[Closed] Zone 2 training - worth it?

but basically just want to enjoy my recreational riding more

Stop reading books then 🙂

[url= http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/zone-2-hr-training ]This thread may be of interest.[/url]

Z2 is also a very sociable pace!

I got bored part way through your post, but in your case I'd say no. If you have limited time then spending hours in Z2 isn't that effective, it just means you spend your limited training time riding slowly. Sweet spot training would be a much more efficient use of time, and will increase your FTP.

I got bored part way through your post,

@mrblobby: Yes that's one of the threads I was reading. I couldn't really draw any conclusions from it though. Was not quite sure what to make of the link "Base: A new definition" which you commented on as it is 9 years old and I know "current thinking" changes quite often! It seemed to imply that hard intervals were better but still didn't really give me to clue as to exactly [i]what[/i] I should be doing!

I got bored part way through your post, but in your case I'd say no. If you have limited time then spending hours in Z2 isn't that effective, it just means you spend your limited training time riding slowly. Sweet spot training would be a much more efficient use of time, and will increase your FTP.

That's what I've been lead to believe as well.
Rather than spending hours out riding in Z2 to build up some base miles, go for 2x20 intervals on road or a turbo at about 95% FTP and it should have similar benefits.
This may or may not be wrong though, I'm no expert when it comes to training!

This is quite interesting to me. I've been commuting for a few years by bike now, and use that mainly as my training for general fitness.

It's a 30km round trip, and in the past i've just gone with the mentality of 'go as fast as you can'. It's about 35 mins each way, with a decent climb and a couple of short sharp others, but with this approach, from about mid week onwards, my legs were smashed.

I've often wondered if there is any way I can apply some structure to it, but never really bothered. Maybe i'll try for a slower general pace and do some random intervals on the way there and back 🙂

The one concerted attempt I made at training, I found that doing 2x20 on the turbo increaced my ability to do 2x20 on the turbo. Without longer 'training' rides I found my energy levels crashed after an hour's riding, and I had no extra on top of that pace!

Whereas going out for a 90min spin in the evening, even at a nominal zone 2-3 pace had enough variaiton in it that I was doing at least some work on a range of different intensities.

If "Z2" is just bumbling along then you probably do need to do more of it as it suggests that you're not particularly efficient.

2x20 is an excellent work out leading up to specific events or to build & maintain race paced speed during the "season", but I wouldn't want to be doing it week in, week out.

I think Weeksy's advice is best 🙂

http://www.hunterallenpowerblog.com/2010/12/next-level.html

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/fitness/training/detraining-the-truth-about-losing-fitness-22330

I'd recommend reading the cyclist training bible by friel. It is mainly focused on building an efficient and effective annual training plan based around what your goals are.

I would say to maintain fitness over winter your daily commute can take the place of Z2 base rides. If you've been doing this commute a while you've probably got all the base fitness you need.

To build on your base fitness take a look at doing 2x20 intervals or perhaps give sufferfest a go during the really bad weather.

The one concerted attempt I made at training, I found that doing 2x20 on the turbo increaced my ability to do 2x20 on the turbo. Without longer 'training' rides I found my energy levels crashed after an hour's riding, and I had no extra on top of that pace!

I think the point is you do them as part of a 3 hour ride - so you do your Z2 ride, but then you do 2 (or 3) 20 minute efforts in the middle. You're not aiming to go flat out after all, it's quite a sustainable pace.

I did a lot of that in the winter before I got to be my fastest, so reckon it works! Certainly plan to do it this year!

I would say to maintain fitness over winter your daily commute can take the place of Z2 base rides. If you've been doing this commute a while you've probably got all the base fitness you need.

@dirtyrider: thanks for the links, will give those a read.

I think the point is you do them as part of a 3 hour ride - so you do your Z2 ride, but then you do 2 (or 3) 20 minute efforts in the middle. You're not aiming to go flat out after all, it's quite a sustainable pace.

Whereas going out for a 90min spin in the evening, even at a nominal zone 2-3 pace had enough variaiton in it that I was doing at least some work on a range of different intensities.

Isn't that just a lack of variety in your turbo work though? No reason why you can't include a range of intensities in your turbo sessions. Though I do agree that if you want to be good at riding outdoors you need to do some riding outdoors!

Whatever you do, the most important part to any training schedule is consistency.
Talking about it on an internet forum won't have any (positive) impact on your fitness. Make a plan. Follow it. Read some stuff around training and specifics as you learn more about your fitness and then adapt and change your plan.

You'll hear lots of different approaches and methods. Only way to really work out if they are best for you is to try them out over a sustained period and try to weigh up the pro's and cons yourself.

One other thing - Z2 is not a bimble. It should be pretty hard, maybe not on your CV system and maybe not in the first hour, but as the time ticks on your wee legs should definitely be feeling pretty tired and not really up for "racing for 30's"

One other thing - Z2 is not a bimble. It should be pretty hard, maybe not on your CV system and maybe not in the first hour, but as the time ticks on your wee legs should definitely be feeling pretty tired and not really up for "racing for 30's"

Only way to really work out if they are best for you is to try them out over a sustained period and try to weigh up the pro's and cons yourself.

apart from your commuting what other riding are you doing consistently?

When the weather's a bit nicer normally 2-4 2-3hr MTB/road rides per week depending on how I feel. At the moment probably just 1 extra easy-paced 2-3hr ride at the weekend. Nothing consistent really!

with the amount of riding you're doing you should in theory be very very fit/fast.

I'm not unfit or slow but I know I could be fitter since at the moment I just ride how I want without giving much thought to training or recovery.

To be honest I think maybe the biggest change I could make is taking the commute a lot easier so that I don't get so fatigued from that. Also I don't do anywhere as much recreational riding over the winter so would love to maintain or ideally improve fitness ready for the spring.

Isn't that just a lack of variety in your turbo work though? No reason why you can't include a range of intensities in your turbo sessions. Though I do agree that if you want to be good at riding outdoors you need to do some riding outdoors!

That's what I did, swaped 2x 20 for just doing the 20min test program on trainerroad at 95% and adding an 8-10min interval at FTP to the end if I wasn't dead. Still felt like I was tireing too quickly on the road but it might just have been gettign better at judgeing RPE so I was used to riding at an RPE on the turbo for an hour and matched that on the road.

Maybe there are different 2x20 definitions out there?

The 2x20 that I use is at highest effort that I can sustain for both 20 min efforts (ie consistent) with 5 min rest in between. Works great on the turbo because you can keep the effort consistent. No way could I slot this into the middle of a 3 hr ride.

'Classic' 2x20s are done at threshold, so you'd struggle to do a whole lot of other meaningful work in the same session. That's what they're designed for, getting in some top-quality effort but not so much that you can't recover and do something the next day.

Maybe there are different 2x20 definitions out there?

Lots of different definitions of threshold. Best use things like 20MP (the most power you can manage for 20 minutes) or 60MP (max 60 min effort.) These are also roughly 10 and 25 mile TT power. People tend to use FTP (functional threshold power) as well, which is the same as 60MP. Most people tend to do 2x20 at FTP.

There's also a few other "thresholds" knocking about but most of these need a lab in order to determine a value.

just checking, when you're doing your 'Z2' rides, you are actually do all of it in zone 2, not averaging z2?

e.g. upping the pace on the flats/ and not taking a breather ever?

its actually quite a workout, or as you get fitter you're caning it along at quite a pace on the flats. would certainly be dangerous to do it on my commmute.

Traditional thinking is all in z2. If you happen to stray into z3 you may as well abandon the session and go home as you'll be told you'll have wasted your time 😉

... though again there are different schools of thought as to what z2 constitutes.

2 is to do with burning fat, rather than carbs. Dr Hutch explains it in his book Faster, very well, but I'll be damned if I can remember the exact reasoning behinds it...

you can recreate Z2 riding with harder rides, on the limit of bonking, just fueling on proteins...

again, damned if I understood why or how, probably need to reread that chapter 🙂

EDIT: i found a section of the book:

At a perfectly consistent moderate pace, the longer you ride for the greater proportion of energy comes from fats. This was established in 1934 in one of the all time classic exercise physiology experiments. It involved monitoring carbohydrates and fat use over a six-hour exercise period. Initially 20% of the energy was from fat. Over the course of six hours of continuous cycling at exactly the same intensity it increased to 80%.

Unfortunately this clawback doesn't help as much as you would hope. Fat use goes up, yes, but mainly because a lot of the carbohydrates store has been used. The bottom line is that the proportion of carbohydrate being used at any point is related to how much is available. When the hammer goes down in the last couple of hours of a long race there is still every chance that the carbohydrate tank will be empty.

In the end despite the vast reservoir of fat available to all of us, it's still carbohydrate that is the key.

…As blood glucose levels fall you recede back to an increasing reliance on the slow burning fat. The 'bangs' only come when you try to ignore this, and completely over-commit to an unsustainable pace. It's not a coincidence that big bangs rarely happen to people training on their own - part of this scenario is normally other stronger riders, pushing you beyond what you can really do. I'd say falling for it is a rookie error if it wasn't for the fact I did exactly the same thing in the next 12-hour I rode.

It certainly doesn't help that even the process that metabolises fat to release energy is powered by carbohydrates: fat burn in a carbohydrate flame. Your body can make glucose from protein, and when you get to the furthest edge of carbohydrate exhaustion it will do more and more of this to keep the fact flame burning. This is bad enough in the race but if you dig yourself a hole like this in training is a disaster, since you be tearing down the very muscle that you're supposed to be nurturing.

All of this rests on the basic metabolic injustice that while you can convert carbohydrate into fat, and protein into fat, and even protein into carbohydrate, you can't convert fat into carbohydrate.

The sole item of good carbohydrate news is that you can put it back fairly easily. Its availability is very closely related to it intake - and experience rider keeps it coming, in a nice constant stream. You can absorb about 60 - 80 g of carbohydrates and hour. Sadly this number isn't amenable to being trained, it's pretty much fixed and it's more or less universal

…It doesn't take a Nobel Prize winning physiologist to spot that if you can find a way to use more fat, you'll use less carbohydrates. Endurance training increases the amount of fat used at any given sub-maximal that level - in fact it can more than double it.

This is why professional bike riders spend their winters packing in the long rides. Five, six, seven hours of grinding, tapping, rolling or trundling, depending on the outlook of the ride in question. Usually done from home even by the stars because the off-season is really the only chance an elite rider gets to stay in one place for more than a few nights, and to see their family. For riders based in northern Europe that often means being on a bike for almost all the hours of winter daylight. The long rides shift the rider firmly into the zone where fat burning is the main fuel source, and the muscles and enzymes adapt to it

It's easy to assume that the long rides aren't necessary - it's not all that hard to get a lot of the aerobic adaptations in the oxygen moving system from relatively short training sessions. But if you a pro who has to race for five or six hours a day why they still, very traditionally, garden grind out the miles, their answer is simply that this is how they stop themselves from falling apart at the end of a long events.

This doesn't mean that people like me haven't gone looking for shortcuts. I'm particularly keen to find one for two reasons I've never been great at the fat burning game and these days, as I retreat from full-time riding, I just don't have the time to spare. The idea of the fasted ride is an old one - get up skip breakfast, put plain water in your bottle, and crank out three or four hours. You try to do it at a place that doesn't involve bonking, but if you are a powerful rider with a high-energy turnover, you'll fail quite a lot of the time. This does help with the fat burning adaptation because, as with the pros long rides, you're in fat burning territory for quite a long time. The problem is that you're quite probably in protein-burning, eating-your-own-legs territory as well. The same dangers apply to all the alternative strategy of stringing together several days of long rides and little carbohydrate.

The current attempt to square this circle is to fuel the three or - four - hour ride using a mix of protein and a small amount of carbohydrate, and maybe some coconut oil in attempt to keep yourself in an anabolic state (building muscle) rather than a catabolic one (tearing it down) while keeping carbohydrate availability low. The protein hopefully means that even if your body starts to demand significant amounts of that as a fuel, at least it's not using muscle. The carbohydrate and the coconut oil should stave off the bonk-royale. It's not a pleasant session you feel like you're hovering on the edge of the abyss for most of it. At least it seems to sort of work, if the lab scores are anything to go by, but it is not as good as the proper long stuff.

I did wonder having read that a while back whether a hard bit of riding to reduce the carb store followed by a couple of hours of easy riding would have a similar effect?

Though it was a bit of an academic thought as I don't race with anywhere near the duration or frequency to necessitate that sort of z2 work.

@warton: that is the "classical" style of Z2/fat burning as I understand it but a) aren't some people moving away from that way of thinking now and b) as mrblobby says most people don't ride like the pros so don't need to train like them. I have no need to ride at pace for 5-6 hours and if I did I certainly wouldn't be doing it again the next day!

From what I've read Z2 rides should be around 2hours+.

Simplistically, short rides/sessions should be high intensity and longer rides should be low (i.e. Z2) intensity.

I find it needs a bit of concentration to maintain (upper) Z2 on the open road, not physically but when you're on the flat you need to be going quite fast to keep your heart rate up.

And don't forget rest days are beneficial too.

I do Z2 over winter and find that for me it works. I'd be knackered if I spent 12 months hammering it.

Fine to creep up occasionally in to Z3 if you hit a hill etc (Joe told me this directly) as can be hard keeping it down for the whole 3+ hrs due to the terrain.

Jase, what duration/frequency for your Z2 rides over winter? Also do you eat anything during your longer Z2 rides?

And don't forget rest days are beneficial too.

I start off at about 2 hrs and then increase it each week. Because of the lack of light only do them at weekends. If I ride in mid week it would be an easy session of no more than an hour e.g. one of the speed sessions detailed in Joe's books.

Yes do eat/drink on the longer rides.

I tweeted Joe Friel the other day to ask if any fundementals had changed since he wrote his MTB Bible as I have just written a plan from it.

The response I got was "Principles have stayed same. Details have expanded with concepts such as polarized training. joefrielsblog.com"

Polarised training is just a new term for the old saying about going really slow when you need to go slow and then really hit the right zones properly when you ramp up the intensity.

@Weeksy- How many times do we need to mention that volume alone doesn't make you fast. If you go hard every day, you will plateau, stagnate or even lose fitness. A good strong base is essential, then you can over-reach followed by rest to bring about the improvement.

I did my first zone 2 ride the other day and I was surprised how hard I had to concentrate to stay in the correct range. It required near constant alterations to my cadence/gear/speed.

I did my first zone 2 ride the other day and I was surprised how hard I had to concentrate to stay in the correct range. It required near constant alterations to my cadence/gear/speed.

A good strong base is essential,

I don't think anyone would argue with this. However there's loads of differing ideas out there as to what constitutes a base and how you build. I think you just pick what best suits you, your goals, and your constraints. May be hours of z2. May be not.

did my first zone 2 ride the other day and I was surprised how hard I had to concentrate to stay in the correct range. It required near constant alterations to my cadence/gear/speed.

Really? What were you doing for your recovery rides? Are they not mostly easy z1/z2 rides?

Really? What were you doing for your recovery rides? Are they not mostly easy z1/z2 rides?

To be honest, I'm still in my preparation weeks at the moment so I'm just trying out a few of the workouts from the menu to see how they feel etc.
Friel recovery is supposed to be Zone 1 no? If what I've read about Polarisation actually made sense then by drifting up into Zone 2 (which could be HR as high as 154 for me) then you're compromising that weeks training as recovery won't be acomplished as completely?

Up until now, for me, recovery has been a day off. Once I get stuck into the plan, active recovery will be needed to help hit the weekly hours and it will be strictly <142 bpm.

I found the same as zilog above, that you would get all set up at say 148bpm and then the road would go slightly downhill and next time I look, I'm doing 115bpm. I found the upwind return leg much easier to stay consistent.

I haven't read the thread, but - yes, long Z2 does work pretty well, but it takes ages and is very dull.

There may be shortcuts depending on who you believe 🙂

Can I just clarify which "Zone 2" people are talking about?

From what I've come across, the zones can be % of max heart rate OR % of lactate threshold heart rate.

I often wonder how proper cycling coaches make a living, then I remember some of the things I read in threads like this 🙂

I got around to doing Friel's LT test last night (after simply using a formula for max HR for the past week).

The zones are significantly higher and closer together. Z2 is now pretty much what Z3.5-4.5 was for me before. Does this sound right? The figures are similar to what Crosshair mentioned above so I guess so! It seems Z2 is significantly faster paced than I thought - I definitely won't be crawling up hills any more - a comfortable cruising pace rather than gentle/almost no effort? Is that correct?

I often wonder how proper cycling coaches make a living, then I remember some of the things I read in threads like this

I know a few cycle coaches (qualified) and they laugh at threads like this with all the spurious misinformed ideas gleaned from reading a book or a few blog posts. Middle aged men are the worst to coach because they never follow their program as they think they know best. 🙄
As for that friel bloke, people think his book is the bible, that's actually very apt considering how relative the bible is to today's society, things have moved on a bit since it was written.

Actual HR varies from person to person so I wouldn't compare the HR you use for Z2 with Crosshairs or anyone elses.

Does sound a bit too high though. Last year I recall going up smallish hills and having to almost stop to prevent my HR from climbing too high.

MrSmith/vdubber: any chance either of you two fine gents could point me in what you consider a better direction please, rather than just being smug gits? 🙂

Jase, did you do Friel's 30 min test to calculate your LT & HR zones?

I know a few cycle coaches (qualified) and they laugh at threads like this with all the spurious misinformed ideas gleaned from reading a book or a few blog posts.

It's actually people trying to learn and figure things out for themselves. I'm sure coaches would rather us cough up £60/mo or whatever and blindly believe whatever they say.

I know a few cycle coaches (qualified) and they laugh at threads like this with all the spurious misinformed ideas gleaned from reading a book or a few blog posts

I'd sooner follow the advice on some of 'these threads' (although I know whose posts I'd heed, it's not everyone's) than pay for some of the coaches I know of. There's more than one way to skin a cat.

I've had a few coaches over the years, but only really stuck with one, as I liked his approach and techniques (which worked), and still broadly use his advice now, some years on. Having a piece of paper doesn't necessarily make you a good coach, and you have no idea of the qualifications or palmares of some of the people you seem so quick to rubbish.

For starters, a lot of 'coaches' are far too prescriptive IMO, part of what you pay for with bespoke coaching should be adaptations to changing situations and circumstances. No point doing a 4 hour ride if you're completely wrecked (for whatever reason), too many adopt a 'one size fits all' approach.

Middle aged men are the worst to coach because they never follow their program as they think they know best

I assume you're either including yourself in that, or are you paying someone to help you finish second to last in the vets at the Gorrick in February? I'd start listening to the advice on this thread! 🙄 **crosses fingers that's the right Gary Smith**

2 is to do with burning fat, rather than carbs

yep.. i'd agree with that.. I did a fitness test about 4 years ago (with andy wadsworth)

[img] [/img]

I was told I was absolutely appalling at utilising fat as lower levels. I think he said he'd never seen sub 50% at such a low heart rate.

I then did about 4 -5 months of zone 2 rides or an hour at lunch time (amoungst interval training) This figure went up to 84% at 125-130bpm

So yes.. you don't need to do loads of zone 2 training. This figure also improves through diet (I did the idave at the same time). I also lost 6kg

I was also told your zone 2 range can change.

After 1st fitness test I was given these zones to work in

Zone 1 = <125 beats per minute.
[b]Zone 2 = 125-144 bpm[/b]
Zone 3 = 144-165 bpm
Zone 4 = 165-178 bpm
Zone 5 = 178 + bpm

After 5 months of training and another fitness test zone 2 completely changed

Level 1 = <140
[b]Level 2 = 140 - 158[/b]
Level 3 = 158- 172
Level 4 = 172 +

Is that not because you went from 5 zones to 4...

Is that not because you went from 5 zones to 4...

maybe i didn't need the 5th one anymore 🙂

I assume you're either including yourself in that, or are you paying someone to help you finish second to last in the vets at the Gorrick in February? I'd start listening to the advice on this thread! **crosses fingers that's the right Gary Smith**

You ran out of luck there.

I would never pay for coaching, buy a power meter or £2k aero wheels as there's far more life enriching things to spend money on that trying to spend my way out of having zero talent on a bike.

You might see my name very near the bottom on a vets SE league cross race next year but that's just a bit of fun and I'm not about to start a training program for that

So you're quick to dismiss everyone on here roundly as having no idea, which you can't tell, when you yourself, definitely have no idea? Still, at least I know which side of the "heed advice or ignore" line you fall!

And why, exactly, are you on a thread called "Zone 2 Training", if you have no interest in training. Seems pretty clear what it's going to be about, isn't there a photography thread for you to troll?

There are probably more life enriching things to be doing than trolling this thread too 🙄

And why, exactly, are you on a thread called "Zone 2 Training", if you have no interest in training

I'm interested in a laymans attitudes/ideas to training (and other professions that people think they can do themselves from reading a book or watching 5min YouTube tutorial)

Last winter I was doing 2-3 high intensity interval sessions with one long social (ish) ride of 3-4 hours at the weekend.

I found the mix very beneficial beating all my PB's early in this years TT season.

I think the high intensity intervals are where it's at as they lift your overall fitness regardless. Your top end benefits as does your endurance at lower outputs.

Not sure if that helps, just my experience.

MrSmith, can't really see much "interest" being expressed in your condescending troll.

Ps, on the turbo I use TrainerRoad and the Sufferfest vids.

I'm interested in a laymans attitudes/ideas to training (and other professions that people think they can do themselves from reading a book or watching 5min YouTube tutorial)

How do you know there are no qualified coaches here? You must be immensely bored.

How do you know there are no qualified coaches here? You must be immensely bored

How do I know there are?

Bored? No, about to pop out for a fartlek session to liven the day up.

How do I know there are?

You don't, but you're making scathing and patronising comments assuming there aren't.

Have fun, don't rush back, good time to be doing longer rides.

Fartlek sounds suspiciously like training to me.

Ok I've just done a short ride to try out Z1/2 as described by Friel.

Z1 was faster paced before but minimal effort so ideal recovery pace I would say.

Z2 was much quicker than before (using Z2 zones based off Max HR derived from formula as found on random web page!) Not enough effort to make legs burn but enough that breathing was noticeably heavier at the top end of Z2 (although still OK to hold conversation I would say) in comparison to previous Z2 which was barely any more effort than a brisk walk.

Does that sound like the right amount of effort? I could see that a non-stop 3 hr ride at that pace would certainly feel like a workout (although not a leg/lung busting one but probably not slow/boring either).

Is it the case then that Joe Friel Z2 is significantly faster paced than "traditional" Z2 or just that working out the zones from a formula and/or according to max HR is just spectacularly crap?

Is it the case then that Joe Friel Z2 is significantly faster paced than "traditional" Z2 or just that working out the zones from a formula and/or according to max HR is just spectacularly crap?

Mostly the latter. See what trickydisco said. His max HR wouldn't have changed but his zones did. HR isn't great for this sort of thing either as it can be up or down for a given effort depending on lots of factors.

Yeah I appreciate that. Would love to get a power meter but can't really afford/justify it at the moment. (Definitely keeping an eye on the more affordable options that are coming out/in the pipeline now).

Does the level of effort for Z2 sound about right to you?

I did the performance test at Loughborough Uni earlier in the year and the HR zones they gave me were much higher than is been used to. Zone 1 for me was now easily zone 2, meaning I could train on long rides at 80% max HR.

They also gave me some good advice on some hard intervals. 4mins on and 4 off. The on's were flat out and the offs as easy as you needed. Repeat until you can no longer keep good form.

did the performance test at Loughborough Uni earlier in the year and the HR zones they gave me were much higher than is been used to.

I'm not entirely sure. They told me that anything below 80% max hr could be classed as zone 1 and that any long ride (3 hours upwards) should be 95% at this level or below.

They really seemed to know their stuff as they assess all the top uk cyclists wiggins included. They did a proper lactate threshold test too. That one broke me!!

BTW my previous HR zones were based on the ones The Garmin software provides.

When on the flat in favourable conditions I could be zipping along at 15-16mph

I got around to doing Friel's LT test last night (after simply using a formula for max HR for the past week).

The zones are significantly higher and closer together. Z2 is now pretty much what Z3.5-4.5 was for me before. Does this sound right?

definitely sounds a lot more like it. you'll get a good measure for 'beginner' competitive cycling. when fitness has improved and you get to wanting to up it, a proper test may be beneficial

@zilog6128

The zones are significantly higher and closer together. Z2 is now pretty much what Z3.5-4.5 was for me before. Does this sound right?

I did the Friel test recently to compare the results against other ways to set zones and found the same thing. According to the British Cycling calculator, my Z2 is from 111 to 136 bpm right now, but according to Friel it should be 134 to 144 bpm.

My max HR is 178 and zone 1 for me me is bellow 145 bpm I think.

My max HR is 178 and zone 1 for me me is bellow 145 bpm I think.

Really? That sounds very narrow. My MHR is 203, but Z1 was lower than that when I had it properly tested. I forget the number!

I'll dig out the info when I get home and pop it on here.

But presumably Zone 2 will vary between the different models, I didn't think it was universal. i.e. You'd test yourself with BC's method if you were going to be using their training plan and likewise for Friel?

My RHR is approx.42, Max HR 186 (almost irrelevant as not used by Friel in calculating zones) and LT 162 making my Z2 for Friel workouts 131-144 (IIRC).

If I was going to use a plan from another provider I wouldn't necessarily use this range for their Z2 work.

All of my turbo work is based around my FTP. As mentioned your HR can vary depending on many things.

My max HR is 178 and zone 1 for me me is bellow 145 bpm I think.

It does sound a bit narrow, but then there are many different definitions of the various zones and everyone's physiology is different. Just looking at what's in TrainingPeaks, you have zones based on lactate threshold, max HR, max and rest HR, max HR and LT, and within each of those you have half a dozen different methods, and then each one of those typically defining somewhere between 5 and 10 different zones! So what's zone 2? 🙂

Power seems a bit more clear cut, though still just estimates.

Though the goal of the different zones is to aid in targeting the various energy systems, and that's different for everyone and can only be determined through proper testing (and you need to be able to interpret the results as I don't think there is a "standard" output.)

What's zone 2 indeed!

Equally, what is fitness?

Compare two Chris's - Froome and Hoy?

Here's the thing.

Everyone, EVERYONE! Responds differently to training.

You have to work out what makes YOU go faster. Took me 15 years.