Training Plan Deconstruction (AKA Everything I Need to Know About Training I...
#101
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,628
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3920 Post(s)
Liked 1,991 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Not sure if I agree. I can "hold" LTHR for 45+mins in January just like I can "hold" LTHR for 45+ in Sept when race season starts even though my CTL is half in January. The power at LTHR is about 50W difference though. Even when you look at a power based PMC, it doesn't inform you of your fitness, it informs you on how much sustainable training you can endure. Regular testing at different intervals are still necessary to determine your readiness, and to assess whether you can sustain the power necessary to stay with a group or make time over a climb etc. My CTL generally decays over the months during the race season even though I generally get faster through periodization of training for specificity. I still use the PMC, but I don't think a HR or power based PMC informs you much about your actual performance capability which rubiksoval is alluding to
We're different people training for different objectives. Monitoring our progress toward those objectives will be different. A few years ago, I could manage a 1 hour over-under paceline with 10,000' in my legs. Can't do that anymore, but the objective is still dropping everyone I can in the last 30 miles..My testing consists of staying with the group and making time over difficult climbs.
All that said, I would define fitness by what you discard: ability to take on a large volume of sustainable training. I went to a talk by a highly regarded long distance racer many years ago. She said, "Distance equals strength." IME she was correct. One of the strongest riders I've ever ridden with did 30,000 miles/year for a couple years. He can still beat most folks up big climbs with his 5-year old daughter asleep in the stoker seat.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#102
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#103
Version 7.0
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,178
Bikes: Too Many
Mentioned: 297 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1367 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,492 Posts
@redlude87. I do not think he has any results, relevant credentials or success palmeres. If he did, he would post them just to shut people up. I think it is as simple as what he has stated. His hobby is analyzing training protocols. His anecdotal evidence based upon what software apps and platforms he has tried is that they are not worth the money. Free training stuff is better. As you point out, his training protocol is super simple.
He posts up an idea / protocol and through half baked crowd sourcing, he gets feebback and revises his oringinal post. So this is not a discussion about training per se but a tool for him to refine his idea.
He posts up an idea / protocol and through half baked crowd sourcing, he gets feebback and revises his oringinal post. So this is not a discussion about training per se but a tool for him to refine his idea.
#104
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
Well you're just better than I! I sure can't do HR work in January that I can do in June. My HR based weekly TSS score gradually goes up. I'm still recovering from an illness last summer, so on our last Sunday group ride I was able to hold LTHR for 35 minutes total, though only ~10 minutes at a time. My legs were totally trashed with a hrTSS of only 155.
We're different people training for different objectives. Monitoring our progress toward those objectives will be different. A few years ago, I could manage a 1 hour over-under paceline with 10,000' in my legs. Can't do that anymore, but the objective is still dropping everyone I can in the last 30 miles..My testing consists of staying with the group and making time over difficult climbs.
All that said, I would define fitness by what you discard: ability to take on a large volume of sustainable training. I went to a talk by a highly regarded long distance racer many years ago. She said, "Distance equals strength." IME she was correct. One of the strongest riders I've ever ridden with did 30,000 miles/year for a couple years. He can still beat most folks up big climbs with his 5-year old daughter asleep in the stoker seat.
We're different people training for different objectives. Monitoring our progress toward those objectives will be different. A few years ago, I could manage a 1 hour over-under paceline with 10,000' in my legs. Can't do that anymore, but the objective is still dropping everyone I can in the last 30 miles..My testing consists of staying with the group and making time over difficult climbs.
All that said, I would define fitness by what you discard: ability to take on a large volume of sustainable training. I went to a talk by a highly regarded long distance racer many years ago. She said, "Distance equals strength." IME she was correct. One of the strongest riders I've ever ridden with did 30,000 miles/year for a couple years. He can still beat most folks up big climbs with his 5-year old daughter asleep in the stoker seat.
#105
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#107
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
You don't have an approach, bro. That's what the same 6 people keep telling you. For some reason you keep playing the "I suck at communication" card, though. Yes. We know. And at understanding training and performance. All of it.
Yet you continue on...
Yet you continue on...
#108
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,628
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3920 Post(s)
Liked 1,991 Times
in
1,417 Posts
What stops you from being able to hold LTHR? By definition its a proxy for physiological response so it should be achievable year round. I dont' think this is something special I can do, most people that do FTP tests year round don't note any significant changes in LTHR throughout the season even if FTP varies greatly. Even when I pace incorrectly for an FTP test and end up blowing up towards the end the HR still sits near my LTHR
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#109
Has a magic bike
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,590
Bikes: 2018 Scott Spark, 2015 Fuji Norcom Straight, 2014 BMC GF01, 2013 Trek Madone
Mentioned: 699 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4456 Post(s)
Liked 425 Times
in
157 Posts
What stops you from being able to hold LTHR? By definition its a proxy for physiological response so it should be achievable year round. I dont' think this is something special I can do, most people that do FTP tests year round don't note any significant changes in LTHR throughout the season even if FTP varies greatly. Even when I pace incorrectly for an FTP test and end up blowing up towards the end the HR still sits near my LTHR
No matter where my FTP is sitting my LTHR is the same. My understanding is that you can train to produce better power at LT but that a given persons heart rate at LT is pretty much fixed (although it declines with aging).
Definitely if I’m really fit, my HR will be lower at a given power output, but that’s just because my FTP is up.
There are caveats to interpreting the HR data and the biggest one for me is ambient temp. My HR will be lower for shorter intervals if I’m doing the work in the cold, and higher if I’m doing the work in the heat. Altitude is also a factor, HR is depressed at high altitude. Caffeine raises HR, as does adrenaline/ stress and dehydration.
But for non-hot temps and long efforts, my LTHR does not vary, year round.
I use HR a lot in my post race analysis. I know what my HR should be for a well-executed TT. If my power is great but my HR was below LTHR, I conclude I could’ve tried harder. Interpreting that of course in light of the variables I know will affect my HR.
#110
Version 7.0
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,178
Bikes: Too Many
Mentioned: 297 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1367 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,492 Posts
@redlude97 @Heathpack @Carbonfiberboy Here is material provided by Lactate.com. They sell lactate measuring meters so they would like us to believe that lactate threshold is the holy grail or endurance sports - and maybe it is. Lactate threshold - What is it? It's importance. How to test for the LT, how to train the LT It's history We all need lactate meters....right.
They have some good citations to articles that you may be interested in.
They have some good citations to articles that you may be interested in.
#111
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,914
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1872 Post(s)
Liked 671 Times
in
512 Posts
Yeah I suck at communication which is why I need the interactivity of a forum. Your summary is spot on and also your comments about the OP. I see know how that was indeed confusing. I see your post as constructive. Thank you for that. The way my thinking was going in the OP was in two parts. The "what I learned in the kitchen" or whatever part was sincere because I'm binge-ing a cooking podcast and the parallels with training are strong. Anyway the intention of the OP is to outline this first and then to apply these concepts to a generic training plan. It would probably make a lot more sense if I just titled it something like "one way to add load monitoring to your training plan" or something like that and then just explain the how's and why's as I describe what a typical training plan does.
Oh yeah and your "from there it's a question of" is spot on. So, you can take a bottom-up approach where you figure out the nuts and bolts and then expand into the overall phasing, etc. or, and what I say in this thread is, you can lean on your training plan to do the overall outline part but then fiddle a bit with the details to better understand, monitor and adjust the workouts, microcycle and progression as needed for your unique abilities.
Oh yeah and your "from there it's a question of" is spot on. So, you can take a bottom-up approach where you figure out the nuts and bolts and then expand into the overall phasing, etc. or, and what I say in this thread is, you can lean on your training plan to do the overall outline part but then fiddle a bit with the details to better understand, monitor and adjust the workouts, microcycle and progression as needed for your unique abilities.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...VTU4oofxXEA1-5
might help, too). Your work has to be crystal clear to everyone with a reason to have interest (so not the fifth-graders among us!) in planning and applying their own training plan.
Don't explain the same thing several times. Do it once, correctly. Repetition can cause confusion. When you do choose a point to clarify, don't just repeat what you said before.
How about trying a simple title and topic, such as: "Simplify your understanding of training plans to make one you'd like to follow." Or, "Better Training Plans through Simplicity." If
Your introduction and closing were kinda nice but too long - short and sweet if it's not core content. You want people sitting back and saying "he's a danged genius!" not ""nice closing, I feel like my hand has been shaked, but ... what did he teach me?"
Don't use words that have precise meanings outside their standard meanings unless their connotative or slang-based meanings are also crystal-clear. I'm here commenting on the thing about the word "random." Likewise "generic" in your phrase "Generic structured training plan."
Finally, when you use abbreviations in an article, the first time you want to use it, spell it out first, like this: "We use too many TLA's in our writing." This is wrong, because you have no clue how the reader understands "TLA." Should be, "We use too many three-letter acronyms (TLA) in our work." After that, use TLA without spelling it out.
If an analogy takes more than one line of text, there's too much of it. Closings rarely need to be longer than two lines, 20 or so words.
In all my technical writing (a lot of it in 40 years as an engineer), I've found examples have to be perfect. If one of my examples has loose ends, I look like I don't give a rats ass about whether my reader gets it. Some people will jump to the examples and only read them. If those are not good, my whole paper takes that reputation. My bad luck, those people are usually the seniors of the company.
So don't take any of this the wrong way. You clearly want to be understood, if you wrote it to more of a layperson's level without reducing the sophistication of your message, I might understand your point as well as Carbonfiberboy does. And we might be able to talk to each other intelligently about what I hope to do, and I could benefit from all that research and daydreaming you seem to have done on your topic. I'm not on this Forum to bust chops, I'm here to learn about training so I can get to my 60 mile with climbing event in September. If you can make use of any of my notes in this posting, I think I'll be helping us both.
#112
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,628
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3920 Post(s)
Liked 1,991 Times
in
1,417 Posts
@redlude97 @Heathpack @Carbonfiberboy Here is material provided by Lactate.com. They sell lactate measuring meters so they would like us to believe that lactate threshold is the holy grail or endurance sports - and maybe it is. Lactate threshold - What is it? It's importance. How to test for the LT, how to train the LT It's history We all need lactate meters....right.
They have some good citations to articles that you may be interested in.
They have some good citations to articles that you may be interested in.
An interesting thing noted in the article is that the HR difference between MLSS and well above MLSS is only a few beats. I try to be accurate within 1 or 2 beats to get best results.
So that's what you do - reduce lactate production and improve lactate processing. It's a fuel so treat it like one. It's a dangerous fuel, so limit its quantity.
On the economy of movement part of it. that too is a big part of my training. I've been devoting all my indoor riding time to that for the past few weeks.
most coaches pay more attention to aspects of economy of movement than anything else
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#113
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
That's from the bottom, like in the article. VO2max intervals are the usual way to pull it up from the top, but not too much, eh? I have learned to not do much VO2max work. Capacity rides where one does as much as possible close to MLSS and recovers by slowing as little as as possible to do so are excellent.
I got another 10 or watts on top of that by doing repeated bouts of work at ~8-10 minute power (118-120ish % FTP). Then that topped out as well. I haven't actually seen any gains in FTP by focusing on VO2 max intervals (~130% ftp for me). Surprisingly enough, I've also seen no gains in my 5 min power, which is what I most expected. Not that the work doesn't have its merit through specificity and sharpening, it just didn't do anything else for improving vo2 max or ftp once I was in shape.
I believe I've hit most of my limits up to ~45 minutes or so. I just don't think I have any more watts to gain and now each year seems about trying to get back to those levels to be successful. Improvements can certainly be made about producing those efforts at the end of longer and longer rides/races, but I don't road race much so that doesn't matter to me.
It's been interesting trying the different methodologies over the years. I feel like now I can work very simply and get back to race-shape pretty efficiently through a little pushing up and a little pulling up. Neuromuscular work has been the must useful and effective performance improvement I've been able to identify and change in the last four years using wko4. It's been the difference between not finishing pro crits and getting in the money.
#114
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 232 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
@Road Fan
Thanks for taking the time to write that up, my friend! I’m going to take all of that to heart and have a go! I’ve been attempting to write podcast scripts about all this but I’m such a divergent thinker it’s hard to settle on a topic flow. I’ll keep at it though and keep you posted. Thanks again!
Thanks for taking the time to write that up, my friend! I’m going to take all of that to heart and have a go! I’ve been attempting to write podcast scripts about all this but I’m such a divergent thinker it’s hard to settle on a topic flow. I’ll keep at it though and keep you posted. Thanks again!
#115
Version 7.0
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,178
Bikes: Too Many
Mentioned: 297 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1367 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,492 Posts
I am done being a lab rat for OP's crowd sourcing. But one last post here.
With respect to economy. In the lactate article, they discuss all aerobic sports including cycling. Swimming and running require more focus on economy than cycling per se. Swimming technique is very important and since water creates a lot of drag, body position in the water is crucial to generate more speed.
Cycling, we are locked into the pedals and posture is fixed. Having said that, poor cycling economy zap speed. I train my hardest efforts in the most efficient position to generate the most speed and I work on position and posture on the bike along with strength and adaptation on the bike.
The track is a proving ground for cycling economy. Speeds are higher and poor economy shows up immediately predominantly because we cannot change gears to offset leg speed issues. If a slight gap opens, I need max force instantly to close it especially if I am in a big gear. All we do at the track is pace line work. So we get really good at riding in a pace line at high speed and optimize our position, cadence and equipment. Otherwise, we quickly run out of aerobic capacity and strength to generate the speed to be competitive.
With respect to economy. In the lactate article, they discuss all aerobic sports including cycling. Swimming and running require more focus on economy than cycling per se. Swimming technique is very important and since water creates a lot of drag, body position in the water is crucial to generate more speed.
Cycling, we are locked into the pedals and posture is fixed. Having said that, poor cycling economy zap speed. I train my hardest efforts in the most efficient position to generate the most speed and I work on position and posture on the bike along with strength and adaptation on the bike.
The track is a proving ground for cycling economy. Speeds are higher and poor economy shows up immediately predominantly because we cannot change gears to offset leg speed issues. If a slight gap opens, I need max force instantly to close it especially if I am in a big gear. All we do at the track is pace line work. So we get really good at riding in a pace line at high speed and optimize our position, cadence and equipment. Otherwise, we quickly run out of aerobic capacity and strength to generate the speed to be competitive.
#116
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
@Road Fan
Thanks for taking the time to write that up, my friend! I’m going to take all of that to heart and have a go! I’ve been attempting to write podcast scripts about all this but I’m such a divergent thinker it’s hard to settle on a topic flow. I’ll keep at it though and keep you posted. Thanks again!
Thanks for taking the time to write that up, my friend! I’m going to take all of that to heart and have a go! I’ve been attempting to write podcast scripts about all this but I’m such a divergent thinker it’s hard to settle on a topic flow. I’ll keep at it though and keep you posted. Thanks again!
#117
Has a magic bike
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,590
Bikes: 2018 Scott Spark, 2015 Fuji Norcom Straight, 2014 BMC GF01, 2013 Trek Madone
Mentioned: 699 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4456 Post(s)
Liked 425 Times
in
157 Posts
@redlude97 @Heathpack @Carbonfiberboy Here is material provided by Lactate.com. They sell lactate measuring meters so they would like us to believe that lactate threshold is the holy grail or endurance sports - and maybe it is. Lactate threshold - What is it? It's importance. How to test for the LT, how to train the LT It's history We all need lactate meters....right.
They have some good citations to articles that you may be interested in.
They have some good citations to articles that you may be interested in.
Several things are implied by the discussion on this site:
1. It has been my impression since shortly after I started TTing that having a killer sprint is likely a disadvantage in TTs. I started to formulate this impression based on the sense that people I know who are good at crits tend to avoid TTs. Descriptions of the sensations they experience during a TT include a lot more descriptors of "misery" than I feel like I experience. Based on this website, the scientific articulation that I'd give to this impression is that crit racers with a good sprint likely have an anaerobic capacity that it too high for TTing. They generate way more lactate than a slow twitch-type does.
2. I have the sense that the comments I frequently read on BF that more training volume is essentially always better is not correct either. I'm not just thinking of big training volumes being unnecessary for very short events but also that it depends on the athlete. If you have an athlete who is almost all slow twitch, for example, might their Achilles heel not be anaerobic capacity? That athlete might be able to absorb big training volumes without over-training, but never really improve speed or performance because they are too fatigued to do workouts which improve anaerobic capacity which might be more relatively important for those athletes than a fast twitch or "mixed" twitch athlete.
3. This websites discusses the central role that a specific goal on a specific date plays in informing the training program. Its the concept that has been brought up infinite times in OP's various threads and something that most people posting here seem to inherently understand: the nature and timing of the goal essentially dictate the optimal training plan for a given athlete, and without an articulated goal, a training plan is at best "uninformed".
Thanks for the post, very interesting stuff. I almost want to buy the CD and a lactate meter and see if Ex wants to play around with it.
Last edited by Heathpack; 02-28-19 at 05:47 PM.
#118
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
I've been aware of this site for awhile now but this is the first I've taken the time to read it thoroughly. I have to say that their model makes inherent sense to me..
Several things are implied by the discussion on this site:
1. It has been my impression since shortly after I started TTing that having a killer sprint is likely a disadvantage in TTs. I started to formulate this impression based on the sense that people I know who are good at crits tend to avoid TTs. Descriptions of the sensations they experience during a TT include a lot more descriptors of "misery" than I feel like I experience. Based on this website, the scientific articulation that I'd give to this impression is that crit racers with a good sprint likely have an anaerobic capacity that it too high for TTing. They generate way more lactate than a slow twitch-type does.
2. I have the sense that the comments I frequently read on BF that more training volume is essentially always better is not correct either. I'm not just thinking of big training volumes being unnecessary for very short events but also that it depends on the athlete. If you have an athlete who is almost all slow twitch, for example, might their Achilles heel not be anaerobic capacity? That athlete might be able to absorb big training volumes without over-training, but never really improve speed or performance because they are too fatigued to do workouts which improve anaerobic capacity which might be more relatively important for those athletes than a fast twitch or "mixed" twitch athlete.
3. This websites discusses the central role that a specific goal on a specific date plays in informing the training program. Its the concept that has been brought up infinite times in OP's various threads and something that most people posting here seem to inherently understand: the nature and timing of the goal essentially dictate the optimal training plan for a given athlete, and without an articulated goal, a training plan is at nest "uninformed".
Thanks for the post, very interesting stuff. I almost want to buy the CD and a lactate meter and see if Ex wants to play around with it.
Several things are implied by the discussion on this site:
1. It has been my impression since shortly after I started TTing that having a killer sprint is likely a disadvantage in TTs. I started to formulate this impression based on the sense that people I know who are good at crits tend to avoid TTs. Descriptions of the sensations they experience during a TT include a lot more descriptors of "misery" than I feel like I experience. Based on this website, the scientific articulation that I'd give to this impression is that crit racers with a good sprint likely have an anaerobic capacity that it too high for TTing. They generate way more lactate than a slow twitch-type does.
2. I have the sense that the comments I frequently read on BF that more training volume is essentially always better is not correct either. I'm not just thinking of big training volumes being unnecessary for very short events but also that it depends on the athlete. If you have an athlete who is almost all slow twitch, for example, might their Achilles heel not be anaerobic capacity? That athlete might be able to absorb big training volumes without over-training, but never really improve speed or performance because they are too fatigued to do workouts which improve anaerobic capacity which might be more relatively important for those athletes than a fast twitch or "mixed" twitch athlete.
3. This websites discusses the central role that a specific goal on a specific date plays in informing the training program. Its the concept that has been brought up infinite times in OP's various threads and something that most people posting here seem to inherently understand: the nature and timing of the goal essentially dictate the optimal training plan for a given athlete, and without an articulated goal, a training plan is at nest "uninformed".
Thanks for the post, very interesting stuff. I almost want to buy the CD and a lactate meter and see if Ex wants to play around with it.
https://www.velonews.com/2019/02/tra...n-weber_483349
#119
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,628
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3920 Post(s)
Liked 1,991 Times
in
1,417 Posts
A few years back I increased FTP by about 10 watts over previous bests by doing a lot of "push-up" sweetspot ~85-90% FTP. But that had its limits. I got up to 3 hours continuous sweetspot at ~89% FTP or thereabouts. Didn't increase FTP any more than the initial gains i'd had from just working up to 75-90 minutes.
I got another 10 or watts on top of that by doing repeated bouts of work at ~8-10 minute power (118-120ish % FTP). Then that topped out as well. I haven't actually seen any gains in FTP by focusing on VO2 max intervals (~130% ftp for me). Surprisingly enough, I've also seen no gains in my 5 min power, which is what I most expected. Not that the work doesn't have its merit through specificity and sharpening, it just didn't do anything else for improving vo2 max or ftp once I was in shape.
I believe I've hit most of my limits up to ~45 minutes or so. I just don't think I have any more watts to gain and now each year seems about trying to get back to those levels to be successful. Improvements can certainly be made about producing those efforts at the end of longer and longer rides/races, but I don't road race much so that doesn't matter to me.
It's been interesting trying the different methodologies over the years. I feel like now I can work very simply and get back to race-shape pretty efficiently through a little pushing up and a little pulling up. Neuromuscular work has been the must useful and effective performance improvement I've been able to identify and change in the last four years using wko4. It's been the difference between not finishing pro crits and getting in the money.
I got another 10 or watts on top of that by doing repeated bouts of work at ~8-10 minute power (118-120ish % FTP). Then that topped out as well. I haven't actually seen any gains in FTP by focusing on VO2 max intervals (~130% ftp for me). Surprisingly enough, I've also seen no gains in my 5 min power, which is what I most expected. Not that the work doesn't have its merit through specificity and sharpening, it just didn't do anything else for improving vo2 max or ftp once I was in shape.
I believe I've hit most of my limits up to ~45 minutes or so. I just don't think I have any more watts to gain and now each year seems about trying to get back to those levels to be successful. Improvements can certainly be made about producing those efforts at the end of longer and longer rides/races, but I don't road race much so that doesn't matter to me.
It's been interesting trying the different methodologies over the years. I feel like now I can work very simply and get back to race-shape pretty efficiently through a little pushing up and a little pulling up. Neuromuscular work has been the must useful and effective performance improvement I've been able to identify and change in the last four years using wko4. It's been the difference between not finishing pro crits and getting in the money.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#120
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,628
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3920 Post(s)
Liked 1,991 Times
in
1,417 Posts
I am done being a lab rat for OP's crowd sourcing. But one last post here.
With respect to economy. In the lactate article, they discuss all aerobic sports including cycling. Swimming and running require more focus on economy than cycling per se. Swimming technique is very important and since water creates a lot of drag, body position in the water is crucial to generate more speed.
Cycling, we are locked into the pedals and posture is fixed. Having said that, poor cycling economy zap speed. I train my hardest efforts in the most efficient position to generate the most speed and I work on position and posture on the bike along with strength and adaptation on the bike.
The track is a proving ground for cycling economy. Speeds are higher and poor economy shows up immediately predominantly because we cannot change gears to offset leg speed issues. If a slight gap opens, I need max force instantly to close it especially if I am in a big gear. All we do at the track is pace line work. So we get really good at riding in a pace line at high speed and optimize our position, cadence and equipment. Otherwise, we quickly run out of aerobic capacity and strength to generate the speed to be competitive.
With respect to economy. In the lactate article, they discuss all aerobic sports including cycling. Swimming and running require more focus on economy than cycling per se. Swimming technique is very important and since water creates a lot of drag, body position in the water is crucial to generate more speed.
Cycling, we are locked into the pedals and posture is fixed. Having said that, poor cycling economy zap speed. I train my hardest efforts in the most efficient position to generate the most speed and I work on position and posture on the bike along with strength and adaptation on the bike.
The track is a proving ground for cycling economy. Speeds are higher and poor economy shows up immediately predominantly because we cannot change gears to offset leg speed issues. If a slight gap opens, I need max force instantly to close it especially if I am in a big gear. All we do at the track is pace line work. So we get really good at riding in a pace line at high speed and optimize our position, cadence and equipment. Otherwise, we quickly run out of aerobic capacity and strength to generate the speed to be competitive.
We are all crowd sourcing here, trying to learn from others. That's the whole point.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#121
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444
Bikes: bikes
Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times
in
711 Posts
So targeting that with a ton of seated 30 secs on /60 secs off at 500 watts +, and seated accelerations pushing 800-900 watts for 10-15 secs, etc,; anything to get my legs used to those efforts, especially seated, as it has so much less accumulated strain. These are higher cadence (100-115 rpm), higher power efforts that really mimic coming out of corners and getting up to speed as quickly and efficiently as possible. .
#122
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,628
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3920 Post(s)
Liked 1,991 Times
in
1,417 Posts
Not really maximal. More shorter, submaximal efforts, but tons and tons of them. So there's an aerobic component at times, but once I'm at a certain aerobic level it becomes more of an issue that after 75-90 minutes there's a "can-barely-get-out-of-the-saddle" fatigue. In WKO terms, it's a bunch of FRC stuff.. Most of the bigger crits have something like 100+ surges of 600+ watts. And within those surges specifically I'll typically need to do 13-15 minutes of accumulated time in between 350-550 watts, and then another 13-15 minutes of 550-750 watts. And then drop a few 1000 watt sprints in the last couple of minutes on top of all of that.
So targeting that with a ton of seated 30 secs on /60 secs off at 500 watts +, and seated accelerations pushing 800-900 watts for 10-15 secs, etc,; anything to get my legs used to those efforts, especially seated, as it has so much less accumulated strain. These are higher cadence (100-115 rpm), higher power efforts that really mimic coming out of corners and getting up to speed as quickly and efficiently as possible. .
So targeting that with a ton of seated 30 secs on /60 secs off at 500 watts +, and seated accelerations pushing 800-900 watts for 10-15 secs, etc,; anything to get my legs used to those efforts, especially seated, as it has so much less accumulated strain. These are higher cadence (100-115 rpm), higher power efforts that really mimic coming out of corners and getting up to speed as quickly and efficiently as possible. .
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#123
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,914
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1872 Post(s)
Liked 671 Times
in
512 Posts
@Road Fan
Thanks for taking the time to write that up, my friend! I’m going to take all of that to heart and have a go! I’ve been attempting to write podcast scripts about all this but I’m such a divergent thinker it’s hard to settle on a topic flow. I’ll keep at it though and keep you posted. Thanks again!
Thanks for taking the time to write that up, my friend! I’m going to take all of that to heart and have a go! I’ve been attempting to write podcast scripts about all this but I’m such a divergent thinker it’s hard to settle on a topic flow. I’ll keep at it though and keep you posted. Thanks again!
There's a lot to be said for being able to work through a complex, well-structured argument or presentation of a large idea. Attention span is not optional in life. Often the results of your work (or play) will be critical to you or to others. You will need to make sure that you are correct and your results are correct.
A lot of podcasts are not clear or well-sequenced - it's really frustrating and tiring to sit through them.
#124
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2236 Post(s)
Liked 1,315 Times
in
707 Posts
Indeed. Communicating is a constant skill to hone.
I'm consideted not bad at creating presentations but still run them by a select group for proofing and am often surprised by the stuff caught in feedback.
The biggest problem being adding too much matetial or complicated wording.
It's extra hard when we want the material to appear intelligent or ground breaking because we tend to sprinkle it too much with techno talk.
The better presentations capture attention or imagination but don't really relay technical data as such. That's what footnotes are for. They contain data but don't clutter the flow of conversation.
I'm consideted not bad at creating presentations but still run them by a select group for proofing and am often surprised by the stuff caught in feedback.
The biggest problem being adding too much matetial or complicated wording.
It's extra hard when we want the material to appear intelligent or ground breaking because we tend to sprinkle it too much with techno talk.
The better presentations capture attention or imagination but don't really relay technical data as such. That's what footnotes are for. They contain data but don't clutter the flow of conversation.
Last edited by Happy Feet; 03-06-19 at 02:00 PM.