When does an anaerobic effort become neuromuscular?

[RapDaddyo]

Originally Posted by frost .

You are drifting away from what Alex (and I) tried to tell you...

Not sure about that (apart from the above sidebar with bgoetz about his AWC workouts). What you and Alex suggested is quadrant analysis. The output of such analysis would be a specific intensity criterion for defining NM efforts. I already said that the rider can (optionally) input his or her own criterion for defining L7s (watts/duration). Quadrant analysis would be a good way to do that. Or, as I said above, a simple percentage of recent max 5sec efforts. I was looking for a simplistic criterion as a default setup for those who don't want to take the time to figure out how to do a quadrant analysis or interpret the results (they exist). So, I was thinking of a simplistic multiple of FTP since FTP is required to do the analysis anyway. But, I think a better approach is a quick scan of recent efforts for the max 5sec effort and perhaps a multiple of that. That's just as easy (assuming the rider has some ride files to scan).

 

[Alex Simmons]

I see no need to normalise just for the sake of it. Just accept the number that the parsing app spits out, and realise that it will be different for different types of riders, with different power profiles, different levels of fitness and different types of rides.

The question still remains - does it matter? And when I say matter, I mean in the sense that in what way will it contribute to helping a coach/rider improve their performance?

Sprint workouts need to be assessed with respect to other similar sprint workouts.

 

[RapDaddyo]

Originally Posted by Alex Simmons .

I see no need to normalise just for the sake of it. Just accept the number that the parsing app spits out, and realise that it will be different for different types of riders, with different power profiles, different levels of fitness and different types of rides.

The question still remains - does it matter? And when I say matter, I mean in the sense that in what way will it contribute to helping a coach/rider improve their performance?

Sprint workouts need to be assessed with respect to other similar sprint workouts.

Well, the parsing app won't just spit out a number. It takes the defined ride schema (intensity and duration) and breaks down a ride into the component pats by duration and TSS. So, if you define an L7 as minimum *** watts and xx sec duration, then it'll find those segments in the ride file and include them as L7s. If you define an L7 as YYY watts and yy secs duration, it'll find those. So, it finds what you tell it to look for.

As to why it matters, you could apply the question to the application as a whole, not just L7s. Does it matter to know what a given workout consisted of in terms of a training schema? Does it matter to know what a week consisted of? A month? I think it does. I plan a ride or a week of rides in terms of targets for time and TSS by training level. IOW, I consciously attempt to manage the mix of my training efforts in addition to total time and TSS. So, if I am going to parse a ride file, I would just as soon try to get it right rather than just throw a dart and hope for the best. Everything else is straightforward except for differentiating between L6s and L7s. Hence the question.

 

[frost]

No, at least I wasn't talking about quadrant analyses (as a user interface) but setting the criteria for L7 based on proximity to AEPF-CPV curve. (getting back to the example of overgeared standing starts which would not be recognized as L7 if fixed percentage (to FTP or max 5s) is used but are often used L7 workouts)

Read eg. this article: http://www.trainingandracingwithapowermeter.com/2010/12/prediction-of-muscle-fiber-type-from_07.html

and maybe this wattage-link has some relevant discussion.

Once you are able to define the curve, from the user point of view it would appear exactly as easy as using a percentage of FTP or eg. max 5sec power. No looking at quadrants, but distribution chart.

Still, a ride where you occasionally hit L7 (however the application defines it) is not a sprint workout and you cannot expect too much/long results from it.

 

[Alex Simmons]

Originally Posted by RapDaddyo .


Well, the parsing app won't just spit out a number. It takes the defined ride schema (intensity and duration) and breaks down a ride into the component pats by duration and TSS. So, if you define an L7 as minimum *** watts and xx sec duration, then it'll find those segments in the ride file and include them as L7s. If you define an L7 as YYY watts and yy secs duration, it'll find those. So, it finds what you tell it to look for.

As to why it matters, you could apply the question to the application as a whole, not just L7s. Does it matter to know what a given workout consisted of in terms of a training schema? Does it matter to know what a week consisted of? A month? I think it does. I plan a ride or a week of rides in terms of targets for time and TSS by training level. IOW, I consciously attempt to manage the mix of my training efforts in addition to total time and TSS. So, if I am going to parse a ride file, I would just as soon try to get it right rather than just throw a dart and hope for the best. Everything else is straightforward except for differentiating between L6s and L7s. Hence the question.

I don't think you should use the same approach for NMP as you do with aerobic work. It's a different beast. If you need a parsing app to tell you what NMP work you are doing, then the training probably isn't appropriate for NMP development.

 

[lanierb]

Originally Posted by Alex Simmons .

I don't think you should use the same approach for NMP as you do with aerobic work. It's a different beast. If you need a parsing app to tell you what NMP work you are doing, then the training probably isn't appropriate for NMP development.

I agree with this. NMP work doesn't just happen along a ride, or even in a race for that matter.

 

[RapDaddyo]

I decided to study all of my NMP efforts over the last few years to see what sort of classification criteria would be useful for me. I wrote a special program to capture key statistics for all efforts >600W and >5secs duration. It was enlightening, although it largely confirmed what I already believed about my NMP potential. I confirmed that I make better top-end power with cadence versus torque. All of my best efforts have an average cadence >130. To my surprise, my best efforts were not when I was fresh. My top five efforts were after 92, 2, 172, 240 and 112 minutes into the ride in which it happened. I was also surprised to see that my trainer efforts were as good as my road efforts.

I have come to a tentative approach for my application re-write. I will slice L7 into four sub-levels, with minimum durations of 5, 10, 15 and 20secs. Each duration will have a minimum NMP power to be classified as L7 in the parsed output. For me, I will set these minimum NMP watts values at 900W, 800W, 700W and 600W respectively. This will result in very few efforts being classified as L7 that were not truly max power training or racing efforts. BTW, I don't claim to have good NMP power. My best efforts even after several weeks of work are only about 1250W. I don't plan to win many sprints.

Each system must be designed to minimize the likelihood of one type of error with the acceptance of an increased likelihood of another type of error. In this case, I have a choice of a bias in favor of (a) capturing all NMP efforts even at the expense of counting some non-NMP efforts as NMP, or (b) counting only true NMP efforts even at the expense of not capturing some NMP efforts that were slightly below the cutoff. I have decided to build the system for type (b) bias.

For NMP efforts, I will expand the standard output statistics with data for duration, average watts, cadence and torque, plus watts, cadence and torque at the start and end of the effort.

 

[lanierb]

Originally Posted by RapDaddyo .
BTW, I don't claim to have good NMP power. My best efforts even after several weeks of work are only about 1250W. I don't plan to win many sprints.

If I'm remembering correctly, in your age group 1250 has to be pretty darned solid!

 

[RapDaddyo]

Originally Posted by lanierb .

If I'm remembering correctly, in your age group 1250 has to be pretty darned solid!

I keep waiting for these guys to lose their top-end power. It ain't happening. Maybe when I'm 90./img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif

 

[Alex Simmons]

Originally Posted by RapDaddyo .


I keep waiting for these guys to lose their top-end power. It ain't happening. Maybe when I'm 90./img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif

Like I keep saying, only have to be the best sprinter of those left at the end of the race. That's easy when you're the only one left.

 

[RapDaddyo]

Originally Posted by Alex Simmons .


Like I keep saying, only have to be the best sprinter of those left at the end of the race. That's easy when you're the only one left.

Haha. That's my sprint strategy, sprint against myself when possible./img/vbsmilies/smilies/biggrin.gif

 

[swampy1970]

Alternatively, you could always ask the question: When does a neuromuscular effort become an anaerobic one?

The answer: When AOG can only do 50 reps of 5min on and 5min off...

/img/vbsmilies/smilies/duck.gif