It is always possible to observe an experiment but draw the wrong conclusions… There are a lot of claims that low intensity work has some kind of fitness adaptation. My conclusions are that low intensity work improves the skill set used. We now have the diagnostic tools to test this. Cycling lacks failure states - the rider can’t make the pedal go around in anything other than the circle dictated by the crank and bottom bracket. High intensity work tends to be less efficient because the intensity masks the errors (pushing down at the bottom of the pedal stroke would be the obvious example). Low intensity work allows riders to better form muscle firing sequences and timing. This is easy enough to test as many power meters now show force vectors.
You can use either but power is far more accurate. The zone number depends on the scale (3 zone model or 5+ zone model). For the 3 zone model most of your rides should be in z1 with your harder rides in z3. In a 5+ zone model most of your rides should be in z2 because z1 becomes your recovery ride zone which isn't really necessary for most of us and your harder rides in z4 or above. A good rule of thumb for z2 heart rate training is 180 minus your age +/- 5bpm.
@@TalleyrandsPuppet You're LT and W/kg are also important but, yes, genes matter the most. Training won't turn you into a TdF GC contender absent genetics. As I said, choose your parents wisely. Friel and others like him play on your vanity and ego by convincing you if you pay him $$$ and follow his training plan you'll be a cycling champion.
