Go Back  Bike Forums > The Racer's Forum > "The 33"-Road Bike Racing
Reload this Page >

Just started training with Power? Post your questions/comments here!

Notices
"The 33"-Road Bike Racing We set this forum up for our members to discuss their experiences in either pro or amateur racing, whether they are the big races, or even the small backyard races. Don't forget to update all the members with your own race results.

Just started training with Power? Post your questions/comments here!

Old 08-19-10, 05:37 PM
  #2576  
Training
 
Issaquatch's Avatar
 
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...
Issaquatch is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 06:24 PM
  #2577  
slow up hills
 
kudude's Avatar
 
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
kudude is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 07:33 PM
  #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
Originally Posted by kudude
I put out more power climbing, but I've never tested on flats b/c there aren't many 20 minute sections without lights
I'd like to do my first test to see what my FTP is, and I'm running into the same dilemma - I can get about 7.6 miles without lights/stop signs, but I think I need a bit more than that.

My other options are all climbing. :/
petalpower is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 10:35 PM
  #2579  
slow up hills
 
kudude's Avatar
 
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).
kudude is offline  
Old 08-19-10, 11:01 PM
  #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
gjb483 is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 12:29 AM
  #2581  
Senior Member
 
tallmantim's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by gjb483
20 minutes on a trainer
Ugghh... I find it hard to concentrate on the trainer, but that might just be me.

Originally Posted by Issaquatch
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...
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.
tallmantim is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 02:07 PM
  #2582  
Throw the stick!!!!
 
LowCel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 18,150

Bikes: GMC Denali

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 31 Posts
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.
LowCel is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 02:13 PM
  #2583  
Senior Member
 
johnybutts's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by LowCel
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.
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.
johnybutts is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 02:27 PM
  #2584  
Huge Member
 
RacerMike's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by LowCel
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.
Set the Garmin up to record "zero" for power.
__________________
--
Originally Posted by BlazingPedals
If you're faster than me, you're fast. If you're not, you suck.
RacerMike is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 02:46 PM
  #2585  
Arrogant Roadie Punk
 
save10's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by kudude
I put out more power climbing, but I've never tested on flats b/c there aren't many 20 minute sections without lights
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

Last edited by save10; 08-20-10 at 05:04 PM.
save10 is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 04:04 PM
  #2586  
grilled cheesus
 
aham23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 8675309
Posts: 6,957

Bikes: 2010 CAAD9 Custom, 06 Giant TCR C2 & 05 Specialized Hardrock Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by LowCel
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.
that is odd. you must have a setting off somewhere, but i am no expert. later.
__________________
aham23 is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 04:55 PM
  #2587  
Throw the stick!!!!
 
LowCel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 18,150

Bikes: GMC Denali

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 31 Posts
Originally Posted by RacerMike
Set the Garmin up to record "zero" for power.
Is that the "zero averaging"? Just turn it on?
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
LowCel is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 05:01 PM
  #2588  
**** that
 
mattm's Avatar
 
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).
__________________
cat 1.

my race videos
mattm is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 05:34 PM
  #2589  
Throw the stick!!!!
 
LowCel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 18,150

Bikes: GMC Denali

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 31 Posts
Originally Posted by mattm
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).
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 may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
LowCel is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 06:00 PM
  #2590  
**** that
 
mattm's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by LowCel
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.
Hmm, the cadence part is weird - is that from the Garmin thingy (on chain stay?) or from the PT?

I just let the PT estimate cadence, seems pretty close from what I can tell.
__________________
cat 1.

my race videos
mattm is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 06:34 PM
  #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!!
petalpower is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 07:45 PM
  #2592  
Throw the stick!!!!
 
LowCel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 18,150

Bikes: GMC Denali

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 176 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 31 Posts
Originally Posted by mattm
Hmm, the cadence part is weird - is that from the Garmin thingy (on chain stay?) or from the PT?

I just let the PT estimate cadence, seems pretty close from what I can tell.
It is from the PT.
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
LowCel is offline  
Old 08-20-10, 11:43 PM
  #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
Originally Posted by save10
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
Hey, bit off-topic, but thanks for that. Work near there but have always gone to Alviso for flat work. Will try this, too.
MtnRide is offline  
Old 08-21-10, 12:22 AM
  #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.
kleinboogie is offline  
Old 08-21-10, 05:08 AM
  #2595  
grilled cheesus
 
aham23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 8675309
Posts: 6,957

Bikes: 2010 CAAD9 Custom, 06 Giant TCR C2 & 05 Specialized Hardrock Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by LowCel
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.
Originally Posted by mattm
Hmm, the cadence part is weird - is that from the Garmin thingy (on chain stay?) or from the PT?

I just let the PT estimate cadence, seems pretty close from what I can tell.
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.
__________________
aham23 is offline  
Old 08-21-10, 10:56 PM
  #2596  
Training
 
Issaquatch's Avatar
 
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?
Issaquatch is offline  
Old 08-21-10, 11:09 PM
  #2597  
slow up hills
 
kudude's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by Issaquatch
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?
0.93 for 4 hrs is a hard ride, but believable (barely). Redo the test if you're curious. Often we see ppl running IF's of 1.1 or so for an hour ----that's a retest
kudude is offline  
Old 08-21-10, 11:33 PM
  #2598  
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
Ygduf's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by Issaquatch
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?
yes.
Ygduf is offline  
Old 08-22-10, 11:38 AM
  #2599  
**** that
 
mattm's Avatar
 
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
Originally Posted by aham23
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.
My PT's cadence reading is accurate from about 40 rpm to 160 rpm; that's what they advertise, and this is also what I've observed. I have not seen any huge #'s or spikes come out of the data, fwiw. (PT Pro+)

Originally Posted by Issaquatch
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?
Yes, definitely too high.

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.
__________________
cat 1.

my race videos
mattm is offline  
Old 08-22-10, 11:57 AM
  #2600  
grilled cheesus
 
aham23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 8675309
Posts: 6,957

Bikes: 2010 CAAD9 Custom, 06 Giant TCR C2 & 05 Specialized Hardrock Sport

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
^^^^ 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.
__________________
aham23 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.