Track Racing by the Numbers

Printable View

Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 2 of 4 First 1234 Last
• 03-27-14, 02:20 AM
jmikami
As often what I wrote and what I thought were not the same. I understand that max effort means you are just pouring every you got every second there is, but I was referring to our energy systems and the fact that we have limited short term energy, but that it is there and we should use it if possible and efficient. So most of us can max out for around 5 to maybe 10 seconds, but have up to 20 or even more seconds at what I would refer to as a "sprint" or ATP effort, or whatever you want to call that short term effort. After that you switch systems or use a combo of them depending on how your body has been trained to handle certain efforts. So for a kilo, those max efforts start to die out after 20 to 30 seconds depending on the rider and you run on fumes. But is there a way to pace it, but still use up that max/ATP/sprint energy as well, or if you pace it are you leaving that ATP on the table and not getting a true max effort? Can you use it at the end or the start, etc?

So the specific part of pacing that I am interested in is how to maximize all systems at the same time for a kilo. IMO, our bodies can be trained to use our different energy systems by doing specific intervals work along with other training work and for longer events like a pursuit, maybe even hit certain things like ATP twice (or whatever energy that might be). I find that I often have a "free" start lap in a pursuit where I can steal some ATP without killing myself before hitting my pace. Then I settle in and ride hard, but at the end I can steal a little bit more and sprint in the final lap. Basically I have found I can pursuit with two peaks and often do this in my intervals on the road. Since I have never had a power meter on the track, I will learn a lot this year I hope and refine my power curve even further. And maybe I just suck at pacing and would be faster if I just stuck to a slightly higher pace. Also pursuit is much longer than a kilo, and a double peak would be foolish in the kilo, but pacing and using all available energy systems and training those systems still makes sense to me.

So I guess I am more interested in pacing for both the pursuit and specifically for the kilo and how that pacing might impact times. Then of course comes the idea of how to best setup your training to ensure those systems are working correctly.
• 03-27-14, 02:36 AM
carleton
Quote:

Originally Posted by JMR
Wow... his dad (I assume), is a very animated talker!

JMR

Unfortunately, he has Parkinson's Disease.
• 03-27-14, 02:38 AM
JMR
Oh, sorry. :(

JMR
• 03-27-14, 02:43 AM
jmikami
Attachment 371222Attachment 371223

Here are two power profiles from intervals on the road I have done. The first is a pursuit profile (5:30 minute effort) and shows a sharper peak at the start, followed by the effort and then the kick at the end. Regardless of how fast I go, or don't go I will often have something left for a kick during a pursuit. However the second image is an all out kilo (1:12 timed effort) on the road and I had nothing left at the end for a kick, the profile is nearly flat so one would guess that I paced it well, which was 100% my goal in that effort. Maybe I did, but at the same time I often feel that a flat profile just means I did not dig into my reserve ATP and left something on the table and could have went faster had I dug deeper. Although maybe I did dig into my ATP and that fall off that would have happened was negated by pulling in my ATP during some point ... who knows, but I tried hard to roll the kilo effort soft at the start and then hold it flat.

This was my best paced effort from last year, but not my best overall average power number - that came from a strong 1000 watt peak in the middle with a soft start and dead end (around 300 watts). If I start all out I die too much and can't hold enough at the end. I am basically a 45 second man and need to extend that this year to a full minute ... cross my fingers that all my intervals pay off with that extension this year.

I can't wait until I can do this on the track with a power meter and see what happens then ... Maybe I am just sick of all the wet northwest weather and wishing I lived closer to an indoor velodrome. I guess if I had a question in all this, it is about kilos and how the rest of you are doing them and training for them. I tend to do them best if I soften them up on purpose at the start and can't score a good time with an all out effort ... yet. My training will be lots and lots of intervals of various lengths, RPMs, hills, etc. I figure this event is my 2nd best chance for a jersey at masters nats this year and I will be putting a lot of effort into it, pursuit is likely my best chance, but it will totally and 100% depend on how my body responds to training this year and I float back and forth between a long sprinter and a short endurance guy.
• 03-27-14, 05:45 PM
Hida Yanra
Quote:

Originally Posted by JMR
Oh, sorry.

#sadtrombone
• 03-31-14, 05:35 PM
carleton
I have managed to confuse myself.

I'm looking at the Flying Lap times from the 2013 US Elite Track Nationals and the numbers don't look right.

Stephen Pelaez was first with 11.167s for his 250M Flying Lap. If that time is correct, that is an average of 22.39m/s or 80.60k/h. If he went 80.6k/h his 200M split was 8.933s. That's not right.

What gives? Was the "Flying Lap" actually a Flying 200?

Then I see Jack Lindquist's Flying Lap time of 12.393s which placed him in 22nd place which is too slow for a Flying 200M and too slow for a Flying 200 for him. He's usually mid 11s in other flying 200s at that track based on other results.

So, is the data screwed up on the website?
• 03-31-14, 05:48 PM
VanceMac
The link is for 2009, not 2013. And I'm going to guess those are the flying 200m times for omnium participants (not the sprinters, as their 200m times are also listed... and as you'd expect, faster)?
• 03-31-14, 05:54 PM
carleton
Quote:

Originally Posted by VanceMac
The link is for 2009, not 2013. And I'm going to guess those are the flying 200m times for omnium participants (not the sprinters, as their 200m times are also listed... and as you'd expect, faster)?

Ah. You are right. I got the year wrong and yeah, these do look like Flying 200M times and not Flying 250 even though they are called "Flying Lap".

It seems like the Flying 200M time for Lindquist is correct. He rode a 1:14 Kilo on the same day which correlates. I guess he got faster after 2009 :D
• 03-31-14, 06:39 PM
Quinn8it
Quote:

Originally Posted by carleton
Ah. You are right. I got the year wrong and yeah, these do look like Flying 200M times and not Flying 250 even though they are called "Flying Lap".

It seems like the Flying 200M time for Lindquist is correct. He rode a 1:14 Kilo on the same day which correlates. I guess he got faster after 2009 :D

No-
That link goes to Omnium Results. Linquist and Farioleti both rode the omnium that year.. (that was the last year Jack considered himself an Enduro- turned into a Sprinter not long after)
admittedly it doesn't look right...

and there are lots of other results missing..
https://www.usacycling.org/results/?permit=2009-2690
like:
the mens sprint 200m times
and the non-Omnium Kilo times.. which i raced (very slowly) that year..
• 03-31-14, 06:47 PM
Quinn8it
something weird is happening at USAC.com

i don't see the Elite Mens Kilo in the list of results- and it has disappeared from my results page. Results for Standing 250m and Team Sprint are still showing in both places..
• 03-31-14, 06:57 PM
carleton
Quote:

Originally Posted by Quinn8it
something weird is happening at USAC.com

i don't see the Elite Mens Kilo in the list of results- and it has disappeared from my results page. Results for Standing 250m and Team Sprint are still showing in both places..

That was the last time they did the Standing 250M TT. I really wish they would reinstate it. It looks like it was a popular event that probably went by pretty quickly. Easy and fast money in terms of entry fees.

It was the 2nd most popular event of Nationals with 28 participants. The most popular was Men's Team Sprint with 36 participants.

They should really bring that event back.
• 03-31-14, 07:05 PM
Quinn8it
Quote:

Originally Posted by carleton
That was the last time they did the Standing 250M TT.

it was a bit of a nightmare!
we heard rumors that the higher-ups were looking to get rid of it- and thats why they put it at the end of a full day of Int-Omnium racing… we ended up racing after 10pm.
people like me- doing their first event at their first Elite Nats showed up early and spent 10hrs at the track to do 1 lap. nobody was in optimal form- everyone was wrecked, tired and hungry..

i don't really agree that its a worthy event… in my opinion
• 03-31-14, 07:15 PM
VanceMac
Quote:

Originally Posted by Quinn8it
i don't really agree that its a worthy event… in my opinion

I'd be in favor of a standing 250m event... IF they got rid of the 500m and let all ages do kilo. That, to me, is pure ridiculousness.
• 03-31-14, 07:59 PM
GhostSS
Maybe a silly questions, but just curious if there is any comparative data on road (geared) bike racers and track (fixed) bike racers. Inspired by some of the mini arguments seen elsewhere on the forum. Obviously the times and speeds are apples and oranges considering environmental factors, track vs road conditions, distances covered, and drafting vs solo, etc.

Really the meat I want to get at is acceleration and top speed, how much of it is the rider and how much is it the bike?. Anyone put a geared bike on a track for fun/in the name of science?

It was my understanding that speed and acceleration was more of a factor of the rider, not the bike when flat terrain is concerned.
• 03-31-14, 09:09 PM
gtrob
Quote:

Originally Posted by GhostSS
Maybe a silly questions, but just curious if there is any comparative data on road (geared) bike racers and track (fixed) bike racers. Inspired by some of the mini arguments seen elsewhere on the forum. Obviously the times and speeds are apples and oranges considering environmental factors, track vs road conditions, distances covered, and drafting vs solo, etc.

Really the meat I want to get at is acceleration and top speed, how much of it is the rider and how much is it the bike?. Anyone put a geared bike on a track for fun/in the name of science?

It was my understanding that speed and acceleration was more of a factor of the rider, not the bike when flat terrain is concerned.

Im not sure what the argument is, but speed or acceleration is completely the rider. The bike has the same power geared or not, which is zero. The only reason speeds on track are so high are because they are so much shorter.
• 03-31-14, 09:12 PM
carleton
Quote:

Originally Posted by Quinn8it
it was a bit of a nightmare!
we heard rumors that the higher-ups were looking to get rid of it- and thats why they put it at the end of a full day of Int-Omnium racing… we ended up racing after 10pm.
people like me- doing their first event at their first Elite Nats showed up early and spent 10hrs at the track to do 1 lap. nobody was in optimal form- everyone was wrecked, tired and hungry..

i don't really agree that its a worthy event… in my opinion

It sounds like the event's timing was poorly managed. That can happen with any event.
• 03-31-14, 09:20 PM
carleton
Quote:

Originally Posted by GhostSS
Maybe a silly questions, but just curious if there is any comparative data on road (geared) bike racers and track (fixed) bike racers. Inspired by some of the mini arguments seen elsewhere on the forum. Obviously the times and speeds are apples and oranges considering environmental factors, track vs road conditions, distances covered, and drafting vs solo, etc.

Really the meat I want to get at is acceleration and top speed, how much of it is the rider and how much is it the bike?. Anyone put a geared bike on a track for fun/in the name of science?

It was my understanding that speed and acceleration was more of a factor of the rider, not the bike when flat terrain is concerned.

It's not a silly question. But, it's comparing apples to oranges.
• 04-01-14, 11:53 AM
DMC707
Quote:

Originally Posted by JMR
Wow... his dad (I assume), is a very animated talker!

JMR

His dad , Davis , is a former pro sprinter for the 7 Eleven and Coors Light pro teams --- i would equate him as being the Mario Cippolini of the US (or perhaps MArio is the Davis Phinney of Europe -- et al. ) -- part of the reason he appears animated though , is regrettably, he has been fighting a battle with Parkinson's that he contracted in his 30's
Davis Phinney was a hero , of sorts, to me back in the 80's and 90's --- we had a similar physique , and it gave me hope --- i thought if this bulky dude can make it as a bike racer, so can I :roflmao2: (didnt work out as well for me as it did for him though -- he has dozens of professional wins , )
• 04-01-14, 06:10 PM
JMR
Quote:

Originally Posted by DMC707
His dad , Davis , is a former pro sprinter for the 7 Eleven and Coors Light pro teams --- i would equate him as being the Mario Cippolini of the US (or perhaps MArio is the Davis Phinney of Europe -- et al. ) -- part of the reason he appears animated though , is regrettably, he has been fighting a battle with Parkinson's that he contracted in his 30's
Davis Phinney was a hero , of sorts, to me back in the 80's and 90's --- we had a similar physique , and it gave me hope --- i thought if this bulky dude can make it as a bike racer, so can I :roflmao2: (didnt work out as well for me as it did for him though -- he has dozens of professional wins , )

Did not know this... thanks for the info!

I'll have a look at some of his old races.

:)

JMR
• 04-01-14, 06:26 PM
carleton
Yeah, he's a great American Cyclist:

- Bronze 1984 Olympic Team time trial
- 5th 1984 Olympic Road race
- 2x Tour de France Stage Winner
- 1st, Overall, 1988 Coors Classic (when this race was the 4th biggest race in the world after the Tour de France, Giro d'Italia, and Vuelta a Espaņa)
- Gold 1983 Pan American Games Team time trial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkFopT9F37w

His wife, Connie Carpenter-Phinney, has similar achievements:

- World Champion in Road and Track
- Gold medal in the 1984 Olympic Road Race
- US Olympic Hall of Fame
- Etc...

Skip to 3:30 here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXNscXDrwDw
• 04-01-14, 06:28 PM
carleton
• 04-01-14, 07:05 PM
jmikami
One of the highlights of my racing career was racing against Davis and Chris Horner in a crit in Seattle during the build up the the 96 trials. I attacked on the first lap and during the TV playback Davis who was also the announcer after the fact and called me out on TV. Although I did poorly in that race during the form of my life because I followed Davis and Chris not thinking that Chris was not a crit rider and Davis was working for teammates who were up the road. Back then I had no clue about tactics and just figured I would sit on their wheels and that would be enough ... and then we were caught by the break and that was that.

But I got my 15 seconds of fame anyways, so attacking on the first lap is not always a bad thing. I eventually tried a late counter attack, but it was pulled back on the final lap, so I didn't even get to sprint against him for minor placings. That would have been fun. Most of the other brushes I had with the heros of my time were during stage races were I really sucked and never was able to ride near the front, but that one day I felt like I could have raced with the pros ... and did.

Scratch that ... Davis was the announcer, but he was retired ... and now I can't remember who the big sprinter of the race was ... but the race had a number of pros because of the trials road race that was coming up. Last time I raced in the same race as Phinney was tour of willamette, and I was only a cat 3 then.

Ok, I think it was Frank McCormack who was the sprinter I was sitting on thinking I was doing the right thing. I am thinking he was more worried about the trials and not some crit, but that was still a fun year ... I knew nothing, but it was fun.
• 04-05-14, 10:12 AM
incog24
Can anyone share any TP data and corresponding times/splits? I'd also be interested in what kind of ratios people are getting from the front to back of the line to evaluate what kind of technical improvements my team can make.

I've only had a power meter on the track for a few months, and only on an indoor 250 once, but it's been pretty interesting. At the moment efforts on the front in the mid 500w territory, and about 250-300w riding in 4th-2nd wheel equates to a low 4:40. There are a lot of obvious improvements to make yet in technique and cda but it'd be interesting to have some other data points. I realise there are a lot of caveats with TP data, turn length, rider sizes etc. but just anything would be interesting for now.
• 04-05-14, 03:13 PM
Cantrackie
Predisposition vs. training.
around 15 or more years ago did a peak power test(2200 watts) a few days ago I did another(2100 watts) both results on well calibrated machines.
These results stumped me a little, I was well trained 15years ago, between lifting plyometrics and on bike training I was probably as strong as ever.
Fast forward to a few days ago, no weight training, no plyometrics, and only a month on the track bike. No other riding or training of significance.
My question, how much time should be spent on max power training when it is clearly already not going to change results drastically? Would training effort be better focused on speed or speed endurance or the like.
Same question on those with a predisposition to better leg speed and lactic tolerance.
• 04-05-14, 03:34 PM
carleton
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cantrackie
Predisposition vs. training.
around 15 or more years ago did a peak power test(2200 watts) a few days ago I did another(2100 watts) both results on well calibrated machines.
These results stumped me a little, I was well trained 15years ago, between lifting plyometrics and on bike training I was probably as strong as ever.
Fast forward to a few days ago, no weight training, no plyometrics, and only a month on the track bike. No other riding or training of significance.
My question, how much time should be spent on max power training when it is clearly already not going to change results drastically? Would training effort be better focused on speed or speed endurance or the like.
Same question on those with a predisposition to better leg speed and lactic tolerance.

Max Power in itself is sort of a red herring. It's an indicator, but not as powerful of an indicator as 5s, 10s, or 15s (or more) power for sprinters. Yes, they are directly related, but you are on the right track in thinking that there is more to it that max power. Power over time is where it's at.

To go even deeper, if you add in weight and CdA of the rider then the marriage of power over time, weight, CdA start telling a more accurate story of what did (or could) happen. I can clock just under 2,200W which might win most local max wattage contests. But, they only way I'd dominate them all one track is if I raced in zero gravity with no atmosphere :D

Also, as you note, predisposition helps...A LOT. You can't coach talent into an athlete. If the ingredients in the athlete (raw strength, fast twitch muscles, and/or fatigue resistant muscles, etc...) are already of high quality then it makes things a lot easier. This is why I think talent ID is so important (and often overlooked).

On a related note: I watched a masters guy (6'2", 220lbs, built like a linebacker) over the course of several years spend tens of thousands of dollars on the kind of bike gear that you see in magazines so that he could hang on for dear life on the back of CAT4 crits and get dropped on road races. He had several accomplished trackie friends say, "You should really try the track...seriously." For years, he resisted. Then one year he tried it and guess what? He rarely finished out of the top 3 of any race he contested. Even after the relatively moderate success, he still went back to road/crit riding for more back-of-the-pack suffering. I never understood that.
Show 30 post(s) from this thread on one page
Page 2 of 4 First 1234 Last