Tracking imporvements

2»

Comments

  • kom14
    kom14 Posts: 31
    Power meter is a good way of directly monitoring your performance as the data isn't affected in the same way as HR is by weather or road conditions, how you feel on the day ie illness or tiredness, supplements you've taken on day eg. caffeine gel which may increase HR. If you're cycling into a headwind you might be going slower in terms of Kph compared to a previous ride, but you can still put out the same target power that you were aiming for in your session. Hope that makes sense.

    Stages have recently released a power meter that is £600ish. Quite a bit cheaper than most others. Was limited availability before xmas, but may be more widely available now.

    As another poster mentioned the 60min or 40km time trial is considered the gold standard for determining FTP. Coggan and Allen also produced a 20 min TT test that is normalised by multiplying 20 min av power by 0.95. They suggest the importance of completing a 10min intro at TT power pre 20min TT to remove the freshness from the legs and provide a more accurate FTP. This 10 min should be performed at same sort of power as the following 20min TT. Could be done on a Wattbike aswell if available to use. Wattbike have some info on their website about power testing based upon BC protocols.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Training-Racing ... ggan+allen Andrew Coggans book. Very Good IMO

    http://www.muscle-fitness.co.uk/digital/specialreports has a short chapter on power testing and power zones

    Training peaks website has info on using power meters aswell...Strava probably does aswell, but not sure.
  • dw300
    dw300 Posts: 1,642
    Tom Dean wrote:
    ...so the more recent ride was set to 88% of your old FTP, not your current FTP!

    No.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qhm7-LEBznk
    All the above is just advice .. you can do whatever the f*ck you wana do!
    Bike Radar Strava Club
    The Northern Ireland Thread
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    dw300 wrote:
    Tom Dean wrote:
    ...so the more recent ride was set to 88% of your old FTP, not your current FTP!

    No.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qhm7-LEBznk
    If you just want to tell me I'm being thick without actually explaining yourself, lets remember that you presented this data as evidence of your improvement when it is nothing of the sort. ok?

    When your FTP was 236W, you rode at 210W. 210W was 88% of your FTP.

    When your FTP was 268W, you rode at 210W. 210W was 78% of your FTP.

    Please show what is wrong here.
  • tedmaul
    tedmaul Posts: 31
    Tom Dean wrote:
    dw300 wrote:
    Tom Dean wrote:
    ...so the more recent ride was set to 88% of your old FTP, not your current FTP!

    No.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qhm7-LEBznk
    If you just want to tell me I'm being thick without actually explaining yourself, lets remember that you presented this data as evidence of your improvement when it is nothing of the sort. ok?

    When your FTP was 236W, you rode at 210W. 210W was 88% of your FTP.

    When your FTP was 268W, you rode at 210W. 210W was 78% of your FTP.

    Please show what is wrong here.

    I thought MarkP80 had pretty much explained it a while back.

    The two rides are at the same power level, but in the second ride he's significantly better trained with a higher FTP, therefore the heart rate and stress level involved in riding at that 210w power in the second (most recent) ride are much lower than they were at the same power in the original ride.
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    I understand this, but HR is not a direct indication of fitness. All dw300's numbers show us is that at some point between the two rides he manually entered a higher FTP figure.
  • tedmaul
    tedmaul Posts: 31
    Tom Dean wrote:
    I understand this, but HR is not a direct indication of fitness. All dw300's numbers show us is that at some point between the two rides he manually entered a higher FTP figure.

    Well, obviously if you don't trust that he didn't just lie about his figures, then ok it might not show his improvement. :D I mean, he might have just created the graphs in photoshop, in which case it doesn't prove anything to anyone. Quite why he'd want to lie about his fitness to himself and then stick it on the internet, i've no idea. But yeah, i guess if we're going to take it to a fairly absurd extreme then ok.

    But presumably, as far as dw300 is concerned, he's not lying to himself and the new FTP was set using a standard FTP test and is therefore set using the same method each time he works it out. In which case the lower TSS and to an extent the lower heart rate would indicate better fitness. As does his higher FTP. It's just another way of demonstrating the same thing really.
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    He did actual testing to set FTP so why not show that instead? How could what he posted possibly be a better illustration of his improvement? The FTP figures weren't even there, you had to back calculate from NP and TSS - I'm guessing he wasn't expecting the OP to do this.

    I just wondered what the value of the second 2x20 session was since it looks fairly meaningless. Aside from whether it was good training though, dw300 seems to be disputing my interpretation of the numbers so I'll let him explain that first.
  • tedmaul
    tedmaul Posts: 31
    Tom Dean wrote:
    He did actual testing to set FTP so why not show that instead? How could what he posted possibly be a better illustration of his improvement? The FTP figures weren't even there, you had to back calculate from NP and TSS - I'm guessing he wasn't expecting the OP to do this.

    He could have showed either. It's just two ways to demonstrate the same thing.

    He could demonstrate improved fitness by saying - 'look, this was my FTP in dec and this is it higher in jan'.

    Or, he could say - 'here's a ride at x watts in dec, here's a ride at the same x watts in jan. Look, my TSS is lower in jan.'

    That's all he was doing. it's just a different way of demonstrating the same FTP improvement.

    Whether it's a 'better' way of showing improvement, i don't know. I think both ways are legit:

    ' i can do things now that were too difficult for me previously'

    or

    ' i can do things i used to find difficult, and now they feel easy'

    Both seem reasonable ways of putting it. To me anyway.
  • dw300
    dw300 Posts: 1,642
    Lol .. The link was just pure exasperation and to lighten the mood, don't take it personally, it's just banter.

    Having said that .. I have fully explained myself several times over. I've provided links to the figures you ask for, you've obviously just not looked.

    All I've said all along, and the point you disagree with is that 'The 2nd workout intensity was set to 88%', I can provide a screenshot if necessary to prove it. I've done all I can to try and explain.

    The only possible thing I can think is that you thought the intervals were done at FTP. They're done at 88% of FTP as it's a 2x20 sweetspot workout. So scaling the 2nd workout down to 88% yields an intervals at 0.88 x 0.88 of current FTP, equalling an interval done at 78% FTP.

    So as I said, you are correct as far as the power/%FTP goes, but incorrect in saying that my statement is wrong. You've read what I've said, taken it to mean something different ..

    What I said .. 'The workout intensity was set to 88%'

    What you heard .. 'The interval intensity was set to 88%'
    All the above is just advice .. you can do whatever the f*ck you wana do!
    Bike Radar Strava Club
    The Northern Ireland Thread
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    dw300 wrote:
    So scaling the 2nd workout down to 88% yields an intervals at 0.88 x 0.88 of current FTP, equalling an interval done at 78% FTP.
    ok I understand what you mean.

    But what is the point?!

    Sorry for my confusion but it seems a very odd way of setting workout intensity.
  • dw300
    dw300 Posts: 1,642
    It all came around from choosing a workout that was as easy for me to replicate as possible, the initial one was one of the rides I'd followed the target power line the closest, and so it was easiest to replicate. That was the only reason for choosing it, other than I didnt want a particularly hard ride that day, which also made it a good day to experiment. It just happened to be a 2x20.

    One thing that might not be apparent when reading about doing this is how good you feel after it. A 2x20 is a tough workout, and its a huge motivational boost to to the same ride and it not even phase you. I do try as much as possible to keep drive and enthusiasm to a max. Seeing progress helps, feeling it is another ball game if you're at the point that you're still making significant gains.
    All the above is just advice .. you can do whatever the f*ck you wana do!
    Bike Radar Strava Club
    The Northern Ireland Thread
  • Max Bridges
    Max Bridges Posts: 108
    Tom Dean wrote:
    I understand this, but HR is not a direct indication of fitness. All dw300's numbers show us is that at some point between the two rides he manually entered a higher FTP figure.




    ""Assuming constant thermodynamic efficiency, VO2 is proportional to power, so power:heart rate is proportional to VO2:heart rate. In turn, VO2:heart rate is proportional to the product of stroke volume and a-vO2 difference (i.e., O2 pulse). Thus, an improvement in power:heart rate is indicative of an increase in stroke volume and/or a-vO2 difference (and/or an increase in thermodynamic efficiency). That's why I've been recording my power:heart rate during ergometer workouts for >20 y. "" Dr Andrew Coggan.

    In other words, more watts per heart beat is an indication of improved fitness.

    Now if our friend had just posted his latest 20 min test and compared it to a 20 min test 13 months ago, and only posted the watts, how would we know if he was really fitter or has just learned to try much harder? We would have to take his word the recent ride felt much easier, but with the heart rate there is a guide to how hard he was actually trying during both efforts.



    However if you are going to compare power: heart rate ratio it is important to ensure you are comparing like for like.
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    HR is affected by too many other factors to draw conclusions from a one-off test.

    ...as you well know, for the zillionth time, etc. etc.
  • Max Bridges
    Max Bridges Posts: 108
    Tom Dean wrote:
    HR is affected by too many other factors to draw conclusions from a one-off test.

    ...as you well know, for the zillionth time, etc. etc.

    If you control the environment and compare like for like, ie, ensure temperature is the same, warm up is the same, fatigue status etc etc you can tell a lot from even a one off test, however, the more controlled tests you have the better, and it is a consistent trend you are looking for.

    If you do an all out 20 min test and the environment is not controlled you are just as likely to get different power readings as temperature will affect performance just as fatigue / freshness or other factors, so a one off max effort test
    also has too many variable factors to draw conclusions from. Power alone or power with heart rate you still need to control the environment and compare like for like. Example, FTP test outdoors compared to indoors. Example, race in the cold compared to race in hot weather. Example, max test on road bike compared to max test on TT bike. All will give different results and comparing them to each other won't tell you if you are fitter.

    If you control the environment and follow the same protocol and use heart rate alongside power you learn much more than if you use power alone.

    Our friend posted some good data which shows conclusively he is considerably fitter after 13 months. The fact the only way you can track improvement is by doing max tests is frankly your problem. If you don't like using heart rate don't, but please stop rubbishing people who do.
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    Max Bridges wrote:
    Our friend posted some good data which shows conclusively he is considerably fitter after 13 months. The fact the only way you can track improvement is by doing max tests is frankly your problem. If you don't like using heart rate don't, but please stop rubbishing people who do.
    It simply doesn't.

    I am not disputing that trends in HR can be useful. A one-off test is not a trend.

    I'm guessing dw300 doesn't know your secret system whereby HR becomes totally reliable because he tested his fitness by doing maximal efforts.
  • Max Bridges
    Max Bridges Posts: 108
    Tom Dean wrote:
    Max Bridges wrote:
    Our friend posted some good data which shows conclusively he is considerably fitter after 13 months. The fact the only way you can track improvement is by doing max tests is frankly your problem. If you don't like using heart rate don't, but please stop rubbishing people who do.
    It simply doesn't.

    I am not disputing that trends in HR can be useful. A one-off test is not a trend.

    I'm guessing dw300 doesn't know your secret system whereby HR becomes totally reliable because he tested his fitness by doing maximal efforts.

    My ' secret' system using power / heart rate ratio obtained during tests conducted in a controlled environment reliably tracks improvements in fitness without the need for maximal tests.

    You can still do maximal tests but I'm able to track improvements before you do a maximal test, so I get actionable intelligence sooner than someone using power alone.
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    I 'know' that, thank you.

    That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
  • Max Bridges
    Max Bridges Posts: 108
    Tom Dean wrote:
    I 'know' that, thank you.

    That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


    My system isn't secret, anyone can send me a PM and I will explain how I use power : heart rate ratio data obtained in a controlled environment with controlled testing protocols, to track improvements in fitness.
  • Tom Dean
    Tom Dean Posts: 1,723
    Ok it's not secret, but you are not going to openly share it. Whatever

Categories