Help - I can't seem to improve my threshold power?!!
Comments
-
Well it was in reference to my own training really.0
-
I may have this wrong I'm not sure but in my case I'm equating this to times going up alpe d'huez but those percentage improvements in watts would be pretty significant time increases I mean even even 10 watts is no small amount in time I mean 37 watts would equate to a pretty good chunk of time, or does it not work like that, I mean 25% and 30 to 50 watts is by my reckoning a pretty serious time increase0
-
A 25% increase in watts wouldnt equate to a 25% increase in speed.0
-
I didn't say it did they are saying a 25% increase in watts or 30 to 50 watts improvement not speed but if you convert that to watts required to do time then it's pretty significant or am I getting it all wrong ?Fenix wrote:A 25% increase in watts wouldnt equate to a 25% increase in speed.0 -
0
-
thecycleclinic wrote:The most likely cause of being stuck at the same power is you are doing the same thing week in week out and therefore you do not develop.
the other guy has said what I would also say a big shift in volume for me helped alot. I used to do 10-12hrs a week and have an with an actual average power for 1hr of about 210W-220W. I doubled my volume and start doing more intervals and power I can sustain for 1 hour (real average for 1 hour) shot up to a peak of 270W this year. I dont do 20 minute tests as I never ride like that. What I am more interested in how much I can deliver over an hour in a race as some races are one hour.
However some riders see similar improvement from doing 10-12hrs a week on a turbo mostly doing intervals in a structured way. I know that would not work for me. As alex said everyone responds differently to training and it also depends on what you are trying to acheive. Improve your FTP for what end? IT is also not just FTP that is important but your ability to recover after hard efforts and go again. Although the the two are connected they I think are not trained the same way.
I don't do 20 minute time trials either, but isn't the 20 minute test still a key metric of your fitness and good training? It's got to be at least as important as the power you can sustain for one hour, no? Unless you do exclusively 25 mile tt, and even then, a high 20 minute power is a very good thing. Or are you talking about a high average over an hour, but with a very peaky profile? High normalised power.0 -
IanLindsay wrote:I am frustrated that although I train consistently I don't seem to be able to increase my functional threshold power which has been stuck around 220 Watts for the last year. I am 53 and train 6 days a week putting in about 120-150 miles a week including 2x 1hr interval sessions, 2x strength training in the gym and 2x longer rides at the weekend of up to 3 hours. But whatever I do my FTP seems to stick at 210-220W. Any advice on what to do to put out more watts? Am I training too much??
none of the above will assist in improving your ftp. FTP is just a guide as to the level of ability people may have or not, if you want to improve your time trial ability then yes you will need to see gains in your ftp.
You will make big gains by training for long periods just below your FTP if indeed your numbers are correct and shorter efforts around it and above it, nothing less than 10mins really. True gains in fitness and speed is the ability to hold a higher effort even if only slightly higher .5mph for example over your normal rides and the only way to do that is to train to hold steady efforts - not short max intervals.Team4Luke supports Cardiac Risk in the Young0 -
alex99 yes what I can sustain over a one hour crit race is more important to me than what i can do over 20 minutes on a turbo. I dabble with TT's, I treat them as a training ride. so if I can sustain a high average power for one hour with lots of sprinting then I feel I am fit (i.e higher NP). I could train to do well in a 20 minute tests but not be able to sprint and recover quickly to go again or stay on or near the front. I race regularly because I enjoy it so i do plenty of hour tests and so I get a good feeling for what is missing. So all the training I do is based around improving recovery times, building endurance, longer sprints (I a pretty poor at short ones), improving average power sustained for 1-2hrs, and improving 1-10 minute power.
I dont use a turbo so a 20 minute test on the road is impractical.http://www.thecycleclinic.co.uk -wheel building and other stuff.0 -
shorter intervals should not be negleted though. team 4 luke is correct in one way to improve FTP 5 to 20 minute intervals are used. under overs are also used which are horrible. under overs are hard to do on the road though but very useful for TT training.
Pyramids are used by some riders I know with good results.http://www.thecycleclinic.co.uk -wheel building and other stuff.0 -
Can I ask is their a reason why 2x20 seems to be the standard to train threshold why not just do an hour ?0
-
I don't suggest people ride at above threshold for such efforts. Far better to ride them well in control so that you can back up and repeat such efforts more regularly, or still be able to do so when a little fatigued.VamP wrote:reacher wrote:Can I ask is their a reason why 2x20 seems to be the standard to train threshold why not just do an hour ?
Because you can ride at slightly above FTP for 20 minutes, but not for an hour. Progressive loading and all that.
As for the OP, there is no other reason than they are convenient. With a warm up and cool down and a short break in between it makes for a nice hour long workout and they are pretty easy to track and see how performance progresses. The original suggestion arose simply because Andy Coggan used to train on a road that was just the right distance to provide a 20-minute TT like effort, although people have been doing efforts of this duration for quite some time. It's also about the time it takes for TT riders to complete a 10-mile (16km) TT.
Of course they are just one of hundreds of workouts one can do to improve threshold power. No particular reason not to do a longer effort. Indeed longer efforts are well worth it, and no reason to do them right at threshold, you still get a lot of training bang for your buck if you knock up to 10% off the power.0 -
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
I don't suggest people ride at above threshold for such efforts. Far better to ride them well in control so that you can back up and repeat such efforts more regularly, or still be able to do so when a little fatigued.VamP wrote:reacher wrote:Can I ask is their a reason why 2x20 seems to be the standard to train threshold why not just do an hour ?
Because you can ride at slightly above FTP for 20 minutes, but not for an hour. Progressive loading and all that.
As for the OP, there is no other reason than they are convenient. With a warm up and cool down and a short break in between it makes for a nice hour long workout and they are pretty easy to track and see how performance progresses. The original suggestion arose simply because Andy Coggan used to train on a road that was just the right distance to provide a 20-minute TT like effort, although people have been doing efforts of this duration for quite some time. It's also about the time it takes for TT riders to complete a 10-mile (16km) TT.
Of course they are just one of hundreds of workouts one can do to improve threshold power. No particular reason not to do a longer effort. Indeed longer efforts are well worth it, and no reason to do them right at threshold, you still get a lot of training bang for your buck if you knock up to 10% off the power.
Ok I see what your saying, their hard work I've been doing them for an hour, they seem to work very well0 -
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
I don't suggest people ride at above threshold for such efforts. Far better to ride them well in control so that you can back up and repeat such efforts more regularly, or still be able to do so when a little fatigued.VamP wrote:reacher wrote:Can I ask is their a reason why 2x20 seems to be the standard to train threshold why not just do an hour ?
Because you can ride at slightly above FTP for 20 minutes, but not for an hour. Progressive loading and all that.
That's interesting. Is it purely to stop people building a psychological aversion to these sessions, or do you associate negative physiological impact with this?
Personally, I've been adhering to the 'alls you can do' maxim, so sometimes I'm just over and sometimes slightly under. Having said that, I seem to have replaced 2x20 with 3x10 and the Hour of Power workouts almost entirely now.
I don't TT.0 -
Everyone is different of course but I find the approach of trying to set a PB every time you hop on the bike for such a session can be counterproductive. It can be both physiological and psychological.VamP wrote:Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
I don't suggest people ride at above threshold for such efforts. Far better to ride them well in control so that you can back up and repeat such efforts more regularly, or still be able to do so when a little fatigued.VamP wrote:reacher wrote:Can I ask is their a reason why 2x20 seems to be the standard to train threshold why not just do an hour ?
Because you can ride at slightly above FTP for 20 minutes, but not for an hour. Progressive loading and all that.
That's interesting. Is it purely to stop people building a psychological aversion to these sessions, or do you associate negative physiological impact with this?
Personally, I've been adhering to the 'alls you can do' maxim, so sometimes I'm just over and sometimes slightly under. Having said that, I seem to have replaced 2x20 with 3x10 and the Hour of Power workouts almost entirely now.
I don't TT.
The real question is how such an approach fits with all the rest of one's training, because one training session does not a season make. If e.g. you are working on building high training loads as well as building threshold capacity (since that's what's specifically required for your particular goals), you might find attempting to go that hard frequently may result in aborted sessions which may have been effectively completed if approached a little more conservatively. That's not to say you don't rev out the engine at times or that it's bad to do (it's not), just to take care when trying to do it all the time - it's akin to "race and recover" mode, which ultimately leads to a decline in fitness.
But if e.g. your loads are not particularly high (forwhatever reason), then you will probably find you have sufficient recovery and pushing hard each time is the only real avenue to generating additional training stress required to stimulate further adaptations.
And of course motivation is key with training, some people love these sorts of sessions, others would rather self harm.
Then of course not everyone has a training environment suitable to execute such efforts, e.g. they live in a busy city, no long steady gradient terrain nearby, indoor trainer set up not that good.
YMMV0 -
Good post Alex.
I don't tend to find myself abandoning planned sessions so I don't think I'm under threat but I do find that I am a relatively low responder to training and need good quality sessions and a fairly negative TSB to see performance improvements. Sweet spot doesn't tend to deliver for me.
Can you expand a little on the concept of "race and recover". As I hadn't heard that expression before and without seeing what's behind it, it leaves me thinking "what's wrong with that?"
0 -
There is nothing wrong with it, since many actually plan to race. The issue is the mix and timing of HIT matters in context of when you want to have your best form.VamP wrote:Can you expand a little on the concept of "race and recover". As I hadn't heard that expression before and without seeing what's behind it, it leaves me thinking "what's wrong with that?"
Generally the amount of recovery required from repeated high intensity work means that over time, training loads eventually drop away to the point that fitness drops as well. There comes a time when putting away the high intensity work for a while is necessary to permit the body to rebuild.
Keep in mind that the time course for physiological adaptations are variable, e.g. one can build up their lactate threshold for months on end, while one's VO2max can be maxed out in a matter of weeks and will thereafter plateau or even begin to decline with fatigue (physical and mental), and shorter duration anaerobic oriented efforts have a relatively short time course for adaptation as well (days to weeks). While most adaptations are stimulated by riding at pretty much all intensities across the spectrum, a focus on one area will generally come at some expense to another.0 -
reacher wrote:Again I'm impressed 300 watts I'm no expert but from what I understand that's a huge improvement, may I ask how heavy you are ? Also out of interest again how are you measuring that ?
I fluctuate between 75-80kg. The measurement is on a wattbike using the usual 20 min FTP test and calculation so weight doesn't really influence things. I use the same wattbike every time I test and train on it just to make sure there isn't any variation in the way that the power measurement is calibrated.0 -
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
There is nothing wrong with it, since many actually plan to race. The issue is the mix and timing of HIT matters in context of when you want to have your best form.VamP wrote:Can you expand a little on the concept of "race and recover". As I hadn't heard that expression before and without seeing what's behind it, it leaves me thinking "what's wrong with that?"
Generally the amount of recovery required from repeated high intensity work means that over time, training loads eventually drop away to the point that fitness drops as well. There comes a time when putting away the high intensity work for a while is necessary to permit the body to rebuild.
Keep in mind that the time course for physiological adaptations are variable, e.g. one can build up their lactate threshold for months on end, while one's VO2max can be maxed out in a matter of weeks and will thereafter plateau or even begin to decline with fatigue (physical and mental), and shorter duration anaerobic oriented efforts have a relatively short time course for adaptation as well (days to weeks). While most adaptations are stimulated by riding at pretty much all intensities across the spectrum, a focus on one area will generally come at some expense to another.
This might explain why I always seem to peak mid-season (cross) and trail off a bit just in time for the key races
Perhaps the answer is not to focus quite so much on z5 and z6 in the first half of the season, and not to altogether drop z4 work in the second half. This is what I am experimenting with this season, but it's too early to say if it's making a difference.0 -
timotie0612 wrote:reacher wrote:Again I'm impressed 300 watts I'm no expert but from what I understand that's a huge improvement, may I ask how heavy you are ? Also out of interest again how are you measuring that ?
I fluctuate between 75-80kg. The measurement is on a wattbike using the usual 20 min FTP test and calculation so weight doesn't really influence things. I use the same wattbike every time I test and train on it just to make sure there isn't any variation in the way that the power measurement is calibrated.
This is where I'm struggling a bit to work all this out, to go from 240 watts to nearly 300 is as I say very impressive from what i understand that's a big improvement or am I getting myself confused because I just don't see how no matter how hard I trained or what system/coaching I had to move myself nearly 60 watts on a climb in the alpes would equate to a massive increase in my time or would it, I've put it into online calculater weight x watts = time0 -
Quite possibly (hard to say really since it's a complex mix of many factors). Sometimes a bit of attention to the top end has its place early on, it might just be a matter of dose.VamP wrote:Perhaps the answer is not to focus quite so much on z5 and z6 in the first half of the season, and not to altogether drop z4 work in the second half. This is what I am experimenting with this season, but it's too early to say if it's making a difference.
The first question to answer is to understand what your priorities are, then understand what's needed and train accordingly.0 -
reacher wrote:timotie0612 wrote:reacher wrote:Again I'm impressed 300 watts I'm no expert but from what I understand that's a huge improvement, may I ask how heavy you are ? Also out of interest again how are you measuring that ?
I fluctuate between 75-80kg. The measurement is on a wattbike using the usual 20 min FTP test and calculation so weight doesn't really influence things. I use the same wattbike every time I test and train on it just to make sure there isn't any variation in the way that the power measurement is calibrated.
This is where I'm struggling a bit to work all this out, to go from 240 watts to nearly 300 is as I say very impressive from what i understand that's a big improvement or am I getting myself confused because I just don't see how no matter how hard I trained or what system/coaching I had to move myself nearly 60 watts on a climb in the alpes would equate to a massive increase in my time or would it, I've put it into online calculater weight x watts = time
It also depends on what is contributing most to your weight. Muscle and fat compete for Oxygen. The leaner your muscle is, the more efficiently you'll function.0
