Block Training

normZurawski said:

I find this stuff fascinating...

Here's a chart that you should find interesting. It represents my 2006 training year to date. Of course, just a chart doesn't say much without knowing what my goals were. I basically geared my year toward a 3-day stage race at the end of January and 5 races in September and October. Also, I knew from prior performance tests that my AC is high relative to FTP, so I consciously downplayed L6 (maybe too much). Note that this is only L4-L6. Obviously, I was hitting it pretty hard in July and August.😉

TiMan said:

Well, as you know Morris does L5 before L4 in the year. I don't know when he fits in L6, if he has his riders doing any at all.

I don't know about Morris, but Dean Golich advocates a "blow it all out" instead of an isopower approach when doing 2-5 min intervals. That might serve to stress anaerobic capacity sufficiently that no specific trainng aimed at this ability is needed (at least if you're a road/stage/off-road racer and not, e.g., a criterium, points race, kilo, or pursuit specialist).

acoggan said:

What literature is that?

I don't have any "abstracts"...just some reference from books.

On page 60 of Morris's book. The graph is of a rider doing L5 intervals, 3 min each. Day 1 through 3 show a small but steady increase in power. Day 4 his power drops to day one level.....day 5 drops way off!
He also noted that HR dropped each day due to training fatigue so to do a block like this based on heart rate would not be a good idea as the rider would work harder each day to get his heart rate up into his typical L5 zone.

Here is a quote from Carmichael's book page 69.
"I have found that athletes are capable of producing the same, if not higher, power outputs on the second day of LT training, and normally they are capable of producing that same wattage for a third day."

acoggan said:

I don't know about Morris, but Dean Golich advocates a "blow it all out" instead of an isopower approach when doing 2-5 min intervals. That might serve to stress anaerobic capacity sufficiently that no specific trainng aimed at this ability is needed (at least if you're a road/stage/off-road racer and not, e.g., a criterium, points race, kilo, or pursuit specialist).

Isn't there a risk that you won't be able to complete the 5 minute interval, if you hammer as hard as you can right from the "get go" trying to empty the anaerobic tank?......or at least a risk of not being able to get in enough total time at VO2 max for the day?

acoggan said:

Here's my take on block training: while I can't really think of any physiological reason why it should be particularly beneficial, ....

I guess the only other comment I might add is that I, too, find it hard to make really large gains in a particular ability unless that is a significant focus of my training...which means that other things basically have to be put on the backburner until it's their turn. IOW, I personally don't find much benefit of doing the "a little level 4 here, a little level 5 there, toss in a level 6 workout every 2 wk" sort of schedule (although I imagine that somebody just starting out very well could).

Dr Coggan, isn't there a physiological reason tied up in what you said above?

From his book Morris makes it clear that he believes block training results in greater and faster adaptations. He sites the 1994 study by David Martin and his own personal experience and experience training others.

Carmichael says this in his book...." After giving the athletes appropriate recovery time, I found that consecutive days of load led to greater training adaptations." p. 69

He is a quote from last years captain of the US pro team Jelly Belly, Kirk Albers. He isn't talking about working one energy system at a time ehre though in his email reply to me.....
"All the time, I find (more) significant gains from multiple days in a row of hard training, much like one would experience in a multi-day stage race."

TiMan said:

Isn't there a risk that you won't be able to complete the 5 minute interval, if you hammer as hard as you can right from the "get go" trying to empty the anaerobic tank?......or at least a risk of not being able to get in enough total time at VO2 max for the day?

I think so, yes (which is why I prefer the isopower approach for level 4 and 5 efforts).

TiMan said:

Dr Coggan, isn't there a physiological reason tied up in what you said above?

Well, sure...but the overload principle applies regardless of whether you're training block-style or not. Or to put it another way: I don't think whether you train hard several days in a row then rest several days in row vs. following a hard/easy pattern on a daily basis would make any significant difference in the rate/extent of adaptation over the long haul.

acoggan said:

Well, sure...but the overload principle applies regardless of whether you're training block-style or not. Or to put it another way: I don't think whether you train hard several days in a row then rest several days in row vs. following a hard/easy pattern on a daily basis would make any significant difference in the rate/extent of adaptation over the long haul.

That may very well be Dr. Coggan....but what about in the "short run"?

Perhaps this would be worth looking at in a "study"...by you. If found to be true by you then it certainly would be another "boon" to power training.

Also, it seems to me that block training one particular element, like L4, requires less total time on the bike to see L 4 improvements and that is good news for working stiffs searching for gains in FTP.

TiMan said:

I would start doing L5 work perhaps a month before your first early races....mabe a three week block and then a recovery week...then a tune up ride and then race.

Even if the races are endurance events?

I'm still interested in acoggan's answer regarding the L5 fitness lost during the L4 block - or your answer for that matter. Likewise, how do you maintain the L4 & L5 gains made after those blocks? Some people add a single L4 and L5 workout every week, which is what I plan on doing.

I know a lot of this is personal. But I'm trying to get out as many kinks before I go through a full year of this stuff and learn a lot of it the hard way.

RapDaddyo said:

Here's a chart that you should find interesting. It represents my 2006 training year to date. Of course, just a chart doesn't say much without knowing what my goals were. I basically geared my year toward a 3-day stage race at the end of January and 5 races in September and October. Also, I knew from prior performance tests that my AC is high relative to FTP, so I consciously downplayed L6 (maybe too much). Note that this is only L4-L6. Obviously, I was hitting it pretty hard in July and August.😉

RD - interesting indeed. Do you find the downplayed L6 held you back at all? That's a level that seems too brutal to have a block on its own, which is why it seems a lot of people lump it with the L5.

acoggan said:

Well, sure...but the overload principle applies regardless of whether you're training block-style or not. Or to put it another way: I don't think whether you train hard several days in a row then rest several days in row vs. following a hard/easy pattern on a daily basis would make any significant difference in the rate/extent of adaptation over the long haul.

Surely there must be some study done on this somewhere?

normZurawski said:

Even if the races are endurance events?

I'm still interested in acoggan's answer regarding the L5 fitness lost during the L4 block - or your answer for that matter. Likewise, how do you maintain the L4 & L5 gains made after those blocks? Some people add a single L4 and L5 workout every week, which is what I plan on doing.

I don't think you loose to much L5 because L4 also works VO2 max. You probably loose some over time but how much...who knows.

You maintain L 4 and 5 gains with racing or with tough group rides if you don't race. You can do an L4 workout weekly year round too as a way to maintain L4.

If you event is simply an event that is pure endurance, and that's it, then you don't need any VO2 max work really....yet is certainly will help improve your aerobic capacity. Lemond once said that great endurance is a by-product of a good VO2 max and I think there is a lot of truth in that.

normZurawski said:

RD - interesting indeed. Do you find the downplayed L6 held you back at all? That's a level that seems too brutal to have a block on its own, which is why it seems a lot of people lump it with the L5.

Not really. My main focus was my 2hr power and I knew AWC would not be as valuable as my 120MP. So, I did a lot of long L4s throughout the summer. I have increased my L5 work already and will increase my focus on L6 beginning in December for my next target event (end of January) because I know I can take advantage of both. I actually draw only a thin line between FTP and VO2MAX because they both contribute to FTP.

I'm going to be thinking in term of blocks for next season's planning, but not using the approach described in this thread. I really can't help but wondering why one would insist so much on either L4 or L5 development if not to overcome a plateau. But that's only me.

I prefer to think of blocks as "arrays" or work, having their overall TSS load. A week can be seen as having maybe two or three blocks. The goal of course is to monitor in increase in the overall difficulty level of blocks, no matter the content. An L5/L5/L5 block.. well that's a possibility but there are others.

TiMan said:

You maintain L 4 and 5 gains with racing or with tough group rides if you don't race. You can do an L4 workout weekly year round too as a way to maintain L4.

Good to know. Sounds like a basic training week would cover your bases for the most part. Weekly L4 work sounds pretty key.

TiMan said:

If you event is simply an event that is pure endurance, and that's it, then you don't need any VO2 max work really....yet is certainly will help improve your aerobic capacity. Lemond once said that great endurance is a by-product of a good VO2 max and I think there is a lot of truth in that.

It's off-road stuff, in the realm of 1500 vertical feet of climbing per 10 miles. Plenty techincal, so not pure endurance. I once read something to the effect that to raise your power at 1-2-3-4-5 hour realms, you need to raise your shorter duration power outputs as well. I agree with that.

I did no VO2-specific work this year and it hurt me in the few events I did do. Matches burning haphazardly, all ride long.

SolarEnergy said:

I'm going to be thinking in term of blocks for next season's planning, but not using the approach described in this thread. I really can't help but wondering why one would insist so much on either L4 or L5 development if not to overcome a plateau. But that's only me.

I think it's a matter of raising it as much as you can before you start incorporating it into your "in-season" routine. Build it as high as you can, then train to maintain it. I don't know if this is developed for people who take winter's off, though.

I think focusing like this isn't a bad thing if it leads to greater adaptation than assortment. I mean, if you knew that a week of L6, followed by a week of L5 and a week of L4 would reap you more gains than 3 week of assorted work, wouldn't it make sense to choose the more productive path, all else being equal?

normZurawski said:

if you knew that a week of L6, followed by a week of L5 and a week of L4 would reap you more gains than 3 week of assorted work, wouldn't it make sense to choose the more productive path, all else being equal?

And what is the evidence for this conclusion?

normZurawski said:

I think focusing like this isn't a bad thing if it leads to greater adaptation than assortment. I mean, if you knew that a week of L6, followed by a week of L5 and a week of L4 would reap you more gains than 3 week of assorted work, wouldn't it make sense to choose the more productive path, all else being equal?

I don't deny this. And never really did.

But blocking aggressively, if improvement is so significant, may simply lead to an improvement curve that is sharper at the beginning of the cycle (or career) to later flaten. I don't believe that we should aim for fast improvement at all cost. That's basically my position.

RapDaddyo said:

And what is the evidence for this conclusion?

It's no conclusion, merely a hypothetical, in reply to SolarEnergy wondering why anyone would do it. If being the key word. I'm just guessing at what Morris is keying on with the block focus.

I have no idea if it will work or not. Actually, I was going to post this in reply to you before, that I'm certain my plan for next year will work. I guarantee it will work, because in the end I'll probably end up riding 2-3 times the number of hours as compared to this year. You could probably take my whole plan, turn it completey in reverse, and it will still work. So if I come back in a year from now saying how great my plan was, you'll know I'm full of it.

SolarEnergy said:

I don't deny this. And never really did.

But blocking aggressively, if improvement is so significant, may simply lead to an improvement curve that is sharper at the beginning of the cycle (or career) to later flaten. I don't believe that we should aim for fast improvement at all cost. That's basically my position.

I see. Well, that approach certainly leans on the slow & steady camp of change, of which I'm usually a firm believer. I tend to agree that drastic changes are not maintainable. There's a guy on one of the mountain biking forums who is a huge Morris proponent, and he says that the blocks are too brutal for him to get through 3 weeks of. Considering the dropout rate for exercise is roughly 50% when you introduce intervals, block training must have a really high dropout rate.

So that's certainly a consideration as well, to be sure.