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 |
29-10.-2003, 08:15 PM
|
#1 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 142
|
testing for improvement
What's the best protocol to use to test for training improvements during a rest week every 4 weeks?
Ric is your MAP protocol suitable for testing to see where improvements have occurred in the last training period? I was wondering if the Monod-CP protocol (from the wattage forum) is the best test with 3- and 12-minute TTs from which improvements in aerobic and anaerobic systems can be estimated. That way I could see if improvements were coming in TT ability, or higher non-maintainable (ie. anaerobic) power ability. Or, is testing even necessary at all if I am constantly pushing my power in TT 3 x 12-20mins intervals? If my power is gradually improving in those intervals is there anypoint wasting possible training time with the rest week and 2-3 days spent (wasted?) testing? Is all training with a power meter effectively a useful 'test'? |
|
|
|
29-10.-2003, 09:02 PM
|
#2 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 82
|
Re: testing for improvement
As I pointed out in a previous thread, I've had a lot of success doing simple 30min TT's on a turbo. I know a test of this nature doesn't fully answer your questions regarding anerobic versus TT improvements, but as a (pretty much dedicated) time trialler I've found it tells me exactly what I need to know. From a large database of my own TT's and training sessions I am able to accurately relate these tests to predicted performances in different duration TT's, and I can also use the data to plan interval sessions that are achievable (e.g. I know I can complete 3 * 5min intervals at 115% of my recent 30min test power without causing excessive fatigue), and I know that a 1hr TT will be at about 95-97% of the test power.
I have found very little change in the relative differences between power at 5mins and power at 60mins (i.e. the slope of my 'power-duration' curve). This may be a result of very little training with intervals of less than 5mins though. |
|
|
|
|
30-10.-2003, 02:48 AM
|
#3 |
|
Community Team
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Newport, South Wales
Posts: 3,831
|
Re: testing for improvement
Originally posted by TTer, I responded with >>
What's the best protocol to use to test for training improvements during a rest week every 4 weeks? >>is a rest week required every four weeks? For the majority of cyclists, who are not solely cyclists (i.e., those who have jobs, school, etc.) i don't believe such frequent rest periods are required. Part of this stems from the fact that most people with non-cycling jobs end up having unscheduled rest periods (e.g., work, family commitments, stress, etc). Ric is your MAP protocol suitable for testing to see where improvements have occurred in the last training period? >>i doubt i would use my protocol to test peformance gains anymore frequently than e.g., once every two months. In practice i test people with this protocol 3 to 4 times a year. I was wondering if the Monod-CP protocol (from the wattage forum) is the best test with 3- and 12-minute TTs from which improvements in aerobic and anaerobic systems can be estimated. That way I could see if improvements were coming in TT ability, or higher non-maintainable (ie. anaerobic) power ability. >>I personally don't use this, although i have previously done some work in this area Or, is testing even necessary at all if I am constantly pushing my power in TT 3 x 12-20mins intervals? >>this really gets to crux of the matter. I think some testing is necessary (i.e., 3 to 4 x's/yr) but with such intervals and a power meter you can see whether you're improving (or not). >>also, on a regular(ish) basis i find that doing an informal test on a hill is quite good Is all training with a power meter effectively a useful 'test'? >>pretty much. But, it's also important to not aim for a power PB every ride -- you'd be shattered very quickly! Ric
__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com |
|
|
|
Linear Mode
