Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
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 |
04-10.-2005, 08:40 PM
|
#1 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 138
|
PBP strategy?
Hi, Any idea about what would be optimum pacing strategy for Paris Brest Paris, concidering a recreational rider targeting somewhat below 80 hours time, maybe ~55 hours riding time, and ~30 hours off the bike time. PBP itself is 1225 km, and includes about 10 000 m climbing. With the bicycle speed analysis calculators seems that the optimum strategy would be riding the uphills with greater power, like 180 W, and the flat sections with moderate power, like 100 W, with those powers the total ride time would be the same 55.5 hours than with a constant power of 140 W, but with the constant power the energy needed would be greater (23 MJ with variable power and 25.5 MJ with constant power). But has anyone here tested this kind of pacing strategies on long hilly courses, are there other factors which would make the constant power easier to maintain up to 20 hours on consecutive days? Recovering faster or less time needed for off bike activities like eating, shopping, filling water bottles perhaps? My maximum power, tested by a gym stationary bike, 20 Watts steps up after one minute was 320 Watts. Some picks from the test: HR Watts 100 95 120 140 140 190 160 240 180 320 So obviously the 140 Watts area should be power target for the ride? Should this be visible in training as well, or should I follow the generic principles of lot of base training, with 1-2 harder sessions of LT or TT per week? Or alternatively, wether the strategy would be hammering up the hills and taking easy on the flats, should I have more emphasis on the LT training+ |
|
|
|
04-10.-2005, 11:25 PM
|
#2 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 4,115
|
Re: PBP strategy?
I see where you're headed in your analysis of pacing strategy. A few points. First, if you're riding with a group (formally or informally) you'll get a lot of time at low power sitting in on the flat. 100w is probably not a bad assumption for your average power on the flat, with maybe ~150w when you're on front (depending, of course, on the pace of your group). Second, your thinking is correct about using more power uphill or upwind and less power on the flat, downhill or downwind. If you ride the uphill segments at 180w and the downhills and flat segments at 100w, that will be faster than if you rode at a constant power of 140w. Third, your normalized (physiologically equivalent) power is not the weighted average of the two power levels weighted by duration at each. IOW, if you ride for 20 mins at 180w and 20 mins at 100w, your NP is not 140w. Actually, in that scenario, your NP would be closer to 155w. If you wanted an NP of 140w, you would need to ride at 100w ~2.25x your duration at 180w, or ~45 mins. This is due to the lactate/power curve, which Andy Coggan has computed to be approximated by a 4th power curve -- see page 5 of Andy's paper on training with power http://www.peakscoachinggroup.com/p...ningchapter.pdf. Finally, if I were training for this event I would put my primary focus on my sustainable power and long-duration rides. All training programs have sessions designed to increase sustainable power (FT).
Last edited by RapDaddyo : 05-10.-2005 at 02:16 AM. Reason: Correction of NP duration and multiplier |
|
|
|
Linear Mode
