Increase power or duration?

Originally Posted by postal_bag

I did my 1 hr test on the trainer today. I started at just under 72% of my MAP, thinking that I was playing it "safe". Well it turns out I was slightly optimistic. I did manage to hold this effort for ~26 min, but at that point I was dying for some relief. I reduced the power by ~10% (sigh!) and held that for about 10 minutes. This seemed to get me back on track, so I began to ramp up the power by 5 watts, every 3 min, until I finished the hour, strongly, at 5 watts above my starting power level.

In the end, my average power was ~4% lower than my target level. It's amazing, the effect of over estimating by a mere 10 watts. I felt that if I had started the test at this level, I could have completed the hour with no need to reduce the power at any point. I may even have been able to increase it by a small amount. My average heart rate for the hour was 89.5% of what I believe is my maximum (as per my recent MAP test).

I will re-test some time next week, being sure not to go out too hard; maybe at 3% less. Trial and error, I guess.

BTW, my average power was within 2% of my previously assumed FT, prior to my most recent MAP test.

Originally Posted by ric_stern/RST

When i drew up my schema for training with power, this was the data point that i had the least amount of data for (and 12 hour data was also somewhat limited). The data i had 'only' covered the world pursuit champion (quite a few data points from him), a female pursuiter at top five world level, a couple of first cats, and some second cats.

all the data points fitted into that 88 - 91%* range for 'all-out' single bouts of exercise of around 4 to 5 mins or so. some of the data was from actual pursuit heats, but there's several hours between heats.

*i think my data point was actually slightly less, but i'm generally not too good at such very short efforts, so i may have discounted that and tried a better attempt later.

I guess it maybe possible to exceed this recommendation (88 - 91%), and trying to recall the article at cyclingnews, i'm pretty sure that i did make that observation (that i wasn't overly certain about this data point). i think i left it at the recommendation based on the limited data i had, which included world champion and record holder.
ric

Originally Posted by fergie

Interesting. The Cycling NZ testing protocol includes a V02max test and a 4km performance test using the Kingcycle. Assuming MAP correlates well with Power at V02 I have had two riders do the 4km test so far. One at 106% of power at V02 and one at 110% of power at V02. The 4km test is done 15min after the V02 test.

Okay it's only two riders, but before I get around to testing a decent sample size am I making some mistake in the testing or my assumptions.

Hamish Ferguson