Home General Training Discussions

Question about VO2 interval structure in OS plans

I have now reviewed the upcoming OS plan in quite a lot of detail…funny how copy-pasting 14 weeks of workouts into TrainingPeaks will get you focused on the nitty-gritty!!

One interesting thing in the advanced plan is that the VO2 workouts start out with 30/30, ramp up to 45/45 then to 1/1. Two years ago they were set at 2.5/2.5 and last year they were "user selected" and I went with 2/2, ramping up to 2.5/2.5.

 

What is the logic for the shorter intervals? Sure the 2x(8x1/1) is no walk in the park (although you don't hit that until really late in the plan). But my experience with 5x2.5/2.5 suggests that the longer intervals are certainly do-able.

 

I'd love to understand a bit about the training logic for the structure here. I thought it might be to make the workouts easier but then I see FTP workouts with z4 intervals of 3x15'(4) and 12(4), 20(4), 12(4) and those are harder workouts than any of the last 2 years' FTP workouts. So perhaps there is some training theory about how the z5 workouts are designed.

 

Thanks,

Matt

Comments

  • Matt, we left the VO2 open last year (and technically, they are always open!) and the feedback was it was way too confusing on where to start/end. This year we took VO2 out of weeks 9-14 and put it across the ENTIRE OS - every thursday is VO2 now. We also removed it from the Saturday rides in weeks 9-14...this means a more balanced approach across the full 14 weeks; it also meant we needed to divide up the work such that you arent nuked on VO2 after a few weeks...I am excited for the new progression...of course you can do what you want with the total VO2 time, up to you. Keep us posted!
  • Posted By Patrick McCrann on 02 Jan 2013 10:39 PM

    it also meant we needed to divide up the work such that you arent nuked on VO2 after a few weeks

    My question was about the structure of the intervals themselves. I get the part about doing it acorss the whole plan. So based on the above the logic for the 3030, 45/45 then 1/1 is to do with folks' likely response to accumulated fatigue of the workouts? I will do them as written if that is what is suggested.

  • With regard to the length of the intervals, I've basically been changing them as I see fit. Started out with 30/30's and worked my way up to 90/90. IMO, these lengths probably vary from person to person, so it's hard to say what's the correct protocol other than not overextending and burning yourself out. 90/90 seems like a pretty good duration for me (the VO2 set starts out managable, but gets much harder towards the end) and I've been doing that for most of the OS. I think I could do a set of 120/120, but that might put me at risk of excessive fatigue.

  • I just finished the bike focus Adv and last weekend did 20 1/1 and then a second hour of 85%. I'm expecting to test much higher next week for Jan OS but 30/30 sounds short. I guess I'll follow it and see.
  • Posted By Robert Sabo on 03 Jan 2013 05:34 AM

    I just finished the bike focus Adv and last weekend did 20 1/1 and then a second hour of 85%. I'm expecting to test much higher next week for Jan OS but 30/30 sounds short. I guess I'll follow it and see.

    I didn't do the bike focus plan but I my question came from a similar context...I've been doing 3x(5x1/1) once a week as my easiest of 3 weekly bike workouts and the only reason I haven't gone up to 1.5/1.5 or 2/2 is that I'm pre-OS just maintaining fitness. I think 30/30 sounds very short but then again in the context of some more challenging FTP workouts we'll see how these Thursdays actually feel. I will start as written and go from there.

  •  I don't think you should be able to do Max VO2 beyond 90 secs....I think 2.5 is kinda long for the specific adaptions targeted in this work...I relate it too Interval training in running...if you read Daniels...the duration is short/measued...for a reason and recovery is short so as not to allow for full recovery

    ...I need to review that and try to correlate it back to this better...but I think there is a fundamental reason/rationale for the intervals length...(having to do with Lactate...) I will repost if I find the information I'm looking for and it makes sense.

     

    I believe 1minl. is optimum...and the key thing is the recovery time...being not to full recovery..

  • Posted By Joseph Lombardi on 03 Jan 2013 03:25 PM

    ...I believe 1minl. is optimum...and the key thing is the recovery time...being not to full recovery..



    ...and the effort level in the recovery time; 65% is what we do, in keeping with the thought of not allowing full recovery (as we do in the run intervals). I've found that my IF for a set of, say, 5 x 1/1 will be 1.0 when I'm doing it correctly.

  • "At proper pace it takes two minutes to reach VO2 max"

    For running "Run between 30" and five minutes per workbout with 3 to 5 minutes being ideal"

    Daniel's was in front of me when I read this.

  • Matt, my n=1, I'm in the NOS and started with 1 minute On sets. To be completely honest, I've done the VO2 work just like we did last year, 1:1 ratio without the extra recovery sessions. Not trying to go against the grain, but I feel it takes me 15-20 seconds to get settled "into" the VO2 zone (and for my Garmin to settle) and would be annoyed to have to shut it off 10 seconds later. I moved up to 1:15's about 8 weeks into the OS. I've been able to hit all target zones for the FTP and VO2 workouts without issues (note-95% is ok in my FTP workouts). So if you feel comfortable currently doing 1:00, I would say that you will probably be ok maintaining that. FWIW.
  • Cool, love to read about a method to the maddnes and why !
  • Posted By Bridget Pichette on 03 Jan 2013 05:14 PM

    "At proper pace it takes two minutes to reach VO2 max"

    For running "Run between 30" and five minutes per workbout with 3 to 5 minutes being ideal"

    Daniel's was in front of me when I read this.



    ....So I wonder how that translates to the bike...ie. more or less time to reach VO2 Max...that would be the critical question...I have a Carmichael book on training or it may be in Training with Power...I need to peek.

  • What they mean in that quote is that it takes a couple of minutes for you to literally get to the point where you are physiologically processing the max amount of O2 that you can...obviously the effort can be more or less constant in the two minutes up to then, but there is a certain amount of fuel "laying around" at steady state in the cells ready to be used. The two minutes is what gets you to the steady state where you're limited by O2 uptake. Not being an expert, I would argue that the two minutes depends on the intensity of what you are doing and is approximate. If you were going at 140% of FTP you'd probably get to physiological VO2 max a bit faster than if you were going at 120% FTP.

    We just use the term VO2max fairly loosely to mean intervals that stress this "system" and are of the sort of efforts that can be maintained for no more than several minutes.

    If you are a big believer that "stressing energy systems" matters, you would argue that this is also why you would control the amount of rest between VO2 intervals fairly carefully. If you are a big believer that the only thing that matters is muscle recruitment, then it would be less important. That's beyond my pay grade. :-)
  • Not sure about running but Training and Racing with a Power Meter by Coggan/Allen and Dr. Philip Skiba describe the v02 zone as 106-120% of FTP , above 120% anaerobic.

    I know one thing , operating above FTP on the run or the bike and I am out of O2 in a hurry.
Sign In or Register to comment.