Ok. Fair enough (not being sarcastic).
No worries. It’s an arbitrary and obscure distinction on my part. It’s just easier than trying to explain in detail the actual “lay of the land” in the field.
Thanks. That is the context I needed.
I have to admit that my eyes glaze over with ISM. He seems to shroud the simplest things in mystery. 2mmol - need a lactate meter to ride his “zone 2”. Talk test - easy enough to understand but depending on how I interpret the talk test, there can be a 30+ watt variance. Is it classic Z2, tempo or sweet spot? I just use my zones from WKO5.
@The_Cog Hey, I really enjoyed the double episode podcast you did with Kolie Moore. You guys covered a lot!
Thanks. I turn down most such requests, but accept some occasionally. The last one I did was back in March for my mate Glenn McConell’s podcast, Inside Exercise.
I am often doing 60-90 min zone 2 after intervals (e.g. 90-120 min SS workout) if I have time. If I do a pure zone 2 on the trainer I have lately done that at 68%, but when doing it after an interval session I will have to reduce the power target a bit to not enter HR zone 3. Not sure if this is due to lactate buildup, increased body core temperature or changes in the blood after a long workout. But I guess this indicates that it is better to do the zone 2 before the intervals.
None of the above. Just fatigue.
Entering Zone 3 is not something to be avoided (see up-thread). If you don’t want to ride Zone 3 because you don’t want to introduce additional fatigue, that is different. But don’t avoid it because of any of the reasons you are stating. They are not a thing.
If that is your preference, nothing wrong with that. But what we are establishing here (or has been established and we’re sharing it with each other) is that there is really nothing to back up whether doing intervals are “better” at the beginning, middle, or end.