Use outside testing to get outside workout numbers and inside to get inside numbers.
At least once and then use that diff to make future calculations (but if you can try to always do both tests)…
1 Like
True. Not to defend AC though, but what do these guys think twitter is? They’re really going to try to conduct scientific discourse on an advertising and personal promotion platform? What’s next? Handing out flyers before the show? “INSCYD testing, bro! All your numbers. Come on down to the gym tomorrow”.
AC followers love to exclaim: “see, this openness is how science should be”. No, no it shouldn’t. Alan is advertising. And if you’re advertising and/or self-promoting, ain’t no time for haters y’all. Lol 
A little bit like coaches posting advice on Internet forums. I mean, it’s cool. Ppl might learn something. But don’t forget for a second that you are a sales lead.
10 Likes
FIFY
7 Likes
Couzens is the only guy I follow that seems to block people left and right. Maybe I should block him? 
1 Like
Good point. I think this cuts to the heart of my mild frustration with this (as well as much of the way we interact on forums like this). Coaching and science get conflated. Our gracious hosts are very guilty of this. But can’t blame them. Ppl demanding “where’s the science” about an interval prescription. Meanwhile a coach is like: “how about the dozens of riders who got fast doing this in my decades of experience? Science enough, for you? Sorry I don’t use your meaning of threshold or that mine is wrong”. Responses like that don’t sit well publicly, especially when they are laced with profanity like almost every coach I’ve had. LOL. But privately, I’ve heard that from SO MANY of them.
As for other fields, makes sense. They’re not having to “broadcast to the masses”, as it were. Followers are likely family, friends, and folks educated in your field.
1 Like
I can’t judge KM general behaviour, I only saw this one tweet which got him blocked. And this was not abrasive or whatsover.
I don’t care about AC blocking folks. His twitter account. I just find it worrying how truth is generated these days. And how certain people are celebrated as experts, not because they are true experts but because they know how to play the social media game. And Seiler falls into this category for me.
On the other hand, I’m stealing this from Steve Magness now, what if Igloi had written dozens of books and not Lydiard? We could have a very different training system now.
4 Likes
There is a worrying trend in the USA, and perhaps beyond, where opposing viewpoints are positioned as bad/evil and must be silenced. You aren’t missing anything if you stop following Couzens, I follow him to get a laugh or two at his transparent sales lead generation tactics.
1 Like
Maybe start another thread on epistemology of exercise science or some other “worries”. Let’s keep this thread clean. We don’t need to embed twitter bs dynamics in these forums.
Calculating LT1 and LT2 approximately without a blood test?
Without doing a lactate test I believe it comes back to what I posted earlier:
- HRV DFa1 may or may not identify LT1
- Aerobic Decoupling may or may not identify LT1
- Border of Coggan’s Power Zone2/Zone3 may or may not identify LT1
- Talk test may or may not identify LT1
- Gas exchange testing may or may not identify LT1
- INSCYD or other power based tests that map you onto lactate curves, may or may not identify LT1
Did I leave out any estimation method?
3 Likes
I smell a new thread.
1 Like
Respiration Rate?
I know when I’m below it and I know when I’m above it, just have no idea when I’m at it.
1 Like
How do you measure respiration rate? Using Garmin’s estimate? Or going into the lab for a gas exchange test?
Guess I could also add “all-day riding HR without waking up overly fatigued” as I’ve used that for general guidance (mine happens to be around upper Z2 power).
1 Like
Here is an alternative to Garmin estimates that I have seen pop up on various social media channels with claims to getting “lab accurate thresholds”
1 Like
One of these perhaps - another must have gadget. How It Works – Tyme Wear™
Just looking up that Hungarian chap. I’d never heard of him until today.
Beaten to it
2 Likes
And I guess to add to this, there seems to be more diversity of opinions than I thought regarding what LT1 actually is, let alone how to measure it.
I guess the same thing can be said for LT2 - if there isn’t even agreement on what it is, how will there be agreement/consensus on how to measure it?
1 Like
To go with your topic, this might not apply specifically to LT1
Best excercise physiology YT channel:
5 Likes
From the video:
bloody classic plot
I remember this video! Great graph. I too enjoy that YT channel. I definitely settled down with all the “threshold angst” after watching this (especially the part “up to and including OBLA 2.0”).
He forgot lactate balance point. #kidding
1 Like
I’m pretty practical, and believe that simple field testing, with a little trial & error, has been sufficient to roughly determine the lower boundary.
For example right now its easy to recovery from an end of week long (for me) 3-5 hour steady state ride at upper z2 hr (Friel zones) at around .74 IF (~200W). And go out two days later on Monday and do my hardest workout which is usually wrapped into 90-120 minutes. And still have quality z2 and higher intensity workouts to round out that Mon-Wed block. So 4-6 hours on the Mon-Wed block. And then another quality 4-6 hours of work on Fri-Sat.
A few days ago on Saturday, completed an easy century that ended up at .66 IF. An easy century was the plan - to hang with the fast group at tempo for the first couple of hours and then when the road tilts up to drop off (LOL that’s my fate on every climb with that group), and keep riding at endurance. My coach commented on it last night, and noted the 4th hour was my strongest at .7 IF but with some variability, and when there is variability my HR is usually lower. On the 4th hour it was lower z2-HR, versus upper z2-HR I see on steady eddy solo efforts. No real fatigue after Saturday, did a Monday recovery ride and yesterday did some threshold-ish intervals and was hammering upper z2 power before and after the intervals. Felt easy and left something on the road. In my mind it was another confirmation of targeting .7 to .79 IF for endurance work is sustainable and recoverable.
Looking at my one double century from 5 years ago, it was something like .66 IF and lower z2. So similar to that 4th hour on Saturday.
Pragmatically speaking, with a little discipline and ride reviews I think it is straightforward to find a practical border between intensity domains with basic field testing.
I don’t know how to add it to that list above, however that’s what I’ve found to work well in practice.
1 Like
I think anybody that has spend some time riding bikes can find this “balance point”. However, it doesn’t mean it’s not fun to talk about potential approaches that might offer a repeatable, objective measurement.
2 Likes