Do you have an actual test placing your different zones at those specific HRs or are these estimates of your own?
I’m asking because FatMax is usually much closer to AeT as opposed to lower than the middle of your Z2.
I did an INSCYD test with @steveneal around 2 years ago. That heart rate should be pretty close as I don’t think it changes that much. I’m just using 70% of HRR for aerobic threshold - no test. This usually puts me right around 75% of threshold by power. There’s a massive San Millan thread over on the TR forum and this seems to be the consensus for where he’s having his riders train. One of the users wrote a script to scrub pro’s files and pull the power data. It’s worth a look.
Some great answers already from everyone.
I will just add that I find the following zones to work quite well when using heart rate.
60-70% of max heart rate will work for most, if you are beginning at haven’t done much endurance then you could push that to 74% of max heart rate, as long as it isn’t muscular.
For Tempo I would use 78-83% of max heart rate.
4 Likes
Thanks @steveneal - that’s much closer to what I’d expect to see and feels right. Interested to hear @ryan thoughts, as he appears to suggest something much higher. For example, the hr level he describes as (amongst other things) ‘recovery’ feels way too hard for that.
Hi @steveneal. This range corresponds to my FatMax heart rate, so the other “aerobic” work I’ve been doing is higher. I remember in another post you had said you identify two endurance intensities. Are both incorporated within this 60-70% of max heart rate range? If so, I’m going to re-calibrate my work. Thanks!
@fazel1010 maybe you are referring to my tempo range? Athletes who don’t have a lot of time to do endurance, I usually have them do more tempo. I like to test for this range so it isn’t too hard, just at the right intensity, but usually falls between 78-83% of max heart rate.
It was up thread. Looks like both would be in the 60% - 70% range so I need to reduce intensity and work in tempo.
2 endurance - which I split into easy and steady endurance - steady endurance would be within 10-15 watts of LT1 (easy endurance would have a ceiling of LT1 but the normalized power would be lower than 10-15 watts below LT1 - OR Inscyd FatMax range
2 Likes
Oh yes.
So there is a number of ways to do this.
Easy endurance - by feeling and for most people likely 150-190w would suffice.
Steady Endurance - close to LT1 and super steady
So a mix of the above could be done. I might start someone with more easy endurance, some steady endurance, and move them towards a goal of all steady endurance.
+++
The other could be a rotation of:
easy endurance / steady endurance / tempo – 20m 20m 20m – for as long as they have up to 3h depending on their fitness level and ability to fuel an aerobic ride like this.
3 Likes
@Mr.B, I was reading back on the old posts and want to make sure I understand which reply we’re looking at. Is that the reply to Scooter where I show that screenshot of the training zones in both a 3 and 5 zone model? If that’s the one, then you’re correct in how those are not calculating exactly what you might expect in terms of the aerobic base HR. I think your point also highlights that while max and threshold HR’s may be similar from athlete to athlete, there are important differences in the metabolic response between and surrounding those points.
That training range table was a result for an athlete that did metabolic testing where we looked at ventilatory and lactate measurements. The model I use to calculate zones is based initially on percentages around VT1/LT1 and VT2/LT2, but after interpreting the ventilatory and lactate data beyond what the metabolic cart suggests as, e.g., VT2, and a cursory overview of lactate numbers, I always make adjustments to those numbers so we end up with a more individualized set of ranges. The initial %'s are just an easy starting point to set general bounds, but they are always adjusted further after that.
So for this athlete, that upper end being 148 beats was actually just at ~2mmol of lactate, and after discussion and looking at training files of that athlete, I decided to establish that upper end of base there. I should also mention that when setting those zones, there is always a discussion of how to use them. I never tell an athlete to ride at that top end exclusively - rather, that top end is the point where on a base ride alarm bells are going off. It’s time to dial it back, as easy as it may still feel. So I actually press athletes (this one in this case) to utilize the lower end and even the “zone 1/recovery” zone depending on the length of the ride and what our intentions are for the session.
To your final suggestions of understanding that long base rides feeling easy, they definitely should, and the base rides this athlete was doing still felt exactly like that. We just had a higher upper limit to allow for some flexibility that was available due to the amount of data we were able to collect. If we were to do a field test and have relatively limited data, we could certainly still set LT1 and establish zones, but we would be limited on how much more we could interpret from the data, and in that case I would not add as much “flexibility” in that range without the evidence to do so (i.e., I would be more conservative in my zones).
I hope that helps!
2 Likes
@ryan - thanks for your prompt and helpful response. After I posted it I began to wonder along the lines you have explained, so really good to see that. I think perhaps I should get some testing done at some point to properly establish my zones. For now I’m going to carry on riding easy (which @trevor suggested in another thread because I’ve had a layoof), I’m starting to really enjoy it 
Keep up the great work!
1 Like
I just listened to a talk by Dr. Seiler and her described the zone 3 as the black hole… what struck me is that in some systems what is often called sweet spot is right in the middle of that zone. So if I interpret the polarized system of Seiler one should avoid sweet spot training and work mostly in the Seiler zone 1 (Fast Labs zones 1-2) and spend as little time in that middle area as possible with a bit in the High range. In the high range I noticed Seiler also said not at flat out 100% because the time at that load is to limiting, so say 90% of max output so one can spend some time there and get the benefit. Have I got it right?
In the very last Fast Talk podcast with Seiler he kind of concedes that some middle intensity (pyramidal distribution) may be beneficial in cycling. I almost fell out of my chair when he said this. 
4 Likes
Here is 90 min session at LT1. Starting to fade a bit. Not sure why so many dropouts in power. Just getting back at it and might be fighting some sickness(congestion) maybe Covid but very mild but was exposed a week ago.
Just SMO2
SMO2 and Power
with HR
3 Likes
Hi @jimmybourisaw that session is a little above LT1 - the smo2 trend needs to be slightly rising at LT1 - glad to see you back at it.
With this LT1 you used in the workout - do you have the Lactate test and did you wear the moxy during that test?
If so can you send the fit files or tell me the dates you did the testing?
Yes. You can view them in intervals too or wko5
1 Like
Steve it was a guess at LT1 from last year and by feel. I figured it might of been a tad high as HR started creep. I plan to do a full test with smo2 and lactate once I am back to 100%.
1 Like