Training in the last week before a race

[gvanwagner]

interesting, I take it you're in favour of a pretty short taper then?

Re the P-D curve shape - well I guess it's never really flat - just some degree of curvature that can change over time. From my n=1 experience, it seems possible to lessen the curvature over time by riding pretty hard for fairly long periods of time, i.e. SST, but for me it takes perhaps months of training to notice substantial changes.

rmur

Yeah I'd guess it's one of those things that depend on its shape beforehand. For example I had a super steep one so I gained flatness a little faster. In the past month I increase IF by .05 on my standard 2hr SST- Which I consider huge. Last season though all of my ~20min TTs were 1.10 IF or higher with a peak at 1.216- Granted that one day was a day of divine intervention AFA form but still. Which is of course why I always laugh when I see .95*20min power as being threshold- I wish my FTP was 345w but it ain't nowhere near true.

Also, what is the Pnorm/Pave difference in your SST rides? If you doing them in on standard rolling (NE?) roads then you might not be spending a lot of time at the proper power even though NP might be there. What IF? Then again, you could take some time off and see how fast those gains that took months to dissipate. In the name of science.;-)

 

[rmur17]

Yeah I'd guess it's one of those things that depend on its shape beforehand. For example I had a super steep one so I gained flatness a little faster. In the past month I increase IF by .05 on my standard 2hr SST- Which I consider huge. Last season though all of my ~20min TTs were 1.10 IF or higher with a peak at 1.216- Granted that one day was a day of divine intervention AFA form but still. Which is of course why I always laugh when I see .95*20min power as being threshold- I wish my FTP was 345w but it ain't nowhere near true.

Also, what is the Pnorm/Pave difference in your SST rides? If you doing them in on standard rolling (NE?) roads then you might not be spending a lot of time at the proper power even though NP might be there. What IF? Then again, you could take some time off and see how fast those gains that took months to dissipate. In the name of science.;-)

I used to be around FT= 0.93 20MP but it's 0.95 now and but I'm much better out in the 4-5 hr range. Back in 2004 I was down around 0.72-0.73 IF PB for 5-hrs but this year I've hit 0.88 and have a lot of rides in the 0.85 range.

NP/AP or VI averages around 1.07 for me in the terrain here so I'm comfortably in the tempo power range for my longish rides or at least a substantial portion of them. I log AP and NP per ride and track my AP-Duration and NP Duration curves.

I occasionally hit a group ride or race with VI up around 1.15 or so - then I'm always a little cautious about taking that NP result too literally. But it seems the NP versus AP PB spread is more about terrain and/or the group dynamic rather than anything physiological ...

rmur

p.s. time off is verboten

 

[acoggan]

I used to be around FT= 0.93 20MP but it's 0.95 now and but I'm much better out in the 4-5 hr range. Back in 2004 I was down around 0.72-0.73 IF PB for 5-hrs but this year I've hit 0.88 and have a lot of rides in the 0.85 range.

So what do you make of individuals whose 20 min power is only 87-91% of their functional threshold power, but who insist that really short, hard workouts are still the way to go?

 

[whoawhoa]

So what do you make of individuals whose 20 min power is only 87-91% of their functional threshold power, but who insist that really short, hard workouts are still the way to go?

I'm not Rmur, but I'd guess they're training for the track pursuit? Or have taken the "train hard, rest hard" philosphy way too far? One of the first things I learned when I got my PM was that I didn't train hard enough, this applied to interval workouts just as much as it did endurance rides.

By the way, what would you make of an individual whos FT is ~97% of their FT? How rare is this?

 

[acoggan]

By the way, what would you make of an individual whos FT is ~97% of their FT? How rare is this?

Uh, exceedingly rare?

I assume you meant that functional threshold power is 97% of 20 min power...if so, I'd say that it is not at all uncommon, although it does put the person on the slowtwitch-like end of the spectrum.

 

[rmur17]

So what do you make of individuals whose 20 min power is only 87-91% of their functional threshold power, but who insist that really short, hard workouts are still the way to go?

uhm .... err ....

Something along the lines of training their strength's instead of weaknesses comes to mind. That's being polite

But I think training that way all the time short-changes medium and long-term progress.

rmur

 

[whoawhoa]

Uh, exceedingly rare?

I assume you meant that functional threshold power is 97% of 20 min power...if so, I'd say that it is not at all uncommon, although it does put the person on the slowtwitch-like end of the spectrum.

uhm, well at least I didn't say my 20mp is 97% of my FT.

Anyway, I'm certainly slowtwitch-like. I'm confident I'm nowhere close to maximizing FT, so I'm going to continue focusing on that despite it being a strength. However, I have one goal event for next year where AWC is somewhat important, is 6-8 weeks long enough to make serious improvements there?

 

[acoggan]

I think training that way all the time short-changes medium and long-term progress.

Me too.

 

[acoggan]

I have one goal event for next year where AWC is somewhat important, is 6-8 weeks long enough to make serious improvements there?

Most definitely. In fact, I can't imagine being able to maintain a very high AWC focus for any longer than 6-8 wk.

 

[gvanwagner]

So what do you make of individuals whose 20 min power is only 87-91% of their functional threshold power, but who insist that really short, hard workouts are still the way to go?

For example Kraig willet insistence on 20mp being Above all other attributes. No wonder his ratio is 1.10-1.15. If he focused on flatening that ratio then he could see some nice improvements in FTP and I bet he'd be significantly better at RRs. In fact this ratio was one of the "holy sh*t" things of this year with a PM.

 

[Alex Simmons]

Most definitely. In fact, I can't imagine being able to maintain a very high AWC focus for any longer than 6-8 wk.

Man - 8 weeks of puking over the railings at the track after these efforts - bring it on baby!!!
Just kidding....

 

[acoggan]

For example Kraig willet insistence on 20mp being Above all other attributes. No wonder his ratio is 1.10-1.15. If he focused on flatening that ratio then he could see some nice improvements in FTP and I bet he'd be significantly better at RRs. In fact this ratio was one of the "holy sh*t" things of this year with a PM.

Kraig who?

Seriously, if you're an ex-racer who only has a few hours each week to ride and the only event you compete in the occasional 20 km club TT, then yeah, pounding it out every time you get on the bike makes sense. But to think that this means that others who make their performance a higher priority can reach their maximum potential by training this way is downright silly.

 

[rmur17]

Kraig who?

Seriously, if you're an ex-racer who only has a few hours each week to ride and the only event you compete in the occasional 20 km club TT, then yeah, pounding it out every time you get on the bike makes sense. But to think that this means that others who make their performance a higher priority can reach their maximum potential by training this way is downright silly.

In the 2004 pre-season (well before it became popular online) I was doing two (sometimes three) weekly sessions on the ergometer right around 20MP. A typical core workout would be 20-25min @20MP, [5min rec], 12-16min repeat, [5rec], and 6-8min @20MP+10W.

Each interval taken to failure on the ergo - though I occasionally stopped the 1st interval @20min and tried to match that on #2. Re progression, when I reached close to 30min on the 1st interval, next week I'd bump up the power 5W and try the same workouts. In any case, I definitely worked quite hard around the 20MP point that pre-season.

As I've related before, I made decent progress in 5-20min power and performed well in local TT's that year up to 30min ... but my P-D curve dropped off fairly steeply after that. I believe my best 2-hr IF was around 0.85 - which is pretty poor. For contrast, I think given a good day and benign conditions that I could average 0.85 IF for 6-hrs this year.

I recognized my lack of 'endurance' over the 2004 season but it was too late (or I was too stubborn) to correct it. Retrospective PMC analysis showed that my avg. in-season (May-Sept) CTL in 2004 was only 70-80 compared to 100-120 the previous two seasons (and 130-140 this year).

I decided to correct that in 2005/2006 and PMC was a great tool. I couldn't see the same patterns/trends to that extent using weekly TSS volume or rolling averages and the like. It was a great eye-opener right out of the bag.

that's my experience.

rmur

 

[normZurawski]

Most definitely. In fact, I can't imagine being able to maintain a very high AWC focus for any longer than 6-8 wk.

What would be entailed by "focus" as opposed to say, a pure David Morris-like block of pure hell?

 

[acoggan]

In the 2004 pre-season (well before it became popular online) I was doing two (sometimes three) weekly sessions on the ergometer right around 20MP. A typical core workout would be 20-25min @20MP, [5min rec], 12-16min repeat, [5rec], and 6-8min @20MP+10W.

Each interval taken to failure on the ergo - though I occasionally stopped the 1st interval @20min and tried to match that on #2. Re progression, when I reached close to 30min on the 1st interval, next week I'd bump up the power 5W and try the same workouts. In any case, I definitely worked quite hard around the 20MP point that pre-season.

As I've related before, I made decent progress in 5-20min power and performed well in local TT's that year up to 30min ... but my P-D curve dropped off fairly steeply after that. I believe my best 2-hr IF was around 0.85 - which is pretty poor. For contrast, I think given a good day and benign conditions that I could average 0.85 IF for 6-hrs this year.

I recognized my lack of 'endurance' over the 2004 season but it was too late (or I was too stubborn) to correct it. Retrospective PMC analysis showed that my avg. in-season (May-Sept) CTL in 2004 was only 70-80 compared to 100-120 the previous two seasons (and 130-140 this year).

I decided to correct that in 2005/2006 and PMC was a great tool. I couldn't see the same patterns/trends to that extent using weekly TSS volume or rolling averages and the like. It was a great eye-opener right out of the bag.

that's my experience.

rmur

Specificity, specificity, specificity...

 

[acoggan]

What would be entailed by "focus" as opposed to say, a pure David Morris-like block of pure hell?

By an AWC "focus" I meant devoting most of the 2-4 "breakthrough" workouts you can handle each week to doing very intense intervals aimed at training this ability. A schedule like that is tough to handle for more than 6-8 wk, and even if you don't crash-and-burn as a result, you may simply find yourself plateauing.

 

[RipVanCommittee]

So what do you make of individuals whose 20 min power is only 87-91% of their functional threshold power, but who insist that really short, hard workouts are still the way to go?

I'd say that

1) that's a bit of an oversimplification of a certain individual's position, and

2) it's really not a fair question since that individual is not here to discuss it, and lastly

3) that individual has had a really positive influence on my overall training philosophy--as have you (so thank you!)

I think you guys need to kiss and make up. Life is too short.....

 

[RipVanCommittee]

For example Kraig willet insistence on 20mp being Above all other attributes. No wonder his ratio is 1.10-1.15. If he focused on flatening that ratio then he could see some nice improvements in FTP and I bet he'd be significantly better at RRs. In fact this ratio was one of the "holy sh*t" things of this year with a PM.

Again, not to pick nits...but I think "insistence on 20mp being above all other attributes" is a bit of a mischaracterization of Kraig, and Kirk's position.

Really, I think the main message that I've taken away from Kirk's writing on the subject is to focus on raising the left side of the power/duration curve in "base" training, and to more specifically address the endurace demands of racing closer to the beginning of the season. This formula has worked really well for me, and for the individuals whom I advise.

Lastly, I don't think Kraig does many road races, but I'll say this: with respect to road racing, it doesn't really matter how flat your profile is after 20 minutes...if you're not able to put out certain amounts of power at durations from 3-20 minutes, you'll be off the back anyway. Then, the flat power curve will just be helping your long, solo TT to the finish.....

Obviously, you need the endurance to do that 5 minute effort at the end of a 4 hour race, but you get my point. So, in that regard, I'd agree that 20MP can be a pretty good indicator of road race fitness, as long as the endurance requirements can be met.

 

[RipVanCommittee]

In the 2004 pre-season (well before it became popular online) I was doing two (sometimes three) weekly sessions on the ergometer right around 20MP. A typical core workout would be 20-25min @20MP, [5min rec], 12-16min repeat, [5rec], and 6-8min @20MP+10W.

Each interval taken to failure on the ergo - though I occasionally stopped the 1st interval @20min and tried to match that on #2. Re progression, when I reached close to 30min on the 1st interval, next week I'd bump up the power 5W and try the same workouts. In any case, I definitely worked quite hard around the 20MP point that pre-season.

As I've related before, I made decent progress in 5-20min power and performed well in local TT's that year up to 30min ... but my P-D curve dropped off fairly steeply after that. I believe my best 2-hr IF was around 0.85 - which is pretty poor. For contrast, I think given a good day and benign conditions that I could average 0.85 IF for 6-hrs this year.

I recognized my lack of 'endurance' over the 2004 season but it was too late (or I was too stubborn) to correct it. Retrospective PMC analysis showed that my avg. in-season (May-Sept) CTL in 2004 was only 70-80 compared to 100-120 the previous two seasons (and 130-140 this year).

I decided to correct that in 2005/2006 and PMC was a great tool. I couldn't see the same patterns/trends to that extent using weekly TSS volume or rolling averages and the like. It was a great eye-opener right out of the bag.

that's my experience.

rmur

ok, my last post on the subject....

While I certainly understand that this is your experience, and I don't mean to question it (it is what it is, afterall), I guess I do wonder a little bit about the composition of the training.

I took a quick look through some charts after reading your post, and in an n=7 or so, the average 2 hour peak is about .90 IF, and the average 4-5 hour NRC road race seems to elicit a max of about .80-.85 IF, which all of the riders for whom I have the information seem to be able to do without incredible hardship. The average CTL in season for these riders is in the 70-100 range (and 50-70 in the preseason), and they all seem to be able to meet the demands of road racing at the elite level.

That's my own, slightly broader experience (I only say broader in that it involves more athletes...it's no attempt to belittle your post or experience--so please don't take it that way!).

 

[gvanwagner]

Again, not to pick nits...but I think "insistence on 20mp being above all other attributes" is a bit of a mischaracterization of Kraig, and Kirk's position..

Point taken but let me put it this way- they use 20mp as number to answer "how fit am I right now". They also state that it is the base of cycling fitness. So how Im reading it is that that number occupies a place that other don't. Mainly I was pointing out that his 1.15 ratio of 20/60 is that way for a reason, he didn't accidently end up like that- it's an artifact of his training program.

Also, if your 20mp improves- it could have been do to a higher vo2max, better oxidized type 2 fibers, higher AWC or better aerobic fitness/FT. So it's at a very "muddy" point on the curve

Really, I think the main message that I've taken away from Kirk's writing on the subject is to focus on raising the left side of the power/duration curve in "base" training, and to more specifically address the endurace demands of racing closer to the beginning of the season. This formula has worked really well for me, and for the individuals whom I advise..

I agree that the most specific work should usually be done closest to the event but the right side of the curve takes the longest to raise. And his insistence that he's good on " a couple fill the right rides"...

Lastly, I don't think Kraig does many road races, but I'll say this: with respect to road racing, it doesn't really matter how flat your profile is after 20 minutes...if you're not able to put out certain amounts of power at durations from 3-20 minutes, you'll be off the back anyway. Then, the flat power curve will just be helping your long, solo TT to the finish......

I use myself as an example- My best 20mp was 5.6w/kg and have done 5.3 multiple times. Going just by that you would think that I'd have no issue making the final selection at bear mt, fitchburg,gore pass, or Parker. But the issue is that that 20mp is (presumably) because of well oxidized type 2 fibers- so a couple of efforts really zap it. I will say that none of the efforts that gave me problems were anyway near MMPs. PLus a lot of races really challenge your curve on the right side.

RR isn't about max power its about fatigue resistance which is where the right side comes in. For example at Parker after being in the early break in the beginning, at the 1:45 mark the race blew apart and I got dropped from the lead group with a ~1min effort that was 140 watts below my 1mp measured 10 days earlier. My 20mp/FTP ratio is 1.216 at peak and 1.15 usually IOW- I know its a weakness. I'd give up 20 watts at 20mp for a flatter curve and Id be a better racer because of it. The issue with 20mp based training is that it makes your curve steepen which will hurt all races beyond 20 min unless you have a serious wattage edge on everybody else.- Assumiong of course that your 20mp training takes away time from training the right.

Obviously, you need the endurance to do that 5 minute effort at the end of a 4 hour race, but you get my point. So, in that regard, I'd agree that 20MP can be a pretty good indicator of road race fitness, as long as the endurance requirements can be met.

Also, remember it's widely accepted that it's OK to disagree with someones ideas. We tear the **** out of CC and Friel's TRAINING PROTOCOL and they're not here to defend themselves. Kraig has put fourth some new training ideas and so opens it for a counterargument just like anything I or anyone base my/their training on and say to the public is open to scrutiny.


Greg