Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Training & Nutrition
Reload this Page >

Interval Repeats are the Cycling Software Industry's Worst Nightmare

Training & Nutrition Learn how to develop a training schedule that's good for you. What should you eat and drink on your ride? Learn everything you need to know about training and nutrition here.

Interval Repeats are the Cycling Software Industry's Worst Nightmare

Reply

Old 09-29-18, 12:45 PM
  #26  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 2,667

Bikes: Felt AR

Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
snip
So the point of this thread is to get people to buy your software? Or watch your videos or something?

Is that the ultimate point, here?

If so, the business aspect of this enterprise seems to be struggling as much as the physiological and methodological aspects.
rubiksoval is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 12:57 PM
  #27  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Yes, a new stipulation.

Because interval training is not intuitive. Now you're making some random assertion that people can learn how to follow instructions from a program? Big deal.

And what's this manipulation garbage? What's your beef with coaching and coaching software again?
See definition 1d above. Athletes CAN understand it but never try because of the candy. Solution is to give them (intuitive) candy and help them with inevitable problems. People can learn from and adjust intuitive workouts and plans, not overly complicated smoke and mirrors.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 01:03 PM
  #28  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
So the point of this thread is to get people to buy your software? Or watch your videos or something?

Is that the ultimate point, here?

If so, the business aspect of this enterprise seems to be struggling as much as the physiological and methodological aspects.
Dude what is wrong with you? Do you talk to people IRL this way? I've been more than patient with your ignorant, condescending and accusational questions but you need to settle down. Go get something to eat or something. Unless you can chill out I won't be responding to any more of your aggressive garbage.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 02:00 PM
  #29  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 2,667

Bikes: Felt AR

Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Here's the deal.

You posted a bulletin board of incongruous, over-generalized assertions that are neither true nor valid. Multiple posters have asked you what the purpose of doing so is, and you've repeatedly dodged those questions by quoting...yourself! This refusal to elaborate on that initial post comes across as you being either intentionally obtuse or deliberately misleading. Not quite sure which at the moment.

In addition, you've failed to elaborate on those points when directly asked to do so, and then you regressed to simply posting word definitions as if your audience is too dumb to understand standard English vernacular.

And then, to top it all off, you posted a 10 minute youtube video that's supposed to...do what? I have no idea. You didn't add any commentary along with it. Just seems like a shameless plug.

Through all of this, you've shown absolutely no reason why anyone should take anything you've said seriously, nor have you demonstrated even the simplest amount of understanding regarding exercise physiology and training methodologies. All you've done is say that it's easy to understand and that people don't is due to them being too lazy and too easily manipulated! Talk about condescending!

Honestly, I'm thrilled you think enough of yourself that you threatening to not respond to me is supposed to be a big deal. But seeing as how you haven't responded to anything with an actual answer yet, and you've done nothing to demonstrate your credible understanding of the information you're attempting to peddle, you'll forgive me for not being overly concerned.

Oh, and p.s., your handle is irksome. You're not faster than me.
rubiksoval is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 02:06 PM
  #30  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 2,667

Bikes: Felt AR

Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
See definition 1d above. Athletes CAN understand it but never try because of the candy. Solution is to give them (intuitive) candy and help them with inevitable problems. People can learn from and adjust intuitive workouts and plans, not overly complicated smoke and mirrors.
Hint for your future business endeavors:

When asked to elaborate, quoting yourself quoting a dictionary does not suffice. Might want to work on your ability to communicate the viewpoints you're trying to get across, and you might also want to refrain from stealing the work of online dictionaries. I assure you I am well aware of the meaning of intuitive, even though the way you're using it in your assertions suggests that you're not.
rubiksoval is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 03:12 PM
  #31  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,649
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 836 Post(s)
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
Dude what is wrong with you? Do you talk to people IRL this way? I've been more than patient with your ignorant, condescending and accusational questions but you need to settle down. Go get something to eat or something. Unless you can chill out I won't be responding to any more of your aggressive garbage.
Rubik's not the only one unable to figure out what you're trying to say or peddle. I think you are mistaken in your assessment on the ability of cyclists to understand effective training methods. Cyclists have been training effectively long before software tools were available. At the end of the day you still have to do the work.
gregf83 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 03:26 PM
  #32  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 14,585

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1608 Post(s)
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
From OP:

I believe the answer is to provide athletes coherent and clearly/consistently progressed indoor training plan templates which can get them started along with guidance on how to monitor and make the inevitable adjustments.



Agree 100% regarding importance of data.



100% agree experience is key and you won't accumulate experience with your eyes closed and your brain turned off.
Well then we do agree.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 04:12 PM
  #33  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 14,585

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1608 Post(s)
Ah, I finally skipped through that video, which I hadn't noticed before. So the OP is trying to develop some interactive coaching software and is maybe trying to get some reactions here. Mission accomplished I guess. I don't know. Interactive coaching software is hard. I know that because I've only seen one useful example and they went belly up, probably from trying to follow the perturbations of Windows software development. A Windows project is never done. I do laud all attempts at doing so, because it could be useful. The software I use was developed with the assistance and input of Ed Burke PhD, rest his soul. It's very good, no tech explanations, just translation of desire into performance. The last iteration was published in 2005, so I'm sure it could be improved upon now. The fancy stuff in the video is unnecessary. Just prescribe the workout like any coach would do, using LTHR or FTP based zones. The software I use retests to check zones every month. Of course one uploads one's rides and the software then generates a series of graphical reports showing anything you want graphed against anything you want. Now it would have to include the Performance Manager from TP or an analogue.

The developer must know more about how to prescribe periodized training that the user. Obviously, if they don't, it's crap.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-18, 04:53 PM
  #34  
DrIsotope 
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 6,128

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn

Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3247 Post(s)
This thread is great in that I have no idea where it's going. Is the OP tacitly selling something, in a weird, indirect, obfuscatory way? That in itself is intriguing.

Apropos of nothing, I don't really train at all. I lack the conviction required for structured intervals, so I make up for that in hours. I'm not very strong or very fast, but man can I ride for a sort-of long time at a ferociously moderate rate of speed.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 05:32 AM
  #35  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
Rubik's not the only one unable to figure out what you're trying to say or peddle. I think you are mistaken in your assessment on the ability of cyclists to understand effective training methods. Cyclists have been training effectively long before software tools were available. At the end of the day you still have to do the work.
If I understand you correctly, then we are saying the same thing. Generic plans don't work.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 05:44 AM
  #36  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 2,667

Bikes: Felt AR

Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
If I understand you correctly, then we are saying the same thing. Generic plans don't work.
Nearly everything works to a certain extent up to a certain point. A point which most recreational cyclists and amateur racers never reach.

Your body adapts to new stimuli. If the stimuli stays the same, the body stops adapting. However, if you increase training load via intensity or duration, then the body will continue to adapt for years (8-10 years according to some coaches).

Workouts can increase the length of the repeat, the total number of repeats, or the intensity of the repeats. There's a whole lot you can do within those three parameters and those programs (developed by elite sports physiologists and athletes) do a lot of manipulation.

Any of those "canned, generic" plans (Friel's stuff, Zwift plans, trainerroad plans) can work because they require periodic testing in order to increase the intensity. As long as someone is putting in the work, then the plan works. Case closed.
rubiksoval is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 05:45 AM
  #37  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
Ah, I finally skipped through that video, which I hadn't noticed before. So the OP is trying to develop some interactive coaching software and is maybe trying to get some reactions here. Mission accomplished I guess. I don't know. Interactive coaching software is hard. I know that because I've only seen one useful example and they went belly up, probably from trying to follow the perturbations of Windows software development. A Windows project is never done. I do laud all attempts at doing so, because it could be useful. The software I use was developed with the assistance and input of Ed Burke PhD, rest his soul. It's very good, no tech explanations, just translation of desire into performance. The last iteration was published in 2005, so I'm sure it could be improved upon now. The fancy stuff in the video is unnecessary. Just prescribe the workout like any coach would do, using LTHR or FTP based zones. The software I use retests to check zones every month. Of course one uploads one's rides and the software then generates a series of graphical reports showing anything you want graphed against anything you want. Now it would have to include the Performance Manager from TP or an analogue.

The developer must know more about how to prescribe periodized training that the user. Obviously, if they don't, it's crap.
This is not about my software. I just used my channel to upload the video. It's not even a listed video.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 07:36 AM
  #38  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Nearly everything works to a certain extent up to a certain point. A point which most recreational cyclists and amateur racers never reach.

Your body adapts to new stimuli. If the stimuli stays the same, the body stops adapting. However, if you increase training load via intensity or duration, then the body will continue to adapt for years (8-10 years according to some coaches).

Workouts can increase the length of the repeat, the total number of repeats, or the intensity of the repeats. There's a whole lot you can do within those three parameters and those programs (developed by elite sports physiologists and athletes) do a lot of manipulation.

Any of those "canned, generic" plans (Friel's stuff, Zwift plans, trainerroad plans) can work because they require periodic testing in order to increase the intensity. As long as someone is putting in the work, then the plan works. Case closed.
This is a constructive post, despite the "case closed".

Nearly everything except generic plans works to a certain extent up to a certain point. A point which most recreational cyclists and amateur racers never reach.

or

Nearly everything works for most people to a certain extent up to a certain point. A point which most recreational cyclists and amateur racers never reach.


One of these modified statements should be a sticky in this forum.

Generic plans do not work at all for many athletes due to things like tolerable ramp rates, recovery rates, schedule, vacations, illness, injury, power profiles, etc. etc. etc.

With technical support, some of these issues like interruptions can be partially worked around by, for example, telling athletes were in the plan to resume based on duration of the gap in training, etc.

But instead of understanding how to workaround a flawed system, I'd recommend athletes learn something from every question they ask instead of just being told what to do. For example, the reason you can pickup where you left off with aerobic endurance training after longer than you can with shorter power conditioning is because short power has a shorter shelf life. This way the athlete accumulates knowledge, understanding and experience instead of simply becoming a software disciple.

There's also no practical way to work around issues with ramp rates or recovery because (for obvious reasons) the systems aren't setup to support monitoring and adjustment.

Issues with failed workouts are even more of a problem with generic plans and for numerous reasons. One reason is uninformed athletes are unable to diagnose the cause of the problem whether it be recovery, power profile, etc.

Another reason is that there is no practical way to adjust workouts both because the software doesn't support it, because the workouts are too complex to understand, because following a plan usually means moving on to the next workout which can hopefully be completed, etc. etc.

This is just two reasons. I could go on forever about this.

Other the other hand, interval repeat workouts are much easier to understand, diagnose and adjust.

The two most common reasons you would fail to complete a workout are that it was too hard or you were not adequately recovered.

And if you were not adequately recovered then that is because the previous workout was too hard, insufficient recovery time was allotted between workouts, and/or cumulative fatigue due to inadequate frequency/composition of recovery weeks, etc. etc.

These are just examples of simple things athletes can learn if they wean themselves from the TR nanny state.

Incidentally, there are some really awesome things you can do in manual ERG mode if you run into problems like split the second interval of a 2 x 20 workout into a 2 x 10 as Hunter Allen recommends.

And you can also do things like add or extend intervals when you remember at the last minute tomorrow's business trip resulting in a week of forced recovery.

There's so much awesomeness athletes are missing out on by being ignorant.

There is a very low bar to exceed for athletes to self-coach and reap enormous benefits from understanding, personalization, monitoring and adjustments ; even if it takes years to understand yourself because this is all gravy because generic plans don't offer this.

All the while, they can be building a true training log that is based on adjustments they've made and can refer back to for analysis and all the while accumulating deep experience about themselves.

I could go on but my daughter keeps distracting me with the moth she caught haha
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 09:26 AM
  #39  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 2,667

Bikes: Felt AR

Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
This is almost comical.

Your entire premise seems to be that people are complete idiots and don't give a single thought to their training. And not only that, but they mindlessly complete workouts for months or years at a time with zero reflection or consideration of anything.

Indeed, you've repeatedly called people ignorant, clueless, lazy, and manipulated.

And now this post continues the maelstrom of inaccuracies and grossly generalized assertions that are simply ridiculous and appear to have little thought behind them. That you'd even throw out a decade-old workout like a 2x20 as an example of your cutting-edge cognition shows the lack of deeper understanding very clearly.

You could go on, but it'd be pretty silly.
rubiksoval is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 09:33 AM
  #40  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 2,667

Bikes: Felt AR

Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
This is a constructive post, despite the "case closed".

Nearly everything except generic plans works to a certain extent up to a certain point. A point which most recreational cyclists and amateur racers never reach.

or

Nearly everything works for most people to a certain extent up to a certain point. A point which most recreational cyclists and amateur racers never reach.


One of these modified statements should be a sticky in this forum.
No, because that's b.s. You really have a penchant for cutting and pasting other people's stuff, huh?

Nearly everything meant nearly everything, while leaving room for something inane like riding 500 miles a week for weeks on end, or riding at one pace for weeks on end, or trying to do hard rides every time you hit the road.

THAT's what my statements meant. Generic plans fit very well within that, as evidenced by the THOUSANDS of people that have used them to improve, not just in cycling, but in running as well.

So please stop bastardizing my words with stuff that makes no sense.
rubiksoval is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 10:07 AM
  #41  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Generic plans using interval repeats fit very well within that, as evidenced by the THOUSANDS of people that have used them to improve, not just in cycling, but in running as well.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 10:33 AM
  #42  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 2,667

Bikes: Felt AR

Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1546 Post(s)
Have you used generic plans that don't incorporate intensity?

Is that the cause of all of your confusion?

Of course, that doesn't make sense, seeing as how trainerroad and all of the other software programs you're railing against incorporate intensity...

Hmm. Sounds like you don't know what to think about any of this!

I think the case is well and truly closed now. Glad we got to the bottom of it all.
rubiksoval is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 03:32 PM
  #43  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Advantages of interval repeats over complex workouts targeting multiple zones:

_
Advantages of interval repeats over complex workouts targeting multiple zones:
_
  • Clear workout goal = Time at intensity
  • Workout intensity is clear
  • Time at intensity is clear
  • Less variation = More scientific
  • Progression method and amount is clear
  • Adjustment method and amount is clear
  • Easy for people to help you
  • Easy to put it all together
    • Weekly time at intensity
    • Rate of progression
    • Phase = Priority = Time at intensity
  • Leverage reliable relationship between fixed power, effort and heart rate under controlled conditions indoors
  • Plans including complex workouts targeting multiple zones can easily be converted to interval repeats
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 06:54 PM
  #44  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Got a castle in - er, Minneapolis, that's where I dwell!
Posts: 24,068

Bikes: 2016 Diamondback Haanjo, 2018 Trek Domane SL5 Gravel

Mentioned: 277 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8319 Post(s)
I'm confused, too. Is this a poorly executed attempt to tell people to stop suckling at the teat of subscription-based training programs and to buy some **** that he's selling, instead?
WhyFi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 07:15 PM
  #45  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,649
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 836 Post(s)
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
I'm confused, too. Is this a poorly executed attempt to tell people to stop suckling at the teat of subscription-based training programs and to buy some **** that he's selling, instead?
I think he just likes very simple training plans. Some of his past posts summarize his personal training which generally consists of riding at a fixed power output for the duration of the session. His methodology appears to be low to moderate intensity and low volume with lots of rest. He believes that training sessions targeting multiple systems are somehow suboptimal. It's not clear what, if anything, he's training for.

I think he'll need to keep his day job....
gregf83 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-18, 07:16 PM
  #46  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 14,585

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 80 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1608 Post(s)
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
I'm confused, too. Is this a poorly executed attempt to tell people to stop suckling at the teat of subscription-based training programs and to buy some **** that he's selling, instead?
I think we're all confused because he's preaching a partial gospel to the temple choir and we can't figure out why he would do that.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-18, 06:56 AM
  #47  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by WhyFi View Post
I'm confused, too. Is this a poorly executed attempt to tell people to stop suckling at the teat of subscription-based training programs and to buy some **** that he's selling, instead?
There's nothing to buy. That's the point. You don't need anything other than the software that comes with your trainer for perform interval repeats. Save your money or use it to buy a better trainer than you otherwise would.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-18, 07:11 AM
  #48  
WhyFi
Senior Member
 
WhyFi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Got a castle in - er, Minneapolis, that's where I dwell!
Posts: 24,068

Bikes: 2016 Diamondback Haanjo, 2018 Trek Domane SL5 Gravel

Mentioned: 277 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8319 Post(s)
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
There's nothing to buy. That's the point. You don't need anything other than the software that comes with your trainer for perform interval repeats. Save your money or use it to buy a better trainer than you otherwise would.
My trainer didn't come with any software and I don't even see a USB port. Now what?
WhyFi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-18, 07:12 AM
  #49  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
I think we're all confused because he's preaching a partial gospel to the temple choir and we can't figure out why he would do that.
I'm not trying to teach people who already understand training. I'm encouraging new cyclists to understand and proactively manage their indoor training and believe interval repeats are the most accessible way to do that.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-18, 07:25 AM
  #50  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
I think he just likes very simple training plans. Some of his past posts summarize his personal training which generally consists of riding at a fixed power output for the duration of the session. His methodology appears to be low to moderate intensity and low volume with lots of rest. He believes that training sessions targeting multiple systems are somehow suboptimal. It's not clear what, if anything, he's training for.

I think he'll need to keep his day job....
Targeting multiple systems in a single workout is inferior if done arbitrarily. If you know what you're doing and customize them then fine. For generic plans they are terrible. For new cyclists, interval repeats are better because they are accessible.
fstrnu is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service