Just started training with Power? Post your questions/comments here!
#2576
Training
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Issaquah, WA
Posts: 294
Bikes: 2015 Focus Mares CX, 2008 Cannondale Supersix
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
They say take 5% off the 20 minute average power.
On a separate note, do you all find that your FTP tests differently depending on whether you test on flats vs a hill climb? My perceived effort in producing a given level of power seems lower on a hill climb than on flat ground. I think my FTP would test 10-20 watts higher on a hill climb. I think I'll try doing the 20 minute test on a hill and see if my FTP comes out differently. Of course, if it does, I'm not sure how I should interpret that for training purposes...
On a separate note, do you all find that your FTP tests differently depending on whether you test on flats vs a hill climb? My perceived effort in producing a given level of power seems lower on a hill climb than on flat ground. I think my FTP would test 10-20 watts higher on a hill climb. I think I'll try doing the 20 minute test on a hill and see if my FTP comes out differently. Of course, if it does, I'm not sure how I should interpret that for training purposes...
#2577
slow up hills
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,931
Bikes: Giant TCR, Redline CX, Ritchey Breakaway, Spec S-works epic
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I put out more power climbing, but I've never tested on flats b/c there aren't many 20 minute sections without lights
#2578
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 492
Bikes: 2014 Specialized Roubaix Pro
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
My other options are all climbing. :/
#2579
slow up hills
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,931
Bikes: Giant TCR, Redline CX, Ritchey Breakaway, Spec S-works epic
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
well, you could always do you test on the hoods with a brake rubbing. Should keep right around the needed 22mph (or not).
#2580
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Jackson, NH
Posts: 205
Bikes: Cannondale 2.8 R700 circa 1997; 2009 Cervelo S2; Trek 930 mountain bike; various others
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
20 minutes on a trainer
#2581
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 910
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Ugghh... I find it hard to concentrate on the trainer, but that might just be me.
I find maintaining efforts on hills easier for extended periods just because you HAVE to keep pedaling - there is no rest available, no opportunity to really soft pedal for a bit. And psychologically, you are working towards a goal (beating the climb) with a carrot at the end.
They say take 5% off the 20 minute average power.
On a separate note, do you all find that your FTP tests differently depending on whether you test on flats vs a hill climb? My perceived effort in producing a given level of power seems lower on a hill climb than on flat ground. I think my FTP would test 10-20 watts higher on a hill climb. I think I'll try doing the 20 minute test on a hill and see if my FTP comes out differently. Of course, if it does, I'm not sure how I should interpret that for training purposes...
On a separate note, do you all find that your FTP tests differently depending on whether you test on flats vs a hill climb? My perceived effort in producing a given level of power seems lower on a hill climb than on flat ground. I think my FTP would test 10-20 watts higher on a hill climb. I think I'll try doing the 20 minute test on a hill and see if my FTP comes out differently. Of course, if it does, I'm not sure how I should interpret that for training purposes...
#2582
Throw the stick!!!!
Does anyone know which program is more accurate for wattage, Training Peaks or Garmin? I am using a powertap pro+ with a 705. For todays ride Garmin shows my average wattage as 170W and Training Peaks WKO+ shows it as 154W (Nom as 178). That is a pretty big difference.
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
#2583
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 3,317
Bikes: Type of horse.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
use trainingpeaks' numbers... just based on consistency, almost every coach and power user uses it so when comparing numbers you'll want to have comparable numbers.
#2584
Huge Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ittybittycity, MD
Posts: 636
Bikes: 2009 BMC Team Machine, Pedal Force RS2, Salsa Campeon, Jamis Nova, Trek 7000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Set the Garmin up to record "zero" for power.
#2585
Arrogant Roadie Punk
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: California
Posts: 2,353
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...5,0.01929&z=16
Last edited by save10; 08-20-10 at 05:04 PM.
#2586
grilled cheesus
that is odd. you must have a setting off somewhere, but i am no expert. later.
__________________
#2587
Throw the stick!!!!
Is that the "zero averaging"? Just turn it on?
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
#2588
**** that
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: CALI
Posts: 15,402
Mentioned: 151 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1099 Post(s)
Liked 104 Times
in
30 Posts
Yeah I think that's what he meant, e.g. include zeroes in the avg. Which would explain the high #'s you see from Garmin.
Are those high numbers from a Garmin app or the device? My 705 shows high numbers for peak power, and it's usually closer to my 5-sec power since it's doing 3-sec averaging. Kind of confusing but fun since I know I did better than what it says (peak-wise anyway).
Are those high numbers from a Garmin app or the device? My 705 shows high numbers for peak power, and it's usually closer to my 5-sec power since it's doing 3-sec averaging. Kind of confusing but fun since I know I did better than what it says (peak-wise anyway).
#2589
Throw the stick!!!!
Yeah I think that's what he meant, e.g. include zeroes in the avg. Which would explain the high #'s you see from Garmin.
Are those high numbers from a Garmin app or the device? My 705 shows high numbers for peak power, and it's usually closer to my 5-sec power since it's doing 3-sec averaging. Kind of confusing but fun since I know I did better than what it says (peak-wise anyway).
Are those high numbers from a Garmin app or the device? My 705 shows high numbers for peak power, and it's usually closer to my 5-sec power since it's doing 3-sec averaging. Kind of confusing but fun since I know I did better than what it says (peak-wise anyway).
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
#2590
**** that
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: CALI
Posts: 15,402
Mentioned: 151 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1099 Post(s)
Liked 104 Times
in
30 Posts
Thanks, that's simple enough. The numbers are the same on the actual device and the garmin program. Now that I figured out the power thing my biggest problem is cadence. Whenever I quit pedaling I get a cadence of about 240 for a split second. Makes "max cadence" pretty much useless.
I just let the PT estimate cadence, seems pretty close from what I can tell.
#2591
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 492
Bikes: 2014 Specialized Roubaix Pro
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Well, I performed my first FTP test this morning and here are the results. Don't laugh - I've only been on the road bike ( or any bike for that matter ) since last August.
Lap 2:
Duration: 20:00
Work: 303 kJ
TSS: 33.4 (intensity factor 1.001)
Norm Power: 253
VI: 1
Pw:HR: 7.39%
Pa:HR: 13.79%
Distance: 7.197 mi
Elevation Gain: 69 ft
Elevation Loss: 69 ft
Grade: 0.0 % (4 ft)
Min Max Avg
Power: 18 423 253 watts
Heart Rate: 133 170 165 bpm
Cadence: 27 116 89 rpm
Speed: 14.7 26.8 21.6 mph
Pace 2:14 4:04 2:47 min/mi
Altitude: 4543 4599 4565 ft
Crank Torque: 57 385 239 lb-in
Well, now with a general knowledge of my FTP, what are my next steps? From Hunter Allen's book, Training And Racing With A Power Meter, the next tests should be:
1. Power Profile.
2. Fatigue Profiles of Levels 5, 6, and 7 )
How much "rest" should I have after today's FTP test? Should I take a day off the bike, and get back out there and complete the Power Profile?
Thanks!!
Lap 2:
Duration: 20:00
Work: 303 kJ
TSS: 33.4 (intensity factor 1.001)
Norm Power: 253
VI: 1
Pw:HR: 7.39%
Pa:HR: 13.79%
Distance: 7.197 mi
Elevation Gain: 69 ft
Elevation Loss: 69 ft
Grade: 0.0 % (4 ft)
Min Max Avg
Power: 18 423 253 watts
Heart Rate: 133 170 165 bpm
Cadence: 27 116 89 rpm
Speed: 14.7 26.8 21.6 mph
Pace 2:14 4:04 2:47 min/mi
Altitude: 4543 4599 4565 ft
Crank Torque: 57 385 239 lb-in
Well, now with a general knowledge of my FTP, what are my next steps? From Hunter Allen's book, Training And Racing With A Power Meter, the next tests should be:
1. Power Profile.
2. Fatigue Profiles of Levels 5, 6, and 7 )
How much "rest" should I have after today's FTP test? Should I take a day off the bike, and get back out there and complete the Power Profile?
Thanks!!
#2592
Throw the stick!!!!
It is from the PT.
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
#2593
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kalifornia
Posts: 287
Bikes: '07 Excalibur, '08 Anthem 1, and some others
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Kudude - I think you're in the east bay, but if you're in the south bay by Great America there is a low traffic business park that is 1.3 miles, essentially 4 corners and all yields signs. I've never had to touch the breaks ever. very light car traffic. bike lane. Really good for doing 20min tests and other such applications. I do various intervals here once or twice a week. Its almost like being on a track. one section is windy. If you ever did Early Birds....its like that. hopefully this link works
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...5,0.01929&z=16
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...5,0.01929&z=16
#2594
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 2,606
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I tried to do an objective test today to see how much body position (aero) makes a difference in power and rpms. I tried to maintain a constant average speed and tested on the hoods vs. in the drops. In the drops I used every aero trick I know (arms in tight or on the tops in pseudo-aerobar style, head down and body flat as possible, coasting on descents, up tempo on flats where little wind exists, etc.).
Looks like the rumors and formulas are right. Aero rocks.
Good wind blowing, relatively flat MUP, ~7.2 mile out and back. Me, 6'2", 190 lbs, 45 yo, not very aero.
50/19 - 18 mph - 23:59:
On the hoods - 82 rpm - 170 watts
In the drops - 77 rpm - 156 watts
Conclusion: 14 less watts and 120 fewer pedal strokes. Not huge but could make a big difference in a century.
50/17 - 20 mph - 21:36:
Hoods - 80 rpm - 229 watts
Drops - 76 rpm - 194 watts
Conclusion: 35 less watts and 86 fewer pedal strokes. Not sure how long I could keep that up but for shorter TT distances this is huge for me. It's a lot easier to be more aero than pull 35 watts out of thin air.
There's of course downsides to being in the drops for extended periods of time and by the end of lap 4 I was starting to feel it.
Next test is to check speed based on power. In the drops, hit the hoods wattage and note speed. I kinda did this the day before but I want to use the exact same hood watts.
Hope this helps.
Looks like the rumors and formulas are right. Aero rocks.
Good wind blowing, relatively flat MUP, ~7.2 mile out and back. Me, 6'2", 190 lbs, 45 yo, not very aero.
50/19 - 18 mph - 23:59:
On the hoods - 82 rpm - 170 watts
In the drops - 77 rpm - 156 watts
Conclusion: 14 less watts and 120 fewer pedal strokes. Not huge but could make a big difference in a century.
50/17 - 20 mph - 21:36:
Hoods - 80 rpm - 229 watts
Drops - 76 rpm - 194 watts
Conclusion: 35 less watts and 86 fewer pedal strokes. Not sure how long I could keep that up but for shorter TT distances this is huge for me. It's a lot easier to be more aero than pull 35 watts out of thin air.
There's of course downsides to being in the drops for extended periods of time and by the end of lap 4 I was starting to feel it.
Next test is to check speed based on power. In the drops, hit the hoods wattage and note speed. I kinda did this the day before but I want to use the exact same hood watts.
Hope this helps.
#2595
grilled cheesus
Thanks, that's simple enough. The numbers are the same on the actual device and the garmin program. Now that I figured out the power thing my biggest problem is cadence. Whenever I quit pedaling I get a cadence of about 240 for a split second. Makes "max cadence" pretty much useless.
since i got power, i kind of stopped paying attention to CAD. i still find HR data interesting, but dont focus on it either. good luck. later.
__________________
#2596
Training
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Issaquah, WA
Posts: 294
Bikes: 2015 Focus Mares CX, 2008 Cannondale Supersix
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Am I correct in thinking that if the intensity factor for a very long ride is very high it could be a sign that FTP is set too low? If so, what kind of # would lead you to re-test FTP? I noticed umd's ride report about his race being intense and noting that he was at nearly 0.9 IF for a few hours. I did a hard group ride today and ended up with an IF of 0.93 (TSS 329) for just about 4 hours in the saddle (including more than 1 hour above what I think is my threshold and more than 30 minutes at more than 60 watts above threshold). I'm wondering if this might mean I need to redo my FTP test.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
#2597
slow up hills
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,931
Bikes: Giant TCR, Redline CX, Ritchey Breakaway, Spec S-works epic
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Am I correct in thinking that if the intensity factor for a very long ride is very high it could be a sign that FTP is set too low? If so, what kind of # would lead you to re-test FTP? I noticed umd's ride report about his race being intense and noting that he was at nearly 0.9 IF for a few hours. I did a hard group ride today and ended up with an IF of 0.93 (TSS 329) for just about 4 hours in the saddle (including more than 1 hour above what I think is my threshold and more than 30 minutes at more than 60 watts above threshold). I'm wondering if this might mean I need to redo my FTP test.
was any one of those hours above 1.0?
Thoughts?
was any one of those hours above 1.0?
Thoughts?
#2598
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 10,978
Bikes: aggressive agreement is what I ride.
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 967 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
Am I correct in thinking that if the intensity factor for a very long ride is very high it could be a sign that FTP is set too low? If so, what kind of # would lead you to re-test FTP? I noticed umd's ride report about his race being intense and noting that he was at nearly 0.9 IF for a few hours. I did a hard group ride today and ended up with an IF of 0.93 (TSS 329) for just about 4 hours in the saddle (including more than 1 hour above what I think is my threshold and more than 30 minutes at more than 60 watts above threshold). I'm wondering if this might mean I need to redo my FTP test.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
#2599
**** that
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: CALI
Posts: 15,402
Mentioned: 151 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1099 Post(s)
Liked 104 Times
in
30 Posts
the PT virtual CAD is very erratic. it will produce a very high, but false, high. from my experience the AVG number always seems to be correct. if you want a truer real time CAD that produces a correct high then add the Garmin CAD sensor to your setup. this is what most do who are concerned about CAD in my neck of the woods.
since i got power, i kind of stopped paying attention to CAD. i still find HR data interesting, but dont focus on it either. good luck. later.
since i got power, i kind of stopped paying attention to CAD. i still find HR data interesting, but dont focus on it either. good luck. later.
Am I correct in thinking that if the intensity factor for a very long ride is very high it could be a sign that FTP is set too low? If so, what kind of # would lead you to re-test FTP? I noticed umd's ride report about his race being intense and noting that he was at nearly 0.9 IF for a few hours. I did a hard group ride today and ended up with an IF of 0.93 (TSS 329) for just about 4 hours in the saddle (including more than 1 hour above what I think is my threshold and more than 30 minutes at more than 60 watts above threshold). I'm wondering if this might mean I need to redo my FTP test.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
What I would do is toy with your FTP until the IF comes out more believable. Might be hard to do without a bunch of known-good long rides, but that's what I would do. Or you could re-test.
#2600
grilled cheesus
^^^^ is th real time CAD all over the place? i typically get a reported high of 200 plus, but i dont really pay that much attention to it anymore. later.
__________________