# Heart rate training question



## mldebono (Dec 18, 2005)

Background: I have been riding casually for the past 20 years. I became more serious in the past two years. I finish in the pack at Cat 4 crits, I will place in the Sport category in mountain in bike races, and at timed centuries I find myself in the top 20 percent. This year I wanted to get serious about training som have been reading the Cyclist's Training Bible and have a question. During the base building phase where you ride in Zones 1 - 3 (according to the training bible) I am going so slow it is painful. I did a relatively flat three and a half hour ride yesterday and averaged under 14 mph in order to stay in zones 1/2. I was not at all tired at the end. The only thing I noticed was at the beginning if I had to stop for a traffic light my pulse would drop from 130 to under 100 in a matter of seconds. After two hours it would drop to 115 to 120. After three hours it would take longer to show any drop. 

I want to make sure I am not wasting my time. I easily could have ridden another three hours at this pace. I wasn't even hungry and drank only water the entire time. 

I am 41 years old, my LTHR is 163 doing the 30 minute test. 

Also - is it possible that my LTHR rises over time? If so then I guess I know one answer. 

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

mldebono said:


> Background: I have been riding casually for the past 20 years. I became more serious in the past two years. I finish in the pack at Cat 4 crits, I will place in the Sport category in mountain in bike races, and at timed centuries I find myself in the top 20 percent. This year I wanted to get serious about training som have been reading the Cyclist's Training Bible and have a question. During the base building phase where you ride in Zones 1 - 3 (according to the training bible) I am going so slow it is painful. I did a relatively flat three and a half hour ride yesterday and averaged under 14 mph in order to stay in zones 1/2. I was not at all tired at the end. The only thing I noticed was at the beginning if I had to stop for a traffic light my pulse would drop from 130 to under 100 in a matter of seconds. After two hours it would drop to 115 to 120. After three hours it would take longer to show any drop.
> 
> I want to make sure I am not wasting my time. I easily could have ridden another three hours at this pace. I wasn't even hungry and drank only water the entire time.
> 
> ...


Have you looked at Joe Friel's discussion of aerobic decoupling as a measure of aerobic fitness. Not sure how it applies to recovery HR but it might I guess.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

I suspect you could be making better use of the 3 hours (or achieve more in less time) but it's a matter of context and how it fits in with the rest of your training.


----------



## ESTrainSmartBlog (Feb 25, 2013)

You're not wasting your time. The lower zones work the aerobic system, so it should feel very easy. The point of working at such a low intensity is to stimulate your body to undergo mitochondial biogenesis. By creating more mitochondria, you effectively increase your VO2 max which would be extremely beneficial in long distances. It really depends on what you want to be best at. Cat4 crits will require more from the anaerobic system, but centuries will require more aerobic system performance. If you want to tackle both disciplines, be sure to periodize your training program to include both training methodologies as it relates to your goals.


----------



## new2rd (Aug 8, 2010)

I've heard about building mitochondria quite a bit, isn't this a win-win regardless of what your goals are? Once this happens, does the mitochondria stay or can you go back to the starting point?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

new2rd said:


> I've heard about building mitochondria quite a bit, isn't this a win-win regardless of what your goals are? Once this happens, does the mitochondria stay or can you go back to the starting point?


Detraining (or what we call reversibility) is very real.

Use it or lose it.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

ESTrainSmartBlog said:


> The point of working at such a low intensity is to stimulate your body to undergo mitochondial biogenesis.


The stimulus however is far greater when riding includes good doses of effort at and near threshold power (40km TT power) levels.


----------



## ESTrainSmartBlog (Feb 25, 2013)

This isn't a win-win situation because it primarily affects the aerobic system. In races where the anaerobic system is dominantly used (criteriums, track racing, etc.), a program that focuses primarily on VO2 won't be ideal for optimal performance.

The mitochondria will not stay if you don't implement a maintenance program to keep it. All you have to do is cut training volume by about 1/3 without changing intensity. If you'd rather not calculate your training volume, most people can maintain these aerobic adaptations by exercising at least three days a week for 30 minutes at a high intensity.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

ESTrainSmartBlog said:


> This isn't a win-win situation because it primarily affects the aerobic system. In races where the anaerobic system is dominantly used (criteriums, track racing, etc.), a program that focuses primarily on VO2 won't be ideal for optimal performance.


The vast majority of cycling events are dominantly aerobic in nature, including criteriums, track races such as pursuit, team pursuit, scratch, points and so on. Even a track 1km TT has roughly half the energy demand supplied by aerobic glycolosis.


----------



## ESTrainSmartBlog (Feb 25, 2013)

The point I'm trying to make is that an exercise program needs to be periodized depending on the type of racing the athlete will encounter. Focusing only on one energy system will lead to a plateau. Races lasting durations close to VO2 drift or ones that don't require significant refueling are considered short. Even 60 minute criteriums can be won without refueling, especially if the cyclist carbohydrate loaded during the tapering phase before the event.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

ESTrainSmartBlog said:


> The point I'm trying to make is that an exercise program needs to be periodized depending on the type of racing the athlete will encounter. Focusing only on one energy system will lead to a plateau. Races lasting durations close to VO2 drift or ones that don't require significant refueling are considered short. Even 60 minute criteriums can be won without refueling, especially if the cyclist carbohydrate loaded during the tapering phase before the event.


Sure, but what's refuelling have to do with the question on detraining and what events are dominantly anaerobic? The only thing one chews during a crit / kermesse is their stem.

As for plateauing - well one can work on lifting threshold power for a long time without plateau. But it requires an appropriate change in workload to continue to provide such stimulus.

I get the feeling you are throwing out a bunch of random info snippets which may or may not have much to do with the questions raised.

Now the OP might not be wasting their time riding so easily, but like I originally said, I suspect they could make better use of their training time.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> The stimulus however is far greater when riding includes good doses of effort at and near threshold power (40km TT power) levels.


Aereobic fitness? Are you referring to sweet spot training / LT intervals / Tempo pace?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Srode said:


> Aereobic fitness? Are you referring to sweet spot training / LT intervals / Tempo pace?


Any and all of the above. 

Training at most levels above recovery has a positive influence on development of our aerobic infrastructure (it's all a continuum), and there is of course a trade off to be made between intensity and duration, but in bang for training buck terms, these are the efforts and effort levels that should be regular part of one's training diet if you are seeking to improve aerobic fitness.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

Thanks for the response Alex. So why the emphasis on Z2 Base by many trainers - 1000 miles or 2 months etc during the Winter months prior to building? Not worthwhile or servers another purpose perhaps? Just now moving into a more building mode with intervals and time in Z3 and Z4, after 1200 miles in Z2 in a month or so - was that not as productive as it could have been compared to higher intensity?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Srode said:


> Thanks for the response Alex. So why the emphasis on Z2 Base by many trainers - 1000 miles or 2 months etc during the Winter months prior to building?


You'd have to ask them.



Srode said:


> Not worthwhile or servers another purpose perhaps? Just now moving into a more building mode with intervals and time in Z3 and Z4, after 1200 miles in Z2 in a month or so - was that not as productive as it could have been compared to higher intensity?


One simply can't give any more than general answers to such questions, as each individual's needs and circumstances can be quite different.

Some people simply can't do the same training volume, don't have the time.

Some are starting from a long layoff from the bike, and so a few weeks of general lower intensity level riding is a good idea, allow body to adapt to the bike again.

Some are forced to train indoors most of the time in winter, and are not well suited to doing longer rides.

Some need greater volume than others. Some enjoy it more and their goals are modest, so it's not big deal.

Some are getting enough Level 3/4 anyway, especially if they are riding any hills. Pretty hard not to do Level 3/4 work on hills.

Some need to loose weight, and doing more longer rides at lower intensity tend to enable one to burn more calories overall, although if you also train to increase threshold power, then one can do longer rides at higher absolute power (and metabolic rate).

But, _in general and IMO,_ anything up to Level 4 _is _base training.


----------



## ESTrainSmartBlog (Feb 25, 2013)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Sure, but what's refuelling have to do with the question on detraining and what events are dominantly anaerobic? The only thing one chews during a crit / kermesse is their stem.
> 
> As for plateauing - well one can work on lifting threshold power for a long time without plateau. But it requires an appropriate change in workload to continue to provide such stimulus.
> 
> ...


Sorry if that wasn't the best example, but everything I've said had a purpose. I mentioned fueling to emphasize the fact that his program will incorporate the extremes of endurance training- short duration/ high intensity (criteriums) and long duration/ low intensity (centuries). 

He will have training phases where this "painfully slow" approach is best and phases where high intensity is more appropriate.

I just wanted to let him know that the painfully slow approach isn't a waste of time, especially if he wants to excel in centuries. A lot of marathoners and ultramarathoners have the urge to push until they feel like they "worked", but the extra intensity won't make a meaningful improvement and it will only make recovery more time consuming. Hope this is better.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

ESTrainSmartBlog said:


> Sorry if that wasn't the best example, but everything I've said had a purpose. I mentioned fueling to emphasize the fact that his program will incorporate the extremes of endurance training- short duration/ high intensity (criteriums) and long duration/ low intensity (centuries).
> 
> He will have training phases where this "painfully slow" approach is best and phases where high intensity is more appropriate.
> 
> I just wanted to let him know that the painfully slow approach isn't a waste of time, especially if he wants to excel in centuries. A lot of marathoners and ultramarathoners have the urge to push until they feel like they "worked", but the extra intensity won't make a meaningful improvement and it will only make recovery more time consuming. Hope this is better.


OK, but a ride of 3 hours when it was so slow such that the OP could have easily ridden another 3 hours no problem, well while I agree it's not a total waste, I'd say he could probably use his three hours for much better effect by lifting the intensity, either overall or during sections of the ride.

Painfully slow is hardly ever the best training no matter what you're training for. It's just junk miles or good for a recovery spin, rides with your kids etc, or maybe when starting after a long break away from the bike.

Marathoners are different as the impacts experienced in running are totally different to cycling.


----------



## ESTrainSmartBlog (Feb 25, 2013)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> OK, but a ride of 3 hours when it was so slow such that the OP could have easily ridden another 3 hours no problem, well while I agree it's not a total waste, I'd say he could probably use his three hours for much better effect by lifting the intensity, either overall or during sections of the ride.
> 
> Painfully slow is hardly ever the best training no matter what you're training for. It's just junk miles or good for a recovery spin, rides with your kids etc, or maybe when starting after a long break away from the bike.
> 
> Marathoners are different as the impacts experienced in running are totally different to cycling.


This is the reason why it's so hard to convince athletes to use this approach until they retest and see the results. These steady state rides always feel too easy. Rich Roll talks about using this approach in the book Finding Ultra. He didn't trust the method at first because on occasion, he had to walk just to stay in zone, but when he retested his lactic threshold, he made a huge improvement over the higher intensity approach.

As I said before, riding at this intensity lasts only for a prescribed amount of time- it's not the only thing he should do and he won't be a wasting his time doing it. If he doesn't see results, I would gladly take the blame, but I've always seen results from the dozens of athletes I've tested during the general preparatory or base building phase.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

I'm not a coach or an expert by any means. But when I am doing those long slow late winter/early spring rides I can't train the traditional way either. Last year I succumbed and most all of my base training was done in the aerobic zone or about 80% of my max heart rate. (Max HR 175 so 3-5 hour rides average HR 140-ish). I had my best year ever last year, but I can't say for sure that that was the reason.
Also I have to really watch that I don't overdo it early, at this time of year I'm lucky to get 2-3 rides a week of about 3 hours duration outside, I hate the trainer. In the spring when I'm out riding more, I do tone it down as the duration increases either because of fitness or because I want to not burn out in May like a lot of my peers.
I guess what I'm saying, I wouldn't be afraid to kick it up a bit and see how it goes


----------



## mldebono (Dec 18, 2005)

Thanks for the good discussion. Unfortunately I crashed, braking my clavicle into 5 mini claviclets which are now all being held together by a some SS hardware. Compression fractures to L1 and L5 will leave me off the bike for two months. 

Having spent the winter in NZ I was in good form early. Oh we'll. When I return I anticipate keeping one easy long day in my plan. It was working for me as my plan was one five hour ride, one two hour ride with 6 efforts of 5 minutes at LT and a 90 minute ride with 5 2 minute intervals
View attachment 276346


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Bummer. Heal well.

Hopefully you'll be able to do a bit of light riding on a trainer at some stage before being able to venture out onto the roads. A bit of set up modification so you are not reliant on using upper body for support will help.


----------

