Dr C. TSS, PMC, and recovery concern

[Tom Anhalt]

Of course....the body adapts to higher and higher levels of stress. ... l..and it may "appear", by looking at things like heart rate at threshold, etc, that the overall stress factor is the same but I don't think it is....

.......there is greater and greater stress, you will say load and so will I, but with that increased load surely comes increased overall systemic stress. This greater stress/load is needed to make adaptation happen. However, With this increased stress comes the need to be even more careful with recovery.

As the cyclists gets closer to and closer to his natural genetic potential it has a harder and harder time adapting to the increased stress, and "leveling the playing field" requires more and more resources....... and recovery becomes more and more of an "issue".

You keep saying "I think" and "surely"...but there's never any scientific backup to these statements.

Thus the man putting out 400watts at FTP for an hour is going to have a harder time recovering, and then adapting, from his effort than a man that rides an hour at his FTP at 250 watts.

Why? If both are at the same % of their genetic potential, why would there be a difference in recovery requirements? Because one can process oxygen better?

 

[TiMan]

You keep saying "I think" and "surely"...but there's never any scientific backup to these statements.

It only logical Tom...and it's what I have found to be true through coaching and as an athlete. I can't pull "studies" "out of my hat" but I can pull my own experience which is in fact a long "study"...even though not scientific I guess.


Tom you are talking about "adaptations" that result from first stress and then recovery. I am talking about stress....external...and thus internal and systemic. Higher load = higher systemic stress.
....and we apply more and more as we get stronger and stronger IN HOPES that we will continue to adapt. Adaptation slows the stronger we get which means the body is not "dealing with" the load as well as it did earlier "lesser" loads. The load becomes more and more of "thorn in our bodies side" so to speak...it becomes more and more "stressful"....and really hard training become more and more fatiguing. Eventually we reach our genetic limit. It is here and as we near this point that guys are the MOST risk for over training...and actually going backwards.

Why? If both are at the same % of their genetic potential,....

Never said that Tom.

Tom....let me be more precise....with any given individual, they will have a harder time recovering from a one hour all out effort when they have a 400 watt FTP than when they had a 300 watt FTP....all other things being equal.
Thus 100 TSS in one hour when you have a 400 watt FTP is going to be harder to recover from...and thus harder to adapt from.

 

[GIH]

I wonder if this is part of the motivation for the long slow hours that pros do. Maybe recovery from a 6 hour 280 watt effort isn't very much compared to a 1 hour 400 watt effort

 

[TiMan]

I wonder if this is part of the motivation for the long slow hours that pros do. Maybe recovery from a 6 hour 280 watt effort isn't very much compared to a 1 hour 400 watt effort

Here is what Greg Lemond says about that.....

"The only benefit a seven hour ride has and the reason the pro's do them is for riding in very mountainous terrain. It's only good because out of the seven hours you are accomplishing 4 hours of really good quality"
Mountain Bike action Nov 96

He also talks about the long rides as "butt toughening' and to help the legs learn to store huge amounts of glycogen for stage racing and for body fat loss reasons.

Physiologically they don't do much to help their FTP

He also said that, "physiologically speaking", world class cyclists don't need to do more then 4-5 quality hour rides for their "long rides". That means good efforts at high L2, tempo, threshold, some VO2.

 

[GIH]

Yeah what you say makes sense. It would be really cool to see a pro training plan, to see how they trained FTP. The powerpoint that Dr. Coggan put together about the pursuit was awesome. Maybe if they are really careful they can still manage to recover (without drugs) enough. Also I imagine that one of the genetic characteristics that these guys have is the ability to handle the extra training load better than others. The margins separating these guys are so thin that really small differences could potentially be decisive in terms of performance. Maybe this also explains why many cyclists are really inconsistent with their results (although most of this can be attributed to periodization). Mayo in last years TDF comes to mind, and climbers in general.
I think they are helped greatly by the fact that training is there only focus (they can sleep long hours, are closely monitored by their physicians, etc).

 

[TiMan]

Yeah what you say makes sense. It would be really cool to see a pro training plan, to see how they trained FTP. The powerpoint that Dr. Coggan put together about the pursuit was awesome. Maybe if they are really careful they can still manage to recover (without drugs) enough. Also I imagine that one of the genetic characteristics that these guys have is the ability to handle the extra training load better than others. The margins separating these guys are so thin that really small differences could potentially be decisive in terms of performance. Maybe this also explains why many cyclists are really inconsistent with their results (although most of this can be attributed to periodization). Mayo in last years TDF comes to mind, and climbers in general.
I think they are helped greatly by the fact that training is there only focus (they can sleep long hours, are closely monitored by their physicians, etc).

It would be nice to see...but don't attempt to copy them unless you have "help" Always remember the "drug factor'.

As a side.....
One thing to keep in mind with the pro's when talking about how little differences make a big deal.
If one has a natural crit of 40-41% like me...and then you jack your crit to 50%, a person like me will usually experience a significantly greater increase in FTP and VO2 max than a guy that has a natural crit of 45% and jacks to 50%.
Also, the testosterone patches that the pro's use in a stage race right after the event and for 4-5 hours before removing will have differing benefits from rider to rider.
So drugs DO NOT "even the playing field".

 

[kclw]

This is an interesting disscusion.


I have to agree with Timan. In my experience as a coach and an athlete as fitness improves workouts around FT get harder.

My wife made a good point when I was telling her about this disscusion. She said "of course the workouts are harder as you get more fit, you are operating at a high percentage of you Vo2 max".

If you ever watch a MTB race you can clearly see this. When the leaders go by they are generally breathing much harder than those just a couple of positions back.

 

[GIH]

So which do you think more limits the ability of a pro cyclist to improve, difficulty achieving desired training volume, or plateaus in things like VO2 max? And what training would you perscribe for a cyclist who had trouble recovering, but wasn't necessarily at their genetic limits in terms of power?

I would guess that a cyclist near their genetic limits would block train, while one having trouble recovering would alternate days, but I am not coach.

 

[TiMan]

So which do you think more limits the ability of a pro cyclist to improve, difficulty achieving desired training volume, or plateaus in things like VO2 max?

Genetics...some are just more gifted and nothing they do will make a difference once they reach a certain level.
Drugs....not knowing how to use them in the best possible way and how to hide their use. ie :Micro-loading EPO once your crit is elevated. Not knowing how to use pure testosterone in an unesterfied form and not knowing how to balance a testosterone level at the upper limits of normal with epitestosterone.
Not having specialists like Dr. Ferarri and a few others at your disposal. Also, not responding to drug therapy as well as others.


Training for the man having trouble with recovery would center around L4 with plenty of recovery days...and a reduced total weekly ride volume of L2.

They can block train but might need more recovery days and smaller increases in weekly load....shorter macrocycles..ect etc

 

[GIH]

Well, to be honest I was mostly curious about the training. Either way, the drugs will enhance their ability to recover and enhance their ability to produce power, and then they will hit another wall and it still gets back to the original question.

About the doping, that really sucks for anyone who want to be a pro. I mean they have to decide between their dreams and their health (and I guess their values too). To be fair, this thread has gotten a little bit sidetracked though.

 

[TiMan]

Well, to be honest I was mostly curious about the training. Either way, the drugs will enhance their ability to recover and enhance their ability to produce power, and then they will hit another wall and it still gets back to the original question.

About the doping, that really sucks for anyone who want to be a pro. I mean they have to decide between their dreams and their health (and I guess their values too). To be fair, this thread has gotten a little bit sidetracked though.

Ya it has gotten side tracked
Final note on this...you can be a pro without drugs but you won't make the big $$. Many riders in the USA are drug free and refuse to dope...but you don't become a Lance, Hamilton, Ullrich, Heras, Panatani, virenque, Landis, Basso etc etc etc..without some serious help. Going to "Le Tour" without help and expecting to place in the top 20 would be like going to Miss America without makeup. Nuf said

 

[Quadsweep]

Tom you are talking about "adaptations" that result from first stress and then recovery. I am talking about stress....external...and thus internal and systemic. Higher load = higher systemic stress.
....and we apply more and more as we get stronger and stronger IN HOPES that we will continue to adapt. Adaptation slows the stronger we get which means the body is not "dealing with" the load as well as it did earlier "lesser" loads. The load becomes more and more of "thorn in our bodies side" so to speak...it becomes more and more "stressful"....and really hard training become more and more fatiguing. Eventually we reach our genetic limit. It is here and as we near this point that guys are the MOST risk for over training...and actually going backwards.

Tom....let me be more precise....with any given individual, they will have a harder time recovering from a one hour all out effort when they have a 400 watt FTP than when they had a 300 watt FTP....all other things being equal.
Thus 100 TSS in one hour when you have a 400 watt FTP is going to be harder to recover from...and thus harder to adapt from.

I agree with Timan. It's been true of me and my progress that's for sure, not that I such a powerful rider.

Good post and good read all the way through.

 

[frenchyge]

My wife made a good point when I was telling her about this disscusion. She said "of course the workouts are harder as you get more fit, you are operating at a high percentage of you Vo2 max".

That is, unless the reason you are more fit is because your VO2max has increased through your previous training, which leads us back to the initial phases of this discussion.

 

[beerco]

Thus the 160 pound man putting out 400watts at FTP for an hour is going to have a harder time recovering, and then adapting, from his effort than a 160pound man that rides an hour at his FTP at 250 watts.

Last time I did a 40k tt it was at about half the wattage of the top pro riders during a similar effort. I couldn't move the next day. I've seen pros ride and WIN GC stages after a long TT. That doesn't gel with your experience.

I'm with Tom. CTL has a lot more to do with recovery than your absolute FTP. i.e. the higher your CTL, the less impact any workout has on your overall fitness or TSB. There are studies which prove this (i.e. the higher your CTL, the greater your ATL time constant) although I don't have access to them.

 

[rmur17]

Last time I did a 40k tt it was at about half the wattage of the top pro riders during a similar effort. I couldn't move the next day. I've seen pros ride and WIN GC stages after a long TT. That doesn't gel with your experience.

I'm with Tom. CTL has a lot more to do with recovery than your absolute FTP. i.e. the higher your CTL, the less impact any workout has on your overall fitness or TSB. There are studies which prove this (i.e. the higher your CTL, the greater your ATL time constant) although I don't have access to them.

yes if it was only about absolute levels in July 2005 at an FTP of 275W I should have able to handle way more TSS/wk than I can right now with an FTP ~100W higher.

There may be a point when it comes to current_FTP as a percentage of genetic maximum but I don't think the absolute levels broadly matter.

 

[acoggan]

Glycogen depletion MAY be similar but I kind of doubt it

On that point you would be wrong: utilization of muscle glycogen (and plasma glucose) are more closely related to the exercise intensity relative to LT than they are to either the absolute intensity or even the intensity relative to VO2max:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=3403447&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...t_uids=1474063&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_docsum

As you said, though, you're not a physiologist...

 

[acoggan]

Tom....let me be more precise....with any given individual, they will have a harder time recovering from a one hour all out effort when they have a 400 watt FTP than when they had a 300 watt FTP....all other things being equal.

If that were true, then less talented individuals would be able to tolerate a higher CTL than more talented individuals. Yet, across a wide range of abilities and ages (and competitve foci), a CTL of ~150 TSS/d is the most that anyone seems to be able to sustain for any length of time.

 

[TiMan]

I has not sure about the glycogen issue... you are right there.

 

[TiMan]

If that were true, then less talented individuals would be able to tolerate a higher CTL than more talented individuals. Yet, across a wide range of abilities and ages (and competitve foci), a CTL of ~150 TSS/d is the most that anyone seems to be able to sustain for any length of time.

There must be a limit on daily TSS. YES

About load though.....
ie:
I can put a Cat 3 and a Cat 1 on the exact same high intensity program, the exact same TSS, and guess what....if they have the same natural athletic ability( the Cat 3 is not just a good "Fred"), that is if they are both "suited" to cycling to the same degree(talent), then the Cat 3 man will have less difficulty with the program than the Cat 1 rider. The first week the Cat 3 man will be really tired if the TSS load is high for him but then he recovers and actually sees better results than the Cat 1 man.

I have seen this over and over and over again in my coaching and especially with three day Gollich/Morris type blocks when TSS is NOT that high but individual workouts are short and hard.
I have found that it is not the long slow rides that bother the Cat 1 man...it's the short difficult rides that give him more trouble the better he gets.
I have found that there is a difference in stress and recovery time needed from 100 TSS done in an hour as compared to 100 done in 2 hours. This is more clearly "seen" as the rider gets "stronger"

Now IF the man with a lower FTP is trying to actually train with the man with the higher FTP then that is another story.....obviously then he generates a far higher TSS by trying to keep up. That actually happens fairly often as a good Cat 3 attempts to move up he likes to ride with the Cat 1 boys....that's a mistake if done frequently.







Andy, would you agree that greater and greater stress needs to be placed upon a rider the closer he gets to his natural maximal ability?

Would you then agree that gains come at a slower and slower rate as you get closer and closer to your natural maximum, all other things being equal?

Would you not agree that the fact that the gains are slower, with a higher load/stress, that the body is not able to adapt as well to the stress?

Then is it not logical that the greater stress placed upon the body is more difficult to recover from?

If more difficult to recover from then it must be more stressful on the system, right?

Then the man going all out for an hour with a FTP very close to or at his natural genetic limit is going to experience more stress and thus have a harder time with recovery, compared to when he did the same effort with an FTP 100 watts less, all other things being equal.

The better you get ie: the higher your FTP, the more difficult it is to recover and then adapt, from the same workouts....and since the long term repeatable "ceiling" for TSS seems to be 150 a day as Andy suggested then you will eventually "be screwed" and NOT progress at all, unless you change the rules and raise your genetic ceiling, and daily tolerable ceiling, with drug use.

 

[acoggan]

I can put a Cat 3 and a Cat 1 on the exact same high intensity program, the exact same TSS, and guess what....if they have the same natural athletic ability( the Cat 3 is not just a good "Fred"), that is if they are both "suited" to cycling to the same degree(talent), then the Cat 3 man will have less difficulty with the program than the Cat 1 rider.

Your experience is inconsistent with that of some two-dozen "beta testers" of the Performance Manager, many of whom coach "across the spectrum" from beginning riders to winners of Grand Tours (see the end of this article for many of their names: http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/performancemanagerscience.asp).

Andy, would you agree that greater and greater stress needs to be placed upon a rider the closer he gets to his natural maximal ability?

Yes.

Would you then agree that gains come at a slower and slower rate as you get closer and closer to your natural maximum, all other things being equal?

Yes.

Would you not agree that the fact that the gains are slower, with a higher load/stress, that the body is not able to adapt as well to the stress?

I'm not sure I'd put it quite that way, but still, yes.

Then is it not logical that the greater stress placed upon the body is more difficult to recover from?

Of course - but the question is, are we speaking stress in an absolute sense, or in a relative sense? Your argument is that there is a significant "absolute" component, but none of the statements above that we agree upon support (or refute) this conclusion.

If more difficult to recover from then it must be more stressful on the system, right?

Yes, but again, you're assuming that it is the absolute stress that matters, not the relative stress (strain, actually).

Then the man going all out for an hour with a FTP very close to or at his natural genetic limit is going to experience more stress and thus have a harder time with recovery, compared to when he did the same effort with an FTP 100 watts less, all other things being equal.

Again, this does not logically follow from your statements above (and it is contrary to, e.g., Rick Murphy's direct experience with this scenario).