2x20 101

2x20s are a cornerstone of many people's workouts for LT adaptation. The reality is that you can do anything from 10 mins and up, although the common durations are 10-30 mins. As to intensity, Andy Coggan's schema calls for 91%-105% of functional threshold (FT) power or 95%-105% of functional HR. As to recovery between intervals, it depends on your recovery power. Let's say your FT is 275w, your recovery power is 55%FT (150w) and you did a 20 min interval at 105%of FT (290w). Then you would be recovered in 6 minutes (.30x20min). IOW, after 6 mins, NP=FT. What do I do? I work out a plan to get in my L4 time (and L5 and L6) on a road course with varying terrain. I don't have a 20 min interval per se, but I do have several L4 segments ranging from 10 mins to 25 mins. I do them at ~90% of my max power for that duration.

Chipotle said:

2x20's seem to be something of a corner stone. I have never done a set nor do I know how to go about it properly. I believe I have read that intensity should be 105% of TT power? Duration obviously 20 min, but how long is the recovery between and at what power zone? How often do you recommend?
What do YOU do?

I do a twenty minute hill, coast down and start up again without any more rest. That works out to about seven to eight minutes and I am coasting most of the way. I assume you are in the Northern Hemisphere so this would be the offseason, so don't worry about exact numbers too much and just go as hard as you can for the first one and try to match it in the second one for your first time doing it the whole exercise. If you can't match it in the second one, you went out too hard in the first, but if it was pretty easy to match it, next time you do the drill, go a little bit harder.

Chipotle said:

2x20's seem to be something of a corner stone. I have never done a set nor do I know how to go about it properly. I believe I have read that intensity should be 105% of TT power? Duration obviously 20 min, but how long is the recovery between and at what power zone? How often do you recommend?
What do YOU do?

As RD mentioned there are plenty of ways to get in L4 work. One way is to approach a progression of 2x20 workouts - typically twice weekly. The downside to this approach is the lack of variety. The upside is the lack of variety 😉. This makes it easy to control the workload and, importantly, to clearly ascertain progress.

Dr. Coggan's has written that one is capable of routinely performing two twenty minute intervals at one's current best hour (40k) power or FT. The shorter 'on' period and minimal rest between sets compensates for the lack of racing motivation and the like.

So the standard approach for someone starting out would be to:
1. Warmup as per your usual routine (maybe 20-30min)
2. Do the 1st interval close to 100% of your current FT. If unsure, be conservative. Select a power in which you can complete the 1st interval without killing yourself the last 5 minutes!
3. Spin lightly in L1 for 5min
4. Attempt a full repeat of the 1st interval.
5. Cooldown

If you can't repeat the power/time on the 2nd interval, you've been a little too aggressive and should back off 5-10W next time out.

Folks typically find they can bump the power up perhaps weekly at the start of a focus period and then bi-weekly as gains get slower. Progression is key and using the std. 2x20's really allows you to focus and feed on that. I often do these on my Computrainer in ergo mode: the controller keeps the power constant and I have to focus on the duration only.

There's no need to calculate NP across the workout. Just take your rest interval in L1 for approximately 5 minutes, keep the recovery interval and power consistent, and you'll be fine.

IIRC, most folks do not find it productive to carry out this routine all year round. It's most often done for 8-12 weeks at an appropriate time of year (up to you to decide on that).

well that's about all I can think of right now. I'm sure Andy's new book will explain the nuances much better than I ever could 😉

rmur

5 min rest for me. Spinning very lightly on the trainer while toweling off and drinking heavily.

I'm sure Andy's new book will explain the nuances much better than I ever could 😉

rmur[/QUOTE]Andy's new book? I wasn't aware. Is it available yet?

Chipotle said:

I'm sure Andy's new book will explain the nuances much better than I ever could 😉

rmur

Andy's new book? I wasn't aware. Is it available yet?[/QUOTE]
Hunter Allen of CyclingPeaks and Andy have one coming out. I'm not sure when ... before Xmas? Nice gift idea 🙂

Good luck with your training. One thing I've learned over 3+ years of training with power is not to sweat the workout micro-details too much - step back and make sure your overall volume is appropriate and your intensity is appropriate for your season.

rmur

I think this discussion inadvertently glosses over the issue of intensity. The OP said he thinks 20s should be done at 105%FT. Woofer said to try them at 20MP (although, importantly, he said if you can't complete the 2nd one you need to back off). But, note that Woofer's recovery is 7-8 mins at zero power. rmur suggested 100%FT. Now, 100%FT and 105%FT may sound similar, but I think they are hugely different. In my case, with an FT of ~275w, it's the difference between 275w and 290w. I don't know about the rest of you, but I think 15w is a big deal near or above FT. I don't even look at the difference as 5%. The first 150w is basically zero intensity -- you get that by clipping into your pedals. So, 275w isn't really 275w. It's 125w over the baseline. So, 5% of 275w is really ~11% of the 125w of power that I actually generated. In general, I think people have the wrong idea about intervals. They think you have to go at max power for a given duration. I couldn't disagree more strongly. I think you set yourself up for disappointment (not completing the interval set) or failure (not even completing the first interval) by going too hard. I would rather have 60 mins at 91%FT than 40 mins at 105%FT. The purpose of the interval is to trigger a specific adaptation, which can often be achieved at a lesser intensity than many think.

RapDaddyo said:

The purpose of the interval is to trigger a specific adaptation, which can often be achieved at a lesser intensity than many think.

It's that very fact that reduces the importance of finding the *exact* appropriate power-level of a 2x20 set. Whether you do them at 95%, 100%, or 105% of FT isn't terribly important as long as you can complete the workout. My unsophisticated approach to intervals is to set the power-level as high as allows the *entire workout* to be completed, and let the interval duration dictate the appropriate power-level. That seems to work fine as a starting point, and then levels can be fine-tuned in 5-10w increments for subsequent workouts. If I wanted to do 60-min in L4 instead of 40, then the interval power would necessarily be slightly lower.

Now, before a HR lurker jumps on this ( 😉 ), just because I'm saying that exact power isn't terribly important doesn't mean I'm suggesting a HR-style interval (with L6 starting power and L2 power at the end of the 20-minutes) is just as good. 🙂

rmur17 said:

Hunter Allen of CyclingPeaks and Andy have one coming out. I'm not sure when ... before Xmas? Nice gift idea 🙂

Oooh. You've made me a very, very happy self-coached athlete.

Andy, where can I pre-order? Do you need any copy-editing, or proof-reading 😉?

frenchyge said:

If I wanted to do 60-min in L4 instead of 40, then the interval power would necessarily be slightly lower.

If you mean as continuous intervals (60 vs. 40), I agree. If you mean 3x20 vs. 2x20, I disagree. My 20min interval power is my 20min interval power, whether I'm doing 1 or 2 or 4.

RapDaddyo said:

If you mean as continuous intervals (60 vs. 40), I agree. If you mean 3x20 vs. 2x20, I disagree. My 20min interval power is my 20min interval power, whether I'm doing 1 or 2 or 4.

Ok. Maybe I misinterpreted this part of your post as referring to interval sets:

RapDaddyo said:

I think you set yourself up for disappointment (not completing the interval set) or failure (not even completing the first interval) by going too hard. I would rather have 60 mins at 91%FT than 40 mins at 105%FT.

I'm not really sure I could do 40 mins at 105%FT either as a single pull, or 2x20 intervals. As Andy mentions, if you can consistently do 20 minute interval sets at >5% of you FT power, then you might need to re-evaluate your FT. Certainly 40 mins straight (in training) at 105%FT would fall into the same category.

frenchyge said:

I'm not really sure I could do 40 mins at 105%FT either as a single pull, or 2x20 intervals. As Andy mentions, if you can consistently do 20 minute interval sets at >5% of you FT power, then you might need to re-evaluate your FT. Certainly 40 mins straight at 105%FT would fall into the same category.

I should have inserted the word "cumulatively" in my reference to 60 mins vs. 40 mins. You attain the desired adaptation at durations >10mins. Other than efficiently using available training time, I don't think there's an advantage to doing one 40 min interval vs. 2x20s or 3x13s for that matter. The main difference is that you could ride the 2x20s at significantly higher power than 1x40 and I think that matters.

RapDaddyo said:

The main difference is that you could ride the 2x20s at significantly higher power than 1x40 and I think that matters.

Agree. L4 and above are really in the interval realm for that reason. It's just too hard to get the minutes in without doing it through intervals.

frenchyge said:

Agree. L4 and above are really in the interval realm for that reason. It's just too hard to get the minutes in without doing it through intervals.

That is the popular view, but I think it's a bit at odds with the real world. Unless we train on a velodrome, we are faced with road courses that shape our options. A 20min interval at ~FT covers a lot of real estate (e.g., >7 miles on the flat). It's not so easy to find an appropriate 7+ mile stretch of road with no stop signs, stop lights, construction zones or whatever else forces us to slow down or stop. I think the ideal solution is to adapt training goals to the constraints of the route (topography, stops, etc.). I care more about getting in my target L4 minutes than I do about the duration of each L4 segment. If I get the desired adaptation at any duration >10 mins, I'm going to take full advantage of that fact in designing my training ride. L4s present the greatest challenge due to the lower end duration constraint. L5s and L6s are much more flexible due to the short duration. I can find places to do 3-8 min intervals much easier than a 20 min interval.

Sure. I'm not arguing, just relating to your observation that:

RapDaddyo said:

you could ride the 2x20s at significantly higher power than 1x40 and I think that matters.

L4 and above practically force the interval approach just because the necessarily high power cannot be held continuously for an entire workout. The duration of the intervals can be set by preference or road conditions, but there will probably be more than 1 rep because the intensity dictates periodic rest periods.

Check your e-mail, BTW.

frenchyge said:

L4 and above practically force the interval approach just because the necessarily high power cannot be held continuously for an entire workout. The duration of the intervals can be set by preference or road conditions, but there will probably be more than 1 rep because the intensity dictates periodic rest periods.

Yep, I agree completely. But, there is an infrequently discussed value to doing the long (40 or even 60 min) intervals. In addition to the adaptation benefit (still significant even if the average power is less than possible at a shorter duration), they serve to help the cyclist understand his/her FT at that duration. In an event of that duration, that (knowledge) turns out to be of huge value. I learned this the hard way when I did a 2hr hillclimb TT. My 2hr FT was significantly less than my 1hr FT and I would have managed my power much more effectively if I had a better estimate of my 2hr FT.

frenchyge said:

My unsophisticated approach to intervals is to set the power-level as high as allows the *entire workout* to be completed, and let the interval duration dictate the appropriate power-level. That seems to work fine as a starting point, and then levels can be fine-tuned in 5-10w increments for subsequent workouts.

That's essentially my approach as well.

rmur17 said:

I'm sure Andy's new book will explain the nuances much better than I ever could 😉

It won't, for two reasons:

1. the focus on the book is on how to use a powermeter to maximum benefit, and while various workouts (mostly those that Hunter uses) are described, they are meant to simply be examples, not a specific description, and

2) you did a bang-up job already. 🙂

rmur17 said:

Andy's new book? I wasn't aware. Is it available yet?

Hunter Allen of CyclingPeaks and Andy have one coming out. I'm not sure when ... before Xmas? Nice gift idea 🙂[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the endorsement!

The title is "How to train and race using a power meter", by Hunter and myself. It should be available from Human Kinetics early next year for $19.95 (IIRC...the publisher sets the price).