"Zone 2 training" query

[nick rockliff]

Just looking back at one of my test results for lactate profile and vo2max.

This was done in 4 min intervals with 1 min rests where you have the blood taken.

Based on a 2k of 6.20 at that time my intervals started at 210W and increased by 30W each time.

210W - 1.81 mmol
240W - 1.23 mmol
270W - 1.55 mmol
300W - 2.89 mmol
330W - 4.11 mmol
360W - 5.25 mmol
410W - 7.59 mmol and vo2max and all out.

300W was the obvious increase above base for LT1 but we added an extra step at 360W to confirm LT2

HR for the two LTs didn't change much across 6 years of testing but the intensity did when I was in an untrained period.

[aegis]

I am actually also questioning where the 2 and 4 mmol thresholds for lactate comes from, it would be great if someone here can point me to the literature on this.

Typically, if you view a graph measuring an athlete's lactate levels while exercising, there will be an inflection point ("first lactate turnpoint") at approximately 2 mmol. There will be a second at approximately 4 mmol.

There is good reason to believe that these turnpoints correspond with significant changes in physiological demands. But, It's very important to emphasize the word "approximately", as there is nothing inherently magical about 2 or 4 mmol.

So it seems there is a sigmoidal relationship with 2/4mmol being population values? I haven't done any lab testing before, do they actually fit the data points and present to you the inflexion points to tell you your threshold levels?

[jrkob]

merely leveling HR is not sufficient to prove UT2 as HR will stabilise in any consistent row! Also when you get the confidence from having done other harder rows and are used to the discomfort, you will be able to maintain a pace that now seems impossible for longer than you can currently contemplate.

Thanks a lot for the detailed explanation, very clear. Appreciated you took the time.
Yes I understand the above, as an extreme, I could be rowing at a super stable HR and yet be outside UT2 if my HR is... like 80.
In fact this is the reason why I was asking Dangerscouse if I should start intensifying the exercise. Reducing my intervals from 3:00 to 2:55, and then 2:50 etc. And everytime, see if the HR really stays flat. As he suggested I'll keep doing 3:00 a few more times before reducing. I'm not in a rush.

in my opinion you can't take much from the HR trace of the first 20-25 min of a row. What you require from your body is changing.

Yes I understand this, fully agree (I can feel it during the row), and in fact this is the reason why yesterday I extended the row by 15:00.

[jrkob]

Can I confirm something guys.
As I said in earlier in a few weeks I will go for my annual health checkup and it will come with a Bruce protocol treadmill test, where - I think - I will have a fairly realiable MaxHR. Well more than the 220-x formulas and the likes, I would hope.
However, this will be a running MaxHR.

For the purpose of calculating the bands (UT2, UT1 etc), this won't work because I would need the MaxHR for rowing, which will be lower, correct ?

Is there a way to evaluate my MaxHR for rowing using the MaxHR for running, or just no ? I've seen some litterature here and there suggesting that the difference between both should be about 10bpm.

[jamesg]

there is 10bpm difference between my MaxHR for running, and rowing.

This means you're better at running than rowing: your rowing stroke is not big enough to fully load your CV systems.

When you have learnt to row reasonably well, there will be a useful amount of Work in each stroke, as needed to get fit, shift boats and spin flywheels. This Work is your stroke Length x your average handle Force.

In your case, size 168x55 48y, a reasonable stroke might be net length 1.0m and AvForce 300N. This stroke has Work worth 300 Newton meters (Nm).

Zone 2 in rowing (aka UT1) is at ratings 20 to 23/24. If that's the training you want to do, you have to learn to do it, by learning to row.

At rating 20 you will produce at least 300x20/60 = 100W. (NB 100/20 = 5).
At 23, 300x23/60 = 115W. (Again, 115/23 = 5).

The power level in Watts can be seen on your C2 PM and in Ergdata, as well as your rating (spm).

If you can't produce that amount of power, improve your stroke until you can. No type of Sport is possible if we don't know how it's done. The main advantage of rowing for fitness is that it's quite simple to get right: use the legs, where there's plenty of muscle.

If then your HR goes outside the limits you want to use, or you just can't do it any more, then stop. It only means you are not yet fit enough: rowing is hard work even when going slow.

[jrkob]

Thank you for the comments, that's very helpful especially the power calculations. I need to clarify a few things though.

there is 10bpm difference between my MaxHR for running, and rowing.

This means you're better at running than rowing: your rowing stroke is not big enough to fully load your CV systems.

What I had seen from various sources is that a MaxHR running should be higher than a MaxHR rowing because the heart has to fight an additional force in the case of running: gravity. In fact, people are mentioning on this forum here and there to make sure to use rowing MaxHR, not running MaxHR. Because of that.

Is all this incorrect ? As in, there should be one unique MaxHR whatever the activity, if all done properly of course ?

Zone 2 in rowing (aka UT1).

This is major difference with my understanding. I post below my calculations of my rowing bands and UT1 would be 145-154.

At the same time, the definition of zone 2 training I'm using which is the one in the video I have posted earlier from Iñigo San-Millán is that it's a light workout which we could sustain for a minimum of 1h, preferably 1h30 per session. Leading to the benefits I mentioned earlier on this thread.

However, if I'm taking the mid of my UT1 band at say 150, I know I cannot row at 150 for 1h or 1h30. Hence the discussion earlier on this thread that it's probably more around 130, which I can sustain. I will try to push the HR a little higher on slightly longer rows in the next 2 weeks hopefully.

Or did you mean UT2 ? Because that's what this seems to translate into in my case.

At rating 20 you will produce at least 300x20/60 = 100W. (NB 100/20 = 5).

Producing 100W at rating 20 is possible.
But:
- not for an hour. In my case, for 25:00. 100W at r20 translates into splits of 2:30/500m and this is presently the best I can do on a 5K when pushing it. As in I'm happy when it stops.
- my HR will reach... let me calculate... 90% MaxHR during this 5K.

So I'm quite far from where you say I should be. But more importantly is it really what I need to do to achieve zone 2 training as per the video ? The gap in effort seems to be very, very large from what is described in the video.

Since we're on the subject of producing effort, I'm posting a picture of what my power curve looks like at 100W and this was at r20. I had not checked that curve in a few weeks and it looks a lot, lot better than it was before, which was showing no strength in the legs at all. I'm surprised. I post this for further comments as well.

Thank you.

[Sakly]

This heart rate stuff and power and sustainability is a bit more complex and you have to factor in different things.
The main additional factors (for me) is overall training volume and ability to recover.
If I have low training volume, I do not really benefit from low intensity steady state and could do higher intensities for the same amount of time, as I can recover from it anyway, even higher stress for the body.
When training volume increases, it is harder to recover from session to session as time between is less. Then the lower intensities come into play. As long as you are not in the second field of training volume, don't really care about HR is 70% or 80% or whatever value of your unknown HR max. Focus on proper stroke power and technique instead.

[jrkob]

If I have low training volume, I do not really benefit from low intensity steady state and could do higher intensities for the same amount of time, as I can recover from it anyway, even higher stress for the body.

I understand what you're saying yes. Again, these low intensity steady sessions, which I understand need to be done in large enough volume to be useful, are part of my bigger workout plan which includes higher intensity steady sessions and intervals (both from the Pete Plan). The idea is to squeeze them every 2, 3 or 4 days (not sure what would be best) as I feel they don't require a huge amount of recovery.
Does this make sense ?

I understand that short, low intensity sessions won't bring much benefit if any at all, and these are not part of the plan.

Also one thing I would like to mention: last year I was only doing long, low intensity sessions. Of course, it was not very well organised. But I noticed that it pretty much solved my blood pressure problem, and fairly rapidly, like 2 weeks. I have noticed that doing the PetePlan only, for some reasons, does not have the same benefit on my blood pressure, it seems to creep back up again a little. And since I re-added these long, low intensity sessions again back in my workout, my blood pressure is back down again. This is a benefit that I want to keep. It seems to have a very, very good effect on my CV system. The blood pressure benefit generally shows the following day. I have explained in another thread why I need to monitor my blood pressure carefully.

[Sakly]

The slow steady states help building a strong base. But that does not mean harder rows do not add something to your base. In the end it is all related to your goals. If you train for longer distances, a stronger base will help much more than on shorter distances (even if a 2k is already much cv based).
Would be interesting to get details about your training plans and goals.
If slow steady also shows benefit for health issues, this should be the first reason to include more of them

[jamesg]

definition of zone 2 training ... is that it's a light workout

Zone 2 is UT1, which in the O'Neill table you show is at ratings 20-24, so certainly no light workout.

If training for anything but racing, you can do what you like. But if you plan to try the 2k, it will help if you take account of it's needs. These are a big stroke and the endurance to deliver about 200 in 6-8 minutes.

So if you want fitness for a 2k (the purpose of the O'Neill table), which can't do you any harm, pull and train a good stroke, you can't fail. Your PM and ergdata show all. At low training ratings (18-24) of course we go slow. But not easy. Some versions of that table also show the bands as %s of 2k test Watts:
UT2 up to 60%
UT1 60-70%
AT 70-80%
Plus AN and TR higher still.

Not sure if any reliable written HR theories are available nowadays. Ideas such as Conconi's (AN, AT, inflexion threshold found in periodical step tests) apparently were developed to mask drug use; today to sell HR monitors, possibly useful no doubt in sports where there is no indication of speed or power. In any case they relate to HR range (Karvonen).

But we have the PM showing Watts (like cyclists too nowadays) so have no need to rely on a proxy. In any case, if HR is too high, we stop: it's called intervals.

As you note, we also have the power curve on PM. Your peak looks slightly late, suggesting you could better pull legs first and maybe quicker; the first thing to do in the stroke on erg, at the catch, is get the entire body mass moving fast asap and so engage the chain; this reduces the slack catch distance but needs all the big muscle we have: in legs and hips.

[jrkob]

If training for anything but racing, you can do what you like.

Would be interesting to get details about your training plans and goals.

Well noted on pulling more on my legs, this is WIO, and I can tell you what you see already here is a huge improvement vs a few weeks ago, where the line was a lot, lot flatter !

Ok so I have no desire to race.

My primary goal is cardiovascular health and making sure I'm getting the lower blood pressure benefit. Secondary objective is improve fitness further.
For the primary goal, from my testing last year I know that slow, long, steady rows work fantastic. In my case, there's no question. For further fitness, this is where the PetePlan comes in.

So I am leaning towards something like this:
Monday: slow, long, steady row
Tuesday: PetePlan SS sessions. They are relatively short in the first few weeks so I can do them a bit faster then the slow, long, steady rows
Wednesday: PetePlans intervals
Thursday: rest day, or, if I think I can, another slow, long, steady row (I will prefer the latter).
Rince and repeat.

Or something along those lines. I am - of course - looking for your suggestions if you have any.

One thing that I think will be an obstacle fairly soon, is nutrition. I mention it because I just saw jamesg mentionning it in another thread.

I have high LDL (genetic) and won't eat everything. I eat super healthily, see an example of my lunches below. Salmon (or tuna) either steamed or baked in a drop of olive oil, an avocado, and either braised or steamed vegetables. And a fruit. For dinner, my wife will cook healthy stuff too. No objection to eat meat, but it has to be lean like turkey, chicken, or lean beef. I avoid lamb etc... unless I am outside and I have no choice. What I stopped eating altogether a while ago already is anything that is inflammatory to the arteries, so: junk food, refined carbs, fried food, sodas, processed meats, and obviously transfats. No candies, no ice cream etc.
If you have recommendations for what to add to this type of lunch like what I post below, let me know. I am opened to suggestions, so long as it's healthy, not inflammatory to the CV system.

[Sakly]

So you plan 4 days on - 3 days off? Any reason why so packed and not spreaded during the week? If it is not possible in others ways, I would place the hard work on the first day (intervals), as you will be recovered the most. Then the two light days, then the harder long PP session.

Diet seems more or less fine to me (without knowing details).
Lean meat, because you don't like a bit more fatty meat? In terms of energy, full fat food is the better option.
You can add as much low starch vegetables as you like. High starch vegetables are ok, if they are added based on energy demands (best case based on your training schedule) and probably not combined with fatty meals.
Leafy greens are always a good choice.

[jamesg]

Lovely grub in HK, 10k restaurants and all with Cantonese Dim Sum.

[jrkob]

So you plan 4 days on - 3 days off?

Apologies I wasn't clear. I meant it's a 4 days cycle. And to use your idea to do the hard day after the (potential) rest day, how about that ?
Day 1: PetePlans intervals
Day 2: slow, long, steady row
Day 3: PetePlan SS sessions. They are relatively short in the first few weeks so I can do them a bit faster then the slow, long, steady rows
Day 4: slow, long, steady row
Then start again at Day 1. There is no full rest day with no rowing, should this be mandatory in which case I add Day 5 mandatory rest ?

So in essence the idea is that about half the rows are the slow, long, steady rows because they are the ones which I believe bring me the best blood pressure benefits (my utmost priority before anything else), and the other half, where I really try to get fitter and better.

Does this makes sense at all ?...

For the nutrition part. Leafy greens etc are awesome, full of fibers and these drop my LDL. I have some every single day, most of the time twice a day.
Fatty meat and full fat food in general, taste wise, are no issue for me. And I do have a big steak or a burger once in while, or a desert with full cream. But these are food that jam with my LDL and are quite inflammatory (fatty beef) so I want to avoid at all cost. Only when I dine out. Having to avoiding these food is precisely why I said I may have a problem building more muscle. But hopefully I'm wrong and I can find something that works ?

[nick rockliff]

Lovely grub in HK, 10k restaurants and all with Cantonese Dim Sum.

I always used to head to Lan Kwai Fong, many good nights in that area.