@trevor: how do you define quality in:
The purpose of those recoveries is to allow you to get ready for the next interval and being able to do it at highest quality.
It really depends on what intervals you are doing. But “quality” is about doing the interval portion (the hard portion) as effectively as possible - so target wattage/heart rate, consistency, no rests during the interval phase, etc.
1 Like
one thing to add to the confusion or maybe not… is for instance long threshold intervals are a lot like having burning bamboo stuck under your finger nails or at least for me and the idea of doing it in erg mode at a very fixed wattage is even more tortuous. One thought that may help with the monotony is to have successive ramps up and down around the target wattage say of 1 minute up then back down to add some variation ie a saw tooth pattern. The end result is a similar average wattage but the effect is different at least I think it may be if only mentally. In that way a 12 minute threshold interval becomes a series of 1 minute intervals up and down … thoughts?
I will break up the monotony by working different cadences.
For Example: I will shift every 3-5 minutes.
Recently, I have been working around 70 rpm.
So 3 min at 80rpm, then 75, 70, 65, 70, 75, 80…
1 Like
I’ve been working that cadence range during a threshold progression, that I capped off with an “hour of power” this week.
Maybe time to revisit my cadence efficiency test.
image hosting website free
1 Like
good point, I just finished a session last evening with the saw tooth or picket fence and I liked it. It made it more interesting. I did as well some gear changes to vary cadence but that was not a focus, just a thing to give my legs and feet a break. There are so many ways to do things . Even though it sounds simple the options and outcomes can be quite a deep dive. the workout looked like this in design
and this way in execution:
I tend to stick to the same intervals for a 4 weeks block (fourth week ease back / recovery). Then I’ll change what I’m doing.
After too many ERG spirals of death I tend to do it on slope mode on my turbo. Then I’ll try and work out what power I can hold for the durations I’m targeting. Then for the recovery between intervals sets I’ll wait till my HR is back around 60-65% of my max before going again.
Intervals is all about being able increase duration at an intensity compared to what you can do continuous. You could argue that continuous is just one longer interval.
I appreciate the responses and no one has addressed my original post: While there appears to be evidence (Lydiard, et al) that supports performing a single, continuous, effort for threshold work (say tempo to threshold), why would one break up these efforts into intervals? What is the expected physiological adaption(s) that would be missing, or is not as apparent, in a continuous effort?
In running, interval threshold work is usually used for two reasons:
- To prolongate the overall time spent at this intensity. If, for example, we would assume that one could endure that intensity for about an hour of continuous work, we can try to run 5x3 miles in order to accumulate over an hour of threshold work.
That seems critical, as we know that one can bear up to 3 heavy workouts during the week, not to overreach too much. And so it’s more rational to add specific work to one workout than it’s to add another specific workout.
- To keep threshold work high-quality. Knowing that cardiac drift and overall fatigue would make a continuous threshold workout much harder in the final minutes, we could split the work to keep the pace and effort more steady. That will probably lead to a bit faster run or at least a more dynamic stride.
Surely the point of intervals is simply to allow for greater time at the target output than would be possible in a continuous session, or conversely to accumulate the same time with a lower resulting fatigue.
Yes, of course. It makes sense for intensities at and above FTP. For sub-threshold work (tempo to sweet spot intensities), it just doesn’t make sense to me.
Why not? You’re working at higher lactate, thus your body is “learning” how to deal with it (effectively use it as an energy source). Lactate level would not be as high as with intensities around VO2max, but still - this workout is more demanding from an oxygen metabolism standpoint.
Threshold intervals may be a good option to deplete your muscles of glycogen and not tax them too much. By doing that you can, for example, start your next workout with lower glycogen levels and again - put more pressure on oxygen metabolism mechanisms. I’m pretty much sure that solution is close to the ideas from Chris Carmichael’s book on time-crunched athletes.
Leaving physiology and going to more subjective matters - interval threshold workouts may enable you to spend more quality time at paces closer to your goal pace. That is surely a great benefit for beginner riders who would get the idea of how should they feel when competing on long distances.
To state it in more general words - it’s a matter of putting those workouts in the right contexts. As we all know, most of the workouts are not good or bad in a general sense, but they may be used in the wrong context. What’s more - it’s not like “you have to do interval threshold work to gain X”. Usually we have at least a couple of ways of gaining one endurance capability, and it’s a coach who chooses what fits the other pieces of training puzzles.
I know what you mean, and I think there are still 2 good reasons:
-
even at <FTP fatigue builds up and can eventually become a limiter. How many people could realistically go out and ride 80 mins steady mid-tempo without building up for a while, but 4x20 with rests is fairly achievebale for most. SST is the same and even more appropriate etc etc
-
Go back and look at all the threads and posts on the TR forum where people talk about either ‘needing variety’ or ‘not being able to hold x for y minutes’ - there are thousands! The other big benefit is mental - either from a boredom perspective or probably more importantly, building mental capacity to maintain an effort for longer.
I do agree many of us have become hooked on intervals vs steady efforts, sometimes as an easy way out, but they do serve a purpose in many situations IMHO.
Another point is totally pragmatic - it may be easier to execute threshold intervals than threshold continuous rides when you live in a hilly area.
I see you do the LSCT protocol as a warm up. Do you do it in Slope Mode and ride to HR then with to Erg. for the main sets as you can can do in Xert?
I do the intervals in slope mode and adjust to hit the heart rate targets. It is a great warm up and by doing it one can get a feeling for readiness to perform a well over time how things are progressing. I had been doing it a few years ago and only recently came back to it. I also look at DFA a1 to see how it reacts to this protocol as another dimension. Currently there is not that many great real time DFA a1 programs but that seems to be changing and hopefully will be there soon.
1 Like
@dkrenik Interesting point you have there.
- if you can provide the energy required to stimulate the muscle development in just 1 interval (continuous training), there is no reason for multiple repeats other than to overcome boredom.
- energy supply can be inefficient even below FTP if the athlete has a relative low Fatmax.
So, if you have developed your aerobic system so that a very large % of FTP is delivered by the oxidative pathway, intervals will slow you down because you get too little stimulus. (unless you sprint all-out to get from a given speed to a higher speed).
my feeling is that interval duration is important for certain adaptations. The big question is how long is long enough? I am sure like most things it depends on the actual training status/ ability/ fitness profile and goals of the person. There is probably a point where there is the right amount of time at intensity is just right (the Goldilocks range). So that is where an individual approach to the duration and intensity needs to be considered? What is enough strain (energy) into the effort may differ based upon you power duration curve?
@scooter indeed. I tend to compare it to a young branch of a tree. You can bent it 10 times without noticeable change to the structure. But at 15 times it starts to tear, then you stop and let is supercompensate.
The same with our muscle. The only big issue is that you can’t assess the damage in real-time. It takes time to learn what load you can handle.