Training & Nutrition - Is there progression

I've seen this chart in a number of places

http://epictrain.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/powerprofilechart.jpg

Does it represent progression or innate ability?

How far up the scale can an average person get with a couple of years of training? Is cat 3 reachable for everyone? Is cat 1?

It depends.

I've seen this chart in a number of places

http://epictrain.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/powerprofilechart.jpg

Does it represent progression or innate ability?

How far up the scale can an average person get with a couple of years of training? Is cat 3 reachable for everyone? Is cat 1?

First of all, it's an approximation. The riders with the highest w/kg don't always win, but of course those with the lowest are at a massive disadvantage.

Like everything else, it is a combination of genetic potential, training and aptitude. Some people simply don't respond physiologically to training at all, so I'd say that while most might be able to make it to Cat3 levels of fitness/power, it wouldn't be possible for everyone. Getting to Cat 1 takes both talent and application - not that I'd know...

Does it represent progression or innate ability?



Both.

The chart is meant for comparing one's power over different time periods. It won't tell you if you have "cat 3" or whatever power. I know a lot of 4s here in NorCal with "cat 2" FTP on that chart.

The power it takes to reach the different categories varies, and of course it's not just power that makes one a successful racer.

The riders who reach cat 2 without too much effort will tell you that anyone can do it if they train, but that's not true. Anyone can do it if they train and have some innate ability.

Some people simply don't respond physiologically to training at all

Despite what you may have heard, this is true. yes, on average subjects gain a certain percentage on whatever attribute, but there is considerable spread among the subjects around that mean (high standard deviation).

That doesn't mean you wouldn't be able to get better, and you never know until you've tried. There's a lot more to sport than just physical attributes.

Despite what you may have heard, this is true. yes, on average subjects gain a certain percentage on whatever attribute, but there is considerable spread among the subjects around that mean (high standard deviation).

That doesn't mean you wouldn't be able to get better, and you never know until you've tried. There's a lot more to sport than just physical attributes.

Sorry, I don't know what point you are trying to make here. Obviously I know it's true, or I wouldn't have said it. "Despite what [I] may have heard? What?

As for being able to get better, obviously one can improve one's cycling skills. But if one's aerobic system doesn't respond to training one is going to struggle at bike racing.

The chart is descriptive, it represents Allen and Coggan's assignment of power/weight measurements to descriptive categories, like "Cat 3" or "good."

You can definitely change you own performance by training. Where you start on the chart and where you can end up is partially up to genetics and partially up to your training.

As to how you can do in races? Well, e-wang size matters but how you use it matters too.