I analysed 20,000 cycling workouts and learned this

[@LukasHridesbikes]

This is a great reminder. I think most people know this, but we don’t put this advice into practice, as if we’re special or different.

[@MoritzPost]

That is a rapid fire video. Love it. Each lesson could be a video by itself! :)

[@danielfrancis6900]

Awesome advice! The lessons off the bike like recovery, sickness and life stress are so relevant for me!!

[@gregmorrison7320]

Great video, well done! No one I follow on Strava spends any real time doing sprint training, big mistake in my opinion. When I was racing, training my sprints twice a week, all year round, really lifted my game. As per Greg Lemonds training advice. But no one seems to want to devote 2 hours out of their week towards this very important component.

[@MsTatakai]

hmm .... okay... how you do your sprint trainings ?

[@LuiisSiilvaa]

This video was amazimg and detailed. Only 1 thing missing thats been messing me up. Zwift racing is so addictive that I'm struggling to fit them in my plan

[@semiprocycling]

There's no real harm replacing any interval training day during a week with a Zwift race.

[@christiankeim]

Overall this was a great video . Very informative, lets of ideas to help adjust a training plan

[@blaze1148]

Recovery rides are overhyped - I don't do them and am improving immensely....the body needs _total rest and recovery_ especially when older.

[@bluemystic7501]

Your experience is anecdotal. My anecdotal experience is that they can keep your legs 'open' for hard workouts instead of getting stale legs from being lazy. If you need 'total rest and recovery' then you probably need to structure your month better.

[@nickbaumcycling]

Great vid. what do you say to the rider who wants to train like a racer, but doesnt race? Just training for the sake of personal improvement and doing well in group rides? (me) Currently doing a zwift winter 6 week plan to improve ftp

[@gheorghefalcaru]

BRAVO!!!!!!!!!

[@PerryScanlon]

Curious how you would compare these 2 training plans: 4 hours per week moderately easy and 1 hour per week moderately hard versus 9.5 hours per week moderately easy and 0.5 hour per week moderately hard.

[@MrKipperfish]

Moderately easy and moderately hard are fuzzy concepts, and those two options aren't really training plans, per se. The 80/20 approach to base building says do 80% of your rides in what is effectively Z2 and for the other 20% do intensity work. Intensity can be sweet spot, threshold, over/unders, even sprints, it doesn't matter that much in the base phase. Tempo, which might be "moderately hard" doesn't have much of a place in most modern training plans. Check out Dylan Johnson's videos on polarized training, fast on 6/12/15 hours a week, and his training plans of the same names. If you've got 5 hours a week, and you wanna build base, do 4hours Z2 and do a 1 hour workout that is properly hard, like threshold intervals. 2x10 one week, then 3x8, then 3x10, 4x8. If you're already trained, you can start with more total time at threshold or higher in the threshold zone and progress from there, adding time and or power each week. The 9.5 & .5 plan probably doesn't have enough intensity to maintain previous fitness in upper zones. I'd probably go for closer to 8 & 2.

[@PerryScanlon]

@MrKipperfish thanks. I've heard Dr. Seiler recommend approximately 90/10 by time and 80/20 by session. The MAF folks do more 95/5 I think, but I know if they well in races. I think Dylan discussed pyramidal 85/10/5 being decent for long events. And there's a cross country ski study where some participants responded better to adding "intensity" which was anything above LT2 minus 5 bpm HR.

[@semiprocycling]

@PerryScanlon: I like your point about the different ratios being descriptive, like 80/20 or 90/10, but I don’t think they work as practical guides for building a plan. Instead, I think it’s more effective to focus on where the athlete is right now-fitness level, goals, and how they respond to different types of training-and let the percentages fall into place naturally as a result of the progression. In practice, this means the intensity distribution-whether pyramidal, polarized, or something else-is just a byproduct of smart planning, not the target itself. Otherwise, there’s a risk of forcing training into a ratio that doesn’t actually suit the individual.

[@semiprocycling]

@MrKipperfish: Your suggested plans are a decent starting point, but they feel a bit generic and might not fully account for individual needs. For example, some riders might thrive with more intensity, while others need extra Z2 to build their aerobic engine without burning out. That’s where an adaptive approach comes in. The issue with sticking to fixed plans, like 4 hours Z2 and 1 hour threshold, is that they risk leaving gains on the table or mismanaging recovery. A more individualized system can make sure the work is hitting the right areas while still being sustainable. It’s not just about following a ratio or recipe but making adjustments based on what works best for the athlete.

[@MrKipperfish]

@@semiprocycling In fact, they don't account for *any* individual needs whatsoever aside from the hypothetical time constraints and a desire to build base. They're not a training plan. Vs. the original comment they're slightly expanded concepts of a plan based on the 80/20 approach. Watching the DJ videos I mentioned, and checking out sample weeks in his plans, will fill in some of the gaps you're talking about. There are hours and hours on KZbin regarding the principles of training that people should observe, a great deal of which you covered in this video! There is a point, however, where you need to do _something_ for long enough to see if it works for you, and starting with what science says works well for most people is solid ground.

[@marsallefrancisco4851]

Is it possible for a individual to have a high number of slow twitch fibers but still be in zone 4 and 5 ,while most of his mates are in zone 1 and 2 ,during a 4 hour group ride? Have you ever seen this type of athlete in your practice? I figured being in zone 4 and 5, most of the time ,would mean I have a predominate amount of fast twitch fibers but I can barely sprint at 800 watts.90% of my time training, is done on my own in zone 2, which feels much better but on Sundays, when I ride with the gang, I slow right down and meet them at the coffee shop.

[@RevoltingRudi]

maybe you are slow-twitch but still not strong enough for your groub ride mates. or maybe your trainingzones arent right.

[@christianb.d1418]

for xc mtb would you still consider aerobic training to be the most important?

[@semiprocycling]

Yes! Listen to this to see how a pro XCO rider trains: www.buzzsprout.com/6262/episodes/5786437-how-to-win-an-elite-men-s-mountain-bike-world-cup

[@bertusbob]

👍👍👍

[@christiankeim]

Lesson 1 seems like a dietary issue. Always

Lessons 10 and 11 seem contradictory. How do you have a solid aerobic base except by spending long periods in the saddle?

[@aymtb]

Forming an aerobic base (purpose) as part of a training plan is not what Lesson 11 is talking about (it specifically excludes it at 5:06, by definition it is talking about extra miles without purpose ).

[@DennisG-d5g]

Several z2 rides of “normal” hours are better than one super long one

[@xGshikamaru]

1h30 every day, much more effective than 1 super long ride

[@RevoltingRudi]

do a 6h ride at 15km/h avg. speed. 3x/week and you will see... almost zero improvement. even if its 18h/week of ride time. on the other side 2h 3x/week @ upper level of Z2 will maybe give realy good results. or you do your 4h supposidly zone 2 ride but sprint every 10 or 15min. then you dont get the planned stimulus for the planned energysystem.

[@blaze1148]

I am a naturally _lower cadence rider_ - I easily keep up with the fast group who are pedalling much faster......high cadence is overrated for me at least !

[@ronb9901]

Yeah it’s a very individual thing for sure.