|
| Author |
Message |
320DMsport
Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 243
 |
 Posted Fri Nov 6, 2009 10:39 pm |
Everone is different, if i'm doing a 5 hour ride i'll mix up some level 1 ridiing on the flat into low level 2 but if i stayed at level 1 for the entire ride i wouldn't be that taxed but i am used to doing longer events like 10 hour mtb enduro's where the terrain could have you in level 1 one minute then flat out the next.
As i was saying my mate uses pete read and his modern training plan is alot diff for this time of year compared to the black book.
But also if you haven't followed a program or riding aimlessly around like ruth said you will benefit.
It is 10 years old and things change.
|
|
|
320DMsport
Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 243
|
Posted Fri Nov 6, 2009 10:41 pm |
Also cheers Alex for the tips, i'm riding more like that this winter and i'm already feeling better after the last 2 months of varied intensity.
|
|
|
greenclaws
Joined: 26 Feb 2004
Posts: 48
Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted Sat Nov 7, 2009 11:30 pm |
I'm trying to follow the Black Book but am a bit confused about the HR zones. My MHR is 204 so my zone numbers look lime this
Level 0 - 133 (55% - 65%)
Level 1 - 153 ( 65% - 75%)
Level 2 - 173 (75% - 85%)
Level 3 - 194 (85% - 95%)
Level 4 - + (95%)
So if I'm doing a 3 hour ride at mid upper level 1 to low level 2 does this mean I should be keeping my HR between 143 -160 approx? Have I got this correct?
ANy help would be much appreciated
|
|
|
inseine
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
Posts: 339
|
Posted Sun Nov 8, 2009 5:33 pm |
| Quote: | So if I'm doing a 3 hour ride at mid upper level 1 to low level 2 does this mean I should be keeping my HR between 143 -160 approx? Have I got this correct?
|
I guess it is but I think you've got to go a bit on feel. AFAIK the idea is to ride at a constant an effort as possible without going mad at any point and arrive home 'pleasantly tired' I think he says. He also says that if it's way too easy or too hard then adjust your levels. It's too easy to hammer a climb and then spend 2 miles either waiting for your mates or recovering but I think you have to go outside the zone to get over some hills;
|
|
|
Si C
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 41
|
Posted Mon Nov 9, 2009 7:33 am |
| inseine wrote: | | Quote: | So if I'm doing a 3 hour ride at mid upper level 1 to low level 2 does this mean I should be keeping my HR between 143 -160 approx? Have I got this correct?
|
I guess it is but I think you've got to go a bit on feel. AFAIK the idea is to ride at a constant an effort as possible without going mad at any point and arrive home 'pleasantly tired' I think he says. He also says that if it's way too easy or too hard then adjust your levels. It's too easy to hammer a climb and then spend 2 miles either waiting for your mates or recovering but I think you have to go outside the zone to get over some hills; |
This is the only part of the Black Book that has me questioning what I am doing. Unless you live in the Cambridgeshire Fens I think keeping the HR zone tight on the longer level 1 ride is near on impossible. Pete also says in the book 'Controlled effort can be difficult, but it is vital that you do otherwise the session will be wasted'
I suppose it's how you interpret that line. Does controlled effort mean keeping it consisstant and not worrying about drifting out of your BPM range on hills, or staying tight to the BPM range even if it means granny gears and walking pace?
I suppose this is where books fall down as apposed to paying for a coach...they don't come with a phone line.
|
|
|
Alex_Simmons/RST
Joined: 14 Sep 2007
Posts: 1766
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
|
|
Si C
Joined: 20 Nov 2008
Posts: 41
|
Posted Mon Nov 9, 2009 10:18 am |
| Alex_Simmons/RST wrote: | To be frank, trying to keep within one limited "zone" is neither practical nor productive. It doesn't reflect real world riding. Power is highly variable, that's normal. Accept that if you live in variable terrain (or do any form of racing) then variable effort is a necessary element of training.
The idea on some days is simply not to attack the hills hard but approach them moderately. But attempting to ride up them in low level zone makes no sense. Unless you are totally cooked and have no choice  |
Thank you Alex.
I think I'm going to stick with the book, but adapt this longer ride given the advice from you guys.
The turbo sessions and 2 hour level 2 ride feel quiet taxing, and I can control them within the parameters that Pete Read suggests.
|
|
|
320DMsport
Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Posts: 243
|
Posted Mon Nov 9, 2009 7:49 pm |
That was my problem, kept low HR until end of january and did a sportive in feb and it was a total shock to the system.
Stick with it but be i can't hr rising on climbs is going to harm things.
I did like the power session but will modify it for this winter and i'll be riding using zones to top L3.
|
|
|
LoveVelo
Joined: 15 Nov 2009
Posts: 6
|
Posted Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:23 pm |
I've just read through the Black Book and there's one key aspect of it that troubles me, and it relates to the definition of heart rate bands. I come from a rowing background and have used a training guide devised by Concept 2, the ergometer manufacturers.
The full guide, which places great store by HR based routines, can be viewed here:
http://concept2.co.uk/training/guide
with the section specifically relating to HR bands here:
http://concept2.co.uk/training/guide?article=training_intensity
The Concept 2 guide uses a ramp test similar to that described in the Black Book to define MHR, so no difference there, but the means of defining HR bands is quite different. The Black Book arrives defines intensity levels as a simple percentage of MHR, whereas Concept 2 guide bases them on a heart rate range that also uses resting pulse as a factor.
Take as an example an athlete with an MHR of 200bpm and a resting pulse of 40bpm. Subtracting 40 from 200 gives a heart rate range of 160, and it is this figure that is used to define percentage of MHR, by adding a percentage of the range to the resting heart rate. To follow through that example, 85% of MHR would be (0.85x160)+40, giving a figure of 176bpm. This is rather different from the Black Book method which would define the 85% band as simply 0.85x200, ie 170 bpm. The difference is even more marked for less fit athletes. Take an example of a MHR of 170 combined with RHR of 60. 85% by the Concept 2 formula gives a target heart rate of 153.5, whereas Black Book gives a figure of 144.5.
It's fair to say, then, that an 85% HR based workout based on the Concept 2 method of defining heart rate range would feel significantly harder than one using heart rate defined using the Black Book.
Given that the Concept 2 erg is the de-facto standard for indoor rowers – used by pretty much every international rower in their training – and the guide is written by some very respected contributors in that field, I'm inclined to stick with its method for defining training bands. Sorry if this sets the cat among the pigeons!
|
|
|
inseine
Joined: 29 Jan 2008
Posts: 339
|
Posted Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:34 pm |
Lovevelo, I'm not sure it matters how you arrive at the figures. Maybe if Pete Reed had used the rowing method he'd have knocked 5% of the figures? Everyone seems to have a slightly different way to define the zones (and some of 4, 5 or 6 zones).
|
|
|
|
Search
