T Stew

I don't do training plans remember? I'm just showing there is a lot of variation in plans out there, things many people might not even realize. Or maybe it's pseudo science like the op suggests. Is every training plan right? I have adapted many of his methods and have used his formula in the past as well as nutritional information. There is a ton of nutritional information in his Big Book. My MAF times have improved greatly even with applying it only half assed. I don't have my records of my MAF tests they were probably ~5 years ago or so. But just by memory... Initially when I did my 'benchmark' test I was struggling to stay at my MAF HR doing a 10:30-11:00 minute/mile. For my most recent MAF test, I haven't used a hrm since last fall but even then I was able to do a mile into the upper 7's at my MAF HR. What is impossible to prove though is where would I have been if I hadn't taken some of his methods and incorporate MAF off an on for a few years?

Would I have been better off doing interval training instead of all the slow running? Maybe I would have been faster, but maybe I couldn't have run as far. Maybe my heart rate would be higher? What is more important?

A recovery ride and the Maffetone method are not the same thing at all. And he does stress recovery times, including both days and recovery weeks. Even including recovery rides, doing any kind of interval work is completely out of his plans until you plateau aerobically.

I agree many who ride as they feel ride too hard etc, maybe not recover enough, etc, but that isn't necessarily always the case. When I first started into endurance running, I went by a simple rule of thumb not to do more than 10% more mileage one week than the previous week, to keep from doing too much too soon. I'm not sure if you would call that a comprehensive plan, but more like a good idea. I take plenty of days off and I don't need a plan to tell me this. Most of the time it's forced days off because of work. But this kind of furthers what I was saying about misinformation... in running there has been lots of talk that a recovery run does absolutely nothing to aid in recovery despite so many that believe it does. But it is often useful for training (not recovering) by running when your body is already spent to train it a bit in depleted mode - similar to what you would have to endure on an ultramarathon. Though I am not sure if this is true for cycling or not, perhaps there is scientific proof a recovery ride helps cyclists. But this seems to be pseudo science in the running world.

I'll point out again or if I didn't mention it, I really can't subscribe to any plan due to my rotating shiftwork, and being a single parent. I also put all my 'training' efforts into running, and have progressed quite well since I started running seriously in 2011. I ride just to aid in fitness, on my off days from running, and to have fun. I do like to ride hard and fast too from time to time, but I have no interest in bike specific racing, but perhaps duathlon some day. I know I am no where near where I could be with one of these training plans (I don't disagree with many of you) and if I didn't run so much, but I like what I am doing and very happy with where I am at.

As I have said before we are all unique, we are not machines nor programs that can respond exactly as something predicts. Generalizations in training can certainly be made, but we are quite variable biological organisms. Pseudo science might be to strong of a word, but I am sure there are things/plans/strategies that work for some and not others, and vice versa.