Am I getting nowhere? Power flat, speed up...

fabiosav

Odd data over time:
I’m a ex-elite level athlete (Worlds in cross country skiing) who took up cycling two years ago. This was after “tapering” (eg darn little activity) for about 20 years... Anyway last season, when I was just starting out average 20 min power ran about 195W. 4,000 miles (not ‘fun rides’, but pushing myself on a lot of it, with a coach) I am up to 220W for 20 min, not much above end of last season. I would say the speed is well up, with 100K ride at 20 mph average, most of it running 22-23MPH. Easy to ride forever at 18 mph.

Am I obsessing over the wrong data?
Am I getting nowhere?
Is my coach not optimizing my results?

Any thoughts?

RapDaddyo

Could it be a volume issue? 4K miles sounds like a lot, but when I looked at my training log I noticed that 4K miles is ~15 weeks of training for me. I think that one can clearly "waste" time in the saddle by spending a lot of minutes at tempo pace, but OTOH I think there is a minimum training volume required to generate significant improvements in power.

fabiosav

Interesting. In all honesty (I won't be offended), do you think 4K is insufficent to get the 20 min up? Would you roll to more power work?

RapDaddyo

Well, first off, I track time and not miles. I mean, I can compute my miles (which I did to respond to your post) but I can go for months and never even add them up. Personally, I set weekly goals of a minimum number of minutes in L4, L5 and L6. Until recently, my weekly goal was 3 hrs/wk in L4-L6, with about a 50%/30%/20% distribution. A couple of weeks ago I increased my goal to 5 hrs/wk with the same distribution. With recovery rides (I prefer not to take days off) and group rides, I get in lots of minutes in L1-L3, but I don't have any defined goals for these minutes. IOW, my only volume goals are stated in terms of minutes in L4, L5 and L6. That's because I think quality minutes at those levels will result in an increase in sustainable power, my main training objective at this point. There are probably some studies on training volumes, but I don't have any to recommend at the moment. I suppose if I had to guess at a minimum training volume to make significant progress I would say maybe 7-10 hours/week, but that is a pure guess. I'm sure someone can point you to a good study on this subject. If your 4K miles has been spread over 2 years, that's ~160 miles/month, or ~8 hrs/month at 18mph. That seems low to me to expect significant progress. I'm not sure it will matter much how effectively you use your time in the saddle if you don't increase your volume, but I could be wrong about this.

Dini77

That's a good point RDO. I also think there;s too much hang-up on miles/week, rather than time at specific levels - i haven;t got a power meter yet so i have to go off HR or perceived effort for all my training zones, but i focus on time spent at specific zones and structure my program on that . Before i got serious (and got a coach) i spent way too much time/miles on tempo riding and not enough at the top end doing specific intervals to increase Lactate Threshold - that's where the real gains are, but it takes time. I also combined this with racing and that has really improved my performance. All the data/comments i hear seem to suggest that 10hrs/week is the 'magic' number to seeing the big improvements - but the training approach/plan is the key (at least for me). I went from 100mile/week rider to 200+/week (usually 10-12hrs) - at my current rate, that's about 10,00miles/year or 572hrs, so fabiosav, it may just be a time on the saddle thing. Also, have you done some racing?

ric_stern/RST

how tall are you? Your mass? your gender? Are you at altitude or sea level? Your age?

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

fabiosav

Ah yes... 5 ft 8, 190lb and male. working on changing one of those! I would not have thought the weight would negativly impact the power (though obviously it crushes speed on hills)

frenchyge

Sounds like your endurance has come up a lot, based on your 100k rides, but you're worried about your 20-min power. 1) Why are you targeting 20-min power? 2) Does your coach understand your goals regarding 20-min power?

Sounds like he's not developing your training plan to target your 20-min power, so I'd recommend a talk with your coach to discuss your goals and get his thoughts on how to get there. Are you just training for weight loss/general fitness, or is there a specific event that you are working towards?

ric_stern/RST

Presumably the mass...

Weight may not adversely impact the power you produce other than if you are overfat. (obviously i have no idea how lean you are). If you are overfat, thermal issues may occur which cause you to prematurely overheat and fatigue at a faster rate.

However, my asking of your mass was to try to normalise your power to body size/mass to get an idea of where you were at. Obviously, if you were female 5ft0 and weighed 90 lb and produced that power (220 W) you'd be a better cyclist as you'd have less air to shift out of the way.

It's difficult to say with any certainty how good you should be and whether your coach is effective or not is difficult to say. I don't know your age, and certainly as you age you may expect a decline in e.g., VO2max, and thus LT (although not at the same rate). However, there's no (apparent) reason why you shouldn't be able to increase fitness (you haven't reported any illness), and you have been increasing fitness (i.e., 190 -> 220 W).

Certainly, i have seen bigger increases in power in older cyclists, and as someone who has once been elite you would possibly expect them to be able to reach a good level of fitness in another sport.

If you're unhappy with your rate of progression you should mention this to your coach. There could very well be some reason for it, that you've not (yet) mentioned here. Of course, it could be that your coach isn't able to progress you at the rate you want, and this could be related to either you (you have little training time, etc) or related to your coach (they're not very good?). Or perhaps your coach thinks your happy with your progress and isn't challenging you with workouts that you really want. You do need to communicate with your coach (i've no idea whether you do or don't). If after thinking about all these points (and others) and you think your coach isn't doing the job, then maybe think about moving to another coach.

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

RapDaddyo

Yes, but it's been decades since I raced. However, the training I did when I raced has clearly influenced my thinking in terms of volume and intensity. I was in grad school in Boston for ~5 years in the early 1970s and took up cycling after getting fed up with nagging injuries from running. A fellow grad school buddy was a competitive cyclist and talked me into it. He rode with a small group of guys who rode 3 hrs (60 miles) /day M-F plus a race most weekends. I rode for a few weeks solo and then joined up with this group. I had no clue at the time that these were several of the top cyclists in the state, including a 3x Olympic Road Team member. Our avg pace was only 20mph, but we charged all the hills which were plentiful on our ride. I never did actual intervals, only hard pushes up the hills and whenever someone got the itch to push the pace. I never had a blistering sprint so I didn't win many races, but was always with the lead group and usually in the top 5-10. I think we're all influenced most heavily by our personal experiences, and this is clearly the case with me. I knew how many hours/week the top cyclists rode because I rode with several of them every day. So, from the outset I formed the impression that to be highly competitive one needs to put in several hours/day in the saddle and regularly push the pace (whatever you call it, intervals or fartlek or hard/easy). But, now I'm trying to get educated and approach the training issues more intelligently and take advantage of proven scientific principles and research. I find it very fascinating, both the physiology and the physics of cycling. It all comes down to science. We can ignore it, but only to our disadvantage.

Dini77

the science of it is unbelievable - so much to get your head around, but it is facinating. No wonder all the pros invest so much into aerodynamics, physiology, training methods, etc. I wish i had a wind-tunnel in my back-yard.

RapDaddyo

When you get that wind tunnel, move to Las Vegas. I have a few ideas I'd like to try out such as my Buck Rogers racing helmet with a fighter-pilot style heads-up (or down in this case) display of the road ahead in my virtual reality sunglasses.

Dini77

That would be pretty sweet - no more craning the neck to look up.
Actually i read somewhere that some guy made a fully enclosed aero shell round his bike with a tv monitor for forward viewing. I think he was in the 'superman' position and set a speed record of about 60 m/hr on the flat (i think)

RapDaddyo

Cool. I love it!