Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Pacing strategy to PR a Climb?

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Pacing strategy to PR a Climb?

Old 01-19-22, 10:17 AM
  #51  
Senior Member
 
woodcraft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 6,016
Likes: 0
Liked 923 Times in 569 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
It's not my reasoning. It's just real physics. But it doesn't imply that you can go full gas on the steeps and then cruise on the flatter sections. The difference in power might be quite subtle depending on the gradients involved. If you put a link to your Strava segment I'll run it through BestBikeSplit for you. I can guarantee the fastest solution will involve higher power targets on the steeper sections.

Yeah, I guess that's me misinterpreting the data.

The snapshot in question: https://www.strava.com/segments/7631...U5ODQ3Nzk0Ng==
woodcraft is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 10:18 AM
  #52  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,528

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Liked 8,776 Times in 4,134 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
It's still not that simple, if you're pushing yourself to the limit. If you're capable of doubling your power on the 500 ft. steep section, you should be able to more than double your power on the 500 ft. less steep section, because you don't have to sustain the power for as long.
For an effort like this, where you're riding at/near your sustainable threshold for the duration, doubling your power on any section is only going to be a gain if you can get back to your previous effort level quickly. If the bump in power requires a significant phase of recovery, it's probably going to be a net loss.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 10:51 AM
  #53  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 4,083
Liked 2,097 Times in 1,314 Posts
Originally Posted by UniChris
I'm "ignoring" nothing - I already recognized that point last night, and mentioned such in posts:



To be correct I should have said "improvement" instead of "gain"
Apologies, I misunderstood what you were saying below from post #45., This is how I read it, you don't see aero drag is significant at 8-10mph. The aero drag difference between 8 mph and 12 mph is around 35 watts (sitting up) and even from 6 to 9 mph, the aero penalty is already 13 watts. Anytime you are expending more than your threshold power, it matters.

But in the realm where I'm riding the air resistance increase if speeding up 6-7 (faster steep) vs 8-9 mph (faster shallow) is not yet a big deal.

For the guy who holds the KOM with an average of maybe 14 mph or so (which might vary well be 10 on the steep and 18 on the shallow) then it could matter.
GhostRider62 is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 11:28 AM
  #54  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Liked 393 Times in 282 Posts
Originally Posted by GhostRider62
The aero drag difference between 8 mph and 12 mph is around 35 watts (sitting up) and even from 6 to 9 mph, the aero penalty is already 13 watts. Anytime you are expending more than your threshold power, it matters.
I pointed out that those factors could well matter to the KOM holder, but I'm not contemplating such differences. Doing the shallower slope at 9 mph vs 8 isn't going to be much more of an increase in wind penalty than doing the slower part at 7 vs 6 - yes it's a trend that absolutely blows up at high speeds, but these are tiny steps where it's not yet that steep a curve.

But basic timing still makes riding the slower part a bit faster more advantageous than riding the faster part a bit faster - it's just the air resistance argument that's not really relevant in the regime where I'm riding it.
UniChris is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 11:38 AM
  #55  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 6,375

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Liked 8,099 Times in 3,219 Posts
Originally Posted by Eric F
For an effort like this, where you're riding at/near your sustainable threshold for the duration, doubling your power on any section is only going to be a gain if you can get back to your previous effort level quickly. If the bump in power requires a significant phase of recovery, it's probably going to be a net loss.
Yep. It's not as simple as "should I double my power on this section, or double my power on that section?"
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 11:44 AM
  #56  
Habitual User
 
Eric F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Altadena, CA
Posts: 8,528

Bikes: 2023 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2018 Trek Procaliber 9.9 RSL, 2018 Storck Fascenario.3 Platinum, 2003 Time VX Special Pro, 2001 Colnago VIP, 1999 Trek 9900 singlespeed, 1977 Nishiki ONP

Liked 8,776 Times in 4,134 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
Yep. It's not as simple as "should I double my power on this section, or double my power on that section?"
Agreed. A big part of getting the most out of this kind of effort is knowing what your body is capable of, and how it reacts to various effort levels.
__________________
"Swedish fish. They're protein shaped." - livedarklions
Eric F is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 06:38 PM
  #57  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Liked 393 Times in 282 Posts
Bounced back from yesterday's bike embarrassment to climb it this afternoon on the unicycle a second slower than Sunday's time. What's kind of funny was Sunday I was sure I'd hit the PR, and today I was sure I was slow, but they were only a second apart. Granted, I did take advantage of how it levels out in the last few dozen yards at the end to bring my speed back up in the last little stretch to where I now know the segment actually ends, vs usually riding that bit as dead as I feel.

Definitely left something in the tank as I continued north and climbed another hill, that's slightly shorter but a much more consistent grade without the steep final cone; ironically that one only ever felt like work not the challenge its raw numbers would suggest. My conclusion is that 5, 6, 7% is just about taking it slow, while 8-10% is where I hit "make or break" challenge on the unicycle. On the bike of course that and more are rideable, if I take them slowly enough. Turns out though that I've never taken that second major hill in one go without stop, so all the stats are bogus. Where I usually stopped is well within the segment, but even where I stopped today that I thought was short of it is, too. Now that I know where that segment really starts, next time I'll have to take it straight.

Waiting for the next above freezing day...

Last edited by UniChris; 01-19-22 at 06:50 PM.
UniChris is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 06:54 PM
  #58  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 9,406
Liked 5,524 Times in 3,407 Posts
Originally Posted by woodcraft
Yeah, I guess that's me misinterpreting the data.

The snapshot in question: https://www.strava.com/segments/7631...U5ODQ3Nzk0Ng==
Here's a link to a BBS Power Plan for this segment (note that the start and end points may be slightly different as I quickly cropped it from the whole route)

https://www.bestbikesplit.com/public/202609

For me riding this segment at threshold (IF =1 @ 283W FTP), it suggests 248W on the initial shallow part, 312W on the first steep section, 235W where it flattens out slightly, back up to 312W for the next steep part and then tailing off down to 176W as it flattens at the top.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 01-19-22, 09:43 PM
  #59  
Senior Member
 
50PlusCycling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 1,236
Liked 941 Times in 470 Posts
What is your definition of "appropriate speed?* I spent a summer competing in Europe as part of a minor cycling team, and being the only non-Spaniard, and the only rider over 60kg, I was the designated sprinter. My "appropriate" speed was whatever it took to get over the mountains without dying and/or falling outside the elimination time. For my teammates the appropriate time was a good deal shorter.
50PlusCycling is offline  
Likes For 50PlusCycling:

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

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