Zone 2 Training

daxplusplus

Does anyone else find strict HR zone 2 training tiring?

If I go out and stick strictly to HR zone 2 (don't go above or, importantly, below zone 2) for more than an hour I find it quite knackering on my legs and not particularly slow.

BTW if I just go out and ensure I only ever hit a max of Zone 2 then yeah .. it's a piece of cake. The important bit about the tiredness is the not dropping down into Zone 1 or below.

So just wondering whether others find it tiring too. Perhaps it's an adaptation that can occur? Or maybe I'm a bit weird as everything I read on here about zone 2 is that it's slow, easy and therefore boring?

Cheers.

imposter2.0

What does zone 2 mean to you? (different people use different zones) - and how accurate is your HR number?

daxplusplus

I use Friel's method of determining and setting HR zones (eg http://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2009/11/quick-guide-to-setting-zones.html)

Last year I did do a fair number of 10 mile TTs which helped pin point/confirm my lactate threshold heart rate (LTHR) .. from that I looked up the zones as defined in Friels training bible.

Now it could be that the zones are out via this method but when I'm in Zone 2 it's not like I'm out of breath .. my heart is not going ballistic and my breathing is raised but I can still talk (but it might be slightly in time with my breathing rather than at a more normal rate).

Newlife

I have done a fair bit of zone 2 riding for the first time this autumn and yes it is tiring but in a different way. I have found that the whole upper leg area seems to get worked but does not generate any long term fatigue that harder riding does. When I do a hard ride mainly my quads get sore which I can then carry for a day or two whilst the all over feeling of a 2 hour+ zone ride never carries over into the next day.

I have done a lot of reading up on zone 2 riding to build a solid base though so do have faith that it is the way to go if you have the time.

BSRU

Maybe it's a sign you have poor endurance or aerobic capacity.
I often ride for two hours in HR zone 2 on a turbo as part of endurance training, if I had more time I could ride alot longer.
Although tiring HR Zone 2 riding is much easier than a 60 - 90 minute HIIT session.

Dippydog3

Zone 2 is my favourite. I am happy there for two to three hours which I do several times a week.

Its sustained efforts above that that hurt me.

bahzob

I am doing a lot of Zone 2 training atm. I have always done a fair amount since its important for my priority events but these articles have swayed my mind on its general importance.

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/what-is-lactate-and-lactate-threshold

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/zone-2-training-for-endurance-athletes

I am using a combination of HR/power as a measure but also find that breathing is a good guide.

Zone 2 starts round about the point where you have to start breathing through the mouth to stay comfortable. Not consciously, it will kick in automatically primarily in order to expel CO2 rather than supply oxygen.

Zone 2 stops around the point where you notice your breathing and have to do it a bit harder to keep power stable. So around the point where you can't talk easily, without significant pauses to get catch your breath.

The thing that gets my head in about Zone 2 is trying to stick to a steady effort, especially since I do them indoors. So during a session I will do a number of ramps or criss crosses varying intensity from the low to high point above, perhaps also including some short durations around sweetspot/threshold. So, assuming zone 2 starts around 250W I will alternate 15 mins@250W/15 mins@275W or ramp up in 4x15 minute +25W intervals from 225W to 300W.

I find this way they are far more fun and, with the right musical background, I can easily do and really enjoy workouts of 2-3 hours.

daxplusplus

@bahzob I think I may have read one of your previous replies re: breathing as an indicator of zone 2 :-)

Like your thinking re: ramps\criss crosses .. the difference between low zone 2 and hi zone 2 is pretty pronounced (from HR and perceived effort).

Unfortunately (fortunately?) my circumstances mean I'm doing a large chunk of my zone 2 work in my commute and not on a turbo - not ideal as it's not long enough but I not complaining as the commute is non stop for approx 1 1/2 hours (on two days that increases up to 4-5 hours) through the cotswolds :-)

I'm in the process of getting a power meter and will combine it with getting my garmin to create more varied workouts (not sure how practical that will be .. but hopeful just haven't tried using that feature before).

I'm up for zone 2 work - there will be plenty of time for HIT stuff come spring (and yes @BSRU it's so much more painful).

@Newlife. Agreed re: upper leg feels tired and I can recover from zone 2rides a lot easier than harder rides.

mamba80

bahzob wrote:

IThe thing that gets my head in about Zone 2 is trying to stick to a steady effort, especially since I do them indoors. So during a session I will do a number of ramps or criss crosses varying intensity from the low to high point above, perhaps also including some short durations around sweetspot/threshold. So, assuming zone 2 starts around 250W I will alternate 15 mins@250W/15 mins@275W or ramp up in 4x15 minute +25W intervals from 225W to 300W.

According to the joe friel article linked to "Zone 2 55% to 74% of FTPw" (which would also be my understanding of this zone) if your starting z2 @ 250w and then going into TH @ 300 ish, your workout sounds like a sweet spot z3/4 session.

Or do you start at z0 as per the Pete Read zone setting method?

nibby

Just started this week keeping to a more structured training plan which involves around 4 rides in Zone 2

I would say the way you describe it above is how it feels to me, although I struggle to stay 100% in Z2 over the entire commute as I have lights/riding into the city etc to deal with so more difficult. I'm going to try a few on the turbo to try and not drop into Z1.

I've read it's good for endurance over the next 2-3 months.

meanredspider

It's funny reading this thread to see the different understandings of what "Zone 2" even is

It's no wonder this whole training thing is such a mess - there's no common understanding even of the terms used.

nibby

What do you think Zone2 is then?

I've been told my zone 2 is for endurance training. I've been told this by a someone who does this thing for a living.

If you know better I would love to hear about it.
Cheers

timdb

meanredspider wrote:

It's funny reading this thread to see the different understandings of what "Zone 2" even is

It's no wonder this whole training thing is such a mess - there's no common understanding even of the terms used.

Have to agree.
I had originally set my zones based on the BC numbers from "max" HR - hours in "zone2" was easy.
Now I have done a VO2max test (sportstest) and my new zones are SIGNIFICANTLY different - "zone2" is much narrower and actually quite hard work!

peddlingmadness

Everyone has a different zone 2 depending on factors like age/fitness/build etc. If your serious about getting it right then get properly tested (Around £90) and get a well thought out training plan with your own specific data. I've always been good at time trials/hill climbs/sprint but, struggle keeping the power on for anything over 3 hours, turns out I'm getting my energy strictly from carbs and not from my stored fat. My RQ levels are just too high too quick, solution was to go back to basics which meant training in Zone 1 (for me 123 to 143 HR) sometimes mentally hard to do when others say hello when passing you by but, I swallowed my pride and kept at it and after 3 months of just 2-3 hours a week at it I'm now a lot faster I burn fat much quicker meaning I'm leaner and I'm able to keep the power on for much longer. My zone 2 incidently is 144 to 159 HR and I do just 1 hour a week which is like a 20 mile Hilly TT. (much harder to keep in the zone going down hill) get a professional test done guys you'll be surprised at the results, I also thought I had a pretty fluid cycling motion, turns out I'm a pedal stomper! p.s Slow is the new fast

meanredspider

nibby wrote:

What do you think Zone2 is then?

I've been told my zone 2 is for endurance training. I've been told this by a someone who does this thing for a living.

If you know better I would love to hear about it.
Cheers

I wasn't having a pop at you - it was just an observation of the thread - quite a few definitions of what "Zone 2" is.

For sure, long (at least an hour but the longer the better) slow (at never more than 70% HRmax) is meant to be good for endurance. It's certainly what I do.

ETA - as above, it should feel embarrassingly slow and it takes all my self control not to speed up when I'm overtaken. Like cars of old, I wish I had a label on my back saying "Running in - please pass"

nibby

sorry, need my morning coffee fix!! I'm obviously feeling grumpy!!

Yes agree, it will be different for different people. I made the investment and went for a test to see what mine actually are rather than guessing and took advice from this.

I've also got to do some for me Threshold sessions in Zone 4!! Tried it for the first time this week on the turbo as my commute doesn't allow me any decent long hills to get into this zone.
I defo need practice on the turbo. I'm a turbo virgin and thought it would be easy to hit zone 4 pretty quick!! How wrong was I!!

LOL - re sign on the back I'm also doing more recovery zone 1 rides which are nice but I'm now getting passed by grannies on sit up and beg bikes

Newlife

The hardest part for me is doing these zone 2 rides when I live in a fairly hilly area. I cannot get out of my local town without climbing a hill. The least steep of these has a 7% average with 11-12% parts, and that is as good as it gets. Spinning my easiest gear and going very slow I can just about keep in high zone 4 on the steeper bits and low zone 4 on the rest. There are other hills once out of the town too but can keep a mix of high zone 2 and low zone 3 for most but doing an entire ride in Zone 2 is not possible for me at the moment.

I am hoping that making the best I can of it, and doing as much endurance work as I can whilst accepting the times when the HR will creep up, will be enough to get me a solid endurance base, and that over time even the hills will be manageable in lower training zones.

daxplusplus

I have a similar problem http://veloviewer.com/segments/2650964 on my commute home .. very steep hill. Normally I don't really bother to keep it in zone 2 (because it is so difficult to do) but I have done it.

They key to doing it in zone 2 was to take it really, really easy in the miles before hand.

Not rocket science I guess but there you go.

BTW I've climbed this hill approx 1000 times .. it's still not easy.

meanredspider

The book I use really emphasises not allowing your HR to rise above the target at any point - evening if it means walking. I assume you need to avoid triggering some sort of response (like your liver dosing your blood with glycogen).

colinsmith123

meanredspider wrote:

The book I use really emphasises not allowing your HR to rise above the target at any point - evening if it means walking. I assume you need to avoid triggering some sort of response (like your liver dosing your blood with glycogen).

This may answer your question..

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/9-training-in-zone-2

Along with explaining the importance of base training

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/17-the-importance-of-base-training

No doubt Bahzbob will be along shortly

meanredspider

colinsmith123 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

The book I use really emphasises not allowing your HR to rise above the target at any point - evening if it means walking. I assume you need to avoid triggering some sort of response (like your liver dosing your blood with glycogen).

This may answer your question..

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/9-training-in-zone-2

Interesting article but didn't explain why you must avoid exceeding the target range HR at any point. Maybe this is inaccurate advice. It does talk about muscle glycogen and not liver glycogen so maybe that is the point. The book I read emphasised that this type of training could be alternated with higher intensity training as it minimises the reliance on glycogen.

colinsmith123

meanredspider wrote:

colinsmith123 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

The book I use really emphasises not allowing your HR to rise above the target at any point - evening if it means walking. I assume you need to avoid triggering some sort of response (like your liver dosing your blood with glycogen).

This may answer your question..

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/9-training-in-zone-2

Interesting article but didn't explain why you must avoid exceeding the target range HR at any point. Maybe this is inaccurate advice. It does talk about muscle glycogen and not liver glycogen so maybe that is the point. The book I read emphasised that this type of training could be alternated with higher intensity training as it minimises the reliance on glycogen.

I think exceeding the target range HR might often be misunderstood. You most likely already know, that there are two thresholds, The first is LTHR, which is the point where lactate concentration increases incrementally with the increase in effort. But the effort is still aerobic. The second is OBLA onset blood lactate accumulation. OBLA is a vital landmark in aerobic physiology because it clearly delimits what you can sustain and what you can't. OBLA is the top of Z3 and is otherwise known as Lactate Threshold, which as you probably already know is the power athletes could sustain for one hour.

I probably should've included the next fact sheet from the website in my last post, but i was too keen to get out on my bike to do some Z2 riding and fall off on the ice, anyway this is it:

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/16-the-physiological-basis-of-the-training-zones

The top of Z3 (MLSS / OBLA) is the landmark that both Dr Hutch in his book and Dr Helen Carter is referring to at the end of the second fact sheet, the third factsheet explains what the physiological effects that take place in each zone, or at least I think it does.

-Train in zones 2 and 3, building intensity as your endurances grows
-Aim for every pedal stroke ‘in zone’, returning with average power/heart rate in zone is not enough
-Train at a range of cadences
-Make an effort to work on weaknesses in terms of position/flexibility etc
-Keep your volume as consistently high as possible
-Look for changes in your power:heart rate relationship as signs your endurance is improving
-Limit or remove any higher intensity work

Bahzbob disagrees with this. As will others, but that is the science as it stands.

If you have not already got this book, another good read is Faster by Dr Michael Hutchinson, particularly chapter 2 and 3.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Faster-Obsession-Science-Fastest-Cyclists/dp/1408843757

Hope that helps.

Tom Dean

colinsmith123 wrote:

-Limit or remove any higher intensity work

There is quite a difference between limit and remove.

wavefront

colinsmith123 wrote:

The first is LTHR, which is the point where lactate concentration increases incrementally with the increase in effort. But the effort is still aerobic. The second is OBLA onset blood lactate accumulation. OBLA is a vital landmark in aerobic physiology because it clearly delimits what you can sustain and what you can't.

colinsmith123 wrote:

OBLA is the top of Z3 and is otherwise known as Lactate Threshold, which as you probably already know is the power athletes could sustain for one hour.

Think we need to be careful with the use of these terms, as you've inadvertently used the term Lactate Threshold to describe two 'landmarks' - You first said it was Aerobic, then you said it was top Z3.

From my understanding,

- Below Lactate Threshold is all day pace, hours and hours and hours - background lactate levels.
- Lactate Threshold is as you say first of all, the point where lactate is produced in greater volume, but is still cleared. It increases with increased effort - Dr Michael Hutchinson describes that he can do 3.5hrs at this level.
- OBLA (Onset Blood Lactate Accumulation) - above this point, lactate is produced in much greater volume, and cannot be cleared quickly enough by the body, but you should be able to ride at for up to an hour.
- Above OBLA, lactate builds quickly, and you can't hold this power for short periods.

OBLA is often confusingly referred to by many as your 'Threshold'. Joe Friel / Trainer road refer to use the term (you've used above) LTHR, but they use it to describe the Heart rate at around which OBLA should occur.

I've heard Lactate Threshold be referred to as Aerobic Threshold, and some use Anaerobic Threshold instead of OBLA. etc etc.....

jgsi

wavefront wrote:

colinsmith123 wrote:

The first is LTHR, which is the point where lactate concentration increases incrementally with the increase in effort. But the effort is still aerobic. The second is OBLA onset blood lactate accumulation. OBLA is a vital landmark in aerobic physiology because it clearly delimits what you can sustain and what you can't.

colinsmith123 wrote:

OBLA is the top of Z3 and is otherwise known as Lactate Threshold, which as you probably already know is the power athletes could sustain for one hour.

Think we need to be careful with the use of these terms, as you've inadvertently used the term Lactate Threshold to describe two 'landmarks' - You first said it was Aerobic, then you said it was top Z3.

From my understanding,

- Below Lactate Threshold is all day pace, hours and hours and hours - background lactate levels.
- Lactate Threshold is as you say first of all, the point where lactate is produced in greater volume, but is still cleared. It increases with increased effort - Dr Michael Hutchinson describes that he can do 3.5hrs at this level.
- OBLA (Onset Blood Lactate Accumulation) - above this point, lactate is produced in much greater volume, and cannot be cleared quickly enough by the body, but you should be able to ride at for up to an hour.
- Above OBLA, lactate builds quickly, and you can't hold this power for short periods.

OBLA is often confusingly referred to by many as your 'Threshold'. Joe Friel / Trainer road refer to use the term (you've used above) LTHR, but they use it to describe the Heart rate at around which OBLA should occur.

I've heard Lactate Threshold be referred to as Aerobic Threshold, and some use Anaerobic Threshold instead of OBLA. etc etc.....

well that clears that little confusion up then... /-)
I only have 2 levels when I race... I do have a HR display on the bike to which I can afford a micro glance every so often, .. if it is under a certain level (found out by practise and the school of hard knocks) I am ok.. if it over that level, then a little voice says to me , these buggers are putting you into the hurt zone from which there is no escape if things dont ease up in a bit.
I dont gaf about zones in that respect.

meanredspider

colinsmith123 wrote:

I probably should've included the next fact sheet from the website in my last post, but i was too keen to get out on my bike to do some Z2 riding and fall off on the ice,

Thanks and I hope you didn't hurt yourself. I did my 2 hours on the Tacx - testing it's control algorithm to match 135bpm - needs a bit more damping It's unbelievably tedious and I figured I should have just headed out on the bike instead. Back in Scotland for Xmas - and the trusty Ice Spiker Pros at the ready.

I'm not sure I've yet found the answer to my original question, though. Why should you avoid exceeding the target range even for a few minutes (ie an inconveniently steep hill in your way)? Many/most of the routes around my Scottish home include such a hill - I can probably stay within the limit if I go embarrassingly slowly but since, even when I was young, I was mistaken for a rower/swimmer/rugby player I don't have a cyclist physique - so this question is often in my mind. Obviously, in Amsterdam (apart from the brutal winter winds) it's easy to do.

meanredspider

JGSI wrote:

well that clears that little confusion up then... /-)
I only have 2 levels when I race... I do have a HR display on the bike to which I can afford a micro glance every so often, .. if it is under a certain level (found out by practise and the school of hard knocks) I am ok.. if it over that level, then a little voice says to me , these buggers are putting you into the hurt zone from which there is no escape if things dont ease up in a bit.
I dont gaf about zones in that respect.

I'm pretty similar though I have a couple of HR points which are probably analogous to these points - somewhere around 140-ish bpm I can do all day every day for days in a row. I'm guessing that this sits in Zone2 somewhere. 160 bpm I can maintain for a few hours but just above that must be my OBLA - around the 165bpm mark. They're pretty trusty landmarks.

Lookyhere

meanredspider wrote:

I'm not sure I've yet found the answer to my original question, though. Why should you avoid exceeding the target range even for a few minutes (ie an inconveniently steep hill in your way)? Many/most of the routes around my Scottish home include such a hill - I can probably stay within the limit if I go embarrassingly slowly but since, even when I was young, I was mistaken for a rower/swimmer/rugby player I don't have a cyclist physique - so this question is often in my mind. Obviously, in Amsterdam (apart from the brutal winter winds) it's easy to do.

Maybe there is no answer because its un researched and it just a theory?

Alex_Simmons/RST

colinsmith123 wrote:

-Aim for every pedal stroke ‘in zone’, returning with average power/heart rate in zone is not enough

Becoming a "zone drone" is neither necessary, nor practical for many. Aerobic metabolic responses simply don't happen on such short time scales, and it's not practical for reasons of terrain and safety when riding in many locations.

meanredspider

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

colinsmith123 wrote:

-Aim for every pedal stroke ‘in zone’, returning with average power/heart rate in zone is not enough

Becoming a "zone drone" is neither necessary, nor practical for many. Aerobic metabolic responses simply don't happen on such short time scales, and it's not practical for reasons of terrain and safety when riding in many locations.

But is there some process that kicks in above a certain effort level that compromise the adaptations you are hoping to achieve in "Zone 2" type training? I believe, for instance, that above a certain effort level, your liver prepares you for effort by dumping some glycogen into your bloodstream. That, I'd imagine, would compromise the use of fat as an energy source. But there might also be some other hormone changes that limit the quality of response to the training. I don't know (hence why I'm asking the question) but it does seem to be a bit of a theme in advice on Zone 2 training.

DeVlaeminck

My guess is that many cyclists already do large amounts of zone 2 work either on club runs or solo rides - perhaps not as much as was once the case though as turbo work and intervals have become more pervasive.

The interesting point is the zone drone question though isn't it. Does a hard finish to a long ride negate the endurance benefits? Does a high intensity turbo session midweek in Winter damage the gains made from a week of otherwise zone 1 and 2 riding and limit the development of a base ?

A guy in our club who is coached is currently avoiding all hills to the extent he'll refuse to continue on any ride with a decent climb in it - he's been training almost exclusively on his own for the past year because his prescribed training sessions will never fit exactly with a group ride. Anecdotally he's still a weak rider but whether that's the coaching or just his genetic ability hard to say.