Basic errors in Dr. Coggans book?

[TiMan]

so IMO the pre-fatiguing is a good test of NMP under reall world conditions but not really optimal conditions for addaptation... i.e. IMO minimal fatigue and full rest between intervals is best during addaptation and then on race day you're legs just go on auto-pilot and do what they did during practice..."

Yes.

It's like this......you can get some neuromuscular adaptation doing 30 sets of so-so Squats in the gym, with little rest between sets, but if you increase the intensity too maximum per set, and allow for full or near complete recovery between sets ,then you can accomplish much more. Not only that but your volume can(and must) be reduced.



Neuromuscular adaptation needs to be sports specific. For the body builder it means maximal muscle mass and strength and with drugs they can get away with higher volume and less intensity, for the power lifter it means maximum power, for the Olympic weight lifter it means maximal power coupled with a high level of technique, for the 100 meter Olympic sprinter it means 100 meter sprint speed and for the cyclist(most types) it means abilty to jump fast WITH MAXIMAL POWER and open a gap, to jump fast WITH MAXIMAL POWER and close a gap, and to Sprint to the finish WITH MAXIMAL POWER and win the race.



Does the 15 second "on" 15 second "off" X10 minutes have a place in training....absolutely! and I have done and recommend similar workouts for not only the crit racer but for the road racer, but certainly not as a part of a neuromuscular workout. This type of workout is clearly a hybrid and it needs to RECOGNIZED AND LABLED as such. Surely you can concede to this much Andy.


Quadsweep, you have more understanding on this subject than some think you do.

 

[RapDaddyo]

No worries, have at it.

O.K. you've given me rope so now I'll hang myself. We're all on this forum to talk about power or dE/dt, we've gotten our head around the mapping between various power levels and the primary metabolic processes that they target. We've also gotten around to an understanding that it's a continuoum and even if we're targeting one metabolic system the others are affected to some degree. And if we were all time trialists we could think of steady state efforts at our target durations and pretty much be done with it.

But we're not all time trialists so with this microinterval discussion we're now talking about dP/dt or dE^2/dt^2 or developing the ability to accelerate from one power to another. Pretty important stuff to the crit rider, points racer, miss and out racer or mass start anything racer. The contentious workout sounds like L4 work, but it's a silly way focus on steady state L4 so the only reason to do it is to work on snap, acceleration or in other words dP/dt. Maybe there's not a perfect bucket in the 7 level schema for this kind of workout but it comes closer to L7 based on the "neuro" training it targets than anything else so that's where it fit in the book.

Close enough summary?

Good summary, but as frenchy pointed out the 2x10min microburst segments at 150%FTP are not the entire workout. After the microburst segments are 10x10s efforts at 300-350%FTP with 2min recoveries between each. For me, 300-350%FTP is very near my max power and are very similar to the L7s that I do at the end of rides. So, it's a hybrid workout with Part B being NM by anybody's definition. I think the issue is less whether the workout belongs in the L7 section (I think it does) than it is, "What is the adaptation benefit of the microburst segments?" The workout preamble suggests that the workout mimics the NM demands of typical crits. That is a reasonable representation in my view, although one could argue for shorter "on" durations at higher power (really just fine-tuning the workout). There are many other workouts to obtain the metabolic adaptations required by crits (e.g., 2x20 L4s). What about the NM demands? Is there a better way to obtain the NM adaptations?

 

[SolarEnergy]

contentious workout sounds like L4 work, but it's a silly way focus on steady state L4 so the only reason to do it is to work on snap, acceleration or in other words dP/dt.

and even that I'm not sure... For a rider's who's FTP is constantly improving probably (probably a bit silly I mean), but for one who is struggling against a plateau, I would probably give it a little try (without necessirlely expecting too much of it).

 

[RapDaddyo]

This type of workout is clearly a hybrid and it needs to RECOGNIZED AND LABLED as such.

But, that characterization applies to more than half the workouts in the book. This is not the first L7 workout listed and by implication is not the "preferred" pure L7 workout. Secondly, the workout preamble specifically likens the workout to the NM demands of a crit. Third, the workout has two distinct parts and the 2nd part is a much more classic NM workout. I certainly had no problem figuring out that this workout is a hybrid. Would you have the authors put a little "HYBRID" symbol beside all of the many hybrid workouts? I'm glad the authors give us a bit more credit for intelligence.

 

[TiMan]

So, it's a hybrid workout with Part B being NM by anybody's definition.

YES!!! and it needs to be LABELED as such! AND...you need to include them in your training.

I think the issue is less whether the workout belongs in the L7 section (I think it does) than it is, "What is the adaptation benefit of the microburst segments?" The workout preamble suggests that the workout mimics the NM demands of typical crits. That is a reasonable representation in my view, although one could argue for shorter "on" durations at higher power (really just fine-tuning the workout). There are many other workouts to obtain the metabolic adaptations required by crits (e.g., 2x20 L4s).

It needs to be put in a crit workout category...so as not to confuse people that are trying to understand neuromuscular workouts in their purest (and best)form....people like Quadsweep and others.
The book needs such "hybrid" examples as they are valuable.

What about the NM demands? Is there a better way to obtain the NM adaptations?

Absolutely, for the cyclist you do SPRINTS in the form of sprint training and jumps. It's as simple as that. For some pure road sprinting specialist, and all track sprinters high intensity squats can help.

 

[SolarEnergy]

I'm posting this just to chat RD. We're on the same page I think.

I think the issue is less whether the workout belongs in the L7 section (I think it does) than it is, "What is the adaptation benefit of the microburst segments?"

That takes a coach a lot of data in order to figure that out. With so many training aspects and means composing a training program, it's kind of hard to associate (for sure) the results obtained with the training means.

But I wouldn't be worried about Hunter Allen though. His position has allowed him to get access to a whole lot of data and riders (I'm saying that while knowing that it was not your intention to even question this).

Is there a better way to obtain the NM adaptations?

Sometimes (in my case I'd even say very often), we're not looking for for the better or best way to obtain a specific adaptation. Just a way that works is good enough.

We save the better or best ways for when we really want to develop an aspect as much as we can. For instance here up north, with 100% of the training taking place on slippery trainers, as a coach I prefer to wait until the riders hit the road before asking them to deliver >1000w bursts. Until then, tickeling NP by mixing some "NEURO" components with others sounds like an acceptable compromise.

 

[RapDaddyo]

We save the better or best ways for when we really want to develop an aspect as much as we can. For instance here up north, with 100% of the training taking place on slippery trainers, as a coach I prefer to wait until the riders hit the road before asking them to deliver >1000w bursts. Until then, tickeling NP by mixing some "NEURO" components with others sounds like an acceptable compromise.

Actually, I think this concept (i.e., the workouts might need to change as one approaches his upper limit) applies to all of the adaptations. In my case, 90% seems to be the transition point. For example, any number of workouts seem to get me within 10% of my FTP upper limit (even <L4 workouts), but it seems that I have to bump the intensity to the upper range of L4 and shorten the duration as necessary to get to my maximum FTP. Maybe the same thing applies to NM. I'm not sure because I seem to be stuck at ~1200W. I think all that's left is drugs and I don't want to win sprints that badly.

 

[frenchyge]

Until then, tickeling NP by mixing some "NEURO" components with others sounds like an acceptable compromise.

Careful. Last time I suggested varying the power like this during L3/L4 trainer intervals to more closely resemble the force/velocity (ie, neuromuscular) demands of road racing I got accused of 'Circus Training.'

Down with hybrids! If we want to train more than one performance component in a day we should dismount and download our PMs between workouts to prevent mixing.

 

[SolarEnergy]

Careful. Last time I suggested varying the power like this during L3/L4 trainer intervals to more closely resemble the force/velocity (ie, neuromuscular) demands of road racing I got accused of 'Circus Training.'

Funny you should mention these because we're actually having a ball at these. I have one I named the Paceline workout. I found out last summer that fast pl work had a very stimulating effect on FTP tested as 60min TT. Workout is 2min at 120%, 3min at 65%. Total NP = 100% FTP.

Down with hybrids! If we want to train more than one performance component in a day we should dismount and download our PMs between workouts to prevent mixing.

Well maybe RapDaddyo's parsing app with a fair bit of tweaking

 

[doctorSpoc]

We save the better or best ways for when we really want to develop an aspect as much as we can. For instance here up north, with 100% of the training taking place on slippery trainers, as a coach I prefer to wait until the riders hit the road before asking them to deliver >1000w bursts. Until then, tickeling NP by mixing some "NEURO" components with others sounds like an acceptable compromise.

"motor coordination" literally does get hard-wired in nerve-bundles and ganglion that control such coodination... you want to be doing your L7 workouts under controlled conditions conditions fresh and with full of recovery so you aren't hard-wiring inefficient "motor coordination"... the format of these micro-intervals are such that a good portion are done under fatigue and the reason that the intensity is important is that it forces a rider to be efficient... one will naturally make minute adjustment to be as efficient as possible.... remove this intensity, as is necessitated by this format and again you aren't forced to be efficient and again you are likely to be sloppy are hard wiring bad "motor coordination". if you want to improve NM even sub maximal you are best to use much more intense efforts than this workout affords

...other than getting a rider used to mixed pace... the ease or difficulty a rider performs this workout might be a good indication of how well they have addapted but it's probably not a good way to induce the specific addapation (race simulation) and in fact it might actually diminish it if not supported by traditional L7 intervals. racing is often not the best way to train since it doesn't super-stress certain areas as we can do with specialized, targeted training... it's not a bad workout... i'm just very sceptical of its effectiveness at inducing NMP addapation.. maximal or sub-maximal.

 

[SolarEnergy]

doctorspoc, a season is 12 months long. But thanks anyway.

 

[RapDaddyo]

i'm just very sceptical of its effectiveness at inducing NMP addapation.. maximal or sub-maximal.

Gee, I never would have guessed.

 

[acoggan]

This type of workout is clearly a hybrid and it needs to RECOGNIZED AND LABLED as such. Surely you can concede to this much Andy.

As I've said several times before, the best way to describe such a workout is "level X with a level 7 twist", where X is the level corresponding to the average power. However, since the only reason you would do such a workout (and note that I've never recommended that anybody actually train this way) would be for the neuromuscular adaptations, it should be viewed as being a level 7 training session, and not level X training session.

 

[acoggan]

i do fancy myself a pretty good critical thinker who can sniff out BS pretty good though...

Your "sniffer" seems in need of a tune-up.

 

[acoggan]

This is beginning to remind me of the showdown between Andy and a certain track sprinter i haven't seen around here much lately.

Indeed, it does - and Warren lost all of those debates too.

 

[frenchyge]

Funny you should mention these because we're actually having a ball at these.

Yeah, circuses can be fun.

 

[doctorSpoc]

doctorspoc, a season is 12 months long. But thanks anyway.

wouldn't suggest very structured, max efforts this time of year either unless you can get outside and do them, but throwing in 3 to 5 x 5-10sec efforts @ about 50% of their 5s max power (for me ~250% FTP).. 1-2min recovery would be fine... this unstructured 10min, once a week will be more useful for NMP adapation/maintenance than the 20min they will spend doing those micro intervals. i wouldn't even be so strict about the power (just as a guide)... just a hard jam, get on top of the gear, hold it for a bit, then bring it down... slippery trainers? i can do that on my kreitlers rollers (600W for me)... after that they can do some Thesh or SST work.

 

[Alex Simmons]

I'm not sure because I seem to be stuck at ~1200W. I think all that's left is drugs and I don't want to win sprints that badly.

Or perhaps a re-apportioning of some aerobic training time to NMP, meaning time previously devoted to hard aerobic workouts is now assigned to recovery time in order to be fresh enough for quality peak NMP workouts and improvement.

 

[TiMan]

Or perhaps a re-apportioning of some aerobic training time to NMP, meaning time previously devoted to hard aerobic workouts is now assigned to recovery time in order to be fresh enough for quality peak NMP workouts and improvement.

That's a good idea.

RapDaddyo, you can increase your peak power to 1500 watts with once a week high intensity full squats. You also need to do sprints on the road once per week. This combo is 100% pure and intense neuromuscular work. It will take about three months.....just in time for the early crits.

A proper high intensity focus on the squat in the gym(deep) once per week with progressive but small jumps in weight weekly will do the trick Rap. 2-3 very hard sets of 10-15 reps(after warm ups) is all it takes. I have done this to ALL of my men that complain of poor sprinting power and ALL have gained very well in three months. But you have to be prepared for some body weight gain...3-5 pounds of pure muscle is very normal.

Most think that you can do little for your sprint if you don't have the genetics....I have found the opposite to be true IF you get serious about practicing your sprint AND do full squats HARD. True, you will never be a super sprinter but you can improve it a lot..

 

[RapDaddyo]

Or perhaps a re-apportioning of some aerobic training time to NMP, meaning time previously devoted to hard aerobic workouts is now assigned to recovery time in order to be fresh enough for quality peak NMP workouts and improvement.

Actually, I can just bring them to the front end of some workouts. I typically do L7s at the end of my workouts on my way home. I don't have any true "recovery" rides and I have never wanted to be fatigued for my high-intensity segments. Although, when I think about it I don't actually find that sprints have a lasting effect on me. So, it's probably just a habit I have gotten into. I'll do a set of ~10x10s full-power efforts at the beginning of a couple of rides starting this week.