Re: power of positive thinking

Robert Chung

On Jun 19, 11:40*pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:

> Cruising up a 6% grade 3.8% faster is nice, but it's not likely to be
> noticeable without instruments or your twin brother next to you on the
> heavier bike, since you're going only 0.5 km/h faster.

Isn't this more a statement about our (in)ability to evaluate speed or
differences in speed than it is about our ability to distinguish any
effect at all from a 3kg change in mass? Suppose you were a passenger
in a car and the driver said you were traveling "around" 25 km/h.
Would you be able to tell whether you were actually traveling at 20?
That's an order of magnitude greater than the difference you're
citing.

On a route that I often do, a 3 kg difference in mass would either
mean around a minute slower per hour for the same power -- or a 5 watt
increase in power for the same time. However, those 5 watts would be
very noticeable. Most of us wouldn't need instrumentation at all to
notice the difference between riding at FTP - 2.5w vs. FTP + 2.5w.

Mark

Robert Chung wrote:
> On Jun 19, 11:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> Cruising up a 6% grade 3.8% faster is nice, but it's not likely to be
>> noticeable without instruments or your twin brother next to you on the
>> heavier bike, since you're going only 0.5 km/h faster.
>
> Isn't this more a statement about our (in)ability to evaluate speed or
> differences in speed than it is about our ability to distinguish any
> effect at all from a 3kg change in mass? Suppose you were a passenger
> in a car and the driver said you were traveling "around" 25 km/h.
> Would you be able to tell whether you were actually traveling at 20?
> That's an order of magnitude greater than the difference you're
> citing.
>
> On a route that I often do, a 3 kg difference in mass would either
> mean around a minute slower per hour for the same power -- or a 5 watt
> increase in power for the same time. However, those 5 watts would be
> very noticeable. Most of us wouldn't need instrumentation at all to
> notice the difference between riding at FTP - 2.5w vs. FTP + 2.5w.
>
FTP? What does File Transfer Protocol have to do with physiology?
(I really have no idea what you mean by FTP).

Mark J.

carlfogel@comcast.net

On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:16:42 -0700 (PDT), Robert Chung
<rechung@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jun 19, 11:40*pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>> Cruising up a 6% grade 3.8% faster is nice, but it's not likely to be
>> noticeable without instruments or your twin brother next to you on the
>> heavier bike, since you're going only 0.5 km/h faster.
>
>Isn't this more a statement about our (in)ability to evaluate speed or
>differences in speed than it is about our ability to distinguish any
>effect at all from a 3kg change in mass? Suppose you were a passenger
>in a car and the driver said you were traveling "around" 25 km/h.
>Would you be able to tell whether you were actually traveling at 20?
>That's an order of magnitude greater than the difference you're
>citing.
>
>On a route that I often do, a 3 kg difference in mass would either
>mean around a minute slower per hour for the same power -- or a 5 watt
>increase in power for the same time. However, those 5 watts would be
>very noticeable. Most of us wouldn't need instrumentation at all to
>notice the difference between riding at FTP - 2.5w vs. FTP + 2.5w.

Dear Robert,

But there is no increase in power, is there?

On your route, with your same normal average effort (power), you'd
cover the same distance in 61 seconds instead of 60--on average--for
an hour.

I doubt that most of us can notice the same effort (power) producing a
1.7% average slowdown over an hour (speed) without a stopwatch,
cyclocomputer, or other rider.

Even if we could, I doubt that most of us would describe the tiny
improvement as a "noticeably robust forward thrust."

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Phil Holman

<carlfogel@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4j9t54tmqd64l82v4q533sfvf602gqe399@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:16:42 -0700 (PDT), Robert Chung
> <rechung@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jun 19, 11:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>>
>>> Cruising up a 6% grade 3.8% faster is nice, but it's not likely to
>>> be
>>> noticeable without instruments or your twin brother next to you on
>>> the
>>> heavier bike, since you're going only 0.5 km/h faster.
>>
>>Isn't this more a statement about our (in)ability to evaluate speed or
>>differences in speed than it is about our ability to distinguish any
>>effect at all from a 3kg change in mass? Suppose you were a passenger
>>in a car and the driver said you were traveling "around" 25 km/h.
>>Would you be able to tell whether you were actually traveling at 20?
>>That's an order of magnitude greater than the difference you're
>>citing.
>>
>>On a route that I often do, a 3 kg difference in mass would either
>>mean around a minute slower per hour for the same power -- or a 5 watt
>>increase in power for the same time. However, those 5 watts would be
>>very noticeable. Most of us wouldn't need instrumentation at all to
>>notice the difference between riding at FTP - 2.5w vs. FTP + 2.5w.
>
> Dear Robert,
>
> But there is no increase in power, is there?
>
> On your route, with your same normal average effort (power), you'd
> cover the same distance in 61 seconds instead of 60--on average--for
> an hour.
>
> I doubt that most of us can notice the same effort (power) producing a
> 1.7% average slowdown over an hour (speed) without a stopwatch,
> cyclocomputer, or other rider.
>
> Even if we could, I doubt that most of us would describe the tiny
> improvement as a "noticeably robust forward thrust."
>
If I loaded an additional 7lb onto my bike, I would move down the order
in sprinting for the city limit signs and jamming up the hills on our
Saturday morning rac--- I mean, social ride.

You are correct that no single factor is that signifcant, but add in
aero wheels, low rolling resistant tires, improved position on the bike,
better diet and training, optimal rider weight, technique and tactics
etc etc.and the difference can be very noticeable.

Phil H

Robert Chung

On Jun 22, 1:06*pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:>

> But there is no increase in power, is there?

Why would you presume not?

> On your route, with your same normal average effort (power), you'd
> cover the same distance in 61 seconds instead of 60--on average--for
> an hour.
>
> I doubt that most of us can notice the same effort (power) producing a
> 1.7% average slowdown over an hour (speed) without a stopwatch,
> cyclocomputer, or other rider.
>
> Even if we could, I doubt that most of us would describe the tiny
> improvement as a "noticeably robust forward thrust."

I'm agreeing that humans aren't very good at perceiving differences in
speed or time. My question was, if in the passenger seat of a car,
could you estimate the speed to within 5 km/h? You did not answer but
I suspect most of us cannot. In an airplane most of us couldn't tell
if we were traveling at 300 or 900 km/h. That we cannot means that
you've chosen an insensitive measurement to make your case.

You entitled this thread "power of positive thinking" which both 1)
implies that no difference is discernible and 2) opens the door to
power. Near FTP, even small differences in power are discernible.

Robert Chung

On Jun 22, 12:13*pm, Mark <mandmljNOS...@NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote:
> Robert Chung wrote:
> > On Jun 19, 11:40 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>
> >> Cruising up a 6% grade 3.8% faster is nice, but it's not likely to be
> >> noticeable without instruments or your twin brother next to you on the
> >> heavier bike, since you're going only 0.5 km/h faster.
>
> > Isn't this more a statement about our (in)ability to evaluate speed or
> > differences in speed than it is about our ability to distinguish any
> > effect at all from a 3kg change in mass? Suppose you were a passenger
> > in a car and the driver said you were traveling "around" 25 km/h.
> > Would you be able to tell whether you were actually traveling at 20?
> > That's an order of magnitude greater than the difference you're
> > citing.
>
> > On a route that I often do, a 3 kg difference in mass would either
> > mean around a minute slower per hour for the same power -- or a 5 watt
> > increase in power for the same time. However, those 5 watts would be
> > very noticeable. Most of us wouldn't need instrumentation at all to
> > notice the difference between riding at FTP - 2.5w vs. FTP + 2.5w.
>
> * FTP? *What does File Transfer Protocol have to do with physiology?
> (I really have no idea what you mean by FTP).

Functional threshold power.