I know all this training business makes us sound a bit serious but, well, some people really are into this bike lark so feel free to talk about all training & self improvement related topics in here
by Robh » Thu Oct 23, 2008 1:01 pm
[quote]If I understand the graphs correctly, the smaller the angle is between the blue line and green line, the better the person is at recovering. So one of the measures of improvement between one test and a subsequent test would be to see if that angle has reduced. Is that right?
Yes, but it depends how good people are with their perceived effort. Stu said his was @ 300W but to me he looked too comfortbale so pushed him to 320W whereas George told me in no uncertain terms he couldn't carry on to 340W.
It will get interesting when I restest people and will seek advice from both Juerg and Andrew how to do their next tests as these people have a lot more experience than myself.
From Andrew Sellars :-
Quote 1 :-
Yes, you do need to be careful about comparing recovery lines between two different people, having taken them to their own perceived 8/10...however, we use the green line as an indicator of recovery, not an absolute measurement of recovery. So watch for the changes over time, and the ability to recover from similar wattages in future tests. As Mike's results show, he can now ramp up over 400 watts, and recover quickly even at 280-300...so a dramatic improvement (not achieved by "threshold work", but by constant attention to structural training.
Quote 2 :-
Juerg's point is well taken...if the green line eventually meets the blue line, then the person is able to "fully recover" fromm the original effort, showing "good" recovery (as both of those examples you gave demonstrated). However, you ad I are looking at it with a bit more detail, and actually examining the exact drop in wattage after the step test portion, and in this case, the recovery seems a little less than ideal. As I mentioned yesterday, Paul has a good point...if you push an athlete very hard on the step test, they will have a bigger drop in the second portion. And Juerg has a good point, that if the green line approaches the blue line, then that shows a good recovery as well.Â
My interpretation tried to identify a weakness that may be improved with training of the STF zone...and that is less of a drop in performance during the initial part of the recovery phase.
[quote]Second, power meters are always touted as being so much better than HR as a training tool as they give a direct measure of your output, whereas HR can fluctuate according to other factors. So why does the LBP test end up with a HR figure rather than a power figure, or could you use express it as either?
Question to you Jon :-
From Andrew Sellars to me this week :-
This brings up a good question for the "wattage is all you need for feedback people". Is 260 watts at 120 RPM the same as 260 watts at 75 RPM? Physiologically the answer is simple. Try it for yourself...watch your heart rate and your breathing rate, and see how long you can survive holding the same wattage at the different cadences...you might be surprised by the results. The next time you go out on the road with RobH, try to ride with his cadence for the whole ride, and see if his training has allowed specific neurologic patterns to have been developed since our camp in Mallorca. I would be willing to bet there are few riders that can sustain his cadence for a 3 hour ride, unless they have been doing some of their own specific training, recognizing the immense importance of neurologic training to cyclists.
Jon,
Do you know who Andrew Coggan is? Well he's the co-author of power training bible that lots of power users have read and last week he joined the FaCT forum after Toks posted a link. Juerg has welcomed him to his board and asked him some questions about power. Still waiting for a reply a week later.
http://www.fact-canada.com/discus/messa ... 1224635398[quote]Lastly, like you were saying, most people don't think about their breathing, it just happens. I'm sure I read a while ago (sorry, can't remember where) that lung capacity / breathing is very rarely a limiting factor on aerobic performance, and that basically your lungs can always supply more than enough oxygen for your blood to be fully oxygenated. If that's right, I'm wondering why the focus on breathing?
I'm not an expert on this subject but will get to know more about it when I introduce the Spirotiger into my own training next year so might need Juerg's assiatnce with this one but I will have a go...
Today's understanding :-Respiration limits physical performance.
Improved respiratory efficiency can lead to increased performance.
Focused respiratory training can significantly improve both efficiency and coordination.
Respiratory Muscle RequirementsRespiratory muscles are the only essential skeletal muscles required for continued life!
They perform over 18,000 respirations per day.
Respiratory muscles have an incredible endurance capacity.
Limitations in respiratory efficiency may be a result of structurally or functionally weak muscles of both inspiration and/or expiration.
Functional limitations can include problems with both coordination and mobility.
Respiratory Requirements during ExerciseWorking muscles require an increase supply of oxygen.
With an increase in oxygen demand, comes an increase in both respiration rate and volume.
Respiratory Requirements of ExerciseAn increased rate of breathing requires coordination of inspiratory and expiratory muscles.
Increased volume requires both muscular coordination and improved costo-vertebral motion.
12 peer-reviewed publications Positive impact of Respiratory Endurance Training
Fatigue of respiratory muscle shown after sport performance
Reduced fatigue of respiratory muscles after respiratory endurance training
Reduced lactate after respiratory endurance training
Source :- Level II course slides