lactate-based versus performance-based training prescription

[acoggan]

Another one of those crazy pro team doctors talking about the value of lactate testing...

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=3789

From the chief team doctor at Saunier-Duval...

“We try to organize training in the most scientific way possible. Lactate is the most important parameter for us. VO2 max. is significant, but it is more an indicator of cardiorespiratory adaptation. At this level, most riders will have developed this to its maximum capacity. Whereas lactate tells us more about what is going on inside the muscle cell, how efficient a rider is and provides a better parameter to prescribe appropriate training.”

...the same team doctor, BTW, that I've corresponded with sporadically over the years, and who on several occasions (EDIT: most recently on 11/24/05) has asked for my assistance in trying to make sense of the data that he has collected.

 

[WarrenG]

...the same team doctor, BTW, that I've corresponded with sporadically over the years, and who on several occasions (EDIT: most recently on 11/24/05) has asked for my assistance in trying to make sense of the data that he has collected.

So you have corresponded with him but he still chooses to use the data in ways that I've suggested recently.

 

[acoggan]

So you have corresponded with him but he still chooses to use the data in ways that I've suggested recently.

1. How do you know he uses lactate data the way you suggest? The article doesn't say that, and he's never suggested it to me in any of our discussions.

2. On a semi-related note: more recently (i.e., since my emails with Dr. San Milan), I've been corresponding with another elite coach who is performing lactate testing. The specific issue at hand was an athlete whose performance ability was far greater than you'd expect based upon their blood lactate response during an incremental exercise test. After a bit of back-and-forth, the coach decided to measure lactate levels during a ~30 min TT, which revealed that this individual's maximal lactate steady state occurred at a blood lactate level of >13 mmol/L. Without knowing anything else about this individual, I correctly predicted that they were relatively new to cycling, more of a sprinter type, and consumed a diet higher in carbohydrates than average (in fact, they are a vegetarian). Perhaps more importantly, however, after multiple finger pricks to determine lactate during two incremental exercise tests and then the TT-style effort, the bottom-line conclusion was that their performance ability was, well, their performance ability. IOW, the coach and athlete could have learned just as much by simply doing the TT and skipping the lactate testing entirely.

 

[WarrenG]

1. How do you know he uses lactate data the way you suggest? The article doesn't say that, .

Yes it does and the quoted text I copied is where it does. Note in particular his comments about "prescribe training", and his two other comments in that same text.

As for your story about the extremely unusual case of MLSS at 13mmo/l, just as the S-D doc described, determining MLSS is not the only use for lactate testing.

Try not to look at things in terms of using only one tool OR another. Lactate testing is a tool that should be used along with other tools and other information.

 

[acoggan]

Yes it does and the quoted text I copied is where it does. Note in particular his comments about "prescribe training", and his two other comments in that same text.

All that quote says (and keep in mind that it's a quote, and potentially inaccurate/distorted) is that they prefer using lactate data over VO2max data for prescribing training. (FWIW, I would too.)

In any case, I just find it ironically funny that you should attempt to bolster your position with yet another appeal to authority when in this case the person in question is writing things to me like "I have read extensively your articles and and have gained much knowledge from them." and has repeatedly invited me to ride in the ONCE and now Saunier Duval-Prodir team car should I ever make it over to Europe for a stretch during one of the major tours. (It's like I told you before, I'm the Kevin Bacon of elite cycling! )

As for your story about the extremely unusual case of MLSS at 13mmo/l, just as the S-D doc described, determining MLSS is not the only use for lactate testing.

Once again you miss the point, Warren: when relying on the lactate analyzer it took additional testing (i.e., a test to determine MLSS) to elucidate what the power data had already revealed.

Try not to look at things in terms of using only one tool OR another. Lactate testing is a tool that should be used along with other tools and other information.

This sounds like what I tell the coaches that have attended the USA Cycling clinics on laboratory-based testing that I have given.

 

[fergie]

Warren, what do we do with lactate measurements? We equate them back to a power output or heart rate anyway. Does Dr Testa tell you to train at lactate 4mmol? No, because we cant measure lactate during a ride so we equate it to heart rate or power. We determine that lactate 4mmol is some type of threshold and do our L4 training efforts at this level. But as has been illustrated 4mmol is not the threshold for many people so it may be too easy for some and impossible for others. Why not do the simple thing and determine power for a set duration and spend a training period trying to improve that?

I ask the question again. Would a wrist watch that showed current lactate levels while riding revolutionise training to the same extent the power meter has?

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

 

[WarrenG]

In any case, I just find it ironically funny that you should attempt to bolster your position with yet another appeal to authority when in this case the person in question is writing things to me like "I have read extensively your articles and and have gained much knowledge from them." and has repeatedly invited me to ride in the ONCE and now Saunier Duval-Prodir team car should I ever make it over to Europe for a stretch during one of the major tours. (It's like I told you before, I'm the Kevin Bacon of elite cycling! ).

I provided the quote as yet another example of how lactate can, and is used by some people who are at least pretty good at what they do. I think it's nice that they learn from you and maybe you can learn from them too. Since it may be awhile before you can go to Europe for a stage race to ride in their car why not come to California and ride in their car here? Maybe you'd cross paths with Max since he is advising Aaron Olsen of the S-D team.

Once again you miss the point, Warren: when relying on the lactate analyzer it took additional testing (i.e., a test to determine MLSS) to elucidate what the power data had already revealed..

I didn't miss that point at all. It's just not relevant to whether or not lactate testing has value. It is as I said, used with other tools to provide some additional information.

 

[larrynipon]

Relevant to the question of which metric better serves to determine what an individual's zones should be, I'm submitting the following data...
1. An LT test (invasive)
2. 2 20 Min TT's on a Computrainer
3. A 3 mile TT
4. A Power Stomp Reading
The qustion being, which metrics should one use to determine training zones? It seems to me that Lactate measurements are a means of determing the physiological effects of various workloads over various durations, but are not the best metric to determine the zones a person should actually work at. Thoughts? Yeah Andy, I know we've been hitting this ad nauseum, but I'm still not clear what approach to take. By the way, the book is great.

LT Results...
Minutes Watts mmol/L HR(BPM)
0 0 0.9 79
4 100 3.7 111
7 150 1.8 130
10 175 2.9 139
13 200 5.2 149
16 225 7.9 157
19 250 9.6 168
22 275 12 134

1st 20 min TT
Entire ride (224w):
Duration: 20:02
Work: 269 kJ
TSS: 35.6 (intensity factor 1.033)
Norm Power: 225
Distance: 7.155 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 166 348 224 watts
Heart Rate: 123 181 165 bpm
Cadence: 79 100 92 rpm
Speed: 17.3 23.4 21.4 mph
Torque: 140 300 205 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 5s (320w):
Duration: 0:05
Work: 2 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 169 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 298 348 320 watts
Heart Rate: 178 178 178 bpm
Cadence: 97 99 98 rpm
Speed: 22.7 23.2 22.9 mph
Torque: 254 300 275 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 10s (305w):
Duration: 0:10
Work: 3 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 339 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 275 348 305 watts
Heart Rate: 178 178 178 bpm
Cadence: 95 100 99 rpm
Speed: 22.3 23.4 23.1 mph
Torque: 241 300 262 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 20s (277w):
Duration: 0:20
Work: 6 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 667 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 220 348 277 watts
Heart Rate: 178 181 178 bpm
Cadence: 91 100 97 rpm
Speed: 21.5 23.4 22.7 mph
Torque: 190 300 242 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 30s (271w):
Duration: 0:30
Work: 8 kJ
TSS: 1.3 (intensity factor 1.242)
Norm Power: 271
Distance: 0.19 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 199 348 271 watts
Heart Rate: 178 181 180 bpm
Cadence: 94 100 97 rpm
Speed: 21.9 23.4 22.7 mph
Torque: 177 300 235 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 1min (259w):
Duration: 1:00
Work: 16 kJ
TSS: 2.4 (intensity factor 1.19)
Norm Power: 259
Distance: 0.372 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 237 280 259 watts
Heart Rate: 176 178 177 bpm
Cadence: 79 86 84 rpm
Speed: 20.8 22.7 22.2 mph
Torque: 236 293 262 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 2min (255w):
Duration: 2:00
Work: 31 kJ
TSS: 4.6 (intensity factor 1.172)
Norm Power: 255
Distance: 0.746 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 184 348 255 watts
Heart Rate: 176 181 178 bpm
Cadence: 79 100 89 rpm
Speed: 20.3 23.4 22.3 mph
Torque: 167 300 243 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 5min (230w):
Duration: 5:00
Work: 69 kJ
TSS: 9.2 (intensity factor 1.051)
Norm Power: 229
Distance: 1.811 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 174 297 230 watts
Heart Rate: 166 175 169 bpm
Cadence: 90 97 93 rpm
Speed: 21.1 22.6 21.7 mph
Torque: 161 261 210 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 10min (226w):
Duration: 10:00
Work: 136 kJ
TSS: 17.9 (intensity factor 1.035)
Norm Power: 226
Distance: 3.601 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 174 297 226 watts
Heart Rate: 157 175 166 bpm
Cadence: 90 97 92 rpm
Speed: 21.1 22.6 21.6 mph
Torque: 161 261 207 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

Peak 20min (224w):
Duration: 20:01
Work: 269 kJ
TSS: 35.6 (intensity factor 1.032)
Norm Power: 225
Distance: 7.149 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 166 348 224 watts
Heart Rate: 123 181 165 bpm
Cadence: 79 100 92 rpm
Speed: 17.3 23.4 21.4 mph
Torque: 140 300 205 lb-in
Altitude: 0 0 0 ft

2nd 20 min TT 12 days later
Entire ride (228w):
Duration: 20:02
Work: 274 kJ
TSS: 37.1 (intensity factor 1.054)
Norm Power: 230
Distance: 7.115 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 130 333 228 watts
Heart Rate: 131 182 158 bpm
Cadence: 73 100 90 rpm
Speed: 16.2 24.4 21.3 mph
Torque: 132 306 213 lb-in

Peak 5s (326w):
Duration: 0:06
Work: 2 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 204 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 320 333 326 watts
Heart Rate: 178 179 179 bpm
Cadence: 90 93 92 rpm
Speed: 23.5 24.2 23.9 mph
Torque: 293 306 301 lb-in

Peak 10s (322w):
Duration: 0:10
Work: 3 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 359 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 315 333 322 watts
Heart Rate: 178 179 178 bpm
Cadence: 90 93 92 rpm
Speed: 23.5 24.4 24 mph
Torque: 286 306 296 lb-in

Peak 20s (310w):
Duration: 0:20
Work: 6 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 713 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 287 325 310 watts
Heart Rate: 171 175 173 bpm
Cadence: 89 93 92 rpm
Speed: 23.2 24.3 23.9 mph
Torque: 272 296 286 lb-in

Peak 30s (307w):
Duration: 0:31
Work: 9 kJ
TSS: 1.7 (intensity factor 1.406)
Norm Power: 307
Distance: 0.203 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 279 325 307 watts
Heart Rate: 171 175 173 bpm
Cadence: 90 93 92 rpm
Speed: 23.4 24.3 24 mph
Torque: 256 296 282 lb-in

Peak 1min (297w):
Duration: 1:01
Work: 18 kJ
TSS: 3 (intensity factor 1.34)
Norm Power: 292
Distance: 0.402 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 230 333 297 watts
Heart Rate: 171 182 175 bpm
Cadence: 88 100 92 rpm
Speed: 22.8 24.4 23.7 mph
Torque: 195 306 273 lb-in

Peak 2min (283w):
Duration: 2:01
Work: 34 kJ
TSS: 5.8 (intensity factor 1.313)
Norm Power: 286
Distance: 0.777 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 230 333 283 watts
Heart Rate: 169 182 172 bpm
Cadence: 83 100 89 rpm
Speed: 21.4 24.4 23.2 mph
Torque: 195 306 267 lb-in

Peak 5min (249w):
Duration: 5:01
Work: 75 kJ
TSS: 11.2 (intensity factor 1.159)
Norm Power: 253
Distance: 1.847 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 207 333 249 watts
Heart Rate: 167 182 170 bpm
Cadence: 83 100 91 rpm
Speed: 20.9 24.4 22.1 mph
Torque: 194 306 231 lb-in

Peak 10min (236w):
Duration: 10:00
Work: 142 kJ
TSS: 20 (intensity factor 1.094)
Norm Power: 238
Distance: 3.606 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 200 333 236 watts
Heart Rate: 158 182 166 bpm
Cadence: 83 100 91 rpm
Speed: 20.3 24.4 21.6 mph
Torque: 186 306 219 lb-in

Peak 20min (228w):
Duration: 20:01
Work: 274 kJ
TSS: 37.1 (intensity factor 1.054)
Norm Power: 230
Distance: 7.109 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 165 333 228 watts
Heart Rate: 131 182 158 bpm
Cadence: 73 100 90 rpm
Speed: 16.8 24.4 21.3 mph
Torque: 164 306 213 lb-in

3 Mile Outdoor TT
Entire ride (265w):
Duration: 7:39
Work: 122 kJ
TSS: 42.3 (intensity factor 1.823)
Norm Power: 283
Distance: 2.853 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 0 419 265 watts
Heart Rate: 100 176 161 bpm
Cadence: 33 116 102 rpm
Speed: 4.5 25.8 22.4 mph
Torque: 0 138 78 lb-in

Peak 5s (395w):
Duration: 0:05
Work: 2 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 194 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 352 419 395 watts
Heart Rate: 152 153 152 bpm
Cadence: 105 108 106 rpm
Speed: 25.4 25.8 25.5 mph
Torque: 90 108 103 lb-in

Peak 10s (373w):
Duration: 0:10
Work: 4 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 358 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 353 390 373 watts
Heart Rate: 146 149 148 bpm
Cadence: 108 113 110 rpm
Speed: 23.5 24.5 24 mph
Torque: 98 108 103 lb-in

Peak 20s (362w):
Duration: 0:20
Work: 7 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 728 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 309 419 362 watts
Heart Rate: 146 152 150 bpm
Cadence: 105 116 111 rpm
Speed: 23.6 25.7 24.7 mph
Torque: 81 108 97 lb-in

Peak 30s (352w):
Duration: 0:30
Work: 11 kJ
TSS: 4.3 (intensity factor 2.27)
Norm Power: 352
Distance: 0.207 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 302 419 352 watts
Heart Rate: 145 154 150 bpm
Cadence: 105 116 110 rpm
Speed: 23.4 25.8 24.7 mph
Torque: 77 108 95 lb-in

Peak 1min (343w):
Duration: 1:00
Work: 21 kJ
TSS: 8.2 (intensity factor 2.205)
Norm Power: 342
Distance: 0.423 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 287 419 343 watts
Heart Rate: 146 160 154 bpm
Cadence: 103 116 107 rpm
Speed: 23.4 25.8 25.2 mph
Torque: 74 108 90 lb-in

Peak 2min (321w):
Duration: 2:01
Work: 39 kJ
TSS: 15.5 (intensity factor 2.149)
Norm Power: 333
Distance: 0.816 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 237 419 321 watts
Heart Rate: 126 163 152 bpm
Cadence: 94 116 105 rpm
Speed: 18.2 25.8 24.2 mph
Torque: 66 108 88 lb-in

Peak 5min (286w):
Duration: 5:01
Work: 86 kJ
TSS: 29.9 (intensity factor 1.891)
Norm Power: 293
Distance: 1.985 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 187 419 286 watts
Heart Rate: 135 172 163 bpm
Cadence: 95 116 105 rpm
Speed: 20.9 25.8 23.7 mph
Torque: 54 108 80 lb-in


40 Mile Road Ride
Entire ride (142w):
Duration: 2:45:50
Work: 1415 kJ
TSS: 436.7 (intensity factor 1.258)
Norm Power: 195
Distance: 40.089 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 0 995 142 watts
Heart Rate: 77 168 137 bpm
Cadence: 29 141 82 rpm
Speed: 2.2 43.2 14.5 mph
Torque: 0 483 90 lb-in

Peak 5s (839w):
Duration: 0:05
Work: 4 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 131 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 567 995 839 watts
Heart Rate: 150 152 151 bpm
Cadence: 103 106 105 rpm
Speed: 17.8 18.3 18.1 mph
Torque: 211 358 305 lb-in

Peak 10s (613w):
Duration: 0:10
Work: 6 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 344 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 352 742 613 watts
Heart Rate: 154 156 155 bpm
Cadence: 80 100 87 rpm
Speed: 22.3 26.1 23.6 mph
Torque: 89 214 173 lb-in

Peak 20s (507w):
Duration: 0:20
Work: 10 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
Distance: 0.223 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 353 578 507 watts
Heart Rate: 143 157 150 bpm
Cadence: 109 136 125 rpm
Speed: 34.8 43.2 39.9 mph
Torque: 66 96 84 lb-in

Peak 30s (438w):
Duration: 0:30
Work: 13 kJ
TSS: 6.7 (intensity factor 2.824)
Norm Power: 438
Distance: 0.313 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 204 578 438 watts
Heart Rate: 137 159 147 bpm
Cadence: 90 136 118 rpm
Speed: 25.8 43.2 37.2 mph
Torque: 52 96 76 lb-in

Peak 1min (337w):
Duration: 1:00
Work: 20 kJ
TSS: 7.9 (intensity factor 2.172)
Norm Power: 337
Distance: 886 ft
Min Max Avg
Power: 219 482 337 watts
Heart Rate: 149 165 157 bpm
Cadence: 80 93 87 rpm
Speed: 9.1 11.2 10.1 mph
Torque: 137 307 221 lb-in

Peak 2min (295w):
Duration: 2:01
Work: 36 kJ
TSS: 12.7 (intensity factor 1.944)
Norm Power: 301
Distance: 0.229 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 205 387 295 watts
Heart Rate: 130 157 148 bpm
Cadence: 54 76 60 rpm
Speed: 6.2 9.2 6.8 mph
Torque: 173 397 287 lb-in

Peak 5min (237w):
Duration: 5:01
Work: 71 kJ
TSS: 20.6 (intensity factor 1.571)
Norm Power: 244
Distance: 0.566 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 103 343 237 watts
Heart Rate: 144 162 157 bpm
Cadence: 41 94 60 rpm
Speed: 4.6 10.7 6.8 mph
Torque: 75 402 248 lb-in

Peak 10min (214w):
Duration: 10:01
Work: 129 kJ
TSS: 37 (intensity factor 1.489)
Norm Power: 231
Distance: 1.589 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 85 433 214 watts
Heart Rate: 117 165 151 bpm
Cadence: 56 99 73 rpm
Speed: 6.3 17 9.5 mph
Torque: 51 348 166 lb-in

Peak 20min (178w):
Duration: 20:01
Work: 213 kJ
TSS: 61.4 (intensity factor 1.357)
Norm Power: 210
Distance: 3.828 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 0 433 178 watts
Heart Rate: 112 165 145 bpm
Cadence: 48 141 78 rpm
Speed: 6.3 30 11.5 mph
Torque: 0 348 127 lb-in

Peak 30min (171w):
Duration: 30:01
Work: 308 kJ
TSS: 87.5 (intensity factor 1.323)
Norm Power: 205
Distance: 6.139 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 0 441 171 watts
Heart Rate: 112 164 144 bpm
Cadence: 48 141 82 rpm
Speed: 6.3 30 12.2 mph
Torque: 0 348 115 lb-in

Peak 60min (168w):
Duration: 1:00:01
Work: 604 kJ
TSS: 182.3 (intensity factor 1.35)
Norm Power: 209
Distance: 14.139 mi
Min Max Avg
Power: 0 578 168 watts
Heart Rate: 111 165 144 bpm
Cadence: 38 141 86 rpm
Speed: 5.9 43.2 14.1 mph
Torque: 0 397 101 lb-in



Without giving my opinion, based on these results, what conclusions would be drawn in terms of FT, LT, and Max Power?

1. How do you know he uses lactate data the way you suggest? The article doesn't say that, and he's never suggested it to me in any of our discussions.

2. On a semi-related note: more recently (i.e., since my emails with Dr. San Milan), I've been corresponding with another elite coach who is performing lactate testing. The specific issue at hand was an athlete whose performance ability was far greater than you'd expect based upon their blood lactate response during an incremental exercise test. After a bit of back-and-forth, the coach decided to measure lactate levels during a ~30 min TT, which revealed that this individual's maximal lactate steady state occurred at a blood lactate level of >13 mmol/L. Without knowing anything else about this individual, I correctly predicted that they were relatively new to cycling, more of a sprinter type, and consumed a diet higher in carbohydrates than average (in fact, they are a vegetarian). Perhaps more importantly, however, after multiple finger pricks to determine lactate during two incremental exercise tests and then the TT-style effort, the bottom-line conclusion was that their performance ability was, well, their performance ability. IOW, the coach and athlete could have learned just as much by simply doing the TT and skipping the lactate testing entirely.

 

[acoggan]

I provided the quote as yet another example of how lactate can, and is used by some people who are at least pretty good at what they do.

But the issue isn't whether lactate testing has any value, the issue is whether it is significantly better (and not just more convenient) than simply measuring power, as you have claimed. Nothing that Dr. San Milan was quoted as saying supports your argument.

I think it's nice that they learn from you and maybe you can learn from them too. Since it may be awhile before you can go to Europe for a stage race to ride in their car why not come to California and ride in their car here? Maybe you'd cross paths with Max since he is advising Aaron Olsen of the S-D team.

To be honest, I wouldn't go even if somebody else were willing to foot the bill. I've already got at least four cycling-related trips scheduled for this year, and that's too much time away from hearth and home as it is.

I didn't miss that point at all. It's just not relevant to whether or not lactate testing has value. It is as I said, used with other tools to provide some additional information.

Actually, it is relevant, because the value of lactate testing can't be determined without considering the advantages and disadvantages of alternatives. Perhaps more to the point, you've essentially claimed that lactate testing is "the only way to go", not that it is just another approach that can sometimes be useful.

 

[WarrenG]

But the issue isn't whether lactate testing has any value, the issue is whether it is significantly better (and not just more convenient) than simply measuring power, as you have claimed. Nothing that Dr. San Milan was quoted as saying supports your argument..

You're ridiculous. He even used the word "prescribe" as it relates to training, something that you have disagreed with in this very thread. It's fine that you disagree with him and me. That you try to twist his words around is silly.

"Lactate is the most important parameter for us....lactate tells us more about what is going on inside the muscle cell, how efficient a rider is and provides a better parameter to prescribe appropriate training."

Perhaps more to the point, you've essentially claimed that lactate testing is "the only way to go", not that it is just another approach that can sometimes be useful.

C'mon Andy, I've never said lactate testing is the only way to go. Stop trying to distort my words to an extreme. You sound more like a guest on a CNN political debate show than a "scientist".

 

[acoggan]

You're ridiculous. He even used the word "prescribe" as it relates to training, something that you have disagreed with in this very thread.

Whether I agree or disagree with Dr. San Milan depends on what he means by "prescribe". If he means that you can set training zones or levels based on lactate data, then I agree with him. If, however, he means as you do, which is that you can determine how much of what type of training somebody needs using lactate data, then I disagree with him. You can't tell from the article what he means, but as I indicated before in none of his emails has he indicated that he uses lactate data as you propose.

"Lactate is the most important parameter for us....lactate tells us more about what is going on inside the muscle cell, how efficient a rider is and provides a better parameter to prescribe appropriate training."

You left out the preceding sentences where he refers to VO2max, which is the parameter that he considers lactate testing to be better than.

C'mon Andy, I've never said lactate testing is the only way to go. Stop trying to distort my words to an extreme. You sound more like a guest on a CNN political debate show than a "scientist".

You've said that it was the most accurate approach, and implied that anybody who was really serious about their training would consider nothing less - want me to dig up your exact words?

 

[acoggan]

Relevant to the question of which metric better serves to determine what an individual's zones should be, I'm submitting the following data...
1. An LT test (invasive)
2. 2 20 Min TT's on a Computrainer
3. A 3 mile TT
4. A Power Stomp Reading

(snip)

based on these results, what conclusions would be drawn in terms of FT, LT, and Max Power?

See http://www.cyclingforums.com/showpost.php?p=2550283&postcount=110 for my answer to your first two questions (to which I might add that applying the critical power paradigm to your 20 min and 3 mi TT data yields an estimate for your functional threshold power of 210 W, i.e., w/in ~5 W of the other ways I estimated it before.

As for your maximum neuromuscular power, offhand it seems fairly average, but I don't recall precisely what you weigh and since it was generated at only ~100 rpm it's possible that you've still got "more in the tank". Either way, you can see how you compare to the average untrained person vs. the best match sprinters in the world using the table found here (and please take the time to read all the explanatory material):

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/profile.html

 

[fergie]

Have you tried identifying "threshold" using the Dmax method? That might help you make sense of the data a bit better, since it should help control for, e.g., differences in muscle glycogen stores.

Went through the curves for most riders I have lactate data for and worked out the Dmax threshold. I am guessing it comes pretty close to working out functional threshold.

It does a pretty good job of predicting differences between my riders. Beter than LT, IAT, 2mmol, 4mmol, pwattMax and MAP.

Only one it does't ring true is for my self on this test...

watts lactate heart rate VO2
0 .7 55
140 1.1 130 21.9
170 1.7 142 24.8
200 4.0 153 28.7
230 5.3 169 38
260 7.6 181 36.8
290 16.8 191 38.5

3 min ramped test. I estimate my Dmax threshold at around 220-230 which more than the 170 watt LT but also more than the 215 watt IAT my exercise physiologist worked out. This test was done in November last year and I have improved greatly since then but when doing a 20min effort on a windtrainer found 218 watts pretty challenging.

I estimate my FT to be around the 207 mark based on mean max from Cycling Peaks but I assume this is not the best way of selecting it.

That being said if I plug 230 into cycling peaks as my FT then the threshold and VO2 zones work out pretty close to what I have been doing in training as I continue to play with my new Powertap.

I also see the Aussies use a Dmax formula that starts the line from the LT instead of the first lactate reading. Puts the threshold at a higher level. Any thoughts on this (ADAPT AT)?

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

 

[WarrenG]

for my self on this test...

watts lactate heart rate VO2
0 .7 55
140 1.1 130 21.9
170 1.7 142 24.8
200 4.0 153 28.7
230 5.3 169 38
260 7.6 181 36.8
290 16.8 191 38.5

3 min ramped test. I estimate my Dmax threshold at around 220-230 which more than the 170 watt LT but also more than the 215 watt IAT my exercise physiologist worked out. This test was done in November last year and I have improved greatly since then but when doing a 20min effort on a windtrainer found 218 watts pretty challenging.

I estimate my FT to be around the 207 mark based on mean max from Cycling Peaks but I assume this is not the best way of selecting it.

That being said if I plug 230 into cycling peaks as my FT then the threshold and VO2 zones work out pretty close to what I have been doing in training as I continue to play with my new Powertap.
(ADAPT AT)?

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

Big jump in lactate between 170 and 200 watts. Already climbing at 170 watts. You think your CP zones should be based on 230 watts even though lactate was already climbing rapidly and getting high and you still find 218 for 20' "pretty challenging". There are numerous clues in here about how you could most effectively improve the components of your FT in the next month or so.

 

[acoggan]

Big jump in lactate between 170 and 200 watts.

Dollars-to-donuts it's a measurement error, i.e., if Fergie repeated the test that funny "bump" in the curve wouldn't be there (thus illustrating why one shouldn't place too much emphasis on lactate testing).

 

[acoggan]

I also see the Aussies use a Dmax formula that starts the line from the LT instead of the first lactate reading. Puts the threshold at a higher level. Any thoughts on this (ADAPT AT)?

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

The original Dmax method correlates more stongly with "hour power" than the modified version (i.e., r=0.89 vs. r=0.79). Moreover, the absolute value for power determined using the Dmax method (i.e., 182 W) was nearly identical to the power subjects could maintain for 1 h (i.e., 184 W), whereas the modified Dmax power (i.e., 214 W) was significantly higher:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/..._uids=10862534&query_hl=4&itool=pubmed_docsum

 

[acoggan]

You think your CP zones should be based on

There is no such thing as a "CP zone" - even Friel doesn't use that terminology.

 

[WarrenG]

Dollars-to-donuts it's a measurement error, i.e., if Fergie repeated the test that funny "bump" in the curve wouldn't be there (thus illustrating why one shouldn't place too much emphasis on lactate testing).

I thought of the error too and maybe it is. I just assumed the people doing the testing knew what they were doing-maybe not. However, the lactate results are not that out of line given the information he provided about his training levels/zones and how they don't seem to mesh with the CP predicted zones and his experience with the IAT power estimate and his 20' TT.

 

[WarrenG]

There is no such thing as a "CP zone" - even Friel doesn't use that terminology.

Pretty silly to even nitpick about this terminology, especially since you are not someone who gets to decide what terms people prefer to use and I doubt anyone misuderstands me when I say zone instead of level or some other word. Zones, levels, ranges, whatever. Please excuse me for not remembering all the little differences among the various intensity descriptions. I suppose I could just use the zones my coach has used for 20 years and pretend they are the only correct terms to use.

When we talk about exercising at a power "level" or whatever you wish to call it, we understand that the training will be done within a range or zone around some number measured in HR, watts, RPE, etc., e.g. level x is a range or zone of intensity near x-y% of LTP or LTHR, and yes we know these boundaries are not precisely defined. I like zones or ranges because it describes this better than just saying "level" because level in many other contexts implies a certain number, or something fairly precise.

The floor is "level". I am training in the lactate threshold zone.

 

[acoggan]

Pretty silly to even nitpick about this terminology

Precise communication of precise ideas requires precise use of precise terminology.