hack

Ooops ... was looking at last year's P1 TT results when posting that.

I gave you a thumbs up while rolling back to the feed zone. My teammate with the keys was still in the race, so I was headed down to hang with the support crew.

All in all, it was rough and I was really on the fence for that last day. I was pretty much certain I'd be pulling out, just wasn't sure how early.

aaronmcd

I'm also inclined to think 20 minute test yields too high ftp. I did a 20' effort recently not all out and hit 331w, set ftp at 315 but I seriously doubt I could do that. Yet I can hit 350 NP for an hour. Not really an issue as I just use the numbers to gauge where my fitness/form might be. But still, at the same CTL I might have similar freshness at -5 TSB one week and +15 another.

jsk

Those who think 20' FTP test yields too high a number, are you doing the 5' all-out effort first? If you do that hard enough, it should diminish the anaerobic contribution to the 20' test so that it doesn't skew too high. In the past I've found that 93% of a 20' test seems to be a pretty good approximation for me, based on subsequent time trial performances.

grolby

Yeah I messed that up last time I did a 20' test, but on the other hand I went out way too hard (like 15 watts high) so I'm assuming it was valid . Seriously though, I agree that my true FTP is almost certainly not 95% of my 20' power. But I don't think it's a big deal. The difference between 95% and 92% of my 20' power is about 8 watts, so my zones are close enough. I can definitely exceed 1 IF in a hard race, but it does need to be a hard race. And I don't do much in the way of time trials, and certainly have never done one anywhere close to an hour. So the difference between my calculated FTP and my "real" FTP seems basically academic to me. I'm not too concerned about it. Mostly I try to talk 20' power when talking threshold numbers, simply because I know that number is real; FTP is just murkier.

globecanvas

IMO the primary practical purpose of FTP is to give you a target for pacing intervals, whether in training or competition. I expect that most of us have a very good sense of where to pace whatever intervals are useful for us. I know what numbers to target for any particular length of time and how to adjust the targets based on context (lower target if doing a lot of intervals in a row, higher target if trying to win a race, etc). I also know where my blow-up numbers are. From all of those numbers you can back out an FTP number that makes sense.

I've never done a 20' test and my highest 20' power is less than 100% of where I set my FTP. But I'm pretty confident in the number. I have a running argument with my teammate who tells me I should set it higher but I know where I blow up.

TheKillerPenguin

ftp is ftp, race is race, tour is tour.

jsk

I would agree with that. Even if a 20' test results in an estimated FTP that's a little on the high side, that's probably an OK thing (if not a good thing), if it means interval workouts are a little harder but still achievable. If somebody is failing to hit their target numbers for intervals, that might indicate FTP is set too high.

Of course if 40K ITT's are an important event for somebody, knowing your true FTP is pretty important. The only other downside I can think of to a substantially too-high FTP is that it can skew the metrics for training load and fitness/freshness in a way that could lead to over-training.

furiousferret

I'm also on the side that FTP is really just a number to set your training zones. Unless you are a Time Trialist, what you can push for 1 hour typically isn't that relevant. Right now my FTP is at least 10 points too high but it works for the training I'm doing right now.

PepeM

I just use whatever WKO thinks my FTP is (mFTP) at this point for zone setting purposes.

mattm

Sucks about the final race, but yeah that final climb is tough.. hard to watch the winning break ride away, I know that feel.

Saw you from a distance a few times, but didn't the chance to ask - how was Boise?

You crashed, which sucks, but what was the crit like? Fast I assume? Sketchy?

Andy STi

Fun weekend at Cascade. Nice to meet you @mattm although didn't get a chance to talk much.

I did the 40+ plus race and had a good weekend. Ended up in 3rd on GC against a quality field. Always a fun race.

echappist

impressive work

canuckbelle

FTP matters for determining one's limiters, too: ratio of aerobic threshold to lactate threshold, and ratio of lactate threshold to VO2...and to neuromuscular power. Looking at those gives an idea where one can make good improvements. E.g., my aerobic threshold is pretty close to my lactate threshold...so my endurance/tempo fitness is really good, comparatively.

mattm

Didn't realize you finished so high up, nice work!

A very tough race.

Nice to meet ya, and see you next year!

hack

Saw you rolling around before the start of the circuit race. Was going to say hello afterward, but my day ended a bit earlier than most others

Great results, by the way.

tetonrider

i was pretty sure that was you but not 100% -- there were more than a few DDA guys. one had a low number and seemed to be about your height/build, too. thanks for the encouragement. i was thinking "there is a chance" at that point.

no regrets. i wondered if i realized the chase was coming just a bit sooner, could i have taken another minute or two of rest/easy pedaling that enabled me to hang on over the top? probably not. i was happy i raced aggressively.

i know you had a teammate in my race, but i didn't see you at all. you also might have seen a teammate of mine who was racing in another field; we get confused pretty often.

Boise was actually amazing. you have more experience with this than i do; it was my first time going to a big, standalone (NCC) crit.

the course was a bit different this year than past years due to a little construction (i'm told it was actually the "old" course), and it was a simple rectangle. it's in the center of town right near the state capitol. they get a huge crowd for the p1 race, but the crowds start showing up for the earlier events, too.

speeds were high and riding was smooth. road conditions were generally great, and you could pedal all corners.

i raced the first race (masters) aggressively. i bet that a break would win this one, and i was right -- except that the winning move went on a counter to one of mine.

in my 2nd race (1/2/3) speeds were a little higher and i'd say the riding was even smoother. my gut told me that this was going to be won on a late move or a field sprint, so my plan was to chill until the last 10' or so and look to make a move then. we got to about 48' into the hour and i was literally just thinking about how smooth/safe the riding was when 2 guys bumped and went down in front of me in turn 1. my bunny hopping skills were not enough to jump a rider, and i went down pretty quick. it happened right near the pit so i was able to get a restart and finish up. the adrenaline was pumping and it wasn't hard to get back in -- but i couldn't do anything other than ride with the pack.

crash aside, my power for the 45' masters crit was nearly 50w higher than for the 1/2/3 crit. different racing strategies, obviously.

the p/1 crit was a super fun scene....really large crowd, lots of food/beer vendors, solid racing. there was one big pile-up in turn 1.

overall i'd say the course was very safe and the event very well run. i would definitely return--and that's saying a bunch from this non-crit-guy!

worst part for me: i drove 5h in the morning, started warming up at 2, raced twice through 6:45....got medical attention.....then cheered on friends in the p1 field....wound up going to the clif bar team party (COOKIES!!!)...then my hosts for the night wanted to hang out later.... when i finally crawled into bed it was 1:50am. i realized i hadn't sat down for about 12h.

couldn't sleep though...body felt like it was on fire from the road rash.

side note that's kind of a big deal: they announced at the starting line that USADA was there and would be testing in every field. it was very clear to check with officials immediately after one's race. the winner of the masters field (who initiated the break, drove it the distance and won the sprint) decided to skip the test, skip the podium and DNS the 1/2/3 race for which he'd registered. he also didn't show for the state crit the next day.

pretty pathetic.

in hindsight, he's the type of guy who wins all the local p12/masters stuff but then doesn't do the relatively short drive to nationals in the 5 years it's nearby (5h to bend or 5h to ogden).

sad in terms of the doubt cast on the team, masters riding, and the sport in general.

USADA tested multiple riders in EVERY field.

rockin'!

hack

Most likely me. Our similarly shaped rider was out of the race with nausea and vomiting post road race. We look similar on a bike, but have totally different profiles. He's our TT and climbing guy and I kind of sprint. Our team isn't that big (8 of us total??), but we just all seem to make it to that race.


Regarding the USADA stuff ... Awesome that they were testing and totally weak that the winner skipped out. I don't know how the rules handle that situation, but in my opinion that should be the equivalent of a fail and subject to the same penalties. Gotta start flexing the USADA muscle and shut that garbage down.

tetonrider

a missed test = a positive. the guy gave his team a lame excuse; he got booted from the team. still, it casts some (further) doubt on the sport.

i have to say that i have been on a bunch of starting lines this year (eg Gila 1/2) where they announced USADA is testing, then when you show up at the finish line they inform us that our field is not being tested.

other than nationals, this is the first race that i saw this year where testing occurred outside of a p1 field. i'm all for more testing.

Flatballer

If the pros skip a test like that I assume there are pretty serious consequences. Why should it be any different for amateurs? Seems like the smart strategy is to dope like crazy and just skip out on any tests and say you had to get home to take your daughter to soccer practice or whatever. Easy.

canuckbelle

That is shifty AF. I don't think a one time missing of a test should be enough to count as a fail, but it should go on one's record...as a strike or something. But to miss the podium AND DNS the next day's race? Yeah, that guy was glowing for sure. NOW I think USADA should target him for a random home test.

mattm

Thanks for the info! Been tempted to check out that crit, but it's a bit of a trek, and right before Cascade.. would be a long road trip/lots of hotel nights.. I need to rent an RV or something!

As for NCC crits, I've never done one - too scared, so far! Maybe I'll work up the nerve one day. But the 1/2/3's at Boise might just be the step down I would be competitive in.

Wow... like @hack said, isn't that the same as failing??

mattm

Assuming it's the same UT guy, guess he didn't in fact get DQ'd..

https://www.usacycling.org/results/?permit=2016-63

gsteinb

fortunately it is indeed a fail, and two year suspension.

otherwise guys like this, who skip out on a test, would still be racing

TheKillerPenguin

When did Lou Ferrigno start racing bikes?

hack

I've got to assume San Rafael is close-ish to an NCC race in terms of field power and race intensity?