Lactate testing / training

[email hidden] wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

I've read a lot about using lactate testing in addition
to (instead of?) heart rate monitoring to make training
more precise.

How widespread is lactate testing today?

How do you use it to improve VO2?

Measuring blood lactate levels can be done at intervals
during a controlled sport-specific exercise session to plot
an individual's blood lactate curve, and to determine that
individual's lactate threshold (LT) pace, heart rate and
precise lactate level (at LT). LT is also known as anaerobic
threshold, and is the region of effort at which blood
lactate starts to accumulate too fast to be neutralized.

VO2max training is different from LT training, and is done
at a level above LT; so once LT is known, you can use either
a percentage above LT or a percent of maxHR to train at
VO2max effort. LT training will improve the ability to ride
at all speeds, particularly at tempo pace.

The LT effort level area (pace and HR) can also be
determined during sport-specific testing using a heart rate
monitor and a carefully controlled progression of effort.
There are many ways to do this but conconi's test is
probably the best known. One book specifically about this
and measuring lactate levels is "Lactate Threshold Training"
by Peter Janssen, 2001.

- Tony

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've read a lot about using lactate testing in addition to
(instead of?) heart rate monitoring to make training more
precise.

How widespread is lactate testing today?

How do you use it to improve VO2?

I don't know but I saw Lance using a little handheld lactate
guaging device in one of his Lance Chronicles episodes. It
was called something like The Lactate Pro or something
catchy like that. I wonder if they will one-day be as cheap
as these $20 HRM's that we find everywhere.

Dave

Quoted message said:

I've read a lot about using lactate testing in addition to
(instead of?) heart rate monitoring to make training more
precise.

How widespread is lactate testing today?

How do you use it to improve VO2?

Training with a Powermeter is probably the most practical
way to go about
it. It will give you a very precise knowledge of your LT (
lactate threshold). Some that train with Power don't
even wear their HR cheststraps anymore.
www.topica.com/lists/wattage/read

Before I started trainiing with Power I used to think my LT
HR was 170 bpm. Today I know it varies between 165 and 175
bpm due to cardiac drift , temperature and other factors
that are difficult to measure. I also know exactly how many
Watts I can average for a given time period. The Power is
much more consistent than my HR and in the end Power is what
it's all about. I did not need to do any blood tests or
visit a lab at any time. All I needed to do was to analyze
my Wattage over a period of time using a good analyzing
tool. www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com

An example. My One hour LT is 270 Watts. If I want to do VO2
training I can look into the tables of the CyclingPeals
Software and see that I should do intervals of 3-8 minutes
at a Wattage of 286-326. Lower Wattage for 8 minutes and
higher Wattage for three minute intervals. Updating and
progress feedback is instantaneous.

--
Perre

"Power is the future"

In article <[email hidden]>, Pistof

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've read a lot about using lactate testing in addition
to (instead of?) heart rate monitoring to make training
more precise.

How widespread is lactate testing today?

How do you use it to improve VO2?

I don't know but I saw Lance using a little handheld
lactate guaging device in one of his Lance Chronicles
episodes. It was called something like The Lactate Pro or
something catchy like that. I wonder if they will one-day
be as cheap as these $20 HRM's that we find everywhere.

The device he was using is good and only costs about $400,
plus a small cost for the disposable blood extractor parts.
Simple to use the device. Not as easy to use the
information properly.

-WG

In article <[email hidden]>, Per Elmsäter

Quoted message said:

An example. My One hour LT is 270 Watts. If I want to do
VO2 training I can look into the tables of the
CyclingPeals Software and see that I should do intervals
of 3-8 minutes at a Wattage of 286-326. Lower Wattage for
8 minutes and higher Wattage for three minute intervals.

My LT (4mMol) power is currently near 320-330 watts but I do
VO2max intervals 30 seconds on/off for 5 to 10 minutes each
set in the range of 480-550 watts during the "on" portion.
Depending on your objectives you may want to add something
like this to your training.

-WG

warren said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Per

Elmsäter said:

An example. My One hour LT is 270 Watts. If I want to do
VO2 training I can look into the tables of the
CyclingPeals Software and see that I should do intervals
of 3-8 minutes at a Wattage of 286-326. Lower Wattage for
8 minutes and higher Wattage for three minute intervals.

My LT (4mMol) power is currently near 320-330 watts but I
do VO2max intervals 30 seconds on/off for 5 to 10 minutes
each set in the range of 480-550 watts during the "on"
portion. Depending on your objectives you may want to add
something like this to your training.

-WG

I do of course do different intervals than the ones
prescribed above. It was as I stated an example of how my
current fitnes will dictate at what level to train for
different goals, with the help of a Powermeter and good
training software.

As for your 30 seconds on/off. If you look at what you
average for 5 or 10 minutes, including the off portion,
you'll notice that it is proabably in the range of 350-400 W
which is percentagewise the same levels I work at when doing
VO2max work at 3-8 minute intervals.

I am in no way an expert on this. Just trying to follow the
advice I've received, as I've understood it, from the
Wattage group and Andy Coggan. Andy in particular has put
down a lot of work in making Power based training effective
and easily attainable by everyone.
www.topica.com/lists/wattage/read

Your Coggan levels would look like this at an LT of 330

L6 Anaerobic capacity 399 W and up Interrvals of 30 sec to 3
min on. app. 2 1/2 minute off L5 VO2 max 350-398 W 3-8 min
on 2 1/2 - 5 min off. Preferably 2 1/2 min off L4 Lactate
treshold 300-349 W 10-60 min on. 2 1/2 - 5 min off.
Preferably 2 1/2 min off. 2*20 min very popular. L3 Tempo
259-299 W. Up to 2 hour hard riding. L2 Endurance 185-260W.
Long Slow Distance L1 Active recovery 0-184W

As your fitness increase or decrease, the software will
adjust your levels.

But Andy Coggan and co-developers of course explain it the
best. cyclingpeakssoftware.compower411.htmlOpen ↗ Just
hope maybe I've caught somebodys cattention and curiosity.
I'm in no way affiliated with the CyclingPeaks group, but as
a very satisfied customer I'd like to see them sell a lot of
their products so they can continue to provide me with good
training tools 😉

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Per Elmsäter

Quoted message said:

warren said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Per

Elmsäter said:

An example. My One hour LT is 270 Watts. If I want to
do VO2 training I can look into the tables of the
CyclingPeals Software and see that I should do
intervals of 3-8 minutes at a Wattage of 286-326. Lower
Wattage for 8 minutes and higher Wattage for three
minute intervals.

My LT (4mMol) power is currently near 320-330 watts but
I do VO2max intervals 30 seconds on/off for 5 to 10
minutes each set in the range of 480-550 watts during
the "on" portion. Depending on your objectives you may
want to add something like this to your training.

-WG

I do of course do different intervals than the ones
prescribed above. It was as I stated an example of how my
current fitnes will dictate at what level to train for
different goals, with the help of a Powermeter and good
training software.

As for your 30 seconds on/off. If you look at what you
average for 5 or 10 minutes, including the off portion,
you'll notice that it is proabably in the range of 350-400
W which is percentagewise the same levels I work at when
doing VO2max work at 3-8 minute intervals.

Steady state intervals can serve different objectives than
30 seconds on/off. Think of the many accelerations during
the shorter intervals. Each type of interval has its uses.
This is why I suggested that you consider adding them to
your training-not replacing your current method.

Quoted message said:

I am in no way an expert on this. Just trying to follow
the advice I've received, as I've understood it, from the
Wattage group and Andy Coggan. Andy in particular has put
down a lot of work in making Power based training
effective and easily attainable by everyone.
www.topica.com/lists/wattage/read

Your Coggan levels would look like this at an LT of 330

L6 Anaerobic capacity 399 W and up Interrvals of 30 sec to
3 min on. app. 2 1/2 minute off L5 VO2 max 350-398 W 3-8
min on 2 1/2 - 5 min off. Preferably 2 1/2 min off L4
Lactate treshold 300-349 W 10-60 min on. 2 1/2 - 5 min
off. Preferably 2 1/2 min off. 2*20 min very popular. L3
Tempo 259-299 W. Up to 2 hour hard riding. L2 Endurance
185-260W. Long Slow Distance L1 Active recovery 0-184W

As your fitness increase or decrease, the software will
adjust your levels.

Yes, but unfortunately power levels don't fall along a
smooth, straight line when plotted against things like
lactate and HR and the appropriate training levels are not
necessarily a certain percentage of your LT power. It's good
that you're happy with the numbers the software provides
you. This information is far better than most of what is
widely available, but the guidelines from the software are
not necessarily the best choice for some people.

-WG

warren said:

Steady state intervals can serve different objectives than
30 seconds on/off. Think of the many accelerations during
the shorter intervals. Each type of interval has its uses.
This is why I suggested that you consider adding them to
your training-not replacing your current method.

Agreed. Nor did I expect you to replace yours 😉

Quoted message said:

This information is far better than most of what is widely
available, but the guidelines from the software are not
necessarily the best choice for some people.

Hey. This ain't no religion. Just adding my small thesis to
all the others in the rbr testament.

--
Perre

You have to be smarter than a robot to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, Per Elmsäter

Quoted message said:

warren said:

Steady state intervals can serve different objectives
than 30 seconds on/off. Think of the many accelerations
during the shorter intervals. Each type of interval has
its uses. This is why I suggested that you consider
adding them to your training-not replacing your current
method.

Agreed. Nor did I expect you to replace yours 😉

I also do ones like you mentioned. Usually on a 2-4% hill.
Sometimes with a 10 second sprint at the very end.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This information is far better than most of what is
widely available, but the guidelines from the software
are not necessarily the best choice for some people.

Hey. This ain't no religion. Just adding my small thesis
to all the others in the rbr testament.

It's a better thesis than most.

-WG

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Pistof said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've read a lot about using lactate testing in
addition to (instead

of?)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

heart rate monitoring to make training more precise.

How widespread is lactate testing today?

How do you use it to improve VO2?

I don't know but I saw Lance using a little handheld
lactate guaging

device

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

in one of his Lance Chronicles episodes. It was called
something like

The

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Lactate Pro or something catchy like that. I wonder if
they will

one-day be

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

as cheap as these $20 HRM's that we find everywhere.

The device he was using is good and only costs about $400,
plus a small

Hey, that's really not bad at all. It's probably a better
investment than a pair of cranks. Do you have a source...,
or better yet, the name of a good unit that I can search the
Internet for?

Quoted message said:

cost for the disposable blood extractor parts. Simple to
use the device. Not as easy to use the information
properly.

I wouldn't know. There probably are books on the
subject, though.

Dave

Scroll down for a couple of points of clarification.

In article <[email hidden]>, Per

Elmsäter said:

Quoted message said:

warren said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Per
Elmsäter <[email hidden]> wrote:

> An example. My One hour LT is 270 Watts. If I want to
> do VO2 training I can look into the tables of the
> CyclingPeals Software and see that I should do
> intervals of 3-8 minutes at a Wattage of 286-326.
> Lower Wattage for 8 minutes and higher Wattage for
> three minute intervals.

My LT (4mMol) power is currently near 320-330 watts but
I do VO2max intervals 30 seconds on/off for 5 to 10
minutes each set in the range of 480-550 watts during
the "on" portion. Depending on your objectives you may
want to add something like this to your training.

-WG

I do of course do different intervals than the ones
prescribed above. It

was

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

as I stated an example of how my current fitnes will
dictate at what

level

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

to train for different goals, with the help of a
Powermeter and good training software.

As for your 30 seconds on/off. If you look at what you
average for 5 or

10

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

minutes, including the off portion, you'll notice that it
is proabably in the range of 350-400 W which is
percentagewise the same levels I work at when doing
VO2max work at 3-8 minute intervals.

Quoted message said:

Steady state intervals can serve different objectives than
30 seconds on/off. Think of the many accelerations during
the shorter intervals. Each type of interval has its uses.
This is why I suggested that you consider adding them to
your training-not replacing your current method.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I am in no way an expert on this. Just trying to follow
the advice I've received, as I've understood it, from the
Wattage group and Andy Coggan. Andy in particular has put
down a lot of work in making Power based

training

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

effective and easily attainable by everyone.
www.topica.com/lists/wattage/read

Your Coggan levels would look like this at an LT of 330

L6 Anaerobic capacity 399 W and up Interrvals of 30 sec
to 3 min

on.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

app. 2 1/2 minute off L5 VO2 max 350-398 W 3-8 min on 2
1/2 - 5 min off. Preferably 2 1/2 min off L4 Lactate
treshold 300-349 W 10-60 min on. 2 1/2 - 5 min off.

Preferably

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

2 1/2 min off. 2*20 min very popular. L3 Tempo 259-299 W.
Up to 2 hour hard riding. L2 Endurance 185-260W. Long
Slow Distance L1 Active recovery 0-184W

The only "preferably" to any of the above interval
prescriptions is that they are the way I personally prefer
to usually structure my workouts. That is, I've never really
made any specific recommendations for how people do
intervals, merely shared what I've found to be effective.
Along the the same lines, the guidelines/examples given for
the types of intervals that would fall into levels 4, 5, and
6 should be viewed as simply examples, i.e., there are a
million different ways of structuring interval training
sessions, all with particular advantages and disadvantages.

Quoted message said:

Yes, but unfortunately power levels don't fall along a
smooth, straight line when plotted against things like
lactate and HR and the appropriate training levels are not
necessarily a certain percentage of your LT power.

I'm not sure what you mean by "a smooth, straight line", but
you can in fact predict how much power somebody can sustain
for a few minutes to many hours based on just one metric,
i.e., their LT. That in turn makes it quite possible to put
forth training levels based on that power, and have what is
practically a "one size fits all" system. The only trick is
1) understanding the science that makes this possible, and
2) having the the experience necessary to place the
divisions appropriately.

Quoted message said:

It's good that you're happy with the numbers the
software provides you. This information is far better
than most of what is widely available, but the
guidelines from the software are not necessarily the
best choice for some people.

First, the only "guideline" built into the software is a
simple calculator that will figure your training levels for
you. You're not forced to use it, though - in fact, there
are also HR-based calculators using different systems
(e.g., Friel's, USAC's, the BCF's) for those who prefer
that option.

Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "not being the best
choice", but as I indicated above, it is indeed quite
possible to describe practically any training session based
on the power levels I've defined.

Andy Coggan

In article <[email hidden]>, Andy

Coggan said:

Scroll down for a couple of points of clarification.

In article <[email hidden]>, Per

Elmsäter said:

Quoted message said:

warren wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes, but unfortunately power levels don't fall along a
smooth, straight line when plotted against things like
lactate and HR and the appropriate training levels are
not necessarily a certain percentage of your LT power.

I'm not sure what you mean by "a smooth, straight line",
but you can in fact predict how much power somebody can
sustain for a few minutes to many hours based on just one
metric, i.e., their LT. That in turn makes it quite
possible to put forth training levels based on that power,
and have what is practically a "one size fits all" system.
The only trick is 1) understanding the science that makes
this possible, and 2) having the the experience necessary
to place the divisions appropriately.

Actually it's the experience and knowledge that shows that
"one size fits all" is often not the best one can do with
the information and training plans built around "one-size-fits-
all" are not optimal.

For example, one can see increases in the watts at the 1mMol
level that indicate the need for more or less training at
certain low intensities, and this can happen (has for me)
even though the watts at 4mMol has only increased slightly.
I've had tests where the % increase in watts at 1 or 2mMol
was nearly twice what it was at 4mMol. This is the kind of
change you would probably want to see during periods with
lots of training well below LT.

The amount of change will also indicate if there is more
room for improvement in this range (e.g. 1mMol, or 4mMol,
etc.) or if the rider should just be doing maintenance
training for this power range.

The shape of the line plotted between 1, 2, 3, and 4mMol
with watts can also change shape (e.g. from a steep curve in
a certain lactate range to a more gradual slope upwards) and
this is useful information too.

Or the curve can just remain the same basic shape but shift
to the right (higher power at all levels), which is what you
are relying on with your method of calculating the "one-size-fits-
all power training zones, but as I've mentioned here it's
not the best for everyone because the shift to the right of
the same shaped curve is not what always happens. However,
for nearly anyone who wants to learn about their power-based
zones from public information your method isn't perfect but
I think it is the best available, which will help a lot of
riders...if they'd only read it and use it.

-WG

"warren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Andy Coggan said:

Scroll down for a couple of points of clarification.

In article <[email hidden]>, Per

Elmsäter said:

> warren wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes, but unfortunately power levels don't fall along a
smooth, straight line when plotted against things like
lactate and HR and the appropriate training levels are
not necessarily a certain percentage of your LT power.

I'm not sure what you mean by "a smooth, straight line",
but you can in

fact

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

predict how much power somebody can sustain for a few
minutes to many

hours

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

based on just one metric, i.e., their LT. That in turn
makes it quite possible to put forth training levels
based on that power, and have what

is

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

practically a "one size fits all" system. The only
trick is 1)

understanding

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the science that makes this possible, and 2) having the
the experience necessary to place the divisions
appropriately.

Actually it's the experience and knowledge that shows that
"one size fits all" is often not the best one can do with
the information and training plans built around "one-size-fits-
all" are not optimal.

You're confusing a scheme for classifying training
intensities/workouts with a training plan. I would never
advocate a 'one-size-fits-all' approach for the latter,
which is why I try my best to avoid giving training advice
over the web. That doesn't mean, though, that you can't
provide an accurate descriptive framework for power outputs
for different training levels based on a single number.

Quoted message said:

For example, one can see increases in the watts at the
1mMol level that indicate the need for more or less
training at certain low intensities, and this can happen
(has for me) even though the watts at 4mMol has only
increased slightly. I've had tests where the % increase in
watts at 1 or 2mMol was nearly twice what it was at 4mMol.
This is the kind of change you would probably want to see
during periods with lots of training well below LT.

The amount of change will also indicate if there is more
room for improvement in this range (e.g. 1mMol, or 4mMol,
etc.) or if the rider should just be doing maintenance
training for this power range.

The shape of the line plotted between 1, 2, 3, and 4mMol
with watts can also change shape (e.g. from a steep curve
in a certain lactate range to a more gradual slope
upwards) and this is useful information too.

As I've said before, IMO you (and/or your coach) are reading
FAR too much into the shape of the blood lactate-exercise
intensity relationship. There are many, many things other
than fitness that influence the absolute blood lactate
concentration at a particular exercise intensity, e.g.,
blood sampling site/method, glycogen stores, nutritional
state, etc. Consequently, you can't interpret the results as
literally as you are trying to do. Morever, even if you
could the only way you could execute a training plan based
on such information with the requisite precision would be if
you did all of your training on an ergometer (which would be
sub-optimal for other reasons).

Quoted message said:

Or the curve can just remain the same basic shape but
shift to the right (higher power at all levels), which is
what you are relying on with your method of calculating
the "one-size-fits-all power training zones, but as I've
mentioned here it's not the best for everyone because the
shift to the right of the same shaped curve is not what
always happens.

The training levels I've proposed do not rely upon making
ANY assumptions with regards to training-induced changes in
blood lactate concentration - in fact, what happens to blood
lactate is totally irrelevant.

Andy Coggan