I’m looking for some thoughts from the training gurus out there.
I just finished Joe Friel’s Power Meter Handbook and decided to do an Aerobic Threshold workout. The plan for the main set was 60 minutes at the very bottom of heart rate zone 2 which for me is 132 bpm (81% of 163 LTHR). I thought this would be a fairly easy workout. After all, I can hold 130-140 bpm all day when running (LTHR of 175)…
Jokes on me I guess! For me to get my heart rate up to high zone 1/low zone 2, I had to ride right in the middle of power zone 3 (around 200 watts for me). So, this workout basically ended up being one long, painful Sweet Spot interval (almost… I’d actually need to be @ 208 watts to hit the bottom of the range).
All that being said, I’m a bit confused as to why I have to pedal in power zone 3 to raise my heart rate to the top of zone 1/bottom of zone 2. I’m versed on the reasoning behind a lower cycling LTHR versus running LTHR. But, this has thrown me a bit.
My hypothesis is this:
Although my aerobic/cardiovascular conditioning and overall fitness is OK, my cycling specific muscular endurance is (relatively) abysmal. And, this very low level of cycling specific muscular endurance causes me to have a low FTP (236 watts). If my FTP were, say, 300 watts, then the wattage (200) required to put me in heart rate zone 2 would be in the middle of power zone 2 making the workout relatively much more easy. If the above statements are correct, then I’m guessing that my main priority needs to be muscular endurance and, subsequently, raising my FTP so that my muscular endurance is more inline with my cardiovascular fitness.
Does that make sense or am I way off track?
Thanks,
Ryan
I’m not sure what the point of this test is. Once you test and find your FTP and HR threshold you can set your numbers from there. Work your power zones because once you’re in the a specific power range you’re working that range, unlike heart rate which takes time to workup to that zone.
How did you set your heart rate zones? They will be different from your running hr zones.
However my lower hr zones produce lower power but become more equal the closer I get to threshold.
I’m not sure what the point of this test is. Once you test and find your FTP and HR threshold you can set your numbers from there. Work your power zones because once you’re in the a specific power range you’re working that range, unlike heart rate which takes time to workup to that zone.
The aerobic threshold workout is not a test but a suggested workout during early base period by joe friel. You essentially just ride in the lower half of heart rate zone 2 for a given amount of time. It is a workout for building aerobic base and can also be used as a diagnostic for seeing if decoupling occurs (falling power over time with a constant heart rate indicating poor aerobic fitness). I was just surprised at how hard I had to work (middle of power zone 3) in order to hold a low zone 2 heart rate and am looking for possible explanations.
I’m looking for some thoughts from the training gurus out there.
I just finished Joe Friel’s Power Meter Handbook and decided to do an Aerobic Threshold workout. The plan for the main set was 60 minutes at the very bottom of heart rate zone 2 which for me is 132 bpm (81% of 163 LTHR). I thought this would be a fairly easy workout. After all, I can hold 130-140 bpm all day when running (LTHR of 175)…
Jokes on me I guess! For me to get my heart rate up to high zone 1/low zone 2, I had to ride right in the middle of power zone 3 (around 200 watts for me). So, this workout basically ended up being one long, painful Sweet Spot interval (almost… I’d actually need to be @ 208 watts to hit the bottom of the range).
All that being said, I’m a bit confused as to why I have to pedal in power zone 3 to raise my heart rate to the top of zone 1/bottom of zone 2. I’m versed on the reasoning behind a lower cycling LTHR versus running LTHR. But, this has thrown me a bit.
My hypothesis is this:
Although my aerobic/cardiovascular conditioning and overall fitness is OK, my cycling specific muscular endurance is (relatively) abysmal. And, this very low level of cycling specific muscular endurance causes me to have a low FTP (236 watts). If my FTP were, say, 300 watts, then the wattage (200) required to put me in heart rate zone 2 would be in the middle of power zone 2 making the workout relatively much more easy. If the above statements are correct, then I’m guessing that my main priority needs to be muscular endurance and, subsequently, raising my FTP so that my muscular endurance is more inline with my cardiovascular fitness.
Does that make sense or am I way off track?
Thanks,
Ryan
Ditch the HR strap, it’s confusing the issue for you.
Assess what power you are capable of sustaining for durations of relevance to you, then train to improve that.
Training that improves FTP is rarely a poor choice for a triathlete, but keep in mind there are many ways to train to improve FTP. Which are best options for you will depend on several things unique to you and your situation.
How did you set your heart rate zones? They will be different from your running hr zones.
They were set on Joe Friel’s percentages and are based on my cycling LTHR based off Friel’s testing protocol. They’re substantially different than my running zones.
If you’ve tested FTP and want to do an L2 workout, why not just use power instead of HR to guide your effort?
Shane
If you’ve tested FTP and want to do an L2 workout, why not just use power instead of HR to guide your effort?
Shane
I get you point and will probably not do this workout again because it doesn’t really work for me. However, The reasoning behind this particular workout, according to Joe Friel, (the only workout that he recommends to be done based on heart rate that I know of BTW) is to improve and assess aerobic condition by analyzing what your power does based on a constant heart rate. If your power trails downward over the course of the ride @ a constant hr, then aerobic fitness may be in question. This is because a lower heart rate for a given power benchmark can be either indicative of improved fitness or overtraining. By doing it this way, you can be sure. My interest lies in understanding why such a relatively low (in respect LTHR) heart rate required a relatively higher power zone to achieve. I fully understand that the hr zones and power zones won’t line up with one another perfectly. However, I would assume that the top of hr zone 1 should not correspond with the middle of power zone 3. For me that means, getting an aerobic base building workout, ie somewhere in hr zone 2, requires me to be in power zone 3 (tempo) or 4 (lactate threshold)… Which is f@cking hard for me to hold for long periods of time.
Thanks,
Ryan
So after doing the workout, have you improved fitness or are you overtraining?
If I were you, I would train by power and, if you want to track HR, then do so but use power to guide your effort through the workout. If you are interested in how your HR responds during a given workout, then you can follow along with your data.
As far as doing a zone 2 workout with L3 or L4 power, you are not. This is evidenced by the fact that the workout felt hard even though a Z2 workout should feel pretty easy. If you are doing sweet spot power, you are certainly not riding easy.
Shane
So after doing the workout, have you improved fitness or are you overtraining?
Shane
I had a good training effect and don’t think I overreached. Not something I would want to do daily, though 
I had a good training effect and don’t think I overreached. Not something I would want to do daily, though
I’m curious as to how you reached this conclusion? You did a workout that should have been reasonably easy and instead it was quite hard so how do you determine that you have a good training effect and are not overreaching?
Shane
If you’ve tested FTP and want to do an L2 workout, why not just use power instead of HR to guide your effort?
Shane
I get you point and will probably not do this workout again because it doesn’t really work for me. However, The reasoning behind this particular workout, according to Joe Friel, (the only workout that he recommends to be done based on heart rate that I know of BTW) is to improve and assess aerobic condition by analyzing what your power does based on a constant heart rate.
Ah. Therein lies the flaw. HR is a dependent variable.
If you want to assess your condition, then find out what power you can actually sustain. What your HR does isn’t relevant.
If I were you, I would train by power
I’d suggest they learn to train *with *power.
Training *by *anything is conceptually flawed.
Indeed, it’s all about your epistemological perspective and analytical framework! Ha! Science!
Anyways, I question the overall value of both the aerobic threshold test and training by HR in general.