coggan vs rst?? levels vs zones? HELP

[Krazyderek]

Ok i have myself completely confused now.

I used the RST map test, and their calculator page here and i get 7 zones. So great, then i read thru the 22pg pdf by cogan that's floating around, and there's a chart with 7 level's but they don't seem to add up to each other.

Because coggan's lvl 4 is 91-105% of threshold power, isn't that my max power in the map test????

Maybe i just have myself all confused, or maybe i should just do a 60 min TT and take that average power to use with the coggan level's chart. If i'm understanding this right, my 60 min avg TT power should be lvl 4 according to coggan..... right??

 

[Krazyderek]

wait, i think i got it, 77% of MAP test is ~=60minTT effort and is 100% of my threshold power.... uggg.. now i see why u guys use so many spread sheets.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Just to clarify; Andy uses training levels based on "Functional Threshold", which is average power from a ~60-min TT. I base my levels on MAP, which is the best 60-secs of an incremental test to exhaustion.

The end result of these tests, i.e., ~1-hr TT power and MAP are *quite* different, however, the actual levels are different percentages (of these different values), and due to the fact that trained cyclists all work within quite a 'narrow' range both systems match up fairly well to each other.

In other words once you change the names of our respective levels and systems they're very similar, for the vast majority of cyclists. For e.g., RST Zone Recovery is approximately similar to AC Level 1, RST Zone 1 is similar to AC Level 2, and so on.

Finally, both myself and Andy, will tell you that to do workouts you should anchor those workouts to your specific current ability rather than trying to match a particular level/zone. The training levels/zones are just a starting point, rather than a final destination.

If you're trying to match two different systems there maybe some initial confusion. On the other hand if you're interested in coaching then your training would be fully laid out for you.

Ric

 

[frenchyge]

wait, i think i got it, 77% of MAP test is ~=60minTT effort and is 100% of my threshold power.... uggg.. now i see why u guys use so many spread sheets.

Once I decided on a schema to use, I ignored the others out there. It's good to understand the differences and similarities if you're looking at example training plans from different coaches, but I can't think of a reason to try to correlate different schema once your training plan is built.

 

[JIM WV]

The end result of these tests, i.e., ~1-hr TT power and MAP are *quite* different, however, the actual levels are different percentages (of these different values), and due to the fact that trained cyclists all work within quite a 'narrow' range both systems match up fairly well to each other.

In other words once you change the names of our respective levels and systems they're very similar, for the vast majority of cyclists. For e.g., RST Zone Recovery is approximately similar to AC Level 1, RST Zone 1 is similar to AC Level 2, and so on. Ric

I've been using the MAP for a while and have set my zones from that, but with plenty of TT efforts, I've also been able to check out Andy's method without any formal testing as well. I've found what Ric indicates -- they both match up quite well for the system you are training just ignore the language level vs. zone, etc. Like Frenchy says, I tend to follow my MAP zones (because that is really the type of testing I am familiar with and have used for a long time, even with my old hr based stuff). Once you pick one I wouldn't really see a need to change.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

I've been using the MAP for a while and have set my zones from that, but with plenty of TT efforts, I've also been able to check out Andy's method without any formal testing as well. I've found what Ric indicates -- they both match up quite well for the system you are training just ignore the language level vs. zone, etc. Like Frenchy says, I tend to follow my MAP zones (because that is really the type of testing I am familiar with and have used for a long time, even with my old hr based stuff). Once you pick one I wouldn't really see a need to change.

For sure you can do plenty of TT type efforts with the MAP zones!! I've just done some now. along with some MAP/VO2max efforts and some nasty 30-sec intervals Great way to kill an hour or so on the trainer

cheers
ric

 

[ric_stern/RST]

By the way, i just wanted to add (looking at the thread title) --- it's not a 'battle' between me and the good doc! I believe we're very similar in the way we'd prescribe training and our thoughts on sports science/exercise physiology. The main difference is just the way we develop our training levels (even though the end result is very similar). [i don't think the OP was trying to suggest there was a 'battle' -- i just wanted to clarify, in case anyone else thought that!]

cheers
ric

 

[acoggan]

The main difference is just the way we develop our training levels (even though the end result is very similar).

Especially when you consider that, contrary to what many mistakenly believe, there's no "magic" to training at some precise intensity (regardless of whether it's quantified based on perceived exertion, heart rate, or power/VO2), and in fact you can't control training intensity all that precisely in the first place (unless you do all of your training on an ergometer).

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Especially when you consider that, contrary to what many mistakenly believe, there's no "magic" to training at some precise intensity (regardless of whether it's quantified based on perceived exertion, heart rate, or power/VO2), and in fact you can't control training intensity all that precisely in the first place (unless you do all of your training on an ergometer).

You mean <gasp> you don't do all your training in a lab on an ergo!

(just kidding folks, i wish the weather would improve here so i could get on the road!).

Ric

 

[lnyndhlp]

Ok i have myself completely confused now.

I used the RST map test, and their calculator page here and i get 7 zones. So great, then i read thru the 22pg pdf by cogan that's floating around, and there's a chart with 7 level's but they don't seem to add up to each other.

Because coggan's lvl 4 is 91-105% of threshold power, isn't that my max power in the map test????

Where is this pdf you speak of?

 

[acoggan]

Where is this pdf you speak of?

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/PowerTrainingChapter.pdf

 

[Alex Simmons]

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/PowerTrainingChapter.pdf

Also see here for a comparison of these training levels:
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2008/01/graphical-representation-of-training.html