Beginners Guide to Training Zones and Metabolic Thresholds

[redsonic]

A decent article on ABC News about training zones and metabolic thresholds for people like me who know nothing about them.
The journalist is a cyclist who was preparing for the Snowy Classic.

[LateStarter]

I might get into it more seriously some day but may need the UTS expert to translate for me. Bike does not have power meter or heart rate stuff but my "smart" trainer(s) have power meter numbers output. The Garmin says my FTP is "poor", I think it is being generous, (158 I think), based on highest average 20 minute power during rides, it spies on me all the time. But if I do a moderately hilly hour follow course indoor ride (say 20 kms / 400m) then it will reckon I have spent 100% of the time at Threshold / VO2 Max (zones 4 & 5) or above!.

To do most of a ride in Endurance zone 2 I would have to potter along a flat course at about 15km/h. Something is wrong somewhere? My trainers (don't ask why I have two!) don't really inspire confidence, the Tacx Flow (wheel on) is more "fun", spins along nicely but I suspect is too optimistic with regard to its grade/speed/power relationship (power curves or something). Whereas the Tacx Flux (wheel-on) is just hard work, very heavy pedalling (even downhill) and not much fun but maybe closer to the real outdoor me??

If the Garmin is "controlling" then everything is harder with both trainers than if the Tacx training app (on phone) is controlling (for the same workout or follow course) so more lack of confidence as to the "reality" of the numbers?

[g-boaf]

To do most of a ride in Endurance zone 2 I would have to potter along a flat course at about 15km/h. Something is wrong somewhere? My trainers (don't ask why I have two!) don't really inspire confidence, the Tacx Flow (wheel on) is more "fun", spins along nicely but I suspect is too optimistic with regard to its grade/speed/power relationship (power curves or something). Whereas the Tacx Flux (wheel-on) is just hard work, very heavy pedalling (even downhill) and not much fun but maybe closer to the real outdoor me??

The Flux may be the more reliable one, but with those wheel on trainers you have to know how to get them calibrated:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Zwift/comments ... _zwift_or/

Otherwise you can end up with world-tour pro levels of power. Cool for winning races in Zwift (or others) and looking like a monster, but not good if you want to improve your own fitness (which needs accurate measurements).

I've only recently been using trainers that are direct drive, they remove all the difficulty.

The tricks to getting better are to alternate between your hard training and easy rides. Do your outdoor rides easy and do your training (indoor) hard. For the indoor to work, you have to know your FTP, which means one of those fun 20 minute efforts and then take 0.95 of the result. Then you can start with your training and after four to five weeks you might try another FTP test to see how you are going.

[Mr Purple]

I might get into it more seriously some day but may need the UTS expert to translate for me. Bike does not have power meter or heart rate stuff but my "smart" trainer(s) have power meter numbers output. The Garmin says my FTP is "poor", I think it is being generous, (158 I think), based on highest average 20 minute power during rides, it spies on me all the time. But if I do a moderately hilly hour follow course indoor ride (say 20 kms / 400m) then it will reckon I have spent 100% of the time at Threshold / VO2 Max (zones 4 & 5) or above!.

To do most of a ride in Endurance zone 2 I would have to potter along a flat course at about 15km/h. Something is wrong somewhere? My trainers (don't ask why I have two!) don't really inspire confidence, the Tacx Flow (wheel on) is more "fun", spins along nicely but I suspect is too optimistic with regard to its grade/speed/power relationship (power curves or something). Whereas the Tacx Flux (wheel-on) is just hard work, very heavy pedalling (even downhill) and not much fun but maybe closer to the real outdoor me??

Your Flux is far more likely to be accurate being a 'wheel off' trainer so I'd rely on that.

158W is not disastrous depending on your weight and age. Be aware that FTP is by and large an abstract concept - it is useful for gauging training zones and as a measure of fitness but despite the name is not really an accurate measure of how much power you will really put out over an hour.

My actual one hour power is only about 90% of FTP, because I absolutely hate being at FTP for more than about 30 minutes. Even the 20 minute FTP tests are diabolical. I always think of it as 'I can put out this much power for 20 minutes, but I don't want to'. Even my harder training rides don't really get more than about 75% FTP and I push pretty hard. So your outdoor estimates aren't actually a great estimate of what you 'can' do.

[am50em]

Technically FTP is the power where maximal lactate is just being cleared.
https://www.trainerroad.com/blog/what-f ... -cyclists/
The time period cyclist can maintain this is 30 to 70 mins. Have to be top level cyclist to get up and over the hour mark.

[g-boaf]

You can also do ramp tests as well then take 0.75x whatever the final minute of power is. That may be better than a 20min or 60min all out effort.

The FTP test is also about knowing how to use your power so you don't blow up too early.

The FTP number also is not really comparable from one person to the next, one guy might have 320w while the next one has 245w, but that 245w person might be very, very light so their watts/kg are much higher.

What you are after is your own number and use that to quantify how you are tracking.

And get into the practice of using something like TrainingPeaks to accurately track your TSS (training stress score), CTL (chronic training load - sort of like your fitness) and TSB (training stress balance).

My current FTP is 265w, but that's over 1 hour and so my 20 minute, if I could be bothered to kill myself might be higher still - but I don't like sitting at 180bpm+ for long amounts of time.