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!

"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 09-27-18, 09:06 AM
  #8451  
MDcatV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,840
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
i think hard efforts during warmup routines are more placebo than anything else. same with openers on the day before a race.
MDcatV is offline  
Old 10-03-18, 03:34 PM
  #8452  
arai_speed
Senior Member
 
arai_speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Cali Caliente
Posts: 94

Bikes: Yes

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I normally set my FTP values (quarterly) by doing a 20 effort up a local hill. Close by, repeatable, etc.

I did one yesterday (10/2) and maintained 290 watts for 20 mins. 290x.95 = 275w FTP

While reviewing my power curve I noticed I had a higher 20 min value from a crit I did on Sunday (9/30) which listed 306w for 20 mins. 306x.95 = 290w FTP

The question now is which # should I use for my FTP? The race driven one or the repeatable effort one?

Thinking back to my most recent test, I'm not sure I could have held 290 watts for another 40 minutes...

Looking forward to your feedback.
arai_speed is offline  
Old 10-03-18, 03:42 PM
  #8453  
TheKillerPenguin
Nonsense
 
TheKillerPenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 13,559

Bikes: Affirmative

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
is that crit effort 306AP or NP? If NP, ignore it for setting your ftp, and use it for bragging to your bros.
TheKillerPenguin is offline  
Old 10-03-18, 04:30 PM
  #8454  
arai_speed
Senior Member
 
arai_speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Cali Caliente
Posts: 94

Bikes: Yes

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TheKillerPenguin View Post
is that crit effort 306AP or NP? If NP, ignore it for setting your ftp, and use it for bragging to your bros.
AP. I was surprised by that too.
arai_speed is offline  
Old 10-03-18, 04:51 PM
  #8455  
TheKillerPenguin
Nonsense
 
TheKillerPenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 13,559

Bikes: Affirmative

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Yeah, I mean if you're used to doing the 20min *.95 method and that's your best one as of recent I'd use it just to remain consistent with how you're measuring your FTP over time.
TheKillerPenguin is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 09:55 AM
  #8456  
ancker
W**** B*
 
ancker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Central IL (Chambana)
Posts: 976

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Your FTP is not your best 20m AP.
Most/all of the 20m FTP tests are designed to pre-fatigue you in a way such that the 20m power times a multiplier closely resembles your max 60m power.

Edit: Stick with your previous hill method (though probably not ideal). A random 20m best should/will always be higher than a "test" that is meant to mimic a 60m effort.

Last edited by ancker; 10-04-18 at 09:56 AM. Reason: More stuff, yo.
ancker is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 10:08 AM
  #8457  
TheKillerPenguin
Nonsense
 
TheKillerPenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 13,559

Bikes: Affirmative

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Well, he's doing the 20min * .95 method and it doesn't sound like he does the pre-fatigue effort, which I think implies he's red lining it for 20min rather than pacing it as if he intended to hold it for an hour. That being the case I think taking the best recent 20min power makes sense.
TheKillerPenguin is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 01:11 PM
  #8458  
arai_speed
Senior Member
 
arai_speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Cali Caliente
Posts: 94

Bikes: Yes

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks for the feedback.


I can definitely see the value, both from a historical and a repeatability stand point to using my non-ideal 20 hill test * .95 (what is ideal?)


The reason why I asked is because I train to race, and if I'm getting higher numbers from a race event, then shouldn't I use those numbers instead?


It would seem that's what I need to replicate (or try to) in my training. Granted, it's only a 15 watt difference, but in the world of marginal gains this one stuck out....
arai_speed is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 01:19 PM
  #8459  
cmh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
You are only using the FTP number to set target ranges for training intervals, right? So ask the question, if those targets were ~15W higher would you be able to complete the intervals or would you blow up and go home early? If you don't know the answer, then go try it for a week at the higher number. The most important thing is to not lose any sleep over it .
cmh is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 01:19 PM
  #8460  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 697

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 321 Post(s)
Liked 16 Times in 10 Posts
I'm cheap and ended up putting the formulas into Excel successfully for CTL/ATL/TSB. I went back as far as I could stand to fill in cells. I'm seeing upper 40's CTL, mid 50's ATL, and TSB's routinely in the -10 to +10 range.

I'm time crunched, so don't get the stress input of longer/easier rides.

I just feel like the whole thing is a bit disappointing and leading me to believe I wouldn't pay for TP because it feels like it belies my actual fitness level. They have charts for CTL/TSS for different cat racing, and I barely meet the 4/5 targets.

However, my power and repeat-ability in the last couple months means I'm dropping the racer boys that show up to the hammer ride. Not just dropping the A-groupies.

But my CTL and weekly TSS you'd think I couldn't finish a metric century or hang on the hammer ride at all.

It feels like that part of the model doesn't take well into account time spent per zone. I'd almost like to know my current CTL/ATL/TSB per each zone. Like split the TSS score by zone.

If you're too positive for too long in your power-intervals zone, might not do well in a RR or crit. Trending positive for too long in Z1/Z2 then don't expect to enjoy a hilly century ride.

Maybe I'm missing something here.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 02:26 PM
  #8461  
ancker
W**** B*
 
ancker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Central IL (Chambana)
Posts: 976

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by arai_speed View Post
Thanks for the feedback.
I can definitely see the value, both from a historical and a repeatability stand point to using my non-ideal 20 hill test * .95 (what is ideal?)
The reason why I asked is because I train to race, and if I'm getting higher numbers from a race event, then shouldn't I use those numbers instead?
It would seem that's what I need to replicate (or try to) in my training. Granted, it's only a 15 watt difference, but in the world of marginal gains this one stuck out....
1) If you're using a plan that is uses constructed workouts based on an FTP that was assumed to be derived via a specific FTP test, you really should be doing the prescribed test so that your targets are as expected. That's what I would consider "ideal".

2) We all train to race/perform. The difference isn't that your 20m numbers from a race are bad or should be ignored, it's that they don't represent what a 20m FTP represents. You can't just take your best 20m power, multiply by 0.95 (or is it 0.94, 0.98, etc) and assume that is your FTP. Similarly, you can't just look at two 8m intervals during a race and derive FTP from that, even though a 2x8m FTP test exists. The point is that the tests are designed to put you in a place to where the results closely match your absolute best 60m power. Any given 20m power best during a race *should* be higher than your existing FTP, because well, 20m is shorter than 60m. So your 20m power should be higher than your 60m power.

2a) If your 60m power from a race is higher than your FTP, I would definitely consider adjusting your FTP up to match.

3) If you want to see your true FTP, do a nice warmup, then do a 60m maximal effort. That will give you your true maximal 60m power, and thus your true FTP. It's really hard to do this, hence the plethora of shorter testing protocols.

4) All that said, I agree with cmh, bump your FTP for a week and see if you can complete your workouts. Too easy? Bump it another 5w and try another week. Too hard, drop it 5w. Try again. Repeat.

5) Marginal gains don't exist.
ancker is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 02:45 PM
  #8462  
ancker
W**** B*
 
ancker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Central IL (Chambana)
Posts: 976

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by burnthesheep View Post
I'm cheap and ended up putting the formulas into Excel successfully for CTL/ATL/TSB. I went back as far as I could stand to fill in cells. I'm seeing upper 40's CTL, mid 50's ATL, and TSB's routinely in the -10 to +10 range.
I'm time crunched, so don't get the stress input of longer/easier rides.
I just feel like the whole thing is a bit disappointing and leading me to believe I wouldn't pay for TP because it feels like it belies my actual fitness level. They have charts for CTL/TSS for different cat racing, and I barely meet the 4/5 targets.
However, my power and repeat-ability in the last couple months means I'm dropping the racer boys that show up to the hammer ride. Not just dropping the A-groupies.
But my CTL and weekly TSS you'd think I couldn't finish a metric century or hang on the hammer ride at all.
It feels like that part of the model doesn't take well into account time spent per zone. I'd almost like to know my current CTL/ATL/TSB per each zone. Like split the TSS score by zone.
If you're too positive for too long in your power-intervals zone, might not do well in a RR or crit. Trending positive for too long in Z1/Z2 then don't expect to enjoy a hilly century ride.
Maybe I'm missing something here.
CTL is exactly that. Chronic training load. It is _not_ a measure of fitness. You can be super fit and fast with low CTL (2-3 intense, but short workouts a week) and super slow with very high CTL (countless hours at Z2/Z3 amassing huge TSS/week). And remember that TSS is a function of FTP. So it takes substantially more work (kJ) to generate the same TSS as your FTP increases.

The scale on TP is stupid. Ignore it. I sort of think it's artificially inflated to motivate you or something. You don't need to be 5W/kg to be a competitive Cat 3....

The second part of your post is supposed to be factored in. The algorithm weighs higher percentages of your FTP more so that you generate more TSS the closer you get (and beyond) your FTP. It probably doesn't weight them enough though.
ancker is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 02:59 PM
  #8463  
Hermes 
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: La Jolla, CA
Posts: 11,130

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 281 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 508 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 12 Posts
I am not sure how many here have sat around with a coach and other racers and discussed FTP and testing protocols. To say the least, everyone has an opinion and we all agreed that we can generate different FTP results depending on the course and equipment. My FTP is the highest climbing a constant grade on the hoods. Flat to rolling in the drops generates a different FTP as well as on the time trial bike. The trainer is another result and the track different again.

Power meters have strength and weaknesses as well as head units. IMO, most power meters and 1 second sampling work well for constant climbing power. In a crit with lots of acceleration and fast high torque situations, 1 second sampling seems too slow and transient response of most PMs except for maybe the SRM scientific poor.

My FTP can vary 10% across different technology modalities. However, if I am told to do an FTP test, being human, I am going to choose a nice steady 4 to 5% grade on my road bike riding on the hoods where I can shoot the lights out of the number. Sadly, that number should be highly discounted to convert to an hour equivalent flat to rolling on my TT bike.
Hermes is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 03:10 PM
  #8464  
jsk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 605

Bikes: Trek Madone, Blue Triad SL, Dixie Flyer BTB

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by arai_speed View Post
I normally set my FTP values (quarterly) by doing a 20 effort up a local hill. Close by, repeatable, etc.

I did one yesterday (10/2) and maintained 290 watts for 20 mins. 290x.95 = 275w FTP

While reviewing my power curve I noticed I had a higher 20 min value from a crit I did on Sunday (9/30) which listed 306w for 20 mins. 306x.95 = 290w FTP

The question now is which # should I use for my FTP? The race driven one or the repeatable effort one?

Thinking back to my most recent test, I'm not sure I could have held 290 watts for another 40 minutes...

Looking forward to your feedback.
The point of FTP is to provide a field estimate of MLSS, aka lactate threshold. So it should be determined from an evenly paced effort. Unless you were riding a steady pace in a breakaway, the crit is almost certainly not a good estimate for FTP. A typical crit has surges intermixed with easier pacing, even coasting/soft-pedaling. So it's not going to a good approximation of a steady-state effort and shouldn't be used to estimate FTP.
jsk is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 03:15 PM
  #8465  
TheKillerPenguin
Nonsense
 
TheKillerPenguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Vagabond
Posts: 13,559

Bikes: Affirmative

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 695 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I guess I don't know of anyone that can put out a higher max 20min effort in a peaky crit type situation than they can steady state on an ideal hill. If anything I'd assume it indicates his actual ideal hill 20min max is higher than 306. Maybe @arai_speed should go out and try for that 306 number for 20min and see if it is doable in training?
TheKillerPenguin is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 03:39 PM
  #8466  
Hermes 
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: La Jolla, CA
Posts: 11,130

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 281 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 508 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Originally Posted by TheKillerPenguin View Post
I guess I don't know of anyone that can put out a higher max 20min effort in a peaky crit type situation than they can steady state on an ideal hill. If anything I'd assume it indicates his actual ideal hill 20min max is higher than 306. Maybe @arai_speed should go out and try for that 306 number for 20min and see if it is doable in training?
Word.

I am not a big testing guy but do as I am told. I just ride these things. But, if I had his 306 watt 20 minute ideal climb number and felt like I could have kept going at that rate for another 40 minutes (even if that assumption turned out not to be true), I would take the 306 out for spin and see if I could do workouts based on that number. If not adjust it downward.
Hermes is offline  
Old 10-04-18, 05:52 PM
  #8467  
arai_speed
Senior Member
 
arai_speed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Cali Caliente
Posts: 94

Bikes: Yes

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks ya'll

I'll give the 306 number a shot. Training is testing...testing is training
arai_speed is offline  
Old 10-30-18, 12:28 PM
  #8468  
ancker
W**** B*
 
ancker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Central IL (Chambana)
Posts: 976

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
So got a nifty email from my Stages Dash/Link account saying my (second hand, pretty old) Quarq Riken battery is low. Neat.
Went to replace battery but could not get battery cap off. So I used a little persuasion....

Unfortunately the cap is fused or something and is *not* coming off. During my 'persuasion" the whole battery housing rotated by about 30 degrees.
It now won't wake up. I assume it's just dead, but does anyone know of a place to source replacement housings? I might try some soldering iron work to salvage it for my trainer bike.

Edit: I just snagged a "for parts" spider off ebay. I'll try to document my quarq surgery.

Last edited by ancker; 10-30-18 at 01:22 PM. Reason: new data!
ancker is offline  
Old 11-02-18, 06:49 PM
  #8469  
ancker
W**** B*
 
ancker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Central IL (Chambana)
Posts: 976

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Update for those interested. This turned out to be much less eventful than I thought it would be.

1) I had to dremel the battery cap off. No idea why it was so fused.
2) The battery compartment is held on by a small allen screw.
- The screw provides the negative terminal connection to the internal electronics.
- The outer compartment, when screwed down fully, provides the positive terminal connection. (This is important, I had it on but the quarq was still dead, a 1/4 turn more of the allen screw and she came back to life.)
3) I had to dremel the old little allen screw as the allen head stripped easily for some reason. Luckily the threads in the quarq body were still good.

So end of the day, replacing a busted/stuck battery compartment on a RIKEN is relatively easy, provided the threads in the body itself are still good.
ancker is offline  
Old 11-03-18, 08:33 AM
  #8470  
ntnyln
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Columbia, MD
Posts: 186
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 44 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ancker View Post
Quarq Stuff.
Nice work on the surgery. Just a heads up, the one and only issue I've ever had with my Quarq's is when I messed with the battery casing. If it spins at all, your data will be inconsistent/wrong. After fussing with mine for a while and getting beyond frustrated, I ended up calling Quarq and then sending it back to get fixed. Never had another problem.
ntnyln is offline  
Old 11-03-18, 12:30 PM
  #8471  
ancker
W**** B*
 
ancker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Central IL (Chambana)
Posts: 976

Bikes: Several

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ntnyln View Post
Nice work on the surgery. Just a heads up, the one and only issue I've ever had with my Quarq's is when I messed with the battery casing. If it spins at all, your data will be inconsistent/wrong. After fussing with mine for a while and getting beyond frustrated, I ended up calling Quarq and then sending it back to get fixed. Never had another problem.
Hopefully I don't see that with mine. I don't see how the battery compartment could affect readings. It's not exactly near the strain gauges.
I'll report back if I have similar issues. A the Zero Offset was within a handful of the last time it Zeroed before the surgery. I figured that was a good sign.
ancker is offline  
Old 12-09-18, 01:02 PM
  #8472  
Racer Ex 
Resident Alien
 
Racer Ex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Location, location.
Posts: 13,083
Mentioned: 154 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 346 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by burnthesheep View Post
I'm cheap and ended up putting the formulas into Excel successfully for CTL/ATL/TSB. I went back as far as I could stand to fill in cells. I'm seeing upper 40's CTL, mid 50's ATL, and TSB's routinely in the -10 to +10 range.

I'm time crunched, so don't get the stress input of longer/easier rides.

I just feel like the whole thing is a bit disappointing and leading me to believe I wouldn't pay for TP because it feels like it belies my actual fitness level. They have charts for CTL/TSS for different cat racing, and I barely meet the 4/5 targets.

However, my power and repeat-ability in the last couple months means I'm dropping the racer boys that show up to the hammer ride. Not just dropping the A-groupies.

But my CTL and weekly TSS you'd think I couldn't finish a metric century or hang on the hammer ride at all.

It feels like that part of the model doesn't take well into account time spent per zone. I'd almost like to know my current CTL/ATL/TSB per each zone. Like split the TSS score by zone.

If you're too positive for too long in your power-intervals zone, might not do well in a RR or crit. Trending positive for too long in Z1/Z2 then don't expect to enjoy a hilly century ride.

Maybe I'm missing something here.
All the analytical software(s) out there are based on "one size fits all" algorithms. Two words: human variability. They also have a tremendous number of holes in them, where they fail to take different affecting circumstances into account. It's wise to look at those metrics in the context of the person and training phase, and as the end product, not the goal.
Racer Ex is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.