Hello,

Quick question regarding the difference in HR approach for the 24 week mountaineering plan vs. the 12 week time crunched plan. The 24 week plan uses AeT to 10 beats below AeT as the Z2 for the workouts (of which the plan had you test AeT in the beginning with a drift test, as well as establishing AnT) where as the 12 week plan appears to use 80-90% AnT for the Z2 and only conducts an AnT test at the beginning. In a perfect world in an athlete without ADS this should be approximately the same number. But knowing that most of the UA athletes suffer from ADS wouldn’t it make more sense to use AeT to 10 beats below AeT for the 12 week time crunched plan?

Does the 12 week time crunched plan use AnT based values because it doesn’t include an AeT test (likely due to time) or is there a more scientific/strategic reason for only using AnT.

I’m asking for my wife because I bought her the 12 week plan and she has never conducted a drift test for AeT. If I were doing the 12 week plan I would be very tempted to use AeT vs. the prescribed 80-90% AnT, but I’m open to hearing why that is a bad idea 🙂

Thanks,
Cory