AWC from a 5 min effort

[gvanwagner]

I've recently done a 5 min power test while rested and pretty well peaked which got me thinking. I did the test on a mostly steady 9.4 % grade. I had read in Training and racing with a power meter book that the quasi plataue of power in a well paced pursuit somwewhat correlates with vo2max power. So does that mean that the increase over estimated vo2max power before that indicates AWC?

In this power test I did the first 2:45 min at 402 watts and the next 2:15 at 385. Looking at the graph it looks clear as daylight the sudden drop in power at the 2:45 mark and by feel it felt like I hit a wall. So is it a reasonable assumption to say that at around 2:45 I had burnt my AWC and had to rely on Aerobic sources for all the power?

17watts for 165 seconds is 2805 J if my math isn't fuzzy. I weigh about 65 kilos but 2.8 KJ for AWC would still be off the charts low. However, it wouldn't be a big surprise that my AWC isn't "there". My power profile Slopes sharply upward to the right with my 5 min about 3 rows higher then FTP.

5s- 900
1min - 580
5 min- 394- the above example
FTP- 320


Thanks,
Greg

 

[frenchyge]

17watts for 165 seconds is 2805 J if my math isn't fuzzy. I weigh about 65 kilos but 2.8 KJ for AWC would still be off the charts low. However, it wouldn't be a big surprise that my AWC isn't "there".

Regarding "the charts," I believe in the original CP model AWC is additional work done above *critical power* (which is said to quantify the aerobic contribution), rather than VO2max power.

 

[jws]

Using the data you gave and keeping in mind that there may be a lot of error involved if those aren't your absolute bests, here's what I get:

Let's call your CP 310W. 394-310=84W; 84W * 300sec = 25.2 kJ, which is 387 J/kg and that's high!!

If we call your CP 320W, it's 22.2 kJ or 341 J/kg, still high.

Using 320W as 60min power, I get CP=313W and AWC= 24.2kJ.

You could try maybe 3 or 4min and 12min tests and run the numbers. Make sure you're fresh and go bttw.

 

[gvanwagner]

Using the data you gave and keeping in mind that there may be a lot of error involved if those aren't your absolute bests, here's what I get:

Let's call your CP 310W. 394-310=84W; 84W * 300sec = 25.2 kJ, which is 387 J/kg and that's high!!

If we call your CP 320W, it's 22.2 kJ or 341 J/kg, still high.

Using 320W as 60min power, I get CP=313W and AWC= 24.2kJ.

You could try maybe 3 or 4min and 12min tests and run the numbers. Make sure you're fresh and go bttw.

Well FTP is right round 320 and 10 MMP is about 360 watts. In theory (Monod model) my AWC is super high but that still doesn't help my 1 min power which is a full 7 rows beneath FTP and 9 rows below 5 min power. While I realize that lack of NMP could affect my ability to "use" AWC within a short time a high AWC should allow my a little bit better actual output for the short durations.


IOW, What could be the reason for having a high theoretical AWC but a low actual power output for the shorter durations? Having a high AWC would be an interesting surprise because I've always been the rider that can go for a while at a hard sustained pace but the accelerations kill.

Also, would 385 watts be a reasonable proxy for pVo2max?


Thanks,
Greg

 

[jws]

Greg,

That's an excellent question and maybe one of the physiologists can answer it. I would have guessed what you said; that you lack the ability to use up your awc quickly. The question is how trainable is that ability.

 

[frenchyge]

IOW, What could be the reason for having a high theoretical AWC but a low actual power output for the shorter durations?

A low neuromuscular power would explain that. 1-min power is on the cusp between neuromuscular power effects and AWC effects, just as 5-min power shares the contributions of AWC and aerobic capacity. Your high AWC could explain why your 5MP is relatively good compared to FT, and why you don't have the straight (/) profile that a purely low-NMP athlete might expect.

Having a high AWC and and good neuromuscular power would probably produce the 'pursuiter' profile (^).

Also, would 385 watts be a reasonable proxy for pVo2max?

Yes, my understanding is that ~120%FT would approximate pVO2max.

 

[WarrenG]

Having a high AWC and and good neuromuscular power would probably produce the 'pursuiter' profile (^).

As mentioned earlier, his neuromuscular power is not great, at only 900w for 5s. FTP is good.

I'd suggest 20/40's (on/off), and 30/30's, in the 480-520 watt range for the "on" portion, and intervals with 4-5' at 100-105% of FTP with a 30" sprint on a hill to finish. Repeat for a total of 4-5.

 

[frenchyge]

As mentioned earlier, his neuromuscular power is not great, at only 900w for 5s. FTP is good.

I agree (and think that's what I said), and his profile supports that as well. That's why he has more of a / (or a ^ that's leaning heavily to the left, anyway) rather than the typical ^ profile.

I'd suggest 20/40's (on/off), and 30/30's, in the 480-520 watt range for the "on" portion, and intervals with 4-5' at 100-105% of FTP with a 30" sprint on a hill to finish. Repeat for a total of 4-5.

What's the reasoning for these longer (4-5') intervals? Are you suggesting that his AWC needs the improvement? I'd think NMP work would be more beneficial, since that appears to be his weakness, such as short 'jumps' or sprints.

 

[acoggan]

I've recently done a 5 min power test while rested and pretty well peaked which got me thinking. I did the test on a mostly steady 9.4 % grade. I had read in Training and racing with a power meter book that the quasi plataue of power in a well paced pursuit somwewhat correlates with vo2max power. So does that mean that the increase over estimated vo2max power before that indicates AWC?

Close, but no cigar.

The additional work performed above estimated power at VO2max can be used to calculate somebody's maximal accumulated O2 deficit (as illustrated in the book). Maximal accumulated O2 deficit is generally considered the "gold standard" measurement of anaerobic capacity (note the absence of the word "work"), and correlates reasonably well with anaerobic work capacity as determined using the critical power approach. Maximal accumulated O2 deficit and anaerobic work capacity are not quite the same thing, however, as evident from the different units in which they are measured (i.e., volume of oxygen versus amount of work). Moreover, since you need to make some additional assumptions re. VO2 kinetics and efficiency to calculate maximal accumulated O2 deficit, for most people simply looking at anaerobic work capacity is easier.

In this power test I did the first 2:45 min at 402 watts and the next 2:15 at 385. Looking at the graph it looks clear as daylight the sudden drop in power at the 2:45 mark and by feel it felt like I hit a wall. So is it a reasonable assumption to say that at around 2:45 I had burnt my AWC and had to rely on Aerobic sources for all the power?

If you substitute the term "anaerobic capacity" for "AWC", then yes, I'd say it's reasonable. However, having not seen the file and not knowing anything else about you, don't take that as an absolute endorsement.

(BTW, I assume that you were at, or at least near, maximal heart rate for the last 2+ min of the effort?)

17watts for 165 seconds is 2805 J if my math isn't fuzzy. I weigh about 65 kilos but 2.8 KJ for AWC would still be off the charts low. However, it wouldn't be a big surprise that my AWC isn't "there". My power profile Slopes sharply upward to the right with my 5 min about 3 rows higher then FTP.

5s- 900
1min - 580
5 min- 394- the above example
FTP- 320

Using your 5 min value along with your 10 min at 360 W, I calculate your critical power to be 326 W (5.0 W/kg) and anaerobic work capacity to be 20400 J (314 J/kg). The latter is probably a bit higher than that of many, if not most, of your competitors, but certainly not unbelievable. This conclusion is consistent with your 1 min power of 580 W (8.9 W/kg), which is pretty high, but not sky-high, on the power profiling table.

 

[acoggan]

In theory (Monod model) my AWC is super high

Not that high...

but that still doesn't help my 1 min power which is a full 7 rows beneath FTP and 9 rows below 5 min power.

Keep in mind that the top rank of that table is a world champion kilo rider (who could snap a 65 kg guy as yourself like a twig ).

While I realize that lack of NMP could affect my ability to "use" AWC within a short time a high AWC should allow my a little bit better actual output for the short durations.

IOW, What could be the reason for having a high theoretical AWC but a low actual power output for the shorter durations? Having a high AWC would be an interesting surprise because I've always been the rider that can go for a while at a hard sustained pace but the accelerations kill.

I think you've already identified your personal strength/weaknesses: your neuromuscular power is clearly on the low side, but your anaerobic capacity is a bit higher than average. As for what (if anything) you should do about it, that's really a coaching question, and I wouldn't presume to know enough about how you've been training, what your goals are, etc., to make any recommendations.

 

[WarrenG]

I agree (and think that's what I said), and his profile supports that as well. That's why he has more of a / (or a ^ that's leaning heavily to the left, anyway) rather than the typical ^ profile.

I was just supporting what you said with his numbers that were the most specific, and straightforward.

What's the reasoning for these longer (4-5') intervals? Are you suggesting that his AWC needs the improvement? I'd think NMP work would be more beneficial, since that appears to be his weakness, such as short 'jumps' or sprints.

Short jumps and accelerations within the context of races, right? For him the 4-5' is not so hard and it will make the 30" hill sprint more applicable/specific for his racing efforts that he wants to improve.

What fibers and energy system(s) do you use to sprint for 30" from rest vs. immediately after the 4-5' intervals? What are the limiters in place or relevant factors when you do the efforts from rest vs. during races? Also, rest only 4' or so between repetitions. Try them yourself, see what you think.

I also suggested the 20/40's and 30/30's to help his NMP within the context of racing. 10/50's at 600+w could be useful too.

 

[frenchyge]

Short jumps and accelerations within the context of races, right?

Actually, no. I was thinking of short in the litteral sense -- 15-30 sec.

For him the 4-5' is not so hard and it will make the 30" hill sprint more applicable/specific for his racing efforts that he wants to improve.

Did he say which race efforts he wanted to improve? Maybe that's where I got lost.

What fibers and energy system(s) do you use to sprint for 30" from rest vs. immediately after the 4-5' intervals? What are the limiters in place or relevant factors when you do the efforts from rest vs. during races? Also, rest only 4' or so between repetitions. Try them yourself, see what you think.

I guess I misread your post. For me, a typical 4-5 minute interval would be quite hard (ie, close to VO2max), and sprinting at the end would be labored at best. I see now that you're suggesting 4-5' at 100-105% FT, which is different than what I had pictured initially. I'm not sure how that would feel. In any case, I'd think the goal would be to develop that muscle snap, and I'm less 'snappy' after 4-5' at FT. Maybe that is race specific training, but does it work NMP or AC (or both)?

 

[acoggan]

For me, a typical 4-5 minute interval would be quite hard (ie, close to VO2max), and sprinting at the end would be labored at best.

That's true for anyone, since peak power declines in proportion to the intensity of the preceeding effort.

I see now that you're suggesting 4-5' at 100-105% FT, which is different than what I had pictured initially. I'm not sure how that would feel.

Lousy? But hey, if it hurts it's gotta be good for you, right?

In any case, I'd think the goal would be to develop that muscle snap, and I'm less 'snappy' after 4-5' at FT. Maybe that is race specific training, but does it work NMP or AC (or both)?

Or neither??

 

[gvanwagner]

If you substitute the term "anaerobic capacity" for "AWC", then yes, I'd say it's reasonable. However, having not seen the file and not knowing anything else about you, don't take that as an absolute endorsement.

(BTW, I assume that you were at, or at least near, maximal heart rate for the last 2+ min of the effort?)

I wasn't wearing my HRM strap but it just doesn't get any harder then that so I would imagine I was pretty close if not at.

Using your 5 min value along with your 10 min at 360 W, I calculate your critical power to be 326 W (5.0 W/kg) and anaerobic work capacity to be 20400 J (314 J/kg). The latter is probably a bit higher than that of many, if not most, of your competitors, but certainly not unbelievable. This conclusion is consistent with your 1 min power of 580 W (8.9 W/kg), which is pretty high, but not sky-high, on the power profiling table.

An estimate of CP as 5.0 seems about right. The AWC stills comes as a surprise as I had always assumed that I was very biased toward the aerobic side of things. To add to this I have also only done less then a dozen Level 6 sessions all season and am clearly ectomorphic so I wouldn't know how I got this AWC.

Slightly to the side, I have noticed that personally I never seems to be able to lay down the power after a few efforts. Could it be that a larger portion of my power then normal is being produced anaerobically and so it doesn't fully recover. For example I have noticed that if I do 2-3 1 min intervals then 15-20 min spinning my power is **** for my 2x20s.

My biggest problem in races is that I can't repeat efforts well enough and that by 1/3 way through a crit Im not able to ride at threshold for long periods of time.

Could my higher anaerobic contribution at higher workloads to be for blame for my bad recovery? While I know that recovery is an aerobic based process, shouldn't a CP of 5.0 be good enough for better recovery then I experience?

Or is it the fact that since my NMP is super low that each effort is particularly taxing and that the NMP component of short hard efforts is fatigued and so can't "express" the AWC left?

Also, does my AWC indicate that my 1 min power could be raised just by focusing on the limiting component (NMP)?


Greg

 

[WarrenG]

Did he say which race efforts he wanted to improve? Maybe that's where I got lost.

Near the end of post #4 in this thread.

I see now that you're suggesting 4-5' at 100-105% FT, which is different than what I had pictured initially. I'm not sure how that would feel. In any case, I'd think the goal would be to develop that muscle snap, and I'm less 'snappy' after 4-5' at FT. Maybe that is race specific training, but does it work NMP or AC (or both)?

Do you care about the race-specific training for the racing weakness he mentioned, or training for something else? Yes, if he wants to do something about his 900 5s power it could be done with the ways I've suggested and others, but for "hard accelerations" during races...

And I was suggesting several different ways of addressing the problem, not just the one you have asked about. You could also try 20" uphill sprints with only 3' rest but those are really hard and should be progressed up to with other training intended to do that.

 

[frenchyge]

Slightly to the side, I have noticed that personally I never seems to be able to lay down the power after a few efforts. Could it be that a larger portion of my power then normal is being produced anaerobically and so it doesn't fully recover.

Well, if your AWC is 20,400J, then it is contributing 5.7w to your power over the course of an hour. When you say you're not able to lay down the power, you're not referring to a loss of just 5-10w, are you?

Could my higher anaerobic contribution at higher workloads to be for blame for my bad recovery? While I know that recovery is an aerobic based process, shouldn't a CP of 5.0 be good enough for better recovery then I experience?

I don't know if it means you'll recover *faster* from a hard effort, but you should be able to recover at nearly 320w while others are still struggling to hold that pace. CP should represent your 'all-day' power output. By attacking after others have made a series of hard efforts, you should be able to cruise away at 300-325w while everyone else is trying to catch their breath. Of course, that doesn't address why you have difficulty in laying down the power after a few efforts.

Also, does my AWC indicate that my 1 min power could be raised just by focusing on the limiting component (NMP)?

That'd be my expectation. Propping up the left side of the ^ (or /) should make your AWC more of a useful advantage.

 

[acoggan]

The AWC stills comes as a surprise as I had always assumed that I was very biased toward the aerobic side of things.

And yet there are those who claim that training and racing with a powermeter isn't really necessary to fully appreciate one's strengths and weaknesses...

Slightly to the side, I have noticed that personally I never seems to be able to lay down the power after a few efforts. Could it be that a larger portion of my power then normal is being produced anaerobically and so it doesn't fully recover. For example I have noticed that if I do 2-3 1 min intervals then 15-20 min spinning my power is **** for my 2x20s.

My biggest problem in races is that I can't repeat efforts well enough and that by 1/3 way through a crit Im not able to ride at threshold for long periods of time.

Could my higher anaerobic contribution at higher workloads to be for blame for my bad recovery? While I know that recovery is an aerobic based process, shouldn't a CP of 5.0 be good enough for better recovery then I experience?

Restoration of the "energy charge" of muscle is a completely aerobic process, i.e., once a muscle stops contracting non-aerobic production of ATP also ceases, and the rate at which PCr is resynthesized is entirely dependent on how many mitochondria that are present (provided that perfusion/O2 availability aren't limiting, which isn't always the case). That's not quite the same as "recovery" in the sense that an athlete would use the word, however.

In any case, I think you've clearly identified what you're good at and what you're not, as well as why. The only bit of advice I therefore might give you is this: speed is a double-edged sword - those who have it must use it wisely.

Also, does my AWC indicate that my 1 min power could be raised just by focusing on the limiting component (NMP)?

Quite possibly.

 

[frenchyge]

Near the end of post #4 in this thread.

Okay, thanks.

Do you care about the race-specific training for the racing weakness he mentioned, or training for something else?

Certainly the training needs to be specific enough to translate into a racing benefit, but I'm not convinced that one needs to actually reproduce the specific situation where the failure occurs in order to target the weakness itself. Intuitively, it seems that that approach may be less effective than just trying to isolate the weakness itself, if that's possible. Granted, I don't really have any coaching experience, so I'm willing to admit the possibility that my intuition is wrong in that regard. But hey, when someone asks for coaching advice on an internet forum, the best they get are 'ideas' to try, right?

 

[frenchyge]

The only bit of advice I therefore might give you is this: speed is a double-edged sword - those who have it must use it wisely.

Thanks Yoda! What's that supposed to mean?

 

[acoggan]

Thanks Yoda! What's that supposed to mean?

Just that what gvanwagner views as a weakness, others might view as a strength. For example, I'd love to be able lay down a 1 min, 8.9 W/kg attack during a race, but that's beyond my ability. When you can bury yourself that deeply, though, you need to be careful to only do so when it makes tactical sense - otherwise, you're just wearing yourself out for no reason. Conversely, somebody who has limited anaerobic capacity doesn't need to be as careful about how they "burn their matches", because they simply don't burn all that brightly.