Alright help me figure out my zones

(John) #1

So I have been cycling more and more and have begun some structured training, I plan to get a power meter soon but before that I have to wrap my head around a few things. There has been discussion about zones before, and how on keto a given zone may be higher than not, I want to see if I can figure this stuff out. I have been testing out carbs as well with great results but that is a different post.

My max HR right now is 185 so I will use that for the numbers here.

Zone 2 is endurance which is supposed to be 60-70% of max HR, or 111-130.
Zone 3 is 70-80% of max HR or 130-148.
Zone 4 is 80-90% of max HR or 148-166.

So endurance rides are supposed to be zone 2, I go over zone 2 in the warmup and could never climb anything in that zone, any incline brings my HR way up. I tried it at 4 MPH up a 5% or so hill and still went over.
Zone 3 we are supposed to work in 10-30 min increments during a longer ride, you aren’t supposed to spend a ton of time there.
So I found this quote on Zone 4

Zone 4 is your “Race Pace” zone - this is where you have burning legs and lungs and you can’t keep the effort up for much more than an hour. And yes, you have to be pretty fit to keep this effort up for an hour, but by definition, your threshold is an effort you can manage for one hour.

Now for the rub, a comfortable pace I can ride all day is 158 which is supposedly the upper end of zone 4. My longest ride ever was a metric century I just completed a week or so ago and the average was 159. This means according to the numbers I was riding comfortably at the top of Zone 4 for over 4 hours. According to the definitions this should not be possible.

this is where you have burning legs and lungs

I only get burning legs after a monster hill climb, no other discomfort in the muscles, I seem to be totally bound by heart and lungs.

For the average endurance athlete, the percentage of time you should spend training in each zone is roughly as follows:

Zone 1 and 2: 80 to 85 percent
Zone 4: 10 to 15 percent
Zone 5: 2 to 5 percent

On a fun 30 mile ride where I am at a relaxed pace and only 3k feet of climbing (looking at recent rides here) I am in zone 1 and 2 <10% of the time. Zone 3 and 4 split 90% pretty evenly then up to 5-10% in zone 5.

Since there is a contradiction here, i’m not sure what to do. The percentages don’t correlate at all for me with how I feel or how long I can keep up. Do I create my own zones based on what is supposed to be accomplished? For example if Zone 4 is Race Pace or the rate you can hold for about an hour should be 90-94% and my endurance moves from a max of 70% to around 80%. Or do I need to try and test something like RER and base it off of that?
Or, now that I am thinking of it do I throw HR out altogether and just go off of power that I can sustain for 20 min or whatever and setup power zones and ignore HR?

#2

I prefer to set my zones by lactic threshold, which better accounts for changes in fitness and individual variability. Ride as hard as you can for 30 min and use that average HR to set your zones. I use this guide: https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/joe-friel-s-quick-guide-to-setting-zones/

(John) #3

Thanks, those zones look way more in line with reality than the ones I had found.

(Kevin Sodhi) #4

I’m using the LTHR for calculating zones for running, but I’m using HR Reserve for Cycling Zones.

(ianrobo) #5

interesting question @jmbundy and if you do not mind me asking how old are you ?

OK to be blunt if you are going out of Z2 on a warm up and can get below it again you are not recovering and on rides causing yourself damage. Now being fat adapted the theory is can ride at an higher HR for longer but that still puts stress on your body which really you have to avoid.

So then we come to the infamous MAF method and one I swear by … To state it bluntly it means going at a slower pace to start with but vitally keeping it below your MAF zone (180-age) and you will find quickly as you build that base the speed comes and the HR keeps down. What this allows in training rides is for any events you may do is to go at higher rate and faster, longer and stronger than you used to be.

Plenty of resources out there on MAF method but I would look at that and maybe once a week a kind of HIIT effort.

(Doug) #6

Ian, this is quite mind-blowing to me. I’ll be 60 next year, so 120 beats per minute maximum… Man, it doesn’t take much for me to get over that. :smile:

(ianrobo) #7

nope and Peter Defty Doug makes the case for MAF you could add on extra 10 bpm if fat adapted which Phil Mac rejects … however lets say you can ride at the speed you want at 135bpm then surely riding at 120bpm is better for you. I am not saying it is easy and it is very very frustrating (esp on hills) but I use it as a measure of an average across a ride and not an absolute never to go over.

(John) #8

I’m 40. I like being in the 150’s to 160’s but I am going to treat those as more rare threshold rides with breaks in between. Recovery as you mentioned is too much.
I grabbed a steel bike and have started doing long rides at much lower HR, seems rando might be my thing. My last big ride was about 7 hours, average of 133 for the first half and 150 for the last (downhill one way, up the second). If I give myself the +10 for keto I only spent about 20 minutes of the 7 hours above that. Salt seems to be my problem now, once it heats up to 95 (35c) I get my electrolytes out of whack. 6 hours of that ride I felt like I could go for days, the last hour got really hot and I felt terrible.

Took a bit to get through my thick skull, but just because you can go for an hour at 170 doesn’t mean you should.

(ianrobo) #9

exactly and great you can do that, say on a long climb or a fast event you may want to do but it is not sustainable in the long term …