Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

Anyone hear of the Z3-Z4 "no man's land" for training?

6K views 13 replies 11 participants last post by  andrello 
#1 ·
http://www.peakscoachinggroup.com/freeinfo/training_zones.html

Note 1: There is a "No-Man's Land" between Z3 and Z4. Training in this area has been found to not be beneficial for either the aerobic requirements of Z3 or the LT/AT training in Z4. You'll probably also find this to be the area you train in most. Avoid this area like the plague.

Where exactly is this point? What percent of my max heart rate is this?

Just wondering because I did a 60 mile ride last week (my longest to date) and averaged zone 3.8 ...did I ruin my training?

James
 
#2 ·
Junk miles?

I think what the coaches are preaching here is to avoid what is a "comfort zone". No you didn't blow your training, you will if you ride in that vicinity of exertion too much. You can set your HR monitor alarms accordingly to avoid this level. Also not a % of max HR, look for a level %of lactic threshhold, the point where you start to feel the burn in your legs. That "no zone" is probably 90-97% of LT. More explanation is required than what we could give you in the space of this answer, need to read some Friel materal to get a better understanding of the overall scheme of periodization training. It can get wordy and confusing.
 
#3 ·
iliveonnitro said:
http://www.peakscoachinggroup.com/freeinfo/training_zones.html

Note 1: There is a "No-Man's Land" between Z3 and Z4. Training in this area has been found to not be beneficial for either the aerobic requirements of Z3 or the LT/AT training in Z4. You'll probably also find this to be the area you train in most. Avoid this area like the plague.

Where exactly is this point? What percent of my max heart rate is this?

Just wondering because I did a 60 mile ride last week (my longest to date) and averaged zone 3.8 ...did I ruin my training?

James
To find these answers, you must write a large check. If they just told you, they'd be going hungry. Like most things in training, there is this myth that there are particular, specific zones and timeframes when things happen. The body is much more fluid than that, and it's perfectly normal for one muscle to be gasping, while another is bored silly. There's not a particular spot, and even if there were, no web site posting could tell where yours was. It changes constantly with training load, fitness, nutrition, and stress levels.

Relax, you didn't ruin anything. Assuming you buy into this particular training philosophy, the worst you did was not gain as much as you could have.

In theory, a lighter ride will allow for endurance building, a higher intensity one greater power. By riding 'in between', wherever that is, you are supposed to be running yourself down too fast to gain much endurance, but not working hard enough for maximum strength/threshold gains. Fair enough.

Many folks set goals by miles, then try to get a 'good' workout by riding hard, but leaving enough in the tank to make it enjoyable and guarantee they get home in time for dinner. It results in this sort of running at a 'high steam' that these folks don't like. Better to have a training plan, and either ride 'easy' for a set time, or to have a shorter period of higher intensity.

You also are looking at an average over a few hours, which isn't very relevant. You might not have spent any time at all in that particular zone, wherever it might be. Say you really attacked the hills, and spun easily on the backside. Classic unstructured interval training, and you acheived the benefits of both, and never were in this theory's 'no man's land.' On the other hand, say you were on the flat,straight rail-trail, humming on at a constant high-normal rate of effort. That is what they would have you avoid for training, though it's perfectly suitable for an event.

There is merit to the theory, but here it's stated too broadly to be of any real use.
 
#4 ·
As I understand it the general theory is that once you're in a competitive phase that high Zone 3 or Tempo or whatever you want to call it (i.e. the general area that is sub-LT or sub maximum sustainable power) is to be avoided because it is too stressful without being likely to result in substantial gains in power. So you either want to ride easier than that doing recovery or easy "aerobic" rides or harder rides consisting of LT or harder intervals.
 
#5 ·
Overthinking

iliveonnitro said:
Note 1: There is a "No-Man's Land" between Z3 and Z4. Training in this area has been found to not be beneficial for either the aerobic requirements of Z3 or the LT/AT training in Z4. You'll probably also find this to be the area you train in most. Avoid this area like the plague.

Where exactly is this point? What percent of my max heart rate is this?

Just wondering because I did a 60 mile ride last week (my longest to date) and averaged zone 3.8 ...did I ruin my training?
As other posters noted, don't overthink this. The simple way to think about this is to ride for aerobic base, tempo rides for endurance, or do intervals, but don't do every ride near your limit. Tempo riding can be thought of as "near your limit" but it is not something you do every day. These guys overemphasize this point to sell their program, but there is a tendency for bikers to go hard every day and not vary their workouts. Also as others note, you should be basing your training on LT, not max HR.
 
#6 ·
iliveonnitro said:
http://www.peakscoachinggroup.com/freeinfo/training_zones.html

Note 1: There is a "No-Man's Land" between Z3 and Z4. Training in this area has been found to not be beneficial for either the aerobic requirements of Z3 or the LT/AT training in Z4. You'll probably also find this to be the area you train in most. Avoid this area like the plague.
Do a search for "sweet spot" training...This is High zone 3, low zone 4 workouts that have been show to be quite beneficial. I can't believe this guy wrote this (or more likely still has it up).

The idea is that you can lay down a good base for later functional threshold training by getting in lots of volume at this level with easier recovery than with straight zone 4 workouts.

here's a link: http://www.fascatcoaching.com/sweetspot.html
 
#7 ·
Where could I get an accurate LT test done?

I go to University of Illinois-Chicago, and the person who runs the Human Performance Lab said it was a big guess - they keep taking blood draws until your lactic acid buildup hits 4.0mmol or something. Those weren't her exact words, but it was something with a 4.0. If you overshoot it, they have to guess from the last result and how high you overshot it in order to determine your LT.

Any clarity to that? Is that just how it is everywhere?
 
#8 ·
iliveonnitro said:
Where could I get an accurate LT test done?

I go to University of Illinois-Chicago, and the person who runs the Human Performance Lab said it was a big guess - they keep taking blood draws until your lactic acid buildup hits 4.0mmol or something. Those weren't her exact words, but it was something with a 4.0. If you overshoot it, they have to guess from the last result and how high you overshot it in order to determine your LT.

Any clarity to that? Is that just how it is everywhere?
simplify...just do a hard 40 minute time trial and take your average HR (I'm assuming you don't have a powermeter). That should be close to your LT (or close enough). It can also change alot with training so you need to adjust it upward as you get fitter. Mine went from 250w to currently 276w.....
 
#9 ·
I think this is a bunch of drek. But what do I know?

Sure, intervals are good and make ya faster. I do 'em.

I think it's like this: if I go out and ride "pretty hard" for 4 hours, I'm cooked. I couldn't do 6 hours at that pace. I'd gain more "endurance" benefit if I took it easier. But I'm not going to ride 6 hours, regardless of what I do, so presuming it doesn't cook me so much I'm burned for tomorrow's hill intervals, or whatever, then I can't see how it "blows" anything.
 
#10 ·
More overthinking

iliveonnitro said:
Where could I get an accurate LT test done?

I go to University of Illinois-Chicago, and the person who runs the Human Performance Lab said it was a big guess - they keep taking blood draws until your lactic acid buildup hits 4.0mmol or something. Those weren't her exact words, but it was something with a 4.0. If you overshoot it, they have to guess from the last result and how high you overshot it in order to determine your LT.

Any clarity to that? Is that just how it is everywhere?
You (and your HPL colleague) are making this way to hard. The academics continue to argue about how to define LT (or AT if you prefer) but Mr_Mojo has it right - do a 20+ minute time trial effort and look at your HR during the last 75% of the effort. That's your LT/AT and you can base training off that. Recognize that your HR will vary with degree of hydration, how tired you are, and the temperature, but that's OK. Every training program states the HR numbers as ranges, so the fact that there is no really precise definition for LT doesn't really matter. Those discussions are best left to the research journals.
 
#11 ·
The only problem with the 20 minute TT test, is that many, many people are not able to push themselves hard enough to reach their LT. (after all, it does hurt, quite a bit)
For some people, their pain is only "mild discomfort", for others.
 
#12 ·
MR_GRUMPY said:
The only problem with the 20 minute TT test, is that many, many people are not able to push themselves hard enough to reach their LT. (after all, it does hurt, quite a bit)
For some people, their pain is only "mild discomfort", for others.
If your eyes aren't bleeding when you finish you didn't go hard enough......

If you can't push yourself hard enough in a 30' TT then being off a couple of beats is not really going to impact your training as you are not going to be near the podium anyway...

A friend of mine, former national level triathlete, always told me he knew he was going hard enough when he felt like he was just about to puke half way through the TT.....he was odd, but successful
 
#13 ·
My TT training way back when: if you don't see spots at the end, you didn't go hard enough.

Since then I've gotten smarter (and slower)...

My thoughts on the 'no man's zone.: Don't ride there too much. Either go harder or easier depending on the day's training goal. If you don't have a training goal, then don't worry about how hard you're riding and enjoy yourself.

I've had buddies that have stayed at a consistently 'high' pace for months. Like clockwork, they're all burned out in June. They're flying in Jan and sucking wind during the summer... I'm sucking wind in Jan and flying during the summer. Who's 'right?' Depends on whatcha wanna do!

M
 
#14 · (Edited)
iliveonnitro said:
http://www.peakscoachinggroup.com/freeinfo/training_zones.html

Note 1: There is a "No-Man's Land" between Z3 and Z4. Training in this area has been found to not be beneficial for either the aerobic requirements of Z3 or the LT/AT training in Z4. You'll probably also find this to be the area you train in most. Avoid this area like the plague.

Where exactly is this point? What percent of my max heart rate is this?
The article does not clearly define the zones: The "no-man's land" is some vague region between being able to speak in complete sentences and being able to speak in only 1 or 2 words. Well, that sounds like a typical good race pace which is well-known to be very beneficial to your fitness. It falls in the region where the most physiological benefits are gained according to this:
http://www.fascatcoaching.com/intervaltypes.html

Don Russell probably means to save your racing for the race and to properly periodize your training.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top