Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

LTHR?
Quote | Reply
First post. Be kind :)

I do not have the benefit of training with power yet (just can't stretch that far money wise), but I am trying to train using HR zones. A few weeks back I followed the Friel method of finding my cycling LTHR with a 30 minute TT effort on the bike. I then followed his instructions on setting my training zones. However, since then I have read a number of slightly different variations on calculating my training zones from my LTHR. The biggest discrepancy between the Friel method and others that I have seen is that others calculate LTHR as 95% of the average HR from the TT test. However, the Friel method does not do this. It just calculates the training zones from straight from my average HR from the TT test. As you can imagine, there is quite a difference in training zones from both methods. For example, what would be Z2 for the Friel method turns out to be Z3 for the others.

Which is correct? Is there a right answers? What do others who use HR training zones do? What method do you use?

Thanks in advance for any replies.
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [Timrd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Friel's method is ave HR of the last 20 min of that 30 min TT is your LTHR. Then you look up HR levels on his chart.

The 95% of that test is not Friel's HR levels but may be someone else's. You'll need to decide on which kool-aid your going to drink and just go with it.

Personally, if I was going with HR I would use Friel's method.

Perhaps you could post some links to the other methods so we can discuss them
Last edited by: jaretj: Mar 27, 18 7:44
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [jaretj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, I got the average from the last 20 minutes of the 30 minute effort.

One such link below:

http://steelcityendurance.com/testing/cycling-threshold-field-test-20-min/


Not sure if that has embedded...




Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [Timrd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pick one method and stick with it. You'll be fine. If it was your first test, you might want to do it again soon anyway. You might be able to suffer a bit more with an understanding of the exertion required.

***
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [Timrd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The problem here appears to be that you are looking at variations. Why? Is Joe's system not working for you? And why mix and match tests and systems? It's not Legos or Garanimals or whatever 21st century metaphor applies...

Interval Design Studio
YouTube | SoundCloud
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [fstrnu] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Joe's system appears to be working. I do need to retest very soon. Just didn't want to be killing myself on the bike unnecessarily, when working Z3 or 4. I don't intend on mixing the systems, just wanted to hear people's thoughts on the matter.

I will be sticking with Joe's system now I have started.
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [jaretj] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jaretj wrote:
Perhaps you could post some links to the other methods so we can discuss them

This comes up enough in some running forums I have this bookmarked...
http://www.fitdigits.com/...eart-rate-zones.html

It will just calculate them based on some basic information. I’m not sure on how all the different methods compare philosophy wise but at least you can compare the zone numbers.
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [M----n] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Agreed. There are some variations out there, but just stick with one. Friel's seems to have worked for me when I was first starting out.

When you get into power/pace zones you'll find variations in protocol there too. Especially on the running side. Are you using pace for the run? or are you using HR across both sports?

M----n wrote:
Pick one method and stick with it. You'll be fine. If it was your first test, you might want to do it again soon anyway. You might be able to suffer a bit more with an understanding of the exertion required.

-Nate
Triathlonpal.com
Flaer|Team Kiwami|Nuun Hydration|Honey Stinger
Twitter: @N8deck
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [Timrd] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Timrd wrote:
Yes, I got the average from the last 20 minutes of the 30 minute effort.

One such link below:

http://steelcityendurance.com/testing/cycling-threshold-field-test-20-min/


Not sure if that has embedded...




I've never heard of the steel city endurance test, it's not the way I would do it but if they based their training levels and race pacing from that HR I don't see anything wrong with it. I think it's a short test but it's likely to be within a few beats of Friel's anyway.
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [triathlonpal] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
triathlonpal wrote:
Agreed. There are some variations out there, but just stick with one. Friel's seems to have worked for me when I was first starting out.

When you get into power/pace zones you'll find variations in protocol there too. Especially on the running side. Are you using pace for the run? or are you using HR across both sports?

M----n wrote:
Pick one method and stick with it. You'll be fine. If it was your first test, you might want to do it again soon anyway. You might be able to suffer a bit more with an understanding of the exertion required.


I am using pace for running. I am a strong runner so do not need to make the same improvements as on the bike.
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [ALightBreeze] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ALightBreeze wrote:
This comes up enough in some running forums I have this bookmarked...
http://www.fitdigits.com/...eart-rate-zones.html

It will just calculate them based on some basic information. I’m not sure on how all the different methods compare philosophy wise but at least you can compare the zone numbers.

That's 7 distinctly different charts. It's almost like there is no definitive answer as to which one is the gold standard. : )

-------------------
Madison photographer Timothy Hughes | Instagram
Quote Reply
Re: LTHR? [Timtek] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Timtek wrote:
ALightBreeze wrote:
This comes up enough in some running forums I have this bookmarked...
http://www.fitdigits.com/...eart-rate-zones.html

It will just calculate them based on some basic information. I’m not sure on how all the different methods compare philosophy wise but at least you can compare the zone numbers.

That's 7 distinctly different charts. It's almost like there is no definitive answer as to which one is the gold standard. : )

Yeah. I always wanted to look at some basic programs to see if they were structured any differently based on where the hr zones were. Like if one plan had z3 at higher heart rates if they prescribed less of that work versus other plans where it might be lower. Try and get some sort of aggregate absolute effort metric.

Knowing that many smarter people have worked on these things it probably already exists.
Quote Reply