How many watts?

[[email protected]]

> even pros screw up their pacing strategies and they've got a lot more
> riding on the right answer than you do. But for 28 lousy seconds, this
> morning people would be saying that the thing to do is to bury yourself on
> the climb; instead, this morning people are saying how wise it is to pace
> yourself.
>

I was glued to the TV when maybe I should have been out riding! ;-)
Part of what makes great athletes great is their ability to take things
right to the very edge of disaster and yet keep control. No matter what
sport. That was very exciting to watch.

> > My 104 will probably end up around 96 or so. I won't be able
> > to go lower than that based on my 193cm and general size. 8kg will make
> > a big difference but my real progress will be in power.
>
> I don't know. I think that losing 8 kg (if it doesn't affect your power
> too much) could be a big boost for staying in contact on the climb, and
> you'll still have 260ish watts to use on the flat. It would be hard for
> you to increase your power by 8% (~8 kg/104 kg) in the short-term; in the
> long-term, yes.
>

The 8 kg I have earmarked for losing most assuredly have no bearing on
my power output. Unless there is some undocumented benefit to having
ones thighs bounce off ones flabby tummy while in a tucked position.

> > Any suggestions on how to determine my "weak link" so I
> > can concentrate on it?
>
> http://www.midweekclub.ca/articles/


There is some great info there. Thanks for the link. Now all I need to
do is figure out where to get the dough for a Polar unit.

Joseph

 

[[email protected]]

> I have had a similar problem. I'm around 230lb/110kg and 6'10"/2.1m, so
> I'm not a natural climber. For a couple of years I struggled on club
> rides to hang on hills. I think there are 2 approaches to this problem:
> work on your weakness or exploit your strengths. I've pretty much gone
> the latter route. My strength is speed on flats where my power to drag
> ratio is better than average. I improved this further by riding a lot
> with aerobars and developing a very low position on the bike. I found

I have been trying to find other large riders for this ride who also
are in the same boat so we all can ride together and help each other.
You don't feel like taking a "vaction" to Norway in a few weeks do you?
;-)

On a side issue, do you have big feet? What size? What brand shoes do
you use? I have size 50 and use Diadora. Their MTB shoes fit great but
the road shoes are a little snug for me. I'm thinking of trying
something else and am looking for suggestions.

Joseph

 

[dvt]

[email protected] wrote:
> The 8 kg I have earmarked for losing most assuredly have no bearing on
> my power output. Unless there is some undocumented benefit to having
> ones thighs bounce off ones flabby tummy while in a tucked position.

In these parts, that's known as an aerobelly.

--
Dave
dvt at psu dot edu

 

[Robert Chung]

[email protected] wrote:

> There is some great info there. Thanks for the link. Now all I need to
> do is figure out where to get the dough for a Polar unit.

The Polar unit is pretty finicky.
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/rechung/wattage/testing/testprotocol.html

 

[[email protected]]

dvt wrote:

> In these parts, that's known as an aerobelly.

Caution! Grotesque humor ahead!

I saw a TV program where a cosmetic procedure known as a "Brazillian
Butt-jobb" was done where fat was extracted from one part of the
patient's body and injected into another to change their shape. Perhaps
I can have a similar proceedure where my tummy is moved to the backs of
my calves so I look like one of those speed-skiers. Probably about as
effective as a disk wheel!

Joseph

 

[Kjell Arne Olsen]

[email protected] wrote:

>So I'm back to my HR method for now. Yesterday I competed in a 10k TT
>on an essentially flat course

Which one?

>Anyway, my stategy for the 540km is to use HR as a measure of output.
>Since HR lags, I will err on the side of taking it easy on minor

HR lag in an event like this should not concern you very much, but
this is a good strategy anyway.

>ascents like overpasses, etc so as not to go into debt before I'm aware
>of it. So the question is what sort of long term power output should I
>expect to be able to maintain based on my 260 max? This is all guessing
>of course, but would 170 watts be reasonable? With a few tests I can
>figure out what my base HR for 170 watts is and try to maintain that
>for the whole ride with adjustment underway for fatigue.
>
>If 170w (65% of max) is not reasonable for a long period, what
>percentage is?

FWIW, I completed Trondheim - Oslo last year with average HR of 72% of
my max, finished witb the second fastest group in 14h 34mins. We
focused on easy climbing to be able to maintain high speed on the
flats (also to get as many club members as possible through), which
after all dominate this race. The race profile looks dramatic, but the
scale fools you a bit. The climb is basically from 50 to 166 km,
making the average grade about 1%!

If you want to, I can e-mail of publish the HRM file, but I don't have
the power unit.

Kjell Arne

--
http://www.brumunddal-sk.idrett.no/
Remove your clothes if you want to answer by e-mail!

 

[[email protected]]

Kjell Arne Olsen wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> >So I'm back to my HR method for now. Yesterday I competed in a 10k TT
> >on an essentially flat course
>
> Which one?

Spinn Cup hosted by Tønsberg CK along 312 in Andebu, Vestfold.

>
> >Anyway, my stategy for the 540km is to use HR as a measure of output.
> >Since HR lags, I will err on the side of taking it easy on minor
>
> HR lag in an event like this should not concern you very much, but
> this is a good strategy anyway.

My main issue is actually finishing. The last 3 attempts I had to bail
because of problems with my wrist and hands. I actually quit at
Gjelleråsen once (about 15km from the finish)! I was completly fried
and I couldn't feel my hands from the elbow down and I was worried
about doing permanent damage to my nerves if I kept at it for another
1.5 hours which it would have taken given my degree of fatiuge. I have
since made changes to my positioning, and have vibration absorbing
carbon fork, frame, stem, and bars and my wrist issue seems to be
solved. I really want to avoid going empty and suffering hugely for the
last few km, so I'm going to be very careful about taking it easy.


> FWIW, I completed Trondheim - Oslo last year with average HR of 72% of
> my max, finished witb the second fastest group in 14h 34mins. We
> focused on easy climbing to be able to maintain high speed on the
> flats (also to get as many club members as possible through), which
> after all dominate this race. The race profile looks dramatic, but the
> scale fools you a bit. The climb is basically from 50 to 166 km,
> making the average grade about 1%!

It's worth a lot! Ladies and Gentlemen, this man is a complete ANIMAL.
14:34 to complete 540 km (335 miles) (37 km/h average, 23 mph) that
goes from sea level, up to 1000 meters and then down to sea level again
with quite a few smaller "bumps" along the way in what is almost
gauranteed to be poor weather (10C, rain) is very, very impressive.

While the grade is pretty mild for the most part (even I didn't really
mind that my lightest gear was a 42x23) it still is steep enough in
places for me to not be able to even think about hanging with faster
riders. Although having a large disciplined group probably makes a huge
difference.

Just out of curiosity, what sort of times do you expect for a 10k TT?
And how much do you ride per week? What sort of body type do you have?

> If you want to, I can e-mail of publish the HRM file, but I don't have

That would be very interesting. When you say 72% of max, how did you
determine your max?

Joseph

 

[Kjell Arne Olsen]

[email protected] wrote:

>
>
>Kjell Arne Olsen wrote:
>> [email protected] wrote:
>>
>> >So I'm back to my HR method for now. Yesterday I competed in a 10k TT
>> >on an essentially flat course
>>
>> Which one?
>
>Spinn Cup hosted by Tønsberg CK along 312 in Andebu, Vestfold.

I haven't been that far for TTs this year. I live a bit more to the
north, along the shores of Lake Mjøsa.

>My main issue is actually finishing. The last 3 attempts I had to bail
>because of problems with my wrist and hands. I actually quit at
>Gjelleråsen once (about 15km from the finish)! I was completly fried
>and I couldn't feel my hands from the elbow down and I was worried
>about doing permanent damage to my nerves if I kept at it for another
>1.5 hours which it would have taken given my degree of fatiuge. I have
>since made changes to my positioning, and have vibration absorbing
>carbon fork, frame, stem, and bars and my wrist issue seems to be
>solved. I really want to avoid going empty and suffering hugely for the
>last few km, so I'm going to be very careful about taking it easy.
>
>
>> FWIW, I completed Trondheim - Oslo last year with average HR of 72% of

With the positioning sorted out, the key to success in this race is a
LOT of long, slow distance. Even more so if you're on the bike for up
to 20 hours. As shown in my 72% of max HR figure.


>> my max, finished witb the second fastest group in 14h 34mins. We
>> focused on easy climbing to be able to maintain high speed on the
>> flats (also to get as many club members as possible through), which
>> after all dominate this race. The race profile looks dramatic, but the
>> scale fools you a bit. The climb is basically from 50 to 166 km,
>> making the average grade about 1%!
>
>It's worth a lot! Ladies and Gentlemen, this man is a complete ANIMAL.
>14:34 to complete 540 km (335 miles) (37 km/h average, 23 mph) that
>goes from sea level, up to 1000 meters and then down to sea level again
>with quite a few smaller "bumps" along the way in what is almost
>gauranteed to be poor weather (10C, rain) is very, very impressive.

Thanks, but I think it's more about being in a well-working, smooth
paceline than being a complete animal...!

>While the grade is pretty mild for the most part (even I didn't really
>mind that my lightest gear was a 42x23) it still is steep enough in
>places for me to not be able to even think about hanging with faster
>riders. Although having a large disciplined group probably makes a huge
>difference.

Absolutely!

>Just out of curiosity, what sort of times do you expect for a 10k TT?
>And how much do you ride per week? What sort of body type do you have?

I had 14.41 in a club TT last year (on my regular bike with clip-on
areo bars), but have only managed 15.10 this year on a TT bike, but
with a far from perfect fit. I ride 10 - 15 hours per week in the
spring, but a yearly total of just over 400 hours of training. The
last figure includes quite a few spinning sessions in the winter. I am
172 cm tall, 66 kg in the summer, around 70 kg in the winter..

>> If you want to, I can e-mail of publish the HRM file, but I don't have
>
>That would be very interesting. When you say 72% of max, how did you
>determine your max?

The max was determined on an ergometer bike in a test lab (NIMI in
Oslo), and has been confirmed more or less on-bike. Check the HRM file
here:

http://www.brumunddal-sk.idrett.no/images/dssp-2004.gif

Cheers,
Kjell Arne
--
http://www.brumunddal-sk.idrett.no/
Remove your clothes if you want to answer by e-mail!

 

[[email protected]]

Kjell Arne Olsen wrote:


> I haven't been that far for TTs this year. I live a bit more to the
> north, along the shores of Lake Mjøsa.

I wonder how far back I'll be from you during Mjøsa Rundt. Are you
going to ride it?


> With the positioning sorted out, the key to success in this race is a
> LOT of long, slow distance. Even more so if you're on the bike for up
> to 20 hours. As shown in my 72% of max HR figure.

I have high hopes for my new improved positioning and equipment. I was
definately old-school before with my steel frame, C-Record components,
and tubulars. My old bike is still very nice, but the new carbon bike
is much more comforatble. The modern 10 speed vs 6 and shifters
integrated into the brake levers also makes a huge difference in being
able to quickly adjust to the situation. One major change has been
switching from 180mm cranks to 175mm, but I still don't know if this
was wise or not. So far this year I have done quite a few long rides,
and unfortunately they have all be slow (not necessarily by design,
however...).


> >It's worth a lot! Ladies and Gentlemen, this man is a complete ANIMAL.
> >14:34 to complete 540 km (335 miles) (37 km/h average, 23 mph) that
> >goes from sea level, up to 1000 meters and then down to sea level again
> >with quite a few smaller "bumps" along the way in what is almost
> >gauranteed to be poor weather (10C, rain) is very, very impressive.
>
> Thanks, but I think it's more about being in a well-working, smooth
> paceline than being a complete animal...!

Ok, let's call it a combination of the two ;-)


>
> I had 14.41 in a club TT last year (on my regular bike with clip-on
> areo bars), but have only managed 15.10 this year on a TT bike, but
> with a far from perfect fit. I ride 10 - 15 hours per week in the
> spring, but a yearly total of just over 400 hours of training. The
> last figure includes quite a few spinning sessions in the winter. I am
> 172 cm tall, 66 kg in the summer, around 70 kg in the winter..

Let's see... You do a 10k in 14+ minutes and Tr-Oslo in 14+ hours. I do
a 10k in 17+. If I manage 17+ hours I will be very, very pleased. I
guess I ride about 8-10 hours per week.


> >That would be very interesting. When you say 72% of max, how did you
> >determine your max?
>
> The max was determined on an ergometer bike in a test lab (NIMI in

Was that through your club or something? How much did that cost, and
what else was measured?

> Oslo), and has been confirmed more or less on-bike. Check the HRM file
> here:
>
> http://www.brumunddal-sk.idrett.no/images/dssp-2004.gif

That is a very interesting graph. To summarize:

You stopped briefly 3 times, your HR never went above 165, but
otherwise was very near the average of 132 the whole time. And the
speed was also quite constant despite 39% of the distance being ascent
with a total of 3360m, and 40% descent for essentially the same
altitude change. The key seems to be consistency. And of course good
conditioning.

What equipment was used to capture this data?

Joseph

 

[Kjell Arne Olsen]

[email protected] wrote:

>I wonder how far back I'll be from you during Mjøsa Rundt. Are you
>going to ride it?

Yes. Good luck to you! I start at 8.20, I think.

>> >That would be very interesting. When you say 72% of max, how did you
>> >determine your max?
>>
>> The max was determined on an ergometer bike in a test lab (NIMI in
>
>Was that through your club or something? How much did that cost, and
>what else was measured?

Lactate profile and HR max. NOK 1000 first time, then NOK 800 for
consecutive tests. www.nimi.no. Of course, a couple of weeks later one
fo our club member could offer the test for free.

>
>> Oslo), and has been confirmed more or less on-bike. Check the HRM file
>> here:
>>
>> http://www.brumunddal-sk.idrett.no/images/dssp-2004.gif
>
>That is a very interesting graph. To summarize:
>
>You stopped briefly 3 times, your HR never went above 165, but
>otherwise was very near the average of 132 the whole time. And the
>speed was also quite constant despite 39% of the distance being ascent
>with a total of 3360m, and 40% descent for essentially the same
>altitude change. The key seems to be consistency. And of course good
>conditioning.

Also it was a bit unnecessary to have the two peaks around 165. As a
first time rider I was allowed to draft from the start, and did it the
first hour. Then one rider in the paceline had to be replaced, and I
got told to come forward from the back of the field, and it seems I
did it in a hurry! The other HR peak occured when I outsprinted the
field in a climb. I had to gain some distance to be able to stop and
take a leak! (the first brief stop). The second brief stop was a
planned one for refilling the pockets with food. Was meant to be 2-3
mins, but was in fact 4 mins. The last stop was not planned, but the
police hold us back to let accumulated traffic pass.

>What equipment was used to capture this data?

My Polar S710 and the accompanying software, Polar Precision
Performance SW.

Cheers,
Kjell Arne
--
http://www.brumunddal-sk.idrett.no/
Remove your clothes if you want to answer by e-mail!

 

[[email protected]]

> Lactate profile and HR max. NOK 1000 first time, then NOK 800 for
> consecutive tests. www.nimi.no. Of course, a couple of weeks later one
> fo our club member could offer the test for free.
>

I'm going to make an appointment!


On Saturday I decided to try out your "72% Rule" to see what my results
would be. I rode out to my cabin which is at about 400m from my house
at sea-level. The distance is 139km and there is about 600m of ascent
in addition to the 400 total at the destination. It was about 10C, and
rain the whole way. I purposefully kept my HR below 145 and tried to
maintain 140. My monitor only shows real-time but I think I was able to
keep it where I wanted it to be. I averaged 24.2 km/hr which I was
happy with considering my clothes probably were carrying at least 4kg
of water! On Sunday I rode home and the rain was traded for a headwind!
But the terrain allowed me to average 29.7 km/hr while still keeping my
HR around 140. I felt great. On Saturday I felt like turning around and
riding home without stopping, and I would have, except my family was
there waiting for me.

I think the 140 HR is key for me to keeping a sustainable pace. I was
almost happy with the speed too considering there was no drafting. I'm
going to try this in Mjøsa Rundt and see what happens with the benfits
of drafting.

Interestingly, 140 BPM is just at the threshold for me of breathing
through my mouth. So even without any gadgets, I know I'm on track if I
can almost breath entirely through my nose.

Good luck on Sunday!

Joseph