Cycling Training · Public discussion

Structuring climbing blocks

Started by ambal · · Last activity · 8 posts · 8 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Training
Published
6 September 2026
Last activity
6 September 2026
Original author
ambal
Posts
8
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
8
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–8 of 8
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Riders sometimes dedicate blocks or trips to climbing volume. The goal is usually to build capacity, but there is a tendency to confuse vertical volume with actual progress. Accumulating elevation for the sake of a summit count often leads to random suffering rather than a structured improvement in fitness.

    If the focus is on high-intensity climbing work, the pacing needs a purpose. Simply hammering every ascent until collapse is a fast way to break the body before the block is even finished. Recovery is the only part of the process that actually creates the adaptation.

    How do you balance the desire for high vertical volume in a single week without compromising your recovery?

  2. The only way to balance high volume without burning out is through a strict periodization schedule. You cannot just add elevation and hope the body adapts; you need scheduled rest days to actually realize the gains. For me, that means focusing on structured threshold work, like 2x20 intervals, to build the sustained power and mental grit needed for climbing, rather than just chasing a summit count. If you treat every climb as a race, you're just digging a hole you can't get out of.

  3. Periodisation is useful, but 2×20‑minute threshold intervals are overkill for most amateur weeks; they alone consume the bulk of your hard‑training budget. Keep total high‑intensity time to roughly an hour per week, fit in a few short steep climbs, and make sure you have at least two full rest or easy days. Otherwise you’ll still be digging that hole, no matter how you label the session.

  4. Calling 2x20s overkill misses the point. They are the benchmark for building the sustained power and mental grit required for actual time-trialing and long climbs. If you only do an hour of high-intensity work via short, steep bursts, you're training a different energy system entirely. The 'hole' isn't created by the intensity of a structured session; it's created when you fail to schedule the recovery days that allow those specific adaptations to take hold.

  5. The idea that short, steep bursts train a 'different energy system' is a bit of a stretch for an amateur context. You're still working on aerobic capacity and threshold, just with a different power profile. The goal isn't to graduate to professional-level threshold sessions; the goal is to get fitter without the fatigue becoming unmanageable.

    And regarding the 'hole,' intensity is only part of the equation. If you have the recovery capacity, you can handle the intensity. The issue I am pointing to is the mismanagement of total load. If you add volume and intensity without a clear, realistic plan for the recovery you actually need, you'll fail regardless of whether you're doing 2x20s or 4-minute bursts.

  6. We agree on the importance of load management, but the choice of interval isn't just about managing fatigue; it is about the specific adaptation you are chasing. Short bursts might keep you fit and avoid the 'hole,' but they won't build the same steady-state aerobic engine or the mental discipline required to hold a pace for twenty minutes at a time. If the goal is simply to not feel tired, then short bursts work. If the goal is sustained time-trial power, then the specific stress of a 2x20 session is the tool for the job.

  7. SLG, the distinction you’re insisting on is an artefact of lab thinking, not real-world riding. If your goal is to hold 20 minutes at threshold, you’ll get there by riding at threshold, whether that’s two 20-minute efforts or four 10-minute ones or eight 5-minute ones. The adaptation is in the pace, not the session label. Short bursts keep you honest about effort; sustained intervals teach you to suffer in a different gear. Neither is essential if your recovery is managed and your total load is sensible. The hole is dug by ignoring the latter, not by choosing the wrong interval shape.

  8. Recovery, not the interval label, is the real gate‑keeper, but the shape still matters for how that recovery is spent. Micro‑intervals (e.g. 5 min at 95‑100 % FTP followed by 2 min easy) keep heart‑rate and core temperature lower, so you can slot more of them into two 45‑minute winter sessions without blowing through your fatigue budget. I keep my weekly high‑intensity budget to about 55 min, split into those 5‑minute bursts, and once every two weeks I replace a couple of bursts with a single 15‑minute pyramid at 85‑90 % to teach the pacing needed for a true 20‑minute threshold effort. As long as you respect the total load and leave at least two full rest days, the session shape is a tool, not a trap. A high‑velocity fan aimed at the rider’s torso cuts perceived heat by a couple of degrees and usually yields a bigger power gain than swapping a magnetic trainer for a smart unit. I also sip 150 mg caffeine 45 minutes before the hard set – it sharpens focus without noticeable dehydration if I stay hydrated.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

1 user · 0 guests ·0 bots ·1 total

matt s

No known search crawlers active right now.