[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 18, 2020 at 12:49 pm · in reply to: Weekly Volume planning #38380

As a general rule, yes, but it’s pretty much impossible for both vertical and gain to mimic the sample plan in the book.

If you’re targeting distance, then how much gain you get will depend on the average grade of the terrain and vice versa.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 18, 2020 at 12:43 pm · in reply to: Which climbing plan? #38378

I think the level you’re at is more important than the duration of the plan. I would start with the beginner plan and then repeat it or lengthen the phases.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 18, 2020 at 12:42 pm · in reply to: Back to back medium longs vs single long run #38377

I don’t think you’ll lose much.

If you’re training for an ultra, then “durability training” (via long sessions) is an important part. But if you’re training for a shorter event, then there won’t be much downside.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 18, 2020 at 12:40 pm · in reply to: Simulating a mountain run at home. #38376

It can definitely work. It comes down to how many step-ups you can tolerate (mentally).

I train someone with limited access to hills and a busy work schedule, so he’s become a step-up machine. And he’s raised his AeT HR by 12% due to his diligence. He uses a metronome and tempo-organized music (via an app) to control his pace.

He’s an ex-marine with an incredible work ethic, so I think that helps him get it done.

The one caveat with your idea is that the squat jumps could become a muscular endurance exercise which needs to be done carefully. Search the site for our articles on our gym-based ME program.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 18, 2020 at 12:32 pm · in reply to: Mt. Rainier & Mt. Baker back-to-back #38373

It’s pretty tough to make any recommendations without knowing a lot of details about your fitness and training. (More than we could cover in a forum thread, I’m afraid.)

Some folks could do these back-to-back on consecutive days and others would need a week to recover. It’s all about fitness and work capacity.

Something to consider is that, with this schedule, your Baker ascent will be at the mercy of your recovery from Rainier. If you’re not recovered enough, it could compromise your attempt on Baker.

If you had good results with the 16-week plan, you may want to consider moving on to the 24-week plan. You can never be too fit, so the more preparation, the better.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 18, 2020 at 12:26 pm · in reply to: Pnoe metabolic testing #38372

Negative drift… How long and gradual was your warm-up?

What are you using for AnT HR?

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 4:28 pm · in reply to: Pnoe metabolic testing #38338

For mountain sports, I would use the steepest treadmill incline that you will have regular access to (for repeated testing). 6% is pretty low-angle.

If you do use 6%, then 1 mph increases are probably reasonable. At steeper inclines, I think 1 mph will be too severe.

I prefer to use changes in pace rather than speed. When testing, I start with changes that are 30″/km and then gradually down to 15″/km when trying to dial in AeT.

One thing: The PNOE website has that “smells like science!” feel. They use “the most famous nutritionist in the US”, a Crossfit owner, and a dietician as spokespeople. That doesn’t bode well for the accuracy and precision of the device… I would look for a proper lab.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 4:14 pm · in reply to: Muscle Endurance for fast twitchers #38337

The approaches we use aren’t fiber-dominance-specific; they’re event-specific.

We use weighted uphill carries as a sharpening exercise for mountaineering, because it’s very sport-specific (low cadence, high weight).

We use the gym ME protocol for skimo and running also because it’s sport-specific )high cadence, more dynamic, lower weight).

The only slow- versus fast-twitch adjustments that we sometimes make are greater weight for fast-twitchers.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 4:09 pm · in reply to: IF based on HR (Trainingpeaks) #38336

what are the upper-value limitations?

Sorry for the confusion. What I meant was that heart rate can never adjust to reflect output. If you put out 300% of aerobic threshold pace for five seconds, your heart rate will not go up to a value that is three times your aerobic threshold heart rate.

So that makes IF immediately useless, at least as it was originally designed for use with power.

the Uphill Athlete recommendations go through great length to adjust TSShr for weight, downhills, etc.

We do that because IF is irrelevant… IF has no bearing on our adjustments.

By now I’m closed to convinced that there is conspiracy going on to hide the fact, that the calculation is wrong

You’re correct. The calculation is wrong because it can never be right. Heart rate doesn’t measure intensity; it measures stress. And it’s a limited system because it has such a constrained range.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 4:03 pm · in reply to: AeT Breathing with Deviated Septum #38335

We no longer recommend nose breathing as a measure of aerobic threshold… We found that athletes with ADS (Aerobic Deficiency Syndrome) can still nose breathe above aerobic threshold.

A better measure of your aerobic threshold is a drift test.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 3:59 pm · in reply to: Thoughts on Whoop Band? #38334

Also, to clarify, I didn’t say that good marketing means they are disqualified. That wouldn’t make any sense. I said that the only thing they do well is marketing.

Here’s a well-designed study on the shortcomings of HRV.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 3:57 pm · in reply to: Thoughts on Whoop Band? #38333

Your money would be better spent trying Omegawave. Half the cost per month and much better information.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 3:54 pm · in reply to: Mt. Rainier & Mt. Baker back-to-back #38332

It seems like a lot of factors have to be in your favor for the two routes to be done so close together.

One day is not a lot of recovery at all unless your training volume is very high and you’re accustomed to that amount of work in one week.

Also, if team fitness was a factor in the past, is it going to be a factor again? Even if you’re fit enough to do both, if your team isn’t, then your fitness may be wasted.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 3:50 pm · in reply to: First Ultra – Thanks! #38331

Thanks for letting us know! I’m glad the Big Vert plan was such a big help.

[Keymaster]

Scott Semple on February 17, 2020 at 3:48 pm · in reply to: Struggling to get into Z3 on elliptical #38330

Only use MAF as a last result with no better information. If you’ve done a drift test, you can ignore it. We also don’t use the nasal standard anymore because we found that athletes with severe ADS can still nose breathe at high outputs.

…is my Ant pretty much equivalent to me AeT.

I’ve never heard of that. The closest I’ve seen of the two threshold is ~5%, so that would be the high-140s for you.

You could try an AeT-type test at ~140 to see what happens. It sounds like you may have inadvertently turned an AeT test into an AnT test.

Or better yet, get a lab test done.