From CTS blog:
Using that scale I’d put many of my lt1 rides in the 5-6 rpe range.
Source:
2 Likes
Right between 5 and 6 sounds like ISM’s zone 2.
1 Like
Or what happens when I follow Coach Isaiah’s zone2 power (range) target 
1 Like
Lydiard’s “best aerobic pace” 
Yep. I said it and now everyone hates me. I’ll go away now…voluntarily LOL
To be fair, I have also heard Jim Miller and KM mention it. Not sure how Miller prescribes it. KM on a few occasions has said something to the effect: “if I just send someone out on an endurance ride by RPE they often just find this pace/power”.
To me this has always been intriguing because when i first started a number of coaches (not Miller or KM) made it a point to say in seminars: I don’t like to have my riders reach for top of Zone 2 (Cusick, for example).
Well, I didn’t start the season at the top of zone2 power. Sorry I never read or followed anything Lydiard, know the name but nothing else. KM says ride to RPE. The adaptations here are driven by relatively low intensity muscle and heart contractions. Pushing power out over time, in my mind, is in response to the anticipated gains (lactate curve moving down and to the right). There is also a performance angle IMHO.
Yeah, I understand. No real reason to read Lydiard necessarily unless you’re interested in history. Any contemporary coach has already incorporated much of his philosophy into their practice, whether they know it or not.
I think I was being too subtle with my humor. “lydiard best aerobic pace” is just a slightly snide way of old_but_not saying “this stuff is nothing new”. “I’ve seen it all before”. Or the more common refrain (common on running forums): “but Lydiard already figured this out…no science needed”. Or we cyclists: “I didn’t get it from ISM, I got it from insert other cool guy”. We’re all learning the same stuff at different times.
Of all the coaches that could be used as a guidepost about feel and RPE, I reckon he’s the guy. He even prescribed some sweetspot training (3/4 effort). 
And no one can say for certain that "Lydiard best aerobic pace** was aerobic threshold, or that AeT is even a thing.
My point is we can and should revisit and challenge ideas. A bunch of smart coaches saying stay away from training this way; another set making it central to their model. And then I always want to know why. What is it that both of you are getting right, but calling the other way wrong? Because I want to do that.
4 Likes
I think that every zone or intensity has his place. You have to look for the right adaptations for your goals. Not?
About Z2 and riding upper zone or not or more @LT1… Personally…When I do a 4hr ride I ride at 65%. Why should I go harder? Extra fatigue for the same gains? I try to add volume in my weeks with 2 more intensive rides. So for me I just stay at that range.
If I had less time I would ride at 70-75%.
I track this with TSS weekly. But would always try to Bé good at my intensive rides (FTP or SST) and build my endurance around that with as many hours at Z2 I can.
But maybe I should focus also at long rides at LT1 or tempo because my goal this year is a very long Gran Fondo with 4 major climbs (5hr climbing Total). So my fat burning endurance kind of tempo sweet spot strength should be as best as possible 
They don’t have to be mutally exclusive of course Why not add 2x30m top z2 efforts into a weekly longer ride? See what happens with fatigue over time or if you see any benefits?
FWIW, the coach that wrote my plan (doesn’t actually coach me but wrote a bespoke plan for LBL and a 200+ mile GF) is a uber experienced and successful ultra athlete of many years. He puts regular ‘top of z2’ endurance rides in my plan.
1 Like
@Bigpikle, that seems a good point. But my idea was when doing 14-15 hours a week, one longer Z2 ride of 4-5hours normal Z2. and the shorter Z2 rides more upper Z2 or fatmax zone.
Ask your coach if it is not better to do 2x30m SST or tempo is better in such a ride?
FWIW, my best legs ever was in a LBL ride (without structured training before, just coming back from 6 days mallorca). 277km at 28/u. For me as not a real climber profile, was awesome. I felt like VDB on the last climb on Saint-Nicolas
M312?
1 Like
I didnt have any SST in my plan at all - big block of z2 and z3 tempo base Nov to Feb, and then switched to threshold and vo2 work to Apr. Thats not to say he isn’t a fan of SST but when he explained it his approach was to give me a plan that included a lot of work I hadn’t done before - I did a very heavy SST focused winter in 2020/21 and the upper end work is something I tend to wuss out on 
SST comes easy to me…
My plan ends at LBL end of April and I plan to switch to a outdoor high volume approach with 1 structured interval day per week and 15-20hrs of ‘stuff’ that will include a lot of z2 and more z3 again. I should get another 6-7 weeks of that as final prep. I’ll retire end April so time is not an issue and we have 2 weeks in the Dordogne planned in May with beautiful roads and lovely 5-30 min climbs all over the place
The 205 miler is Chase the Sun North in the UK, from Whitley Bay to Ayr. 3000m climbing on the way so its going to be a big day out for sure! Got me scared to death! If this goes well then I fancy M312 as I’ve had a hankering for a few years. I did get a group of mates together to attempt an informal run at the original circumference route but then C19…
LBL sounds fantastic and the experience on those climbs will no doubt be epic. Hopefully the legs will be there for me!
2 Likes
Yeah, you really will enjoy Le Stockeu, La Redoute and the Roche aux Faucons 
. After 200km in the legs, those gonna hurt ;-). But that is why we do it, not?
2 Likes
We do it because we were drunk when we pressed ‘enter’, very much like eBay …
4 Likes
Outside magazine has a blurb on the Moxy sensor and some comments on how the Norwegian Triathlon team and others are using the technology. It’s fun stuff.
1 Like
These rides are the exact examples in the new book by Phil Skiba. 3-5 hour ride with a 2x20, 3x20, working up to a 4x30 tempo in the middle of the ride. Depending on the training phase, it will switch to threshold* instead of tempo. *One could call it sweet spot as well.
1 Like
The plot thickens. 
.
2 Likes
I tell you. We are being mined for content. First Coggan and now TTS.
He also mentioned the controversy about it not existing.
Assuming it exists, what is the benefit of riding under (where lactate is still at baseline) versus riding right over where lactate has risen (but is steadily being utilized as a fuel)?
2 Likes
If you’ve struggled to find a method via respiration (be it breath count or “perceived changes” in breathing) to find AeT/LT1/LT (lower) magic, Mark Burnley has good (and bad) news for you.
You’re not alone. Many simply cannot detect it.
Around 14:48.
2 Likes
I’m not alone 
But: One should train below or above LT1 but not at LT1? Sounds a little bit silly but I guess there is some nuance to it. And as a ISM disciple I don’t care anyway.
2 Likes
Sounded very much like the quasi-threshold that FTP is.
1 Like
Exactly. And this is the crux of the argument about there “not being LT-whatevers” because the curve is smooth and continuous. There are quasi-steady states (yes, that’s an actual term it refers to the fact that physiologically there can never be a true steady state…why? fatigue…or eventually…sleep…or death). Just pick a point on the curve below CP (which is higher than FTP), and voila, that’s a steady state that has a finite duration.
The only special characteristic about LT1 is a deviation from baseline, whether that is an inflection point that is visual or just an “Ed Coyle” quantitative definition. Science barely agrees on this and the internet most definitely never will LOL.
Moreover, there is not a clear line of demarcation between “I can hold this for long long time and oh my I’m about to pop”. It’s fuzzy. It’s human.
The reason guys like Burnley acknowledge the existence of LT1 is, as he states, “well, you have to get from baseline to NOT baseline”. It can occur suddenly (as in the classic lactate curve in textbooks, an inflection point), gradually (curves of untrained athletes), or something in between. When I participated in an online coaching forum where ppl posted a bunch of lactate curves, the “something in between” was overwhelmingly the most common.
CP is genius (as is FTP) because it eliminates the practice of having to use lactate to determine some medium-to-high intensity demarcation. Because LT2 (whatever that might be for you) is not different than LT2 +/- .5mmol, +/- 1mmol, +/- whatever. It’s up there on the curve, and physiologically the same stuff is happening…until it isn’t. The “until it isn’t” part cannot be determined using lactate.
Why is FTP also genius (even though there may not be anything physiological happening there)? Because it’s close enough. And it’s easy in the field.
Love that he acknowledged the debate (“I would be remiss…”) around LT1 but actually took a side. Good. That’s what you’re supposed to do. Not this “science via reality show twitter” crap, where the audience takes a side like a football game or Real Housewives dinner argument.
5 Likes