physiological stress for a ride... so it’s kinda sorta measure of IF times so many hrs
so yeah for sure... example: if I do a ~1hr AWC z6 workout = about 70TSS... 100km group ride usually ~50TSS per hour... so ~150TSS.
so the chronic fatigue will be take more of a hit from the lower intensity group ride...
BUT agree there are some things that TSS doesn’t capture... my legs could be WAY more stiff day after AWC day... doesn’t help you one bit with the optimum mix of actual workouts that you need to do for your goal... all it gives you is.. whatever you’re doing... this is what it’s costing you physiological... how much acute and chronic fatigue (ATL, CTL respectively)..
TSS is great for managing how to ramp your volume to not over train... TSS also correlated with adaptation so tells you how much benefit from your training... as long as you’ve got the right mix of intensities for your goal...
@@drapetomaniack You are totally right my dude.
Even after Dylan Johnson's video, I'm still not convinced that polarized would really be effective on my average of 4 hrs/week of cycling
Sure but if curious email me which days you ride and which days you rest (totaling 4hrs) and I'll send you a free personalized training plan of POL Vs other styles
@@Fastfitnesstips I would like te receive one aswell if possible. Always have difficulties putting a polarized schema together. Thanks in advance
Interesting video, clearly you have the data, but when I consider low intensity training, I would never target Zone 1 (Coggan) as I always consider these to be junk miles, all the advice I have ever read for low intensity suggests that you should target Zone 2, and upper Zone 2 at that but here you are suggesting spending most of your time in Z1?
I was mainly talking about seller z1 which is Coggan z1 and z2...if you want a personalized recommendation try out calculator fft.tips/tpp
The threshold vs polarised study you highlighted is quite misleading. I don’t know anyone in the real world who does 0 minutes in z3 in a 3 zone model. Of course the polarised training with 20% in z3 would be return better results when compared with training that has 0% in z3!
A sweetspot plan with 0 time in z3 and a sweetspot plan with 1 z3 workout per week cannot even be compared.
These studies also do not consider block periodisation where perhaps aerobic and muscular endurance is worked for a block, then shifting to a more polarised model with hiit training for a block, then returning again.
Training should be tailored to individuals, not based on studies that exclude so many variables. For example I did a 3 week sweetspot block and rose my FTP by 5%, noticed my power test showed my FTP was 83% of power at vo2max, so I did a block of vo2max to lift the ceiling and my FTP rose by another 5% in another 3 weeks.
Have to disagree STRONGLY with you saying that you can use heart rate... you cannot use HR because the time all the higher intensity intervals > threshold are to short to use HR as a guide or track those intervals..
See in Sheet you changed the highest zone to zone6(&7) but still call in neuromuscular power... I have to say imho you chose wrong... if I had to choose one it would have been Anaerobic Work Capacity and Coggan calls zone 6.. that's because the VAST majority of that range is AWC and because zone 7 what Coggan actually calls "Neuromuscular" doesn't have a defined intensity (just as hard as you can go.. full on sprint) and intervals in that zone last only 5-10 seconds so could only hope to contribute max 2-3 minutes in a week... and is more like practice than training... it's the 'one of these zones that not like the other'
I agree its difficult to use just HR because of HR lag and drift, but it can still be more helpful than nothing at all (assuming no power meter). But if someone was training purely on HR I would simplify zones into the Seiler three zone system and prescribe training in a slightly different way to power meter based training.
Thanks!
Great video, thanks for doing that. This hole confusing area needed some clarification, which you provided. Now could you PLEASE do another to clarify what the best high intensity workouts are. The low intensity workouts are pretty straight forward, but not so for the high intensity.... Thanks!
Try this link for the optimal high intensity workouts....th-cam.com/video/ZXNOF8LzZTE/w-d-xo.html
@@Fastfitnesstips Thanks, but I don't see the description of the optimal HIT workout in there, is there another link maybe?
@@wagvice1 Ah you mean what style of HIIT workout? true, we don't go into that here.....one for the future! *my current preference is V02 max intervals)
Wow...Do we really need to spend that much time in Zone 1 where it doesn’t take any effort whatsoever?
How do I edit the spreadsheet ?
„Top left“? On an iOS device ...
@@davidbest5413 I think its in the google sheets menu for ipad.....or just send me your email and follow the reply link.
Great video btw - just what I needed, and exactly what the doctor told me at the sports clinic: 80/20 Polarized training
@@davidbest5413 Not from what can tell... there is no menu option to request on Sheets for Ipad Pro. However, there was an option in the Windows version as a drop down in "View Only" button.
nice one