Substituting race for TT Test

walterptiv said:

Which measurements should I use, or should I just stick with the levels I have until I can schedule a better test? I had PR's for my 1, 2, 5, 10, 30 and 60 minute power outputs and could get the associated HR from my CP software.

Your FT is at least as high as your 60min NP. Adjust your levels based on that.

frenchyge said:

Your FT is at least as high as your 60min NP. Adjust your levels based on that.

Maybe, maybe not!

Depends on the duration and intensity of the efforts.

There's a reason Andy puts using 60minute np from a mass start race fairly low on the list of ways to estimate FTP.

Scott

scotmart said:

Depends on the duration and intensity of the efforts.

How so? I don't have the book.

scotmart said:

There's a reason Andy puts using 60minute np from a mass start race fairly low on the list of ways to estimate FTP.

And I thought there was a reason it was on the list in the first place. 😉

Just finally got home to the computer. My normalized power shows a 2W improvement (and puts me now at 3.14 w/kg for FT) over last month. So, I guess the estimates are at least in the ballpark.

Is 2w per month normal progress in the base period? Should I expect bigger jumps as I go into the build and race phase of the year? Per the Coggan, power profiles, chart I'm closing in on being a middle of the road Cat 4 but I still have another 10w to go for FT durations.

walterptiv said:

Just finally got home to the computer. My normalized power shows a 2W improvement (and puts me now at 3.14 w/kg for FT) over last month. So, I guess the estimates are at least in the ballpark.

Is 2w per month normal progress in the base period? Should I expect bigger jumps as I go into the build and race phase of the year? Per the Coggan, power profiles, chart I'm closing in on being a middle of the road Cat 4 but I still have another 10w to go for FT durations.

A 2 W "improvement" doesn't mean anything, this is smaller than daily biological variations (~2%). I'm not sure what training you're doing (or whether you have a coach) but you should expect bigger improvements, as 2 W isn't an improvement. Perhaps, if all you've been doing is steady base miles you can't expect anymore...

Ric

ric_stern/RST said:

Perhaps, if all you've been doing is steady base miles you can't expect anymore...

Hmmm. That's interesting and good to know. My shorter duration wattages have all increased by at least 40% during the base periods but this FT number has pretty much stayed the same if a 2w fluctuation is meaningless. I guess I need to think about mixing in some different workouts.

walterptiv said:

Hmmm. That's interesting and good to know. My shorter duration wattages have all increased by at least 40% during the base periods but this FT number has pretty much stayed the same if a 2w fluctuation is meaningless. I guess I need to think about mixing in some different workouts.

Obviously, i don't know what training you've been doing (i don't know if you've documented it in a previous post). But 40% in your short duration power? Has your "base" training been centred around these short efforts?? What sort of racing or riding do you do?

Ric

I've got two things going for me, this is my first few months with a powermeter and I'm only beginning my second season of racing. So, until I've got more data points, I'm expecting some wild fluctuaions in numbers. Most all of my workouts come as drills I do during my 30 - 45 min commute, so they naturally tend to be things that can be completed in a few minutes. I escape from my family for an hour or so on Saturday and four hours on Sunday, I think I need to focus more on using that time to raise the FT number as the workouts during the week are improving the shorter distances.

walterptiv said:

I've got two things going for me, this is my first few months with a powermeter and I'm only beginning my second season of racing. So, until I've got more data points, I'm expecting some wild fluctuaions in numbers. Most all of my workouts come as drills I do during my 30 - 45 min commute, so they naturally tend to be things that can be completed in a few minutes. I escape from my family for an hour or so on Saturday and four hours on Sunday, I think I need to focus more on using that time to raise the FT number as the workouts during the week are improving the shorter distances.

Even during such a short commute, i believe it's possible (although it may depend on your local traffic conditions) to improve both your sustainable power and your MAP. What type of racing do you do?

ric

ric_stern/RST said:

What type of racing do you do?

Around here we have mostly crits and circuit races though there is one RR each month in the summer and some TT's are sprinkled throughout. That will likely be my race diet for the year.

walterptiv said:

Around here we have mostly crits and circuit races though there is one RR each month in the summer and some TT's are sprinkled throughout. That will likely be my race diet for the year.

i just wanted to check you weren't doing e.g. 200-metre track sprinting (my advice would be different then)

Crits, circuits and RR require you to improve your TTpower, MAP, and peak power - depending on the type of rider you are.

Ric

frenchyge said:

I thought there was a reason it was on the list in the first place. 😉

Scott's point - which is a good one - is that normalized power from a really hard ~1 h race or training session provides an estimate of your functional threshold power. Generally speaking, it will be w/in 5% or so, but there can be outliers (such as the data Ric recently sent me). Tracking normalized power for such efforts is therefore often helpful in determining when it has increased significantly and/or when it might be time to retest, but you can't unequivocally state that your functional threshold power will always be at least as high as your ~1 h normalized power.

acoggan said:

Scott's point - which is a good one - is that normalized power from a really hard ~1 h race or training session provides an estimate of your functional threshold power. Generally speaking, it will be w/in 5% or so, but there can be outliers (such as the data Ric recently sent me). Tracking normalized power for such efforts is therefore often helpful in determining when it has increased significantly and/or when it might be time to retest, but you can't unequivocally state that your functional threshold power will always be at least as high as your ~1 h normalized power.

sorry for the thread drift... any news on that data file i sent.

ok folks, back to your regular programming now 😉

Ric

walterptiv said:

Hmmm. That's interesting and good to know. My shorter duration wattages have all increased by at least 40% during the base periods but this FT number has pretty much stayed the same if a 2w fluctuation is meaningless. I guess I need to think about mixing in some different workouts.

It sounds to me as if you're simply looking at your highest (peak) power for, e.g., 5 s, 1 min, 5 min, and 20 min (the default values used in CyclingPeaks). To steal an analogy from Robert Chung: like looking at your bank statement, that will only tell you what you actually did, not what you could have done. IOW, unless you're somehow testing yourself regularly (either via races, formal TTs done in training, or simply via what I like to call "benchmark" training sessions), you can't really use those values to determine changes in your fitness.

ric_stern/RST said:

sorry for the thread drift... any news on that data file i sent.

ok folks, back to your regular programming now 😉

Ric

Definitely an NP buster...in fact, all of the durations at which normalized power clearly overestimated your rider's real abilities were due to a super-hard ~2 min effort that occurred around the 20 min mark (IIRC). You might therefore review the file to see if the data around that point make sense, but I'm assuming that they are correct and that you've simply unearthed a case where the normalized power algorithm hasn't correctly done it's intended job.

If you turn up any more such files, please, send them along...better still, if you can point some more subjects in Lindsay's direction, that'd be great!

acoggan said:

Definitely an NP buster...in fact, all of the durations at which normalized power clearly overestimated your rider's real abilities were due to a super-hard ~2 min effort that occurred around the 20 min mark (IIRC). You might therefore review the file to see if the data around that point make sense, but I'm assuming that they are correct and that you've simply unearthed a case where the normalized power algorithm hasn't correctly done it's intended job.

there was a 2-minute ish climb he had to hang on for, for dear life (he didn't want to get dropped!) at about 25-mins into the file. I didn't realise (that 2-min effort) would have such an effect on the other data.

Quoted post said:

If you turn up any more such files, please, send them along...better still, if you can point some more subjects in Lindsay's direction, that'd be great!

always trying to!

thanks
ric