Turbo trainer - Power outputs

lochindaal

I am currently recovering from knee surgery and gradually building up on my turbo.

I have a tacx basic with power output (and I know it's not highly accurate) and I was wondering what a good sustainable power output figure is.

I am training for the etape this year and wanted to know what an average power output would be on a long sportive.

Hope that makes sense

doyler78

lochindaal wrote:

I am currently recovering from knee surgery and gradually building up on my turbo.

I have a tacx basic with power output (and I know it's not highly accurate) and I was wondering what a good sustainable power output figure is.

I am training for the etape this year and wanted to know what an average power output would be on a long sportive.

Hope that makes sense

When comparing averages then you can't compare yourself to the next person just by knowing total watts as a lighter person will need less total watts to do exactly the same climb as a heavier rider in the same time. Its your w/kg (watts per kilo) that's the more important figure if you want to compare yourself to others.

Here's a place to have play with all the figures, it's a bit more basic than some other ones out there as the options are a little more limited however I think it is great because you can do the side by rider calcs.

Stick the ride profile and how fast you want to do the climb and it will tell you what you need to do to get there. See how far off you are and adjust your expectations accordingly

http://2peak.com/tools/powercalculator.php

liversedge

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/pow ... rofile.asp

If you want to see how you stack up against the pros 8)

phil s

Like doyler said w/kg is more relevant than an arbitrary wattage. Let's say I'm 69kg and can put out 320w, and another rider is 76kg and can also put out 320w it's obvious who's getting dropped when the road goes upwards. Maybe a good starting point is to always have your bike set-up in the turbo the same, figure out what tyre pressure you'll be running and make sure that's always consistent, then warm the turbo up and see what numbers you produce. Then do a watts per kilo division and aim to improve your sessions based on that figure. FWIW, Ivan Basso trains for about 4hrs at 4.2w/kg apparently, but then again he did pay a dodgy doctor money just in case he ever wanted to dope

liversedge

phil s wrote:

Like doyler said w/kg is more relevant than an arbitrary wattage. Let's say I'm 69kg and can put out 320w, and another rider is 76kg and can also put out 320w it's obvious who's getting dropped when the road goes upwards.

<pedant alert>
No it isn't!! It all depends on how long each rider can sustain that power output. Which is why power profiles look at maximum sustained power output over 1hr 5 mins 1 min and 5 seconds.
</pedant alert>

phil s

Ok, to be pedantic I meant riders able to sustain the same wattage for the same duration.

phil s

And to be double-pedantic power profiles also look at 20min wattage

Alex_Simmons/RST

phil s wrote:

And to be double-pedantic power profiles also look at 20min wattage

Not for at least two, maybe three years they haven't. Power profiling now days refers to FTP.

In answer to the OP, it depends on many things but generally a sportive is ridden at 70%-80% of your FTP (1-hour power).

lochindaal

Thanks for all the info everyone.

Alex what is FTP? The link for me goes to a broken page

doyler78

Here's an explanation

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/pow ... eshold.asp

Basically its the maximum steady state power you can sustain for around 1 hour (45-60mins). Basically a properly paced 25 mile tt is one of the best ways to determine your ftp (functional threshold power).

Here's info on setting training zones based on ftp and the physiological adaptions that can be expected from training in those zones.

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/articles/ ... evels.aspx

Just click the back to articles in the top right of the page for a full list of articles on all things power.

Alex_Simmons/RST

lochindaal wrote:

Thanks for all the info everyone.

Alex what is FTP? The link for me goes to a broken page

Doyler's put the link up, although the "link" FTP posted wasn't meant to be a link, I think the text editor somehow thinks it's an HTML code or something and makes it look like a link. :?

Functional Threshold Power (FTP) is the highest quasi-steady state power you can maintain without fatiguing for about an hour.

BigG67

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

lochindaal wrote:

Thanks for all the info everyone.

Alex what is FTP? The link for me goes to a broken page

Doyler's put the link up, although the "link" FTP posted wasn't meant to be a link, I think the text editor somehow thinks it's an HTML code or something and makes it look like a link. :?

Functional Threshold Power (FTP) is the highest quasi-steady state power you can maintain without fatiguing for about an hour.

With that ("without fatiguing") are you saying FTP ISN'T 1 hour TT pace, as that would be fatiguing. Is FTP a level that can be sustained for 1 hour with a level of discomfort but could be taken on for another 20 mins or so if needed?

Sorry but I'm beginning to get to grips with this and relise that FTP is pretty much the basis of everything....

doyler78

A properly paced 1hr tt would mean that you have produced a steady effort throughout the whole tt and that effort is the maximum you can sustain for that 1hr ie you end with nothing in reserve. Therefore going 1hr20mins means you have underestimated the power you can sustain and you would be better trying again when you have properly rested.

If you can't motivate yourself to a 1hr tt then do a 30 min test and use 95% as a good starting point. It can be refined later once you have enough data to start noticing patterns or if you do a 25mile or 1hr tt which was properly paced.

(Just learning a bit about this myself so writing this as much to see if it gets shot down so that I can at least refine my knowledge where I've picked things up wrongly )

BigG67

Doyler

I'm with you, but would say that your definition - which makes sense - doesn't fall into a definition of "without fatiguing".

On mt Tacx - which I know isn't real world accurate but is fine against itself - I can do 260W consistently for 1 hour, start to finish. I couldn't sit at 270W all the way through...yet...but I could probably do 50 mins of 260W and push out for 270W for the last 10 and then throw up at the end, which would be...fatigued.

When I've read about TT pacing it's often said to start out steady and then build up, to pace the effort.

Hence my confusion.

doyler78

BigG67

I think you have just proved to yourself there why FTP is important. Its importance is that efforts just below FTP can be sustained for long periods of time (up to a couple of hours) whereas efforts over FTP cannot be sustained for very long that's why training around FTP has huge benefits for endurance cyclists.

If you can sustain 260W for more than an hour however can't sustain 270W for anywhere near this length of time then you can say that your FTP lies somewhere between the two.

Without fatiguing just means that you don't blow before the end as you your average watts will be overestimated and thus your FTP so what you are aiming to do is to get to the end and that be the point of fatigue so you aren't technically fatiguing during the effort but you can't do anything more so you would be fatigued if you carried on. Does that make sense?

Yeah I've heard that about tt pacing ie start conservatively and build to a pace that you believe you can sustain to the end and if you do find that there is a bit in the tank then you basically go for it to the line. I think this is really about finding your pace in the conditions on the course on that day and therefore you can't rely on previous efforts absolutely however you will have a good idea of where to start and that's why this approach is taken ie your not exactly sure of the right pace for the conditions but have a good idea so start conservatively then work into it. The benefit of having the power meter then conditions aren't the important determinant but the watts on the screen and if you go with what the watts are saying you should be able to set your optimal pace from the go, assuming you have properly warmed up beforehand. Now as someone who has never time trialled that could be complete rubbish but it is just what jumps out at me as a possible reason for pacing like this.

Alex_Simmons/RST

BigG67 wrote:

Doyler

I'm with you, but would say that your definition - which makes sense - doesn't fall into a definition of "without fatiguing".

On mt Tacx - which I know isn't real world accurate but is fine against itself - I can do 260W consistently for 1 hour, start to finish. I couldn't sit at 270W all the way through...yet...but I could probably do 50 mins of 260W and push out for 270W for the last 10 and then throw up at the end, which would be...fatigued.

When I've read about TT pacing it's often said to start out steady and then build up, to pace the effort.

Hence my confusion.

By "without fatiguing", we mean an ability to maintain power in a quasi steady state for the entire duration. That doesn't mean the ride doesn't fatigue you in the sense that you aren't knackered at the end of it.

But you are on the edge. Push a bit too much, and you'll be forced to slow at some stage and will need to do so at a rate significantly further on the downside than you were over in order to allow your body to recover from the over exertion as well as continue to propel you along.

Hence the average power of your 1-hr effort would be your FTP. Let say 260W for 50-min + 270W for 10-min = avg of 262W

That's still well paced as it would be unreasonable to expect you to know the difference between riding at 260W vs 262W.

In terms of power fade, what we are talking about is the same rider who goes out at 285W, fades badly after 10-min and end up crawling for the next 20-30-min at 220W before they can pick it up again, ending up with an average of 245-250W.

BigG67

Doyler/Alex - that makes sense.

I've not done competitive TTs either (though my 7 mile commute is one each way; just can't help but try and beat my time ) so I'm very hazy on pacing.

I get it better now that Alex has talked about the maths around the ave - I hadn't thought to do them and can see that even if I'm capable of 10W or so more toward the end of 1 hour the effect on the ave is minimal, however, if I go too hard and blow or go too soft all the way through the effect is huge.

Looks like my internal debate is caused by my being close to my FTP. I'm up for doing a retest this weekend after 4 weeks of sessions mainly using 5x5m (wth 5min rest) at 300W (115% FTP) and of course 2x20. I'm hoping my VO2Max is beginning to move up a little - though I can't test that at home - and my FTP likewise.