Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
runner

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 59
 #1 
Sometimes you have to decide between doing a single
(longer) session and a double (or even triple) session.

One can make an argument for either and there's probably
times when longer single sessions are preferable and vice-versa.

For example, one argument for longer single sessions is that it's
better at building endurance. One 3hr run does not 
equal two 1.5 hr runs. Conversely, one could argue that 
glycogen levels can be replenished faster with two (shorter)
sessions and that more hormonal release occurs in doubles
(since most hormones are released in the first 40 minutes).
And so on.

Have any users of Moxy looked into single/double sessions
and how it affects different energy systems based on observed
SmO2 and ThB trends?
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #2 
Really great  question and points.
 This is  where physiological  feedback  comes exactly in. Physiological training is not a  question of  hours  or  km   but rather on  what  your goal  is  to  try to stimulate. So  it is  all about the ability  to deliver  and or utilize  the available  energy. To   know  that  you have  an advantage  if  you can see  it.

Depending on your limiter  you may not be able  to  do a second same session as planned  as  for example  your respiration may be  so fatigued  from the morning session  that you have to slow  down  so much  to still have a balanced    energy  level  that  the   movement  may  not  make a lot  of  sense  for  what you like to achieve. On the otehr side  you   may have planned  a  3hour  run  and after 1h 50 minutes  you see  that you start  to restrict the blood flow and you feel it  so you  have to  either slow  down  till you are back on the same physiological stimulation  or  if  you maintain the  speed  you may change  the idea  of  your  workout. This again is up  to  you on what  the goal is.
 There  can not be  a goal setting of  time lie three hours  but rather a goal setting  of a physiological; stimulation which may  have a duration fo three hours. 
Planning a workout based on  times or speed   is not an optimal way to keep control on what is going on  in your physiological team.
 
runner

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 59
 #3 
Planning a workout based on  times or speed   is not an optimal way


This is an interesting point. How does one go about making a coherent training plan?

In a rigid system, you do some sort of test (VO2 / lactate),
create zones and then you train based on your zone until
your next test. You would rarely adjust your training unless 
something goes really wrong (you are so overtrained that
you can't complete the plan).

It seems that in physiological-based training any plan is very
tentative at best since you don't know how your body will react 
to a training stimuli. And once you change one or two sessions
the entire plan could go up in flames.

For instance, if your plan is calling for some hard intervals and your SmO2
is telling you no, it's a stupid idea, do you go back to it the next day or a day
after or you immediately re-evaluate since your body can't keep up.


sebo2000

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 227
 #4 
I think we are all accustom to structured plans to much, we like to follow stuff that someone gave it to us, we like to collect TTS points, KMs. hours etc. We are all fixed on collecting "points" not to mention TSS points, but in everyday life "Air miles" and all other loyalty points...

Lets look at this from race perspective: 

I had unexpected race yesterday and my training calls for VO2max session today, what should i do? Do I relay suck it up and hammer down? If I do I might not recover for my next day training, will I even complete my last few intervals?

It's like with car racing, car can not go anymore, but we are still pushing the gas pedal, it can only end one way...Something will blow up[smile]

You can still have very structured training. Understand your biggest limiters, and items "it would be good do improve" have in your mind certain workouts and rotate them, it does not mean you will have to rotate them every day, if you plan your training properly, there is a chance you will need only small tweaks.

Real life example that will most likely apply only to me and my current limiters on that day:

Wanted to do 60min in balanced zone flat SmO2 eg started at 45% and wanted to finish at 44-45% After 15 min I was at 30% what do I do? I adjusted the power on my erg by good 30W and finished the session with SmO2 44%

Now the question: Was this the best move? My body got the same physiological "stress" but I could probably completely change the workout and work on some specific muscles or just simply do some good old stretching it would probably bring more benefit to my body. If I would not have Moxy I would complete the 60 min at way to high wattage and would start slowly digging myself in to the hole if repeated more frequently.





juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #5 
Great points  and  yes  that  is  what  is the question.

In a rigid system, you do some sort of test (VO2 / lactate),
create zones and then you train based on your zone until
your next test. 

Absolutely  and I like the  word  rigid. and I like the  idea  that we create zones based on what ? calculation, predictions an %  of ..... Advantage . No  questions  asked  easy  to do a calculation it is straight forward  and it gives n  organised  workout  so progress is in many cases  here  for sure. 


It seems that in physiological-based training any plan is very
tentative at best since you don't know how your body will react 
to a training stimuli. And once you change one or two sessions
the entire plan could go up in flames.

Absolutely  and I like  very tentative  but   once you  are used  it is very  clear  as  your  body  tells  you  what  do  to and not  to  do.   This is  that  your  body  does not go up in flames  and it is much easier  to  have a plan  up in flames  as it is  on paper  any way.


For instance, if your plan is calling for some hard intervals and your SmO2
is telling you no, it's a stupid idea, do you go back to it the next day or a day
after or you immediately re-evaluate since your body can't keep up.

If you plan is telling  you o  do a hard  workout based on what feedback  besides a plan  , but  you have a  stress fracture  , ????

 You never go  back  you always go d  forward . Example on  your planned   hard interval  workout  day ( What  was the physiological goal  from your hard  workout )  cardiac overload  , intermuscular  overload , intra muscular overload., MCT  1  MCT  4  ,   deoxygenation  a.s

Now  you see  that in he   pre  workout  calibration your  cardiac  system is not recovered  from yesterdays  " easy " long  run.
For  who was it  easy  the  3  hours. Joints ???,   cardiac  ??  you  may have dehydraed???  and so on.
 So  today  your   hard  interval  may be a huge stress on he already overloaded  joints  despite a  slow speed yesterday. Dehyrdation  dropped  the preload  and overloaded  the cardiac muscle  despite a low  HR  and slow speed ???

So  today  you like  to de load  cardiac   and joins  but you lie to follow you plan  to have a   string utilization / deoxygenation stimulus.
 So no problem  keep  speed low  and  use  a  physiological stimulation  to get in what you have planned. 
 So  your  plan  went up in flames  the  day before  and you have to  put the fire  out  with a  smart adjustment,  based on your bodies respond  rather than on a theoretical based idea  on speed  and power.

Metabolic acidosis create  stress fractures in  runners  not   respiratory acidosis. See  forum  information where we  discussed  this   a while back.
 Crazy ideas  but  ????
runner

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 59
 #6 
Good points.

That said, I couldn't find any research on singles vs. doubles
(or one long vs two split sessions) using NIRS.

Has anybody done any practical tests with this?
How does SmO2/ThB looks like a day after (for singles
vs doubles)?

I suspect that SmO2/ThB curves will look very different
for singles and doubles since you really are working different
energy systems.
 


juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #7 
Not  sure  but  you will  find out.
  Different energy systems. ??  There is no  different energy system  whether  you do a  strength workout  or a  long  endurance  workout.  The  end goal is  to  create ATP  no matter what. Or  somebody  comes  up  with a different  suggestion of the end  goal. The only different is,  how  fast we have to  try  to  maintain ATP  due to  the  request  for ATP.

 We have  to get over the  idea, that we  either  burn  fat  or  glucose  or  Cr.P  . The physiological system  asks  for  any  substance to help to maintain ATP  and it is more a  question which one  is most efficient  at the current intensity. So  the question is  again O2   delivery and utilization   and how good can I deliver  or a bad   is the current delivery.

I suspect that SmO2/ThB curves will look very different
for singles and doubles since you really are working different
energy systems.
 

There is  no such thing like I  suspect,   but  the real deal  as I see as I do. The  real seen  with live  feedback  and you know  what   causes  than the limitation of delivery.  So no  attack here against anybody  just  he  fundamental difference  we  look at   physiological  reactions.
sebo2000

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 227
 #8 
Has anybody done any practical tests with this?
How does SmO2/ThB looks like a day after (for singles
vs doubles)?

just example:

60min @ 240W in balanced zone vs. 2x30min @ 240W balanced zone with 2 min RIB rest in between?

3rd day no visible difference, your second workout will be very slightly easier but still would be hard to spot with Moxy. (taking under consideration all the conditions)

having said that:

Today 60min workout at 240W in "balanced zone", might be totally different from tomorrows 60min in 240W , because tomorrow same workout @240W might put your body in deoxy zone, due to many factors "the same power level" workout will have totally different outcome. I have a good recent example of that, will post when  get back.

To have the same physiological stress you might need to drop the load to eg: 225W. or actually increase the load by another 15W...
And this example illustrates fairly well how inefficient are all predefined plans vs Physiological training with Moxy.

It all works until you make progress, but once you stop making progress, or progress is very small, or realize some of your limitations, Moxy is really great tool if not the best to get the job done in diagnosing where you need help.

to illustrate this better:

In the past I used to log a lot of Z3 miles...

Now, at this time of the year I want to log a lot of miles in balanced/oxy zone (starting at 40% finishing at 44% +-1%) if I translate this to my old system it would be Z3 and quite a bit of Z2, because every XX day I need to drop the load to be able to be in balanced\oxy zone.

In the past I use to be tired, I use to have days with "crappy legs" "noodle legs" I always thought that is how it should be, I could not be more wrong...

This new system requires change in your mindset, I stopped looking at TSS points, yesterday I only got 59TSS (I guess i still peak a little bit, to understand the differences[smile] in the past  I would not get off the bike if I would not hit 85 minimum. If I would hit 85 yesterday I would be just digging bigger hole.









Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net