Training for The Uphill Athlete Scott Johnston New Hunting Podcast

[The_Jim]

Oh totally, more training is going to be better than less. Particularly for endurance.

I'm asking more like: if you know your training is going to be fixed at (say) 5 hours per week, will you have better outcomes from zone 2 work or something at a higher intensity?

I think the higher intensity is going to give you the opposite effect of zone 2 - It will train your heart rate to spike.

 

[Willie IV]

How much weekly zone 2 work are you planning to do?

5 to 6 days but at varying degrees of incline, speed and weight. I'm wanting to keep my body from adapting to one routine so I'll change it up. One day is a grind it out day (2-3 hrs) and some days are 0% incline for only 30 minutes. Most days range from 45 - 90 minutes.

 

[mad_angler]

Oh totally, more training is going to be better than less. Particularly for endurance.

I'm asking more like: if you know your training is going to be fixed at (say) 5 hours per week, will you have better outcomes from zone 2 work or something at a higher intensity?

I think Scott specifically addressed this when talking with Cliff. He said that leaving zone 2 actually hurts your performance. When you are out of zone 2, you are telling your body to ignore aerobic pathways and focus on anaerobic pathways. That defeats the primary goal of his program.

That is my uneducated recollection. Others maybe heard it differently...

Listen to the podcast around 1:29 where this exact question is asked and answered...

 

[Poser]

Oh totally, more training is going to be better than less. Particularly for endurance.

I'm asking more like: if you know your training is going to be fixed at (say) 5 hours per week, will you have better outcomes from zone 2 work or something at a higher intensity?

I would expect that one's fitness would plateau only doing zone 2 training for a handful of hours a week.
The question is if that plateau level of fitness is sufficient for your demands. If you were climbing a Himalayan peak, it most certainly would not be sufficient, but it may be enough for a moderately difficult hunting trip. Of course, if you further divide that 5 hours up with some strength training and, eventually, some muscular endurance, you're not going to be left with much zone 2 training.

 

[kad11]

I think Scott specifically addressed this when talking with Cliff. He said that leaving zone 2 actually hurts your performance. When you are out of zone 2, you are telling your body to ignore aerobic pathways and focus on anaerobic pathways. That defeats the primary goal of his program.

That is my uneducated recollection. Others maybe heard it differently...

I understood it the same as you...

 

[The_Jim]

If you trust ChatGPT - this sounds accurate to me though...

Great question—and you’re thinking about this exactly the right way.
There is a very real diminishing-returns curve for Zone 2 aerobic training. You don’t need elite-athlete volume to get most of the benefit, especially for hunting.
Below is a practical, evidence-based way to think about it.

The Zone 2 “Return on Investment” Curve​

~3–4 hours/week → ~60% of max aerobic base gains​

• Big improvements if you’re coming from low/moderate volume
• Better fat oxidation, lower resting HR
• Faster recovery between efforts

Who this fits: Busy people, maintenance mode

---

~5–6 hours/week → ~75–80% of aerobic base gains​

This is the sweet spot for most hunters

• Major mitochondrial growth
• Strong capillary density increases
• Noticeable drop in HR at given pace
• Very good endurance carryover to rucking and long days

Time efficiency: Extremely high
Fatigue cost: Low
Injury risk: Low

~7–8 hours/week → ~85–90% of gains​

• Gains continue, but slower
• Requires better sleep and fueling
• Mostly useful if you’re prepping for very long pack-outs or multi-day hunts

10+ hours/week → Final 5–10%​

• Elite endurance territory
• High fatigue, high time cost
• Not necessary unless you’re chasing performance margins

 

[hibernation]

Of course, if you further divide that 5 hours up with some strength training and, eventually, some muscular endurance, you're not going to be left with much zone 2 training.

Yeah, that's where I'm struggling a little. Strength training, some mobility and rehab work, shooting the bow regularly, now add in some longer zone 2 work... it adds up fast.

 

[TheM1DoesMyTalking]

For sure endurance is a high volume low intensity - I have a feeling you can probably do like 50% of the training volume to get 80% of the results. It would be interesting to hear his perspective on that.

From Scott's article on Aerobic Deficiency Syndrome:

"Rules of Thumb
The aerobic needle will move very slowly if you do less than 3 hours of aerobic base training per week. Do not expect a noticeable improvement in your aerobic pace in less than six months. If you consistently get in 5-6 hours a week of aerobic base training, you will probably notice an increase in aerobic pace in 3-4 months. Things pick up when you hit 8 hours a week, and we have seen people cure ADS in 2-3 months."

 

[thinhorn_AK]

5-6 hours of zone 2 per week is great but that volume is going to pile up when you add in your strength work and everything else.

 

[kad11]

Roughly accurate? Build strength and aerobic capacity first, then add muscular endurance and HIIT periodically while maintaining foundation?

 

[P Carter]

I’ve done their ultra running plans for mountain running. The volume was too high for me. So I just scaled to the duration of my event. Instead of back to back 4 hour runs, a one hour run one day and 3 the next. That sort of thing. Worked great. I maxed at 12 hrs/week for a few weeks, but most were right around 8 hours. Ran 40 miles with 11,000 of vertical and wasn’t sore the next day.

I think the thrust of it is: here’s an ideal program with a proposed set of concepts and workouts. My guess is, if you scale that to meet your training availability, it’ll work really well.

Specifically, I’d guess 5 hrs of zone 2 a week, if maintained as a base for several months, and the ME and strength on top, is going to be great. And if you can do, say, 4 weeks of bumping that to 8 hrs and scale back the strength work to maintenance levels for the 4 weeks, even better.

Substituting high intensity for zone 2 is qualitatively different because it works a different energy system.

Anyway, for what it’s worth, I think folks on the thread are right on. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good - any program with consistent zone 2 aerobic work, strength work, and an ME component will be awesome if you stick with it and progress/periodize in a reasonable way.

 

[bpeay4]

For those not wanting to go too far off the deep end on this stuff and keep it simple... If you want to increase your stamina in the mountains...

- incorporate extended (at least 1 hour) sessions of Zone 2 work into your routine. The idea is that anything above Zone 2 training (HITT, Running etc.) does not increase aerobic capacity
- if possible keep the work relative to hunting ( weighted hikes or stair master is better than a stationary bike)

you can make this as complicated as you want but for the average guy just simply doing a few Zone 2 sessions a week will make a difference.

 

[V2Pnutrition]

Scott, Steve, and every other Z2 proponent have done a great job getting their methodologies to the masses- no doubt about it. I've read, love, and purchased copies of them for our own clients and group.

But, this is far less about there being some magic formula/training zone and more about the sum of the parts: find the right mix of easy, moderate, and hard over time. Assuming that's above what you've already been used to doing- and it sounds like much of this concept is brand new to some of us- and you'll reap a noticeable reward. Sure, more is better, but that might also mean 2-3-4 hours leading into your hunt reaps massive rewards if you've been doing none of this up until now.

A single 8-12 week block may look like this:

You can see where this is WAY above what the usual way.
You can see where it was gradual- not a linear rocket ship up to 2x the volume.
You can see where there were periods of recovery for a week to absorb the volume.
(If you could zero in further) you would see where this is WAY below the "ideal" volume "needed" for Z2 to "work".

Even though not "ideal" (15-20 hours), you can see where practical is still highly effective when above your norm:

The second year of training like this carried further than my first because there was a base to build from. There are some more thoughts and ideas included in the image and the arrows.

Also, Z2 proponents aren't saying "never do hard, high-intense workouts!" They're saying there is a place, time, and reason to add those, but they're not the thing (as many have been accustomed to believing).

Strength training and recovery as vital parts too as they're the foundation in which ALL this volume rests.

Having a plan is great, but knowing flexibility IN that plan is important too or you end up with diminishing returns from turning the jets on too much.

TLDR: It goes without saying that 20-minutes won't put you in "Zone 2". At the same time, don't let the recommended volume scare you away from trying it at all. Keep the general rule of thumb, challenge your normal dedicated time to fitness (i.e. give a little more time to it than usual), but still make it realistic. Be consistent. You'll reap the reward.

PS: This thread epitomizes when it's worth hiring a coach. A decent understanding of the basics doesn't mean a high degree of confidence and certainty. A good coach will help you navigate your questions and provide explanation in a way that makes you understand it so well that you couldn't NOT buy in. The difference is then have a high degree of confidence what what you're doing will work and that makes the work easier to commit to.

 

[Marbles]

I bought and downloaded the $80 program. Here are my thoughts...

First and foremost, this program will definitely work. If you follow the program, you will extremely ready for a real mountain hunt. Your leg and full body strength will be great and your endurance will also be great.

Other thoughts:
- It is extremely cheap. $80 is basically free
- It is well documented. It has enough descriptions and attachments to guide you through every workout
- It does a nice job including leg, core, and upper body strength
- It does a GREAT job including mountain hunting-specific workouts and acclimation.

But... there is always a but...
I looks quite time consuming. It asks for about 9-12 hours of work each week. Much of that is weighted hiking/climbing for 1-3 hours at a shot. That is why I'm convinced that it would do a great job. If someone spends that much time doing hunting focused exercise, there is no doubt in my mind that you'd be extremely well prepared. But i don't know if I have that much time or desire. It does seem fairly easy to modify a few workouts or drop 1-2 per week to manage your other commitments.

I plan on doing the program as closely as I can but will probably miss at least one workout per week and will probably modify another workout.

There is unfortunately no substitute for time in endurance.

I'd be real interested to hear Scott Johnston talk about how weekly training volume plays into this style of training. These plans all revolve around tons of zone 2 work, which is great if you can manage it, but how do things change for the person who's doing 3 to 5 hours per week? Is that enough to get meaningful benefits? Or are you better off doing harder workouts, especially since you're not taxing your recovery in the same way as an athlete doing 10 to 20 hours per week?

Higher intensity actually down regulates the metabolic pathways needed for endurance (he even touches on this in the podcast in this thread). So, you cannot replace volume with intensity. If you don't have the time, the adaptations occur slower and you will not be able to reach the same potential. Above aerobic threshold should account for no more than 10% of weekly volume, less than 5% if someone is aerobically deficit.

Around 6 hours of aerobic base training (zone 1 and 2) a week is where things start really improving. And durations of about an hour plus. But, you can see improvement with less.

Doubles (am and pm workouts) start coming into play when volume is really more than is beneficial in a single session (north of 4 hours). So, if you need to log 7 hours you might do 4 in the morning and 3 in the evening. Or, you might hit different types of work, such as intensity or ME work in the morning followed by Z1 or two in the evening with the recovery allowing for better over all quality.