![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#31 | |||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kansas City, USA
Posts: 3,691
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Still doesn't mean you can't be a great and successful racer. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#32 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 96
|
Quote:
I'm not saying I have the answer because I'm not an "elite" cyclist and don't have access to their training programs. But when I read this statement, more stimulus = more adaptation, the question that came to mind was, "at what cost?" I would think elite cyclists and their coaches would opt for overload to the point of diminishing returns, and then take as much rest as they can to consolidate fitness and avoid psychological burnout. At some point more stimulus is not going to create adaptation, only fatigue, which will compromise performance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 | ||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kansas City, USA
Posts: 3,691
|
Quote:
Sorry, that was the short answer to the question quoted above the statement, not a suggested general training philosophy. Obviously there is a breaking point, but up until that point there would be a positive correlation between the amount of training and the resulting improvements. 8 hours per week would still be well down on that curve, IMO. Quote:
The more hours they have to work with, the more they can fine tune this process and the further they can inch out on that branch without cracking it. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#34 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 96
|
^ strongly agree on both points
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 337
|
Until recently, I've always placed a big emphasis on intensity. But historically, all my big improvements have been the result of increased volume. Even at the cost of a little intensity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 45
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#37 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/ Check out item 12 for more info on CTL. -Dave |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#38 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 45
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#39 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,743
|
Quote:
I would say, in general, as high as you can manage while not degrading event specific fitness. How many season's worth of power meter data do you have? The answer may already be in the data.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#40 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 45
|
Quote:
I'll probably kick it back a notch for a week then start building up again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#41 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
Last year was my first complete year with power data. My CTL peaked with a one day high of 104 but was in the 80s to 90s most of the race season. I raced well with that base but would have liked a bit more for tapers and perhaps to feel stronger on day two and three of stage races. I've just hit 100 this season all of it from indoor training and hope to be somewhere around 110 by the first stage races or multiday events roll around. There are no hard and fast rules and it depends a lot on the kind of events you're targeting but I wouldn't want to do much racing with my CTL below 80 and doubt I'll ever get above 120 based on available time to train and recover. One way to think of it is that a CTL of 100 means you've averaged a full one hour time trial raced at FTP per day for the last 3 months or more. With a base like that a run of the mill crit is pretty close to your average daily load, a road race a bit more and a time trial probably the same or less. It's nice to go into a weekend of racing knowing the events are on par with your average load for the previous 3 months. With a CTL of 50 or 60 almost any event is going to be above your average load and multiday events can really force you to dig deep. -Dave |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 45
|
Quote:
So it looks like it will be a season of discovery for me. But currently, like I mentioned, I'm just below 80 CTL. It went from 66.2 to 77.8 in 3 weeks, I think I might have overdone things a bit with increasing my training load so quickly. I had a bad crash in Dec, broke my collar-bone.. when things were feeling better I really ramped up the training load. I can't imagine getting to the 90 range at my current rate. This general feeling of fatigue is starting to set in. I think it time for an easy week. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#43 | ||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
Were you trying a lot of high end work as part of the mix as in chasing 20 minute or 5 minute records frequently during your training? Did you have a lot of L5 and or L6 workouts during that period? Were you diligent about refueling with carbs and some protein in the critical half hour after each workout?( http://www.mysports101.com/a.php?a=17 ) Were you dealing with other unexpected life stresses? Quote:
I find dropping back to a week or two of concentrated SST work can be really refreshing if I've dug a bit too deep and can help me break through power plateaus and staleness. Anyway a soft week can still move you forward but not quite as aggressively as what you've been doing. Good luck, -Dave |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#44 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 110
|
Quote:
I have to disagree with you. A race, even a crit, should far exceed your average daily load. If this isn't true then you are either racing in a category way to slow for you or you are trainning way to hard and to tired to race properly. If you are able to one full hour of FTP per day for the last 3 months then your estimate for FTP is to low or you system of measurement system is incorrect. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#45 | ||
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,506
|
Quote:
Quote:
By definition a CTL of 100 is a load equal to riding a full hour at FTP every day for the last 3 months. That's the way the math works out based on FTP and many folks have CTL in excess of 100. Every one of them has handled a daily average load equal to a full one hour time trial ridden at FTP. Sure they more than likely work harder some days and rest on other days and it's doubtful that they train at an intensity equal to a one hour TT at race pace. Most folks will train at lower intensity but they'll also train longer than an hour per day and it's the long term TSS average(CTL) that what we're talking about. The example I've given is directly from the definition of TSS and from that CTL. Having a CTL at or above 100 doesn't mean you've underestimated your FTP, it means you've trained a lot. -Dave Last edited by daveryanwyoming : 17-03.-2008 at 09:15 AM. |
||
|
|
|