Oh, I know what it is. It's a 4 letter word, that's what.

Yes, "what" is a 4 letter word.

;)

wut?

While I am locked into the Garmin ecosystem, some of their stuff is garbage. Even the pros will get unproductive ride notifications. Z2 rides are fine but it depends on how they balance your other rides and recovery. Point being don't get too concerned about unproductive notifications. The biggest hurdle most riders have is just getting out there in the first place

Really, is Zone 2 really worth incorporating into a time-crunched amateur/hobbyist cyclist's training at all? Not asking rhetorically.

The main advantages, if I understand them correctly, seem to be these:

Zone 2 trains your system to adapt better to metabolizing fat.

Zone 2 adds little or no stress and may well enable recovery from previous high-stress rides.

I don't see how either of those applies to someone whose training rides don't exceed 10 hours or so a week. With that training load, is there really any fat adaptation occurring that's worth mentioning? And wouldn't time off the bike be just about as effective for recovery as a Zone 2 ride?

Zone 2 also trains your aerobic system (but other zones do as well).
The simple guideline of:
A couple of hard rides per week plus one long one. Fill out the rest however you want but make sure you're not excessively fatigued for the hard rides.
Seems to work well. If you're doing higher volume, you'll naturally have to go pretty easy to avoid being too tired on your hard days. If you're quite low volume, you'll be able to get away with more intensity in between the key days.

Makes sense. And reminds me of another simple guideline that i came across many decades ago, maybe in an interview with a pro-level coach in a bike magazine, talking about the average amateur racer's approach to training:

"Your hard days are too easy, and your easy days are too hard."

I get exactly the same message, over and over. When surrounded by hills, not getting the heart rate up is not an option (a double negative?)

Makes sense for young-uns. Oldsters are not supposed to redline or run at redline due to arterial calcification concerns. But since it gives me joy, I do it anyway. And I would rather keel over on my bike than sitting in a hospital or sofa.

I’m not so sure about that “no redlining” advice for us oldsters. We need more recovery time, for sure. But I haven’t seen evidence that high intensity is damaging.

Is a 1 hour Zone 2 ride still beneficial? Yes, but to what extent will depend.

How do you stay in Zone 2 when you have no choice but to climb a hill? Depends on the hill, generally staying seated and slowing down.

Lots of 'depends' if you are older ;), or have specific limitations.
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...ff09cec19b.jpg
Or better yet, Clear your handlebars and your Mind may follow.
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...e684d6b39.jpeg
Best rides for me are when Zones are the furthest from my thoughts.

That's why I haven't bought a power meter.

Well, that and the price.

Mostly the price.

Really? One of the best things about a power meter (for me) is that it relieved me of having to think about structured training at all. Structured training is something you do because you don't have a simple way to achieve or measure a particular training dose. I just ride and the power meter (and head unit) records what I did. It gets automatically uploaded, and an app computes my training load. If I'm interested in my training load (I'm not always interested but if I were) then I can glance at the app and say, "Hmmm, I guess I'm roughly on track" or (rarely) "Hmmm, I guess I need a bit more volume/intensity/endurance/top-end/whatever." A power meter simplified my life.

Depends on what one is training for. :foo:
Cycling can serve the Mind as well as the Body.

BTW, not disagreeing with anyone's training techniques for whatever in this big sport interests them.

Example - As an old guy and 45 year consistent cyclist - I'm 'training' regularly so that when the 2 youngest grandchildren are big enough to ride a tandem, I'm alive and fit enough to be their captain. Beyond that I mostly want to smile during and after rides. Then again, maybe I'm just a deviant unique case. Roll On!
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...6cc4b85a59.jpg

“Physical activity and exercise training are associated with a lower risk for coronary events. However, cross-sectional studies in middle-aged and older male athletes revealed increased coronary artery calcification (CAC) and atherosclerotic plaques, which were related to the amount and intensity of lifelong exercise. We examined the longitudinal relationship between exercise training characteristics and coronary atherosclerosis.”

Source: American Heart Association

These discussions often involve people talking past each other. And no wonder. Some people ride to be the best they can be, some ride in the hope of staving off deterioration, some ride because the doc said to get some exercise and it's easier than walking.

The range of types of riders and riding probably exceeds the range of levels that Judo belts represent.

(Just looked: apparently six student levels and 10 expert levels.)

Yes, really. I spent some time doing more structured workouts during winters a couple years ago, depending on the power meter in my smart trainer, but I never had any kind of plan, and the last year or so I just did free riding, sometimes tossing in one of the longer climbs if I felt like it.

I will confess, however, that I came out of the winters where I was doing structured workouts noticeably stronger and faster than I have the last year or two. I'm also two years closer to 70, though, so that's a confounding variable.

Agree.
@DirePenguin seems to be riding to please his Garmin. Or because of it. Maybe Garmin is (for cyclists) like an AI program teaching everyone to be a competitive categorized rider. Gone astray for the majority of average cyclists.

We talk past each other (or in spite of each other) because we all have different specific goals/priorities/outcomes, Garmin (to my knowledge) does not. Then there is Thread Drift - hopefully constructive, but also to other purposes.

I haven't been doing structured workouts but over the last year or two I've gotten stronger/faster just by doing more volume. Not that I'm strong or fast -- just stronger and faster than before, and I'm getting farther away from 70.

Yeah, I've seen that report. The confusing part is this:

"The clinical relevance of this finding remains unclear"

So I guess the big unanswered question is if these very vigorous exercisers have bad health outcomes. Or, as a follow on question, did the high calcium group make themselves healthier by avoiding soft and more dangerous plaques?

I'm in the best shape I have been in for 15+ years or so. What turned it around was a few years of basically zone 2 riding. 1 hour, 2, 10 whatever. I am only working intensity in when I am getting into race season. You can tweak your top end in a very short amount of time but there is definitely a reason we spent a lot of time doing volume at low intensity. You can achieve the same thing by just riding easy. Don't worry if you have to go hard to climb a hill. Just relax and take in the sights once you're over the top. Then every now and then join a spirited group ride and bash each others legs off. :D

Remember its a hobby. Also Garmin doesn't really know much so don't take it too seriously.

Back about 40 years ago or so, some bike magazine guy argued that the "S" in the acronym LSD should be interpreted not as "slow" but as "steady."

"Steady," of course, is ambiguous in the context, unlike "slow." He probably thought it a waste of his time to pedal around at effort levels below those that we now prefer to as Zone 3 and Zone 4. Thus missing the point entirely.

So, takeaways,

1) Garmin’s training advice is not great.

2) Zone 2 training is particularly good if you have a lot of time to train, or just like riding at that pace.

3) if you want to be fast, and don’t have a lot of time you need to do more intensity and less Zone 2, with the realization that you are making tradeoffs given your time limitations.

A true Z2 ride is not as fun as folks make it out to be. 71%, 5% or less Z1, makes the last hour of a 4 hour+ ride, pretty tough.

Did you look at the table of participant health metrics. Average weight 83 kg - 183 cm - too fat for this sport.:D Plus a few were smoking and many former smokers and BP looked okay but not spectacular. Total cholesterol was 208 which is not podium material.

How about the athletes that are lower body fat, eat better (whatever that means), get more sleep and have better blood metrics? I think there are a lot of variables to consider. That does not mean the study is wrong per se but does not take into account all the variables.

Different population of athletes may generate different results.