[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on September 12, 2019 at 1:32 pm · in reply to: Improving AeT #28338

Hi Scott,

Thanks for quick reply. Understand your point on plans – right now I constantly tweaking as it beds in. Point noted on the ramp – right now I’m finding the training load pretty easy as it’s a lot less intense than I’m used to, but will bring it back at first signs of fatigue.

Interesting point on ME – I had wondered about including but will drop and stick to aerobic – I can add to last two months however, as I have experienced legs tiring on long days before the rest of me – they’re strong, but could do with a bit of endurance work – last two months should suffice.

10:10:15:25:40 is simply the weekly training profile as a % of planned weekly volume – 10% on day 1, 10% on day 2, 15% on day 3, 25% on Day 4 and 40% on day 5 ….. most likely change will be reversing the day 4 and day 5 loads.

6 weeks is good for me for retest.

Thanks for the advice – much appreciated.

Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on September 1, 2019 at 3:38 pm · in reply to: Strict Zone 2 vs the 80/20 rule for ADS #27732

Thanks Scott ….. appreciate the advice ….. think I can still do the Sunday cycle but need to modify …. food for thought.

Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on August 31, 2019 at 3:15 am · in reply to: Strict Zone 2 vs the 80/20 rule for ADS #27624

Hi Scott,

May I probe your answer to JDB’s question a bit further.

My primary aim is to improve my aerobic base for multi day events – not races, but tough mountaineering/ski touring journeys. I’ve based my program around Z1 and Z2 zones where top of Z2 is my AeT as measured by recent heart rate drift test. I intend to redo the test monthly and adjust as or if the AeT moves up which is should do as i suffer from ASD. Most of the training will be “walking” based as I live close to mountains, but I was intending to keep in my standard Sunday cycle with friends as much as anything for the social side. However that cycle will take me into Z3 and occasionally into Z4 – will that reduce the effectiveness or even negate all the Z1/Z2 work to build aerobic base.

Duration of base building plan is ~7 months, and the cycle part will be between 15 – 25% of weekly volume. Time spent in Z3/4 will be less than 10% of volume, but will be weekly. IS this ok, or should I look at removing it totally?

Thanks for any guidance.

Derek

[derekosborne22]

derekosborne22 on August 29, 2019 at 1:15 pm · in reply to: Training HR zone comparison #27566

Hi Guys,

Perhaps I can jump in on this topic.

I’m new to this forum, but have been training “traditionally” using HR Zones for many years, albeit not entirely comfortably as I’ve always believed them to be compromised – just look at how many ways you can find to calculate them. However, until I read Training for the Uphill Athlete, I had seen little else that was better. So, I’ll give you my take on it and how I have based my new training regime which starts September.

AeT and LT are the two markers and all my cardio training is based off them.

Having used a HR monitor regularly for years I had good evidence as to where my LT was – somewhere around the 150 mark. I know I can work continuously at around that HR for about an hour and not much longer before I have to really slow down.

AeT was new to me. I’ve have nose problems from rugby days in my youth so the “breathing through the nose method” wasn’t an option. However, having access to a gym with treadmills, I used to “60 minute constant load walk test” and that came up with and Set around 110 – a little lower than expected but will use for Sept and re-test. By the way, I’m in my 60’s hence the low numbers – not as young as I once was.

Key to both of the above is I noted the HR not based on any formula, but on MY metabolic response to exercise. That is new to me, and I guess many on this forum. My AeT and LT markers.

I then manually set up my HR Zones as follows:

Zone 1: 88 – 99 (80%-90% of 110)
Zone 2: 99 – 110 (90% – Aet)
Zone 3: 110 – 150 (AeT – LT)
Zone 4: 150 – 164 (LT – 95% of max HR)
Zone 5: >164

Not sure Zones 4 & 5 need differentiated the way I have but as they are least important to me then I’m not too bothered.

I’ve a 10 day tough ski mountaineering tour in 9 months time and have created a plan based around AeT and LT for the next 9 months, with a monthly re-test/reset of AeT over the first 5 months. For anyone who’s interested I’m happy to share progress, end results, and comparison with my fitness on previous tours using more traditional training methods. I’m also totally open to any thoughts, comments or tips.

Cheers Guys.