I have taken the liberty of bolding the key word here. These are workouts, not noodling around that some like to suggest “endurance” training is.
I just go by perceived exertion.
2 Likes
PPP: if it feels hard, it is hard.
…did I do it right?
1 Like
My problem is that I’m late to cycling, in my late 60’s and retired, so to all practical purposes have unlimited time to ride my bike and I’m still trying to figure it all out so I can get fitter and better without feeling knackered all the time whilst still enjoying the long group rides with my friends. I’m also definitely not built as a cyclist!
I find your contributions on here incredibly useful but still confusing sometimes.
It may or may not be tangential, but when 90 minutes at 70% of ftp feels hard (generally ‘a slog’) that is, for me, a 100% reliable indicator that I need a rest week.
1 Like
In ERG mode Normalized Power is approximately equal to average power, therefore to get an IF of 0.75-0.85 for a “moderate intensity filler workout” the power target needs would need to be set at 75-85% FTP?
1 Like
Your math is correct.
How long of a training session at approx 85% FTP (indoor erg mode) would you still consider to be “endurance” work? And thank you for being so generous with your knowledge.
1 Like
I’m not really sure that I understand your question.
But, in my own case I would do 1 h at that intensity as a “moderate intensity filler workout” between more strenuous sessions, or up to 2 h if the weather prevented me from getting outdoors on a Saturday or Sunday.
1 Like
Thank you. I think I understand you to be saying that 85% of FTP may be an appropriate indoor (erg type) endurance zone workout for a time period up to around 2 hours.
I think the point here is you shouldn’t be targeting any particular zone for endurance rides. You should ride as hard and as steady as you can for a given duration provided that its not leaving you fatigued for your next interval workout.
Ok. The whole thing is a matter of context. So for you, there are “filler workouts”. Many of us don’t do that!. I don’t do 1 hour of endurance, unless is a recovery ride.
Give it a try and see if you feel it impacts your hard workouts. If not, then you’re good. For me, personally, that would be way too much intensity and reduce my ability to perform well on the following high intensity workout. As @mcneese.chad mentioned above, we’re all individuals, and what works for Cog or what works for me may or may not work for you.
4 Likes
I’ve read through all this a few times. And googled around a bit to try to find more info. Sort of boggling my mind a bit.
So by cumulative you mean day over day 24 hour periods? There are no durations listed that I can see either of the ‘moderate’ rides or the time span between sessions.
What is the relation of IF to duration? It seems like there isn’t one. You do mention a 5hr ride in the same comment. I’m assuming this is tss related.
So by example I know I can do a 3 hour session at ~72% of ftp and be ‘recovered’ for the most part within a 24 hour span. There is no ‘cumulative’ fatigue. Is that because the tss is <= 150?
So if I’m reading what you wrote correctly, You say there is no adaptation here. Because it’s less than an IF of .75 and at a duration/stress <= 3hrs (and therefore <=150tss).
It does feel a bit like the definition of ‘an endurance trained athlete’ is a person capable of doing back to back 3 hour rides at sub 75% of FTP, effectively, in perpetuity.
Anyway, I really appreciate your participation in these threads. I know it would tire me out if I were you. haha. 
100xy^2 (if you know, you know)
Ok, so assume I have 10h to ride a week - I’m a somewhat serious amateur. Make my (“real”) FTP 300w to make math easy. I do a 3h ride as my “long” ride once a week on the trainer in the weekend. I do two “hard” high intensity workouts a week, each 1-1.5h in duration. That leaves me with 4-5h a week to squeeze into 3 weekday evening rides and leave me with one rest day a week.
You’re saying you would split these remaining hours up into time spent riding around 0.8 (240w). So a typical week for this athlete in your mind would look something like:
M: rest
T: 1.5h hard (4x8min Vo2 or something IDK)
W: 1.5h @ 240w
T: 1.5h @ 240w
F: 1h @ 255w (0.85)
S: 1.5h hard
S: 3h endurance by RPE.
I don’t think he is saying specifically to ride at .75-.85 for those shorter filler rides, rather if you are able to ride at that intensity without sacrificing your interval days, you should. For some people the max sustainable intensity for those shorter rides might be lower.
2 Likes
There is. I have read it in the past. Can’t remember where, if I remember and find it I’ll link it.
That’s what I’m trying to clarify, because the comment pretty explicitly says that if the fatigue from doing all these “filler” rides at ~0.8 is causing them problems, then their FTP is too high or they’re not eating enough carbs.
Which is interesting to me as that’s somewhat different than both personal/being coached experience and opinions I’ve heard elsewhere. So I wanna make sure I’ve understood what he’s trying to express before reflecting on it too much.
1 Like
IF is NP/FTP. If your goal is to gain fitness or sustain through endurance workouts, then You’ll need to ride at a relatively high IF.
What he is saying, I believe, is that you’re not going to be building fitness riding 0.6 IF day or over day for an hour or two bc the stimulus is too low. However, if you did a high quality interval session one day and spin 0.6 IF a day or two after, that makes sense, but those days are allowing you to recover, tho some ‘define’ that intensity as ‘endurance’.
If you ride 0.6 for 5h, that’s enough stimulus to gain fitness because it’s a really long ride.
You just basically need big stimulus to keep pushing up your fitness level. Big stimulus is a relative term to the individual, but if you consider an hour or two at 0.6-0.65 to be a big stimulus, most endurance athletes wouldn’t consider you to be very well trained in the first place
6 Likes
A key comment above
I think a lot of us want to take what he says and apply it to our training plan, or compare it to our real world experience, and that often results in a mismatch
1 Like