Review of the VO2 conflict section against primary sources (verified via
PubMed + search):
- Rønnestad & Hansen 2016 (PMID 23942167) confirmed: 13 cyclists, 30s vs
50%/80% Tmax at 2:1 work:rest, measured time >=90% VO2peak, 30s won. Table
row corrected to reflect the actual comparison.
- Yang 2025 optimum ~140s is a MEDIUM rep (~2.3 min), between the poles.
Section reframed from binary short-vs-long to an inverted-U with a
modality/protocol-dependent peak. 'Weighted toward running' softened to
match what the abstract actually supports.
- Removed the overstatement 'best-controlled evidence favors short 30/15
intervals'. Added two caveats: (1) cycling short-interval superiority is
largely one research group; (2) effort-matched work (total-work-matched)
reportedly nulls the advantage (Seiler group; unpublished/secondary,
flagged low-tier, not cited as fact).
- Practical menu now defaults to medium (~2-4 min, near the pooled optimum)
rather than short; short/long presented as goal-dependent options.
- citations.md: added single-group caveat on Ronnestad body of work and an
explicit NOT-VERIFIABLE entry for the effort-matched replication.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TqrhBhC3GEcKyaw8RTk8G6
Modular cycling-training skill: periodization logic, workout design, and
research-backed protocols that companion an Intervals.icu MCP server (the
server owns all data + computed metrics; the skill owns knowledge + reasoning).
Structure:
- SKILL.md router + README (companion-to-MCP architecture, install steps)
- references/: durability, mtb-xco-demands, strength-for-cyclists,
vo2max-intervals, periodization, data-confounds, citations
- assets/: base + build plan templates, durability field-test protocol
Every quantitative claim carries an inline citation; citations.md is the
single source of truth with PMID/DOI, each verified against PubMed on
2026-07-20. Notable honesty flags baked in:
- VO2 rep-length: running (Fleckenstein 2025) vs cycling (Ronnestad) conflict
documented rather than asserted; cycling evidence favors short intervals.
- 'Yu et al. 2025' (frequency > distribution) could not be found; not cited.
- Under-researched doses (durability, taper TSB, CTL ramp) flagged 'track response'.
- HR-confound doc forbids naive decoupling<5% / RHR+5 rules.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TqrhBhC3GEcKyaw8RTk8G6
Chris Farhood