12 Week Plan and AnT vs. using AeT

  • Creator
  • #60733
    Cory from Wisconsin


    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 🙂


  • Participant
    Cory from Wisconsin on #60735

    *Topic should have read 12 week plan NOT 8 week plan. I have no idea if the 8 week plan uses AnT or AeT for Z2 and my question is in regards to the 12 week time crunched plan. Thanks.

    Anonymous on #60752


    Thanks for writing in with you question. You already answered it: The Time Crunched plan use AnT as a reference point because there is more high intensity in this shorter plan and time is a bog factor. If you would like to do an AeT test and use that for governing your aerobic base work that will be wise but not essential.

    I hope this helps.

Viewing 2 replies - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.