Zone 2 Training

[Clarktar]

I currently do MTNTough and I've recently heard of Todd and HumanPredator from this forum. Have you done MTNTough at all? I'd love to hear a comparison of the two.

I have. I'll send ya a PM to not clutter this thread up

 

[schmalzy]

I have. I'll send ya a PM to not clutter this thread up

Clark if you don’t mind can you shoot me your synopsis/comparison as well?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SteveAndTheCrigBoys]

Post it up here, doesn't sound like clutter to me.

 

[BBob]

Updated Thinking on Aerobic Assessment for Mountain Athletes

Until recently, there were limited options for an endurance athlete to get a handle on his or her metabolic response to exercise at varying intensities. There are several good options, but we’ll start with the one we usually default to. Be aware that it requires serious technology, such as an...

evokeendurance.com

I posted it somewhere before but anyone going this route can demo the premium Training Peaks for two weeks for free. TP will calculate your Pa:Hr (Aerobic Decoupling) to help you figure out your Zone 2 HR

https://help.trainingpeaks.com/hc/en-us/articles/204071724-Aerobic-Decoupling-Pw-Hr-and-Pa-HR-and-Efficiency-Factor-EF

 

[snowynock]

I have. I'll send ya a PM to not clutter this thread up

Ok cool. I'm a new user so I don't think I have access to PMs just yet so if you sent and I didn't reply - that's why.

 

[mtnbound]

I have not done one of their programs recently, but I have done several Mtntough programs in the past. For myself they are not well balanced. You do a lot of high intensity and high volume workouts and the goal always seemed to be complete exhaustion and fatigue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[savage250]

Reviving an old thread here but I am just looking for some understanding on Zone 2. My MHR = 190 and my RHR = 51. Using online calculator that puts my zone 2 max around 148 bpm which makes sense to me. Using my Garmin though, it thinks my zone 2 max should be around 133 bpm which I think it too low based on exertion. I tried it today and did 45 minutes on the treadmill, basically walking at an 8% incline for 45 minutes, not exceeding 133 bpm to stay in the Garmin/treadmill indicated zone 2 (chest HR strap). Is this the right range for developing the aerobic capacity, or should I be pushing it more to the 148bpm? Staying at 133bpm as my limit means very little running for me as I usually am in the 140's.

 

[mtwarden]

There are several different ways to get a more accurate zone breakdown, but I found them all a little complex. I've simply settled for "can I carry on a conversation" for my upper Zone 2.

I keep threatening to pay for a sophisticated lab test to see, but it seems like that simple test is working for me.

 

[P Carter]

There are several different ways to get a more accurate zone breakdown, but I found them all a little complex. I've simply settled for "can I carry on a conversation" for my upper Zone 2.

I keep threatening to pay for a sophisticated lab test to see, but it seems like that simple test is working for me.

I use a heartrate monitor, but it almost always correlates to this. In fact, probably 90% of the time, if the "talk test" and heartrate monitor don't match, the monitor is glitching. (Usually bad contacts.) It might differ a bit, though, if folks are just getting started building an aerobic base. Particularly if folks are sensitive at their perceived speed---zone 2 will be slooooowwwww to start, even (and perhaps particularly) for people that are very fit but that have focused on anaerobic work.

 

[mtwarden]

I use a heartrate monitor, but it almost always correlates to this. In fact, probably 90% of the time, if the "talk test" and heartrate monitor don't match, the monitor is glitching. (Usually bad contacts.) It might differ a bit, though, if folks are just getting started building an aerobic base. Particularly if folks are sensitive at their perceived speed---zone 2 will be slooooowwwww to start, even (and perhaps particularly) for people that are very fit but that have focused on anaerobic work.

Good to know

I agree if you've been running (or some other aerobic activity) a fair bit and just started focusing on Zone 2—it does seem slow.

 

[mtbraun]

I've been running Garmin watches for 5 years now, and despite the mountain of data it has accumulated, is still off on max HR and zone calculated target HR. I don't know why their algorithms are incorrect. I've validated my precise levels through VO2 max testing. Perceived Exertion is a very reliable method for determining zone 2, but it does take some practice to determine the level. Another pretty reliable calculation is MAF - 180-age. For MAF you need a reliable HR monitor. I know some folks do not like the wrist-based monitors, I've been happy with my Garmins.

 

[P Carter]

I've been running Garmin watches for 5 years now, and despite the mountain of data it has accumulated, is still off on max HR and zone calculated target HR. I don't know why their algorithms are incorrect. I've validated my precise levels through VO2 max testing. Perceived Exertion is a very reliable method for determining zone 2, but it does take some practice to determine the level. Another pretty reliable calculation is MAF - 180-age. For MAF you need a reliable HR monitor. I know some folks do not like the wrist-based monitors, I've been happy with my Garmins.

I've found that the wrist optical monitors are really unreliable. A chest strap is top-notch, but annoying. (Annoying to put on, and in cold weather you often lose the electrical contacts and have to...use saliva. Annoying.)

This year, I got an optical monitor that fits on the forearm or bicep, and it seems like the best of both worlds: convenient but reasonably accurate.

 

[BBob]

Good to know

I agree if you've been running (or some other aerobic activity) a fair bit and just started focusing on Zone 2—it does seem slow.

I’ll say even if you’re all around fit Zone 2 most always feels slow and too easy while doing it. Everyone wants to go harder so it’s hard to put on the brakes. After a hard block during the week the Zone 2 work can still feel easy while doing it but the after effect’s can make me feel exhausted and slammed at times.

This year, I got an optical monitor that fits on the forearm or bicep, and it seems like the best of both worlds: convenient but reasonably accurate.

Same, I switched to a Polar Verity Sense optical this last summer. I used Garmin chest straps for decades prior. No issues with accuracy at all. Have tons of data with it. The Polar won’t do HRV readings if you want that capability.

 

[mtbraun]

I've found that the wrist optical monitors are really unreliable. A chest strap is top-notch, but annoying. (Annoying to put on, and in cold weather you often lose the electrical contacts and have to...use saliva. Annoying.)

This year, I got an optical monitor that fits on the forearm or bicep, and it seems like the best of both worlds: convenient but reasonably accurate.

I know lots of people have seen this unreliability. That’s not been my experience. Over long periods of time with hundreds of workouts it’s been really accurate. Perhaps my wrist physiology is more conducive.

 

[Savage99]

My “calculated” zone 2 HR is also much lower than I can manage jogging very slowly. I use the conversational pace metric and over time have been able to sus out perceived effort and how fast/slow to go do that for a while. Im using a watch to measure HR, so there is some error there.

As an example of suspect HR data. In a few different tris my watch said I was at 190+ for 5 min or so after leaving T2 for the run. I find this hard to believe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[savage250]

I know there are 5 zones, but I originally believed that Zone 1 didn't really count as it was basically a rest zone so the actual Zone 1 was the the "Blue" zone (max 133 bpm) on my Garmin and Zone 2 was the "Green" zone (max at 149 bpm). That is how I was training for the past 2 years once I had learned about zone training (not exceeding 149 bpm). Unfortunately I had a pretty slack past few months so I'm trying to get back into aerobic fitness now. I will focus more on the talk test.

Thanks for the replies.

 

[BBob]

^^^ Zone 1 can be used as an active recovery area so it certainly can count and can be a very useful zone.

 

[mtbraun]

^^^ Zone 1 can be used as an active recovery area so it certainly can count and can be a very useful zone.

Definitely. I think zone 1 active recovery is underutilized.

 

[mtwarden]

After something really hard, fill in the blank for yourself, active recovery in Zone 1 is "exactly what the doctor ordered"

 

[mtbraun]

After something really hard, fill in the blank for yourself, active recovery in Zone 1 is "exactly what the doctor ordered"

This is anecdotal, but I've done enough of these to be convinced. After a long trail run (20miles with 4-5k vert), I'll stay "on my feet" the rest of the day, walking up to another 4 miles as I go about chores, etc. I feel much better the following day than if I was lethargic after that hard workout.