Test Results

acoggan said:

Well sure...which is why I've personally been into the wind tunnel three times, why we conducted a number of field tests to try to refine my wife's aero position, etc. Still, from the physiological perspective (which means when you're talking about training), power is performance...speed is merely the result of your power and the physics of cycling.

for time trialing, yes it is a very good predictor of performance as long as position, pacing etc are under control but not necessarily true of road racing, where the guy with the lowest average power in his or her group can be the guy that who is often in a very good position to perform the best... i.e. win the race... in road racing the power - performance thing can be turned on it's head because of drafting, team work, tactics and a little luck... yes maximizing power means you are in a better position to utilize drafting, team work, tactics and luck, but power is not the end all and be all when you are talking about road racing...

acoggan said:

Yes, quite basic "stuff": you don't let a subject warm up so intensely as to elevate their lactate concentration above the resting level, as that just hinders interpretation of the data.

It doesn't hinder it if you know what you're doing. A complete warm-up like that prepares the person for the harder efforts to come and during the early part of the test the effort is so light that lactate levels should return to base levels, so no harm done, and the subject is more ready for the test. The appearance here that you don't seem to understand some basic things about the test calls into question your actual expertise with the test and its interpretation.

acoggan said:

Well, let's see: multiple district road and TT championships in five different states, on the podium two out of three times I've been to master road nationals (putting ~1 min into Kevin Metcalfe, BTW)

Not worth mentioning Kevin. TT's were not really Kevin's best event and he wasn't sleeping in an altitude tent either. Not only did he not resort to that crutch for a masters race, when he did the pursuit at Nat's he won or was a very close second to his teammate. He was able to figure out how to do well in a 40kTT AND a pursuit, and points race-something you haven't been able to do. Better knowledge of training methodology could help you do that too.

acoggan said:

... a 75% winning percentage in road races since I started racing in the masters ranks,

You're stats against your local competition aren't worth bragging about. Several guys around here in NorCal can TT as well, or slightly less well than you and unlike you they can also attack at 600-1000 watts, and sprint. In a 45+ road race you wouldn't be able to get away from guys like Mark Caldwell because he and some others can attack much harder than you can, they also TT pretty well, and he sprints well enough to have won the last two criterium Nat's for 50-54.

acoggan said:

...yeah, it really sounds like I need help training myself. 🙄

A guy who thinks he knows so much about training, sleeps in an altitude tent (for a masters race?!), shows up for only one race at nat's, then can only get 7th or 8th place in the pursuit, two years in a row. People shake their head and laugh at you for that. You have plenty of room for improvement and a good coach that you listened to could help you with that. You could probably learn how to get top 5 in more than one event at Nat's even without sleeping in a tent.

doctorSpoc said:

for time trialing, yes it is a very good predictor of performance as long as position, pacing etc are under control but not necessarily true of road racing, where the guy with the lowest average power in his or her group can be the guy that who is often in a very good position to perform the best... i.e. win the race... in road racing the power - performance thing can be turned on it's head because of drafting, team work, tactics and a little luck... yes maximizing power means you are in a better position to utilize drafting, team work, tactics and luck, but power is not the end all and be all when you are talking about road racing...

Good stuff. It pays to have more than one arrow in your quiver if you want to do well against good competition on a regular basis.

WarrenG said:

So typical of you Andy. When you don't agree with the facts in front of your face you either say they don't mean anything, or they're not important, or try to say the test was done so badly that the measurements are wrong. The test shows a flatter curve simply because of the change in training. The test was done and supervised by a person who has done thousands of them with very respected expertise, so to imply that he/they weren't aware of what they are doing is just plain ignorant, no, desperate on your part.

People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones Warren.

doctorSpoc said:

power is not the end all and be all when you are talking about road racing...

No, but it is the be all and end all when you are talking about training for racing. Or to put it another way: the sole purpose of a training program is to increase the power that you can produce for various durations.

WarrenG said:

It doesn't hinder it if you know what you're doing. A complete warm-up like that prepares the person for the harder efforts to come and during the early part of the test the effort is so light that lactate levels should return to base levels, so no harm done, and the subject is more ready for the test.

If you start the test with a low enough load, then the early stages are sufficent warm-up for "the harder efforts to come", and you don't have to worry about not being able to identify LT because lactate is falsely elevated during the initial stages.

WarrenG said:

The appearance here that you don't seem to understand some basic things about the test calls into question your actual expertise with the test and its interpretation.

Warren, I've forgotten more about lactate testing than you'll ever know.

WarrenG said:

Not worth mentioning Kevin. TT's were not really Kevin's best event

NorCal must be lacking in decent TTers, then - wasn't he district champion several times over?

WarrenG said:

and he wasn't sleeping in an altitude tent either.

You seem to have an overly optimistic view of what sleeping in an altitude tent can and cannot do for performance at sea level. The benefits in something like a 40 km TT are going to only be measured in a handful of seconds, and that's only if you're a "responder" (which I don't seem to be).

BTW, I didn't get the altitude tent until a couple years after I kicked Kevin's butt (and in turn had my own kicked by the likes of Kent Bostick, Carl Sundquist, and Thurlow Rogers, who won the ITT at master nationals the years I went).

WarrenG said:

Not only did he not resort to that crutch for a masters race

Jealous that I can afford one and you can't, Warren? 😉

WarrenG said:

, when he did the pursuit at Nat's he won or was a very close second to his teammate. He was able to figure out how to do well in a 40kTT AND a pursuit, and points race-something you haven't been able to do. Better knowledge of training methodology could help you do that too.

Kevin's ability to excel in all three events when I'm really only good in a road TT or road race is undoubtly due to differences in our builds/physiologies, not in the way we train. That is, unless you think you can train somebody who 6'0" tall and 148 lbs who has a 28" waist, <20" thighs, wears a size 38 suit coat, and is 75-80% slow twitch to be an awesome sprinter. 😉

WarrenG said:

, You're stats against your local competition aren't worth bragging about.

Local? Since turning 40 I've raced in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Deleware, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri. When was the last time you or your buddies ventured outside of NorCal, the Land of the Industrial Park criterium, to race on some challenging terrain?

WarrenG said:

, Several guys around here in NorCal can TT as well, or slightly less well than you and unlike you they can also attack at 600-1000 watts, and sprint.

Geez, Warren, even when you're right, you're wrong! FYI I can attack at 600-1000 W...it just takes more than that to be able to create separation in one fell swoop. So, my tactic is just to be persistent and try to wear people out. It generally fails in shorter races, but give me ~2 h and some terrain to work with, and I'm a happy camper.

WarrenG said:

, In a 45+ road race you wouldn't be able to get away from guys like Mark Caldwell because he and some others can attack much harder than you can, they also TT pretty well, and he sprints well enough to have won the last two criterium Nat's for 50-54.

I don't know Mark, but he sounds quite a bit like Grant Soma...who I took 2 min out of at the D20 TT one year, and left behind in several of the road races I won, including the race for which the powermeter file is posted at the CyclingPeaks website. Grant saw the danger when I finally slipped off the front, but still couldn't prevent me from pulling ahead by 1 min before the final climb. (Of course, with all due respect to Grant, he's beaten me in more races than I've beaten him...ah, to be able to pour on the power the way he can during the last lap of a criterium!).

WarrenG said:

, A guy who thinks he knows so much about training, sleeps in an altitude tent (for a masters race?!), shows up for only one race at nat's, then can only get 7th or 8th place in the pursuit, two years in a row.

Horses for courses, Warren, horses for courses. I'm no more cut out to be a pursuiter than you are cut out to be a road racer, but that doesn't stop me from having fun trying different things. When was the last time you entered something other than a criterium or track race?

WarrenG said:

, People shake their head and laugh at you for that.

You mean people like your friend Rich Voss, who not only once, but twice, spent several hunderd dollars to hear me talk, or Larry Nolan, who volunteered to me at Indy this year that he did much better at altitude after getting some advice on how to acclimatize properly instead of just "winging it" like he did in Colorado Springs in '04? If those guys are laughing at me behind my back (which I doubt), then they are rather two-faced, wouldn't you say? In any case, it seems to me that the only person who gets made fun of publically is you (as any search of rec.bicycles.racing would reveal).

acoggan said:

No, but it is the be all and end all when you are talking about training for racing. Or to put it another way: the sole purpose of a training program is to increase the power that you can produce for various durations.

but does the ability to recover quickly and repeat high intensity efforts over and over fall into that category? i'm not sure repeatablility/lacticacid buffering etc really does... sure the insensity/power of the attack needs to be sufficent to be meaningful, but the recovery and repeat is not a power related/trained thing. when you train AC intervals it's not even necessary to track power... it's not really relevant. This ability is abslolutely essential for a road racer.. and it's something that time trialist usually really suck at.. i love that .. put them in there place [img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img].. just kidding. if you don't have that "arrow in your quiver" you're going to have a really hard time in a road race...

doctorSpoc said:

but does the ability to recover quickly and repeat high intensity efforts over and over fall into that category?

Sure it does. (And I say that regardless of the fact that having a high muscle respiratory capacity, and hence a high LT, is a significant contributor to what you describe.)

doctorSpoc said:

i'm not sure repeatablility/lacticacid buffering etc really does... sure the insensity/power of the attack needs to be sufficent to be meaningful, but the recovery and repeat is not a power related/trained thing. when you train AC intervals it's not even necessary to track power... it's not really relevant.

You're failing to distinguish between using a powermeter when training, and training to increase your power output. The goal of one's training program (by which I mean the things you do to induce physiological adaptations that improve your performance) is always to increase your power over some duration/in some scenario, even if actually measuring power when performing said training isn't necessarily helpful.

One more point: when it comes right down to it, even tactics are really about power. That is, what are tactics but the judicious application of one's limited power at the most appropriate time to try to maximize the chance that you're first across the finish line? Again, actually measuring your power may not help you achieve this goal, but that doesn't change the underlying basis of all tactics.

acoggan said:

NorCal must be lacking in decent TTers, then - wasn't he district champion several times over?

He was, awhile back. 6-8+ years ago I think. He was better on a national scale in pursuit, and pretty good in points races too even though his max speed was only about 34mph.

(sleeping in an altitude tent)

acoggan said:

Jealous that I can afford one and you can't, Warren? 😉

I wouldn't stoop to that. It's a joke to use a tent for local masters races and 7th place at Nat's. Sell your tent and buy some good coaching-it will help you more.

acoggan said:

Kevin's ability to excel in all three events when I'm really only good in a road TT or road race is undoubtly due to differences in our builds/physiologies, not in the way we train. That is, unless you think you can train somebody who 6'0" tall and 148 lbs who has a 28" waist, <20" thighs, wears a size 38 suit coat, and is 75-80% slow twitch to be an awesome sprinter. 😉

How do you get from pursuit to "awesome sprinter"? Lots of guys can go from rr, TT , down to pursuit far, far better than you have. You can TT well, and if you are as good as you think you are in criteriums then pursuit is not a stretch by any means with the proper preparation.

acoggan said:

Local? Since turning 40 I've raced in Maryland, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Deleware, Indiana, Illinois, and Missouri. When was the last time you or your buddies ventured outside of NorCal, the Land of the Industrial Park criterium, to race on some challenging terrain?

More ignorance. Lot of flat terrain around those parts. Ah yes, the mountains of the Atlantic Coast and the Upper Midwest...

Look at the course profiles/descriptions for RR's and some criteriums around NorCal at ncncna.org. Ever hear of the Sierra Nevada Mountains? Their foothills which are adjacent to where I live? The Coastal Mountains? I did around 300 criteriums along the north east and mid-atlantic region and there is a very high percentage of dead flat criteriums there and road races that do not have even 1000+ feet of climbing per 20-mile lap. About 20% of the criteriums we have around here have moderate to extreme hills each lap, including the one I'll do next Sunday.

One of the big reasons we don't see many good road racers from NorCal going to the Masters Nat's is because the courses are so much easier (non-selective) at Nat's than what they like for racing.

Not much need to travel outside Callifornia for local level races when there is an abundance of races around here for about 8 months a year and excellent competition. Every weekend our 45+ race has 4-7 guys who have won at Nat's in the last two years. When the guys from SoCal come up it can get even more challenging-especially in the 35+.

acoggan said:

I don't know Mark, but he sounds quite a bit like Grant Soma...

No, Mark is considerably smaller and sprints much better. As for climbing, Mark won the pro 1,2 race at Nevada City about 10 years ago.

acoggan said:

Horses for courses, Warren, horses for courses. I'm no more cut out to be a pursuiter than you are cut out to be a road racer,

There you go again. You are ignoring the riders I've already mentioned as well as many, many more who can go from road racing to pursuit. It is not a big stretch, except for you.

acoggan said:

When was the last time you entered something other than a criterium or track race?

I get bored in road races if they're relatively flat and if they're hilly it would make no sense for me. I do virtually every track event there is, from team sprint to even madison and a 45 minute points race. 35 to 40 races a year is enough for me. Since you're so good in criteriums, the points race would be a natural choice, but you would rather watch. I've done 5 different track events at Nat's and Worlds. You have chosen to do only one.

acoggan said:

You mean people like your friend Rich Voss, who not only once, but twice, spent several hunderd dollars to hear me talk, or Larry Nolan, who volunteered to me at Indy this year that he did much better at altitude after getting some advice on how to acclimatize properly instead of just "winging it" like he did in Colorado Springs in '04? If those guys are laughing at me behind my back (which I doubt), ...

No comment on what they say, and why limit the list to just two people? Why bring up Larry anyway? He talks to many people at Nat's and he'll chat with anyone who wants to chat with him. FYI, Larry and I talked and emailed about altitude acclimation after CO Springs in 2004 and before Park City last year. I expect we will again before we go to CO this August.

WarrenG said:

He was, awhile back. 6-8+ years ago I think. He was better on a national scale in pursuit, and pretty good in points races too even though his max speed was only about 34mph.

(sleeping in an altitude tent)

I wouldn't stoop to that. It's a joke to use a tent for local masters races and 7th place at Nat's. Sell your tent and buy some good coaching-it will help you more.

How do you get from pursuit to "awesome sprinter"? Lots of guys can go from rr, TT , down to pursuit far, far better than you have. You can TT well, and if you are as good as you think you are in criteriums then pursuit is not a stretch by any means with the proper preparation.

More ignorance. Lot of flat terrain around those parts. Ah yes, the mountains of the Atlantic Coast and the Upper Midwest...

Look at the course profiles/descriptions for RR's and some criteriums around NorCal at ncncna.org. Ever hear of the Sierra Nevada Mountains? Their foothills which are adjacent to where I live? The Coastal Mountains? I did around 300 criteriums along the north east and mid-atlantic region and there is a very high percentage of dead flat criteriums there and road races that do not have even 1000+ feet of climbing per 20-mile lap. About 20% of the criteriums we have around here have moderate to extreme hills each lap, including the one I'll do next Sunday.

One of the big reasons we don't see many good road racers from NorCal going to the Masters Nat's is because the courses are so much easier (non-selective) at Nat's than what they like for racing.

Not much need to travel outside Callifornia for local level races when there is an abundance of races around here for about 8 months a year and excellent competition. Every weekend our 45+ race has 4-7 guys who have won at Nat's in the last two years. When the guys from SoCal come up it can get even more challenging-especially in the 35+.

No, Mark is considerably smaller and sprints much better. As for climbing, Mark won the pro 1,2 race at Nevada City about 10 years ago.

There you go again. You are ignoring the riders I've already mentioned as well as many, many more who can go from road racing to pursuit. It is not a big stretch, except for you.

I get bored in road races if they're relatively flat and if they're hilly it would make no sense for me. I do virtually every track event there is, from team sprint to even madison and a 45 minute points race. 35 to 40 races a year is enough for me. Since you're so good in criteriums, the points race would be a natural choice, but you would rather watch. I've done 5 different track events at Nat's and Worlds. You have chosen to do only one.

No comment on what they say, and why limit the list to just two people? Why bring up Larry anyway? He talks to many people at Nat's and he'll chat with anyone who wants to chat with him. FYI, Larry and I talked and emailed about altitude acclimation after CO Springs in 2004 and before Park City last year. I expect we will again before we go to CO this August.

This is getting stupid. Why do you insist on constantly mentioning results from Masters races and act like that has anything to do with the ability to coach a rider? Andy has already said that it's been 20+ years since he's been "serious" about cycling. If you think anyone is being convinced by constant "my friend, masters national champion, from NorCal," then you're mistaken (or at least I hope so). And I find it laughable that you think you are smarter or more qualified than an excercise physiologist, yet call Andy "arrogant."

You two clearly don't like each other, but can we at least keep the arguing on-topic?

WarrenG said:

How do you get from pursuit to "awesome sprinter"? Lots of guys can go from rr, TT , down to pursuit far, far better than you have. You can TT well, and if you are as good as you think you are in criteriums then pursuit is not a stretch by any means with the proper preparation.

Where did I ever say I was good in any criteriums? The fact is that I'm generally not, at least not unless they include a hill, or feature a really long straightaway so that I can wind up and launch attacks from the rear. If they don't, I have a hard time creating the small breakaway that I need in order to place well (it doesn't stop me from trying, though, and I rarely miss out on being in any breakaway...if one gets off the front w/o me, I'll stay on the front as long as necessary/until I crack to bring it back and reshuffle the deck).

WarrenG said:

More ignorance. Lot of flat terrain around those parts. Ah yes, the mountains of the Atlantic Coast and the Upper Midwest...

Yes, lots of flat terrain in the midwest, but also some hills, too...nothing that takes more than perhaps 5 min to climb, but that's really all you need to get rid of 6'5", 210 lbs wheelsuckers like yourself. 😉

WarrenG said:

Look at the course profiles/descriptions for RR's and some criteriums around NorCal at ncncna.org. Ever hear of the Sierra Nevada Mountains? Their foothills which are adjacent to where I live? The Coastal Mountains? I did around 300 criteriums along the north east and mid-atlantic region and there is a very high percentage of dead flat criteriums there and road races that do not have even 1000+ feet of climbing per 20-mile lap. About 20% of the criteriums we have around here have moderate to extreme hills each lap, including the one I'll do next Sunday.

Let's talk about the last hilly road race, stage race, or TT that you did well in, or for that matter even the last criterium you won that included a hill. Heck, for that matter let's talk about the last criterium you won, Warren...

WarrenG said:

You are ignoring the riders I've already mentioned as well as many, many more who can go from road racing to pursuit. It is not a big stretch, except for you.

...and anybody else with my particular physiology/physique. Specifically, my maximal accumulated O2 deficit (consider the gold-standard meaurement of anaerobic capacity) is 20% lower than that of your typical endurance track racer (and only half that of an elite pursuiter's), and my wife (who is 6' shorter than I am) and I have about the same lean body mass.

WarrenG said:

I get bored in road races if they're relatively flat and if they're hilly it would make no sense for me.

Just like it doesn't make any sense to expect me to excel at pursuiting, but like I said, I've had fun trying it anyway. This year I'm thinking of training for our district TT and doing it "old school" style, i.e., on a round-tubed, box-rimmed road bike with drop bars...I think it would be interesting to see just how much I've actually slowed down since we all raced that way, even though I'll probably not win if I take that approach.

WarrenG said:

Since you're so good in criteriums, the points race would be a natural choice

But since my neuromuscular power is low I'm not very good in criteriums. Similarly, I wouldn't be any good at points racing, as my only hope of scoring points would be by taking a lap.

WarrenG said:

No comment on what they say

What's there to say?

WarrenG said:

and why limit the list to just two people?

Simple: because you keep alluding to mysterious, unnamed people, and those are the only two people that we both have met. If you want to put some names to your anonymous sources, I'm sure everyone would love to hear them.

WarrenG said:

Why bring up Larry anyway?

See above.

WarrenG said:

He talks to many people at Nat's and he'll chat with anyone who wants to chat with him.

Yeah, Larry seems like a very nice guy (which is why I doubt you when you imply that he's laughing about me behind my back).

WarrenG said:

FYI, Larry and I talked and emailed about altitude acclimation after CO Springs in 2004 and before Park City last year. I expect we will again before we go to CO this August.

Wait a sec...didn't you previously brag about how your friends were so good that they didn't need to worry about the effects of altitude? Oh right, you did, as you used it as an excuse to rag on me about taking the issue more seriously by using the altitude tent to preacclimatize. So, which is it: should masters racers do whatever they can to prepare for competition at altitude, or should they just blow it all off because, after all, it's just masters racing?

acoggan said:

...(And I say that regardless of the fact that having a high muscle respiratory capacity, and hence a high LT, is a significant contributor to what you describe.)

sure but not really speaking to my point..

acoggan said:

You're failing to distinguish between using a powermeter when training, and training to increase your power output. The goal of one's training program (by which I mean the things you do to induce physiological adaptations that improve your performance) is always to increase your power over some duration/in some scenario, even if actually measuring power when performing said training isn't necessarily helpful.

no, i understand what your saying and that's why i added that "...sure the insensity/power of the attack needs to be sufficent to be meaningful...", but my point is that that i don't think this particular physiological attribute is related to power... it has as it's end goal to be able to produce more power in the following phase, i.e. attack no. 2 but the training and the physiological addaption is not about producing power in and of it's self...

when you add ".../in some scenario" to the statement then it is true, but just by adding that ".../in some scenario" you significantly broaden your statement such that it takes on new meaning and you are not really saying the same thing anymore... semantics.

acoggan said:

One more point: when it comes right down to it, even tactics are really about power. That is, what are tactics but the judicious application of one's limited power at the most appropriate time to try to maximize the chance that you're first across the finish line? Again, actually measuring your power may not help you achieve this goal, but that doesn't change the underlying basis of all tactics.

IHMO the defining characteristic of road racing is the phenomenon of drafting.. all tactics and power requirements flow from there. drafting differentiates RRing from TTing and most other endurance sports and gives it most of it's character.. again, power requirment in road racing are as they are because of the phenomenon of drafting not the other way around.

but getting back to my point... in the case of road racing... power is not equal to performance and and individual's power output is not a very good predictor of performance... it's a contributing factor and can help an individual to come up with strategies and tactics but but by it self, it's not going to get you across the line first in a road race...

[EDIT] you say "even tactics are really about power", but couldn't someone else just as easily say my power requirement are all about the tactics i employ? i would say that without considering both of these components to performance and others you are not going to be successfull.[EDIT]

acoggan said:

Wait a sec...didn't you previously brag about how your friends were so good that they didn't need to worry about the effects of altitude? Oh right, you did, as you used it as an excuse to rag on me about taking the issue more seriously by using the altitude tent to preacclimatize. So, which is it: should masters racers do whatever they can to prepare for competition at altitude, or should they just blow it all off because, after all, it's just masters racing?

Where do you get this stuff? I never even implied (and certainly don't think it) that somebody would be so good they wouldn't need to worry about altitude, especially if it's the person's first time racing at altitude, and over multiple days. It's an individual response thing too.

One thing I said that you may have blown out of proportion was that my coach had told me that generally, the more fit (with perhaps special attention given to training certain aspects of fitness) a person is the less their performance would suffer relative to their sea level performance (as much as if they weren't as fit). IOW, even if they're really fit their performance would go down, just (generally) not as much as if they weren't as fit. And of course, some events would be more affected than others.

Since you brought up Grant, last year at Nat's he expressed to me his thought that he probably wouldn't go to CO this year for Nat's because of the altitude. I encouraged him to go and gave him some suggestions on how to overcome/lessen the problem and how the altitude had affected (and not affected) some of the guys from NorCal when we were there in 2004. I hope he goes because he seems like a good guy to be around and race with.

doctorSpoc said:

[EDIT] you say "even tactics are really about power", but couldn't someone else just as easily say my power requirement are all about the tactics i employ?[EDIT]

Nice! 🙂 However, doesn't that ultimately still make it all about power? 😉

WarrenG said:

Where do you get this stuff?

From your previous berating of me for using an altitude tent prior to racing at Colorado Springs in '04, versus Larry's approach of just showing up and letting the chips fall where they may.

WarrenG said:

One thing I said that you may have blown out of proportion was that my coach had told me that generally, the more fit (with perhaps special attention given to training certain aspects of fitness) a person is the less their performance would suffer relative to their sea level performance (as much as if they weren't as fit). IOW, even if they're really fit their performance would go down, just (generally) not as much as if they weren't as fit.

Your coach (if he indeed really told you that) is wrong. The people who suffer the greatest decrement in performance as a result of altitude exposure are those who are most fit, i.e., those with the highest VO2max, LT, etc. See:

Gore, C. J., S. C. Little, A. G. Hahn, G. C. Scroop, D. B. Watson, K. I. Norton, R. J. Wood, D. P. Campbell, and D. L. Emonson. Increased arterial desaturation in trained cyclists during maximal exercise at 580 m altitude. J. Appl. Physiol. 80:2204-2210, 1996.

Koistinen, P., T. Takala, V. Martikkala, and J. Leppaluoto. Aerobic fitness influences the response of maximal oxygen uptake and lactate threshold in acute hypobaric hypoxia. Int. J. Sports Med. 26:78-81, 1995.

Martin, D., and J. K'roy. Effects of acute hypoxia on the V·O2max of trained and untrained subjects. J. Sports Sci. 11:37-42, 1993.

Shephard, R. J., E. Bouhlel, H. Vandewalle, and H. Monod. Peak oxygen intake and hypoxia: influence of physical fitness. Int. J. Sports Med. 9:279-283, 1988.

Wagner, P. D. Muscle O2 transport and O2 dependent control of metabolism. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 27:47-53, 1995.

Young, P. M., J. R. Sutton, H. J. Green, J. T. Reeves, P. B. Rock, C. S. Houston, and A. Cymerman. Operation Everest II: metabolic and hormonal responses to incremental exercise to exhaustion. J. Appl. Physiol. 73:2574-2579, 1992.

whoawhoa said:

...And I find it laughable that you think you are smarter or more qualified than an excercise physiologist, yet call Andy "arrogant."

Just because one understands most things about the physiology of exercise doesn't mean they are particularly good at the "applied" area of ex phys. "Applied" ex phys would be a choice for people who are interested in the area of coaching and training athletes. Much knowledge can be gained from that experience, some of which appears to contradict what you thought you knew from studying ex phys in school. This was the summary as told to me by a Stanford grad with a degree in ex phys who then went to work studying athletes on a daily basis.

And BTW, Andy and I agree about many things related to training for cycling.

I wrote...my coach had told me that generally, the more fit (with perhaps special attention given to training certain aspects of fitness) a person is the less their performance would suffer relative to their sea level performance (as much as if they weren't as fit). IOW, even if they're really fit their performance would go down, just (generally) not as much as if they weren't as fit.

acoggan said:

Your coach (if he indeed really told you that) is wrong. The people who suffer the greatest decrement in performance as a result of altitude exposure are those who are most fit, i.e., those with the highest VO2max, LT, etc. .

I did NOT say that a more fit person would suffer less than a less fit person. What I said was that the SAME PERSON, when more fit, would _generally_ suffer less decline than when they were not as fit, and there were some things WRT to training that could help too. I could add that tactics could play a part too.

As an aside, the 5 guys I know about in the 45-49 pursuit ended up with almost the same placings in CO as they did the next year in Indianapolis. It's as if they were all affected equally by the altitude even though their placings varied among 1st to 8th place.

I looked at the first five studies (abstracts) that you listed and not even one was appropriate for what I said.

You mention studies comparing an untrained person with a trained person- who cares?! Those are not our choices for the problem we want to overcome or deal with. (Do you believe that the less fit person suffering less decline would then beat the more fit person?)

You mention some other studies comparing people with higher VO2max with other people with lower VO2max. Again, not applicable for what I said, and one conclusion said that hyperventilation would help overcome the measured decline-which of course is one way we try to cope-by breathing at a higher rate.

And no, I doubt my coach did formal studies about this. He was probably basing his opinion on his observations during the hundreds of days he's spent with pros during stage races that occasionally reach significant altitudes.

acoggan said:

Nice! 🙂 However, doesn't that ultimately still make it all about power? 😉

Yes, but it's on the other side of the = sign his way. ;-)

I don't know what is more disturbing about this thread: WarrenG's anecdotal version of the scientific method that must have Karl Popper rolling over in his grave, or Andy's getting into the sandbox to play for so long. Gangsta rappers run less smack at each other than this.

whoawhoa said:

This is getting stupid. Why do you insist on constantly mentioning results from Masters races and act like that has anything to do with the ability to coach a rider? Andy has already said that it's been 20+ years since he's been "serious" about cycling. If you think anyone is being convinced by constant "my friend, masters national champion, from NorCal," then you're mistaken (or at least I hope so). And I find it laughable that you think you are smarter or more qualified than an excercise physiologist, yet call Andy "arrogant."

You two clearly don't like each other, but can we at least keep the arguing on-topic?

I couldn't agree with you more.

doctorSpoc said:

....IHMO the defining characteristic of road racing is the phenomenon of drafting.. all tactics and power requirements flow from there. drafting differentiates RRing from TTing and most other endurance sports and gives it most of it's character.. again, power requirment in road racing are as they are because of the phenomenon of drafting not the other way around.

but getting back to my point... in the case of road racing... power is not equal to performance and and individual's power output is not a very good predictor of performance... it's a contributing factor and can help an individual to come up with strategies and tactics but but by it self, it's not going to get you across the line first in a road race...

[EDIT] you say "even tactics are really about power", but couldn't someone else just as easily say my power requirement are all about the tactics i employ? i would say that without considering both of these components to performance and others you are not going to be successfull.[EDIT]

So power isn't a good predictor of performance - I guess it's just nonsense when they say that to win a major climb at TdF you need to be able to put out approx. 6.4W/kg. All i can say is that if i improved my FT by 20W i'd be in a hell of a better position to utilise any tactic i have in mind. Yes, on it's own power won't get you to the line first, but i'd bet that more power = more winning opportunities.

You can be drafting behind someone doing 50km/hr and still be putting down significant power. If you're not able to sustain this power and still have enough there to be able to win it in the end, what good are your tactics? Tactics are limited by what power you have available to utilise

When i'm out there training for a RR should i be training my tactics or training to increase power? If i only have 10hrs/week to use, which should I focus more on - increasing power or improving tactics.