Hi,

Ok, ive been reading up on power, and training etc today and ive come up with a possible work around that may or may not work, so im posting it hear to gather your thoughts.

At the moment I only have a hrm and sadly no plans this year to buy a power meter, but I still want a way of making sure im using the right intensity when doing interval training.

At the moment if im doing a 60min hr zone 3 tempo workout on the turbo, its taking approx 15min to get my heart rate into zone 3, so until its there I cannot judge how hard I should be pedalling. That 15min could be too high, or too low which is why its taking ages to get to zone 3, also for vo2max intervals, you cannot use heart rate as these are normally 4 - 6min long and heart rate is too slow. From my understanding heart rate is good for long rides, say 30min or longer but short intervals power is best.

So ive been thinking that the power community refer to levels as CP3, CP6, CP12, CP20, CP30, CP60, CP90 etc, and CP60 being your FTP.

So, my understanding (please correct me if im wrong) is CP60 is the highest power output you can maintain for 60min, and CP20 is the same but for 20min, CP3 is 3min and so on. If thats the case, if I ride max effort for 60min and record my average speed that speed would effectively be my CP60 speed, of FTS - Functional Threshold Speed?

Obviously this would only work on an indoor turbo training or rollers as there are too many variables outside to use speed, hills, wind, etc etc but when using a turbo it should be a good estimate shouldnt it?

If so, I could then use power zones, such as these https://www.trainingbible.com/joesblo...ing-zones.html replacing the power at CP60, with my average speed to work out approx speeds to achieve for each level of effort. Then when I do say a 20min interval I make sure im going at my CP20 speed?

With regular CP60 tests I could monitor my new speeds as I get fitter?

Does this sound right?

sounds like you're not completing a proper warm up.

If you look online, there are power curves posted for some trainers that plot mph vs. watts, so you can convert. Just keep in mind that your actual power output can change with tire pressure or trainer tension (depending on type). Also, unless your computer shows accurate speeds down to 10ths, you're not going to get very sensitive power estimates.

They say all models are wrong but some are useful---your power estimates are likely to be off, but at least you'll have a way to approximate power-based training.

Its mainly to get an approximate, I know its not accurate unless you have a power meter. I didnt know they posted power curves for turbos, I will see if mine has one. But room temp and tire pressures are generally constant.

Superdex - I normally do a 10min warm up, varing the intensity and cadence and I do get warmed up nicely but my heart always raises ALOT slower indoors on the turbo. Outdoors my heart will be in zone 3 within 5 min without a warmup, and me PE feels slow compared!!

Same for me on rollers. I think this is pretty common - probably nothing to worry too much about.

What does that tell you?. Unless your roads are inch thick in snow, you know where its at.

Mr Friel talks the talk, but why ain't he walking the walk? or why hasn't he walked the walk with his knowledge?. I went to this Uni, I went to that Uni, but in cycling, I have achieved nothing.

Thoughts???... Too harsh?.

Damn, there was a great quote from Louie Simmons, I'll try & find it & it was regarding why you shouldn't listen to "bookworms" who hadn't been there & done it. Fantastic, I'll try & find it. What I will say is, so many factors with regards to overall cycling performance. Balls of steel, dedication to cycling, the riders integrity etc far outweighing "CP60 being your FTP", or "FTS - Functional Threshold Speed". Maybe too Old Skool?. At the end of the day, just make sure your turning the cranks, train hard & "try to enjoy it".

Also, Speed = Power Gavin. Using speed instead of power???... Speed is power. "CP60, Zone 5, (90%-100% VO2 Max) etc etc. Your at maximum speed, maximum power.

Its over my head, I just enjoy it & train hard, lol...

You don't have to be that great at what you do to be a good coach in the same field. Different skill sets. The smartest athletes may not be the best in terms of physical gifts, but those are usually the guys who make good coaches. And,they still have the experience of participating in what they're coaching, they just weren't the best at it.

People who are naturally gifted in sports, and other fields, may have issues teaching people who aren't. It's likely they never had to conceptualize what they were doing to that degree.

I look at it like this. Every professional team including the soccer team I'm apart of has a "trainer" (different from the head coach/Manager). Now this trainer, he went to the local University, got the advanced sports science degree, researches all the websites etc. Now, I have a fast 40Yd dash, the quickest on the team. But, hes telling me how to run it, how to condition my body for it, what I should be doing, what I shouldn't & I ask him "What are you running in the 40" have you tested the methods & got great results personally???... Response; Never timed myself********************... I don't know if its just my single minded mentally that its my or the highway or if its just the alarm bells ringin' in my head.

What I'm saying is; I got my methods, they work & I've gone out & proved them through trial & error. Your telling me something else & you haven't proved a thing. No! No! I went to University.

This is from an old post in the power thread.

This was recovery ride on a trainer. Power is yellow, speed is blue.
The power output and settings (same bicycle gear, no adjustments in the trainer) were constant, yet the speed dropped during the first 25-30 minutes. I asked if somebody knew why.
A proposed explanation was that thru your workout, the trainer heats up and the materials expand, causing the resistance to increase, and the speed (recorded with a sensor in the rear wheel, in contact with the trainer) to drop.

You might want to keep this in mind if you want to use speed on the trainer as a surrogate for power.

Only assuming constant resistance.

Not necessarily as maximum power is often during acceleration, and maximum speed is achieved well after power has tapered off.

So someone's knowledge is meaningless unless they are the strongest/fastest at whatever they study? That's absurd.

Yes

Yes.

So your methods worked for you, that doesn't mean that different methods couldn't also work better. The methods that the coaches/trainers are pushing work and are proven through trial and error as well, on a much larger group of athletes than just you. You may have gotten by on natural talent but a good coach will be able to get even more out of you.

Clearly.

When I played basketball (HS & College) we had a word for players that 'knew it all' - 'Un-coachable'.
They plateaued while the rest of us surpassed.

What I'm saying is, When Friel himself wins a tour with his methods, or he imposes his methods on a eventual tour winner, there isn't much point me taking notice. You can follow his methods to the letter but you are not neccesarily going to go on & beat someone who isn't into the science & applies his methods compared to someone who only goes out & trains hard.

Um, you realize that most modern training is based on his methods, right? Charmichael (read: Armstrong) uses similar methods. Not everyone has the same potential or opportunuties, expecting someone to personally "win" to validate their methods is absurd on its face.

I am not saying that these training plans have to be followed to the letter or that a power meter is necessary to reach your potential, but the training concepts that they espouse are solid and time-tested. To believe that you are better than that and can't benefit from a coach's advice is nothing short of fail.

Especially when you take a step back and consider what we're looking for. We aren't looking for someone who is able to bring himself to his peak performance. We want someone who can bring another person to their full potential. That requires a much different skill set and the ability to do one does not necessarily translate to the other. To reinforce this, as far as I know, Max Testa has never ridden a bike. He certainly never competed.

So, by that rationale Lance, Ali, Tiger Woods, etc have all made horrendous coaching decisions because their coach didn't win? Brilliant logic there.

Also, Lance doesn't say STFU I don't need a coach I know how to win. He has a coach who knows how to make him win.

I guess I'm too old skool. Your blog for instance, hell no, although I wouldn't mind living in Cali.

I personally think science in cycling is a little overrated, certainly isn't the be all end all. Just ride & ride hard, keep dedicated (there is a small amount of method too my madness too), but graphs, charts, complex training regimes, not for me, too much too think about & when you come out of the other end, especially in a sport like cycling you will not have necessarily progressed over the old skool methods of Merxck's, Hinault etc...

Jusr because I write about it in excruciating detail on my blog does not make it complicated. The concepts are simple and it still boils down to "ride hard" but there is a method to when to ride hard and when to ride easy. I just "rode hard" the last few years and made gains but hit a plateau, and especially last year did too much too soon and burned out quickly.

And it if it makes you feel better; my coach can "walk the walk" as well as "talk the talk," as you put it, as he is a former protour rider.

I like the fact your coach has walked the walked. Lets say that when Lance Armstrong retires & he decides to get into coaching. Now Chris Carmichael is far more knowledgeable but the guy who I would look to straight away would be Lance, not just because of the name, but hes been there & done it. That is what I'm saying.

I also agree with you regarding riding hard all the time, hitting plateaus & burning out. Maybe that could have something to do with the Force-velocity curve relationship???... Not sure though.

I'd rather have Lance's coach As a coach than have Lance as a coach. That's the whole point. So what that Lance has "done it"? He did it with his coach's knowledge and direction. He may not fully understand why he did something a particular way, or how that can be adapted to different situations or athletes. Lance would know what works for him but he may not know how to apply that to you.

Bottom line is that the best person at something is not necessarily the best person to teach the same thing.

But I'm not entirely sure what you are arguing against here... Are you opposed to structured training in general, structured training coupled with performance monitoring (hear rate and/or power), structured training facilitated by a coach, or just structured training by a coach who isn't personally the most acomplished athlete?

Since you are so good that you can't imagine being coached by anyone lower than a tdf-winnng calibre rider, you must have a pretty long list of accomplishments yourself.

I guess I also have a respect issue.

I don't respect bookworms trying to make a name for themselves. Your basically planted on your arse all day.

Is that your opinion of Joe Friel, Hunter Allen, Andy Coggan, Chris Carmichael, etc.?