Does more zone 4 training reduce my need for long endurance rides, or is this just a myth perpetuated by coaches and training plans looking to sell a quick fix to cyclists who cant be bothered to put in the time and effort required to truly build endurance.
It seems like every training plan and coach is pushing zone 4 training as the key to unlocking improved power and endurance, but is this really the case. Are we just trading one type of training for another, or is there actual science behind the idea that zone 4 training can replace long endurance rides.
If zone 4 training is so effective, why do professional cyclists still prioritize long endurance rides in their training plans. Is it just a matter of tradition, or is there something specific that long endurance rides provide that zone 4 training cant replicate.
What are the actual benefits of zone 4 training, and how do they compare to the benefits of long endurance rides. Are we looking at improved cardiovascular fitness, increased muscular endurance, or something else entirely.
Can zone 4 training really be used as a substitute for long endurance rides, or is it more of a supplement to be used in conjunction with traditional endurance training.
What are the potential drawbacks of relying too heavily on zone 4 training, and how can cyclists avoid falling into the trap of thinking that this type of training is a quick fix for all their endurance needs.
Is the idea that more zone 4 training reduces the need for long endurance rides just a myth, or is there actual science behind it.