I was very disappointed that Dr. Attia and Dr. Patrick did not go more in depth about their differing opinions on Zone 2 Training (80/20 vs 50/50). Dr. Patrick also believes Zone 3 training is good whereas Dr. Attia does not believe going above 2 mmol/L of lactate is optimal.Dr. Patrick briefly mentioned it but Dr. Attia passed right over it and simply reiterated the benefits of Zone 2. Their views on lactate's role in exercise are quite different and would have made for an interesting discussion.
99.99% of humans die before the age of 100 so don’t take it all too seriously 😂🙌🏽 just do your exercise so you can get around better in your final years
Without knowing time duration it’s too hard to say 80/20 vs 50/50. If someone is dogmatic about 80/20 but only has 2hrs of training time per week then there would only be 24mins max per week of intensive training. In the same way trying to do 50/50 whilst aiming for 20hours per week would probably be disastrous for most! I have poor recovery by my own observations, 1-1.5hrs (time in zone) of high intensity is about my max for the week. So, I fall into the 80/20 camp, I pad out extra time with low intensity as much as possible
@@peterreynolds5788 The thing is the minimum dose recommended for zone 2 training is 150 minutes a week, so you are already around 3 hours of training just with your zone 2. If you add a 15 to 20 minutes vo2max session you already have your 80/20 right there (more like 90/10, but you get the point). What I mean is that if you addhere to the zone 2 philosophy, then by definition you are commited to train at least 3 hours a week in that zone. The supporters of HIIT, on the other hand, prefer higher intensities and shorter durations, precisely because they don't want to do 3 hours of slow cardio every week. So nobody doing 1 hour or less of cardio a week is going to follow the 80/20 formula.
A fundamental problem with the 80/20 ratio that I've not seen addressed has to do with its source - it comes from observing athletes that are doing 25-30 hours per week of training, meaning that they are spending 6 hours/week doing really hard work and 24 hours/week doing really easy. There is no evidence that I've seen that suggests the same ratio is optimal for people do 1/3 of that total volume, say 10 hours per week. I think it is likely that the optimal ratio changes for lower volume trainers. It wouldn't surprise me if the optimal ratio for 10 hrs/week was 70/30, and perhaps 50/50 for people who train 5 hours per week. A study by Muñoz et al. (2014) on well-trained cyclists with lower weekly training volumes (around 8-10 hours per week) suggested that a more balanced approach, such as 70/30 or even 60/40, could be beneficial for improving performance and VO2 max. A study by Stöggl and Sperlich (2015) found that recreational runners training 5-7 hours per week improved their performance with a mix of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training, suggesting a more balanced ratio. Have you seen any other research that explores this?
This is a very important subject that does not get enough attention. That the 80/20 rule was derived from ELITE athlete training not regular people. Perhaps 80/20 might still apply with 80% in Zone 2 but also including Zone 3, and then 20% in Zone 4 and 5. But less of an extreme distribution between only Zone 2 and 5. Can you share the links to the studies you have found above and any others found since? I am sure many people on here are interested.
We can nitpick studies all day, and so many do. But what matters is intelligently experimenting on yourself to find what works best. Seiler’s “polarized” training has been so distorted that almost nobody knows what Zone 2 is, or how to do VO2 max training, or what to do in between. I’ve coached elite athletes (and many regular athletes, people who just want to be fit) for over four decades and everyone is very, very different. The main problem with elite athletes is that they tend to want to spend more time in the middle, so they need incentives to move it out. Regular people tend to spend too much time low and most have no clue how hard they need to work to get VO2 type benefits. So we have to systematically TEACH them, both physically and mentally, how to get to actual VO2 type work. And you can spend 80% in a good Z2 and not be optimizing your workouts because Z2 responds to TIME as the overload. So you need to periodize that Z2 work (and I have people work at much lower intensities A LOT) so that they systematically are doing a lot of time there; and increasing amount of time to get real results at the top end. So it’s complicated. Formulas are only guides. EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT. Intelligent, systematic experimentation is the only way to learn and converge on workable training regimes. That’s just my two cents, since nobody has the answers. We are all searching in the dark for clues.
I found an interview with Seiler talking about exactly this with Dylan Johnson. He says flat out it is an area with research greatly lacking. He said if you only have 3 hours each week then yeah go much harder, but somewhere around 7+ hours 80/20 seems to start becoming optimal again. I suppose what matters most is the most volume of challenging work balanced with the least recovery. The less you train the more you can recover. I would guess if you have between 3-7 hours then it intensity would be more pyramidal maybe 70/30 or 60/40. I hope a lot more research is done on training distribution for regular people. Instead of this madness encouraging nothing but HIIT, or nothing but slow Zone 2.
Speaking from experience: Doing only low intensity: getting slower on moderate effort but fatigue resistance improve (peak power decline but can extend moderate power duration) Doing only high intensity: Vo2max seems to be improving, but poor fatigue resistance ( based on Power, 15minutes power improved but seems like very tough to extend the power to more than 15 minutes) there is issue in extending moderate power Now doing both around 80-90% low intensity, and the rest high intensity Performance gradually improved, predicted moderate power improved without issue of fatigue resistance Logically, imo doing only high intensity dominantly improves fast twitch function, that is why
It's fairly easy to get some zone 2 training done, but where I bump into problems is trying to do several VO2 sessions a week AND do pretty heavy resistance training involving quads and back. VO2 intervals are taxing and recovery is required, but squats and deadlifts are taxing too and also require recovery, not to mention plateaus and how to move through those. I'm 65, fit and have been active my whole life, so I manage to make it all happen, but I can see many people new to these longevity recommendations just being overwhelmed to the point of just saying, "screw it"
Several VO2 max sessions per week is not necessary. Two at the most for a duration of maybe 6 weeks will basically get you all the benefits that you can possibly get. Cycle off for 6 weeks, maybe doing near-threshold work, then repeat if you want? If you're trying to train like a cyclist, they'll only do VO2 max stuff near race season, whereas near-threshold work can kind of be done all year long if you want.
@@user-ti9zc1xv2b Two per week for 6 weeks is what most highly trained athletes will do when they're trying to peak for an event. But If you're not an athlete, you probably shouldn't train like one. Train mostly in zone 2 and then maybe once per week do some higher intensity intervals.
I have a cheap amazfit chinese fitness watch and it uses PAI points for your fitness based on the HUNT study. It stupid because it demand from you to do VO2 max training several times per week in order to reach the desired 100 points. Really to much for a amateur fitness watch
Pro endurance athletes do 0 or 1 VO2 max sessions per week, not more. For endurance performance, lactate threshold is the most important after zone 2 training anyway. VO2 max is 3rd place. Near 100% of endurance athletes and trainers agree on that. 1 VO2 max session and 1 LT session per week almost maximizes the adaptations you can expect from high intensity training. When you get progressively more tired, you need a break and you need to reconsider your plan. It's either this, or plateau, or injury. Period. You can not out-discipline your body's needs for recovery.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 🏃 *Metabolic flexibility involves shifting between using glucose and fatty acids as substrates, emphasizing Zone 2 training for optimal results.* 01:10 🚴♂️ *High-level endurance athletes like cyclists, distance runners, and skiers demonstrate the highest metabolic flexibility and VO2 Max, with cyclists often using wattage as a measurable indicator.* 03:00 🏋️ *The 80/20 principle in training, focusing 80% on Zone 2 efficiency and 20% on V2 Max, is derived from the observation of elite athletes who achieve the best metabolic flexibility and performance.* 04:35 🕰️ *When planning exercise routines, start with the time commitment a person is willing to make per week, dividing it into half for strength and stability and the other half for cardio, with an 80/20 split in cardio between Zone 2 and V2 Max.* 06:14 ⏱️ *Optimal V2 Max power is generated in intervals lasting 3 to 8 minutes, emphasizing the importance of finding the right balance in intensity during training for effective results.* Made with HARPA AI
Just a thought. Nearly 70. Have been cycling and running for 55 years. A huge baseline of zone 2. I find I can do better with the 50/50 for VO2 max. Not as high as it once was but not bad.
Many should not start with this. I prefer Phil Maffetone approach for most. Get a heart rate monitor where you can set a range. Take 180 minus your age. This number will be the top of your range. Take the “Top of the Range” number and minus 10 to set your bottom number. Example: if your age is 40, 180-40=140. Top will be 140. Take 140-10=130. So a 40 year old’s range is 140-130. Keep your heart rate weather you are one that need to walk to keep it there, or a painfully slow jog. As you improve over time, you will be able to run faster while keeping it in that range. You will be in proper aerobic exercise and burn fat. Then every once in a while, run at a higher rate. This will get you to a point in a healthy way to where you can start doing a V02max style of exercise. Great way to build up safely.
Rhonda and Peter have very different opinions on the role of lactate in exercise. I am very disappointed they did not discuss this further. Rhonda brought it up briefly but Peter simply reiterated the benefits of 80/20 without anything further.
Its because he rides san milan 80:20 bullshittery. Its not be all end all. It depends on the goal. Its not set in stone. Science is always evolving but this doctor is set in his ways. Remember he used to cycle so he is biased. If you have 20 hours a week to train then yeh but what if you are pressed for time? Then you need pyramidal. Simple.
@@jacklauren9359you don't have to do 20 hrs a week for 80/20 to work. There's been studies showing its still really effective at lower volumes. I'm making progress on 6-8 hrs a week. Pyramidal and 80/20 are both effective forms of training though. I do think if you do very low volume only 2 or 3 hrs a week then you gotta do a higher percentage of V02. Couple sessions a week
@@jacklauren9359 80:20 isn't "bullshittery" dude. It's pretty much proven in every endurance sport. That's why you don't see a crossfit or high intensity athletes taking up triathlons and smashing ironmans or ultra runs. It doesn't mean these athletes can't have high V02 max measurements, but the efficiency in lactate clearance and mitochondria will be subpar to an endurance athlete with lots of zone 2 and interval work. 80/20 isn't the end all be all to all of exercise, but when it comes to improving lactate clearance, there is no comparison. Daily HIIT workouts aren't enough time to build the aerobic base to maximize lactate clearance function.
I have switched my HIIT to the Norwegian 4x4 which Rhonda recommended in her video of Improve Cognition and Longevity. I was doing a 30 second peak with a 90 second recovery(more of just a backing off). With the N 4x4 it is 85-95% of max HR of 3-4 minutes with 3 minutes recovery at 70%. It is actually far easier to accomplish because of the recovery phase. It takes about 30-33 minutes based on recovery so 3x a week would be 1.5 hours for something that is achievable for most. I know Peter takes his 80/20 work from the research of Inigo San Millan with long distance cyclists. He likes to do long zone 2 indoor bike rides a few times a week. It would be interesting to have a study done where 2 groups trained both with a 3 sessions of 30 minutes per week either with his 80/20 breakdown or more of a 50/50 approach like the Norwegian 4x4 and subsequently test for VO2 max. I just know for myself if I have time I would rather do outdoor activities such as tennis/Pickleball which gives some zone training benefits but doesn't have the precision and time required for true zone 2 training.
Very interesting observations. I am curious about your thoughts on tennis and outdoor activity. Where would tennis/badminton fall in the zone 2 - HIIT continuum and its relevance in this discussion? For people like me, and I suspect a lot more people, natural activities like racket sports and outdoor jogging are easier to stick to than indoor training
Hi not sure if you have tracked through Attia's podcasts and website but you will see he has done at least two interviews with Milan and definitely seems to be sourcing his material from there. Can't recall him doing anything with Seiler but could be wrong. @@aarondcmedia9585
It really depends on the volume! If you do too much medium / high intensity training, you’re potentially doing more harm than good. If you’re training 5 hours per week, then go ahead and do HIIT, zone 3/4, and strength train. If you’re doing more volume, you MUST do more zone 2.
For me during my training block, I do 80/20 (Zone 2/VO2 Max). Outside the training block, I do 50/50. The difference is in the increased mileage during the training block and the inability to recover from both the long runs and the harder runs. The benefits are just not worth the risk of injury.
@@Spudsmachenzie1 I can only speak for myself when I'm doing my own risk assessment of how I would perform under different training loads and agenda. Under a low training volume plan with no upcoming race, I'm assessing that the possibility of me being injured to be significantly lower and thus the benefits would be worth it.
Dr, thank you SO much for providing all this great content. As a long-time cyclist, it is refreshing to see someone take the "voodoo" out of training. I have learned heaps and truly appreciate the effort. Just one concern, especially with your audience size and your voice. Knee tracking appears to be off. Certainly, you're making more watts than me in Z2, and neither of us is earning a paycheck on the saddle. Nor, am I there to see for sure, and a phone lens makes for a distorted image. Just another part of painting a more complete picture. Thanks again.
Rhonda deserves to show us a snippet of how hard she’s going at her HIIT and some workouts she does. Peter did a great thing by showing what his zone 2 looks like since he showed how out of it he looks, and it was a very humbling of him to show
1:09 - No. It's 20% of *sessions* not volume. No pro cyclist is doing 20% of their weekly volume (20-30hours) at high intensity. Not even they can handle it. Dr Seiler's research has all the details on this - he states that the best in the world typically do 1 hard workout for every 4 easy workouts. It has nothing to do with volume.
Please show us the research showing that average people working out 6-8 hours a week cardio/strength combined that the 80-20 zone 2 is the most efficient method to improve vo2 max or cardio capacity. Always referring to the elite cyclists is not very comparable
The 80/20 method is well documented in the cycling community. You can find research on Dylan Johnson's channel. Or you could just do the research yourself you lazy bastard ;)
My experience is different. I am doing 2x Zone 2 workouts a week (200 W), and 3-8 min intervals once a week (300-375W), but I also do 20-60 min all-out efforts (280-315W). Recently, i did 3 weeks with almost exclusively Zone 3 efforts - for me, 265W. This dramatically improved my ability to climb multiple long climbs. And if you think about it, this is what Pogacar and Vingegaard does a ton of in their races - mountains of 5 W/kg for 20-60 minutes, which must be their Zone 3.
Peter's recomendations are solid for overall health. But in terms of cycling training in general. His approach is massively simplified and doesn't even come close to the demands of training for cycling well.
Maybe the other question or aside would be, does 80/20 create more consistency in workout/training for the percentage of people. The idea that more people can rinse/repeat the ratio to improve their lives over their life. The rabbit hole of understanding is great but...maybe the idea is to get more people doing something weekly is the entire goal of fitness. I would hope.
After 5 years of road cycling training, I've got to say Dr. Attia's concept of Endurance training with 80% at Z2 vs. 20% at VO2max has some truth but also oversimplify things. I respect Dr. Attia but there is more to cardio training than just Z2/Z5. Spending some time training at other intensities (e.g. Z1, Z3, Z4a, Z4, Z6, etc.) can be productive and useful. The proper mix depends on one's needs and goals. For a more complete picture, check out Tim Cusick at BaseCamp Cycling - Train Where You Belong or Koli Moore of Empirical Cycling.
Norwegian cross country skiing results from the last 40 years prove you wrong. The only problems with polarized training is that the zone 1-2 training takes a lot of time and it’s quite boring. 😅
Here’s the thing with Peter Attia - he speaks in shorthand, expecting all his listeners to already understand not only the basics but all of the nuances. I don’t know who he thinks his audience is but he could help me by speaking to me like I’m a 3-year old. 😊
You miss out training at threshold - as an older athlete we can always improve the the threshold power but it is difficult to keep improving vo2max. I’m in under 1% for my vo2max for 51… but most my training on the bike that gets me faster is at threshold pace. Climbing short 4 mins, 20 mins and then those longer power endurance climbs. I also recover well… yes lots of zone 2 if you have the time or that longer ride at the weekend. My point is - you’ve kinda overlooked how important threshold work is to better bike/ski/run performance / overall strength is - ..nice interview. Thanks
Main issue for us average but motivated Joe’s is that pro cyclists spend 20-30hrs a week and have loads of time to devote to z2. Interested how this translates to the time poor.
Nail on the head. If you're not a pro, don't train like a pro. Their schedules have different demands, their targeted events have different demands. Their bodies recover and make adaptations differently from the rest of us. They are less injury prone than us and their diets and sleep are on point. The main reason the pros do so much Z2 is because of the insane amount of volume they do across all intensities. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive. An age grouper training 7h/week with an hour of intervals is going to stay an age grouper - which is a totally adequate goal for most of us. And 7h/week keeps you way more healthy and fit than most of the population (since Attia is Mr Longevity).
Important point. For those who have less time, I don't think there is much issue upping the higher zone work to 50% of volume. That higher level volume is still below the time amount a large volume athlete spends at the higher zones.
He actually touches on this in another podcast, you basically need 10+ hours a week total to dedicate and your sessions should at least be 90mins at least, ideally and minimum 60mins at shortest.
If you only work 8 hours a day and sleep for 8 then you’d have 8 hrs to go balls to the wall on a fan bike every day, stop making excuses puuuuuuuuuuuuussy, get some David Goggins in ya 🙌🏽💪🏽
How about just training for love of the sport and pure enjoyment? I XC ski, cycle, row and occasionally run going through all zones depending on how I feel. Been doing this more than 50 years as fun is my goal and health and fitness a benefit. If I’m tired I back off or take a rest day and if I feel good I enjoy pushing harder. Pretty simple.
Don’t just rely on TH-cam then actually read some text books or journal articles… he’s just talking about polarised training, not a concept he invented but one that has been studied and reviewed over and over, plenty of science to back it up, that started out with empirical observation through to demonstrable measurable objective science over hundreds of years. It’s utilised by generations of athletes.
Zone 2 builds arterial infrastructure (piping), zones, 3,4,5 build heart stroke volume. You can have all the stroke volume on the planet, but have not optimized arterial infrastructure....
Do you have any links to resources discussing how to improve arterial infrastructure? I have only found a few very brief videos from Pavel Tsatsouline about "blood vessel training" and "plumbing" specifically.
Thank you for this. I have been waiting a long time for the appropriate discussion to ask this question. I'm 53. I have been training for, and running OCR events (Tough Mudder/Spartan Race/Abominable Snow Race/Highlander Assault/etc.) since 2016. My challenge to the 80/20 Zone 2 training routine is this - I just completed the Highlander Assault King Arthur Challenge; 27.8 miles and ~75 obstacles. To train for this event I followed an 80/20 Zone 2 training routine for 6 months. I finished the event, but two hours off of my target time. So my challenge is this - I do not (and I suspect I never will) run in an "Aerobic" heart rate zone. When I am on course, or out for a long distance training run, my heart rate is always in the mid-"Threshold" range. While training for the Highlander Assault, my V02 max actually went down. As an endurance athlete, V02 max is everything. Everything I have experienced for the last 8 years indicates that the best tool for increasing V02 max is sustained intensity - i.e. "train the way you race, race the way you train". Therefore, I am struggling to reconcile the research and recommendations with my personal experience. Thoughts on what I am doing wrong?
Afaik, elite cyclist actually trains pyramidal and not 80/20. Just because they need to accumulate TSS. So a lot more zone 3 work, but not quite 50/50.
I wish it would be so simple as to say 3 to 8 minutes is the best interval, but I have also read some studies where they compared very short intervals like 30s or less and achieved same or better results, so once again the studies contradict each other and there doesn't seem to be simple clear answer.
Here are 3 real time tests: 1) Estimate your perceived effort on a scale of 1-10. If the effort feels like a 4 to 5, that is a pass. 2) Take a deep breath and then say the entire alphabet from A to Z clearly without stopping. If you can do this or even say a few extra letters (e.g. A-E) that is a pass. 3) Using an accurate heart rate monitor (e.g. Polar H10 chest strap) check if your heart rate is within 65-75% of your maximum heart rate. Generally speaking, this is another indicator that you are training within Z2. I suggest doing the 3 tests about 20 minutes into a training session. If you pass all 3, you could try increasing the bias of your effort say 2-3%. Vice versa, if you can't pass all 3 tests, try decreasing the bias of your efforts, say 2-3% or 5%. Next get settled into the adjusted pace and repeats the tests as required This method can help you calibrate Endurance training efforts in real time. Taking note of these tests over time can also give some indication if your aerobic fitness is increasing, etc.
Easiest way to test is if you easily can hold a conversation during the training session and also the next day feels like you could easily do the same session all over again. Building your base level fitness takes time and are usually done mostly in off season. Have it as a year long training goal.
For sub-elite athlete, I don't know if what he is saying applies. Just because you have low lactate at high heart rate, does not mean you are now a "fat burner." Most of the studies are college kids or masters athletes whose physiology is way different from most. From what I understand, it takes months to years to develop that ability to shift toward fatty acid utilizations. I wouldn't worry about it. It's all good training. If your recovery is suffering, obviously you naturally do less HIIT. DO WHAT MAKES YOU STAY CONSISTENT. The point of 80/20 is more for those training half/full marathon and who are in it for the long haul. For the rest, why overthink it?
I liked this discussion. Sadly, I feel Dr. Rhonda had a great point that got dismissed quickly. What Attia might be missing is that the best distance runners he referenced (such as the Kenyan marathoners) seem to have converged their zones and have such a high lactate threshold that their marathon pace is already into zone 3 and maybe 4. Also their training to get to this point utilizes hills, HIIT intervals, high altitudes, faster races for VO2 Max. He seems to describe it is as if they’re always chilling in zone 2. That’s definitely not the case. Also, even a great high end professional like Dr. Attia could learn from another pro who is among the best in her field (and also in rockin shape too!)
They aren’t always chilling in zone 2, they are chilling in zone 2 80% of the time. Which in reality is more like 90% for elites. You have to think of It from a time perspective. For the Kenyan runners you referenced for every 90 minutes they do in zone 2 they are doing 10 minute hills, intervals, etc. if they are running 2 or 3 hours a day then there is still plenty of time for zone 4/5.
Dr Attia is a great expert in this field, but on this 80/20 rule I am not sure I fully agree. He says that he believes that only 20% of the cardio training volume should be at the higher intensity and says his reasoning for that is "empirical" and the basis is his experience of how elite athletes train. However, the scenario of an elite athlete [lets say a cyclist] who is undertaking a huge volume of training on a daily basis, does not translate to the average person who is trying to get let's say 4 x 20 to 25 minute sessions in a week. If the average person undertook that 80/20 rule, too much of their training time would be at too low an intensity. The average person would be better, as was sort of hinted at by Dr Patrick, doing a 20 minute HIIT type session to get maximum mitrochondrial response in the time available. This was also suggested by Dr Martin Gibala in a different interview with Dr Patrick. I am going to create my own video on this as I think it is an important distinction on this 80/20 rule to make.
I still want to see her do a 4X4 and I mean the whole workout, not just one round, I bet it looks nothing like we think. Probably barely moving at the end of each 4 minute rounds. I know a lot of these guys talk about what they do and I am not buying it. Cold plunge every day etc. Cycling maybe I could see the 4x4 but running I aint buying it unless they are elite athletes. In studies they site, How a bunch of 50 year olds improved VO2 max I would love to see what it looked like. Anyone have a video I would love to see it. I have not been able to complete 4 rounds running up a mountain without gassing by the 2nd round. Maybe going too hard but when they describe it we all imagine it looks way better than it actually or probably does.
Personally, I think we all are a little different. I have seen both return huge gains. I think as much as anything it is more about personalised coaching where bloods and other environmental factors are taken into consideration.
Just do vigorous exercise so you can live a tad longer and get around better when you’re older but 99.99% of people die before the age of 100 so live it up 🙌🏽💪🏽
Interesting that Attila "discovered" that pro cyclist often train 80/20, at least in the off season. But didn't really consider they ride 4-5h per day of training. Then applies the 80/20 concept to someone who is going to do 30 min at a much lower power output than a pro? Lol, really!? A pro zone 2 is probably average Joe's zone 4. I've ridden with those who raced the Tour and the Giro. That's why you cannot just learn theory like these guys. Anyhow, ride your bike and have fun, that way you do it more often, hit some hills hard, enjoy the scenery don't get so stuck in what one paper said or try to hit a certain number if that gets boring. They have never quantified mitochondria biogenesis or mito quality from PGC or various training modes and compared them. It's all just myopic theory at this point. Take it with a grain of salt.
I have a question. 4 hours of zone 2 = 240 minutes (80% of training time) 20% of 240 = 48 minutes for zone 5 1x per week zone 5, 4x4 = 16 minutes. So this means it would ectually be better to do another zone 5 training?
I’ve thought the same thing before. Like when you do zone 2, you can usually sustain it the whole time. However, as you pointed out, 4x4 HIIT you’re only in zone 4/5 for half of the time. I’m so confused on all these recommendations. All I know is my VO2 max certainly dropped after switching from HIIT every other day to 80/20. Therefore, I think I’m going to go with Rhonda’s approach for a while to see what happens (50/50).
Depends on your goals. For cycling, cross country skiing and long distance running the 80/20 is proven by Norwegian athletes for 40 years of results. It also takes time to get results. You should follow this plan for a year. Norwegian athletes usually also ramp up their training intensity a couple of weeks before a big race. Of season is usually done by doing a lot of base miles in zone 1-2.
You're doing your math wrong. If you're doing 240 mins of Zone 2, then you would do 60 min of Zone 5. (240/80%=300 min total training x 20% = 60 min Zone 5) But, I think that's a lot of total training min in a week. It's not saying you can't do it. But another idea is 3 hours of Zone 2 (180 mins/80% = 225 total training time x 20% = 45 mins Zone 5). Or if you want to go based off your current 16 mins Zone 5 (16/20%=80 mins total training time x 80% = 64 mins Zone 2). But I don't think that's enough of either kind. I'd recommend somewhere between 150-200 mins of Zone 2 and figure out your 20% of Zone 5 from that.
Yes definetly, i read his book outlive. The data is really strong on weighttraining especially in older individuals that tend to die often from fall related consequences
Nicely described. Although, the 80/20 method should be segregated workout sessions and not included in one session. I other words, 20% of weekly training sessions should be high intensity rather than 20% of a single session. The reason being that 20% high intensity level done correctly should not also allow for 80% aerobic easier activity in the same session and still provide for ample recovery. That being said, it would be possible to do a single 80/20 session IF the athlete's experience and monitoring level is sufficient to know the recovery demands for the session while also knowing that a single 80/20 session has a smaller margin for error.
I am not a serious athlete but training for improving heart and vascular health. Do you think there is much difference in heart and vascular adaptations doing 80/20 in the same workout? Either doing Zone 2 in one block and then intervals at the end, versus intervals at the start, versus intervals throughout the workout?
@@bmp713 The issue is less about heart and vascular adaptation. Instead, doing a single workout with 80% Z2 and finishing with 20% HIIT or anaerobic type sets vs. (say) a week worth of separate 80% and 20% sessions will likely hinder recovery. That in turn reduces the long term positive impact of training on the vascular system and the adaptive process of the muscle's mitochondria. Both of these need to adapted for training to improve. And, training intensity zones focuses on one or the other. Mixing them is not the best approach... but, it does lead to improvement at a slower rate and for some may increase the chances of injury. And, typically this slow improvement is a result of the HIIT being below optimal intensity and the Z2 being too short to be maximally effective.
As a cyclist, I don't think this training method is all that useful to the average person. First of all, I think most trained cyclists only do 6 weeks of vo2 max training as that's all that it takes to realize their genetic potential - and they do this closer to race season. But that v02 max training also comes AFTER months and months of zone 2 and near-threshold work. Peter talks about the endurance/fitness pyramid and he's right, you kind of need a good aerobic base to push power later in the year. But cyclists are very careful with their interval sessions as they can easily train you into a hole - and it's not easy to get out of that hole. The average individual attempting this type of training will likely train themselves into a hole, see a gradual decline in power numbers, and be tired all the time. IMO, the average person should be doing easy endurance work a number of times per week, which I'd call zone 2. And if you're wanting to push yourself, do near-threshold work 1 or 2 times per week. Unless you're a competitive athlete, there's no need to train like one.
How much time are you willing to put in? 50% strength, 50% cardio of that cardio 80% zone 2, 20% doing 3-8 minutes with same amount of rest at 85-95% max heart rate
I'm a sub 4 min mile runner, and sub 15min 5km runner, and i get my best results when im doing most of my runs as fast intervals. Intervals done at 400m, 800m, 1500m and 5km race pace. 3 or 4 of these sessions per week. Very little zone 2, only as recovery runs on the other days. Quality over quantity.
But 5k running is considered “sprint” compared to cycling and cross country skiing. My best cross country skiing and cycling results I got from doing 4 hour zone 1-2 sessions 1-3 times a week.
@@stongnyid I don't believe that. I'm nothing special. When I was 12 I was out the back of the class when we did cross country runs. After a few minutes the fit kids were hundreds of metres ahead. No natural talent, but I started training speed and endurance, and they both came together in the middle. I believe its far better to turn kids into sprinters then later add endurance to their body, then it is to try the other way. It doesn't work well.
Nothing special? Wikipedia says 1,755 people have run a sub-4 miles, (And btw, all men.) and all since 1959. There have been, conservatively, 10 billion people alive on earth from 1959-2023. That means that sub-4 milers are one in about 6 million. By any definition, that’s an outlier. .3% is three standard deviations. What is .000018%?
@@stongnyid I mean I don't have any natural ability. I wasn't a natural fast sprinter or a good distance runner before i started training. But I dedicated myself to it and got better over 4 or 5 years. I definitely am nothing special, but I made myself decent.
What I find interesting and perplexing, is how do these people at midlife become so fascinated with endurance sports training when they never actually competed as a youngster. I mean why now at their age.. this lady is clearly in her mid to late 40’s. Is it about health are a sense of wishing they would have been an athlete themselves. And by athlete I mean getting to a complete level at university or beyond?
If I use nasal breathing as my ballpark for Z2, my heartrate can go upto 185bpm, as a 35 year old. Should I keep it there or switch closer to the 145-155bpm standard and ignore my nasal breathing?
If your heartrate goes up to 185, youre not doing Z2. So either ignore your nasal breathing or if you insist on doing it, get your intensity down. Its not that hard, dont overthink it.
Loving this content and had a go at the Norwegian 4x4 today. Question though... im doing this on a Rogue Echo. Are you meant to stay at 85-90% of your heart rate for all 4min or stick to certain wattage that will have you there in the last few minuities of the set. I went up to 900w for the first 20- 30 seconds to get my heart rate right up. But by the end of 4min my heart rate was still at 90% but watts had dropped to 370w. Is this correct or should I aim to just stick at 450-500w for the full 4min , meaning my heart rate wont get to 85% until 1-2 min into the set. But my pace is constant over the 4min.
You did it right by going as hard as possible at the beginning. You're not trying to necessarily go as far as possible, but rather as hard as possible, feel like you're dying, and then keep going...
You should maintain a constant wattage range (like 450-500, as you mentioned). My range is 315-350 for all four intervals (I take three minutes of rest between intervals). Here is how it feels: The first 30s is quite easy. By two minutes fatigue is starting to kick in. In the last minute I have to focus intensely and really exert myself to keep the watts above 315. By the end of the fourth interval I am breathing heavily, feel very taxed, and am relieved that it's all over. However, I don't feel like I am going to vomit or faint or anything dramatic like that. I have looked into this a lot and this is my understanding of how the 4x4 is done. The fact that you hold can 450-500 for four minutes is, in my opinion, indicative of a very high level of fitness.
@@sjt6979 cheers, yeah I’ve done it a bit now and find 430 watts is sweet spot and can maintain for full workout and by and of 4 set it’s a good hard push
@@trailbunny2309 Awesome job! The only thing left for me to determine now is often one should do a 4x4 workout. I have heard lots of people say once a week is fine. It's hard for me to believe that doing any sort of workout just once per week can yield benefits, but I am certainly no exercise physiologist. How often do you do the 4x4?
@@sjt6979 I tend to do it once a week or once a fortnight. It’s more just maintenance for me as I’m 43 and not trying to get fitter. But do also do about 100km of cycling during the week to work. Which is more lower intensity
Why does he recommend 80% zone 2 as opposed to 80% zone 3 or 4 for the same amount of time? Will it long term damage your heart or something? I find I feel more refreshed if I run zone 3 instead of zone 2 but I only have 45 mins for cardio each day.
@@johnnycab8986 Thanks, is there a source or study for where this 7-8 hour figure is from? I find my brain works much better if I get more than zone 2 cardio everyday but I don’t want to overdo it.
the training of high level endurance athletes has been studied and it comes out as 80% of their training is done in zone 2 and only 20% of their week is dedicated to zones 3-5. I'm sure there is other ways to skin a cat but that is the most common link between top level athletes. Once your HR reaches a certain point it doesn't pump out any more blood (SV) so training over it is only doing more damage to the body and making you more fatigued without any extra benefit @@martinlutherkingjr.5582
Above zone 2 produces lactate of which prevents the growth of your base being the development of the cardioid vascular system. It's well documented for years
All of these numbers and "zones" turn me off to exercise. Ill just continue to hike and full body workouts a couple times of week. We're all gonna die in the end anywyas.
I routinely do a 25 minute workout which is based on Tabata, but my partner and I do double Tabata (40 seconds on , 20 seconds recovery) We do 5 rounds of 5 exercises at this pace. I think this is VO2 max training. Is my thinking correct on this?
I would really like to hear what can an average person do with a given VO2 max. At 68 I should be able to walk x miles with a VO2 max of y, what are those round numbers for x and y, ballpark. I use the Apple Watch, but it seems low given what I can do in a typical training session.
Dudes! Two words: overuse injuries. To do long periods of regular cardio, and especially high-intensity cardio, you need to be blessed with joints where everything lines up correctly. I am unfortunately not in that category. I spent most of my exercise time doing strength and flexibility, the cardio usually results in an overuse injury I have to spent time rehabbing from afterwords. Don’t know what to do about the cardio piece.
The reality of science is the researchers preferences always effect the outcomes of their studies. Dr. Attia doesn't like Zone 4/5 training, and as such doesn't spend much time himself nor his patients in that realm of exertion. Dr. Patrick is looking at how 80% zone 2 isn't actually increasing VO2 max in a statistically significant way, and that there's no way around hard work if that's the metric you're using. That's what the data suggests. Set goals, do the best you can, don't kid yourself; it's gonna suck, but it's worth it. It never gets easier, you just get better.
Dumb question but how do you cout the 20% of time in the 80/20 polarized approach? For example if I do a 60 minute vo2 zmax interval session with 5x4 minute vo2 intervals do I count the 60 minutes towards the 20% or just the 20 minutes spent at intensity?
I have wondered the same and recently learned that Seiler (the 80/20 guy) classifies the 80% and 20% by session, not by duration or by mileage. So each sessions is either classified as easy or hard. For example, a progression tempo run would count as hard even though first 1/3 of it was run in Zone 2.
Does anyone know about the 20% rule in zone 5? For instance, if I follow a pattern of 4 minutes on and 4 minutes off, should I consider only the 4 minutes on towards the 20%, or should I include the total of 8 minutes in the calculation?
I believe 80/20 refers to the ‘sessions’ and not the actual time of intense efforts. For example my marathon training to me is 80/20 as I do a 4x4 once a week and my other 4 trainings are Z2 (including my long run).
This is ridiculously overcomplicated. It almost sounds like crankism to be honest at times. Who cares about these random stats? We are far more complicated than what can be gleaned from scientific cherry picking. Just move, whatever makes you do that and regularly is the answer.
Which cardiologists are saying that? Hard core endurance athletes including long distance runners seem to get more atrial fibrillation, which is a risk factor for stroke but not for death due to heart complications.
I always do my heart zone training using the highest resistance on cardio machines. For the treadmill. I set it at 13% incline because that's the highest I can maintain without bothering my knees. Using only speed and little strength doesn't seem as beneficial
Yeah, because they don't strength train. They specifically optimize their training regimen around their sport. The point isn't to do 80% of all training in Zone 2, it's to do 80% of your cardio in Zone 2 to maximize the efficiency of your cardiovascular system to that end.
@@nichtsistkostenlos6565the point is, do not compare yourself to freaking pros. This doctor thinks he is a pro but nowhere near it. Its just a study. Question to you what if u have 5 hours only? How u do the 80:20🤷🏻♂️
@@jacklauren9359it’s not about comparing yourself to pros. It’s using them as a reference since they are the ones incentivized to optimize for cardiovascular performance. He is actually an expert and what he says is based on numerous studies, on top of what he prescribes to his own patients. If you had listened to the clip, he specifically stated that for his patients he recommends 50:50 strength and cardio training. And 80:20 of that cardio is zone 2 to vo2 max. So if you only have 5 hours, 2.5 hours for strength training, 2 hours for zone 2, and 30 min for vo2 max.
Actually what Dr Attia is telling is that is the elite in terms of aerobic capacity. From there he states that it is not necessary for anyone to train to that level to get most of the cardio benefits
Interesting how modern exercise people are rediscovering what we already knew from like the 1920s. This is not new people. Arthur Lydiard trained the best athletes on the planet using this method.
If you really want to expand your metabolic flexibility, you need to find out exactly how to push yourself until your glycogen stores are at zero. I train with a ketogenic diet, I run anywhere from 24 to 32 mi fasted. I carry glucose with me. When I began to pass out that's when I take my glucose and go home. Training zones or anywhere from 1 to 5.
I really really really want to know what bmx like in terms of skatepark riding x games style stuff. I want to know how this type of activity affects vo2 max. My heart rate is all over the place. 110 bpm, 145 bpm, > 170 bpm but. It's not linear
I find it a bit nonsensical to use a model made for the “most metabolically flexible, healthiest” elite human beings who likely train 6 days a week, 3-4 hours a day (without even considering the amount of time dedicated to recovery and misc. physical preparation) and putting that advice without caveat to be consumed and applied by the general public. For most Americans, I would imagine even keeping up with 1 hour x six days a week is a bit of a struggle. So what then, 3 hours of strength and stability, 2 hours and change of Zone 2 then 30ish minutes of HIIT? Will that really lead to a relative outcome? They should really do a study on that with non-elite athletes and show the evidence (including that with exercise adherence in mind) that this model still applies and I would say this is useful science. Until then, this seems like highly impractical and maybe even bad scheme for anyone who isn’t committing at least 12 hours of training a week.
You can CLEARLY hear Attia doesn't exactly know what he's talking about. "They might have the most mitochondria by not training 80-20", based on what? He would never pass scientific requirements talking like that.
What he is saying has some truth but it is wrong for over all health, have a long distance runner , Box for 3 minute rounds, or grappling for a few rounds, or just do some weighted burpee's, that long distance runner will just crap out very fast!!! but why if they can run at high rate for long time, maybe because muscles are paired down with strength and they just practice their sport a lot. I trained with some world class runners and when it came to performance say speed for how many punches You can throw in a 5 minutes they did not have the lungs or Muscle to compare with average boxers.
Diaz brothers enter the chat. They do triathlons. Nick was strikforce champion. MMA, boxing, and Muay Thai training cardio protocol is about the same as a marathon. 4/5 miles per day in camp. Just saying.
Long distance cyclist, runners looks old, the best youthful looks are fitness peoples, who prioritized resistant training with a little bit cardio. I think it is pointless to chase big vo2 max number, survival rate 45 vo2 max vs 60 is 3,5 percent difference.
NOthing in the fitness world is new.... All this has been said 40 plus years ago ... Look at vern gambetta (have you heard of him?) Why doc says 2 minute hold for squats, hang from bar,etc... Where did he come up with that nuber? Because its harder if we go longer. Going longer does nothing more for your body.... a 30 second squat hold will be just as effective as a 2 minute hold..... something to think about.
My grandad is 88 and has never been to the gym or followed a strict diet. He stays active by gardening and eats at restuarants weekly with friends. It doesn't make sense for him to spend an hour every day going to the gym and eating a perfect diet, he made it to 88 without that. There's so many stories like this. Why should people spend so much time trying to delay the inevitible with hard exercise and diets?
For the average joe its Not a big Point. But its Kind of interesting for me how the body works,how people optimize it and how people can achieve These Great things Like Ultra runners,cyclists,triathletes and so on… Your grandfather is Not everybody You can't draw conclusions from one person to everyone. Smoking is Bad and Most of the people die earlier. But some get a 100 years old. Would you say that Smoking is Not a big deal because somebody you know gets it to a 100? Probably Not
It's not about delaying the inevitable, it's about maintaining the best quality of life while the inevitable is happening. The vast majority are unfortunately not as lucky as your grandfather. So maybe we shouldn't try to rely on luck.
Yeah. Read studies of people who made it to 115. None mentioned gym memberships, exercise programs or sports. Some drink a little alcohol everyday. A couple even smoke.
Point 1) For Most of us its Not that Important. But its Kind of interesting how the Body works and how the top athletes Train to get There. Point 2) Dr attia is Kind of annoying at this Point because theire Both experts and top scientists but he cuts her Short all the time anyway. Point 3) Its Common Sense that ALL top cyclists are doping. Was that a Part of theire studies too? And the doping is a vo2 Max doping, Thats why they can cycle that fast for that Long… And only because he was a cyclist he things this is the Most important topic.
would love to know demographic make-up of Peter's sample upon which he bases this cardio training protocol. Especially if there are any peri/menopausal women in the mix. men are build for HIIT and women for Zone 2 steady state cardio. So does it really make sense to recommend similar protocols? I've heard evidence suggests peri/menopausal women should mostly do HIIT, not mostly Z2 with occasional HIIT.
4 watts a kilo ,and the main reason why he can manage that ,is mainly because he chooses well is genitors . You should instead speak in terms of % 😊 . We are not all monsters !
Peter is completely off point, 80/20 is only because the body cant handle more hiit long term then 4 to 5 hours a week, so pro cyclist are forced to train easy to get further benefits. If you have 10 hours s week 60/40 would ilicit much better fitness adaption then 80/20
@@thomashald8000 10 hs/week would mean 2x 1 HR ,Z4 sessions eg 3x20 mins Z4. You want to do 4 of these Z4 sessions per week? You'll be burning out in no time
@@dickieblench5001 i personally do on average, 1 4 hour ride z2, 2 sweetspot sessions 2 hours each and 1 vo2 max ore a maybe a race/zwift race somewhere between 9 and 12 hours total.
Download my FREE 9-page Cognitive Enhancement Blueprint:
bdnfprotocols.com/
I was very disappointed that Dr. Attia and Dr. Patrick did not go more in depth about their differing opinions on Zone 2 Training (80/20 vs 50/50). Dr. Patrick also believes Zone 3 training is good whereas Dr. Attia does not believe going above 2 mmol/L of lactate is optimal.Dr. Patrick briefly mentioned it but Dr. Attia passed right over it and simply reiterated the benefits of Zone 2. Their views on lactate's role in exercise are quite different and would have made for an interesting discussion.
even more important is the difference between men and women. According to Dr. Stacey Sims, zone 2 is less important for women.
That would get way too much in the weeks fo the average person. He's OCD, she likes to experiment. It all works.
99.99% of humans die before the age of 100 so don’t take it all too seriously 😂🙌🏽 just do your exercise so you can get around better in your final years
Without knowing time duration it’s too hard to say 80/20 vs 50/50. If someone is dogmatic about 80/20 but only has 2hrs of training time per week then there would only be 24mins max per week of intensive training. In the same way trying to do 50/50 whilst aiming for 20hours per week would probably be disastrous for most!
I have poor recovery by my own observations, 1-1.5hrs (time in zone) of high intensity is about my max for the week. So, I fall into the 80/20 camp, I pad out extra time with low intensity as much as possible
@@peterreynolds5788 The thing is the minimum dose recommended for zone 2 training is 150 minutes a week, so you are already around 3 hours of training just with your zone 2. If you add a 15 to 20 minutes vo2max session you already have your 80/20 right there (more like 90/10, but you get the point). What I mean is that if you addhere to the zone 2 philosophy, then by definition you are commited to train at least 3 hours a week in that zone. The supporters of HIIT, on the other hand, prefer higher intensities and shorter durations, precisely because they don't want to do 3 hours of slow cardio every week. So nobody doing 1 hour or less of cardio a week is going to follow the 80/20 formula.
A fundamental problem with the 80/20 ratio that I've not seen addressed has to do with its source - it comes from observing athletes that are doing 25-30 hours per week of training, meaning that they are spending 6 hours/week doing really hard work and 24 hours/week doing really easy. There is no evidence that I've seen that suggests the same ratio is optimal for people do 1/3 of that total volume, say 10 hours per week. I think it is likely that the optimal ratio changes for lower volume trainers. It wouldn't surprise me if the optimal ratio for 10 hrs/week was 70/30, and perhaps 50/50 for people who train 5 hours per week. A study by Muñoz et al. (2014) on well-trained cyclists with lower weekly training volumes (around 8-10 hours per week) suggested that a more balanced approach, such as 70/30 or even 60/40, could be beneficial for improving performance and VO2 max. A study by Stöggl and Sperlich (2015) found that recreational runners training 5-7 hours per week improved their performance with a mix of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and moderate-intensity continuous training, suggesting a more balanced ratio. Have you seen any other research that explores this?
This is a very important subject that does not get enough attention. That the 80/20 rule was derived from ELITE athlete training not regular people. Perhaps 80/20 might still apply with 80% in Zone 2 but also including Zone 3, and then 20% in Zone 4 and 5. But less of an extreme distribution between only Zone 2 and 5.
Can you share the links to the studies you have found above and any others found since?
I am sure many people on here are interested.
We can nitpick studies all day, and so many do. But what matters is intelligently experimenting on yourself to find what works best. Seiler’s “polarized” training has been so distorted that almost nobody knows what Zone 2 is, or how to do VO2 max training, or what to do in between. I’ve coached elite athletes (and many regular athletes, people who just want to be fit) for over four decades and everyone is very, very different. The main problem with elite athletes is that they tend to want to spend more time in the middle, so they need incentives to move it out. Regular people tend to spend too much time low and most have no clue how hard they need to work to get VO2 type benefits. So we have to systematically TEACH them, both physically and mentally, how to get to actual VO2 type work. And you can spend 80% in a good Z2 and not be optimizing your workouts because Z2 responds to TIME as the overload. So you need to periodize that Z2 work (and I have people work at much lower intensities A LOT) so that they systematically are doing a lot of time there; and increasing amount of time to get real results at the top end. So it’s complicated. Formulas are only guides. EVERYONE IS DIFFERENT. Intelligent, systematic experimentation is the only way to learn and converge on workable training regimes. That’s just my two cents, since nobody has the answers. We are all searching in the dark for clues.
I found an interview with Seiler talking about exactly this with Dylan Johnson. He says flat out it is an area with research greatly lacking. He said if you only have 3 hours each week then yeah go much harder, but somewhere around 7+ hours 80/20 seems to start becoming optimal again.
I suppose what matters most is the most volume of challenging work balanced with the least recovery. The less you train the more you can recover. I would guess if you have between 3-7 hours then it intensity would be more pyramidal maybe 70/30 or 60/40.
I hope a lot more research is done on training distribution for regular people. Instead of this madness encouraging nothing but HIIT, or nothing but slow Zone 2.
Speaking from experience:
Doing only low intensity: getting slower on moderate effort but fatigue resistance improve (peak power decline but can extend moderate power duration)
Doing only high intensity:
Vo2max seems to be improving, but poor fatigue resistance ( based on Power, 15minutes power improved but seems like very tough to extend the power to more than 15 minutes) there is issue in extending moderate power
Now doing both around 80-90% low intensity, and the rest high intensity
Performance gradually improved, predicted moderate power improved without issue of fatigue resistance
Logically, imo doing only high intensity dominantly improves fast twitch function, that is why
It's fairly easy to get some zone 2 training done, but where I bump into problems is trying to do several VO2 sessions a week AND do pretty heavy resistance training involving quads and back. VO2 intervals are taxing and recovery is required, but squats and deadlifts are taxing too and also require recovery, not to mention plateaus and how to move through those. I'm 65, fit and have been active my whole life, so I manage to make it all happen, but I can see many people new to these longevity recommendations just being overwhelmed to the point of just saying, "screw it"
Several VO2 max sessions per week is not necessary. Two at the most for a duration of maybe 6 weeks will basically get you all the benefits that you can possibly get. Cycle off for 6 weeks, maybe doing near-threshold work, then repeat if you want? If you're trying to train like a cyclist, they'll only do VO2 max stuff near race season, whereas near-threshold work can kind of be done all year long if you want.
@@bluemystic7501 Hi, am i ready this well? 1 VO2 max session every 3 weeks?
@@user-ti9zc1xv2b Two per week for 6 weeks is what most highly trained athletes will do when they're trying to peak for an event. But If you're not an athlete, you probably shouldn't train like one. Train mostly in zone 2 and then maybe once per week do some higher intensity intervals.
I have a cheap amazfit chinese fitness watch and it uses PAI points for your fitness based on the HUNT study. It stupid because it demand from you to do VO2 max training several times per week in order to reach the desired 100 points. Really to much for a amateur fitness watch
Pro endurance athletes do 0 or 1 VO2 max sessions per week, not more. For endurance performance, lactate threshold is the most important after zone 2 training anyway. VO2 max is 3rd place. Near 100% of endurance athletes and trainers agree on that. 1 VO2 max session and 1 LT session per week almost maximizes the adaptations you can expect from high intensity training. When you get progressively more tired, you need a break and you need to reconsider your plan. It's either this, or plateau, or injury. Period. You can not out-discipline your body's needs for recovery.
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:00 🏃 *Metabolic flexibility involves shifting between using glucose and fatty acids as substrates, emphasizing Zone 2 training for optimal results.*
01:10 🚴♂️ *High-level endurance athletes like cyclists, distance runners, and skiers demonstrate the highest metabolic flexibility and VO2 Max, with cyclists often using wattage as a measurable indicator.*
03:00 🏋️ *The 80/20 principle in training, focusing 80% on Zone 2 efficiency and 20% on V2 Max, is derived from the observation of elite athletes who achieve the best metabolic flexibility and performance.*
04:35 🕰️ *When planning exercise routines, start with the time commitment a person is willing to make per week, dividing it into half for strength and stability and the other half for cardio, with an 80/20 split in cardio between Zone 2 and V2 Max.*
06:14 ⏱️ *Optimal V2 Max power is generated in intervals lasting 3 to 8 minutes, emphasizing the importance of finding the right balance in intensity during training for effective results.*
Made with HARPA AI
Just a thought. Nearly 70. Have been cycling and running for 55 years. A huge baseline of zone 2. I find I can do better with the 50/50 for VO2 max. Not as high as it once was but not bad.
Many should not start with this. I prefer Phil Maffetone approach for most. Get a heart rate monitor where you can set a range. Take 180 minus your age. This number will be the top of your range. Take the “Top of the Range” number and minus 10 to set your bottom number. Example: if your age is 40, 180-40=140. Top will be 140. Take 140-10=130. So a 40 year old’s range is 140-130. Keep your heart rate weather you are one that need to walk to keep it there, or a painfully slow jog. As you improve over time, you will be able to run faster while keeping it in that range. You will be in proper aerobic exercise and burn fat. Then every once in a while, run at a higher rate. This will get you to a point in a healthy way to where you can start doing a V02max style of exercise. Great way to build up safely.
Wow … love ur explanation ❤
@@madonnarocks4478 Thank you! I hope this helps you and others attain your goals for health!
Good call! I find Maffetone's method to be intuitive and simple, exactly what we want.
Max heart rate is personnal, and need to be found before establishing anything else 😊!
Sounds like the same idea
Rhonda and Peter have very different opinions on the role of lactate in exercise. I am very disappointed they did not discuss this further. Rhonda brought it up briefly but Peter simply reiterated the benefits of 80/20 without anything further.
Its because he rides san milan 80:20 bullshittery. Its not be all end all. It depends on the goal. Its not set in stone. Science is always evolving but this doctor is set in his ways. Remember he used to cycle so he is biased. If you have 20 hours a week to train then yeh but what if you are pressed for time? Then you need pyramidal. Simple.
@@jacklauren9359you don't have to do 20 hrs a week for 80/20 to work. There's been studies showing its still really effective at lower volumes. I'm making progress on 6-8 hrs a week. Pyramidal and 80/20 are both effective forms of training though. I do think if you do very low volume only 2 or 3 hrs a week then you gotta do a higher percentage of V02. Couple sessions a week
@@jacklauren9359 80:20 isn't "bullshittery" dude. It's pretty much proven in every endurance sport. That's why you don't see a crossfit or high intensity athletes taking up triathlons and smashing ironmans or ultra runs. It doesn't mean these athletes can't have high V02 max measurements, but the efficiency in lactate clearance and mitochondria will be subpar to an endurance athlete with lots of zone 2 and interval work. 80/20 isn't the end all be all to all of exercise, but when it comes to improving lactate clearance, there is no comparison. Daily HIIT workouts aren't enough time to build the aerobic base to maximize lactate clearance function.
I have switched my HIIT to the Norwegian 4x4 which Rhonda recommended in her video of Improve Cognition and Longevity. I was doing a 30 second peak with a 90 second recovery(more of just a backing off). With the N 4x4 it is 85-95% of max HR of 3-4 minutes with 3 minutes recovery at 70%. It is actually far easier to accomplish because of the recovery phase. It takes about 30-33 minutes based on recovery so 3x a week would be 1.5 hours for something that is achievable for most. I know Peter takes his 80/20 work from the research of Inigo San Millan with long distance cyclists. He likes to do long zone 2 indoor bike rides a few times a week. It would be interesting to have a study done where 2 groups trained both with a 3 sessions of 30 minutes per week either with his 80/20 breakdown or more of a 50/50 approach like the Norwegian 4x4 and subsequently test for VO2 max. I just know for myself if I have time I would rather do outdoor activities such as tennis/Pickleball which gives some zone training benefits but doesn't have the precision and time required for true zone 2 training.
Seiler is the one who looked at elite athletes (which Attia pretty much admits where it came from) so I find it curious you think it's Milan's work.
Very interesting observations. I am curious about your thoughts on tennis and outdoor activity. Where would tennis/badminton fall in the zone 2 - HIIT continuum and its relevance in this discussion? For people like me, and I suspect a lot more people, natural activities like racket sports and outdoor jogging are easier to stick to than indoor training
80% training time in zone 2 weekly, 20% weekly training time VO2max intervals
Hi not sure if you have tracked through Attia's podcasts and website but you will see he has done at least two interviews with Milan and definitely seems to be sourcing his material from there. Can't recall him doing anything with Seiler but could be wrong. @@aarondcmedia9585
@@fsalamprobably a lot of glycolytic work than aerobic work for tennis.
It really depends on the volume! If you do too much medium / high intensity training, you’re potentially doing more harm than good.
If you’re training 5 hours per week, then go ahead and do HIIT, zone 3/4, and strength train.
If you’re doing more volume, you MUST do more zone 2.
Hey, I follow both of these doctors closely, am so glad that they had this discussion
Only one of them is the real deal, I'll let you guess which one.
For me during my training block, I do 80/20 (Zone 2/VO2 Max). Outside the training block, I do 50/50.
The difference is in the increased mileage during the training block and the inability to recover from both the long runs and the harder runs. The benefits are just not worth the risk of injury.
If I may ask, if the benefits are not worth it with 50/50 why are you doing it?
@@Spudsmachenzie1 I can only speak for myself when I'm doing my own risk assessment of how I would perform under different training loads and agenda. Under a low training volume plan with no upcoming race, I'm assessing that the possibility of me being injured to be significantly lower and thus the benefits would be worth it.
Dr, thank you SO much for providing all this great content. As a long-time cyclist, it is refreshing to see someone take the "voodoo" out of training. I have learned heaps and truly appreciate the effort. Just one concern, especially with your audience size and your voice. Knee tracking appears to be off. Certainly, you're making more watts than me in Z2, and neither of us is earning a paycheck on the saddle. Nor, am I there to see for sure, and a phone lens makes for a distorted image. Just another part of painting a more complete picture. Thanks again.
Rhonda deserves to show us a snippet of how hard she’s going at her HIIT and some workouts she does. Peter did a great thing by showing what his zone 2 looks like since he showed how out of it he looks, and it was a very humbling of him to show
4:00 to 4:07 is exactly the opposite of what's true. aerobic 2 increases number of mitochondria, anaerobic increases efficiency
1:09 - No. It's 20% of *sessions* not volume. No pro cyclist is doing 20% of their weekly volume (20-30hours) at high intensity. Not even they can handle it. Dr Seiler's research has all the details on this - he states that the best in the world typically do 1 hard workout for every 4 easy workouts. It has nothing to do with volume.
Where’s the study that states steroids is heavily involved and how does that effect these results?
Please show us the research showing that average people working out 6-8 hours a week cardio/strength combined that the 80-20 zone 2 is the most efficient method to improve vo2 max or cardio capacity.
Always referring to the elite cyclists is not very comparable
The 80/20 method is well documented in the cycling community. You can find research on Dylan Johnson's channel. Or you could just do the research yourself you lazy bastard ;)
My experience is different. I am doing 2x Zone 2 workouts a week (200 W), and 3-8 min intervals once a week (300-375W), but I also do 20-60 min all-out efforts (280-315W). Recently, i did 3 weeks with almost exclusively Zone 3 efforts - for me, 265W. This dramatically improved my ability to climb multiple long climbs. And if you think about it, this is what Pogacar and Vingegaard does a ton of in their races - mountains of 5 W/kg for 20-60 minutes, which must be their Zone 3.
Peter's recomendations are solid for overall health. But in terms of cycling training in general. His approach is massively simplified and doesn't even come close to the demands of training for cycling well.
Attia, excellent as usual
Maybe the other question or aside would be, does 80/20 create more consistency in workout/training for the percentage of people. The idea that more people can rinse/repeat the ratio to improve their lives over their life. The rabbit hole of understanding is great but...maybe the idea is to get more people doing something weekly is the entire goal of fitness. I would hope.
After 5 years of road cycling training, I've got to say Dr. Attia's concept of Endurance training with 80% at Z2 vs. 20% at VO2max has some truth but also oversimplify things. I respect Dr. Attia but there is more to cardio training than just Z2/Z5. Spending some time training at other intensities (e.g. Z1, Z3, Z4a, Z4, Z6, etc.) can be productive and useful. The proper mix depends on one's needs and goals. For a more complete picture, check out Tim Cusick at BaseCamp Cycling - Train Where You Belong or Koli Moore of Empirical Cycling.
Norwegian cross country skiing results from the last 40 years prove you wrong. The only problems with polarized training is that the zone 1-2 training takes a lot of time and it’s quite boring. 😅
Here’s the thing with Peter Attia - he speaks in shorthand, expecting all his listeners to already understand not only the basics but all of the nuances. I don’t know who he thinks his audience is but he could help me by speaking to me like I’m a 3-year old. 😊
You miss out training at threshold - as an older athlete we can always improve the the threshold power but it is difficult to keep improving vo2max. I’m in under 1% for my vo2max for 51… but most my training on the bike that gets me faster is at threshold pace. Climbing short 4 mins, 20 mins and then those longer power endurance climbs. I also recover well… yes lots of zone 2 if you have the time or that longer ride at the weekend. My point is - you’ve kinda overlooked how important threshold work is to better bike/ski/run performance / overall strength is - ..nice interview. Thanks
Main issue for us average but motivated Joe’s is that pro cyclists spend 20-30hrs a week and have loads of time to devote to z2. Interested how this translates to the time poor.
Nail on the head. If you're not a pro, don't train like a pro. Their schedules have different demands, their targeted events have different demands. Their bodies recover and make adaptations differently from the rest of us. They are less injury prone than us and their diets and sleep are on point. The main reason the pros do so much Z2 is because of the insane amount of volume they do across all intensities. It is descriptive rather than prescriptive. An age grouper training 7h/week with an hour of intervals is going to stay an age grouper - which is a totally adequate goal for most of us. And 7h/week keeps you way more healthy and fit than most of the population (since Attia is Mr Longevity).
Important point. For those who have less time, I don't think there is much issue upping the higher zone work to 50% of volume. That higher level volume is still below the time amount a large volume athlete spends at the higher zones.
He actually touches on this in another podcast, you basically need 10+ hours a week total to dedicate and your sessions should at least be 90mins at least, ideally and minimum 60mins at shortest.
Thanks for that. I assumed it was a fairly significant time requirement. Needs to do a podcast on convincing the wire
If you only work 8 hours a day and sleep for 8 then you’d have 8 hrs to go balls to the wall on a fan bike every day, stop making excuses puuuuuuuuuuuuussy, get some David Goggins in ya 🙌🏽💪🏽
I feel zone 3-4 is far too neglected in these models. As a runner, you’re racing in zone 3-4.
Billat intervals are considered among the best VO2 Max workout. That's 30s/30s intervals, what people consider HIIT.
How about just training for love of the sport and pure enjoyment? I XC ski, cycle, row and occasionally run going through all zones depending on how I feel.
Been doing this more than 50 years as fun is my goal and health and fitness a benefit. If I’m tired I back off or take a rest day and if I feel good I enjoy pushing harder. Pretty simple.
A lot of us love statistics. You don’t have to use them or measure them but it is one of the most fun parts of cycling for me. Studies.
Don’t just rely on TH-cam then actually read some text books or journal articles… he’s just talking about polarised training, not a concept he invented but one that has been studied and reviewed over and over, plenty of science to back it up, that started out with empirical observation through to demonstrable measurable objective science over hundreds of years. It’s utilised by generations of athletes.
Zone 2 builds arterial infrastructure (piping), zones, 3,4,5 build heart stroke volume. You can have all the stroke volume on the planet, but have not optimized arterial infrastructure....
Do you have any links to resources discussing how to improve arterial infrastructure? I have only found a few very brief videos from Pavel Tsatsouline about "blood vessel training" and "plumbing" specifically.
Thank you for this. I have been waiting a long time for the appropriate discussion to ask this question. I'm 53. I have been training for, and running OCR events (Tough Mudder/Spartan Race/Abominable Snow Race/Highlander Assault/etc.) since 2016. My challenge to the 80/20 Zone 2 training routine is this - I just completed the Highlander Assault King Arthur Challenge; 27.8 miles and ~75 obstacles. To train for this event I followed an 80/20 Zone 2 training routine for 6 months. I finished the event, but two hours off of my target time. So my challenge is this - I do not (and I suspect I never will) run in an "Aerobic" heart rate zone. When I am on course, or out for a long distance training run, my heart rate is always in the mid-"Threshold" range. While training for the Highlander Assault, my V02 max actually went down. As an endurance athlete, V02 max is everything. Everything I have experienced for the last 8 years indicates that the best tool for increasing V02 max is sustained intensity - i.e. "train the way you race, race the way you train". Therefore, I am struggling to reconcile the research and recommendations with my personal experience. Thoughts on what I am doing wrong?
Afaik, elite cyclist actually trains pyramidal and not 80/20. Just because they need to accumulate TSS. So a lot more zone 3 work, but not quite 50/50.
I wish it would be so simple as to say 3 to 8 minutes is the best interval, but I have also read some studies where they compared very short intervals like 30s or less and achieved same or better results, so once again the studies contradict each other and there doesn't seem to be simple clear answer.
What’s the best practical yet accurate way for someone to find their true Zone 2 without specialized equipment? Just the talk test?
Zone 2 with a Garmin watch is 60-70% of heart rate reserve so about 0.65*(HRmax-HRrest)+HRrest = 134bpm
0.65*(176-54)+54
Here are 3 real time tests:
1) Estimate your perceived effort on a scale of 1-10. If the effort feels like a 4 to 5, that is a pass.
2) Take a deep breath and then say the entire alphabet from A to Z clearly without stopping. If you can do this or even say a few extra letters (e.g. A-E) that is a pass.
3) Using an accurate heart rate monitor (e.g. Polar H10 chest strap) check if your heart rate is within 65-75% of your maximum heart rate. Generally speaking, this is another indicator that you are training within Z2.
I suggest doing the 3 tests about 20 minutes into a training session. If you pass all 3, you could try increasing the bias of your effort say 2-3%. Vice versa, if you can't pass all 3 tests, try decreasing the bias of your efforts, say 2-3% or 5%. Next get settled into the adjusted pace and repeats the tests as required
This method can help you calibrate Endurance training efforts in real time. Taking note of these tests over time can also give some indication if your aerobic fitness is increasing, etc.
Easiest way to test is if you easily can hold a conversation during the training session and also the next day feels like you could easily do the same session all over again. Building your base level fitness takes time and are usually done mostly in off season. Have it as a year long training goal.
Thanks 😊
For sub-elite athlete, I don't know if what he is saying applies. Just because you have low lactate at high heart rate, does not mean you are now a "fat burner." Most of the studies are college kids or masters athletes whose physiology is way different from most. From what I understand, it takes months to years to develop that ability to shift toward fatty acid utilizations. I wouldn't worry about it. It's all good training. If your recovery is suffering, obviously you naturally do less HIIT. DO WHAT MAKES YOU STAY CONSISTENT. The point of 80/20 is more for those training half/full marathon and who are in it for the long haul. For the rest, why overthink it?
I liked this discussion. Sadly, I feel Dr. Rhonda had a great point that got dismissed quickly. What Attia might be missing is that the best distance runners he referenced (such as the Kenyan marathoners) seem to have converged their zones and have such a high lactate threshold that their marathon pace is already into zone 3 and maybe 4. Also their training to get to this point utilizes hills, HIIT intervals, high altitudes, faster races for VO2 Max. He seems to describe it is as if they’re always chilling in zone 2. That’s definitely not the case. Also, even a great high end professional like Dr. Attia could learn from another pro who is among the best in her field (and also in rockin shape too!)
They aren’t always chilling in zone 2, they are chilling in zone 2 80% of the time. Which in reality is more like 90% for elites. You have to think of It from a time perspective. For the Kenyan runners you referenced for every 90 minutes they do in zone 2 they are doing 10 minute hills, intervals, etc. if they are running 2 or 3 hours a day then there is still plenty of time for zone 4/5.
@@Spudsmachenzie1 Yes that’s exactly my point. Reread my comment, Attia seemed to speak as if they are always in zone 2 :)
Dr Attia is a great expert in this field, but on this 80/20 rule I am not sure I fully agree. He says that he believes that only 20% of the cardio training volume should be at the higher intensity and says his reasoning for that is "empirical" and the basis is his experience of how elite athletes train. However, the scenario of an elite athlete [lets say a cyclist] who is undertaking a huge volume of training on a daily basis, does not translate to the average person who is trying to get let's say 4 x 20 to 25 minute sessions in a week. If the average person undertook that 80/20 rule, too much of their training time would be at too low an intensity. The average person would be better, as was sort of hinted at by Dr Patrick, doing a 20 minute HIIT type session to get maximum mitrochondrial response in the time available. This was also suggested by Dr Martin Gibala in a different interview with Dr Patrick. I am going to create my own video on this as I think it is an important distinction on this 80/20 rule to make.
I still want to see her do a 4X4 and I mean the whole workout, not just one round, I bet it looks nothing like we think. Probably barely moving at the end of each 4 minute rounds. I know a lot of these guys talk about what they do and I am not buying it. Cold plunge every day etc. Cycling maybe I could see the 4x4 but running I aint buying it unless they are elite athletes. In studies they site, How a bunch of 50 year olds improved VO2 max I would love to see what it looked like. Anyone have a video I would love to see it. I have not been able to complete 4 rounds running up a mountain without gassing by the 2nd round. Maybe going too hard but when they describe it we all imagine it looks way better than it actually or probably does.
Personally, I think we all are a little different. I have seen both return huge gains. I think as much as anything it is more about personalised coaching where bloods and other environmental factors are taken into consideration.
I'd like you to apply your knowledge and theories to training for rock climbing performance
When he says 80/20 does that count the on and off part of the VO2 max training or just the on parts?
Just do vigorous exercise so you can live a tad longer and get around better when you’re older but 99.99% of people die before the age of 100 so live it up 🙌🏽💪🏽
Interesting that Attila "discovered" that pro cyclist often train 80/20, at least in the off season. But didn't really consider they ride 4-5h per day of training. Then applies the 80/20 concept to someone who is going to do 30 min at a much lower power output than a pro? Lol, really!?
A pro zone 2 is probably average Joe's zone 4. I've ridden with those who raced the Tour and the Giro. That's why you cannot just learn theory like these guys. Anyhow, ride your bike and have fun, that way you do it more often, hit some hills hard, enjoy the scenery don't get so stuck in what one paper said or try to hit a certain number if that gets boring.
They have never quantified mitochondria biogenesis or mito quality from PGC or various training modes and compared them. It's all just myopic theory at this point. Take it with a grain of salt.
I don't have time on Zone 2 200 minutes minimum per week...... so HIIT/ZONE 4-5 for me no brainer... 3 times a week, 20-30 minutes each
I have a question. 4 hours of zone 2 = 240 minutes (80% of training time)
20% of 240 = 48 minutes for zone 5
1x per week zone 5, 4x4 = 16 minutes.
So this means it would ectually be better to do another zone 5 training?
I’ve thought the same thing before. Like when you do zone 2, you can usually sustain it the whole time. However, as you pointed out, 4x4 HIIT you’re only in zone 4/5 for half of the time.
I’m so confused on all these recommendations. All I know is my VO2 max certainly dropped after switching from HIIT every other day to 80/20. Therefore, I think I’m going to go with Rhonda’s approach for a while to see what happens (50/50).
Depends on your goals. For cycling, cross country skiing and long distance running the 80/20 is proven by Norwegian athletes for 40 years of results. It also takes time to get results. You should follow this plan for a year. Norwegian athletes usually also ramp up their training intensity a couple of weeks before a big race. Of season is usually done by doing a lot of base miles in zone 1-2.
@@ketle369 does this answer the question at all?
@@ketle369 the goal is to get a v02max as high as possible
You're doing your math wrong. If you're doing 240 mins of Zone 2, then you would do 60 min of Zone 5. (240/80%=300 min total training x 20% = 60 min Zone 5) But, I think that's a lot of total training min in a week. It's not saying you can't do it. But another idea is 3 hours of Zone 2 (180 mins/80% = 225 total training time x 20% = 45 mins Zone 5). Or if you want to go based off your current 16 mins Zone 5 (16/20%=80 mins total training time x 80% = 64 mins Zone 2). But I don't think that's enough of either kind. I'd recommend somewhere between 150-200 mins of Zone 2 and figure out your 20% of Zone 5 from that.
Does Peter Attia also recommend weight training? I am talking about overall health not specific sport performance.
Yes definetly, i read his book outlive. The data is really strong on weighttraining especially in older individuals that tend to die often from fall related consequences
Nicely described. Although, the 80/20 method should be segregated workout sessions and not included in one session. I other words, 20% of weekly training sessions should be high intensity rather than 20% of a single session. The reason being that 20% high intensity level done correctly should not also allow for 80% aerobic easier activity in the same session and still provide for ample recovery. That being said, it would be possible to do a single 80/20 session IF the athlete's experience and monitoring level is sufficient to know the recovery demands for the session while also knowing that a single 80/20 session has a smaller margin for error.
I am not a serious athlete but training for improving heart and vascular health. Do you think there is much difference in heart and vascular adaptations doing 80/20 in the same workout? Either doing Zone 2 in one block and then intervals at the end, versus intervals at the start, versus intervals throughout the workout?
@@bmp713 The issue is less about heart and vascular adaptation. Instead, doing a single workout with 80% Z2 and finishing with 20% HIIT or anaerobic type sets vs. (say) a week worth of separate 80% and 20% sessions will likely hinder recovery. That in turn reduces the long term positive impact of training on the vascular system and the adaptive process of the muscle's mitochondria. Both of these need to adapted for training to improve. And, training intensity zones focuses on one or the other. Mixing them is not the best approach... but, it does lead to improvement at a slower rate and for some may increase the chances of injury. And, typically this slow improvement is a result of the HIIT being below optimal intensity and the Z2 being too short to be maximally effective.
As a cyclist, I don't think this training method is all that useful to the average person. First of all, I think most trained cyclists only do 6 weeks of vo2 max training as that's all that it takes to realize their genetic potential - and they do this closer to race season. But that v02 max training also comes AFTER months and months of zone 2 and near-threshold work. Peter talks about the endurance/fitness pyramid and he's right, you kind of need a good aerobic base to push power later in the year. But cyclists are very careful with their interval sessions as they can easily train you into a hole - and it's not easy to get out of that hole. The average individual attempting this type of training will likely train themselves into a hole, see a gradual decline in power numbers, and be tired all the time.
IMO, the average person should be doing easy endurance work a number of times per week, which I'd call zone 2. And if you're wanting to push yourself, do near-threshold work 1 or 2 times per week. Unless you're a competitive athlete, there's no need to train like one.
How does a 1:1 ratio between the high intensity and zone 2 amount to 80% zone 2 training?
How much time are you willing to put in?
50% strength, 50% cardio
of that cardio 80% zone 2, 20% doing 3-8 minutes with same amount of rest at 85-95% max heart rate
I'm a sub 4 min mile runner, and sub 15min 5km runner, and i get my best results when im doing most of my runs as fast intervals. Intervals done at 400m, 800m, 1500m and 5km race pace. 3 or 4 of these sessions per week. Very little zone 2, only as recovery runs on the other days. Quality over quantity.
But 5k running is considered “sprint” compared to cycling and cross country skiing. My best cross country skiing and cycling results I got from doing 4 hour zone 1-2 sessions 1-3 times a week.
1. You're an outlier. Most people can't get anywhere near a
@@stongnyid I don't believe that. I'm nothing special. When I was 12 I was out the back of the class when we did cross country runs. After a few minutes the fit kids were hundreds of metres ahead. No natural talent, but I started training speed and endurance, and they both came together in the middle. I believe its far better to turn kids into sprinters then later add endurance to their body, then it is to try the other way. It doesn't work well.
Nothing special? Wikipedia says 1,755 people have run a sub-4 miles, (And btw, all men.) and all since 1959. There have been, conservatively, 10 billion people alive on earth from 1959-2023. That means that sub-4 milers are one in about 6 million.
By any definition, that’s an outlier. .3% is three standard deviations. What is .000018%?
@@stongnyid I mean I don't have any natural ability. I wasn't a natural fast sprinter or a good distance runner before i started training. But I dedicated myself to it and got better over 4 or 5 years. I definitely am nothing special, but I made myself decent.
So, if I do 4 hours of Z2, I need to do an hour of Z5?
It's by the sessions themselves, not time in zones per workouts across the week.
Z4
Lets say You Have hockey 3 Times a week should You spend 12 hours in zone 2 on top or that then ?
What I find interesting and perplexing, is how do these people at midlife become so fascinated with endurance sports training when they never actually competed as a youngster. I mean why now at their age.. this lady is clearly in her mid to late 40’s. Is it about health are a sense of wishing they would have been an athlete themselves. And by athlete I mean getting to a complete level at university or beyond?
Yes
If I use nasal breathing as my ballpark for Z2, my heartrate can go upto 185bpm, as a 35 year old.
Should I keep it there or switch closer to the 145-155bpm standard and ignore my nasal breathing?
If your heartrate goes up to 185, youre not doing Z2. So either ignore your nasal breathing or if you insist on doing it, get your intensity down. Its not that hard, dont overthink it.
Loving this content and had a go at the Norwegian 4x4 today. Question though... im doing this on a Rogue Echo.
Are you meant to stay at 85-90% of your heart rate for all 4min or stick to certain wattage that will have you there in the last few minuities of the set.
I went up to 900w for the first 20- 30 seconds to get my heart rate right up. But by the end of 4min my heart rate was still at 90% but watts had dropped to 370w.
Is this correct or should I aim to just stick at 450-500w for the full 4min , meaning my heart rate wont get to 85% until 1-2 min into the set. But my pace is constant over the 4min.
You did it right by going as hard as possible at the beginning. You're not trying to necessarily go as far as possible, but rather as hard as possible, feel like you're dying, and then keep going...
You should maintain a constant wattage range (like 450-500, as you mentioned). My range is 315-350 for all four intervals (I take three minutes of rest between intervals). Here is how it feels: The first 30s is quite easy. By two minutes fatigue is starting to kick in. In the last minute I have to focus intensely and really exert myself to keep the watts above 315. By the end of the fourth interval I am breathing heavily, feel very taxed, and am relieved that it's all over. However, I don't feel like I am going to vomit or faint or anything dramatic like that. I have looked into this a lot and this is my understanding of how the 4x4 is done. The fact that you hold can 450-500 for four minutes is, in my opinion, indicative of a very high level of fitness.
@@sjt6979 cheers, yeah I’ve done it a bit now and find 430 watts is sweet spot and can maintain for full workout and by and of 4 set it’s a good hard push
@@trailbunny2309 Awesome job! The only thing left for me to determine now is often one should do a 4x4 workout. I have heard lots of people say once a week is fine. It's hard for me to believe that doing any sort of workout just once per week can yield benefits, but I am certainly no exercise physiologist. How often do you do the 4x4?
@@sjt6979 I tend to do it once a week or once a fortnight. It’s more just maintenance for me as I’m 43 and not trying to get fitter. But do also do about 100km of cycling during the week to work. Which is more lower intensity
Should the hiit be at the beginning or the end of the zone two?
Why does he recommend 80% zone 2 as opposed to 80% zone 3 or 4 for the same amount of time? Will it long term damage your heart or something? I find I feel more refreshed if I run zone 3 instead of zone 2 but I only have 45 mins for cardio each day.
@@johnnycab8986 Thanks, is there a source or study for where this 7-8 hour figure is from? I find my brain works much better if I get more than zone 2 cardio everyday but I don’t want to overdo it.
@@martinlutherkingjr.5582 so keep doing zone 3, it seems that is the answer you want to hear.
@@DMGC529 No, I want to hear what has the most robust evidence backing it for longevity. What I actually do is another matter.
the training of high level endurance athletes has been studied and it comes out as 80% of their training is done in zone 2 and only 20% of their week is dedicated to zones 3-5. I'm sure there is other ways to skin a cat but that is the most common link between top level athletes. Once your HR reaches a certain point it doesn't pump out any more blood (SV) so training over it is only doing more damage to the body and making you more fatigued without any extra benefit @@martinlutherkingjr.5582
Above zone 2 produces lactate of which prevents the growth of your base being the development of the cardioid vascular system. It's well documented for years
All of these numbers and "zones" turn me off to exercise. Ill just continue to hike and full body workouts a couple times of week. We're all gonna die in the end anywyas.
Love this comment 😂
Wondering if there's a desired HR drop at end of recovery time? Running 1min on/1:40 off with a drop of 30/35 BPM. Thank you, LOVE these videos!
Heart rate recovery is available to read about online. Above 30-35 would be average to slightly above average, after 60 seconds
I am 67 and do a weekly run on the treadmill at a speed of 10.5 km speed at an elevation of 10 for 2 kms. , does this improve my VO2 max ?
I routinely do a 25 minute workout which is based on Tabata, but my partner and I do double Tabata (40 seconds on , 20 seconds recovery) We do 5 rounds of 5 exercises at this pace. I think this is VO2 max training. Is my thinking correct on this?
I would really like to hear what can an average person do with a given VO2 max. At 68 I should be able to walk x miles with a VO2 max of y, what are those round numbers for x and y, ballpark. I use the Apple Watch, but it seems low given what I can do in a typical training session.
Long distance runners look like A!DS patients though. Call them "metabolically flexible" all you want but I'd rather look like a sprinter.
there are other tissues than muscles
does mitochomdria work in all the same?
Dudes! Two words: overuse injuries. To do long periods of regular cardio, and especially high-intensity cardio, you need to be blessed with joints where everything lines up correctly. I am unfortunately not in that category. I spent most of my exercise time doing strength and flexibility, the cardio usually results in an overuse injury I have to spent time rehabbing from afterwords. Don’t know what to do about the cardio piece.
What is VO2 ???
The pro endurance athletes tend to do pyramidal training, mostly zones 2, 3, and 4 in a 5 or 7-zone model.
The reality of science is the researchers preferences always effect the outcomes of their studies. Dr. Attia doesn't like Zone 4/5 training, and as such doesn't spend much time himself nor his patients in that realm of exertion. Dr. Patrick is looking at how 80% zone 2 isn't actually increasing VO2 max in a statistically significant way, and that there's no way around hard work if that's the metric you're using. That's what the data suggests. Set goals, do the best you can, don't kid yourself; it's gonna suck, but it's worth it. It never gets easier, you just get better.
How about rowers?
Dumb question but how do you cout the 20% of time in the 80/20 polarized approach? For example if I do a 60 minute vo2 zmax interval session with 5x4 minute vo2 intervals do I count the 60 minutes towards the 20% or just the 20 minutes spent at intensity?
I have wondered the same and recently learned that Seiler (the 80/20 guy) classifies the 80% and 20% by session, not by duration or by mileage. So each sessions is either classified as easy or hard. For example, a progression tempo run would count as hard even though first 1/3 of it was run in Zone 2.
I've seen this explained - I think by Seiler - it is the total time of the session, not the total time of the intense intervals
Why are we talking about doped up bicyclist?
Not swimmers?
Does anyone know about the 20% rule in zone 5? For instance, if I follow a pattern of 4 minutes on and 4 minutes off, should I consider only the 4 minutes on towards the 20%, or should I include the total of 8 minutes in the calculation?
I believe 80/20 refers to the ‘sessions’ and not the actual time of intense efforts. For example my marathon training to me is 80/20 as I do a 4x4 once a week and my other 4 trainings are Z2 (including my long run).
How about playing and having fun?
This is ridiculously overcomplicated. It almost sounds like crankism to be honest at times. Who cares about these random stats? We are far more complicated than what can be gleaned from scientific cherry picking. Just move, whatever makes you do that and regularly is the answer.
Why do I hear from all cardiologists saying runners die early from heart complications?
Probably long distance runners? I watched videos recently saying that they damage their hearts. I don't do that, I go for 1/2 to 1 hour
Because they want you to die
Correlation does not imply causation.
Which cardiologists are saying that? Hard core endurance athletes including long distance runners seem to get more atrial fibrillation, which is a risk factor for stroke but not for death due to heart complications.
Maybe these runners are training mostly in zones 3 and 4, and are stressing the heart too much leading to potential atrial fibrillation
I always do my heart zone training using the highest resistance on cardio machines. For the treadmill. I set it at 13% incline because that's the highest I can maintain without bothering my knees. Using only speed and little strength doesn't seem as beneficial
But.....most of those high level cyclists are very weak in other types of physical work ( lift or carrying heavy objects).
Yeah, because they don't strength train. They specifically optimize their training regimen around their sport. The point isn't to do 80% of all training in Zone 2, it's to do 80% of your cardio in Zone 2 to maximize the efficiency of your cardiovascular system to that end.
@@nichtsistkostenlos6565the point is, do not compare yourself to freaking pros. This doctor thinks he is a pro but nowhere near it. Its just a study. Question to you what if u have 5 hours only? How u do the 80:20🤷🏻♂️
@@jacklauren935930 min interval session a week, the rest in zone 1-2.
@@jacklauren9359it’s not about comparing yourself to pros. It’s using them as a reference since they are the ones incentivized to optimize for cardiovascular performance. He is actually an expert and what he says is based on numerous studies, on top of what he prescribes to his own patients. If you had listened to the clip, he specifically stated that for his patients he recommends 50:50 strength and cardio training. And 80:20 of that cardio is zone 2 to vo2 max. So if you only have 5 hours, 2.5 hours for strength training, 2 hours for zone 2, and 30 min for vo2 max.
Actually what Dr Attia is telling is that is the elite in terms of aerobic capacity. From there he states that it is not necessary for anyone to train to that level to get most of the cardio benefits
Interesting how modern exercise people are rediscovering what we already knew from like the 1920s. This is not new people. Arthur Lydiard trained the best athletes on the planet using this method.
If you really want to expand your metabolic flexibility, you need to find out exactly how to push yourself until your glycogen stores are at zero. I train with a ketogenic diet, I run anywhere from 24 to 32 mi fasted. I carry glucose with me. When I began to pass out that's when I take my glucose and go home. Training zones or anywhere from 1 to 5.
I do long runs aswell. How often do you do this?
That’s sounds like something I will never try.
I really really really want to know what bmx like in terms of skatepark riding x games style stuff. I want to know how this type of activity affects vo2 max. My heart rate is all over the place. 110 bpm, 145 bpm, > 170 bpm but. It's not linear
I find it a bit nonsensical to use a model made for the “most metabolically flexible, healthiest” elite human beings who likely train 6 days a week, 3-4 hours a day (without even considering the amount of time dedicated to recovery and misc. physical preparation) and putting that advice without caveat to be consumed and applied by the general public.
For most Americans, I would imagine even keeping up with 1 hour x six days a week is a bit of a struggle. So what then, 3 hours of strength and stability, 2 hours and change of Zone 2 then 30ish minutes of HIIT? Will that really lead to a relative outcome? They should really do a study on that with non-elite athletes and show the evidence (including that with exercise adherence in mind) that this model still applies and I would say this is useful science. Until then, this seems like highly impractical and maybe even bad scheme for anyone who isn’t committing at least 12 hours of training a week.
You can CLEARLY hear Attia doesn't exactly know what he's talking about. "They might have the most mitochondria by not training 80-20", based on what? He would never pass scientific requirements talking like that.
Because they've done the actual biospys... I like how people in this thread have invented whole clothe 'problems' to shit they know jack shit about.
Translation please
Too much science. The common man just needs to run his butt off. "How do I run faster?" "Run faster!"
Such a complicated discussion about vo2 max and not one word about doping
What he is saying has some truth but it is wrong for over all health, have a long distance runner , Box for 3 minute rounds, or grappling for a few rounds, or just do some weighted burpee's, that long distance runner will just crap out very fast!!! but why if they can run at high rate for long time, maybe because muscles are paired down with strength and they just practice their sport a lot. I trained with some world class runners and when it came to performance say speed for how many punches You can throw in a 5 minutes they did not have the lungs or Muscle to compare with average boxers.
Diaz brothers enter the chat. They do triathlons. Nick was strikforce champion. MMA, boxing, and Muay Thai training cardio protocol is about the same as a marathon. 4/5 miles per day in camp.
Just saying.
You can’t box me if you can’t catch me 😂
Long distance cyclist, runners looks old, the best youthful looks are fitness peoples, who prioritized resistant training with a little bit cardio. I think it is pointless to chase big vo2 max number, survival rate 45 vo2 max vs 60 is 3,5 percent difference.
I think it’s hysterical that the doctor speaking about fitness and health is wearing a helmet that reads Marlboro” in the thumbnail.
Yeah that’s weird?? Maybe it’s some spoof? Can’t imagine Attia where something like that
It’s a hat based on a f1 drivers helmet. He’s f1 obsessed.
He is a fan of Senna
Let's see zone 5
NOthing in the fitness world is new.... All this has been said 40 plus years ago ... Look at vern gambetta (have you heard of him?) Why doc says 2 minute hold for squats, hang from bar,etc... Where did he come up with that nuber? Because its harder if we go longer. Going longer does nothing more for your body.... a 30 second squat hold will be just as effective as a 2 minute hold..... something to think about.
My grandad is 88 and has never been to the gym or followed a strict diet. He stays active by gardening and eats at restuarants weekly with friends. It doesn't make sense for him to spend an hour every day going to the gym and eating a perfect diet, he made it to 88 without that.
There's so many stories like this. Why should people spend so much time trying to delay the inevitible with hard exercise and diets?
For the average joe its Not a big Point.
But its Kind of interesting for me how the body works,how people optimize it and how people can achieve These Great things Like Ultra runners,cyclists,triathletes and so on…
Your grandfather is Not everybody
You can't draw conclusions from one person to everyone.
Smoking is Bad and Most of the people die earlier.
But some get a 100 years old.
Would you say that Smoking is Not a big deal because somebody you know gets it to a 100?
Probably Not
maybe the dumbest thing I've ever read in my life lol
It's not about delaying the inevitable, it's about maintaining the best quality of life while the inevitable is happening.
The vast majority are unfortunately not as lucky as your grandfather.
So maybe we shouldn't try to rely on luck.
Yeah. Read studies of people who made it to 115. None mentioned gym memberships, exercise programs or sports. Some drink a little alcohol everyday. A couple even smoke.
@@rickshae1525 Go do that then, why are you even watching this?
let's see how it works out for you lol
Point 1)
For Most of us its Not that Important.
But its Kind of interesting how the Body works and how the top athletes Train to get There.
Point 2)
Dr attia is Kind of annoying at this Point because theire Both experts and top scientists but he cuts her Short all the time anyway.
Point 3)
Its Common Sense that ALL top cyclists are doping.
Was that a Part of theire studies too?
And the doping is a vo2 Max doping, Thats why they can cycle that fast for that Long…
And only because he was a cyclist he things this is the Most important topic.
Perfectionist tendencies reduce life expectancy 7.3 years for men, and 6.9 years for women.
would love to know demographic make-up of Peter's sample upon which he bases this cardio training protocol. Especially if there are any peri/menopausal women in the mix.
men are build for HIIT and women for Zone 2 steady state cardio. So does it really make sense to recommend similar protocols?
I've heard evidence suggests peri/menopausal women should mostly do HIIT, not mostly Z2 with occasional HIIT.
4 watts a kilo ,and the main reason why he can manage that ,is mainly because he chooses well is genitors . You should instead speak in terms of % 😊 . We are not all monsters !
Zone 3 raises cortisol the most of any aerobic exercise. Not good.
Peter is completely off point, 80/20 is only because the body cant handle more hiit long term then 4 to 5 hours a week, so pro cyclist are forced to train easy to get further benefits. If you have 10 hours s week 60/40 would ilicit much better fitness adaption then 80/20
No
@@dickieblench5001 please elaborate?
Ore just keep on reading the commentaries
@@thomashald8000 10 hs/week would mean 2x 1 HR ,Z4 sessions eg 3x20 mins Z4. You want to do 4 of these Z4 sessions per week? You'll be burning out in no time
@@dickieblench5001 i personally do on average, 1 4 hour ride z2, 2 sweetspot sessions 2 hours each and 1 vo2 max ore a maybe a race/zwift race somewhere between 9 and 12 hours total.
When he talks about what the best cyclists in the world, do we account for EPO/ PED use?
Its confirmed ! DR PATRICK IS FIT !