another question about aerobic base training

[dsoucek]

Hello.
I have been searching the forum and related things have been asked in various threads but not quite my specific question, so I apologize if this is a redundant question.
After an 8 week long Pete Plan type training block, ending with a 2K time trial, I’ve decide to work on my aerobic fitness. I’d like to adhere to the Seiler 80/20 method in which 80% of training time is in the aerobic zone. I use HR to cap my steady state sessions and I know my resting (49) and max (175) heart rates.
My question is: is UT1 within this aerobic zone or is it what is considered the “no man’s land” zone that is to be avoided?

The training program I plan to follow for ~2-3 months (after which I would go back to 2K specific training) is:
Monday, Wednesday, Friday – 42:00 UT2 heart rate capped at 137 (upper limit of UT2)
Tuesday – 3 X 12:00 UT1, 5’rest. Heart rate capped at 150 (upper limit of UT1)
Thursday – 4 X 2K or 5 X 1500m, 5’ rest (no heart rate cap on these, 1500s would be at 5K pace)
Saturday - 15K UT2
Are there tweaks that might better improve aerobic base training?

Thanks for any input.
Dave Soucek

[jackarabit]

__?___ UT1 is understood as Oxygen UtilisationTraining Zone #1. Done correctly w/ HR capped at a prescribed percentage of individual cardio-pulmonary capacity (150bpm in your case), it is aerobic training. Your schedule at a glance looks 4:1ish to me.

[dsoucek]

thank you. I never knew what UT1 stood for.

[hjs]

thank you. I never knew what UT1 stood for.

Its not fully aerobic, Ut1 goes to 4 mmol lactate numbers, this means the fast fibers are involved and do produce lactate. In a 80/20 low/high this is not used.

[jackarabit]

Hjs writes:

Its not fully aerobic, . . .

That “fully” speaks volumes about the power of qualification and the current enthusiasm for collecting exhaled air and pricking fingers! I’ll see your fully and raise you a predominantly, Henry. Perhaps a historiography of exercise physiology pre-Seiler and a new synthesis is necessary to correct the confusion about metabolic boundaries which I appear to share with the OP.

HR zone training may be yesterday’s news but it is what it was: an attempt to associate metabolic process and turnpoints with the easily observed alteration of loads placed on a pump beneath the skin.

[Mark E]

In Seiler's three zone system UT1 would definitely be the "no man's land" of neither easy enough nor hard enough.

However, I think this is where cycling and rowing depart a good deal. Nobody is training for 3- to 5-hour race efforts in rowing. In cycling that's the whole point of preparing for elite/pro road racing.

Get the scoop on Seiler's zone system here:

https://www.velonews.com/2018/07/news/f ... ler_473325

[jackarabit]

Fair dinkum to provide attribution, Mark. Thankyou. Here’s a table from the C2 Rower Training Guide containing Terry O’Neill’s old zone system.



Obviously, one can legitimately define UT1 using this system. It is less clear to me how Seiler defines UT1 in his 3 zone scheme. There is a problem when UT1 (the old school Macintosh ) is conflated with UT1 (the new school Macintosh ). The OP’s mention of HR cap as defining upper limit of zone UT1 prompted my ingenuous yet antique response. I leave the sorting out chores to you, to include this puzzling paragraph from your linked Seiler puff piece:

2. Dr. Seiler’s three-zone model of training (see below). There are many zone models out there. Most of us use five zones for training, but some models have as many as nine. In his research, Seiler has pointed out that when we test, there are two physiological breakpoints. One is our anaerobic threshold, or MLSS. Your coach may call it FTP. It tends to be right around the point where we hit 4 mmol/mL lactate. The other breakpoint, which is lower — about 85 percent of anaerobic threshold and at 2 mmol/mL of lactate — is often called our aerobic threshold. Seiler feels these breakpoints define three physiological zones. Zone 1 is below the aerobic threshold, and what we call easy base training. Zone 2 is between the breakpoints and has many names, including no man’s land or sweet spot. The third zone is our high-intensity training zone.

And a screenshot from the VeloNews podcast intro:



How I miss the simple pleasure of Maynard Hershon at (or off) the back!!

[gooseflight]

I might be missing something but isn't the point of 80/20 that you do base training -- [very] high volumes of low rate aerobic work at the start of the programme with faster work introduced at the end? Doing 80/20 across a week isn't going to deliver an 80/20 outcome. Looking at your programme you're only really a short interval session away from the Pete Plan anyway.

[hjs]

Hjs writes:

Its not fully aerobic, . . .

That “fully” speaks volumes about the power of qualification and the current enthusiasm for collecting exhaled air and pricking fingers! I’ll see your fully and raise you a predominantly, Henry. Perhaps a historiography of exercise physiology pre-Seiler and a new synthesis is necessary to correct the confusion about metabolic boundaries which I appear to share with the OP.

HR zone training may be yesterday’s news but it is what it was: an attempt to associate metabolic process and turnpoints with the easily observed alteration of loads placed on a pump beneath the skin.

Everything above a few minutes is mostly aerobic jack. Try holding your breath

Idea about 80/20 is "easy" of fully aimed at aerobic, or "hard" aimed at max short work. Everything inbetween is to hard or not hard enough. The idea is that mixing up different energy systems should be avoided.
For most ergers, who are far off from maximaly trained and don,t train at a very high volume its not needed I think.

Going really hard on the erg is tough, even at races I see people not reaching that state, for myself, as an example, think I have done not 1 session this season that I would consider really hard. Think I am guilty of the "inbetween" zone.

[hjs]

Fair dinkum to provide attribution, Mark. Thankyou. Here’s a table from the C2 Rower Training Guide containing Terry O’Neill’s old zone system.

Mmm breathing calm, but sweating heavy..... can,t find that combi, talking about winter, in summer its soaked

[dsoucek]

Thank you, all, for your thoughtful responses.

Gooseflight, it's entirely possible I'm wrong, but my understanding is that 80/20 percentages are over the course of a week, not a longer training block.

Since I am (hopefully) not maximally trained, perhaps an 80/20 split is not so important.
Perhaps a better question is: When coming of a 2K specific training block, and wanting to focus on aerobic base development and mental/physical recovery, is UT1 work useful to include?

Dave

[lindsayh]

Thank you, all, for your thoughtful responses
Gooseflight, it's entirely possible I'm wrong, but my understanding is that 80/20 percentages are over the course of a week, not a longer training block.
Since I am (hopefully) not maximally trained, perhaps an 80/20 split is not so important.
Perhaps a better question is: When coming of a 2K specific training block, and wanting to focus on aerobic base development and mental/physical recovery, is UT1 work useful to include? Dave

Dave for me I would use the 80/20 over a longer block than a week as part of a periodised program depending on time of year and proximity to races so there would be weeks and likely months which are more 90/10 and 70/30. UTI is always useful even in the weeks before a race but if you have a look at the ISS training guide you will see exactly what they think as a preparation for a 2k race and the balance changes in the 6 months preparing for a race. The plan gives a week by week for up to 24 weeks leading to a specific race date and projected time all based on HR based training zones.
https://indoorsportservices.co.uk/training/guide

[dsoucek]

I see. thanks, Lindsayh

[jackarabit]

I might be missing something but isn't the point of 80/20 that you do base training -- [very] high volumes of low rate aerobic work at the start of the programme with faster work introduced at the end? Doing 80/20 across a week isn't going to deliver an 80/20 outcome. Looking at your programme you're only really a short interval session away from the Pete Plan anyway.

Roy, the successive concentrations of mostly aerobic base development and mostly race prep and racing, the classic progression seen in seasonal outdoor sports, is typically referred to as periodized training. Seems to me polarized training is avoidance of training just above LT because “studies of rates of performance improvement in elite athletes” identify that level of effort as non-productive from one end of the yr to the other, now and forever. Greg Smith once said that AT was a zone he passed thru to get to the gritty stuff, not where he comfortably lingered. I have taken it for granted that one could do this and also organize one’s training as 100/0 (or 100/0/0) in an early season aerobic rebuild period (block of calendar time). Is it possible to superpose these prescriptive p-word schemes in practise?

[jackarabit]

Hjs writes:

Its not fully aerobic, . . .

That “fully” speaks volumes about the power of qualification and the current enthusiasm for collecting exhaled air and pricking fingers! I’ll see your fully and raise you a predominantly, Henry. Perhaps a historiography of exercise physiology pre-Seiler and a new synthesis is necessary to correct the confusion about metabolic boundaries which I appear to share with the OP.

HR zone training may be yesterday’s news but it is what it was: an attempt to associate metabolic process and turnpoints with the easily observed alteration of loads placed on a pump beneath the skin.

Everything above a few minutes is mostly aerobic jack. Try holding your breath

Idea about 80/20 is "easy" of fully aimed at aerobic, or "hard" aimed at max short work. Everything inbetween is to hard or not hard enough. The idea is that mixing up different energy systems should be avoided.
For most ergers, who are far off from maximaly trained and don,t train at a very high volume its not needed I think.

Going really hard on the erg is tough, even at races I see people not reaching that state, for myself, as an example, think I have done not 1 session this season that I would consider really hard. Think I am guilty of the "inbetween" zone.

I do understand, Henry. The weevils in the flour aren’t the main course but we eat them just the same and we’re all dying of an oxidative process called living. Despite these fuzzy edges, the light was brought forth out of darkness and the firmament raised above the water by an unseen power which had a yen for definition and boundaries. As a species we are remarkably focused on organizing the fuzz and putting it in boxes, only to discover that the contents defy the labels. Go figure?