What is the evidence that training with power is superior to . . .

Discussion in 'Power Training' started by Fday, Apr 25, 2008.

  1. acoggan

    acoggan Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,047
    Likes Received:
    9
    While AOG is clearly just a troll, I think you'd be surprised just how many people are influenced by posts such as his. Hence, comments such as his require rebuttal, or else those less able to see through his schtick will be misinformed.
     


  2. Alex Simmons

    Alex Simmons Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,471
    Likes Received:
    20
    I suspect the crickets will be heard chirping for many a moon.
     
  3. alienator

    alienator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    12,596
    Likes Received:
    160
    Yes, that is one unfortunate effect of the information flood that the internet brings to the world. Couple that with the fact that too many people don't think critically about what they read, and you end up with a lot of open mouths choking down crap. Here, it's likely there are a few willingly gorging themselves on the intellectual feces that is AOG's typical advice.
     
  4. doctorSpoc

    doctorSpoc New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Messages:
    1,488
    Likes Received:
    4
    ??? I work for a large multi-national company and my job is designing Network Management Software to manage our switches and routers.. and our portfolio of switches does in fact include MULTI-terabit switches.. and I can't make heads or tails out of what you've written here...

    by definition, switching occurs at L2 and routing at L3.. "L3 Switch" is a marketing term for a switch that also does routing.. that doesn't change the FACT that switching occurs at L2 and routing at L3... and as I said.. that's by definition..
     
  5. An old Guy

    An old Guy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,380
    Likes Received:
    21
    I don't see where TSS predicts that is possible or impossible. It is simply an unsupported claim you made for TSS. You have also made the claims that TSS is not testable and that it predicts nothing. But you are making predictions and asking for test results.

    Don't get me involved in treating your religion as science. It is not science.

    ---

    The original poster did more than 2 hours of intervals and you rejected them without even seeing the data file. I believe your objection was they were not high enough in intensity. As I recall your last demand that I post the results of my intervals you wrote "any intensity" was acceptable. That seems to have changed.

    You are a false prophet with a fraudulent religion.

    ---

    I can provide you with a bank routing number and account number. When you wire transfer $100K into the account (my bank puts a hold on large sums transferred in so there may be some delay), I could provide what you ask of me. When you apologize to me and remove all the disparaging remarks you have written, I could return your money less expenses about $1000/day or part thereof. You will have to quantify "high intensity", accept the number I provide as my FTP, and accept the numbers off of my PowerTap without objection.

    I don't work cheap. But I don't work for frauds. I don't work with bullies. I don't work with people who lie as much as you have in this thread.
     
  6. acoggan

    acoggan Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,047
    Likes Received:
    9
    1. It is not TSS but the normalized power concept that predicts what you have claimed to be able to do is impossible.

    2. The OP didn't do structured intervals, they competed in a race, and I've said nothing about their performance.

    EDIT: Replying here even though you've posted the 2nd comment above to the wrong thread.
     
  7. An old Guy

    An old Guy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,380
    Likes Received:
    21
    Thinking I might have missed something subtle between TSS and NP, I looked up the difference between TSS and NP and found a paper by some guy named Coggan:

    It appears that: TSS = 100*NP*time. So that 120TSS in an hour is the same as 1.20IF for an hour. Is the same as 120% NP for an hour. Seems the same to me.

    But I also found this quote:

    "To account for this variability, TrainingPeaks uses a special algorithm to calculate an adjusted or normalized power for each ride or segment of a ride (longer than 30 seconds) that you analyze. This algorithm is somewhat complicated, but importantly it incorporates two key pieces of information: 1) the physiological responses to rapid changes in exercise intensity are not instantaneous, but follow a predictable time course, and 2) many critical physiological responses (e.g., glycogen utilization, lactate production, stress hormone levels) are curvilinearly, rather than linearly, related to exercise intensity,"

    In the past when you disclaimed "glycogen depletion," you said that "glycogen utilization" appeared only once in your papers on this stuff. Now I find a second reference. You need to stop misrepresenting stuff.

    ---

    I like how you use the phrase "predictable time course." You have stated your TSS stuff allows no predictions. You need to stay consistent.

    I have no desire to give your religion any credibility, I suggest you formalize your "impossibility" claim and motivate someone else to do the "impossible."
     
  8. Alex Simmons

    Alex Simmons Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,471
    Likes Received:
    20
    Oh dear.

    Your really are a troll of dubious proportions.

    For about the millionth time, you have got the basic relationship between TSS, and NP and time wrong.

    TSS = IF^2 x hours x 100

    that's IF squared, or IF x IF
    where IF = NP/FTP

    so if you score 120 TSS in one hour, then that suggests you rode with an IF of 1.095 (i.e. NP was 109.5% of FTP) which is still highly improbable, if not impossible. In other words, you either didn't do it, or you have underestimated your FTP. Take your pick.

    As for physiological responses following a predictable time course, that's just basic physiology. Stuff takes time to happen, and most of the important stuff in our bodies (wrt to exercise) takes place at a rate that is reasonably well known and predictable, and is curvilinear, several with "half life" responses in the order of 30 seconds to a minute.
     
  9. An old Guy

    An old Guy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,380
    Likes Received:
    21
    "millionth time" I think you exaggerate. But I did make the same typo as I have made before. PowerAgent and Golden Cheetah do the correct math. "Correct" in the sense that they get TSS (bikescore), IF, and NP as defined.

    But you miss the point of the issue.

    I did define the intervals as 160%FTP/0% for 1 minute each for an hour or two. NP attempts to produce an constant power equivalent for a ride that is done at varying power outputs.

    The intervals have an average power output of 80% FTP. The NP equivalent of 120% FTP is out of line with:

    1) (perception) the intervals are much easier than a steady 100% FTP effort, so the effort is certainly not 110% FTP
    2) (heart rate) within normal ride variation average heart rate for the intervals (heart rate average 76% of LT) is the same as for a 1 hour steady riding at 85%, not close to that of 1 hour at 100% FTP (heart rate average near 100% of LT),
    3) 2 hours of the intervals at an average power of 80% FTP is certainly possible, but 2 hours at constant power output at 110% FTP is not.

    The intervals are equivalent to an 80% FTP ride not a 110% FTP ride. Therein lies the problem with IF NP, and TSS.
     
  10. Felt_Rider

    Felt_Rider Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Messages:
    3,257
    Likes Received:
    27
    Just now while trying to get some owner review thoughts on a particular TT frame on a different cycling forum, I read through 4 pages of a Cliff Clavin type spouting off crap. Much like here where a guy that is either trolling for reaction or just simply mentally handicapped, the person over there spent three pages defending his contradictions and his stupid comments. That guy made all sorts of false comments toward one bike company that I suppose he thought no one would look into until a company representative stepped on the scene and started politely telling the rest of the audience the truth.

    hmmmm.....I almost thought it was the same village idiot that moved to our village, but if that is the case the person over there sounded a little more intelligent.
     
  11. DAL1955

    DAL1955 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    4
    Old Guy: You have a time problem....

    1. Actually I think your intervals were defined as 150%, as that is what works out to the 120 TSS when you do the NP, IF and NP calculations for your interval the way the programs do.
    2. I'm not sure you have identified a problem with IF, TSS, or NP. What you have identified is the problem with trying to train by either heart rate or perceived exertion and compare those efforts to other more quantitative methods of characterizing an particular effort.
    3. The NP calculated correctly will be 110% of FTP for your intervals, however, for the training stress to be equivalent, you should compare your 1 hour (50% work) interval to 40 minutes of steady state 110% FTP effort. This comparison results in roughly equal training stress.
    4. What you are doing is playing games with the math in the calculations, by inserting equal periods of 0% effort, and letting the programs assume the default 1 hour effort around which the concepts are based.
    5. You may perceive your intervals as easier than a 1 hr 110% FTP steady state effort, because they are; you are not doing equal work. A steady state 1 hr effort at 110% FTP consumes 47% more power than does a 60 min @50% work @150%FTP.

    DAL
     
  12. acoggan

    acoggan Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,047
    Likes Received:
    9
    You must have missed post #558 above...either that, or you're hoping that by repeating your false claims that you can confuse those who aren't really following this thread.
     
  13. acoggan

    acoggan Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,047
    Likes Received:
    9
    Post the file.
     
  14. DAL1955

    DAL1955 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    4
    Like that's going to happen!
     
  15. swampy1970

    swampy1970 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Messages:
    10,057
    Likes Received:
    185
    Post the file.




    [​IMG]
     
  16. Alex Simmons

    Alex Simmons Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2006
    Messages:
    2,471
    Likes Received:
    20
    /img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif ...
     
Loading...
Loading...