Reading up on Kenneth Jay's new book (which btw is excellent IMO) I stumbled over a detail I don't fully understand.
In the description of the 36:36 MVO2 Protocol, it reads:
"During this protocol, many people ask, why the interval setting is 36 seconds. [...] Thirty-six seconds is 60% of 1 minute. Research has shown that doing intervals at 60% of the time spent at VO2max is far superior to 50% [...]."
Ok, I got the reason, BUT in this case "the time" would not be a minute, but:
"the time" = "work time" + "rest time" = 36 seconds work + 36 seconds of rest = 72 seconds
which means, that we would end up doing intervals at 50% of the time spent (36 sec. of 72 sec.).
This also seems to be quite obvious to me, since the work:rest ratio ist explicitly stated to be 1:1 (50%:50%) in the paragraph above.
To get the intervals up to 60% of the "time", wouldn't we need to shorten the "rest" to 24 seconds, while keeping the "work" at 36 seconds?
Can someone give me a hint? Kenneth, anyone...!?
I'm sure I'm probably just too blind to see an obvious mistake in my thinking and will feel really stupid, once one of you points out why it has to be 36:36, but it seems I just cant figure it out by myself :-/
Cheers,
Daniel
In the description of the 36:36 MVO2 Protocol, it reads:
"During this protocol, many people ask, why the interval setting is 36 seconds. [...] Thirty-six seconds is 60% of 1 minute. Research has shown that doing intervals at 60% of the time spent at VO2max is far superior to 50% [...]."
Ok, I got the reason, BUT in this case "the time" would not be a minute, but:
"the time" = "work time" + "rest time" = 36 seconds work + 36 seconds of rest = 72 seconds
which means, that we would end up doing intervals at 50% of the time spent (36 sec. of 72 sec.).
This also seems to be quite obvious to me, since the work:rest ratio ist explicitly stated to be 1:1 (50%:50%) in the paragraph above.
To get the intervals up to 60% of the "time", wouldn't we need to shorten the "rest" to 24 seconds, while keeping the "work" at 36 seconds?
Can someone give me a hint? Kenneth, anyone...!?
I'm sure I'm probably just too blind to see an obvious mistake in my thinking and will feel really stupid, once one of you points out why it has to be 36:36, but it seems I just cant figure it out by myself :-/
Cheers,
Daniel