# Intervals: 3 x 20 minutes versus 6 x 10 minutes



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

I have a question that may be academic: 

Would six 10 minute intervals be better preparation for races that three 20 minute intervals? 

More, shorter intervals would seem to more accurately reflect the numerous, short accelerations in a race. 

Alternatively, would 6 x 10s be a good alternate to 3 x 20s?


----------



## shawndoggy (Feb 3, 2004)

Both are working to raise threshold power; neither is going to (directly) prepare you for those 30-90 second bursts where it goes ballistic. They will help indirectly, however, by raising your threshold power, which in turn means that you will recover from those efforts sooner.

As far as which intervals to do, mix it up. 3x20, 6x10, 4x15, 1x60, 2x30... all birds of the same feather. The shorter intervals may be more palatable as you start out; IMHO, the longer ones make you tough as nails.


----------



## Argentius (Aug 26, 2004)

*Different systems.*

3 x 20 minute intervals are training aerobic or "threshold" power. Recovery time is about half interval duration.
.
3 - to - 5 minute intervals are training anerobic or "VOmax" power. I read that 8- or 9- minute intervals are the outside duration that's effective for these sorts of intervals. Recovery time is typically equal to interval time.
.
You also mention the "numerous, short accelerations in a race." That sounds more like "jumps," or neuromuscular power.
.
"They" say that you ought to pick the system you are training, and train that. I've never managed to get that specific...


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

This helps. Thanks.


----------



## lemonlime (Sep 24, 2003)

Just to tag onto the thread...

So when you do your intervals, do you start out at max power and just hold it there for the duration, or do you build up to it a bit?

Asking because when I start out, the first 30-40 seconds are strong but then I'm dying. If I'm doing a five minute interval, I try to settle into it but invariably I'm unable to hold the same power for the entire time. My chart shows the initial spike, a slight drop off and then holds relatively steady for the remainder.

Am I just not strong enough, or should I initially start a little softer and finish harder?


----------



## bauerb (Jan 18, 2006)

argentus nailed it. You *must* monitor your heart rate to get this right, and you should also be properly tested for LT and Vo2max.
a longer interval done at or just below LT will increase your LT power. eg, my LT is 158 and I will do long intervals at 150-160
my HR at vo2max is 180, so I do shorter intervals around 165-175.

In my case I had over estimated my LT, so I did masses of intervals well above LT. as a side effect, I have very high vo2max power relative to my LT power. starting this fall I will be doing more sub-LT work


----------



## Vegancx (Jan 22, 2004)

Argentius said:


> 3 x 20 minute intervals are training aerobic or "threshold" power. Recovery time is about half interval duration.
> .
> 3 - to - 5 minute intervals are training anerobic or "VOmax" power. I read that 8- or 9- minute intervals are the outside duration that's effective for these sorts of intervals. Recovery time is typically equal to interval time.
> .
> ...


To get adaptations at threshold, intervals need to be at least 12 minutes in duration... at least that's what the current literature suggests. 

You could split the different and do 4 x 15' 

60' is a lot of threshold work though, so you may actually benefit more by doing 2 x 20' at a little higher power.


----------



## shawndoggy (Feb 3, 2004)

lemonlime said:


> Am I just not strong enough, or should I initially start a little softer and finish harder?


You are better off negative splitting -- start at the low end of goal power, and finish strong. If you can't ever complete the interval, what's the point? Better to ratchet back 10-15w and get 'er done.


----------



## shawndoggy (Feb 3, 2004)

Vegancx said:


> 60' is a lot of threshold work though, so you may actually benefit more by doing 2 x 20' at a little higher power.


Depends what the goal is and how close to max power you are doing. Backing the intervals off by 10w and doing a third results in greater training stress, burns more calories, and is psychologically more tolerable. But if the goal is building tolerance at the bleeding edge, yes, do fewer at a higher intensity.


----------



## estone2 (Sep 25, 2005)

Pablo said:


> I have a question that may be academic:
> 
> Would six 10 minute intervals be better preparation for races that three 20 minute intervals?
> 
> ...


For races, LT power's not useful, as previous people have said.

What's better is trainign with blocks similar to this (A workout of mine...):

6 10 minute blocks. 5-10 minutes recovery between intervals. Maintain a high cadence throughout the effort. 

During each 10 minutes include:
- 10 second sprint/1:50 minutes tempo
- 30 second sprint/1:30 minutes submax
- 1 minute max/1 minute tempo
- 10 second sprint/1:50 submax
- 30 second max/1:20 tempo/10 second sprint


----------



## bill (Feb 5, 2004)

> For races, LT power's not useful, as previous people have said.


hmm.
I think LT power is pretty danged useful for races. I've always heard that it may be the single most important metric. 
why do you say this? I mean, yeah, you get dropped if you can't accelerate, but raising the power you sustainably put out is only going to help you in every aspect of racing. If you're at your limit before the acceleration, or before the sprint, you aren't going to have any acceleration (or sprint). If you're at your limit in the pack, you're not going to bridge to the break or close a gap, etc., etc.


----------



## estone2 (Sep 25, 2005)

bill said:


> hmm.
> I think LT power is pretty danged useful for races. I've always heard that it may be the single most important metric.
> why do you say this? I mean, yeah, you get dropped if you can't accelerate, but raising the power you sustainably put out is only going to help you in every aspect of racing. If you're at your limit before the acceleration, or before the sprint, you aren't going to have any acceleration (or sprint). If you're at your limit in the pack, you're not going to bridge to the break or close a gap, etc., etc.


Because sitting in the pack you're not near LT. If you're at your limit in a pack, you should probably just stop racing, your body clearly wasn't made for cycling...

In a crit, my PowerTap shows me sprinting out of every corner at 700+ watts. Then, I pedal at like 200. Then, SPRINT, pedal, SPRINT, pedal. No LT there. It's just sprinting over and over again.

That's what the workout block I gave allows you to do. It develops some LT but it prepares you for hard accelerations well above LT.

What the LT blocks (2x20 etc) do is create a rider like myself. I can time trial you into the ground, but the second you throw in an acceleration, I'm gone. You have to have some shorter stuff too to keep it mixed up.

LT is good to work on earlier in the season. Right now, you're sharpening the sword, getting the sprints and so forth perfected.


----------



## bill (Feb 5, 2004)

if your nose is in the wind, whether you're in a break or chasing it, or lining out the field, etc., LT is HUGELY important. and if you're sprinting at 700 watts out of every corner, you are scrubbing an awful lot of speed, which is unavoidable sometimes, but not if you're at the front or off the front.
Actually, I take it back some -- we want to deconstruct our riding into this and that. Mostly it's just about smooth and strong. There are many ways to be strong, whether it's on a flat or going up a hill or punching it to attack or whatever, but at a certain point stronger is stronger. The more you can do at LT, the more you have "headroom," as we used to say in the sound support business -- the more you have, the more you can do.


----------



## shawndoggy (Feb 3, 2004)

bill said:


> The more you can do at LT, the more you have "headroom," as we used to say in the sound support business -- the more you have, the more you can do.


'zactly. Using Estone's example, at 700w anyone would be above FTP. Then you are back down to 200. When you cross your FTP on the way back down really influences how quickly you recover. If your FTP is 220, you're going to have a harder time hanging on to those 700w surges than if your FTP is 350, even if you have practiced the "surgey" intervals. The guy with the 350 ftp is recovering at 270w, while the guy with the 220w ftp is still on the rivet.

That said, there is definitely a place for estone's surge type intervals once the aerobic building work has started to plateau. Now is kind of a weird time in the season to be doing loads of 2x20s, unless you are rebuilding after a peak. That sort of exclusive focus on FTP is best done in winter and spring to build up for race season (though a case can be made for doing some ftp work even during the heart of race season).


----------



## fleck (Mar 25, 2005)

estone2 said:


> Because sitting in the pack you're not near LT. If you're at your limit in a pack, you should probably just stop racing, your body clearly wasn't made for cycling...
> 
> LT is good to work on earlier in the season. Right now, you're sharpening the sword, getting the sprints and so forth perfected.



However, we don't all race in the pack all the time. If you're in a breakaway that LT becomes a bit more important. However its' still a bit of an interval effort. If you're up front chasing a brake for a teamate, your LT is what you need. If you've got a long hill, it's all LT. If you're racing a TT thats also LT. It really depends on what kind of racing you do and when in the season you are. As estone said, LT work is early season in general. 
However, with CX around the corner, LT becomes important again along with your longer intervals.


----------



## bill (Feb 5, 2004)

I know that the typical pattern is to do these in a base or a build phase, but this season I started doing them after the racing started, and I think that they helped. Like, a lot. This season, a teammate pointed out to me that I never seemed to be cruising at or near threshold during group rides. He said that I either was loafing or hammering. I realized he probably was right, so I started focusing more in training on going right up to the line and trying to stay there, even if it meant keeping out in the wind much of the ride. I was strong by then, anyway, so that my LT was already up a bit without ever working on it, and then when I started to work at LT, the fitness really seemed to step up. I mean, who really knows, there are so many variables, but I kind of wonder whether it isn't an equally legitimate way to get the fitness to an edge.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

estone2 said:


> For races, LT power's not useful, as previous people have said.


People say a lot of things. The studies in the peer-reviewed literature show that success in endurance cycling (1 km and longer) is most closely correlated with power at LT.


----------



## shawndoggy (Feb 3, 2004)

bill said:


> I know that the typical pattern is to do these in a base or a build phase, but this season I started doing them after the racing started, and I think that they helped. Like, a lot. This season, a teammate pointed out to me that I never seemed to be cruising at or near threshold during group rides. He said that I either was loafing or hammering.


If you think that THAT works, just think what doing isopower intervals would do! In other words, you can't really do threshold intervals on a group ride, unless your group ride takes you up 20+ minute climbs. Unless you are intentionally sitting off the back, and it's a long endurance ride, it's very difficult to spend more than a few minutes in the wind at power, and certainly I've never been able to hold a steady wattage like that for more than a couple of minutes unless the size of the group is less than 5 (or we're climbing the aforementioned hill).

2x20s and the like are really best done alone.


----------



## bill (Feb 5, 2004)

Oh, I started doing those, too.


----------



## novagator (Apr 4, 2002)

*As Andy Coggan...*

would say, cycling is an aerobic sport. LT, or FTP (as it relates to your weight) is probably the best predictor of cycling success. I do FTP work all year and work in VO2 and Zone 6 and 7 work in blocks depending on what events I have coming up (confession time, I'm only Cat 3 pack fodder, so take my training advise with a grain of salt...but I am a good TT'ist


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*stairsteps?*

Why not do stairsteps and cover it all?


----------



## konaken (Sep 13, 2005)

*Very interesting workout idea*



estone2 said:


> For races, LT power's not useful, as previous people have said.
> 
> What's better is trainign with blocks similar to this (A workout of mine...):
> 
> ...



You talk about tempo and submax. What is your idea of these efforts in % of max HR? In otherwords, if my max HR is 185, what would your suggestion be for these efforts?

thanks for the help.


----------



## scmtnboy (Aug 22, 2006)

Let me preface this by stating that I only got back into training and racing seriously a little over 1 year ago after 13 year layoff. I have been training and racing with a power meter for about 6 months. 

I really think that you will get the benefit out of either. I think as far a racing goes it is good to mix up your training. 

Currently as far as intensity work goes I am doing 

Tues : Group ride with 20 minutes tempo, one 15 minute climb at 110% of FTP , and then 15 minutes race simiulation that really works the Anerobic and Nueromuscular zones.

Wed : Training Ride with 3 threshold (FTP) climbs ranging from 20-35 minutes. This is on a 3 hour ride. 

Sat : Group Ride or Race

Sun : 2.5 Hrs tempo ride with one 20-30 minute FTP Climb

I like the looks of Estone's workout. It is fun to mix things up. I really like doing Hunter Allens race winning intervals. They consist of a jump for 30 sec then ride at threshold for 3-3.5 minutes and then finish with a sprint. They will make you want to puke but are good training for finishing races. These really work the vo2 max power.


----------



## estone2 (Sep 25, 2005)

konaken said:


> You talk about tempo and submax. What is your idea of these efforts in % of max HR? In otherwords, if my max HR is 185, what would your suggestion be for these efforts?
> 
> thanks for the help.


Hmmmm. I've never looked at it heart rate wise. I train with power, personally.

It's hard to give values off of max HR - lactate threshold HR would be more useful - it could be that your LTHR is 184 or it could be 153, and since tempo and submax are determined by that, MHR doesn't tell you ranges.

I can define tempo and submax for you, however. these definitions are for this workout and for the training philosophy that i'm following. other groups of thought may have different definitions or terms, so yeah...

Tempo is approximately your 2 hour pace. Go as hard as you can for 2 hours. When you're done, look at avg hr, and that's your tempo intensity.

Submax is your ultra long ride intensity - it's the pace that you can hold more or less indefinitely. go out for 3.5 hours, and then look at your avg hr. That's your submax intensity. You can actually probably hold this intensity for substantially longer than 3 hours - I know that I've held submax for as long as 7.5 hours... you go numb after a while  

hth!
-estone2


----------



## konaken (Sep 13, 2005)

*Thanks*

Your terms as defined help me alot. They should get me pointed in the right direction. 

thanks

KonaKen


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

So, Coach Ethan, how did you do in cat4/5 superweek with your 4.2w/kg at LT? 

LT is very important for time trials and breakaways. Not very important for crits. Being aggressive is the most important for any race, imho.

However, Ethan is correct by saying that LT isn't a good way to do intervals. 60min at LT doesn't improve your LT power (or improve anything for that matter) but 60min above LT can. The only problem is actually completing 3x20 or 6x10 at an intensity that is high enough to overreach the body and improve your fitness. Do you know how ridiculously hard that is? My 60min HR is 88% of my max HR (from only a moderately difficult 60min race). To do more than 2x20 or 4x10 at 89-90% of my max makes me want to gouge my eyes out or throw up a lung.


----------



## estone2 (Sep 25, 2005)

iliveonnitro said:


> So, Coach Ethan, how did you do in cat4/5 superweek with your 4.2w/kg at LT?
> 
> LT is very important for time trials and breakaways. Not very important for crits. Being aggressive is the most important for any race, imho.


yeah exactly. i'm **** at crits, and i have power to spare...


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

iliveonnitro said:


> 60min at LT doesn't improve your LT power (or improve anything for that matter) but 60min above LT can.


Well this guy, who I hear knows something about it, thinks 90%-105% of threshold is very effective in improving threshold power; and somehow he convinced the USCF of it, too. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=r...MM01KiuHfa5ZnyvNQ&sig2=36UbF_EBK_DZq7bYLbH9dQ
So I don't think it's necessary to exceed LT in training to see improvement in threshold power (and that doesn't even start to consider sweet-spot training).


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

asgelle said:


> Well this guy, who I hear knows something about it, thinks 90%-105% of threshold is very effective in improving threshold power; and somehow he convinced the USCF of it, too. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=r...MM01KiuHfa5ZnyvNQ&sig2=36UbF_EBK_DZq7bYLbH9dQ
> So I don't think it's necessary to exceed LT in training to see improvement in threshold power (and that doesn't even start to consider sweet-spot training).


Coggan's use of "threshold power" in that article, and in his book, is CP60. That is, 60min critical power, or approximately your 40km TT power. He calls it "Functional Threshold Power (FTP)," but often refers to it as just threshold power.

This is NOT the same as lactate threshold power (LT), which is what we were primarily discussing. The two terms are often, erroneously, swapped. Your LT is much closer to your CP120/2hr power (or ~4mmol/mL), but still considerably longer than your FTP. Coggan's 90-105% of FTP training is much more effective at raising your lactate threshold power than doing straight intervals at LT.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

iliveonnitro said:


> This is NOT the same as lactate threshold power (LT), which is what we were primarily discussing. The two terms are often, erroneously, swapped. Your LT is much closer to your CP120/2hr power (or ~4mmol/mL), but still considerably longer than your FTP. Coggan's 90-105% of FTP training is much more effective at raising your lactate threshold power than doing straight intervals at LT.


Sorry. Yes, my mistake.


----------

