Zone Training

Printable View

09-06-2006, 10:19 AM
li10up

Zone Training

My max HR is 185. I typically ride 20-25 miles between 14-15 mph (avg. speed) with my HR somewhere around 145-155 which is 78-83% of max. I don't feel overly tired - it's a comfortable pace for me. I usually ride 3 days a week all within these numbers.

Now my questions:
1. Is this a good zone to be in?
2. Would I benefit in any way by forcing myself to stay at a lower HR? If so, what % HR?
3. Or, should I be shooting for a higher HR?

I've read about training zones, etc. but they are a bit confusing. I don't see why you would intentionally keep your HR lower than what you are capable of sustaining. I can understand the benefits of pushing oneself. Can anyone clear this up for me?
09-06-2006, 10:22 AM
SadieKate

RECOVERY

You can't get stronger without allowing muscles to rebuild. They can only do this with recovery rides. A good training plan includes variety.

Read up on periodization. This may help you with the concept.
09-06-2006, 10:27 AM
li10up

My recovery days are built into my off days (racquetball days). Mon Wed Sat riding, Tue Thur racquetball. Then on Sun I'm usually just a slug. :)
So if I don't need recovery days on the bike is there any reason to ride easier?
09-06-2006, 10:48 AM
SadieKate

The purpose of recovery is to have some motion and circulation without stressing the muscles. Intense training (riding or otherwise) that stress leg muscles actually put micro-tears in the muscles. The muscles will only rebuild without this stress. I personally would not consider racquetball a recovery activity at all. Since you say you're not tired after riding, your cycling is more likely the recovery activity for the racquetball.
09-06-2006, 10:52 AM
Cassandra_Cain

Hi…

Just a question for you – how did you come up with that max HR? Formula? Other?

What range you train in could be the subject of endless discussions. I guess I would ask – what are your goals? What do you want to do? Is there some objective/ride/number/feat that you want to achieve?

The reason you train intentionally at a lower HR than what you can sustain is entirely in how it affects the body. Riding at the highest HR you can sustain is going to be very different, on your body, than riding at a lower HR.

A generally accepted and successful way to train is to do a fair bit of long-distance, moderate paced riding. This is typically called LSD. This builds up your aerobic base, makes you more efficient, conditions your muscles/joints/tendons/ligaments/etc. When you’ve done a decent amount of this, say 250-500 miles, then you can start higher intensity workouts.

I ride 3x/week like you do. My typical approach is 1) LSD ride on weekends, say 40-60 miles at a moderate pace, 2) shorter ride with all hill intervals and hill repeats during the week, at say 95-105% of my lactate threshold heartrate (LT), 3) similar to #1, but a bit shorter, mainly for recovery.

If you ride hard all the time you will quickly plateau. The body needs to be pushed, yes, to overcompensate and be stronger – but it needs just as much time and rides, where it can recuperate and heal. Ignoring one will make your overall fitness suffer.

I’d suggest books like Joe Friel’s Cyclist Training Bible.

Here’s an excerpt from one of his books – a person asked – why is easier better….

The answer to your question really depends upon where your current fitness levels are. Simply riding for two hours in a relatively easy state (heart rate zones 1-2) will not improve fitness very much if you already have sufficient aerobic endurance and muscular adaptations necessary for higher intensity workouts. But, if you have not built sufficient aerobic fitness and have not gradually introduced more ride time to your muscles, riding a two-hour workout within heart rate zones 1-2 can be very beneficial towards your overall fitness and race results later on.

Have you ever heard the saying "races are won and lost in the winter?" What this refers to is an athlete's true peak fitness is first established within the preparation and base periods. The larger the base (to a point) the higher the peak and less risk of injury. By skipping a proper base period an athlete will risk having lower fitness during their peak, as compared to if they had a high quality base period. As mentioned earlier, the risk of injury also rises with a short base period and if you're injured you certainly can not compete at your potential.

On a slightly different topic you mentioned a percentage of max heart rate within your question. Ultrafit Associates does not describe training intensity by using max heart rate. By doing so there is an assumption that two athletes with the same max heart rate are performing at the very same intensity levels. When in fact heart rate levels are highly variable between athletes when it comes to the percentage of max heart rate at which they become anaerobic. We base intensity, with respect to heart rate, on the percentage of an athletes lactate threshold heart rate as a determinant of intensity levels. You can read more on this within any of Joe's "Training Bible" books.
09-06-2006, 10:53 AM
maillotpois

DItto what SK said. Racquetball is probably great cross-training (works a lot of different muscles, pounds on your bones to make them healthy, and helps w/agility and fast twitch muscle stuff), but it's not a recovery activity!

You also didn't say what your goals are. If you are happy riding at a comfortable pace three times a week, then it sounds like you have a great plan going. If you want to get faster, ride longer, do harder rides, then you need to alter your riding plan. But you didn't say that. Hard to give a suggestion when we don't know what the goal is.
09-06-2006, 11:13 AM
li10up

Quote:

Originally Posted by SadieKate

The purpose of recovery is to have some motion and circulation without stressing the muscles. Intense training (riding or otherwise) that stress leg muscles actually put micro-tears in the muscles. The muscles will only rebuild without this stress. I personally would not consider racquetball a recovery activity at all. Since you say you're not tired after riding, your cycling is more likely the recovery activity for the racquetball.

Are you saying I'm not riding hard enough? I admit that my legs don't bother me at all after my rides. Should I be riding harder? But if I do continue riding the way I do I don't really need to worry about recovery, right? I wouldn't classify the riding or the racquetball as intense...in the sense of there being mico-tears and I need to rest to recover.

Quote:

Just a question for you – how did you come up with that max HR? Formula? Other?

That is the highest number I've seen on my HR monitor...and that was going up a hill trying to keep pace with someone else. I could barely breathe at that point so I think it's pretty accurate.

Quote:

You also didn't say what your goals are. If you are happy riding at a comfortable pace three times a week, then it sounds like you have a great plan going. If you want to get faster, ride longer, do harder rides, then you need to alter your riding plan. But you didn't say that. Hard to give a suggestion when we don't know what the goal is.

I would like to be able to ride faster (an average speed of 15-16 mph) and longer (I would like to ride a century next year - I did a metric this year). Nearly all my rides have been 20-25 miles with 3 or 4 50-62 mile rides. But I have ridden over 1300 miles so far this year. I guess I'd classify all of my rides, exceptions noted, as base miles.
09-06-2006, 11:25 AM
Cassandra_Cain

Quote:

Originally Posted by li10up

That is the highest number I've seen on my HR monitor...and that was going up a hill trying to keep pace with someone else. I could barely breathe at that point so I think it's pretty accurate.

Ok. If that is just the highest # you've seen on your HR monitor then I would seriously doubt it is your max, or even particularly close to it. It is very hard to acheive max HR on a bike because it is not a fully weight bearing activity like say running. Running or even inline skating uses more muscles and thus can produce a higher HR.

We mentioned this in a thread recently but, I would forget about MAX HR. It is one of the least useful numbers IMO. Trying to reach your MAX hr can be dangerous on a bike, especially on the road - you could be close to blacking out and keeling over.

Much more useful is your LT, lactate threshold. Do a 30 minute time trial - ride as hard as you can. Your avg HR on the monitor is a good indication of your LT. Then when you do your regular rides, base them as a % of this LT number, which you can measure, and not have to guess on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by li10up

I would like to be able to ride faster (an average speed of 15-16 mph) and longer (I would like to ride a century next year - I did a metric this year). Nearly all my rides have been 20-25 miles with 3 or 4 50-62 mile rides. But I have ridden over 1300 miles so far this year. I guess I'd classify all of my rides, exceptions noted, as base miles.

Pick one or the other - longer or faster. If you want to ride longer than just bump up the mileage slowly, say 5-10% weekly. There are countless riding plans for a century online.

If you want to ride faster, than you would do intervals of high intensity work at the level/speed you want to get to. Do that and combine it with longer, slower rides, and you'll be faster.

Some books that might help:

The Heart Rate Monitor Book for Outdoor and Indoor Cyclists: A Heart Zone Training Program by Sally Edwards and Sally Reed

Total Heart Rate Training: Customize and Maximize Your Workout Using a Heart Rate Monitor by Joe Friel
09-06-2006, 11:34 AM
maillotpois

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cassandra_Cain

Much more useful is your LT, lactate threshold.

RIGHT!! And that is one number you can actually change (improve) with focused training! Unlike VO2 max, max HR (generally), etc.
09-06-2006, 01:44 PM
li10up

Quote:

Much more useful is your LT, lactate threshold. Do a 30 minute time trial - ride as hard as you can. Your avg HR on the monitor is a good indication of your LT. Then when you do your regular rides, base them as a % of this LT number, which you can measure, and not have to guess on.

Finally!! Information on LT which is easy to make sense of! I'm assuming you do a 10 minute warm up or so before going all out for 30 minutes? Thanks for the info.

Quote:

Ok. If that is just the highest # you've seen on your HR monitor then I would seriously doubt it is your max, or even particularly close to it. It is very hard to acheive max HR on a bike because it is not a fully weight bearing activity like say running. Running or even inline skating uses more muscles and thus can produce a higher HR.

I did not know that. It seemed like it should be accurate since I'm 44 years old and the 220-age thing falls somewhat close to that...which I know is just a guesstimate. I always thought any aerobic exercise done at max capacity (to the point of almost collapsing) would give you your max HR.
09-06-2006, 03:08 PM
Cassandra_Cain

Quote:

Originally Posted by li10up

Finally!! Information on LT which is easy to make sense of! I'm assuming you do a 10 minute warm up or so before going all out for 30 minutes? Thanks for the info.

Glad to be of help :)

Heh....yes. Please warm up for 10 minutes, maybe a bit more even.

When you first launch into your 30 minute time trial your HR will take a few minutes to catch up to the effort. But catch up it will. After the first 10 minutes it should be quite stable - and that number, whatever it is = LT.