what increase can I expect in my ftp over winter

janesy

A little background:

My training started in 2013 doing endurance mtb races and Triathlons. No structured training, around 6-8 hours a week.
2014 I started to race road. Training was up to 10 hours using hr. In just over 6 months I'm now Cat2. (got it August) 2 months off with broken collarbone.

I now have a P2max powermeter and have done an FTP test. Result was 307watts at 71kg is 4.25kgw.
what I what to know, what number will this likely increase to? is 350 unrealistic?

currently im doing 4-5 sessions on my rollers at about an hour doing structured efforts, then doing a couple of longer rides. what do i need to do to get it higher?


tapped on my phone on a bus...

meanredspider

janesy wrote:

what do i need to do to get it higher?


tapped on my phone on a bus...

Take your bike not the bus!
(Just kidding)

jgsi

Professional coaching if you are getting this serious.

colinsmith123

janesy wrote:

A little background:

My training started in 2013 doing endurance mtb races and Triathlons. No structured training, around 6-8 hours a week.
2014 I started to race road. Training was up to 10 hours using hr. In just over 6 months I'm now Cat2. (got it August) 2 months off with broken collarbone.

I now have a P2max powermeter and have done an FTP test. Result was 307watts at 71kg is 4.25kgw.
what I what to know, what number will this likely increase to? is 350 unrealistic?

currently im doing 4-5 sessions on my rollers at about an hour doing structured efforts, then doing a couple of longer rides. what do i need to do to get it higher?


tapped on my phone on a bus...

Engage a coach or,

-Stick to your training plan, continue with the sweet-spot efforts (I know the OP did not mention SS, but he is doing structured efforts for an hour, so I have to assume he already knows what he is doing)
-Manage the increase of your TSS per week, using the performance manager chart
-Give yourself adequate recovery time. Recognise and accept you need to rest when you are tired.
-Keep up with the regular FTP tests

And more than ever..

Be patient, an increase in FTP this winter will come, it might not be the increase you are looking for. Increasing FTP is not infinite.

Is 350 realistic? Read this book...

Note. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Faster-Obsession-Science-Fastest-Cyclists/dp/1408843757/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1415800480&sr=1-1

I hope this helps.

ugo.santalucia

DO you need that number to increase?

If you've racked up that many points in 6 months, it means you are good at sprinting and for that your FPT is not that important... work on your strengths, I would say... get a coach that helps you improve what you are good at.

ric/rstsport

janesy wrote:

A little background:

My training started in 2013 doing endurance mtb races and Triathlons. No structured training, around 6-8 hours a week.
2014 I started to race road. Training was up to 10 hours using hr. In just over 6 months I'm now Cat2. (got it August) 2 months off with broken collarbone.

I now have a P2max powermeter and have done an FTP test. Result was 307watts at 71kg is 4.25kgw.
what I what to know, what number will this likely increase to? is 350 unrealistic?

currently im doing 4-5 sessions on my rollers at about an hour doing structured efforts, then doing a couple of longer rides. what do i need to do to get it higher?

tapped on my phone on a bus...

Coaching.

There's no way anyone can tell you (correctly) what to do on here without knowing a whole lot more about you (e.g. we have a 16 page questionnaire for this).

No idea whether 350 W is realistic - there's no way to determine what's possible for definite, but looking at previous training in detail may give an idea. you should also note that you don't want to underestimate what's possible (i.e. >350 W). Many people think of a number (power) or feeling of fitness and when they reach it they ease off the gas

(edited because i'm a numpty ;-)

meanredspider

Possibly the most sensible thing I've ever read on here: we are all limited by our beliefs

okgo

ugo.santalucia wrote:

DO you need that number to increase?

If you've racked up that many points in 6 months, it means you are good at sprinting and for that your FPT is not that important... work on your strengths, I would say... get a coach that helps you improve what you are good at.

300 watts probably won't get you to the end of a decent level race so wouldn't matter how good your sprint is

Agree with Ric, though the law of averages may be stacked on the negative side given not many people at your weight get to 350w FTP. But that should act as a shot in the arm rather than a reason not to bother

FatTed

But that should act as a shot in the arm rather than a reason not to bother

I think the analogy of intravenous Drug abuse should not be encouraged.

bahzob

If you haven't already followed a structured training plan then I'd suggest first thing to do is follow one.

This will both give you the best chance of improving your FTP and give you a solid base of information about how you perform that you can use for future reference and to quantify strengths/weaknesses.

A coach can provide this and is a good investment if your target is to progress from Cat 2. That said a book like "Time Crunched Cyclist" is a cheaper alternative and a good way to check you can follow a rigid plan (Not everyone can due to real life).

It includes a 12 week experienced racer plan which should, amongst other things, improve your FTP. The simplest way to answer your OP would be test yourself, follow this plan and see what improvement has resulted.

ric/rstsport

If it's not too much self-promotion keep a check out on the RST Sport Facebook page and newsletter as we're just about to release details of the chance to win a YEAR's FREE coaching with RST https://www.facebook.com/RSTSport

Wrath Rob

I used the Racing and Training With Power book, plus Joe Friel's one, plus a turbo training, goal setting and a PowerTap. I went from 280w to 320w in 5 months so with some proper coaching and dedication I don't see it as an unreasonable ask, though it will depend where your fitness is right now, i.e. if you're already pretty fit then raising it by 50w with the amount of time available for training for you may be the limiting factor. As a mate said, training boils down to "more miles, harder". If you can't put the time in, you won't improve.

As hinted above, what will be more important is to look at the events you want to compete in, identify any limiting factors and work on them. For example my FTP is pretty good, but my limiting factor is recovery from intervals, so in a crit race with a lot of surges I'd get dropped before being able to compete in the sprint. Part of my training was therefore to do short, sharp intervals to train my body to recover quicker. If you're doing road races, what may be the limiting factor is a 3 minute climb on each loop of the circuit, so your 3 minute power would then be a lot more important to prevent being dropped. Conversely if you're doing TTs, your steady state power will be much more important and therefore you can focus more on FTP than the others.

DeVlaeminck

Re. the Time Crunched Cyclist book, does anyone who has it think it might be worth getting for someone in my situation. I've joined a gym with wattbikes and am doing quite a lot on them over the Winter so 60-90 minute sessions during the week will be a staple. Weekends though I do have time to do at least one 4 hour ride so my total time available for training is more like 8-10 hours than 6 - some weeks I could do more as if I get a day in the week when I'm not working I can get out for another longish ride.

Are the plans rigid for 6 hours - I'm aware they are quite high intensity - I've got a twin target of road racing (lvrc so 50-55mile toughish courses) and a half decent Marmotte next year. Would the time crunched plans be reasonable over winter ?

janesy

Thanks for all advice given.

I will look in to a coach, damn expensive though paying for snake oil.
(please don't take that as an insult or literally)

I know my weaknesses and strengths and have created a plan to work on them.

ric/rstsport

three options for coaching (oh dear all self-promotion!)

1) A custom made Training Plan from us
2) Full on coaching from us
3) Enter our competition and win a *year's* FREE coaching

janesy

Thanks Ric,

May be in touch.

BenderRodriguez

janesy wrote:

Thanks for all advice given.

I will look in to a coach, damn expensive though paying for snake oil.

You might enjoy this:

http://pelotonmagazine.com/the-ring/dav ... es-client/

mamba80

^ that is ace !!!

bahzob

DeVlaeminck wrote:

Re. the Time Crunched Cyclist book, does anyone who has it think it might be worth getting for someone in my situation. I've joined a gym with wattbikes and am doing quite a lot on them over the Winter so 60-90 minute sessions during the week will be a staple. Weekends though I do have time to do at least one 4 hour ride so my total time available for training is more like 8-10 hours than 6 - some weeks I could do more as if I get a day in the week when I'm not working I can get out for another longish ride.

Are the plans rigid for 6 hours - I'm aware they are quite high intensity - I've got a twin target of road racing (lvrc so 50-55mile toughish courses) and a half decent Marmotte next year. Would the time crunched plans be reasonable over winter ?

Yes it will be ideal. The plan is 6 hours minimum but the more time the better. It will fit in perfectly with your current availability, specifically it will give all the 60-90 minute sessions specific targets. It also has weekend workouts that can be either longer endurance or races.

Its fine for over winter. If time is limited then its important to maintain intensity to retain fitness. There are also a number of plans, some easier than others. What I would suggest is to identify the date next year when you want to reach peak fitness. Then work back 13-14 weeks from then and start the 12 week "racer" plan then. (followed by a short 1-2 week taper)

Between now and the start of the "racer" plan you could do the "new century" plan. This will get you used to the workouts, set some baselines in terms of target power and is good for events like the Marmotte. If you do this at 100% you should also see some increase in FTP. If you want to take it a bit easier over winter then doing it at around 90% should maintain current fitness level and not result in you feeling burned out before starting the "racer" plan.

That should get you well set up. The only change I would make depends on how the Marmotte ranks in your overall priorities. If it's high then in the build up to it I would drop one of the weekly workouts and substitute with 60-90 minutes of non-stop constant power in the "sweetspot" zone to simulate the effort of the climbs.

janesy

BenderRodriguez wrote:

janesy wrote:

Thanks for all advice given.

I will look in to a coach, damn expensive though paying for snake oil.

You might enjoy this:

http://pelotonmagazine.com/the-ring/dav ... es-client/

However, Tuppersmith remains optimistic. “I really learned a lot from Sam. If I can find another online coach to run my credit card, I’m pretty sure I can upgrade to Cat 4 next year. It’s doable.”

lol. there is a point when people should give up.

Tom Dean

bahzob wrote:

What I would suggest is to identify the date next year when you want to reach peak fitness. Then work back 13-14 weeks from then and start the 12 week "racer" plan then. (followed by a short 1-2 week taper

The book says that peak performance can be expected at around week 8.

bahzob

Tom Dean wrote:

bahzob wrote:

What I would suggest is to identify the date next year when you want to reach peak fitness. Then work back 13-14 weeks from then and start the 12 week "racer" plan then. (followed by a short 1-2 week taper

The book says that peak performance can be expected at around week 8.

My mistake, all the more reason for the OP to try it out as will yield a pretty definitive answer to his question within a couple of months.

colinsmith123

Dan Henchy's PBScience website is now back up after being unavailable for a while.

http://www.pbscience.com/

I know of no other cycling coaching website that provides so much free technical / training / coaching information. The Fact Sheets on the website are a great source of information as is Dan's blog.

Dan and Dr Helen Carter have the credentials to substantiate and support their claims. Unfortunately what I don't have is the money to be coached by them. Coaching isn't just about the science, if it was, Shane Sutton wouldn't be where he is today. Not all coaches are equal, just as cyclists are not all equal. We cannot all be world champions.

The OP's original post was, what increase can i expect in my ftp over winter,

As this is winter, a good place to start reading up on the science of why base training is important can be found here..

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/17-the-importance-of-base-training

bahzob

colinsmith123 wrote:

Dan Henchy's PBScience website is now back up after being unavailable for a while.

http://www.pbscience.com/

I know of no other cycling coaching website that provides so much free technical / training / coaching information. The Fact Sheets on the website are a great source of information as is Dan's blog.

Dan and Dr Helen Carter have the credentials to substantiate and support their claims. Unfortunately what I don't have is the money to be coached by them. Coaching isn't just about the science, if it was, Shane Sutton wouldn't be where he is today. Not all coaches are equal, just as cyclists are not all equal. We cannot all be world champions.

The OP's original post was, what increase can i expect in my ftp over winter,

As this is winter, a good place to start reading up on the science of why base training is important can be found here..

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/17-the-importance-of-base-training

It certainly looks like a good resource. There is a lot of good stuff in there. But I am afraid it also demonstrates the need to look around.

The statement "Limit or remove any higher intensity work" during base period is misleading and gives the wrong message.

Limit: yes, reduce the number of high intensity sessions a week.
Remove: Absolutely no. While it may not be worth trying to increase FTP over winter you do not want to see it decrease significantly. Remove high intensity and it will. This applies especially to part-time athletes and those getting older, it's even becoming mainstream opinion in the professional ranks who have unlimited training time.

colinsmith123

bahzob wrote:

colinsmith123 wrote:

Dan Henchy's PBScience website is now back up after being unavailable for a while.

http://www.pbscience.com/

I know of no other cycling coaching website that provides so much free technical / training / coaching information. The Fact Sheets on the website are a great source of information as is Dan's blog.

Dan and Dr Helen Carter have the credentials to substantiate and support their claims. Unfortunately what I don't have is the money to be coached by them. Coaching isn't just about the science, if it was, Shane Sutton wouldn't be where he is today. Not all coaches are equal, just as cyclists are not all equal. We cannot all be world champions.

The OP's original post was, what increase can i expect in my ftp over winter,

As this is winter, a good place to start reading up on the science of why base training is important can be found here..

http://www.pbscience.com/index.php/training-articles/factsheets/17-the-importance-of-base-training

It certainly looks like a good resource. There is a lot of good stuff in there. But I am afraid it also demonstrates the need to look around.

The statement "Limit or remove any higher intensity work" during base period is misleading and gives the wrong message.

Limit: yes, reduce the number of high intensity sessions a week.
Remove: Absolutely no. While it may not be worth trying to increase FTP over winter you do not want to see it decrease significantly. Remove high intensity and it will. This applies especially to part-time athletes and those getting older, it's even becoming mainstream opinion in the professional ranks who have unlimited training time.

Dan and Dr Helen Carter have the credentials to substantiate and support their claims.

Here's Helen's..

http://about.brighton.ac.uk/sasm/about-us/contacting-staff/academic-staff/hc35/

okgo

So do the coaches who reccomend keeping intensity over the winter.

meanredspider

bahzob wrote:

This applies especially to part-time athletes and those getting older

Yes. Those athletes getting younger don't need to worry.

Being slightly more serious - the reason these debates are pretty pointless is that, whilst we can land a fridge on a speeding rock a zillion miles away, we don't know the best ways for everyone to get fit. We are all too different even if we do understand what works for some people.

I love how, in these debates, people reach for the scientific papers like Wild West gun slingers. Have I seen one example of something definitive yet? No, not once. We can't even decide what's good for us to eat. Let's be honest with ourselves.

charlie_potatoes

meanredspider wrote:

Being slightly more serious - the reason these debates are pretty pointless is that, whilst we can land a fridge on a speeding rock a zillion miles away, we don't know the best ways for everyone to get fit. We are all too different even if we do understand what works for some people.

I love how, in these debates, people reach for the scientific papers like Wild West gun slingers. Have I seen one example of something definitive yet? No, not once. We can't even decide what's good for us to eat. Let's be honest with ourselves.

Good points well made.

imposter2.0

Charlie Potatoes wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Being slightly more serious - the reason these debates are pretty pointless is that, whilst we can land a fridge on a speeding rock a zillion miles away, we don't know the best ways for everyone to get fit. We are all too different even if we do understand what works for some people.

I love how, in these debates, people reach for the scientific papers like Wild West gun slingers. Have I seen one example of something definitive yet? No, not once. We can't even decide what's good for us to eat. Let's be honest with ourselves.

Good points well made.

Except for the 'fridge' bit - I thought it was a washing machine..??

BenderRodriguez

meanredspider wrote:

Being slightly more serious - the reason these debates are pretty pointless is that, whilst we can land a fridge on a speeding rock a zillion miles away, we don't know the best ways for everyone to get fit. We are all too different even if we do understand what works for some people.

I love how, in these debates, people reach for the scientific papers like Wild West gun slingers. Have I seen one example of something definitive yet? No, not once. We can't even decide what's good for us to eat. Let's be honest with ourselves.

A great post! Of course, if you are in the business of selling coaching services, then you have to pretend that you really do know what will work for any given individual. You might even pretend that that you can work this out from a multi-page questionnaire...

Bottom line is that everyone involved in selling coaching services will, to a large degree, be basing what they tell their clients on little more than own personal beliefs, even if they pretend that their own beliefs are the only ones actually supported by the evidence. (Of course, if you select you evidence carefully enough you can 'prove' almost anything. A great example was the 'God was an astronaut' nonsense popularised by Erich von Daniken...)

For example, take this quote from the link given above:

Part of the argument against base training is that it does not improve fitness per se – fitness usually being defined in terms of VO2 max, MMP or any of the commonly used thresholds. Endurance is a different characteristic than that measured by lab or field testing – quite simply it is the ability to endure a specific intensity. For example, consider two athletes with a lactate threshold at 200W. The first athlete can complete 2hrs riding constantly at lactate threshold whereas the second can ride for 4hrs at the same intensity – in other words the second athlete has better endurance.

There are plenty of other 'experts' around (such as Andrew Coggan, the power-meter guy) who would say that this a total nonsense and that if two riders have the same threshold power output, they will, to all intents and purposes, have the same endurance ability, at all levels from 4 minutes right up to an ultra-endurance effort lasting 37 hours.

They can't both be right, whatever their 'credentials'!

BenderRodriguez

P.s. I wouldn't deny that many people who buy coaching services improve. However, I have a feeling this probably has a lot more to with the fact that, having spent thousands on coaching services, and having someone to answer to, means that most people will simply work harder than they did previously as they don't want to waste their 'investment', rather than because the plan they are given to follow represents some sort of 'optimum' for that individual, and which can only be identified with 'expert' help.