Gustav Larsson's huge inexplicable power increase
Comments
-
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Well if you had both good efficiency (say 24%) and could sustain a high % of VO2 Max at threshold (say 90%), then a VO2max of 65 could potentially see an FTP of >4.8W/kg. But having all those ducks lined up in a row is the trickcelbianchi wrote:I'd be interested in what KK or Alex make of my unimpressive numbers. I am a UK based rider, currently a 3rd cat. Do well enough in most 2/3/4 races and can usually muster a top 3 in most of the end of season hill climb races.
My lab tested VO2 max was 65 last season. I weigh 72.7kg and my current FTP is showing as 300 Watts. (4.1 w/kg)
Based on the knowledge of you 2 chaps, what do you reckon is a realistic upper end that I can get my FTP to, given my VO2 max.
What would be my genetic limitations?
But there is certainly potential to push FTP higher than you are at presently.
Alex,
Thanks for the comments. to achive 4.8WKG I can either lose 10kg and keep current FTP, increase current FTP to 348 or a mixture of the two.
I think I'll re-do my FTP test as it is about 6 weeks since I tested it and I have been increasing my intensity in readiness for racing again.0 -
Murr X wrote:
KK, would a V02 of above 85 really be needed to hold 5.3W/kg at 62kg? Its just as I said before it was tested years ago at 66 and although admittedly I was not as nearly as well trained as when I was at 330W (FTP at 62kg), I had still been training and racing for some time.KKspeeder wrote:An 85 VO2 max is 6.2 w/kg AT VO2 max with 23% delta! 460 watts at 23% with 74 kilos for example.
5 minutes at 6.1 wkg at BEST! Maybe 5.1 or 5.2 at FTP with super-good training!
Thanks
I true 330 watts for an entire 60 minute TT is really good for 62 kilos without dope. If I remember correctly Levi Leipheimer had about 385 for his True FTP at last years Vuelta (from what doctor Ferrari observed) and close to 400 at Amgen but probably not quite that high.
In fact, the average Pro in the tour of California probably had close to this. Were you pro, bro?
And to awnser your question.... It takes a huge VO2 max to produce a huge watts/kilo at FTP because VO2 max (max amount of oxygen assimilated per kilo per minute) is the ceiling for Funtional Threshold power (max all out 60 minute TT power). You can only get your threshold percentage so high. You need atleast 400 watts for your max aerobic power to get there and no way thats going to happen without ATLEASY a VO2 max in the low 80s-mid 80s.
You can hold a little above lactate threshold. Lance Armstrong for example, has his LT at 77%-81% of his VO2 max. Your never going to get much past that, and Lance has a freaky high threshold percentage.
You need a VO2 max of 5.2-5.4 liters per minute to do that, and that is not peanuts.
TRUE VO2 max power can only be sustained for a few minutes. VO2 max itself can be kept up for 6-8 minutes but the heart fatiques, less blood is pumped per beat and the total power output on the bike drops.0 -
I think the whole thread here would have more substance to it if KK hadnt appeared in the last 10 days and >90% of his posts are about doping. Clearly there is an agenda here ? Have you been here before under another name maybe ?0
-
cougie wrote:I think the whole thread here would have more substance to it if KK hadnt appeared in the last 10 days and >90% of his posts are about doping. Clearly there is an agenda here ? Have you been here before under another name maybe ?
pushing EPO? "And the Lord said unto Cain, 'where is Abel thy brother?' And he said, 'I know not: I dropped him on the climb up to the motorway bridge'."
- eccolafilosofiadelpedale0 -
celbianchi wrote:I'd be interested in what KK or Alex make of my unimpressive numbers. I am a UK based rider, currently a 3rd cat. Do well enough in most 2/3/4 races and can usually muster a top 3 in most of the end of season hill climb races.
My lab tested VO2 max was 65 last season. I weigh 72.7kg and my current FTP is showing as 300 Watts. (4.1 w/kg)
Based on the knowledge of you 2 chaps, what do you reckon is a realistic upper end that I can get my FTP to, given my VO2 max.
What would be my genetic limitations?
Its all about smart training, and determination. As I said earlier, studies have shown you can train VO2 max up quite a bit, and then of course threshold percentage once again. Right now your FTP is getting close to your VO2 max which means its probably time to move on.
I'd be interested to know how old you are, and what type of training you've completed to this point?
You can do 4-6 weeks working on VO2 max. One absolutely flat out 6-8 minute TT per week might help. Do a 10 minute leadup in your warmup where you slowly increase the intensity so your ready for this. Once you complete the all out 6-8 minute effort, your DONE.
And.... 5 minutes*4 at 112% of FTP with 3 minute recovery in between on another day....
You will be crying for mommy after the 3rd or 4th one though... Best go into the 5 min VO2 max repeats with some hardcore motivation.
Doing the 5min*4...... crank the Trance music or some battle music while out on an empty stretch of road like some Rammstein Zerstören!
The idea with this training is to increase the ceiling... After a 2 weeks or 4-6 VO2 max workouts, try to complete a 5*5min at 112% FTP. That is the epitome of torture....
Also, for a 3rd brutal workout during the week you can do a 2*20min at 100-105% FTP with 5 min of rest between the two.
The HARDER you train the LESS total hours you can do but it will make you stronger. The Cuttingedgemuscle.com has some good info on VO2 max repeats and training for free...
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/1931382 ... eader-link
This....
You can do quite well IF you are focused and motivated... a 65 VO2 max is not peanuts and everbody can improve atleast a little bit, you as a local club rider probably a LOT. I wouldnt be suprised if you could get to 325-340 watts for an entire hour by the middle of the racing season.
You can get a VO2 max at your genetic peak on 10 hours of smart training a week. BUT you must be super low bodyfat... Like sub 5% bodyfat. That is tough to do and you have to go VERY slow.... Get a Dexa scan to find your body fat.
AS far as pushing EPO? Clearly I'm against doping. Just honest is all. The evidence points towards an inconvenient truth.0 -
celbianchi wrote:Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Well if you had both good efficiency (say 24%) and could sustain a high % of VO2 Max at threshold (say 90%), then a VO2max of 65 could potentially see an FTP of >4.8W/kg. But having all those ducks lined up in a row is the trickcelbianchi wrote:I'd be interested in what KK or Alex make of my unimpressive numbers. I am a UK based rider, currently a 3rd cat. Do well enough in most 2/3/4 races and can usually muster a top 3 in most of the end of season hill climb races.
My lab tested VO2 max was 65 last season. I weigh 72.7kg and my current FTP is showing as 300 Watts. (4.1 w/kg)
Based on the knowledge of you 2 chaps, what do you reckon is a realistic upper end that I can get my FTP to, given my VO2 max.
What would be my genetic limitations? But there is certainly potential to push FTP higher than you are at presently.
Alex,
Thanks for the comments. to achive 4.8WKG I can either lose 10kg and keep current FTP, increase current FTP to 348 or a mixture of the two.
I think I'll re-do my FTP test as it is about 6 weeks since I tested it and I have been increasing my intensity in readiness for racing again.
You can ONLY peak your VO2 max on sub-5% bodyfat...
Losing 22 pounds is really HUGE and would take some time... Atleast 6 months if going SLOW and steady.... I would go in and get bodyfat tested with a Dexa scan.
How to Test Your Body Fat
"DEXA (dual energy X-ray absorptiometry)
This test is used to measure bone density, but it also measures body fat percentage as well as where most of your fat is (as if you didn't know). The facts about DEXA:
DEXA uses a whole body scanner and two different low-dose x-rays to read bone mass and soft tissue mass.
It takes about 10-20 minutes to do a body scan
It provides a high degree of precision with a 2-3 % margin of error.
This is considered a gold standard for measuring body fat and bone density
It's painless."
VO2 max is the amount of oxygen assimilated per kilo of bodyweight....
If you COULD get down to sub 63 kg without losing a lot of muscle mass your oxygen intake/Kilo WOULD be through the roof. And your sustainable power per kilo as well....
Christ, if you had 4.8 liters per minute at 62 kilos, thats 77 VO2 max.0 -
And there's the rub - you haven't examined the evidence all that well.KKspeeder wrote:The evidence points towards an inconvenient truth.
Take Larsson's TT power file.
Notice some anomalies with the data? No, probably not.
Well I can tell you that if you look closely, you'll realise his average power is actually lower than the software summary shows it to be. Why? Because Larsson's bike didn't have a speed sensor fitted to his disk wheel. That meant that time spent coasting was not recorded by the meter (if you know about how SRMs work you'll know why). That's time at zero power. There is at least 41 seconds of it, although I suspect it's more like 50 seconds.
Hence his real average for the 31 min (30:58 ) is ~475W.
Larsson is 80kg. That gives him 5.9W/kg for a 30-min TT.
Taking, say 95% of that (for instance) for 1-hour power, that gives him an FTP of 450W or 5.6W/kg. Certainly well within the realms of human endeavour by natural means.
Now - when are you going to enlighten us with your VO2 to power output calculations?0 -
NO guys with low body fat below 190 pounds can get to 390 watts at FTP cleanly unless a total genetic freak and then they are going pro pronto. I know for a FACT 370 watts for FTP at anything below 75kg will win you some big races in the U.S. (not like Pro 1-2) but REAL big sh*t UCI categorized races. You wont win the G.C. of the Tour of Utah but you can win some stuff.
And YES, the 175 pound Indurain finished well behind the ripped 148 pound Greg LeMond in all the dead flat Tour de France TTs 1989-1990 pre-EPO with his 390 watts and all.
Bigger gives you the likely-hood of more power but not much more until your ripped above 175 pounds and over 6-foot. You can get to a 420 watts clean but you are built like a hockey player above 6 foot 4 (Ondrej Sosenka) and he had nearly 500 because he was jacked on EPO and Pot Belge.
Your VO2 max (maximum amount of 02 assimilated per kilo) is likely to be less as you get bigger. (above 150 pounds.)0 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOB89nuU ... re=related
Lookit this video of Indurain cutting through the field in the long TT after EPO in 1991.
LeMond actually managed to stay ahead of him for a ways during that TOur. :shock:0 -
KKsp, no I wasn't pro. I had raced in Europe for a while as an elite but going pro just wasn't to be.
5.3W/kg was the figure I hit at my VERY best and I had indeed been able to hold this for the entire hour in training. Really this was as high I was ever going to get myself and it truly did take an inconceivable, inconceivable amount of work to get there. My proudest power figure was holding 344W for just under 45mins when in a solo breakaway but even that was not enough to prevent me from getting my ass well and truly kicked over there. There really are many, many great riders out there and I just couldn't compete with them - end of.
I haven't raced for years now (due to health reasons) but train a little bit.
I have had a few DEXA scans which showed me I had osteopenia and was osteoporotic in my hips and lower back and I would recommend that all serious cyclists have a bone density check as you can have this "silent killer" without realizing it. I was ultra lean at 62kg/136lb (70kg/155lb now) at 5feet 11. I do agree that many cyclists are heavier than they need to be and could gain a fair bit by losing weight, I was a master at this and made Riis look like a fat a$$
but it isn't necessarily good for you... 0 -
All this proves is not to believe anything you read on forums.0
-
.............unless it's written by Alexeh wrote:All this proves is not to believe anything you read on forums. 0 -
Yep
I don't always agree with Alex but he is certainly one of the few people I consider worth seriously looking into what they are saying and why. And too be fair nomally I'd say he's bang on the money.0 -
Murr X wrote:KKsp, no I wasn't pro. I had raced in Europe for a while as an elite but going pro just wasn't to be.
5.3W/kg was the figure I hit at my VERY best and I had indeed been able to hold this for the entire hour in training. Really this was as high I was ever going to get myself and it truly did take an inconceivable, inconceivable amount of work to get there. My proudest power figure was holding 344W for just under 45mins when in a solo breakaway but even that was not enough to prevent me from getting my ass well and truly kicked over there. There really are many, many great riders out there and I just couldn't compete with them - end of.
I haven't raced for years now (due to health reasons) but train a little bit.
I have had a few DEXA scans which showed me I had osteopenia and was osteoporotic in my hips and lower back and I would recommend that all serious cyclists have a bone density check as you can have this "silent killer" without realizing it. I was ultra lean at 62kg/136lb (70kg/155lb now) at 5feet 11. I do agree that many cyclists are heavier than they need to be and could gain a fair bit by losing weight, I was a master at this and made Riis look like a fat a$$ but it isn't necessarily good for you...
Yeah, you can do quite well on that. Once you get to a level where they are doping you cannot really get much out of it totally clean, even with some talent like you no doubt had. In fact.... A rider with "some Talent" who is jacked with a high hematocrit will destroy a clean rider that is a super talented freak...
The highest a woman has ever gotten was 5.7 w/kg and of course on EPO.... Also, woman loose their menstrual cycle with real low bodyfat..... Athletic amenorrhoea sets in with caloric restriction and this can be more common when dropping weight instead of maintaining and.... more common than they admit too.... Elite sport is not alway healthy---but you can have fun and be competitive with a good attitude and not taking it to the limit like a gun is to your head.
I do absolutely believe you can succeed on about 370 for U.S. based TTs.... Outside of California. Thats a LOT of power despite what Alex claiming its peanuts.
Those of us that have been on a bike with a powermeter know how much that really is.
David Millar had about 5.4 w/kg last year during the Tour de France. Remember that as we watch the ProTour season unfold....0 -
Yes, and he is also exceptionally aero, with a CdA of ~ 0.21-0.22 m^2 and paces TT's exceptionally well. And it is these factors that are why he TTs so well but doesn't match it on the climbs since his power to weight ratio (while excellent) isn't quite high enough.KKspeeder wrote:David Millar had about 5.4 w/kg last year during the Tour de France. Remember that as we watch the ProTour season unfold....
His power in the first ITT of 2008 TdF was 410W Normalised. According to you, that's just not possible, it's too high..... :roll:0 -
He could have been jacked. I said you dont get past 390 watts cleanly for an hour if skinny below 190 pounds unless a total freak... If your really big about 420 watts because I think a guy like Sosenka could get a little past 400. Nobody even fully-jacked gets over about 500 watts.... Jacking your hematocrit gives the best responders about a 25% total power gain at FTP... So no, I dont believe its possible to get much over 390 clean.
If I remember correctly Millar could average about 397 watts and he weighs 76kg. 5.2 w/kg at 76 kg is certainly big time PRO potential FOR SURE and Worlds Contender for SURE even if already jacked.
Right now Zabriskie is Autologous blood doping because you do not go over somebody like Hurricane Gustov in a TT even with the best aero. So Garmin are lying.
Now, some riders on the team might be clean, you cant say its all of them or even half of them... because there was even a clean rider on Festina!
Nobody at the very top is using EPO anymore. They are to scared. Even the human identical EPO (Dynepo) is not being doped with.... They are too scared after the CERA bust last year. All animal based EPO is detectable, I'm not saying tested for but its a HUGE risk for somebody to use animal-based EPO.
They are Autologous blood doping. UCI could stop that with total body hemoglobin testing with C02 gas... But they wont do that. Its not a cost issue, its a corruption issue.
When Lance dropped Catlin he said Catlin was a "cost issue." Lance, your loaded. In the USA that means your rich.0 -
kkspeeder, your argument is basically that some of the performances of pro cyclists are impossible unless they're either total freaks or doping, so they must be doping?
has it occured to you that they may be physical freaks, and that's why they are pro cyclists?0 -
If this forum is going to be infected with the sort of trash talk promulgated by KKspeeder, then people will lose interest is coming along to post questions, discuss and learn about matters pertaining to TRAINING, which is, after all, what this forum is about.
If a poster want to talk about doping, fine, but go find a forum for talking about doping.
When was the last time the race forum talked about racing? I don't bother with it anymore. I'd hate to see this forum go the same way. But if it does, well it'll just slip off my bookmarks page.0 -
Got to agree with this. I think this thread is far past its sell-by date... Can we keep this forum about how normal humans can train without doping, rather than an endless debate about what the pros do/don't? Please?Alex_Simmons wrote:If a poster want to talk about doping, fine, but go find a forum for talking about doping.0 -
Alex, there are quite a few threads on Race which are about racing, in amongst all the doping threads. Well, it's a sad fact that when you talk about pro cycling you end up talking about doping, given the problems the sport has (amongst many, less-publicised other sports).
I think KKspeeder has come to bikeradar with quite an agenda, and I find the "if you disagree with me you are supporting doping" tone quite distasteful. Nonetheless, he touches on a subject that is relatively interesting, if nothing else then from an exercise physiology viewpoint, and that is what the limits of natural performance are. It is particularly pertinent given Greg Lemond's suggestions of using power meter data in the grand tours to flag up possible doped performances (whcih I presonally happen to think is a ridiculous idea). However, KKspeeder seems reluctant to tell us how he links VO2max to potential FTP, other than "Lemond could manage 390 so anything above that has to be doped, unless you're a really big guy", which I find quite unsatisfactory. In fact I think Alex has already commented in much more detail on how VO2max might correlate with FTP.
I think KKspeeder would do well to understand that this forum is not cuttingedgemuscle, and if he plans on posting anything more here, a slight modification of tone, at least, might be an idea...Le Blaireau (1)0 -
You guys are responding to me. If you want somebody to go away, dont engage them. There is still a major blood doping problem in Pro Racing.
Why cycling needs to be "clean" PR wise, I dont know. NFL football doesnt need to be, neither does NHL hockey or any other sport for that matter. I do think if doping is illegal it should be enforced as illegal. Otherwise you just faking it, and having to cover up for people like me that make obvious comments.
Its great that they had Operation Puerto, but did they ever start testing for Autologous blood transfusions? Do people think one raid is going to stop 100 guys from banking their blood somewhere else with a different doctor?
I think the sport has long-since reached a point where there either needs to be no testing and doping be legalized, or they do something about autologous transfusions. Testing has ruined the Tour, it takes out guys that were doing their job. Its not fair to these riders to make them play Russian Roulette with their careers so the sport can have better Public Relations.
A while ago in 1998 Ric Stern had a good point that doping should simply be legalized. He later refracted his comments, but I dont see why he should have felt compelled to.
If you dont dope and complain, your jelous because you didnt win. IF you dope and get caught, your a cheater and a drug addict. If you dont dope and manage to win big; you have "sour grapes" later on when you complain.
If you testify and tell the truth, your a liar. Doesnt matter if there is NO motive for lying at all whatsoever. If you jack like hell for 18 years, hook up with an infamous doping doctor; and win the Tour 8 times your a hero even if everybody knows you doped. Because you beat the Europeans "at their own game." Dopers win, people who are honest are bitter, jelous or fat ugly liars.0 -
KKspeeder wrote:You guys are responding to me. If you want somebody to go away, dont engage them. There is still a major blood doping problem in Pro Racing.
Why cycling needs to be "clean" PR wise, I dont know. NFL football doesnt need to be, neither does NHL hockey or any other sport for that matter. I do think if doping is illegal it should be enforced as illegal. Otherwise you just faking it, and having to cover up for people like me that make obvious comments.
Its great that they had Operation Puerto, but did they ever start testing for Autologous blood transfusions? Do people think one raid is going to stop 100 guys from banking their blood somewhere else with a different doctor?
I think the sport has long-since reached a point where there either needs to be no testing and doping be legalized, or they do something about autologous transfusions. Testing has ruined the Tour, it takes out guys that were doing their job. Its not fair to these riders to make them play Russian Roulette with their careers so the sport can have better Public Relations.
A while ago in 1998 Ric Stern had a good point that doping should simply be legalized. He later refracted his comments, but I dont see why he should have felt compelled to.
If you dont dope and complain, your jelous because you didnt win. IF you dope and get caught, your a cheater and a drug addict. If you dont dope and manage to win big; you have "sour grapes" later on when you complain.
If you testify and tell the truth, your a liar. Doesnt matter if there is NO motive for lying at all whatsoever. If you jack like hell for 18 years, hook up with an infamous doping doctor; and win the Tour 8 times your a hero even if everybody knows you doped. Because you beat the Europeans "at their own game." Dopers win, people who are honest are bitter, jelous or fat ugly liars.
the article i wrote in 1998, while carrying some interesting points (e.g. the issue that it may be more unhealthy to keep to the rules for some riders - such as Boardman, rather than taking the hormones he required for his condition), was a "devil's advocate" article. I've never supported the use of drugs (in an illegal manner), never taken any illegal drugs, and would never suggest that anyone does. in fact, i'd drop someone *fast* if they were doping. In short i abhor drug taking (as it relates to this point).
ricProfessional cycle coaching for cyclists of all levels
www.cyclecoach.com0 -
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:If this forum is going to be infected with the sort of trash talk promulgated by KKspeeder, then people will lose interest is coming along to post questions, discuss and learn about matters pertaining to TRAINING, which is, after all, what this forum is about.
When was the last time the race forum talked about racing?
Is attacking fraud trash talk?
What does racing and training mean when somebody gets to the Pro or cat 1 level, and they only get beat by dopers?
There are masters riders doping, lower cats 4-5. On cuttingedge there was a cat 4 doing test cycles and a cat 5 in Miami was already doing EPO.
The older ones have the money for the drugs.0 -
-
The crap is this team 'Livestrong". Developing stronger for the future for the 900cc Turbo blood refills transfused in 35 minutes between the testing controls and the race starts, when a Blood Transfusion of that size is supposed to take 3-4 hours Thats what it takes, STRENGTH.
This is a big forum with lotta hits and I speak nothing but the TRUTH.
But your right.... I think american racing is becoming more corrupt and dirty that Europe.... Nobody want to combat it (especially USADA) and if you want to race a bike at the moment accept being beaten by drug addicts.
The reality, Red Draggon is not really crap.
Cycling Reality= projectile vomiting0 -
I thought so.
But you didn't answer my question directly.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are honest and not a doper (but correct me if I'm wrong), but you do come across as bitter. I guess, with the talent you must undoubtedly have to race 1st cat, if you feel you've been racing and losing out to people who are dopers, then perhaps I can understand the bitterness that comes across in your postings.
And, you may be right, maybe you have raced and lost out to dopers, but at the end of the day, you also need to get over it and learn to accept that, despite your talent, there are people more genetically gifted than you. Just because you got beaten, it doesn't mean they are all dopers. It doesn't mean they trained harder or smarter than you either, though they may have done. They are just, in the Darwinist sense of the word, 'fitter' (for the purpose of bike racing) than you.0 -
fastcat wrote:I thought so.
But you didn't answer my question directly.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are honest and not a doper (but correct me if I'm wrong), but you do come across as bitter. I guess, with the talent you must undoubtedly have to race 1st cat, if you feel you've been racing and losing out to people who are dopers, then perhaps I can understand the bitterness that comes across in your postings.
And, you may be right, maybe you have raced and lost out to dopers, but at the end of the day, you also need to get over it and learn to accept that, despite your talent, there are people more genetically gifted than you. Just because you got beaten, it doesn't mean they are all dopers. It doesn't mean they trained harder or smarter than you either, though they may have done. They are just, in the Darwinist sense of the word, 'fitter' (for the purpose of bike racing) than you.
Why should he just accept it?
If he has been beaten by dopers, he has every right to be bitter, in fact he has every right to be more than bitter (whatever that is??)
I agree with Alex in that this is probably not the place for this discussion but at the same time I'm fed up with everyone (and this totally includes other sports) burying their heads in the sand when it comes to doping. For that reason I sympathises with the guy, so I can tolerate the odd rant in the wrong place.0
