I’m not sure if you read that right. LT2 is not a pace or wattage you can hold for a couple of hours, I wish but not gonna happen. Are you not mistaken with LT1/

Jeroen

---

Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands

Hello Jeroen

yes I'm sure

Have you read the Dr Skiba article I reference in the post ?
He clearly write that a well trained athlete can hold LT2 for 2 hours
He also write a very well trained athlete can hold a bit more than LT2 for 2 hours.
A more "leisure" athlete will be able to hold it 90 minutes I guess.

Arild Tveiten also wrote LT2 is below FTP... and FTP you can hold it for an hour... because it is the definition of FTP.

LT1 you can hold it 12h+ if you eat and drink enough.

Is this the article you actually wanted to share? I can't find anything about LT2 in there either. And nothing about 2h.

sryke wrote:

Is this the article you actually wanted to share? I can't find anything about LT2 in there either. And nothing about 2h.

Link :
http://physfarm.com/new/?page_id=511


Quote :
This is actually a lot easier to do than most athletes realize. You could ride around at / about LT for a couple hours without much of a problem. Running, it is probably in the ballpark of your marathon pace, although elites can run a marathon a bit harder than this.

I don't believe on those threshold rule of tumb stuf that is discussed over here. Sure, for amateurs, but if you really want to go into this - following some rule of thumb is not enough. He wouldn't measure as much if he though it was sufficient to just do the intensity you would for a two hour effort, or whatever.

Yes, i’ve read it but that is not the whole alinea of text, it is

At the low end of the spectrum, we have Lactate Threshold or LT. This is simply the point where the level of lactate in the blood rises by 1 mmol / L over exercise baseline. In other words, if you are zipping along at 1.5 mmol / L, and you speed up enough that you reach 2.5 mmol / L, you have crossed LT. This is actually a lot easier to do than most athletes realize. You could ride around at / about LT for a couple hours without much of a problem. Running, it is probably in the ballpark of your marathon pace, although elites can run a marathon a bit harder than this.


And LT2 is not on the low end of the spectrum. So dr. Skiba uses ‘just’ 1 LT and then uses in the ‘middle’ of the range OBLA and after that MLSS. So his LT looks like to be more a LT1…..also if you see when he refers at what lactate point he is talking about.

Jeroen

---

Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands

Can you please recommend other ways to find LT2 say on the bike for training without lactate testing?

Heart rate or maybe compared to FTP or another way?

Dr Philip Skiba sometimes come here, so I will let him give his version.

My interpretation is :
LT(2) is at the lower end of the spectrum of "threshold", compared to FTP, OBLA, CP (MLSS).
Arild Tveiten wrote the same, writing LT2 was below FTP and MLSS

If you think LT1 can be only runned/biked 2h.... you are far from reality.

Another proof : Dr Skiba clearly mention lactate level of 2,5 mmol/L for this "LT", so clearly pointing to LT2
Another proof : do you really think Eliud Kipchoge run a 2h marathon at LT1 ?? While Blu and Iden race a IM above LT1 ?? No, for sure

LT2 (2.3 to 2.8 mmol/L) can be maintained 90mn to 2h for most peoples. Yes it is hard. Reason why you train 3x20mn at this level.
LT1 (1 to 1.5 mmol/L) can be maintained much much longer time. Reason why you can train easily 6h at LT1 and do it again easily the day after.

If you can't hold an effort for 90mn, then you are above your LT2.
Maybe you are at FTP (defined by A.Coggan at maximum effort for 1h) ?
Or CP (30 to 45mn for most non pro athletes, according to Dr Skiba) ?

Mine is approximatively, at this stage :

Bike power :
64% of VO2max power
89% of CP
93% of FTP

BPM : approx 81% of max BPM

BUT.... this is me. Apart from individual specificities, if your fat ox is much higher or much lower, it can be very different.

I suppose the reason why norwayans uses the lactate testing is :
1- ensure the lactate level is at the right level to ensure fat molecules still access to the muscular cell (will not happen if lactate level too high)
2- long term, the LT1 and LT2 move to the right if you train properly, and you need to reposition the power / BPM

Thank you for taking the time to answer

Did you use a lactate meter to figure yours out?

I have been thinking about getting one

Few years ago it was measured with lactate.
More recently I made an evaluation with 2h max efforts. Thank god looks like I made some progress :-)

I would love to get a lactate meter (just because I'm a curious geek, not because my athletic level deserve it)

In the videos I see they take the blood sample from the ear

I have a loving caring wife but do not think she would be up for that lol

I wonder if from the finger would be almost as good?

I notice the people I see squeezing the ear to get the blood out. I always through when I did glucose testing you should were not suppose to squeeze as it could skew the results

We need some experts advices here :-)

I don't know why they test ears for lactate.

As a diabetic I've probably done close to 50,000 blood tests over 30 years pricking my fingers. You generally have to squeeze the blood out a bit, although sometimes a big enough blob will come out without needing to squeeze. Only reason you would not squeeze is if you have some kinda sugary substance on your fingers. So so long as you have clean fingers, no reason not to squeeze.

No idea if 'squeezing' would affect lactate results. It won't for blood sugars unless there is sugar etc on your fingers.

Sorry to hear about you having diabetes

I gave done far fewer tests. Approx 500 times are get the years when studying how my body reacted to various foods, length of time between feedings, feedings before after and during different types of exercising. Fasted state etc. I found that if I hung my Amr down before lancing I didn’t need to squeeze

I do see a few studies which indicate squeezing May skew the results

Here is one

https://www.google.com/...dUSTRE72760U20110308

LT1 at 93% of FTP is off the scale high compared to the tests I've seen. Around 75% of FTP is more normal. If you can't get a lactate test I'd just use zone 2 of coggins 7 zone model as your low intensity training zone (56-75% of FTP),not perfect but likely good enough.

If you are really serious about training a lactate meter is not a huge investment in the grand scheme of things - it is equivalent to two lab testing sessions here in the UK so you make your money back pretty quick. Probably uneccessary for recreational athletes, but if you really like the numbers and knowing for sure you are in the right zone go for it. It's not particularly difficult to use.

As for using ear for blood sample it tends to be standard lab practice. Not because it provides a better blood sample - finger is fine. It's more just practicality of it being an easy place to access compared to fingers which may be on handlebars on a stationary bike or moving around much more than the ear during running on a treadmill. Secondary reasons are some people are a little squeamish and not being able to see any blood works better for them, and some people moan about fingers being sore (ear probably bruises just as much but not really noticeable as nothing coming into contact with it).

Great info thank you!

I agree meter, test strips and lancets not too ouch if an investment

I want to make sure to educate myself before getting it

Any book you would recommend to educate myself?



As for the 93% maybe he was saying that for LT2?

To your last point, there are real risks of doing high threshold efforts IF you're basing the targets off an inflated FTP. While a session, or even a few weeks, of faux-threshold (IOW, long VO2) work is manageable, it's not sustainable for the longer term. I learned my lesson the hard way, but I finally figured out how to avoid the burnout resulting from basing things off an inflated FTP.

A few years ago, at the age of 60, I set my PR for a 40km TT. I was self-coached and took a very simple approach. For any given workout, whatever the energy system/zone/iLevel/whatever you want to call it I was targeting, I always aimed for the lower end of the power range. I had heard numerous podcasts where coaches talked about a common mistake being to always try to do the very top of the range, or within a watt or so. I took this to the extreme in the opposite direction.

Three things happened: 1) for over 6 months, I never failed a workout. 2) I was really, really fresh on race day. 3) For 54 minutes I did about 5 watts more in a strict TT position than what I thought my FTP was, based on tests done on my road bike.

I was watching GTN a few episodes ago and I’m their “what the tech” segment talked about an upcoming constant lactate monitor you could attach to your body like the glucose monitors that super sapiens has out.

It could then potentially be read continuously on your garmin.

Sounds like it’s still under some development so unknown release date.

Finding the zones is pretty easy (although there is some disagreement even there). The more complicated part might be how you use that information to program training. There are a few different ideas, and honestly I don't think there is enough evidence to say any are better or worse. It's generally accepted (by the athletes using lactate at least - trainer road and others may disagree), that most training (80-90+% should be below LT1. Exactly where the other 10-20% should be is perhaps not so clear. Traditional polarised training would say it should be above (and in some cases considerably above) LT2. However some suggestion (especially for longer distances) intervals just below LT2 are preferred (reasoning being you can spend more time at that intensity, recovery is quicker, perhaps they replicate race pace more, and seem to be popular with the Norwegians who are the trend right now). Some also say you ideally train at exactly LT2.

For calculating zones
- sit on bike ready to go and take a resting lactate measurement
- cycle for 4 mins at a very easy pace 40 or 50% of FTP is not unreasonable think of this partly as a warm-up. At the end of 4 mins take a lactate measurement (don't be surprised if this measurement is lower than resting sometimes a bit of gentle exercise can lower it).
- increase the power (erg mode is ideal for this, but try to maintain same cadence throughout), ride for 4 mins, take another measurement. Keep repeating this process untill you have 2 consecutive measurements over 4mmol/l.
- where lactate first rises above 2mmol/l can be used as LT1 power and HR. Where it rises over 4mmol/l can be used as LT2 power and HR.

In terms of how much to increase power each 4 mins. Smaller increases will give you a more accurate prediction of exactly where your thresholds are. However, also means a longer test. Around 10 steps from warm up power to FTP power tends to work pretty well IME i.e.
FTP = 300 (I'd probably round it to the nearest 10 just for simplicity it doesn't matter for the test results)
Start at 50% = 150
Power increase per step = FTP - start power / 10 = 15
So your planned test powers would be 150, 165, 180, 195, 210, 225 etc. Just keep going until you get two measurements of 4mmol/l.

If you really want to get super exact you can always retest i.e.
Test 1 results
210W - 1.8mmol/l
225W - 2.2mmol/l
So then you do a 2nd test where you measure lactate at 210w, 215W, 220W, 225W. Honestly it seems overkill to me I'd just use 210W but it's an option if you want.

You then need to do it running too as the threshold HR are often different and it's perhaps better to know thresholds in relation to running pace than HR anyway. Find a track and use pace instead of power and repeat a similar step test.

Oh my gosh!

You are awesome!

I agree 90% below LT2 most of the rest a little below LT2

Really appreciate you taking the time to do this 😎

I am going ahead and order the tester

Wouldn't 4min be too short? We always use 6 min

No idea what the basis for it is but I found a decent LT1 test in a thread on the TrainerRoad forum. 15 min warmup, then 6 x 6 min with each step going up 5W, starting at 65% of estimated FTP and ending at 80%

When Skiba says LT he is referring to LT1. This is crystal clear in his new book, most obviously when he says it occurs near VT1.

I’m not saying you cannot exercise longer then 2 hours, you are the one mentioning 2 hrs. Dr. Skiba just mentions that you can cruise along for a couple of hours without any problem. Which is something else then putting in a hard effort at LT2

Further he mentions exactly what you write as well, that his LT starts when the level of lactate rises to 1, so the same what you say is LT1.
So to me it is crystal clear that his LT in the article is LT1 and also he says in that same alinea that when the lactate level rises to or above 2.5 you have crossed that LT.
So for me all proof that he means LT1

Could be a matter of how you read it but I can’t read it as LT2 if you take the lactate levels he mentions.

Jeroen

---

Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands