I had an INSCYD Test before subscribing to Fast Talk Laboratories.
My results were as follows:
VO2max: 53,2 ml/min/kg, 332 W
VLamax: 0,6 mmol/l/s
Anaerobic Threshold 241 W (3,1W/kg), 72,7% of VO2max
The laboratory recommended the following training for the base phase to me:
Monday: Rest
Tuesday: 1:30h VO2max Intervals, 3 x 10 x 30/30 sec. at 350 Watt
Wednesday: 1:30h Low Cadence Training 3 x 15 min, Cadence 40-60, fasted
Thursday: 1:30h Base miles Z2
Friday: Rest
Saturday: 1:30 Base miles Z2 + Sweet Spot 3 x 15 min
Sunday: 2:00 Base miles Z2
What do you think about this plan for the base phase?
It seems to have too much intensity for me and also doesnāt fit your recommendations about base training (54 year old with job& family).
That looks to be about 9 hours of base for the week, which is inline with 450 annual hours (Iām referencing Joe Frielās Training Bible). What are you wanting to achieve for the year (hours or TSS)?
I put your data, without knowing the exact details, into a week and it shows the follow TIZ:
itās 8 hours per week. The specified times are the entire training of the respective days.
In the past, I trained 6 -8 hours a week, with a weekly TSS of 350 - 450 with the Time-Crunched-Cyclist approach, but I stagnated last spring.
This was the reason for the INSCYD Test. In 2022 I can train 7 - 9, sometimes 10 hours a week.
My goals ā¦ I donāt race, my goal is to become more powerful for hilly gravel riding of 2 - 5 hours duration and maybe some Gran FondoĀ“s or Centuryās.
I wonder above all if the VO2max Intervals are a good idea in the Base phase ā¦
Forgot to mention make sure your power zones match heart rate, by that I mean if you use 3 zone system for power, same for heart rate. 5 zone for power, same for heart rate.
Hi @mweber501, it sounds like @steveneal has this under control and is getting the information he needs from you. So, Iāll keep my response short. Just want to address those couple questions you asked me specifically about.
First, based on a fairly quick read, it looks to me like the coaches who tested you want to focus on your aerobic system. Makes sense - you were following a time crunched approach which really elevated your anaerobic capacity and plateaued likely because the aerobic system wasnāt strong enough to take you any further. In particular, Iām looking at the fact that your anaeorbic threshold is 71.7% of your VO2max which is low. Lots of opportunity there! So, using the base phase to really target the aerobic system is a good idea for you.
One interval session per week in the base season is fine. Frankly, I give most of my athletes two sessions. My bias is more towards threshold style work and not āVO2maxā or anaerobic capacity work. My reason is that VO2max intervals, like the oneās youāre doing, tend to produce all of their gains within six to eight weeks, while you can see gains with threshold intensity intervals for 12-14 weeks. But, I have seen good coaches use higher intensity sub-two minute intervals very successfully in the base, so thatās just my bias.
Very interested in hearing what Steve discovers after looking at a couple weeks of your training
Thanks for your answer @trevor . Happy new year to you !
There are 3 interval sessions per week, not one.
After the VO2max session on Tuesday there is a fasted Low Cadence interval training with 3 x 15 minutes at sweet spot intensity (50 - 65 rpm) and another sweet spot workout with 3 x 15 on Saturday.
IĀ“m advised to add length to the two sweet spot sessions until I reach 3 x 20 min.
Overall volume for a week is about 8 hours.
Do you think that these three interval sessions per week in the base season is fine?
After reading through your Base Training Pathway I have some doubts ā¦
I agree with @steveneal fully. I really only see the VO2max workout as a true interval workout.
Obviously, you know Iām a fan of the polarized approach which has little sweet spot work (I use it with myself and my athletes only at certain points in the season.) So, I personally donāt like to prescribe it in the base phase. Iād give you one or two interval sessions in Seilerās zone 3 and keep the rest of your work in zone 1. But thatās my bias.
I have seen sweet spot work help give a good kickstart in athletes who have an underdeveloped aerobic system. So, if itās used judiciously, it can be effective in the base phase for a season or two while you develop that engine.
@trevor, after reading your Base Training Pathway and your Interval Training Pathway my heart goes with your polarized approach. I will use it to target my aerobic system this base phase.
2 weeks: Two sessions 4x4min threshold, rest z1 (Seiler zones)
4 weeks: Two sessions 5x5min threshold, rest z1
4 weeks: Two sessions 4x8min threshold, rest z1
4 weeks: One session 4x8min threshold, one session 3x16min threshold, rest z1
It makes more sense to me to save the VO2max intervals for the race phase.
What percentage of the VO2max is on average for the FTP achievable?
Do you think itās a good idea to add in some short high intensity work once or twice a month to maintain my VO2max (especially with regard to my age of 54)?
At 54 years, I would strongly consider keeping the recommended 30/30s weekly or at least every 10 days. My personal experience using Weberās (INSCYD) concepts as well as polarized and pyramidal, etc. with different athletes is the volume can really matter. If riding 12-14+ hours a week, then the volume can take care of things nicely using polarized - raise VO2, lower VLAMAX, raise threshold = better performance in gravel or longer events. However, if riding ~8 hours a week, then the zone 1 rides tend to be too short and easy to stress the fast twitch fibers in a way that is likely to lower VLAMAX and raise threshold IMO/IME. I think the sweet spot work or flirting with Seiler Zone 2 becomes important when riding less hours weekly if the goal is to improve threshold/endurance. Again, there is a time and place for most different training concepts, but I do find genius in the INSCYD approach - test. what do you want to achieve? implement a training program targeted at that for 8-12 weeks and re-test to see what happened and adjust as needed. The approach is to address the physiology needed to perform rather than use specificity for the event. Base, Build, Race may not be the best or only way pending what the goal is. To my understanding, Seilerās āBaseā is actually High zone 1/Low Zone 2 (could be Tempo/SS/Medio) and low Zone 3 (Threshold) - higher volume. His āBuildā is Low Zone 1 and high Zone 3 - less volume. The 30/30s end up being kind of a threshold workout, so the plan as laid out could be considered āPolarizedā and closely fit with Seilerās recommendations for the base or prep period. Iād consider trying it for 8 weeks and see how it goes. Only way to know and I think it is low risk versus following a standard Base approach.
Slightly off topic, but related to INSCYD testingā¦how do you take the power zone results from an INSCYD test and enter them into Training Peaks? I looked at the various TP power models and there isnāt one that correlates. And when I took a closer look at the zones from my INSCYD test, there were overlapping and a gap at the higher end.
You wonāt be able to get them exactly but you can add your own zones and rename them (also better and easier in Intervals.icu) but in most if not all software you canāt have an overlap or a gap. I always track them based on the ceiling or most important part of the zone - so maybe in Inscyd you would create a ceiling slightly above the target.
thanks for your advice.
Your comments about the INSCYD approach are very interesting (address the physiology needed to perform). Because IĀ“m not racing I thought about this a lot of times, wondering if I should still perform a base, build, race phase approach ā¦
Do you give your athletes the 30/30s (or some variation) for the full season? If yes, wouldnāt this lead to burnout or stagnation?
How long should the zone 1 rides be for lowering VLAMAX and building Mitochondria?
