[davidorti]

Hi all, I have been reading this site for quite long time and I am currently reading TftNA. I have some thoughts regarding volume tracking in the early, transition phase of a training plan (and also forward, really).

When taking training hours into account, does time volume just accumulate aerobic base spent time, or any training time? Does it includes strength training too? Does it includes Z0, recovery sessions as well, and why? Last question makes me difficult to separate training from active daily life.

In my case I am looking to spend about 50% of volume of past years, which is around 5 hours to me. I feel that I reach this level quite easily if I add strength training and recovery walks/sessions.

Thank you all in advance,
(and sorry if this question is already answered/obvious for some reason)
David

Topic

[depeyster]

depeyster on June 21, 2019 at 8:40 am #23775

I too am curious. If I do a 15-minute warm-up and 15-minute cooldown do those 30 minutes count towards training time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous on June 21, 2019 at 5:08 pm #23804

Yes, it all counts. Strength, recovery sessions, warm-ups and cool-downs are all important and should be counted toward the total.

@davidorti: Can you clarify what you mean by “active daily life”? In general, I wouldn’t include any activity with a heart rate below 50% of maximum. Individual work capacity is also a factor. What is a non-fitness-improving walk for some may indeed be training for another if the latter was very untrained.

It’s okay if the transition phase feels quite easy. It should feel easy. It lays the basic groundwork for more work later on.

[davidorti]

davidorti on June 21, 2019 at 5:38 pm #23806

Ok! Thank you Scott for your input.

I wasn’t sure if I was supposed to count there some occasional bike rides, or some other displacements I do in my daily life that maybe are quite similar (but shorter) to a recovery activity. I don’t see that activities below 50% should be excluded as a norm: I have to work hard to surpass that barrier in a bike ride, even walking –excluding uphill– on a recovery session is also well below that.

Also, those heart rates you (and Scott, Steve) refer, are taken simply relatively to the maximum? By calculating it over my rest hearth rate (Karvonen formula) I think they fit more easily into recognizeable feelings:

Target Heart Rate = [(max HR – resting HR) × %Intensity] + resting HR

What do you think?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous on June 21, 2019 at 5:59 pm #23808

Maximum heart rate is not a great reference, but it seems more widely known. That’s why I mentioned it. It’s much better to work off of your aerobic threshold heart rate.

I’m not familiar with the Karvonen method, but a couple of quick calculations tell me that (for me) it would recommend heart rates that are too high. For example, a target of 50% prescribed 63% of maximum, and a target of 75% prescribed 82% of maximum. For me, those are all very different intensities.

I recommend using your AeT HR and then going with the intensities that are mentioned in TftNA and TftUA.

[davidorti]

davidorti on June 22, 2019 at 5:37 am #23815

Yeah, probably varies. I find that some point in between two methods work best for me. What do you mean, using AeT HR and relating intensities to it?

Also, AeT HR is not fixed, right? Varies with fitness, I mean.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous on June 25, 2019 at 4:12 pm #24000

At UA, we usually use set AeT as the top of Z2 and AnT as the top of Z3. The top of Z1 would be a heart rate ten percent lower than AeT.