Dreww10

My primary goal at this point, in regards to base mile training, is just making the gains needed to do my normal routes again at a mostly Z2 pace, moreso than finding my absolute max potential right away. If I venture out to more mixed terrain (I've been looping a flat neighborhood 2-4 hours every single day), I spend significant time in Zones 3-5, no matter how slow I go. In the case of most hills or even some false flats, it's a choice of let the HR skyrocket or get off and walk up it.

Dreww10

Following up: about 1,200 miles in now in 7-8 weeks at mostly Zone 2. I can't say that riding slow has slowed me down (I honestly believe it has), but I find that I'm now unable to ride either fast or slow. Hopped in an 'A' group ride for the first time this season (one I've been able to hang with before) and my HR was pegged at roughly 98-99% of max (it was actually higher than I've ever had it before, so I'm unofficially adjusting my max) for a long, long time before I cracked and did the ride of shame. Also did a standard 40K TT route that I have and, while my time was almost identical to last season, the average HR for the ride was substantially higher (a lack of efficiency, perhaps?).

Did knock out a solo century recently and did so with very little food intake, so it would seem the Zone 2 riding has increased my body's ability to utilize fat, but it hasn't increased fitness as it relates to power or speed at a given HR in any way. So, do I continue this Zone 2 riding, or chalk it up a regimen that works for some and not for others and try something different?

Carbonfiberboy 

It worked great. You got the expected results. Your higher HR is because you're rested. Higher HR is better, not worse. Higher HR = more blood flow assuming stroke volume is unchanged. So now what you do is add in Z5 work, say 4 reps of 8 minutes at 4 beats over LTHR twice a week, or just once a week and a very intense group ride where you intentionally redline.

Dreww10

I'm not arguing with you, but I thought the goal was to get faster and stronger at a lower HR, rather than higher? I can tell you that nobody in that all-out group ride was near their max, as I was. Isn't riding that hard at a low HR a sign of fitness and efficiency, and the guy choking on his lung and past the redline being the opposite? Just trying to understand.

Carbonfiberboy 

Yes, the goal is to ride faster throughout the HR range. However, riding hard at a low HR is a sign of needing rest. Nothing to do with efficiency. If I notice that, I immediately back it off and finish the ride at a moderate pace. Pushing when your HR won't come up just digs the hole deeper. Riding comfortably at a low HR however is a symptom of being strong and adequately rested.

The fact that your 40k TT time was good even though you've had a long period with no hard training is a strong indicator that you're doing it right. That your HR was higher is good. When I go out on a group ride and see that my HR comes right up, I know I'll have a strong ride. It could very well be that your maximum and working HRs are a bit higher than you suspected. If you do LTHR testing, now would be a good time to do such a test. Then repeat after adding in the high HR training for a 3 weeks. It's important to continue the moderate training as much as is allowed by recovery.

There was a thread somewhere here about going by feel rather than numbers. You bring up a good point about "choking on his lung." I do go by breathing more closely than I go by HR. Panting hard means I'm over LT. However I know just how hard I can pant and still hold that effort for some period of time. I know that two 10-minute efforts at that level will cook me, so I know about what I can do where on a ride. I call it "titrating the pain." I also know that the other riders are suffering if I'm suffering, even though it seems like they're fine and I'm killing myself.

In any case, it looks like it's time for you to go out and suffer a little. Just watch your HR on rides. If you have trouble getting it to go up easily, you'll know you've been overdoing the hard efforts. I also watch my morning resting and morning standing HRs. I've been watching them for 20 years, so I know exactly what means what. Gotta have some metrics to go by.

Dominae

Building an effective base is a lifetime proposition. It can take years, and every year (I am 54) I'm amazed at how much more efficient I am than the previous year. This will go on, year after year, until I'm in the grave and unable to ride. Its definitely not a short term proposition or a quick fix. It's a whole new perspective on riding.

intransit1217

Reading this thread, two things came to mind. One, which has probably been overcome already is: Would taking a week off have helped him reset for the new training regimen?

And two, was just support. I also had the problem slowing down. But once I "got it" I enjoyed looking around while riding, and bonus, power came up and fatigue dropped a bit.

Oh and this, you are re-training yourself. It take time to undo things sometimes. Keep at it. The bennies are awesome.

denvertrout

Yes, I believe that is the goal, to become faster and stronger at a given HR. If your zone 2 is 125-135 for example,then you should be faster or produce more power (depends what you are measuring) in that range. Same effort from 2 months ago should result in a stronger rider today, HR being the same.

At the top end, I lost some of that temporarily when working exclusively on zone 2, but with a little effort it came back easily. Now what I find is I can stay at the top end much longer than before, and in zone 2 I produce way more power than a year ago, and I am barely working. I say keep at it, stay consistent and watch over time that your HR is staying the same, but your measurable outcome (speed/power) both go up.

gregf83 

Sounds like your zones are still off. You can't ride for more than a few seconds at your max HR so that extended period of riding with a high HR was probably something closer to 90-95% of MHR. It's quite possible all the zone 2 riding you thought you'd been doing was actually closer to zone 1 riding which would be less useful.

Richard Cranium

Well, keep measuring, and keep trying to make sense of the numbers.

A couple of things come to mind.

1. Big assumption number one - figuring cardiovascular efficiency reflects mechanical efficiency linearly.
2. No accounting for actual resting CV efficiency -and it's relationship to the linearity of all other HR zones.

I could go on - but you are already confused, after a life time of paying attention - some things are never answered.....

inspclouseau

I toned down my two weekend rides and started to follow this formattgis weekend. I'm interested in the results in the upcoming weeks.

Question though as I'm time crunched. If I am on a 2 hour ride, is it hurtful to mix in say a 10 minute tempo session in zone 4? A couple of sprints? Or more beneficial to keep intervals and tempo rides specific for those scheduled rides, independent of endurance rides?

Also, does an endurance ride of 2 hours have really that much benefit? I thought I remember reading somewhere to get the benefit of a zone 2 endurance ride you really need to get North of the 2 hour length of time - is that not true?

Thanks.

Carbonfiberboy 

No, you don't need to only do rides which only do one thing, though it's sometimes beneficial especially if you're recovering. I do many steady-state zone 2 rides on my rollers year 'round. As was said in another thread here, look at your uploaded totals by zone. You should see ~80% of your time for the week has been in zones 1 & 2. If you're following any sort of rational training program, that's what you'll see.

Yes, longer rides are better. They don't need to be strictly zone 2 rides, though. If you're doing endurance work, just hold the effort down a bit. It won't take long to get a feel for how that works.

inspclouseau

Thanks for the advice!

Dreww10

Didn't realize there were some additional responses here. But just following up on the follow-up...I've put in about 1,700 miles of mostly (I'd say 70%) Z2 riding since just before starting this thread, and have yet to see what I'd consider any kind of real improvement, top end or low end. On one hand, I could say endurance has improved, but I've slowed the pace so drastically, that it's almost a given I can go further, easier. So, we'll call it a wash.

One thing of particular note that's set me back lately is that my muscles have become gradually more and more sore for the same effort/distance over the course of this experiment, to the point that several days off or repeated low Z1 recovery rides won't even begin to heal them. I've increased my protein/carb intake, but that hasn't solved it. To provide some context, I've ridden every day of a month at Z3-5 before and my legs weren't as sore as they have been doing this strictly Z2 with one short interval session per week regimen. Unfortunately, until I can solve it, or just take a few weeks off to heal, I don't see much advancement occurring.

There are, however, a couple of questions that have arisen during this experiment:

1) Is it physical HR, or the actual power output of your legs at a given moment that drives improvements in fitness/speed? By that I mean, if your HR is higher than usual for any number of reasons, but you're still riding at a perceived Z2 power output (I don't have a power meter) are you still reaping the rewards? Or is the state of your heart being in Z2 that leads to gains?

2) Do intervals net any results if you can't attain your Max HR? Rested or not rested, the highest HR I've ever been able to reach on an interval is 185, which is 15 bpm short of my max. The highest I've ever had it on a solo ride is 192. I only seem to be able to push it to near max when it's do-or-die to hang onto a wheel in a group ride.

Most of my intervals, I peak at about 178 bpm and any higher almost cracks me....BUT, I can average 170 bpm for a whole 40K. So, there's only a few bpm difference between my 3-4 minute interval pace and my 40K pace. Which, doesn't seem right. Thoughts, suggestions?

Carbonfiberboy 

1) It's power. HR is a vague guide but really doesn't show training effect, other than that it will show you when you are ready to accept hard training and when you are not. That's the reason that so many serious riders are using power meters. I would note that Friel and his coaches require both PM and HRM. When I train, I go more by breathing than I do strictly by HR, though I use HR a lot to be certain I'm in the right ballpark.

2) Max HR has nothing to do with anything. Forget you ever heard that term.

Your experience with training is at variance with most folks I've ridden with or talked to. A possibility is that today everyone sets their zones off their lactate threshold heart rate (LTHR) or functional threshold power (FTP), depending on whether they are going by HR or power. You don't mention whether you have ever done a LTHR test. You should do one now. Either use the sticky on this forum or the CTS method. Then please post your results. CTS uses their own zone system which works with their training instructions. I can convert your test results into the Friel zone system, with which you seem to be more familiar.

sprince

I think some people are just not built for the slow grind. I can do shorter rides at 95-100% effort every day and recover just fine overnight, but just one long, slow 3 hour ride can wreck me for weeks (not the legs, but just generally tired and lethargic).

Dreww10

You may have an interesting point there. I did a pair of long Z2 rides over the weekend and my legs were completely sore/exhausted, but then spent the four days since doing shorter Z3/Z4 rides just to mix things up, with a few bursts into the top of Z5, and the legs have, surprisingly, become less sore each day, despite continual punishment with no rest days.

Today, when I should have been lethargic after five days and 220 miles in the saddle, I achieved the lowest Avg./Max HR I've ever ridden at, by a lot, on a 20+ mph average ride (I held 20 intentionally and observed my HR to gauge my progress).

Dreww10

Rather than start a new thread, I figured I'd continue this one, perhaps to gain some advice on a new direction as training for a new season comes around this winter.

Seven months and over 6,000 miles of disciplined riding after starting this thread, I think my experimentation with the training philosophies discussed are, well, a failure (for my body anyway). More than 75% of my riding this season has been Zone 2, with the rest, by and large, all-out efforts in a group ride or structured interval session. Essentially, I've aimed for polarization, but my findings are 1) No discernible speed/power was gained whatsoever in Zone 2 HR (avg. speeds are still 14.5-16 mph if I stay religious to Zone 2) and 2) in heeding the advice of countless threads on different forums to exclude hard Zone 3-4 rides like I once did, my body has become completely unable to sustain an effort longer than the 3-6 minutes that I've conditioned it for via intervals. Whereas I could once average over 21 mph if I wanted to, it's now everything I want to do 19 and even on those rides I crack every 3-6 minutes and have to recover.

So, moving forward, 1) is Zone 2/endurance power/speed a genetic limitation that everyone reaches and should I concern myself less with staying there and 2) would I be wise to bring hard, sustained (say 60-90 minute) efforts where lactic acid build-up is constant back into my regimen?

LMaster

This is a contradiction. If you're upping your HR into Z3/4/5 then you're by definition not taking it easy. Why does your heart rate spike? Because on the hills or into the wind you start pushing harder on the pedals. How do you prevent that from happening? Don't push so hard on the pedals. Yes, this might mean you slow to 4 or 5 mph on hills or under 10mph in a decent wind...but that's how it goes sometimes.

cyclezen

not sure if it was this thread or another where the whole Zone 2 thing was hashed again - it seems this comes up regular, like a full moon - maybe more frequent.
My personal take on zone 2 (HR zones) is that one becomes incredibly good at riding for long times and distances at zone 2 pace... But forget speed or anything close to holding the wheels of others who train harder/ more focused.
Zones were developed/established so that training regimes could more easily be mapped out/discussed between a coach/book writer/interested party(and now blogger) and party of the first part - the rider.
The only thing I've found over the years, that is a clear indicator of my fitness is and has been the AT - Anerobic Threshold HR (or whatever name you wanna give it). Riding for any length of time above means degrading performance. Staying some degree below, means I have significant better performance, if allowed to stay below. The higher I can get my AT, the better I can perform in any competitive situation.
As a matter of reference, I place my AT HR rate at the division area between Zone 4 & 5. Everything in Zone 5 effort is anaerobic to a sig. degree. The higher I go the faster the fuse burns til I assplode...

Your body don;t know nuttin from zone 2, it only sees it as easy. I'm not sure where anyone would think that zone 2 power/speed is a genetic limitation. SO I'm not sure what you're askin.
Training is a balance of effort and recovery. We all react a bit different and at different times.

I know my AT HR and even though it's a shadow of it's former self, it is my gauge for any efforts I put in as 'training'. As a 'Zone', it's that gray range right between 4 & 5. Forget Max heart rate - whatever that might seem to be. The higher you can push your AT, the faster/longer/harder you will be able to ride/perform.
For what its worth, Zone 2 is my 'active recovery' zone - when I need to let my body recover from prior hard days, I ride zone 2ish. Much slower, below 2, if I'm truely toast, and still want to ride because it's a beautiful evening. Or I go for a walk.
Not sure where you read to exclude the higher HRs/zones; but you're now experiencing the training effects of doing that.
Riding zone 2 for long periods was a good way to retain muscle memory while still allowing long term periodic recovery in the off-season. Not so much these days, with the very small offseason many riders experience these days.
Find your AT, and then its a matter of deciding what kind of training might best suit you for what you want to achieve, from the abundant training programs available.

EDIT: spiking HR in low effort rides - inevitable. There's hardly a roller worth mentioning that doesn't cause me to go 75% AT HR.
Unless you have a completely flat ride, uphills cause spiking. Drop the speed as much as possible, but falling over sideways is not an option. Get thru the spike, and carry on

RiPHRaPH

I have read this thread from its beginnings to its recent incarnation. Even though we are missing some vital information like: what is the end game here. I'm assuming it is to stay at the front of your A rides.
I've been where you are. Most European riders say that American riders don't ride slow enough on slow days and ride too fast on faster days. My riding buddy has been an accomplished Cat 2 rider and my other riding buddy played college hockey and is a freight train. I was always getting shucked off faster rides. I did all the math and calculations. I finally asked Mr Cat 2 what to do.
He basically said that it isn't always about the 2-4 hours on the bike... it's what is happening the other 20-22 hours of the day.

We all had full time hectic jobs, raised and coached our kids, did our husband duties and everything else. Sometimes you get to the bike at a deficit. He suggested that I " just ride" --> now our routine included Monday, walk the bike. Tuesday, pace. Wednesday intervals, Thursday pace, Friday, walk the bike. Saturday and/or Sunday was the A rides.

We didn't push it early or late in the season. We mixed cross in our rides. Instead of being a slave to the bike and a numbers cruncher, I'd go by feel. Now, my zones were not their zones... and sometimes I had to change my ride to hang with them. But overall, I was approaching mental burnout. Their lung capacity was larger than mine ever could be.

So I subscribe to making gains via technique and strategy. I was taught where to be and when to be there during certain points in the ride. (be in the front at this turn/when to jump in the pace line / when to actively rest/ when and who to draft) as well as paying attention to when to drink and when to shift.

I found that I was in the wrong gear often. During pace line he would point to me or gently push me to grab that wheel. I'd see when he was able to shift at the right time, in the right gear. I found that being in these correct gears I was able to stay in the pack. He told me that when he was racing, he would never let anyone see him suffering. Psychologically it is a game changer.

He pretty much taught me how to compete. I was thinking about the ride in its totality, so at mile 30 if there was a break I would hold myself back telling myself that...geez, if I overcook here then I'm not going to have enough for mile 65 and the final sprint. That is a defeatist reasoning. You have to do everything you can to stay on that wheel at mile 30 because there is no mile 65 if you are shucked off the back there.

So on Saturday and Sunday it really didn't matter what my HR was. I had to stay on that wheel. Everyone is tired. Some show it and others don't. By being at the front more, I did less braking and less jostling in the pack... now, I still struggled, but there were some weekends where I was the ****ing king. I held my own. Others didn't work out.

But I have a life to live damn it. Just ride. Don't overthink it. Be smart and be more aggressive. All this data... I burned out mentally. I wouldn't look at my Garmin readings but once a week.

Dreww10

There are responses in this thread to suggest that spending considerable time riding at Z2 will make you better/faster/stronger at Z2, with personal proof to purportedly back it up. I know of local riders - strong riders - who are 20-22 mph all-day-long riders at their Z2 HR and spend MOST of their training time there, but is that trained or is that genetic? My findings this season would seem to suggest the latter, and that other than active recovery, they've been thousands of junk miles.

hubcyclist

Here's my n=1 take. I took a lot of time off last winter for various reasons and dropped in fitness pretty considerably, with my ftp dropping from 265 to probably 230. When I started riding again, I tried mainly just doing z2, and I think it helped mainly as far as building volume and not getting tired toward the end of longer rides and the ability to ride more without feeling like all the energy was out. But I think my recent gains back to my old FTP have been doing a lot of tempo and threshold, and not really a lot of z2. By working my threshold and subthreshold, I essentially shift all my zones forward. I think you get that to some extent from z2, but ultimately you have to really work on riding hard for long periods of time. I'll get on a virtual race on zwift and ride near threshold for an hour nonstop, for example. In fact, being limited to 90-120mins on my rides, I'd prefer riding tempo and harder as opposed to z2 because I get more bang for my buck as far as training stress I'm aiming to achieve. I guess my point is, if you want to get faster at z2, you're going to have to spend time in z4, like 10-20min intervals. My guess is you've hit a plateau and aren't making any gains because you're not pushing yourself.

Also, while I use HR, I actually kind of hate it because I find mine a lot of time reads high when I'm in z2 power (using a power meter, so I really gauge myself off power and not HR). Just recently I noticed in different sessions where I was riding at 88% of my ftp where my HR was at 147bpm a couple of days and like 160 another time. So I really wouldn't sweat it, just ride what feels comfortable aerobically speaking, in my fact it may be useful if you just turn off your HR display and just go out and then look at the data afterwards.

Carbonfiberboy 

This is all so true. It's wonderful to do group rides where there are mentors. Too frequently riders are shy of giving advice, and too frequently riders are unwilling to accept advice. My struggles match yours. What you talking about is "riding smarter." A lot of it is between your ears. There's also training smarter.

I'm a little different: on a tough ride, I'll watch my HR like a hawk. If I had a PM, I'd watch that. I use that aid to titrate the pain - that's what I call it. Part of riding smarter. I've learned how much I can take at a time. That still leaves an interesting decision: to give it all you've got at the expense of being dropped later, or to sit in, conserve, and try to finish with a group. My instrumentation enables me to make that decision. Mostly on training rides I give it serious gas in the first 1/3 of the ride and then just try to hang in there until the finish. That way I know I'll have burnt all my matches - the opposite of the negative split one would try for in an event ride or race.

On long hard group rides, I find that if I go for a negative split, too often I'm tired and can't get raise my full power or HR near the end and thus can't stimulate my body enough to get a good training effect at the high end. I don't know if that's really true or not, but we all know to ride home when we can't hit our numbers on the nth hill repeat or interval, so I figure it's the same on a group ride.

cyclezen

OK, I'm not gonna throw water on the smoke (cough) if you say all-day Z2 at 20-22. We all know that 'all-day 22' is really 17-19 avg on the computer when the ride is done...
Course if you live in Flatland, then it could be possible.
If really true, genetic or other? So many factors... age, BMI, diet, stress, yadda yadda yadda - all add or subtract from what anyone is capable of.
Forget 'all-day 22' as expected, consider it a goal to work towards.
This is about you.
If you've faithfully followed their lead and done a ton of steady pace riding in zone 2 and found that you're going slower, not faster (when you've been faster before...) - do you attribute that to genetics, or just a riding/conditioning pattern (training) which makes you less capable?
If your objective is to ride at a level close to the 'ALL-Day Z2 22mph' guyz, then you'll have to step up and have the body work harder so it adapts to the higher level (which you say is currently harder for you to hold).

My Z2 (80% of AT) for my AT/LT HR (158) is round about 125. At 125 I can do 18, sometimes 19 on the flat. To do 21-22 I would have to be in the mid-higher 130's or my Z3...
If I rode Z2 for most of my riding time, I would continue to get slower, not faster, or even 'same'. Much more about Aging, and my younger days tells me it's not genetics.
That's me, an old man.

If your Z2 is at some level other than where the 'ALL-Day Z2 22mph' guyz are, then you'll just have to work up to it - given all the factors in or against your favor.
If your conditioning improves, your Z2 may not change much, but you'll likely be riding faster in any zone.