Welcome to The Cycling Performance Club Podcast!  In this episode we continue our trip down the rabbit hole of exercise intensity with Dr. Nick Jamnick (part 2 of 2). Previously, we critically examined graded exercise tests, VO2max testing, lactate thresholds, and the usefulness of lactate testing. Herein, we dive deep into Nick’s comprehensive review critiquing the common methods of determining and prescribing exercise intensity. This review evaluated different methods of prescribing intensity based on their ability to cause the distinct acute responses found in each of the physiologically defined exercise domains. The methods were categorised into three groups: maximal anchors (e.g. percentage of maximal heart rate or peak power), submaximal anchors (e.g. critical power, MLSS), and delta methods (e.g. heart rate reserve).  Spoiler alert: Most of the methods examined did not fare well! So, continue with us down the exercise intensity rabbit hole to find out what methods survived the brutal scrutiny of Nick’s review and why only a few methods out performed the rest. Did the method you use to determine intensity pass or fail?  Guest panelist: Nicholas Jamnick, PhD Researchgate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nicholas-Jamnick LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nick-jamnick-8351a7a7/ Twitter: @SportResearchEx Co-hosts: Jason Boynton, Ph.D. boyntoncoaching.com Cyrus Monk cyclistscientist.com Producer & co-host: Damian Ruse semiprocycling.com Instagram: @cyclingperformanceclub Facebook: @cyclingperformanceclub Twitter: @cyclingclubpod LinkedIn: The Cycling Performance Club Podcast References: An Examination and Critique of Current Methods to Determine Exercise Intensity https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-020-01322-8 Polarized training has greater impact on key endurance variables than threshold, high intensity, or high volume training https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2014.00033/full