tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post6752617936682503038..comments2024-03-15T03:34:26.390-07:00Comments on Alan Couzens: The Science of 'Steady'Alan Couzenshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07123240819644335101noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-43617676547983561652009-08-04T11:55:55.640-07:002009-08-04T11:55:55.640-07:00Hey Kirk,
For sure, intensity is needed and most ...Hey Kirk,<br /><br />For sure, intensity is needed and most athletes will improve when they 'cut back on the volume and increase intensity'. However, I firmly believe that those who wait longer before doing so will improve more - the hallowed concept of base. <br /><br />I did not include other data from the study that showed that FOG fibers (which are better trained by tempo, threshold and VO2max) training have greater potential for improvement than ST fibers. However, tolerance to FOG training is largely dependent on how quickly lactate is removed from fibers, along with how quickly glycogen can be recovered, both functions of ST fibers. Therefore, when an ST 'fit' athlete decides to emphasize FOG training, the margin for improvement will be far greater than a novice athlete who does the same. <br /><br />Best,<br /><br />ACAlan Couzenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07123240819644335101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-45424091209564265912009-08-04T11:29:53.713-07:002009-08-04T11:29:53.713-07:00You may be correct, my own personal (n=1 (me) as a...You may be correct, my own personal (n=1 (me) as a bike racer, UCI domestic level for 8+ years and n=50 of coached athletes) fitness went way up when I cut back on the volume and increased the intensity.<br /><br />I do admit, not many of those above (aside from myself) were doing many races over 2 hours.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17592076408854263310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-81767827439042522082009-08-04T11:20:25.286-07:002009-08-04T11:20:25.286-07:00Hey Kirk,
I think we're speaking the same lan...Hey Kirk,<br /><br />I think we're speaking the same language re power and HR. I just disagree with a Z3 emphasis. Sure, it may be optimal for an athlete training 10-12hrs/wk but most athletes will get even better performance by dialing it down 10 beats/20 watts, cutting the fluff from their lives and training 10 more hours each week. <br /><br />Best,<br /><br />ACAlan Couzenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07123240819644335101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-7163799881843733262009-08-04T09:55:47.198-07:002009-08-04T09:55:47.198-07:00Hey Paul,
Since muscle fibers are 100% aerobic up...Hey Paul,<br /><br />Since muscle fibers are 100% aerobic up to AeT, I believe to challenge the aerobic system, AeT should represent the low end of the steady zone. Not to say that anything below this is wasted, esp if the session is long enough, but I believe the focus should be just above AeT for most main sets. <br /><br />I think the 30-40% is a reasonable goal when factoring in warm-ups, cooldowns, maintenance of other physiological qualities and recovery training. <br /><br />Thanks, as always, for the input.<br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />ACAlan Couzenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07123240819644335101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-998143295331322802009-08-04T04:50:28.938-07:002009-08-04T04:50:28.938-07:00Nice post Alan,
I actually put my steady zone at ...Nice post Alan,<br /><br />I actually put my steady zone at -5bpm Aet to +5bpm. I think I got this fromKP. My aim is too hit 30-40% of my weekly volume in this zone. To me that is challenging. <br /><br />I'm a flat 10hr IM athlete that puts in around 18-20hrs PW of training, if that helps. <br /><br />Training in hte steady zone is easier for novice athletes, but once you gain some experience and can handle the volume training in hte steady zone upwards of 30% PW become quite challenging and requires careful planning.<br /><br />PaulPaul Fleurenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11475494771101660722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-43152945579137056652009-08-02T04:43:30.846-07:002009-08-02T04:43:30.846-07:00Hmmm, maybe I'm thinking in terms of power (as...Hmmm, maybe I'm thinking in terms of power (as opposed to heartrate): http://home.trainingpeaks.com/articles/cycling/power-training-levels.aspxUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17592076408854263310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-91752692446958391592009-08-01T20:28:11.500-07:002009-08-01T20:28:11.500-07:00Hey Mat,
Generally speaking, in my way of thinkin...Hey Mat,<br /><br />Generally speaking, in my way of thinking, steady trumps easy. IOW, I'd rather see an athlete do 60min of steady, than 'hold back' and do 90min of easy. <br /><br />I'd probably rather see an athlete do 90min of anything than 30min of steady but if there is this big of a gap between easy and steady tolerance, I'd suspect steady hasn't been properly defined. So, no real caveats to progress to steady. Generally, I'm happy with a wide range of easy-steady in the first 4-6 weeks of the season before starting focused main sets. <br /><br />I didn't add the FOG chart in the post but steady also helps threshold. There is decent carry-over. So, for the novice to int. athlete, little need to emphasize threshold. <br /><br />BG training can start pretty early in the piece providing the athlete is structurally sound, but at steady intensity. <br /><br />Thanks for the encouraging words. <br /><br />All the best,<br /><br />ACAlan Couzenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07123240819644335101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-23530557367042641822009-08-01T20:21:23.042-07:002009-08-01T20:21:23.042-07:00Hey Kirk and Lucho,
The intensity zones that you&...Hey Kirk and Lucho,<br /><br />The intensity zones that you're both referring to are closer to what Coyle would call the 'lactate threshold'. Training at this level has good benefit to the time limited athlete or the metabolically strong athlete.<br /><br />My advice would be to fill the week with the bulk at level 2 (AeT to AeT+10) and determine your tolerance to it before adding a chunk of zone 3 training. Some athletes will tolerate a good chunk of it (particularly females and smaller athletes) but for large, male athletes, with weak meatbolic profiles, a lot of tempo training in the week will wreck them. <br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />ACAlan Couzenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07123240819644335101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-47294368055899049742009-08-01T19:56:58.849-07:002009-08-01T19:56:58.849-07:00Hey AC, does this imply that we should rack up 60 ...Hey AC, does this imply that we should rack up 60 - 90 min of "easy" per sport per day first then look to progressively convert that into "steady" training?<br /><br />Also if steady is where it's at, what are the caveat's before progressing to "steady" zone?<br /><br />If "mod-hard" and "threshold" zones provide the most stimulus for aerobic improvement what is the protocol for maximizing returns while not frying one's self?<br /><br />I'm fishing for a good starting point for a novice athlete.<br /><br />I'm assuming it all comes back that post you wrote on complex training: the principal of variety for multilateral development?<br /><br />Cheers AC, keep the great posts coming!!<br /><br />P.S. What are the requirements before prescribing Big Gear work on the bike?<br /><br />Regards <br /><br />Matmat judehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04514873830450305457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-29354420531140892372009-08-01T14:04:15.362-07:002009-08-01T14:04:15.362-07:00Hello Alan-
Renato Canova uses the term 'aero...Hello Alan-<br /> Renato Canova uses the term 'aerobic threshold' to describe the point at which you reach 2.0-2.3 mmol of lactate, which corresponds to marathon pace in a well trained runner. In recent tests I hit 2.0 mmol at 5:37 pace per mile. 2 hours per day at this effort would put me in the hospital after 2 days. What am I missing here? <br />Cheers! <br /> Tim LuchoLuchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07992289866901355978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-33213703292292862542009-08-01T12:19:11.447-07:002009-08-01T12:19:11.447-07:00AC,
Would you put "steady" in the Zone...AC,<br /> Would you put "steady" in the Zone 3 (of 7), ie solid "tempo"?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17592076408854263310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-82629786298036276162009-08-01T11:03:21.710-07:002009-08-01T11:03:21.710-07:00I think coaches who look at science independent of...I think coaches who look at science independent of best coaching practice may be limiting their athletes' potential. <br /><br />Studies like this are interesting in that they help to provide the 'whys' of best (human) athletic practice but most worthwhile discoveries are made by coaches (first) then scientists (second) often with decades in between. <br /><br />Cheers,<br /><br />ACAlan Couzenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07123240819644335101noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7915222980782433094.post-84320973956435570382009-08-01T10:16:05.455-07:002009-08-01T10:16:05.455-07:00Nice but rats aint humans. Do you think that scien...Nice but rats aint humans. Do you think that science may be limiting the true athletic potential. Why have IM times at the sharp end not improved siginificantly in 20 years (in spite of the technology)? "Steady" may be more tolerable for all but may not give the best results, but I guess for most of us "steady" will give us our most achievable results.runtilyoudrophttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10320557501874389677noreply@blogger.com