Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Power Training › Kilowatt club
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Kilowatt club - Page 2

post #16 of 138
7/11/06 at 2:22pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndROOb
L4 for the last month has been a 25 mile TT at the weekend, followed by a 10 or a 25 midweek. This was not that dis-similar during the TT training plan.

L5: I have started to re-address L5 recently, as I found that the 'plan' tended to address L6 more regularly. There was some L5 work, but not much. So now, I plan to do a couple of 6x4 or 5x5 sessions weekly.

L6: As mentioned above, I have been doing plenty, from 3 minute sessions at 130% ftp, 2 minute sessions at 150% ftp, and 1 minute sessions at 170-180% ftp. Weekly total ~ 1 hr. I plan to continue using these but mainly for pre-race day tune-ups.
So, my interpretation is that you're doing 1.5-2 hrs L4, 0 L5, 1 hr L6. Total L4-L6 ~2.5-3 hrs. Does that sound right?

As you may know from some of my posts in other threads, I have come around to summarizing my training with one set of statistics -- total duration by level, L4-L7. In fact, I wrote a program to parse my ride files for exactly this purpose. My first priority is a grand total volume and my second priority is the mix. I have found by trial and error that <3 hrs grand total results in small (if any) increases in power at any point on my MP/duration curve. Of course, in saying that I have never put less than 50% of my total volume in L4. So, would my VO2MAX and/or AWC increase significantly if I did 3 hrs/wk at L5/L6 exclusively? Probably, but I have never tried it. My gains start to kick in between 3-6 hours and >6 hours they really kick in. My current regimen is ~8 hrs L4, 1.5-2 hrs L5, 1.5-2 hrs L6, ~10mins L7 per week. Now, that's a lot of volume and my rides have to be extremely efficient to attain those stats. I just don't waste any unnecessary time in L1-L3. Everybody wants to talk about the mix as though that's the only thing required to increase power. I think one has to focus on volume as well. I actually think total volume is more important than the mix.
Reply
Reply
post #17 of 138
7/11/06 at 4:35pm
Thread Starter 

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by RapDaddyo
So, my interpretation is that you're doing 1.5-2 hrs L4, 0 L5, 1 hr L6. Total L4-L6 ~2.5-3 hrs. Does that sound right?

As you may know from some of my posts in other threads, I have come around to summarizing my training with one set of statistics -- total duration by level, L4-L7. In fact, I wrote a program to parse my ride files for exactly this purpose. My first priority is a grand total volume and my second priority is the mix. I have found by trial and error that <3 hrs grand total results in small (if any) increases in power at any point on my MP/duration curve. Of course, in saying that I have never put less than 50% of my total volume in L4. So, would my VO2MAX and/or AWC increase significantly if I did 3 hrs/wk at L5/L6 exclusively? Probably, but I have never tried it. My gains start to kick in between 3-6 hours and >6 hours they really kick in. My current regimen is ~8 hrs L4, 1.5-2 hrs L5, 1.5-2 hrs L6, ~10mins L7 per week. Now, that's a lot of volume and my rides have to be extremely efficient to attain those stats. I just don't waste any unnecessary time in L1-L3. Everybody wants to talk about the mix as though that's the only thing required to increase power. I think one has to focus on volume as well. I actually think total volume is more important than the mix.
Then I must start extending my volume, at a rate that wont kill me, and base it around a ratio of 4:1:1 in respect to L4:L5:L6, and add a spoon full of L7, and I might start seeing some noticeable results. Would I be right in saying that the more volume you train at a given intensity, the quicker you will become used to that intensity, that in turn enables you to start training at a higher intensity?
Reply
Reply
post #18 of 138
7/11/06 at 4:57pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndROOb
Then I must start extending my volume, at a rate that wont kill me, and base it around a ratio of 4:1:1 in respect to L4:L5:L6, and add a spoon full of L7, and I might start seeing some noticeable results. Would I be right in saying that the more volume you train at a given intensity, the quicker you will become used to that intensity, that in turn enables you to start training at a higher intensity?
I think the ratio (mix) is ideally a function of three factors: (1) where you are in the annual training cycle; (2) what your target events are; and (3) what your training has been. I put a lot of emphasis on L4 and L5 throughout the year because my FTP is important to every single one of my target events. In fact, I care more about my 2hr power than my 1hr power. I don't put much emphasis on L6 until ~6 weeks before a target event because I think AWC responds quickly to training and thus I can leave it until closer to an event. That being said, I think AWC is huge (mega-huge) for all mass-start races and that when a rider gets dropped and is bewildered because his NP at that point was well within his FTP, the first thing I would do is a match analysis of his ride to see how many matches he burned up to that point and especially in the 5-10 minutes immediately preceding getting dropped.

As to getting used to a given intensity with more volume, yes, that does happen to some extent. More importantly, the physiological adaptation (over time) enables one to ride at a given intensity longer. What happens (to me, at least) is that when I initially ride at a demanding intensity (e.g., 300W) my quads start squawking almost immediately. The desire to back off and give them some relief is strong and continuous. But, after awhile, after days and hours at that intensity, they start squawking later and later and later and I'm able to ride for a very long duration. I get to the point where I look down after many minutes and say, "When are you boys going to start squawking?" Unfortunately, that's when I know I need to increase the intensity. Ugh! Here we go again.
Reply
Reply
post #19 of 138
7/12/06 at 9:57pm

Re: Kilowatt club

i'm in to today during a short but high intensity group ride we had a couple sprints, 1st one i had 1058w for 5s, tapering a bit to 1038w for 10s, i'm 23, 73kg
Reply
Reply
post #20 of 138
7/13/06 at 5:43pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Hah! Add me to the list! I got a max on the PTap cpu of 1011 today. This is definitely the first time I've seen that go into four digits. It was probably only a single sample, and Andy has pointed out the "precession" effect on PowerTaps makes single-sample maxes suspect, but I'm counting it...
Reply
Reply
post #21 of 138
7/13/06 at 6:03pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmavm
Hah! Add me to the list! I got a max on the PTap cpu of 1011 today. This is definitely the first time I've seen that go into four digits. It was probably only a single sample, and Andy has pointed out the "precession" effect on PowerTaps makes single-sample maxes suspect, but I'm counting it...
Not only do I think you should count it, I think you should do what I did the first time I broke the 1 kW barrier: take a pic of display for posterity!
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 138
7/13/06 at 6:20pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by acoggan
Not only do I think you should count it, I think you should do what I did the first time I broke the 1 kW barrier: take a pic of display for posterity!
I assume you're talking about the "AV watts" display for a 30-second interval...
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 138
7/13/06 at 7:15pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenG
I assume you're talking about the "AV watts" display for a 30-second interval...
Actually, it's my FT that's now 1011W. How will I do in cat 5 with this sort of power output?
Reply
Reply
post #24 of 138
7/13/06 at 7:22pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by kmavm
Actually, it's my FT that's now 1011W. How will I do in cat 5 with this sort of power output?
It depends. How much do you weigh?
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 138
7/13/06 at 7:59pm
Thread Starter 

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndROOb
Well, I have one goal(for 2 seasons now) to go under the hour for a 25mile(40km) TT, and I have realised that I can achieve this with >240w. My PB at the moment is 1.00.03(AP: 239w) , so close and yet so far, but having hit the 1000w for 2 seconds, I want to hold it for 5 seconds, and then longer.
Managed to throw down 1052w for 5 seconds yesterday

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndROOb
I also hope to get my 5 minute power up to 310-320w, and that currently lies at 302w. My anaerobic capacity seems pretty good so with a few efforts I think this is possible.
Today, 315w for 5 minutes, in the bag

My power profile is starting to look a bit better now.
The only remaining goal.......................25 miles.
59.59 would be just fine.
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 138
7/13/06 at 11:09pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Ok, I'm in. And I tell ya, it's not easy for an old guy either!
LL
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 138
7/13/06 at 11:30pm

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndROOb
The only remaining goal.......................25 miles.
59.59 would be just fine.
I think the right pacing strategy alone will get you to that goal. Or, maybe just change your tires.
Reply
Reply
post #28 of 138
7/14/06 at 7:30am
Thread Starter 

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by RapDaddyo
I think the right pacing strategy alone will get you to that goal. Or, maybe just change your tires.
Funny thing is, RD, right up to the TT when I was 3 seconds over the hour, I had my pacing strategy well tuned, a little over-powered to start with but fairly cinsistant given the topography. This strategy was using the constant power display.
Then for some reason(desperation possibly ), I started to use the average power display, and this has not helped. The main reason is because I found that I was over-compensating if the AP dropped in order to bring it back to where it should be, resulting in an uneven output.

As a result of this(3 TT's later), I am returning to following constant power output, as I feel this is what got me closest, so this will get me under.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 138
7/14/06 at 9:57am

Re: Kilowatt club

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndROOb
Funny thing is, RD, right up to the TT when I was 3 seconds over the hour, I had my pacing strategy well tuned, a little over-powered to start with but fairly cinsistant given the topography. This strategy was using the constant power display.
Then for some reason(desperation possibly ), I started to use the average power display, and this has not helped. The main reason is because I found that I was over-compensating if the AP dropped in order to bring it back to where it should be, resulting in an uneven output.

As a result of this(3 TT's later), I am returning to following constant power output, as I feel this is what got me closest, so this will get me under.
I can see that. I have never ridden with AP on my display, but I can understand the over-correction tendency. I don't even like a long average interval for current power. I set up my PT computer for the shortest averaging duration of watts, speed and cadence.
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 138
8/7/06 at 1:05pm

Re: Kilowatt club

yesterday i became part of the kilowatt for 30 seconds club. at 69kgs, i'm fairly confident my long sprint is better than my FTP of 4.92w/kg. anybody know what type of w/kg and absolute watts top kilo competitors generate in that first half of a kilo?
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Power Training
Cycling Forums › Forums › Bikes › Power Training › Kilowatt club