Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy (Post 23164351)

They're probably going quite hard. I don't know of anyone who climbs in zone 2, even on all day events. The best aerobic conditioning I've ever found is simply riding with a group that's faster than you.

Originally Posted by terrymorse (Post 23164380)

I often climb in zone 2, especially if it's a long-ish social ride. Yesterday's ride was Mt. Hamilton, with a buddy who is fit but climbs a bit slower. 44 miles up-and-down, 5200 feet. About 2.6 W/kg average on the uphill part, right in the middle of my zone 2.

Originally Posted by terrymorse (Post 23164380)

I often climb in zone 2, especially if it's a long-ish social ride. Yesterday's ride was Mt. Hamilton, with a buddy who is fit but climbs a bit slower. 44 miles up-and-down, 5200 feet. About 2.6 W/kg average on the uphill part, right in the middle of my zone 2.

Originally Posted by Hermes (Post 23164465)

I think that is pretty common especially for lighter weight riders. I am more of a z3 / Z4 climber of Mount Hamilton primarily because I rode it on Thanksgiving morning as part of the Low Key Hill Climbs. I disliked the return ride post race where we have to climb the two descents. Legs were dead to me.

Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy (Post 23164351)

They're probably going quite hard. I don't know of anyone who climbs in zone 2, even on all day events. The best aerobic conditioning I've ever found is simply riding with a group that's faster than you. That's way better than doing intervals on your own. Getting dropped is very good. Keep riding with that group. I got dropped every ride for about a year, that's once a week, but I held on longer every ride. We rode once a week, all year, rain or shine. Eventually I wound up leading that group. I'd tell the newbies to "hang onto their wheel until the blood spurts from your eyeballs." A group ride will teach you everything you need to know about cadence, pacing, nutrition, and clothing. Cadence: always spin about the same cadence as the rider whose wheel you're on.

That said, that's just once a week. A 3-5 hour group ride is all the high end conditioning you'll need. The rest of the week, ride Z2. You probably won't be able to profitably do anything else, but do put in some miles. Strength training in the gym twice a week is a good idea, too. I usually did a ride the same day, but only an hour or less, before the gym. If you don't do the group ride every week, you will need to do some intervals to make up for it. This Z2 only thing is taken from pros and elites who can put in 15-20 hours/week, but they are also doing group rides or runs or skis of varying intensity.

When I started my year's training in October, I'd put in a lot of Z2 hours, working up to 2 hours on the rollers 5 days/week for about a month, which was very helpful. That was plenty of low end work, but that's a lot of riding, many people won't be able to even do that. By now, I'd usually be doing some sort of midweek intervals too, maybe low cadence Z3 hill climbs or long periods of max cadence work on the rollers. Only 4 months to July. I kept up doing this routine every year into my 70s.

Originally Posted by Sierra_rider (Post 23165148)

For the past couple seasons, I've made an effort to include a large amount of zone 2 into my riding. I still do 1-2 high-intensity rides during the week, so I'd consider it balanced. I'm not going to make any arguments about mitochondria, fat burning, etc, but it has allowed me to maintain a higher volume without accumulating too much fatigue. I'm able to make my intensity days of higher quality than when I used to just try to hammer everywhere.The result is that I saw a sizable increase in FTP last year and more importantly, my ability to make hard efforts near the end of a long event, has improved.

Originally Posted by bblair (Post 23165281)

Yea...every year, I just suck until May. Cold, windy, out of shape, a few extra pounds.

Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy (Post 23165370)

Yes, very frustrating. The solution is either resistance rollers or any sort of indoor trainer and hopefully a power meter to go with your HRM.

Originally Posted by ofajen (Post 23166617)

My solution this winter was to transition to running and strength training. I did my first ride in two months today and it went surprisingly well. I didn’t have any issues of not having the necessary strength to manage on my single speed bike. In fact, I was able to comfortably stay in the saddle on some steeper hills that I would typically stand on. I attribute that to strength training all winter even though it was targeted to support running. I suspect the benefits overlap a lot.

Otto

Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy (Post 23166635)

How did you target running with your strength work?

Originally Posted by ofajen (Post 23166835)

Some frequent leg exercises are split squats, single and double leg squats, Romanian deadlifts single and double, step ups, and step downs. To strengthen and stabilize my knees. It’s worked great for running, as I haven’t had much knee discomfort. On slow runs, I’m mostly constrained by how much my feet can take. And I’ve felt OK to do fast intervals and sprints, which adds variety to the week.

I have to give credit to an acquaintance I see regularly at our rec center. He goes there to lift and the indoor track runs right around the weight machine area. We always chat if we are there. He just graduated med school here and will seek a residency placement after a year of research. Anyway as I was building up mileage I was noticing sometimes my knees would feel ok and sometimes not. He suggested I look up the basic exercises for strength training that support running and those are the basic things you see on all the guides from university programs and PT offices.

Otto

Originally Posted by rsbob (Post 23168648)

I find Z2 rides absolute insufferable torture.

Originally Posted by terrymorse (Post 23168987)

Do you do social rides? That's where I get lots of Z2 time, and the company makes it more enjoyable.

Originally Posted by sshakari (Post 23176898)

I've been riding in Zone 2 based on my heart rate and not my power zones.
I wonder what the difference is?

Originally Posted by PeteHski (Post 23177251)

How did you set your power zones?

Originally Posted by McFlyRides (Post 23178580)

I don't have a PM at this time, and it's been ages since I had a lab test. So I use perceived effort to define my zones, focusing on what feels like the anaerobic threshold. The other zones are percentages of that AT HR, not percentages of a theoretical max HR.

Essentially, below that AT HR, I'm breathing hard, forcefully, but controlled. Below that HR, I can continue for some time even though it's quite hard.

Above that AT HR I'm gasping, the walls are closing in, and I can't continue at that pace more than a few minutes.

For me, it's easier to find that anaerobic threshold by experience and perceived exertion than it is to know what my max HR is. I'm 50+, so the formula says 170 is my max. In my races last year I saw 184 in one race and 188 in another. For me it takes a finish line sprint to see those numbers--the adrenaline, the tangible goal of going faster to defend against or catch another rider.

Originally Posted by terrymorse (Post 23107784)

Yeah, some people call that the "zone 2 trap". It feels so pleasant that people want to do it all the time, so they get stuck in that slow plateau.

I think of zone 2 in a similar way, as a recovery ride pace. If I'm feeling fatigued from the prior day(s), but not so fatigued that I need a rest day, it's time for an easy zone 2 cruiser. But the notion that you must stay in zone 2 for the whole ride or you'll undo the zone 2 "benefit", or flip some metabolic switch, seems just plain goofy.

Pootling along at zone 2 for hours is boring. My favorite type of ride is plenty of zone 2 cruising, broken up by some harder efforts lasting 1 to 10 minutes. Mixing up the pace keeps things interesting, I'm getting a more well rounded workout, and I don't get so thashed that I can't go again the next day.

Originally Posted by rsbob (Post 23180053)

This is something I have been wondering about since the beginning of this thread. Doubt any research exists at this time that discusses majority low effort punctuated by a few intense one. Do the higher level efforts negate, compliment, or increase the benefits?
Where I live, it’s impossible to sustain Z2 for hours on end without having climbs of 10-15% without constant doubling back. I too like breaking up effort levels just to defeat the boredom aspect.

In the same way, there are days when I just go out and stay in Z4-5 with occasional forays into anaerobic just because I like working hard, but then I am trashed the next day. I really dislike doing intervals, which probably means I will not be improving but at least I won’t be hating working out.

Originally Posted by ofajen (Post 23180205)

You might want to listen to the episodes of Inside Exercise where McConnell interviews Andy Coggan. They discuss this extensively and there is some research on this.

Otto

Originally Posted by PeteHski (Post 23180230)

Do you know what they concluded?

Originally Posted by rsbob (Post 23180053)

This is something I have been wondering about since the beginning of this thread. Doubt any research exists at this time that discusses majority low effort punctuated by a few intense one. Do the higher level efforts negate, compliment, or increase the benefits?

Originally Posted by terrymorse (Post 23180330)

I've heard some claims bandied about (rymes with "Dr. Fan Fill-On") that doing a hard effort will <mumbo jumbo about metabolic triggers or hormones or some other woo woo>, thus reducing the benefit of a low intensity workout.

I think that's silly. I ascribe to the "all roads lead to Rome" school of training, and the only concern with a hard effort is added fatigue, which requires more recovery time.