[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on February 28, 2022 at 10:27 am · in reply to: Downhill skiing #63753

Hi Shashi – that’s useful.

I’m comfortable with RPE so happy to use that. All I need to do now is estimate how much of the day was actually skiing – I guess sitting on a chairlift going up doesn’t count :-(((

Thanks for quick response.

Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on January 15, 2022 at 5:55 am · in reply to: Forum Index #62159

Thanks for responses guys. Agree you can use the search function, but basically it’s confirmed – it’s broke. Whilst by no means vital it was good to be able to browse posts by topic. Would be good if someone can fix.

Cheers,
Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on January 11, 2022 at 12:14 am · in reply to: Forum Index #61905

Hi Shashi,

Tried link and same result – have attached screenshot.

Thanks,
Derek

Attachments:

You must be logged in to view attached files.

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on November 9, 2021 at 7:33 am · in reply to: TSS for indoor climbing sessions #59029

Hi Shashi,

Thanks for the note back and reference to a very useful article – I need to go back and reassess my climbing sessions as they are “scored” too high (as I kind of expected), and also my hill sessions as I have not included the fudge factor of an additional TSS for every 1000 ft climbing. In the total scheme of things it won’t make much difference to my CTL.

I kind of expected your last answer – I can still climb, but I won’t get too much direct ski mountaineering benefit from it although as a full body workout it won’t being doing any harm. Consequently, I’ve now added a short leg strength session to one of my standard short cardio sessions to make up. Having reviewed last years efforts, leg endurance rather than cardio needs addressing, hence the focus. Rest assured though, still doing a good volume of Z2 cardio work.

Cheers and thanks again,
Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on September 21, 2021 at 11:35 am · in reply to: Chamonix Mountain Fit suggested TSS #57219

Hi Guys …. read through the links and the info is really useful, particular SJ’s in depth explanation in 2017. Thanks a lot.

Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on July 6, 2021 at 8:21 am · in reply to: Declining pace at AeT #55502

Hi RG,

I sympathise with your question. In short, STICK WITH IT.

We’re of a similar age and looking at your treadmill results we have a similar HR profile so my experience may apply to you, particularly if like me your prior training was mainly in the “harder is better” camp.

I’m approaching the end of year 2 using UA protocols and it did take some time to see improvements. My first AeT (UA’s treadmill test) gave me an AeT of 110 and boy, was it hard to go slow enough to stay under 110, so I quickly gave up biking and used the gym treadmill as my main training vehicle for most of the first 6 months. During that time I did move my AeT up to around 120 but like you was getting frustrated. Further AeT treadmill tests were giving inconsistent results and I was trying to force-fit AeT improvements into the results. Scott Johnston (UA founder) quite firmly pulled me back – at my age (now 65) an AeT in the 120’s may well be as good as it gets, but I should see speed gains with that. Roll on to now ….. my AeT is still in the 120’s, but I am fitter, faster and stronger than I have ever been in my life, both on the bike and in the mountains …. full stop.

I looked back at my records and averaged around 9hrs training a week for the first 30 weeks with >90% of that time at or under AeT, and most of the time above would only have been by a few beats – I did zero high intensity sessions during that time, and to this day low intensity sessions are still the mainstay of my training. Net, stick with it and try to get weekly volume in the 8-12hr range – it will work, but the adaptions take longer at our age, and everyone is different.

I could go into a lot more detail, particularly tweaks I have made in year 2 indirectly due to COVID restrictions, but the principle of having low intensity as the mainstay still stands. The exact definition of low intensity is where protocols differ, particularly if you have a large gap between AeT an AnT that due to age cannot be reduced to the desirable 10bpm. Discussion for another day.

Hope this helps.
Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on April 20, 2021 at 8:15 am · in reply to: Cycling Tempo rides #53268

Thanks AshRick ….. agree re their usefulness and already being done once a week, and quiet often drifting into tempo during Sunday rides with the boys. Doesn’t really answer my question however …. is a tempo/Z3 ride classified as “low” or “high” intensity when it comes to the sacred annual 80:20 rule.

Cheers.

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on November 16, 2020 at 11:18 am · in reply to: Chest strap HRM recommendation #46895

Another vote for Polar – use for years without any issues.

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on September 14, 2020 at 12:03 pm · in reply to: AeT feels like a decent effort #45040

Thanks for clarification Scott – makes sense.

Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on September 7, 2020 at 11:03 am · in reply to: AeT feels like a decent effort #44801

Hi Scott,

Just for the avoidance of doubt, I assume the “too easy” statement refers to training done within Z1 and Z2. My understanding is that anything below Z1 is “recovery” and hence has little to no training stimulus. Whilst it won’t do any damage, equally it won’t drive any adaptation.

Agree though about trying to be right on AeT. I made that mistake early on and now work my base sessions around the Z2 mid point and don’t get hung up when it drifts either side of that.

Thanks for clarification.
Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on September 2, 2020 at 4:22 am · in reply to: Z3 Yes, no, maybe #44706

I’m with Rich.b on this. I also have Friel’s “Fast After 50” and the hint is in the title FAST. My interpretation of his book and protocols are very much aimed at the competitive athlete who wishes to retain competitiveness after they are 50. Uphill Athlete, as Scott J says, is very much based at mountaineering in it’s broadest sense and hence the protocols have a different focus as the “events” have different needs. Specificity is driving the two different protocols – neither is wrong as long as you apply to the right events.

On a personal front, whilst I’m not and never have been a competitive athlete I do have two slightly competing “events” – mountaineering in all it’s guises, and road cycling. Hence I mix protocols: Autumn/Winter and into Spring is almost entirely Z1/Z2 and ME sessions as that is my prime mountaineering time. Come the Spring/Summer, the road bike comes out and I need to add tempo sessions in Z3/Z4 – although I still maintain a couple of Z1/Z2 sessions a week – and there is the occasional flat out “time trial” ride. I’m about to start the change back to mountaineering and as the gyms have opened back up will be able to do the first AeT test since January – it will be very interesting to see where this sits – I certainly feel fitter and stronger than I did six months ago as evidenced by longer and faster rides than ever. We’ll find out soon what the numbers say 🙂

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on August 11, 2020 at 4:39 am · in reply to: ADS and weekend hikes/ rides #44238

Hi Emwa,

Let me join in the call for an ADS support group – might be useful as I had a 25% gap between AeT and AnT even after 4 months of pure Z1/Z2 training – sever ADS. In my case it’s probably age – I’m 64!!! So to that end let me share some insights from some 50 years of hiking and a year using UA protocols. It will no doubt be a lengthy reply but hopefully it will give you some confidence and ideas to move forward.

1. Let me state up front – UA completely changed my approach to training and after almost a year using UA as the basis for training I am hiking and riding better than I probably was in my 20’s. It works, but you have to be patient, and in my case adapt it to meet your desires. It also takes a bit more time – HIIT is a great regime for those who are really time limited, but if you want long term gains you need to invest a bit more time. As I will explain, I don’t follow it rigidly, nor do I get too hung up with false accuracy – ie if HR drifts over AeT by a few bpm so what – your metabolism is a continuum of aerobic and anaerobic, it’s not an either/or.

2. If you’re reading this reply you are probably like me: you are not, or have never been, an elite athlete. You are simply looking to improve your fitness to increase your enjoyment from whatever endurance activity you participate in – remember the word “enjoyment”

3. There are more training regimes than ever across the globe, each having their advocates. Fundamentally they are all variations on the same basic theme – if you want to improve your endurance you have to do cardio exercise – 3 or more times a week every week, of 30 minutes or more duration. Whatever form it takes doesn’t really matter, your cardio fitness will improve. Example 1: in the early 2000’s way before UA, I had an annual hiking weekend with some friends. One year we had a newbie – they felt they were fit and were younger than most of us. However, they were not hiking fit and by the end of the weekend were completely shattered. Role on a year, they came back and the difference was huge, as was their enjoyment. What caused the change – regular 2-3 times a week spin classes at the local gym. Now spin is a form of HIIT so not within the UA protocol, but for them it worked and really transformed their performance and their enjoyment. So, like thousands did before UA came along, any regular form of cardio training will improve your cardio performance. Period.

So, if you’re still reading here is some practical advice based on my last year with UA.

1. Are you still weight training? If so then you have a decision to make – drop that and focus on cardio? Doing both will be hard on your body and time. If you wish to maintain some weight training then perhaps move it to high rep/low weight ONCE per week max. If you choose all body exercises (deadlifts, squats) then it will keep body familiar with weights whilst giving you a muscular endurance benefit to better augment cardio. But keep it “easy” – your main focus should be cardio.

2. If you can drop the bike element for a few months then I think this will help. Riding with severe ADS and getting enjoyment is not easy imho.

3. Focus on walking. I assume you have access to a gym and hence a treadmill. Walk on this 3 times a week with a minimum 10% incline. Pace it so HR stays in top half of your Z2 and start at 30min per session. Work it up to 3 by 90-120minutes. Once you get there redo HR drift test, reset AeT (hopefully improved) and repeat. The benefit of this is it’s 100% controllable and will start the adaptation changes in your aerobic metabolism. After 3-4 weeks of this start trying to do some of the sessions fasted as this will aid the changes.

4. Weekend hikes. Still do them and enjoy them. Perhaps ask your friends just to reign in the pace a bit, but don’t get too hung up on your HR. The more you can keep it in Z2 the better, but enjoy the hike and the chat. The one caveat to this is if these hikes really fatigue you – if so then you maybe need to shorten them or drop the intensity.

5. Be patient: it took me nearly 2 months to start moving my AeT so it takes time. IF possible, stick with this walking only regime through to YE – it will work but you do need to keep at it weekly and remain patient. (I found audio books great for lessening the boredom of long treadmill sessions)

6. Riding. This is where sticking to UA protocol doesn’t work for me. If you research any riding training plans from any reputable source it will include combinations of hill work, tempo rides, intervals, time trials etc etc as well as long easy rides. Basically that’s what I’ve done over the last 4 months, but have kept in 2 easy Z1/Z2 rides. Have I gone backwards – no!!! Example 2: 35 mile Z1/Z2 ride 4 months ago: frustratingly slow, ended up in Z3 for nearly 10% of time, and had average HR mid Z2. Role on 4 months to yesterday – same ride: 17% faster, zero time in Z3 and HR average was mid Z1 – huge improvement. And instead of hanging onto the back of the group on Sunday rides, I’m now one of the first to top of the hills, often in the front when pushing into a headwind and setting PB’s almost on a weekly basis. My cardio is best I think it’s ever been, and even when in Z3 it’s perfectly comfortable. Once the gyms open up it will be interesting to see if my AeT has moved up, but to be honest I’m happy just enjoying the increased fitness.

7. Final point. Whether hiking or riding, once you get used to going “slow” I found it’s actually much more enjoyable. I’m not shattered when I get back home, I can go out more often without feeling fatigued, I have time to enjoy views and idle chat, and get a real satisfaction from not having to stop for rests or food or whatever. And actually the current “slow” is not actually that slow any more :-))) Whilst I’m not sticking rigidly to the UA protocols it forms the backbone of my exercise these days. It is now much more part of my life than purely training. Hence I’m exercising more which of course makes me fitter.

As I say long note, but hope it helps.

Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on June 26, 2020 at 3:07 pm · in reply to: Am I ruining my aerobic base for short term gains by adding in these harder sessions? #43075

Hi Guys,

Thanks to you both for your input and I agree an AeT test is a priority. So that it’s an “apples for apples” I want to do on treadmill, which means I need to wait until gyms open up again – hopefully some point in July. I will do and let you know results.

I suspect that my AeT has increased. Gut feel from how I’m feeling on the bike, plus Scott S’s comment that typically AeT on a bike is 10-20 bpm less than a weight bearing AeT. Riding around my weight bearing AeT of 120 is really easy and yes, my pace in Z1/Z2 sessions on bike has increased in last 3 months by >10%, although I suspect that may be due to addition of more intense sessions. It may be helpful to share 2 examples of fitness improvements:

1) The mountains: a 6500 vertical feet mountain day with one 20 minute break for food was relatively easy – haven’t done that vertical in a day for probably >40 years, and certainly never with the relative ease

2) An identical repeat ride: June 2020: 24.4km/hr, June 2019: 23.7km/hr – a small 3% improvement from pre to post UA protocol. BUT that’s not the whole story: 2020 done with an avg HR of 120, down from 147, and a Strava Relative Effort of 77, down from my all time record relative effort of 440 (both Relative Efforts were HR based not RPE (Perceived Relative Effort)) Further the June 2019 ride required a lengthy recovery stop at around 2/3rds distance and I was done-in at end. June 2020 was non stop and comfortable throughout. Not olympian pace and never will be, but a quantitive example of improvements and for that I’m delighted and grateful – thanks guys.

I have two dilemmas however:

1) Apart from the health, well being and general enjoyment of exercise, my sole reason for “training” is to keep myself fit enough to still do multi-day walking, ski and/or bike tours, some of which are recognisably tough, well into my 70s and hopefully longer. Some of these can have days of up to 12 hours – sometimes back-to-back – and some single day events can be >12 hours. Therefore I schedule a few training days to simulate these long days (or close to them). It’s these longer days where I really struggle to keep my HR below AeT, particularly on uphill sessions after the first 2-3 hours of work. Is this HR drift upwards not a natural consequence of continual work? In the mountains I can (mostly) keep HR in Z1/Z2 for >80% of time with the rest between 5-10bpm above AeT – nowhere near AnT or hard RPE. Looking back at my 27 week “weight bearing” training period of approx 260 hours, I averaged 89% in Z1/Z2 across the 27 weeks with only 3 weeks above 20% of AeT. On the bike however it’s more challenging … see point 2.

2) I enjoy cycling with friends during the summer for the company, social chat etc, and for the lightly competitive side. However, I simply can’t cycle with them and keep my HR below 120 all of the time – they’d be waiting for me at the top of every hill which is simply not fair on them. My averages are often 120 or less as per the real example above, but – sad to say – I’m now averaging >40% of weekly volume above my AeT 3 weeks out of 4. Not sure if it makes much difference, but most of the above AeT work is mid Z3 – rarely near, on or above AnT. Not doing this will considerably reduce my enjoyment of cycling.

Sorry if this is a bit rambling and perhaps my desires, age, fitness levels and physiology are unique, although I’m sure you’ll have some non-competitive clients wishing to hit a “tick list” mountaineering objective that are not too different from me. At risk of repeating myself, I’m fully bought into the UA principle and once the bike is put away end of Sept I’ll be back into “weight bearing” base building (Z1/Z2) as per last year, but I do need to go above my current AeT – if indeed it’s “stuck” around 120 – to get the satisfaction from cycling I desire. I also need to remember that I’m less than a year into the UA protocol – not long given the years of “harder-is-better” training that preceded it.

As always any comments/advice welcome, but of nothing else I hope the above helps you understand my motivations and decisions. If it’s suboptimal then so-be-it – I’m still seeing more benefits from your protocols than from any other protocol I’ve used in past 20+ years.

Thanks and stay safe,
Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on June 24, 2020 at 5:08 am · in reply to: Am I ruining my aerobic base for short term gains by adding in these harder sessions? #43019

Hi Scott,

Quick practical question if I may.

It’s been about 10 weeks since I started adding in intensity, so according to your advice above I should be dropping this and moving back to Z1/Z2 only. I was planning to do this during the quieter Sept – Dec period to add more aerobic base, but worry that if I do now I’ll lose the fitness/performance gains of the last 10 weeks. With an AeT of 120 and AnT of 152, Z1/Z2 sessions are very easy from both a HR and a RPE perspective so my weekly training load will reduce unless I add quite a lot more duration.

Any thoughts or advice on what to do till Sept?

Thanks again,
Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on June 23, 2020 at 3:08 pm · in reply to: Am I ruining my aerobic base for short term gains by adding in these harder sessions? #43012

Hi Scott …. as you say conversation is always good as we are all different in so many ways. I do hope however that my bike AeT is not 10-20 beats less than weight bearing – that would make it between 100 and 110 – I’d be cycling that slowly that pedestrians would be walking past me!!! Slight exaggeration, but you get the point.

Re getting to a 10% gap between AeT and AnT, I had a conversation with the other Scott some months ago about my AeT test results and he firmly advised that at my age I might have to accept that my AeT might not get much if any higher than the 120 no matter how much training I did and I should accept it and focus more on the pace benefit, which to a certain extent I have done. Riding at a max of 110 however isn’t an viable option, let alone 100, but I still do regular sessions at or under my weight bearing AeT of 120. For info my at rest HR is around 50, by max is around 172 and I can maintain around 152 for between 40 – 60 minutes so I guess that’s my AnT.

At risk of repeating myself, the only solid thing I know is I’m a lot fitter than I can ever remember being, and I have always kept myself reasonable fit – long weekends in the mountains or a weeks hut to hut ski touring didn’t really require any pre training. Specifically, looking back at cycle routes done last year, I’m doing them faster and at a considerably lower average and peak HR so it is working and working well. I also have never arrived home this season completed done-in – something I fairly regularly did under the “harder is better” protocol of the past.

One MAJOR benefit for someone now in their 60’s is that AeT training is easy to do 4,5 even 6 days a week, week in week out, without feeling at all fatigued As you will well know, managing fatigue becomes more of an issue as we get older. Without the fatigue it’s enjoyable, and being enjoyable means it’s become part of my life structure, and without the fatigue it doesn’t interfere with other aspects of my life. I’ve done hard HIIT sessions in the past and been so exhausted that the rest of the day is pretty much wasted. The one thing I make sure I do include is periodisation – micro, meso and macro – irrespective of what training protocol you use, periodisation is always there in one form or other. As to what form that takes and what the focus of next year will be is in the lap of Coronavirus, but the “easy will be easy, and what hard there is will specific, time limited, and hard.

Thanks again for all the feedback. I’ll continue on the bike across the summer and take your points on board and once the gym opens up again will do another AeT test. As to what form training takes from then and what the focus of next year will be is in the lap of Coronavirus, but for sure the “easy will be easy and frequent, and the hard will specific, time limited, and hard”.

Take care,
Derek