Looking to try polarized/pyramidal training but don't know where to start? I've got training plans that use these methods available here: www.trainingpeaks.com/coach/dylanjohnsontraining#trainingplans
Dylan.....can you please explain something for all of us? Regarding 80/20....20% in Zone 3, how is that 20% defined? Actual weekly hours spent in Zone 3, or, the % of weekly workouts containing Zone 3 intervals? Example…..let’s say I rode 5 days/week, for a total of 10 hours. If (1) of those (5) days contained 20 minutes worth of Zone 3, I could say I met the 20% rule (1 of 5 days containing Z3 intervals). Now, if 20% is based on how many actual hours…..then I would need to spend 2 hours in Zone 3 for the 10 hour week. HUGE difference. Any comments to clarify for your audience would be greatly appreciated. Love your content !!!
@@lancedobbs7736 there is a reason, why your training should be structured. HIIT and zone 2(5 zone model) training should be separate sessions. There is a recovery time between threshold time - you dont have to subtract that from total interval session. Same goes for warmup and cooldown. But If you like to count minutes - based on your training time - 20min is not enough, 2h too much time in threshold.
@@lancedobbs7736 From EVOQ complete polarized training guide "When you break it up into pure time, which seems easier to track and conceptualize, it’s 90% in zone 1, very little in zone 2, and 10% in zone 3. You can even lean more to 95/5."
This is by far the best cycling training channel on TH-cam. I've learned so much and have seen significant fitness/power gains in my own training. Thanks Dylan!
Would be awesome to see you and coach Chad from TR on a podcast episode together. There's definitely merit to both your viewpoints and the difference in opinions would make for some really useful content.
@@bigtrouserbikes5649 Same with me. I've heard the TR guys on the podcast state that if you have 20+ hours a week to do your base then lots of Zone 1 is a good way to do it. Sweet Spot Base helps those of us with
@@tomasazevedo1979 I think this is key. The more hours per week you train, the more polarized makes sense. For the majority of amateurs, polarized is a tough sell, and SS may be the best approach if you're limited on time.
I also listen to the TR guys; given the amount of data TR (claims it) has, you would think they would publish something to show ( maybe not even prove) that SS is as effective as they say it is. Too much anecdotal evidence for me; I do wonder if there is a population for which SS is the best; maybe for a base phase, maybe those with less than 10 hours, or maybe who have modest ftp, maybe for those in the icy north who have to be on an indoor trainer for 3 months. I just wish TR would release some data.
Similar to Eric and others comments below, none of the studies seem to test the mixed periodization that actually exists in many training plans; e.g. that there is a SS centric build phase, followed by a more polarized race prep phase. Personally, from years of trying different things, I think, for most time limited amateur cyclists, this is actually what works best and builds the most rounded athlete; i.e. both speed and endurance. These phases can be repeated 2-3 times a year. A lot of polarized studies focus on professional athletes that are doing roughly double the hours that amateurs can afford, hence benefit more from the sheer length of their z1 workouts. One other point though; I think a lot of amateurs also think z1 in a 3 zone model, means noodling around at z1 in a 5 zone model. Actually if you read the polarized studies and look where the pros are actually training, "z1" is mid-high z2 in a 5 zone model - i.e. aiming for just below/at that LT1 line.
Dylan, thanks very much for this video. Despite all the available science, it is difficult to find a clear comparison between approaches with sound references to science. With your last bit on pyramidal and conclusions throughout I think you really nailed it. Overall, I take away that polarized is the way to go, but with sweet spot time actually considered within the 20% time of high intensity. So do 80% below LT1 and the rest above, individualizing proportions of Z2 and Z3 in the three-zone model depending on your overall objectives, where in the season you are, how tired you are in that day, and the characteristics of your event. Thanks so much!
7:20 is so god damn true. I was riding with trainerroad for couple months in this year, and although during their sweetspot base is saw 20 ftp improvement, the next phase killed me. I was definitely underperforming, and came back to polarised training. Maybe this is personal, because many people see good results with Sweetspot, but for me base phase of crunching 10-20 hours a week is necessary to mentally rest. Also doing strength training (that I guess everyone in this channel does) is almost impossible with sweetspot base, while with zone 1 it is quite chill (my legs do not hurt as much after 2h+ endurance ride from dms)
Athletes oftentimes over complicate training and end up wasting too much time and effort on anaerobic training, call it zone this or that whatever...most end up on the path to overtraining. I like the Maffetone approach as it got me out of the downward cycle of zone training and into more of a big base and let the racing take care of the anaerobic improvements. General philosophy concerning endurance training 1.) Build a great aerobic base 2.) Eat well 3.) Reduce stress 4.) Improve brain function Training slower enables your aerobic system to improve endurance so that you can actually race faster.
I think both Polarized and Sweet Spot serve their own purpose. Polarized training builds your aerobic engine i.e. improves your VO2Max. Sweet Spot training shifts your MLSS closer to your VO2Max. The VO2Max is the upper ceiling of ones ability for sustained endurance efforts. However, you can never reach that ceiling because there is another bottleneck which is the MLSS. From the MLSS on you will accumulate H+ ions in the respective muscles that cannot be "carried away" and thus has to be buffered. The buffering capacity will be depleted long before you run out of carbs. Only thing you can do is: shifting the point where lactate levels start to rise although you do not increase the effort (which is the MLSS). That is exactly what Sweet Spot training does. The closer your effort to MLSS is, the more your Power@MLSS will shift towards Power@VO2Max. But you must not get to close because in that case, the exercise induced strain slopes signifanctly upwards with the need for recocery rising so much that you cannot repeat such exercises often without the risk to overreach. Button line: build displacement (VO2Max) first, then shift the rev limiter (MLSS) upwards.
Great Vid. I did a lot of SS (TR) last year for a very hilly IM, had my worst performance in 15years. Looking to go a lot more 8020 this year. I think it will give more consistency to my training. Too much SS just seemed to build fatigue and leave me open to illness and injury
The Trainer road high volume training plans are in my view for well trained athletes - you also need to eat a lot of carbs - TR works/worked for me but they are hard going - if i had the time id go for polarised...
I don’t think it needs to be an either or. Polarized training works best in a 8 week phase when building on a strong aerobic base. Part of building that base is easy distance AND sweet spot. The most effective training plans take a 6 or 12 month perspective, which includes rest, base, and competition. Polarized training has a time and a place. The studies cited only looked at 6-8 weeks which the optimal time for polarized training. Indoor cycling plans are primarily designed for winter training which the part where you should be developing base. The hard /easy phase is better outside. I get the need to turn up the contrast and respect BHD. This is the best channel for cycling info.
This literally turned my world upside down... I need to do significantly more reading on this from the articles you posted, as I'm hesitant to change up my TrainerRoad SweetSpot plan (but if the science is there, then there is no excuse not to). Thanks for this man, your channel has had some seriously positive impact on many peoples' lives. Keep it up!
Thanks, Dylan. Just to be sure, translating to the 6 zone model used by Zwift, you should target Z2 (endurance) and Z5 (vo2max) if we want to target zone 1 & 3 (polarized training)?
thanks for this profound video. truly helps in planning training. digged myself into a hole of severe overtraining with nasty symptoms by excessive sweetspot last winter. feeling much better with polarized since summer.
i personally use a strongly polarized training for ski mountaineering (i just ride for fun). in a 15 hour training week i do 13.5 hours of z1 and only 1.5 hours of z3 w no attempted time in z2. doing this has made me the fittest climber ive ever been
A couple of clarifications here. First, SST as popularized by Trainerroad is an alternative base training protocol for cyclists unable to train more than 10 hours per week. SST is meant to provide the best bang for your buck during the base period only, and is only claimed to be optimal when training time is constrained ~10 hours. After completing a sweet spot base phase, users move on to a build phase that is roughly 80/20, so the burning question is not whether SST or Polarized makes you faster, but whether SST-->Polarized makes you faster than Traditional Base-->Polarized. Otherwise we are just rehearsing the Threshold training v. Polarized literature, which has mostly pronounced in favor of Polarized going back quite a few years. Second, zone two in a three zone model does not adequately define sweet spot as prescribed by most training plans. If LT1 is ~75% of FTP and LT2 is FTP or just below, then zone 2 is far too broad to be equated with sweet spot. Most prescriptions place sweet spot between 88% and 94% - specifically not upper endurance/tempo (75-85%) and specifically not threshold 95-100%. Proponents of sweet spot claim that training within this narrow range offers benefits to threshold power and TTE that upper endurance/tempo do not, while simultaneously building base fitness in way that threshold training does not. This dual effect is precisely why SS is prized as a major training efficiency during the base phase. Hopefully future research will evaluate these claims and determine what the tradeoffs are over traditional base/build.
Eric I think you are right on. We need to understand (1) is this better for people with under 10 hrs a week to train for a Base (b/c I don't have enough time for mounds of Z1 work and 20% Z3); and (2) will doing this to build base endurance then lead into a Polarized model for Build and Specialize? Dylan can you please fill us in?!
@@llouco I think the answer is already in Eric's post: "After completing a sweet spot base phase, users move on to a build phase that is roughly 80/20". Thus, the build phase (of Trainerroad) roughly equates to a polarized 80/20 model.
You're swapping out "training" and inserting "base training", and so make redundant the apples vs apples comparison of SST vs polarised. The rub of it is, according to the science, SST is good, but inferior to polarised training. In terms of your comment about specificity of SST, it's a good point, but still lacks scientific rigour. As a runner who now cycles, there's so much attention focused on tempo (threshold) runs, but the science has never black & white said they are truely beneficial in the way intervals (polarised) are. In defence of SST (or tempo runs), one thing that definitely gets missed is the mental toughness. There is something about getting in the uncomfortable zone, and hanging there, that is very different to short/sharp bursts. That learned grit is crucial.
I am a competitive kayaker and my race partner and I adopted the polarized method after years of sweet spot training. We both enjoyed the most significant improvements in performance in recent years, by training less (way more time in zone 1). Prof Stephen Seiler on TH-cam has some good I information worth checking out
I think one aspect of training that most people overlook is SKILL. Zone 1 is optimal for growing your skills at a particular sport. I like to refer to zone1 skill growth as compound interest. Your zone 1 speed gets faster the more skills you acquire. (Zone 1 is not static)This is especially important in sports that have more varied movement patterns, and more varied terrain.
What a great video Dylan. I’m so glad you found this info for me. This will help me achieve my goals in 2021. I don’t know what I would do without you big dyl
Awesome vid. Thank you! I'm a fan of SweetSpot for the period coming out of base but before you're actually in your race season, and I believe my rationale is related to your point about events that are performed in SweetSpot (13:00 of your vid). In January and February, the folks I'm training with (here in Virginia) are preparing for some early season gravel with the NUE events beginning later in the Spring. Hence, the gravel events will often be performed at a SweetSpot pace. My mantra is, "we want to get comfortable with being uncomfortable." Building up from 2-3 8min SS intervals to 3-4 20min SS intervals (during January - February) teaches that lesson. Gravel pacing is hard, and we need to get used to settling into it. Your recognition of the difference between Ironman and HalfIronman may be relevant too -- as it may be a function of the experience and performance level of the athlete. Someone that is a seasoned, well-tuned, and super-disciplined Ironman athlete can train in Z1 and Z3, then perform in Z2. The less experienced amateurs (probably more likely to be in those 1/2 IM events) may be better served by training in the zone they are preparing to perform in. So, in summary, for many of the folks I train with I recommend two SweetSpot sessions during the work week (with rest or light Z1 days prior), one tempo MTB/gravel session on the weekend, and then another Z1 (aerobic) session on the weekend. And yes, getting that rest in between is critical to getting the desired adaptations. Thanks again for the vid and discussion!
Bro Science Update for the MAMILS out there: Over the last two years, I find that when I spend around 80% of my time in PZ Zone 1, I make the most gains. I'm 53 years old and have tried a lot of different plans over the years. I simply burn out and stagnate when I do pure sweet-spot base plans like Trainer Road. I never heard of pyramidal before this video but based on my breakdown, this is where I end up.
Polarized training works and does so for all ages and level of cyclist (beginner to pro). If you are truly a beginner then sweet-spot training is a great way to get you quickly up to speed i.e., through predominantly central adaptations. After 6-12 months of sweet spot training there is no where to go but down. Thanks for the video.
Hi, Dylan. Thanks for this video. It confirms to me something that I'd intuitively decided to try last year- reducing the amount of zone 2 training I was doing. I'm 62 years old, btw, and (after a brief flirtation with time trials in my late teens) only took up time trialling seriously 6 years ago. Last summer we had few events (due to Covid restrictions) but I still managed to clock a few new PBs on the few courses that I was able to race. I'm looking to go even faster this year. As a scientist myself I really appreciate the science based approach that you use to back up your advice.
Excelent topic choice. Listened to it about 50 times...Will not find out anything new, and need to ride much for this to become important. But I feel good about myself and happy when i watch these kinds of videos :D
Very informative video, as always, thx! I have been training on Dylan’s training plan for 11 weeks and have hit record FTP numbers off the gun - 4 weeks into the program. Safe to say he knows what he is talking about.
Polarised lines up with how i imagine our ancestors would hunt: Zone1: Stalking an animal slowly for a long time (over days) unitl it's fatigued then Zone 2: Make our prey dip into its Zone 3 testing its fatuge level Zone 3: High intensity to make the final chase to kill... I'm probably wrong but it sounds plausable lol
I used to coach strength athletes in olympic weightlifting and this is dead on what I used for programming my athletes and what USAW teaches it's coaches. Basically you live and train in the 75-85% range and touch the 92-98% range every once in a while during periodization and save the 100-105% for competition. It seems this is the sweet spot for stress and adaptation for strength or aerobic conditioning. I love science!
Couldn’t the results from the first Ironman Study be because athletes spending more time in Z2 (3 zone model) are more likely to be time crunched, so have lower overall training volumes/TSS than athletes who are spending more time in Z1. So these Performance measures / correlations are based on training volumes as opposed to training type.
Are you too into cycling when you think this video title is clickbaity??? Great videos Dylan, I really get a lot out of them and they help me think about and reevaluate my training strategy.
u absolutely rock. 11'ish minutes with you provide much more science backed info than hour long podcasts with much talk (and less content). keep it up:)
Sweet spot. Did polarized for two years and got nothing out of it other than exhaustion and fear of every workout. 6 weeks of sweet spot and my threshold is up 15%, my anxiety about workouts is zero, my riding enjoyment is much higher.
I normally Just ride with the highest average speed physically possible, then go full gas on every single KOM that I travel near to. Also I make sure to beat all of the grannies with their e-bikes on the bike path. And i’m pretty fast (compared to them)
I have been watching this channel since early on. Dylan you are awesome! Please go on to get your sports physiology PhD after your cycling career is over. We need someone like you designing the studies!
Polarized is not an approach to training, so much as an end result. If you want to perform in endurance sports, volume is king. You need to train as much as you can find the time for (and can recover from), consistently. When training that much, there's only so much intensity you can absorb and so, by necessity, one can only achieve the necessary volume by training easier a lot of the time.
Not true. Lowering volume often improves performance because it's even easier to recover. Volume is rarely king if ever. Training to a specific time of exertion(your event) often requires limiting volume the whole time you train.
Very good video. Since most of us can’t train 20 - 30 hours a week, just stating that volume is king for endurance sports is not that insightful. The more insightful question of which zones to train in for riders with limited time, is more worth considering. There’s a very well known approach that with limited time, that sweet spot training is most beneficial since it covers more the most physiological adaptions than any other single workout or zone. This video adds a counter argument to this belief. In summary, I thought that the study results comparing the polarized and pyramid approach to sweet spot were interesting. Yes, we would all like to train 30 hours a week and have volume be king. Then we would not have to consider all of this great information. Thanks for putting the time in to teach us something new and interesting.
@@stevemcalpine99 The crux of my response was not that volume is the most effective training method. What I'm saying is that volume will largely determine the level you can aspire to reach by appropriately using your training time. That time must be split between endurance, speed, strength and recovery exercises. Optimal use of however much time you have to train is still important. But the reality is that considerable volume is required for anyone to maximize their potential at endurance sport. The same perfect recipe, scaled up or scaled down, doesn't yield the same results. The elite athletes simply wouldn't do that much volume unless it was necessary. And to cope with so much volume, it goes without saying that not all of that volume can be at high intensity.
I’m interested in studies that control for volume, not just % training time in zone. I suspect that on lower volume plans (7-8 hrs / week or less) SS comes out on top, but for higher volume PT yields better performance
The first study had an average of 6.4hrs/week for the polarized (POL) group and 7.5hrs/week for the threshold/SS group, with better results for the POL group.
@@collax2613 with the caveat that the study was short, and the threshold group didn't do any high intensity, which is not the way athletes train. Doing high intensity intervals would have improved the performance of the threshold group as well. It is no secret that HIT improves performance substantially, and no serious athletes only train threshold or sweet spot, it is just part of a training plan. In general cyclist train more pyramidal anyway ( Zone 1, Zone2 and Zone 3 in a 3 zone model). With that said there is a HUGE benefit to doing large volumes of Z2.
Precisely what I got into after last weeks video: intriguing concepts, Thnx Dylan! My initial idea is: zone one is boring. I like to be entertained especially through spin class in winter were I make my initial acceleration and interval base, I miss those polarized accelerations and extremes on Zwift. My best approach is start with +45 min Spin Class (or two) is to do that first, and then follow that up with +30 minutes/fat burn recovery session and I want to emulate that on Zwift too, not quite succeeding as Zwift training programs are boring compared to Spin-class and Zwift free riding/racing often let’s you hold back on the maximum efforts in order to stay with the group and not overcook it. (even if they are difficult) So: my conclusion of the execution of it must be, I can only do the zone 1 work if I’m tired enough if else I’m bored and I start over performing no matter what. Doing zone 1 work on it’s own is therefore very hard to execute if you are feeling motivated. Doing Zwift (Group)rides don’t make you do the polarized/extreme training you need to. Personally I hate to much structure, I only started making real power gains when I got off the small gears and threw caution and moderation out of the window.
I used to think the same way that zone 1 is boring, and rode mostly sweetspot or other hard efforts. My endurance rides were not very structured nor plenty. This lead to fitness plateau that I have recently been growing out of thanks due to more ez pz rides and less hard rides, two structured hard rides a week at most. I understand the sentiment, but think about how the pros train. Mostly it is easy rides and when hard efforts are done, nothing is being held back. More easy rides allows for more foundation to be built for the harder efforts and overall less revocery time as opposed to sweetspot style riding.
Hello Dylan, that contribution was really helpful. Thank you very much for such well balanced and thorough researched cycling expertise. Looking back onto my season, it's exactly what frustrated me.I've been quite "at it" but progress had been rather shallow. It seems that a substantial change in training structure is due. I see you've placed a link for training plans. That's certainly next step.
Now I'm in winter,,just short fast sessions...mixed in with a couple of endurance rides....not sure if it's right,,but I think it's right for me...another great informative video...cheers 😎
What is often neglegted in these studies and discussions is how the efforts in competitions contribute to the individual's level of fitness. For example, if one follows polarized plan, but spends a lot time near or at sweetspot in competitions (and in some preparation periods) and reaches a certain (good) level of fitness, is it only due to polarized training or the combination of polarized (training) and sweetspot (competiton) efforts?
Best training for me has Been to try always break Records this year during winter My ftp was around 300 then 5 months later 340 but recovery ride is most important i always try to keep heart rate 120
Great Video, very interesting topic. I try to add Blocks of Sweet Spot to plans, but rather replacing the 20% Zone 3 with Sweet spot. Keep up the great work!
YEAH - as a 16:07 5k PB Runner - I've actually done 80/20 for 4-5months now - Zone 1 - training this year with 1 day of hills and - YES - I can hit harder Tempo days and Race times w/ similar times as last year, very surprising...
great content, seems like i plateud, im just a little over 6 months into cycling, (dont have a powermeter based on HR/speed only ) i TT commute 45 km 2x a week (back & forth), light weekday rides + long light/med weekend rides. and i dont see much improvement in time/speed with the commute. after watching, realized what im doing is basically sweetspot training with TT commute & other rides are just recovery/sweetspot rides. i'm gonna try polarized/pyramid this coming month. lets see recently got a top 5 KOM, for 32.5kph for 40km course solo TT commute with 5.7kg bag, mostly flats. might not look that impressive but traffic/roads here arent great that just means im improving, lets see how far i can take this up to.
Interesting. Super helpful video. When I began reading into training science. A lot of people recommended doing similar efforts to the race I'm training for. This polarized method speaks against that.
Great video Dylan, very informative. One of the reasons why pyramidal and polarized might not show differences further strengthens the value of those long, tedious L1 rides. It takes a while to learn to do an endurance ride the way it's meant, staying the whole time below L1, not averaging L1 power with frequent spikes. In a proper L1 endurance ride after 3.5 hours is when things start feeling differently, and those 170 watts do start to feel heavier.
Great video. I can relate to these findings... Going from zwift training plans which are mostly sweet spot I felt fatigued and this led to poor performance and low motivation. When I switched to Mosley training plan on training peaks which follows the polarized approach I felt stronger and enjoying the nice n easy days. And looked forward to the high intensity days! However, the zone 1 training is very humbling and you need a lot of patience to improve that zone.
I would not throw SS under the bus. For a beginner or time crunched athletes SS is still preferred. The time needed at Zone 1 is 2-3 times that of SS during base training. I think if you do more efficient SS first and platau, the go back to a more traditional approach. Dylan is probably correct for top end athletes but there is plenty of evidence for SS out there.
Finally a bike guy who says polarized is good and be careful with sweet spot. YEA Dylan. I would bet pyramidal works best on short schedules,m like 5-6 hrs per week, but if i you are doing 10-12 hrs plus POL is better as it produces less cortisol. PS Dylan- every polarized training I have seen has you doing 5-10% of training at threshold depending on where you are vs racing season
Can you do a video on indoor vs outdoor training. In the bad zwift workouts video you say to do “quality” HI rides outdoors because indoor power is lower, but I prefer the opposite: quality HI sessions indoors for consistency and repeatability, Z1/2 sessions outdoors. Trying to do quality sessions outdoors is hard because traffic, topography and weather make holding consistent power tricky. Thoughts?
I've watched this a couple times and found it interesting and compelling. However, given that most of us who follow your advice have dismissed SS heavy plans and do the more traditional method; 2 or occasionally 3 HIIT/week, couple recovery days and a long day (or something like that), it would be interesting to consider polarized versus a typical plan you'd subscribe. After many years of Joe Friel's Cyclist Training Bible, I've been following Fast after 50 program pretty closely for a decade (race age - 62). I've been pretty happy with what I think is one of the best self-coaching methods and have had far more success than I deserve (in Cat Grandpa) but have completely fallen apart this year. Can't complete and interval set (often can't even finish the FIRST interval) to save my life. Desperately seeking a way to get back on track. Love your videos, thanks for doing all the research and presenting it coherently.
What nobody ever seems to talk about with this is the *time* *spent* *riding* Once you go above 15-20 hours a week, I don't think it really matters about POL vs PYR. Stuck at 5-8 hours a week? Then yes, I bet there's a huge difference.
Great video Dylan. Isn’t the primary benefit from Sweet Spot the performance gains with limited time on the bike? Can you achieve the same benefits with Polarized training with the same amount of training time?
Well, the first study had an average of 6.4hrs/week for the polarized (POL) group and 7.5hrs/week for the threshold/SS group, with better results for the POL group. Of course the results could change when you go to very low training volumes and just throw out most Z1 work, but for roughly similar amount of training time the 80/20% POL group had better results than the 60/40% SS group.
Coincidently, the training regimen I'm doing now is what BHD is preaching. I do a set of two rides of 20 min high intensity rides with minimum IF 1.0 per day, with at least two hours of rest between the rides. (No warm-up, out the door and go as fast as the traffic conditions permit.) This way, I can drop a lot of cars along the way. You know, a drop is a drop even for a few seconds. BTW, that training session gets me to my favorite cafe and back home. I haven't experienced any significant performance gain though. ;)
Zone 10 helps me the most but only if I perform 12 sets of zone 15 fire burners before and after and then straight into alternating squats, reverse lunges and dead-lifts. The third repeat of the entire session really helps my TSS without impacting freshness the next day.
Great information. I train to hard on my light days but can't stand road cycling which is the easy way to get in base miles I know. Yet, I would rather my eyes bleed than ride my road bike.
Hey Dylan, Im getting a lot of mixed messages regarding what you recommend for this off season training. First you have a video talking about the importance of base training and to use sweetspot in that training and now you're suggesting to not use sweetspot. Could you make a video that just outlines the best winter training plan for someone who plans to race in the spring. Thanks and love the channel!
If you want to race in the spring race in the winter. If you want to race in the summer race in the spring. That's my experience. You reach the best peak as others are starting this way, and also race ride into the correct speed. Clean athletes probably only have 1-2 peaks per year
The studies in this video don't consider base training and training periodization at all, therefore the video does not say anything about what base training should look like. It might be good to have a new video about different training phases, summarizing the best advice for each training phase.
TR swears by sweet spot.. I think it's actually because it gets results quicker maybe, which encourages people to stick with it. I did this so I sort of know that's the case. I got really great results that didn't last.
@@syrus3k Anyone who is either new to training or at a low level of fitness will get faster by training SS, that much is a fact and so SS plans appear great which is why they are so popular and also easy to market, until you plateau that is.
@@SteveT__001 I don't know about that program on my early training. I just did hard ride ( end up on z2 - z3 all the time ). My fitness boosted like a rocket on the first year, and then went plateau after 2. I was scratching my head, and now I end up on doing polarized this last one and half years. But I haven't tested it yet. I am trying to build some speed for specific TT next year. ..
Yeah TR plans really can lead to overtraining if you don't know when to skip a workout for instance. And if you skip a workout too often that is a huge warning sign that should be taken into account. For me another issue was these training plans meant I had to train alone because any group ride I'd do would be way too intense compared to what was prescribed for that session. The good thing about polarized training is the emphasis it puts on easy days being easy, and hard days being hard. No group rides can fit into any of that in my experience, so people following such a plan tend to be more disciplined when it comes to respecting the zones
My 2 cents - SS during base to build CTL when training volume less than 10 hours per week, then transition to polarised when approaching race season. I find without SS one loses too much muscular endurance which is critical for long road races, but polarised also critical for maximum V02 capability. All these things highly dependent on the athlete, their history, training status, and what training phase they are in...hence coaches being so valuable!
Polarized everytime for me. Infact I rarely do any sweet spot or threshold at all unless racing or in a fast group ride. There is too much confusion when people mention zones because many people go by a three zone scale (triathletes or people who don't have a PM). 7 zone scale is best. Z1 is recovery, Z2 is endurance, Z3 is tempo, Z4 is threshold, Z5 is vo2 max, Z6 is anaerobic, Z7 is neuromuscular. Z3.5 being sweet spot, where tempo approaches threshold.
Thanks Dylan! Top stuff as always. Man! This has huge implications for training, albeit I am not an athlete, most of my turbo training sessions are Zone 2. In fact, most Zwift training sessions are biased to sweet spot. Worth a rethink then! Cheers
![[MV] A leap of faith...ความเชื่อใจครั้งสุดท้าย (From "Petrichor the series")](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/U1piZH2CNXA/mqdefault.jpg)
Looking to try polarized/pyramidal training but don't know where to start? I've got training plans that use these methods available here: www.trainingpeaks.com/coach/dylanjohnsontraining#trainingplans
What plans of yours do you recommend with a polarized focus?
Dylan.....can you please explain something for all of us? Regarding 80/20....20% in Zone 3, how is that 20% defined? Actual weekly hours spent in Zone 3, or, the % of weekly workouts containing Zone 3 intervals?
Example…..let’s say I rode 5 days/week, for a total of 10 hours. If (1) of those (5) days contained 20 minutes worth of Zone 3, I could say I met the 20% rule (1 of 5 days containing Z3 intervals). Now, if 20% is based on how many actual hours…..then I would need to spend 2 hours in Zone 3 for the 10 hour week. HUGE difference. Any comments to clarify for your audience would be greatly appreciated. Love your content !!!
Have you got a duathlon sprint plan? 5k 30k 2.5k?
@@lancedobbs7736 there is a reason, why your training should be structured. HIIT and zone 2(5 zone model) training should be separate sessions. There is a recovery time between threshold time - you dont have to subtract that from total interval session. Same goes for warmup and cooldown. But If you like to count minutes - based on your training time - 20min is not enough, 2h too much time in threshold.
@@lancedobbs7736 From EVOQ complete polarized training guide "When you break it up into pure time, which seems easier to track and conceptualize, it’s 90% in zone 1, very little in zone 2, and 10% in zone 3. You can even lean more to 95/5."
Backwards Hat Dylan always says what I am thinking
BINGO!
Indeed!!!
Exactly, he's the voice of the people.
man of the people
Don't ever get rid of BHD!!!
I only need one zone, the hard enough to drop you zone. That's it, research done! Thanks BHD I can always count on you.
This is by far the best cycling training channel on TH-cam. I've learned so much and have seen significant fitness/power gains in my own training. Thanks Dylan!
Not the content we deserve but the content we need
BHD needs to have his own training plans available on Training Peaks
What will Dylan do if BHD outsells him?
He does. I'm currently doing his FTP booster plan, which involves 20 minute efforts at 600% of FTP
@@LucasKunneman claim him as a dependent at tax time ;)
BHD has his own training plans available on *Strava*.
1. Pick a segment.
2. Ride segment repeats until KOM.
3. Return to step 1.
6 hours neuromuscular... it’s what all the pros do
Would be awesome to see you and coach Chad from TR on a podcast episode together. There's definitely merit to both your viewpoints and the difference in opinions would make for some really useful content.
I would love to see that as well. As I am heavy into a TR program with tons of SST at the moment. Now I'm scratching my head!!
@@bigtrouserbikes5649 Same with me. I've heard the TR guys on the podcast state that if you have 20+ hours a week to do your base then lots of Zone 1 is a good way to do it. Sweet Spot Base helps those of us with
@@tomasazevedo1979 I think this is key. The more hours per week you train, the more polarized makes sense. For the majority of amateurs, polarized is a tough sell, and SS may be the best approach if you're limited on time.
The viewpoints don’t even overlap, nobody at TrainerRoad or FasCat or anywhere else has ever suggested that somebody should Sweet Spot year round.
I also listen to the TR guys; given the amount of data TR (claims it) has, you would think they would publish something to show ( maybe not even prove) that SS is as effective as they say it is. Too much anecdotal evidence for me; I do wonder if there is a population for which SS is the best; maybe for a base phase, maybe those with less than 10 hours, or maybe who have modest ftp, maybe for those in the icy north who have to be on an indoor trainer for 3 months. I just wish TR would release some data.
I have a friend who started doing polarized training for triathlon, back in 2006. Everyone thought he was crazy until race season started.
Similar to Eric and others comments below, none of the studies seem to test the mixed periodization that actually exists in many training plans; e.g. that there is a SS centric build phase, followed by a more polarized race prep phase. Personally, from years of trying different things, I think, for most time limited amateur cyclists, this is actually what works best and builds the most rounded athlete; i.e. both speed and endurance. These phases can be repeated 2-3 times a year. A lot of polarized studies focus on professional athletes that are doing roughly double the hours that amateurs can afford, hence benefit more from the sheer length of their z1 workouts. One other point though; I think a lot of amateurs also think z1 in a 3 zone model, means noodling around at z1 in a 5 zone model. Actually if you read the polarized studies and look where the pros are actually training, "z1" is mid-high z2 in a 5 zone model - i.e. aiming for just below/at that LT1 line.
Dylan, thanks very much for this video. Despite all the available science, it is difficult to find a clear comparison between approaches with sound references to science.
With your last bit on pyramidal and conclusions throughout I think you really nailed it.
Overall, I take away that polarized is the way to go, but with sweet spot time actually considered within the 20% time of high intensity.
So do 80% below LT1 and the rest above, individualizing proportions of Z2 and Z3 in the three-zone model depending on your overall objectives, where in the season you are, how tired you are in that day, and the characteristics of your event.
Thanks so much!
Zone 2 is the most fun to do. Now that it has turned winter and I am lifting, I really started appreciating Zone 1. Zone 1 is my new favorite!
Yep. Clearing lactic acid after lifting is needed.
Spot on!
once your zone 1 gets over 3w/kg, you'll enjoy even more.
7:20 is so god damn true. I was riding with trainerroad for couple months in this year, and although during their sweetspot base is saw 20 ftp improvement, the next phase killed me. I was definitely underperforming, and came back to polarised training. Maybe this is personal, because many people see good results with Sweetspot, but for me base phase of crunching 10-20 hours a week is necessary to mentally rest. Also doing strength training (that I guess everyone in this channel does) is almost impossible with sweetspot base, while with zone 1 it is quite chill (my legs do not hurt as much after 2h+ endurance ride from dms)
Glad you agree with Professor Stephen Seiler and the guys at fast labs. BTW, that’s why I stopped paying attention to TR.
Backwards Hat Dylan is all we need. Just listen, laugh and remember not to do as he says. Simple.
I think sweetspot has its place in base/build phases, and then working into polarised blocks the closer it gets to race season
I agree. None of these studies included multiple training phases
Yes yes yes
@@jeremysweeten2792 3 to 4 weeks of sweetspot to exhaustion is more than enough... in those 5 to 6 months in my opinion
Athletes oftentimes over complicate training and end up wasting too much time and effort on anaerobic training, call it zone this or that whatever...most end up on the path to overtraining. I like the Maffetone approach as it got me out of the downward cycle of zone training and into more of a big base and let the racing take care of the anaerobic improvements. General philosophy concerning endurance training
1.) Build a great aerobic base
2.) Eat well
3.) Reduce stress
4.) Improve brain function
Training slower enables your aerobic system to improve endurance so that you can actually race faster.
I think both Polarized and Sweet Spot serve their own purpose. Polarized training builds your aerobic engine i.e. improves your VO2Max. Sweet Spot training shifts your MLSS closer to your VO2Max.
The VO2Max is the upper ceiling of ones ability for sustained endurance efforts. However, you can never reach that ceiling because there is another bottleneck which is the MLSS. From the MLSS on you will accumulate H+ ions in the respective muscles that cannot be "carried away" and thus has to be buffered. The buffering capacity will be depleted long before you run out of carbs. Only thing you can do is: shifting the point where lactate levels start to rise although you do not increase the effort (which is the MLSS). That is exactly what Sweet Spot training does. The closer your effort to MLSS is, the more your Power@MLSS will shift towards Power@VO2Max. But you must not get to close because in that case, the exercise induced strain slopes signifanctly upwards with the need for recocery rising so much that you cannot repeat such exercises often without the risk to overreach.
Button line: build displacement (VO2Max) first, then shift the rev limiter (MLSS) upwards.
Great Vid. I did a lot of SS (TR) last year for a very hilly IM, had my worst performance in 15years. Looking to go a lot more 8020 this year. I think it will give more consistency to my training. Too much SS just seemed to build fatigue and leave me open to illness and injury
The Trainer road high volume training plans are in my view for well trained athletes - you also need to eat a lot of carbs - TR works/worked for me but they are hard going - if i had the time id go for polarised...
Yeah that's a bummer. You did all the sweet spot to just find out hills require punchy efforts to make the fastest splits
Thanks Dylan! Answered what I was questioning about my approach. Too many trainer road videos and not enough of yours.
I love bro boy’s reaction. I have such a hard time staying at zone 1, but you have convinced me to do so more often
I don’t think it needs to be an either or. Polarized training works best in a 8 week phase when building on a strong aerobic base. Part of building that base is easy distance AND sweet spot. The most effective training plans take a 6 or 12 month perspective, which includes rest, base, and competition. Polarized training has a time and a place. The studies cited only looked at 6-8 weeks which the optimal time for polarized training.
Indoor cycling plans are primarily designed for winter training which the part where you should be developing base. The hard /easy phase is better outside.
I get the need to turn up the contrast and respect BHD. This is the best channel for cycling info.
This literally turned my world upside down... I need to do significantly more reading on this from the articles you posted, as I'm hesitant to change up my TrainerRoad SweetSpot plan (but if the science is there, then there is no excuse not to). Thanks for this man, your channel has had some seriously positive impact on many peoples' lives. Keep it up!
Thanks, Dylan.
Just to be sure, translating to the 6 zone model used by Zwift, you should target Z2 (endurance) and Z5 (vo2max) if we want to target zone 1 & 3 (polarized training)?
I have no clue what I am doing. As usually. Every new video tells me something different lol
thanks for this profound video. truly helps in planning training. digged myself into a hole of severe overtraining with nasty symptoms by excessive sweetspot last winter. feeling much better with polarized since summer.
I always wait for backward hat Dylan
i personally use a strongly polarized training for ski mountaineering (i just ride for fun). in a 15 hour training week i do 13.5 hours of z1 and only 1.5 hours of z3 w no attempted time in z2. doing this has made me the fittest climber ive ever been
give the other guy more airtime 😂. great video dude thanks for sharing
If you're new to the channel, the "other guy" is affectionately known as BHD - Backwards Hat Dylan.
A couple of clarifications here. First, SST as popularized by Trainerroad is an alternative base training protocol for cyclists unable to train more than 10 hours per week. SST is meant to provide the best bang for your buck during the base period only, and is only claimed to be optimal when training time is constrained ~10 hours. After completing a sweet spot base phase, users move on to a build phase that is roughly 80/20, so the burning question is not whether SST or Polarized makes you faster, but whether SST-->Polarized makes you faster than Traditional Base-->Polarized. Otherwise we are just rehearsing the Threshold training v. Polarized literature, which has mostly pronounced in favor of Polarized going back quite a few years. Second, zone two in a three zone model does not adequately define sweet spot as prescribed by most training plans. If LT1 is ~75% of FTP and LT2 is FTP or just below, then zone 2 is far too broad to be equated with sweet spot. Most prescriptions place sweet spot between 88% and 94% - specifically not upper endurance/tempo (75-85%) and specifically not threshold 95-100%. Proponents of sweet spot claim that training within this narrow range offers benefits to threshold power and TTE that upper endurance/tempo do not, while simultaneously building base fitness in way that threshold training does not. This dual effect is precisely why SS is prized as a major training efficiency during the base phase. Hopefully future research will evaluate these claims and determine what the tradeoffs are over traditional base/build.
Just draft people better. It's worth more gains than polarized vs any other plan. And focus on wpk
Eric I think you are right on. We need to understand (1) is this better for people with under 10 hrs a week to train for a Base (b/c I don't have enough time for mounds of Z1 work and 20% Z3); and (2) will doing this to build base endurance then lead into a Polarized model for Build and Specialize?
Dylan can you please fill us in?!
Thank you! This was exactly my understanding of SST and what I came here to get clarification on
@@llouco I think the answer is already in Eric's post: "After completing a sweet spot base phase, users move on to a build phase that is roughly 80/20". Thus, the build phase (of Trainerroad) roughly equates to a polarized 80/20 model.
You're swapping out "training" and inserting "base training", and so make redundant the apples vs apples comparison of SST vs polarised. The rub of it is, according to the science, SST is good, but inferior to polarised training.
In terms of your comment about specificity of SST, it's a good point, but still lacks scientific rigour. As a runner who now cycles, there's so much attention focused on tempo (threshold) runs, but the science has never black & white said they are truely beneficial in the way intervals (polarised) are.
In defence of SST (or tempo runs), one thing that definitely gets missed is the mental toughness. There is something about getting in the uncomfortable zone, and hanging there, that is very different to short/sharp bursts. That learned grit is crucial.
I am a competitive kayaker and my race partner and I adopted the polarized method after years of sweet spot training. We both enjoyed the most significant improvements in performance in recent years, by training less (way more time in zone 1). Prof Stephen Seiler on TH-cam has some good I information worth checking out
I think one aspect of training that most people overlook is SKILL. Zone 1 is optimal for growing your skills at a particular sport. I like to refer to zone1 skill growth as compound interest. Your zone 1 speed gets faster the more skills you acquire. (Zone 1 is not static)This is especially important in sports that have more varied movement patterns, and more varied terrain.
What a great video Dylan. I’m so glad you found this info for me. This will help me achieve my goals in 2021. I don’t know what I would do without you big dyl
Awesome vid. Thank you!
I'm a fan of SweetSpot for the period coming out of base but before you're actually in your race season, and I believe my rationale is related to your point about events that are performed in SweetSpot (13:00 of your vid). In January and February, the folks I'm training with (here in Virginia) are preparing for some early season gravel with the NUE events beginning later in the Spring. Hence, the gravel events will often be performed at a SweetSpot pace. My mantra is, "we want to get comfortable with being uncomfortable." Building up from 2-3 8min SS intervals to 3-4 20min SS intervals (during January - February) teaches that lesson. Gravel pacing is hard, and we need to get used to settling into it. Your recognition of the difference between Ironman and HalfIronman may be relevant too -- as it may be a function of the experience and performance level of the athlete. Someone that is a seasoned, well-tuned, and super-disciplined Ironman athlete can train in Z1 and Z3, then perform in Z2. The less experienced amateurs (probably more likely to be in those 1/2 IM events) may be better served by training in the zone they are preparing to perform in.
So, in summary, for many of the folks I train with I recommend two SweetSpot sessions during the work week (with rest or light Z1 days prior), one tempo MTB/gravel session on the weekend, and then another Z1 (aerobic) session on the weekend. And yes, getting that rest in between is critical to getting the desired adaptations.
Thanks again for the vid and discussion!
Bro Science Update for the MAMILS out there: Over the last two years, I find that when I spend around 80% of my time in PZ Zone 1, I make the most gains. I'm 53 years old and have tried a lot of different plans over the years. I simply burn out and stagnate when I do pure sweet-spot base plans like Trainer Road. I never heard of pyramidal before this video but based on my breakdown, this is where I end up.
What % of FTP is Zone 3?
@@enriqueDFTL 90% of VO2 max on power or 88% of maxHR in HR ZONES
You are the best free coach ever !!
And BACKWARD HAT Dylan too. 😊
Polarized training works and does so for all ages and level of cyclist (beginner to pro). If you are truly a beginner then sweet-spot training is a great way to get you quickly up to speed i.e., through predominantly central adaptations. After 6-12 months of sweet spot training there is no where to go but down. Thanks for the video.
Love this video. Super clear and easy to understand backed up with studies!
Hi, Dylan. Thanks for this video. It confirms to me something that I'd intuitively decided to try last year- reducing the amount of zone 2 training I was doing. I'm 62 years old, btw, and (after a brief flirtation with time trials in my late teens) only took up time trialling seriously 6 years ago. Last summer we had few events (due to Covid restrictions) but I still managed to clock a few new PBs on the few courses that I was able to race. I'm looking to go even faster this year. As a scientist myself I really appreciate the science based approach that you use to back up your advice.
Dylan == the man with a plan.
Excelent topic choice. Listened to it about 50 times...Will not find out anything new, and need to ride much for this to become important. But I feel good about myself and happy when i watch these kinds of videos :D
Awesome overview! I've learned a lot here and now better understand where the 80-20 rule comes from
Very informative video, as always, thx!
I have been training on Dylan’s training plan for 11 weeks and have hit record FTP numbers off the gun - 4 weeks into the program. Safe to say he knows what he is talking about.
Polarised lines up with how i imagine our ancestors would hunt:
Zone1: Stalking an animal slowly for a long time (over days) unitl it's fatigued then
Zone 2: Make our prey dip into its Zone 3 testing its fatuge level
Zone 3: High intensity to make the final chase to kill...
I'm probably wrong but it sounds plausable lol
I enjoy your content Dylan.
Thanks for the science based training insights. I feel Zwift is similar where you seldom go super hard and never go super easy.
Trainerroad has entered the chat
😂
They started charging everyone else double to enter the chat. -U10
You just need a bike not a trainer lol
I used to coach strength athletes in olympic weightlifting and this is dead on what I used for programming my athletes and what USAW teaches it's coaches. Basically you live and train in the 75-85% range and touch the 92-98% range every once in a while during periodization and save the 100-105% for competition. It seems this is the sweet spot for stress and adaptation for strength or aerobic conditioning. I love science!
Couldn’t the results from the first Ironman Study be because athletes spending more time in Z2 (3 zone model) are more likely to be time crunched, so have lower overall training volumes/TSS than athletes who are spending more time in Z1. So these Performance measures / correlations are based on training volumes as opposed to training type.
Exactly try to get your ctl to 80-100 with Z1(3zone model) with 8-10hr a week. Good luck.
@@cyclingfan5683 i think the how to get fast with 10 hours video have basicly that.
Are you too into cycling when you think this video title is clickbaity??? Great videos Dylan, I really get a lot out of them and they help me think about and reevaluate my training strategy.
Bikenetic Falls Church, VA!!
u absolutely rock. 11'ish minutes with you provide much more science backed info than hour long podcasts with much talk (and less content). keep it up:)
Which training method do you use? Polarized, sweet spot, pyramidal, something else?
Sweet spot. Did polarized for two years and got nothing out of it other than exhaustion and fear of every workout. 6 weeks of sweet spot and my threshold is up 15%, my anxiety about workouts is zero, my riding enjoyment is much higher.
I normally Just ride with the highest average speed physically possible, then go full gas on every single KOM that I travel near to. Also I make sure to beat all of the grannies with their
e-bikes on the bike path. And i’m pretty fast (compared to them)
Had a go for a few years on polarized with some success. Now with less time to train, I am doing a SS block
I’ve read a lot about sweet spot and was going to incorporate it into my training for crit races.. I’ll stick with 80-20 I think
@@TheUltimateULTRA - Always fun dropping an E-bike!
I have been watching this channel since early on. Dylan you are awesome! Please go on to get your sports physiology PhD after your cycling career is over. We need someone like you designing the studies!
Do you stay in 80/20 as you start to peak for your A race?
That's super interesting! I'm in the Polarized training camp, using The Sufferfest, and I'm very happy with my progress.
Polarized is not an approach to training, so much as an end result. If you want to perform in endurance sports, volume is king. You need to train as much as you can find the time for (and can recover from), consistently. When training that much, there's only so much intensity you can absorb and so, by necessity, one can only achieve the necessary volume by training easier a lot of the time.
Not true. Lowering volume often improves performance because it's even easier to recover. Volume is rarely king if ever. Training to a specific time of exertion(your event) often requires limiting volume the whole time you train.
@@mindcillerThen why do pro tour riders do so much volume?
Very good video. Since most of us can’t train 20 - 30 hours a week, just stating that volume is king for endurance sports is not that insightful. The more insightful question of which zones to train in for riders with limited time, is more worth considering. There’s a very well known approach that with limited time, that sweet spot training is most beneficial since it covers more the most physiological adaptions than any other single workout or zone. This video adds a counter argument to this belief. In summary, I thought that the study results comparing the polarized and pyramid approach to sweet spot were interesting. Yes, we would all like to train 30 hours a week and have volume be king. Then we would not have to consider all of this great information. Thanks for putting the time in to teach us something new and interesting.
@@stevemcalpine99 The crux of my response was not that volume is the most effective training method. What I'm saying is that volume will largely determine the level you can aspire to reach by appropriately using your training time. That time must be split between endurance, speed, strength and recovery exercises. Optimal use of however much time you have to train is still important. But the reality is that considerable volume is required for anyone to maximize their potential at endurance sport. The same perfect recipe, scaled up or scaled down, doesn't yield the same results. The elite athletes simply wouldn't do that much volume unless it was necessary. And to cope with so much volume, it goes without saying that not all of that volume can be at high intensity.
I’m interested in studies that control for volume, not just % training time in zone. I suspect that on lower volume plans (7-8 hrs / week or less) SS comes out on top, but for higher volume PT yields better performance
The first study had an average of 6.4hrs/week for the polarized (POL) group and 7.5hrs/week for the threshold/SS group, with better results for the POL group.
@@collax2613 with the caveat that the study was short, and the threshold group didn't do any high intensity, which is not the way athletes train. Doing high intensity intervals would have improved the performance of the threshold group as well. It is no secret that HIT improves performance substantially, and no serious athletes only train threshold or sweet spot, it is just part of a training plan. In general cyclist train more pyramidal anyway ( Zone 1, Zone2 and Zone 3 in a 3 zone model). With that said there is a HUGE benefit to doing large volumes of Z2.
Precisely what I got into after last weeks video: intriguing concepts, Thnx Dylan!
My initial idea is: zone one is boring.
I like to be entertained especially through spin class in winter were I make my initial acceleration and interval base, I miss those polarized accelerations and extremes on Zwift.
My best approach is start with +45 min Spin Class (or two) is to do that first, and then follow that up with +30 minutes/fat burn recovery session and I want to emulate that on Zwift too, not quite succeeding as Zwift training programs are boring compared to Spin-class and Zwift free riding/racing often let’s you hold back on the maximum efforts in order to stay with the group and not overcook it. (even if they are difficult)
So: my conclusion of the execution of it must be, I can only do the zone 1 work if I’m tired enough if else I’m bored and I start over performing no matter what. Doing zone 1 work on it’s own is therefore very hard to execute if you are feeling motivated. Doing Zwift (Group)rides don’t make you do the polarized/extreme training you need to.
Personally I hate to much structure, I only started making real power gains when I got off the small gears and threw caution and moderation out of the window.
I used to think the same way that zone 1 is boring, and rode mostly sweetspot or other hard efforts. My endurance rides were not very structured nor plenty. This lead to fitness plateau that I have recently been growing out of thanks due to more ez pz rides and less hard rides, two structured hard rides a week at most. I understand the sentiment, but think about how the pros train. Mostly it is easy rides and when hard efforts are done, nothing is being held back. More easy rides allows for more foundation to be built for the harder efforts and overall less revocery time as opposed to sweetspot style riding.
I'm lucky to just get on the bike and ride!!! But I love this channel, even though I'm not even on the same continent of bike skill as Dylan.
Hello Dylan, that contribution was really helpful. Thank you very much for such well balanced and thorough researched cycling expertise. Looking back onto my season, it's exactly what frustrated me.I've been quite "at it" but progress had been rather shallow.
It seems that a substantial change in training structure is due. I see you've placed a link for training plans. That's certainly next step.
Wow. Nice hoodie! Bikenetic is a great shop.
Now I'm in winter,,just short fast sessions...mixed in with a couple of endurance rides....not sure if it's right,,but I think it's right for me...another great informative video...cheers 😎
Did you even listen to the video?
@@scotth3354 I only watch the adverts 😎maybe I am on the wrong channel 😅😇
What is often neglegted in these studies and discussions is how the efforts in competitions contribute to the individual's level of fitness. For example, if one follows polarized plan, but spends a lot time near or at sweetspot in competitions (and in some preparation periods) and reaches a certain (good) level of fitness, is it only due to polarized training or the combination of polarized (training) and sweetspot (competiton) efforts?
Quite interesting, thanks for looking at this.
Best training for me has Been to try always break Records this year during winter My ftp was around 300 then 5 months later 340 but recovery ride is most important i always try to keep heart rate 120
Thanks for this video - I've been looking into that area for last couple weeks and struggle to made the decision. Thanks again.
Great Video, very interesting topic. I try to add Blocks of Sweet Spot to plans, but rather replacing the 20% Zone 3 with Sweet spot. Keep up the great work!
Excellent work Dylan. Thanks, I'm going to check out one of your plans
YEAH - as a 16:07 5k PB Runner - I've actually done 80/20 for 4-5months now - Zone 1 - training this year with 1 day of hills and - YES - I can hit harder Tempo days and Race times w/ similar times as last year, very surprising...
great content, seems like i plateud, im just a little over 6 months into cycling, (dont have a powermeter based on HR/speed only ) i TT commute 45 km 2x a week (back & forth), light weekday rides + long light/med weekend rides.
and i dont see much improvement in time/speed with the commute.
after watching, realized what im doing is basically sweetspot training with TT commute & other rides are just recovery/sweetspot rides.
i'm gonna try polarized/pyramid this coming month. lets see
recently got a top 5 KOM, for 32.5kph for 40km course solo TT commute with 5.7kg bag, mostly flats. might not look that impressive but traffic/roads here arent great
that just means im improving, lets see how far i can take this up to.
But zone 1 training takes so long 😩 I’m trying to get back home and nerd on my stats on Strava 😳
Thankyou for covering this! This has been a question I was wondering about for a while!
I like to polarize my sweet spot training on the days I don't hit the sweet spot of my polarized training. Works for me!
Interesting. Super helpful video. When I began reading into training science. A lot of people recommended doing similar efforts to the race I'm training for. This polarized method speaks against that.
Great video Dylan, very informative. One of the reasons why pyramidal and polarized might not show differences further strengthens the value of those long, tedious L1 rides. It takes a while to learn to do an endurance ride the way it's meant, staying the whole time below L1, not averaging L1 power with frequent spikes. In a proper L1 endurance ride after 3.5 hours is when things start feeling differently, and those 170 watts do start to feel heavier.
Ah.. Zone 1... my favorite zone.
Cool to see the Bikenetic logo.
Excellent video. Succinct. Very clear and well-organized. Thanks, Dylan.
Great video. I can relate to these findings... Going from zwift training plans which are mostly sweet spot I felt fatigued and this led to poor performance and low motivation. When I switched to Mosley training plan on training peaks which follows the polarized approach I felt stronger and enjoying the nice n easy days. And looked forward to the high intensity days! However, the zone 1 training is very humbling and you need a lot of patience to improve that zone.
Like others who have commented I think it would be great if the 3 zone model was mapped against power zones
I would not throw SS under the bus. For a beginner or time crunched athletes SS is still preferred. The time needed at Zone 1 is 2-3 times that of SS during base training. I think if you do more efficient SS first and platau, the go back to a more traditional approach. Dylan is probably correct for top end athletes but there is plenty of evidence for SS out there.
he didn't .... he just said don't let it take up the bulk of the schedule
It isn't 2-3 times. How are you arriving at that number?
Hey Dylan - is your sweatshirt referring to the Bikenetic bike shop in Falls Church, Virginia? It's a cool shop.
Finally a bike guy who says polarized is good and be careful with sweet spot. YEA Dylan. I would bet pyramidal works best on short schedules,m like 5-6 hrs per week, but if i you are doing 10-12 hrs plus POL is better as it produces less cortisol. PS Dylan- every polarized training I have seen has you doing 5-10% of training at threshold depending on where you are vs racing season
Love your content, slowly but surely moving to an 80-20 training plan myself.
Can you do a video on indoor vs outdoor training. In the bad zwift workouts video you say to do “quality” HI rides outdoors because indoor power is lower, but I prefer the opposite: quality HI sessions indoors for consistency and repeatability, Z1/2 sessions outdoors. Trying to do quality sessions outdoors is hard because traffic, topography and weather make holding consistent power tricky. Thoughts?
I've watched this a couple times and found it interesting and compelling. However, given that most of us who follow your advice have dismissed SS heavy plans and do the more traditional method; 2 or occasionally 3 HIIT/week, couple recovery days and a long day (or something like that), it would be interesting to consider polarized versus a typical plan you'd subscribe.
After many years of Joe Friel's Cyclist Training Bible, I've been following Fast after 50 program pretty closely for a decade (race age - 62). I've been pretty happy with what I think is one of the best self-coaching methods and have had far more success than I deserve (in Cat Grandpa) but have completely fallen apart this year. Can't complete and interval set (often can't even finish the FIRST interval) to save my life. Desperately seeking a way to get back on track. Love your videos, thanks for doing all the research and presenting it coherently.
Thanks for the video ... This question is something I have wondered about for a long time!
What nobody ever seems to talk about with this is the *time* *spent* *riding*
Once you go above 15-20 hours a week, I don't think it really matters about POL vs PYR.
Stuck at 5-8 hours a week? Then yes, I bet there's a huge difference.
Came to the same takeaway too. Seems like either SS or POL are good options for those with
According to the Studies there seems to be no benefit to ride more, i guess.
Thanks, Dylan! Merry Christmas!
Great video Dylan. Isn’t the primary benefit from Sweet Spot the performance gains with limited time on the bike? Can you achieve the same benefits with Polarized training with the same amount of training time?
Well, the first study had an average of 6.4hrs/week for the polarized (POL) group and 7.5hrs/week for the threshold/SS group, with better results for the POL group. Of course the results could change when you go to very low training volumes and just throw out most Z1 work, but for roughly similar amount of training time the 80/20% POL group had better results than the 60/40% SS group.
Yep here for #protipsbyBHD
Comedic genius start.
Coincidently, the training regimen I'm doing now is what BHD is preaching. I do a set of two rides of 20 min high intensity rides with minimum IF 1.0 per day, with at least two hours of rest between the rides. (No warm-up, out the door and go as fast as the traffic conditions permit.) This way, I can drop a lot of cars along the way. You know, a drop is a drop even for a few seconds. BTW, that training session gets me to my favorite cafe and back home. I haven't experienced any significant performance gain though. ;)
Zone 10 helps me the most but only if I perform 12 sets of zone 15 fire burners before and after and then straight into alternating squats, reverse lunges and dead-lifts. The third repeat of the entire session really helps my TSS without impacting freshness the next day.
Great information. I train to hard on my light days but can't stand road cycling which is the easy way to get in base miles I know. Yet, I would rather my eyes bleed than ride my road bike.
Lol for that final reaction for zone 1 training
I mostly do zone 3
Hey Dylan, Im getting a lot of mixed messages regarding what you recommend for this off season training. First you have a video talking about the importance of base training and to use sweetspot in that training and now you're suggesting to not use sweetspot. Could you make a video that just outlines the best winter training plan for someone who plans to race in the spring. Thanks and love the channel!
If you want to race in the spring race in the winter. If you want to race in the summer race in the spring. That's my experience. You reach the best peak as others are starting this way, and also race ride into the correct speed. Clean athletes probably only have 1-2 peaks per year
The studies in this video don't consider base training and training periodization at all, therefore the video does not say anything about what base training should look like. It might be good to have a new video about different training phases, summarizing the best advice for each training phase.
Lots of overtrained people on TR based plan too
TR swears by sweet spot.. I think it's actually because it gets results quicker maybe, which encourages people to stick with it. I did this so I sort of know that's the case. I got really great results that didn't last.
Very true, the TR CEO tried his own medicine and got himself into a pretty deep hole.
@@syrus3k Anyone who is either new to training or at a low level of fitness will get faster by training SS, that much is a fact and so SS plans appear great which is why they are so popular and also easy to market, until you plateau that is.
@@SteveT__001 I don't know about that program on my early training. I just did hard ride ( end up on z2 - z3 all the time ). My fitness boosted like a rocket on the first year, and then went plateau after 2. I was scratching my head, and now I end up on doing polarized this last one and half years. But I haven't tested it yet.
I am trying to build some speed for specific TT next year. ..
Yeah TR plans really can lead to overtraining if you don't know when to skip a workout for instance. And if you skip a workout too often that is a huge warning sign that should be taken into account. For me another issue was these training plans meant I had to train alone because any group ride I'd do would be way too intense compared to what was prescribed for that session. The good thing about polarized training is the emphasis it puts on easy days being easy, and hard days being hard. No group rides can fit into any of that in my experience, so people following such a plan tend to be more disciplined when it comes to respecting the zones
Backwards Hat Dylan slays it... 😆😆😆 … interesting data....
My 2 cents - SS during base to build CTL when training volume less than 10 hours per week, then transition to polarised when approaching race season. I find without SS one loses too much muscular endurance which is critical for long road races, but polarised also critical for maximum V02 capability. All these things highly dependent on the athlete, their history, training status, and what training phase they are in...hence coaches being so valuable!
Polarized everytime for me. Infact I rarely do any sweet spot or threshold at all unless racing or in a fast group ride. There is too much confusion when people mention zones because many people go by a three zone scale (triathletes or people who don't have a PM). 7 zone scale is best. Z1 is recovery, Z2 is endurance, Z3 is tempo, Z4 is threshold, Z5 is vo2 max, Z6 is anaerobic, Z7 is neuromuscular. Z3.5 being sweet spot, where tempo approaches threshold.
Thanks Dylan! Top stuff as always. Man! This has huge implications for training, albeit I am not an athlete, most of my turbo training sessions are Zone 2. In fact, most Zwift training sessions are biased to sweet spot. Worth a rethink then! Cheers
Nice video! Small addition, 80-20 polarized training are sessions. Time in zone is more like 90-10 (80-10-10)