Intensity and Suffering

Intensity is relative. Suffering is relative.

Recently, a friend of mine performed both a VO2max test at the UofU and a lactate threshold test with Dr. Max Testa from TOSH. After the latter test he spoke with Dr. Testa about the results of his test and about the implications of the ‘shape’ of his HR-blood lactate curve and his Power-blood lactate curve. My friend was both encouraged and disappointed by the results. Of course he had hoped for higher power at the onset of blood lactate accumulation (OBLA)! Don’t we all? Be he was also motivated by the results to work more ‘intensely’ and ‘suffer’ more in the upcoming months. I’ve thought a lot about what intensity means since that time and will summarize a bit of my philosophy here.

I should note at the outset that I’m only a moderate fan of diagnostic VO2max and lactate threshold tests and especially the interpretation of results from these tests. Sure they provide a means for comparing baseline measures from different cyclists and they certainly have value for determining a sensible starting point for structuring a training program, but they don’t tell you more about how to make yourself suffer than you probably already know. And they only provide a transient estimate of your current capacity. After a couple weeks of intense training, the results are no longer valid. Also, many cyclists put way too much confidence in their lactate threshold power estimate, not recognizing that it can be skewed by a significant amount depending on their stress level, hydration level, previous training, etc. at the time of the test. Furthermore, a lactate threshold test only reveals an estimate of the ‘amount’ of accumulated lactate in the blood after brief (steady-state) efforts, and does not account for the ‘rate’ of lactate accumulation during each effort nor for the capacity of the rider to tolerate the accumulation during each effort. The amount of time you can suffer and tolerate the build up of lactate at any power level higher than your OBLA power or the relative rate at which you can buffer lactate at the higher power may be much better indicators of your intensity and possibly of your riding capacity.

To convince yourself of the fact that the ‘threshold’ may not be all that you believe, try riding non-stop at just below your estimated threshold power and see if you really do remain at or near that power with the same HR or stress level as indefinitely as the term ‘threshold’ suggests. Of course you may conclude that the term ‘threshold’ is simply a misnomer and that it is just a question of semantics. Or you may conclude that the increase in HR is due to cardiac drift or dehydration or whatever. But in the end you probably know that you’re really not working intensely enough to make big performance gains, and you’re not really riding easily enough to recover. According to some people, if you train at the power level associated with your lactate threshold, you’re just adding on extra miles that keep you uncomfortably at the status quo.

In addition to the potentially weak measure of intensity these tests provide, they don’t account for the amount of internal and psychological suffering that a cyclist endures to achieve a specific power output or blood lactate concentration. For example, if an untrained cyclist is asked to ride for 2 minutes at 6 W/kg, he/she will be ‘suffering’ a lot more intensely than a national class rider who does the same. So you might conclude that intensity and suffering are a function of training time/type or of the amount of relative lactic acid that accumulates during the 2 minutes. However, even if 2 highly trained cyclists with nearly identical power-endurance profiles, the same physical builds, and the same relative VO2max and OBLA powers ride at 6 W/kg, one of these riders will outlast the other simply due to suffering more or longer. If the two riders were physically equal, then one had to be riding more intensely than the other to last longer. Factors that contribute to suffering, such as tolerance of physical, emotional, and psychological stress, aren’t reproducibly measurable and these factors constantly change based on environmental conditions or the immediate ‘stress’ level of the cyclist.

While I can’t conclude what is the best way to actually measure suffering or intensity, I can suggest a simple strategy for ensuring that you’re really riding intensely and that you’ll get higher and faster gains. First of all, consider upping your effort by riding more hours during the week. The best riders tend to put in a lot more time than the rest of us. That’s obvious. Then, when it’s time to go hard, go really hard! Much harder than you normally do and harder than you think you can. Don’t fool yourself into believing that you’re already working hard enough and that other stronger riders are simply more talented. You’ve got to stress your body way beyond your comfort level to make strident progress. During a hard session, ask yourself if you can possibly handle another 30 seconds or 1 minute or more at your interval power. If the answer is no, then do a bit anyway. I think most people succumb to the stress much too soon during a hard effort. And, when you’re doing longer hard steady-state workouts, include many random bursts of very hard effort with minimal recovery during the ride. Be intense! Surprise yourself by doing these back to back sometimes. Not only does this better simulate real performance efforts, but it leads to bigger and faster gains. Near the end of your longer rides, treat the workout like the finish to a serious performance event and ‘kick’ for the final 30 seconds, 1-2 minutes, or even 10 minutes. Absolutely leave nothing left in the tank on a lot more rides than just once per month. Then, when it’s time to relax, really relax!

I think too many cyclists claim that other riders are better than they are simply because they’re more genetically gifted. That’s hogwash! While there are awesome physical specimens out there, most freak riders simply suffer much more deeply than the rest of us a lot more often. Don’t pass off lots of hard work as a free lunch pass! You’ve got to put in the time and definitely put in the real suffering. For almost any cyclist at any level, quality training must be included in quantity training to make the best gains. Now I’m not suggesting that every workout you do should lead to complete physical destruction. Also, I know you can’t fake long distance endurance or ride without recovery hours/miles, so you’ve got to put in rides appropriate to your event distance or intensity or fatigue level. But I am suggesting that in lieu of using pre-determined HR ranges or power measures determined from diagnostic VO2max or lactate threshold tests, just go as hard as you can on many of your rides for the entire time you’re planning on riding. You can usually do these efforts by feel. Think about it. You know what real intensity is. If you are able to mindlessly think about your day or about what you’ve got going on after the ride, instead of the raw intensity of the effort, you’re probably not suffering enough. If you can talk to a friend during your ride or if you can even recognize that it’s your friend next to you, you might not be going hard enough. If you want serious gains, you’ve got to seriously suffer. Choose a metabolic stress that puts every piece of your body and mind on edge and work as if you don’t know that there’s an easier way. Forget about your heart rate and how far above your threshold you are. Just ride hard! Most of the time, I think pre-determined HR ranges and work loads are too constraining to reach that level of intensity anyway.

Once you get better at this type of effort, and if you’re really intense, the next step might be to do your rides indoors at the same power levels without any outside stimulus or motivation. I know this seems a bit crazy, but try a focused 90 minute ride without a friend, the TV, radio, or even a fan or much lighting sometime. This level of psychological stressor, combined with the metabolic stress of the ride tends to train your body and mind into believing that all the other lower efforts just aren’t that bad. Perhaps to epitomize this concept, a friend recently reminded me of a nice analogy. He said that survivors in concentration camps would intentionally inflict pain upon themselves at a higher level than the torture they’d receive, so that when they were tortured the effective pain and stress was a bit reduced, because they had already ‘trained’ their bodies and minds how to really suffer.

Remember, suffering is relative. If you can train your mind and body to suffer better than your competitors, you’ll have at least one edge over them. As Dean Karnazes said, “If it doesn’t require extraordinary effort, you’re not pushing hard enough.”

J-Naut