# Duration for Threshold Workouts



## kingfisher (Mar 6, 2009)

The common duration for a threshold workout seems to be 2x20 @ FTP with a 5-10 minute rest between. For me, that's around 300 watts. 

Could a 4x12 at, say 320 watts be more effective, though? In that workout, I would spend more time at a higher wattage than the 2x20s. 

I race in the NYC region, and the longest hills I climb are about 10 minutes (at most). On the flipside, races cover a lot of rolling hills, with very few long flat stretches. Wouldn't 4x12 at higher wattage prepare me better for this type of racing? 

I would still do shorter 4 to 6 minute VO2 max drills, and even shorter anaerobic reps. I'm just asking if it makes sense to substitute a shorter, harder, rep session for the 2x20s.


----------



## Ghost234 (Jun 1, 2010)

Be careful how short you go with the intervals. If you go below 8 minutes, its Vo2 territory. 

I typically do 10 minutes at 110-115% of FTP. I usually do 3 of them (but one standing for the entire interval). So for you it would be 340~ish watts for 10 minutes, with 2-3 minutes rest. 


Others like to do 4x10 @ FTP. Some like 1x40 @ FTP. Its all personal preference. Personally I think you have too much rest between those intervals. When I do 2x20's I usually keep only a 2 minute rest.


----------



## PissedOffCil (Jan 3, 2008)

Well this is an ongoing debate without a true answer for a couple of reasons
1) Some people react differently to different stresses
2) One person reacts diferently at different stages of training

I believe that longer intervals have more benefit because they'll raise your power for shorter intervals too and make them feel easier.

Of course the opposite could be said about power rise but when you are used to shorter intervals, it's much harder to get used to the longer ones without doing some.

With that said, If you plateau with 20 minute segments, maybe you should go harder for shorter periods and vice versa...


----------



## hrumpole (Jun 17, 2008)

This is my first year really trying structured training and first month with a power meter, so take this for what it's worth. For me, a 20 minute interval @ FTP is hard, at least on the trainer. I'm glad when they're done. They make the 8-10 minute ones easier, and have definitely goosed 5 min power. YMMV. 

Based on "The Book" and what I've read @ the wattage group, if you're going at 12 minutes over 110 of FTP, it's more a VO2 max workout. So that suggests that FTP might be low (depending how hard these intervals are), or that you're targeting another system. It sounds like you're just pushing the edge of FTP/VO2. If you're at 105 or thereabouts, it's still L4, but painful L4. I think the issue is as much the time between sessions/# per week as it is the percentage.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

If working to improve power at threshold, then unless you are limited by a relatively low maximal aerobic power, you'd generally be better off with more volume overall and longer efforts at slightly lower power. Doesn't need to be at or above FTP. Doing longer efforts at ~95% is plenty hard enough to drive the desired adaptations.


----------



## yakobo (Aug 22, 2006)

I'm no expert, but I know there is talk about it being better to err on the down side, because just above threshold is a "dead zone" ie, counterproductive for good training. What is this all about?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

yakobo said:


> I'm no expert, but I know there is talk about it being better to err on the down side, because just above threshold is a "dead zone" ie, counterproductive for good training. What is this all about?


There's no such thing as a "dead zone" but training above threshold is very taxing and may require greater amount of recovery and/or reduce the level/intensity at which one can ride on subsequent day(s). 

In an intensity/volume tradeoff, you will be able to sustain far greater volume at the appropriate level by going a little under threshold than by going over it.


----------



## rbart4506 (Aug 4, 2004)

That's what my coach has had me doing...

This allows 3 good days in a row of threshold work before a rest day. Then it's two more nice long days of threshold before we start it all over again...


----------



## Keski (Sep 25, 2004)

There is something to be said for keeping the duration of the individual intervals to the shortest duration that will provide the required benefit. The longer you make the interval the more heartrate and wattage drift you will experience due to lapses in concentration and focus. The shorter the interval the easier it is to focus and concentrate and maintain the desired effort.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## MontyCrisco (Sep 21, 2008)

Keski said:


> The shorter the interval the easier it is to focus and concentrate and maintain the desired effort.


I agree it makes sense to do 3x13 rather than 2x20 if it means you can hold your pace for the duration. But I do worry about going too much shorter than 10 minutes. My understanding is the adaptations are just not happening at that duration even if your cumulative time at threshold is the same. Also there's a tendency to push too hard at that duration, leading anaerobic adaptations instead of the desired aerobic adaptations you're targeting with threshold work. 

I do find 20 minutes at threshold hard to pace just right. So I've been taking baby steps at it, starting with 3x12 sessions and stretching the interval time out toward 20 m bit by bit. I've found this is helping me learn to pace them just right. It's also made it easier to pace my tempo/SST efforts in the 30-45m range, though I still have a ways to go on that.


----------



## dot (Mar 4, 2004)

a question to short interval non-believers: why would Friel use 6-12 min duration for such intervals (he calls them "cruise intervals")? And his consistent intervals do not go over 12 min in length.

Just a piece of anectodal experience: I'm spending this winter on rollers. My work is mostly "short" intervals, 7-8 min some beats below my probable LT. The thing is with every week since November I was able to move up a notch the intensity ladder and crank up my speed. I've got a chart built based on my roller sessions and my av. speed for a session keeps going up while av. HR stays in the same limits. I don't how it will translate into outdoors form but since rollers are a tool giving consistent data even without a powermeter, I think it's worth taking my progress into account.


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

dot said:


> a question to short interval non-believers: why would Friel use 6-12 min duration for such intervals (he calls them "cruise intervals")? And his consistent intervals do not go over 12 min in length.
> 
> Just a piece of anectodal experience: I'm spending this winter on rollers. My work is mostly "short" intervals, 7-8 min some beats below my probable LT. The thing is with every week since November I was able to move up a notch the intensity ladder and crank up my speed. I've got a chart built based on my roller sessions and my av. speed for a session keeps going up while av. HR stays in the same limits. I don't how it will translate into outdoors form but since rollers are a tool giving consistent data even without a powermeter, I think it's worth taking my progress into account.


Are you saying your practiced the same thing over and over and got better at it? Fascinating.

The problem many people have with <10 minute intervals is that they don't target one system. They're so short that they stress vo2 max systems but don't stress the systems to maximum effect. If you are super disciplined and do them at 20 minute pace, then they have a proper training effect but you might as well be doing 2x 20s and save some time. If, however, you need to do 8-10 minute efforts in a race (like the OP with Bear Mtn.) then they'll help you get better at that specific type of effort. However if your gain is better all around fitness, you may as well do specific LT and vo2 intervals.


----------



## dot (Mar 4, 2004)

kbiker3111 said:


> Are you saying your practiced the same thing over and over and got better at it? Fascinating.


not exactly. I was interested in how I would progress over time with the same interval duration and performed my intervals at moderate RPE. That means speed was not the same, it has gone up at the same RPE. I don't have a lab with a bunch of rats or athletes to torture, only me. A friend of mine who worked as a sport scientist in a lab and made lots of testing of real athlets and tried different routines on them, he could.

Now I moved to a trainer and CTS experienced competitor programme (tomorrow I'll finish my second week) because I had practically run out of gears on my road bike



> The problem many people have with <10 minute intervals is that they don't target one system. They're so short that they stress vo2 max systems but don't stress the systems to maximum effect.


I' ve got a kind of different idea on what "systems" we stress. I don't believe in specific LT work or VO2max work. Practically any work we do targets muscles and their ability to work longer and with more power. VO2max numbers are easily trained and detrained (the notorious Tabata protocol for instance).

To train mid- and high-treshold fibers to make them more aerobic we need to tire them, to make them spend stored carbs which they use for food. To make them spend their carbs we need to make them work. That means intensity X duration. They might vary but that's it, it doesn't matter how long a single interval is or how intense it is, one thing that matters is if glycogen stores are empty or not in the end. That's why 30 sec sprint training with multiple repetitions might produce similar effects on LT and FTP as prolonged under-threshold work. That is 12x30 sec at 150-170% of FTP might produce similar effect as 5x5 min at 100% of FTP or 3x10-15 min at 95% of FTP and so on (I made numbers from my head, don't be punctilious). The only thing one needs to avoid is severe acidosis (if one's not a Chris Hoy wanna-be)


----------



## jonleestrong (Jan 10, 2011)

Train specifically to your "A" races. Looks like higher watts and less time would be up your alley.


----------



## plx (Mar 28, 2011)

why not make it 2x30 mins? too hard?
20 mins is ok, less than that it's not


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

plx said:


> why not make it 2x30 mins? too hard?
> 20 mins is ok, less than that it's not


why not 1 x 60 then?

nothing wrong with less than 20 min. Just depends on your objective and where you are coming from. But I agree that the longer a contiguous effort at this level is, the better the training effect.

Some people don't have ready access to places to do contiguous efforts this long.


----------



## LatvianRider (Sep 14, 2008)

There are many ways to do threshold work and drive the FTP up and some of it can be done with much shorter work than you describe. Specificity is key to your target races. Switch up the intervals early on then get more specific. PM for more details.


----------

