« Polarized Training Update | Main | Midsole Cleats and Pedals »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Tom Hughes

Thanks for the article Joe.
I've heard you mention EF in regards to cycling before and you mentioned what a 'good' efficiency factor was. I can't find this again, would you mind putting that back up?
Does the actual EF matter or is it just a good metric to monitor. Interesting as I have improved my metabolic flexibility through a high fat/ketogenic diet my EF for cycling has gone from 1.7 to 2.1.


2 lines of "scary" math for your readers was not needed, i.e. yards/min is simply 1760/NGP

e.g. 1760/7.5 = 234.7

no need to work out NGS which is hours related when you already had NGP which is per minute per mile and wanted yards per minute , knowing 1760 yards in a mile :)

Joe Friel

Tom Hughes - EF is only "good" or "bad" relative to the individual's previous EFs from similar workouts.

Patrick Stoddard

If I'm doing my runs according to pace rather than HR and use a 5K race as my pace test to determine what paces are easy, threshold, intervals, etc. can I use the NGP as the 5K pace rather than the actual 5K race time if the race was on a hilly course?

Joe Friel

Patrick Stoddard--Yes, you could.

Sergio Clemente

Two questions:
1) What would explain a 0.5 variance in EF. Could it be because I'm not very efficient on hills (Some of the lower EF were on hills)?
2) What kind of drills or things do you recommend for increasing efficiency?

Joe Friel

Sergio Clemente--1) I really can't say, but it sounds like you may not have been on the same course. How about the intensity of the workout? How about time of day, pre-workout food, caffeine, warm-up differences, etc. As many things as possible need to be the same in order to compare EFs. 2) Anything that improves aerobic fitness benefits EF, such as volume of training, intensity of training, strength training, plyometrics, becoming better at fat burning, number of workouts per week, etc.

Mark Paris

I'm skeptical. How much day to day noise is there in one's HR if you keep your speed and distance constant from workout to workout. If there's a lot (which there likely is), you'll have to see a big improvement in efficiency in order to reliably claim that any improvement is legit. Considering this is all happening 28 to 32 BP under AT, I would think the chance of sizable improvements in that range are minimal. Then again, is HR noise linear?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Subscribe via Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner