Why Doing 98% Low-Intensity Training (Below VT1) Works for Long Endurance Events #triathlon #cycling

Why It Matters

Focusing on efficiency rather than maximal power reshapes training for endurance athletes, enabling elite performance with reduced injury risk and training stress.

Key Takeaways

• Emphasize 98% low-intensity work below VT1 for endurance
• Reserve only ~2% of training at VO2max intensity
• Avoid threshold sessions to preserve metabolic efficiency
• High gross efficiency can offset modest VO2max in marathoners
• Prioritizing efficiency yields performance comparable to power-focused training

Summary

The video argues that long‑distance athletes should base the bulk of their training—about 98%—at intensities below the first ventilatory threshold (VT1), reserving only roughly 2% for high‑intensity VO2max work. The presenter deliberately avoids threshold sessions, claiming they add little to performance while eroding efficiency.

He illustrates the point with a Spanish marathoner who ran 2:06 despite a modest VO2max of 66 ml·kg⁻¹·min⁻¹. The runner’s gross mechanical efficiency was an exceptional 26%, a figure the host likens to the efficiency of elite cyclists with VO2max values above 90. The example demonstrates that superior efficiency can compensate for lower aerobic power.

Key quotes include, “I usually avoid completely threshold training,” and, “gross efficiency is as surprising as a VO2max of 90.” These statements underscore the belief that metabolic economy, not maximal oxygen uptake, drives success in ultra‑endurance events.

For coaches and athletes, the message suggests redesigning periodization toward predominantly low‑intensity volume, emphasizing technique, cadence, and economy. By maximizing efficiency, competitors can achieve elite times without the traditional high‑intensity threshold workload.