Jump to content

bruce

Members
  • Posts

    1629
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bruce

  1. Nice pic Michelle, thanks! Any chance I can get the original from you? My missus has been wanting a pic of me racing for ages now!
  2. Yes, average would probably have been in that range - my MaxHR is 184.
  3. Sorry, forgot to put my HR strap on, Peak power was 1220watts, but that happened closing a break at the start of the race. Didn't hit peak power in the final sprint because Shaun went at the turn and it was 444m to the finish, so it was a much longer effort. The finish was 444m at a 4% gradient. I averaged 35.7kmk/h.
  4. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th in VA In the chase group - cannondale, specialised, raleigh, cervelo.
  5. Race:Duration: 2:20:33 (2:20:46)Work: 2181 kJTSS: 214.5 (intensity factor 0.958)Norm Power:335VI: 1.29Distance: 92.335 kmMinMaxAvgPower: 01220259wattsCadence: 3019381rpmSpeed: 081.939.4kphPace 00:4400:0001:31min/kmHub Torque: 049.59.3lb-inCrank Torque:0138.930.9N-mSprint:Duration: 00:45Work: 26 kJTSS: 3.7 (intensity factor 1.719)Norm Power:n/aVI: n/aDistance: 444 mMinMaxAvgPower: 34981563wattsCadence: 7013896rpmSpeed: 27.841.135.7kphPace 01:2802:0901:41min/kmHub Torque: 1.532.818.6lb-inCrank Torque:4.699.855.7N-mPeak 1min (577 watts):Duration: 01:00Work: 35 kJTSS: 5.1 (intensity factor 1.736)Norm Power:n/aVI: n/aDistance: 534 mMinMaxAvgPower: 297914577wattsCadence: 639478rpmSpeed: 26.743.131.7kphPace 01:2402:1501:53min/kmHub Torque: 8.93321.9lb-inCrank Torque:35.4110.470.7N-mPeak 2min (486 watts):Duration: 02:01Work: 59 kJTSS: 6.7 (intensity factor 1.41)Norm Power:n/aVI: n/aDistance: 1.014 kmMinMaxAvgPower: 227893486wattsCadence: 6710982rpmSpeed: 27.234.530.4kphPace 01:4402:1201:58min/kmHub Torque: 8.634.919.2lb-inCrank Torque:21.4106.557N-mPeak 10min (349 watts):Duration: 10:01Work: 210 kJTSS: 21.6 (intensity factor 1.138)Norm Power:398VI: 1.14Distance: 5.5 kmMinMaxAvgPower: 0893349wattsCadence: 4512480rpmSpeed: 18.869.533kphPace 00:5203:1101:49min/kmHub Torque: 034.914.4lb-inCrank Torque:0106.542.1N-mPeak 60min (275 watts):Duration: 1:00:30 (1:01:29)Work: 990 kJTSS: 94.3 (intensity factor 0.971)Norm Power:340VI: 1.24Distance: 37.491 kmMinMaxAvgPower: 0981275wattsCadence: 3014381rpmSpeed: 081.937.4kphPace 00:4400:0001:36min/kmHub Torque: 035.510.4lb-inCrank Torque:0108.433N-mWill post race reports and some analysis of these stats on my blog during the course of the morning. One thing of interest. I had predicted that the selection would happen on the climb on Aureole and you would need to be able to do 6w/kg for 2 minutes. Selection actually happened on Witkoppen, leading up to Aureole and was 6.3w/kg for 2 minutes - new personal best for me.
  6. No shortcut, do it as Ronelle described. Note though that this is only available on the MMP curve in the Athlete Home Page, not on the MMP curve on the workout.
  7. bruce

    IBIKE

    First quater of 2008 if there website is to be believed. About $ 1100 excluding the computer Yes, that could be Jan 1 or April 1, then the trick will be getting hold of one - I suspect there may be quite a long manufacturing backlog. Added to that I'm not so sure I want one of the first batch off the production line (every one of the other manufacturers have had niggles to iron out with their first units.)
  8. bruce

    IBIKE

    In my experience, the SRM and Powertap are euqivalent in terms of accuracy. The decision depends on whether you prefer the PM to be on the bike and hence have a choice of wheels, or on the wheel and be able to move it between bikes (or alternatively have a race set and training set of wheel) and of course price. Differences in accuracy are negligable in terms of training information. The first Ergomo that I tested was quite inconsistent, and was recalled to Germany due to a faulty batch of resistors. I have just had a new one installed which is a lot more consistent, but still appears to exhibit some non-linearity - I'm running a long term test on it (over a few months) to get a good understanding of how the unit behaves. The iBike that I tested was very sensitive to calibration and could give some really way out numbers if the calibration was not correct, or I changed position significantly etc. They have introduced a number of improvements at Interbike this year - vibration damping mounts and error correcting software - I am waiting for the new mounts from Paul to test them out. The problem with having way out numbers sometimes is that it really skews your training data. I had the previous version of the Polar, which worked okay but was not reliable in certain gear combinations and had a 5sec sampling rate which is not acceptable. THe new one has a better sampling rate but I understand that memory is somewhat limited. The new one is also a wireless system. Can't comment on the accuracy of the new one. The Quarq looks like it is going to set the world alight. 10 strain gauges configured for good accuracy and temperature compensation (2 more than the scientific SRM). Head unit incorporating GPS and Ant+ compatible. Also compatible with the new Garmins (as is the new wireless SRM). Who knows when it will become available though.
  9. I swear if hair grew out of that head of yours, it would be blonde!!
  10. 2 hours sleep the night before also didn't do much to help - got into bed at 1:30am and had to get up at 3:45am.
  11. http://www.bikemaxpower.com/blog/Bruce_Diesel/291
  12. bruce

    What a Joke!!

    As a marketing example it doesn't even come close to USPS/LA/Trek. And not even that gets close to Seaco' date=' Chippo and Cannondale.[/quote'] Marketing and sponsorships are measured in terms of % return on investment i.e. how much company revenue improves due to the sponsorship or marketing strategy. If this is the metric, then no, Saeco, Chippo, and Cannondale would be comparitively insignificant.
  13. bruce

    What a Joke!!

    As a marketing example it doesn't even come close to USPS/LA/Trek.bruce2007-11-08 06:11:12
  14. Guys, stop and think about how these things actually work. What is the difference between a stop sign, and a traffic light? Well, a stop sign is placed at an intersection so that one direction allows traffic to continue at normal speed, whilst the other direction foces the traffic to stop, look, then go again when it is safe to do so. Now, a traffic light get's placed at that intersection when the traffic volume becomes too great for the vehicles that stop at the stop sign to get a chance to go through. All that it does is follow some arbitrary timer that switches on a red light, then a green light, then an orange light. So, I come along at 5 in the morning, when traffic volumes are very low, and instead of waiting for a timed light that has absolutely no idea as to whether it is safe to proceed or not, I choose to treat the traffic light as a stop sign. I stop, look, then proceed when it is safe to do so. Usually this is quick enough to prevent me from having to unclip, clip in, and move through a potentially dangerous intersection very slowly. The most dangerous situation on a bicycle is when there is a big speed differential between the bicycle and the cars around it. Stopping and unclipping makes this situation worse, not better. We can shout as much as we like about rules etc, but at the end of the day, common sense must prevail. Traffic control signals are not designed for bicycles riding at 5:00am in the morning. They are designed for peak traffic loads during rush hour. Making your safetly the responsibility of some red light blinking on an arbitrary timer is about as ridiculous as putting your pet inside the microwave to dry it off, because the manual doesn't specifically say you shouldn't. I'm sure I'll get flamed for this, but this is how I ride, and I usually ride alone or in a small group. Nobody here has convinced me to ride any differently.
  15. Hi All, The bearing cones on my hub came loose, forcing me to change wheels in the race. So I only have the first hour of racing. Race:Duration: 01:02:13Work: 875 kJTSS: 87.4 (intensity factor 0.918)Norm Power:321VI: 1.37Distance: 39.694 kmMinMaxAvgPower: 01158234wattsHeart rate: 87175144bpmCadence: 3017481rpmSpeed: 7.261.238.3kphPace 00:5908:2001:34min/kmClimbs:Duration: 00:57Work: 33 kJTSS: 4.6 (intensity factor 1.716)Norm Power:n/aVI: n/aDistance: 503 mMinMaxAvgPower: 62815587wattsHeart rate: 160175170bpmCadence: 559180rpmSpeed: 24.641.931.6kphPace 01:2602:2601:54min/km1:48 RestDuration: 00:43Work: 25 kJTSS: 3.8 (intensity factor 1.781)Norm Power:n/aVI: n/aDistance: 245 mMinMaxAvgPower: 339826591wattsHeart rate: 165175171bpmCadence: 598870rpmSpeed: 18.122.620.5kphPace 02:3903:1902:56min/km5:36 RestDuration: 02:02Work: 56 kJTSS: 6.1 (intensity factor 1.336)Norm Power:n/aVI: n/aDistance: 834 mMinMaxAvgPower: 205730458wattsHeart rate: 161174170bpmCadence: 599374rpmSpeed: 18.635.124.3kphPace 01:4303:1402:28min/kmPeak 5min (386 watts):Duration: 05:01Work: 116 kJTSS: 14.6 (intensity factor 1.321)Norm Power:462VI: 1.2Distance: 3.014 kmMinMaxAvgPower: 0880386wattsHeart rate: 159175168bpmCadence: 5311382rpmSpeed: 18.161.236kphPace 00:5903:1901:40min/kmPeak 20min (309 watts):Duration: 20:01Work: 371 kJTSS: 41.5 (intensity factor 1.115)Norm Power:390VI: 1.26Distance: 12.094 kmMinMaxAvgPower: 01004309wattsHeart rate: 137175158bpmCadence: 3512481rpmSpeed: 18.161.236.2kphPace 00:5903:1901:39min/km
  16. I recall that' date=' never ate so much popcorn in my life. [/quote'] The dude who was aiming at a 3:30 Argus? And wanted to take on 101% head-to-head.
  17. Bruce would get that from me. Sorry just to calrify the award for "most informative" not "coolest hubber chick" ROTFLMAO
  18. Frank Overton, the guy who originally termed the phrase "Sweet Spot Training" has updated this information. This article really describes what Peter and I have been saying in terms of training efficiency and getting the most out of your limited hours. Check it out at: http://www.fascatcoaching.com/training_tips/SweetSpot_partdeux.html
  19. Tough call AL - I know you are a sceptic but this is where some sort of direct measure is needed. You may well be too fatigued to do anything meaningful the day after the ride you described - but if you weren't you might not know it by looking at HR (which may be depressed due to fatigue) I guess you could look at speed and try to establsih if the ride was likely to be at a decent power output or pace. It is normal to find that effort to power ratio gets higher as you fatigue (in other words it feels harder for the same power) and this is ok as long as the quality is there' date=' but if the quality is poor then you would be better of resting and saving the ride for the next day. [/quote'] this is also related to bruce reply.... this is more a question than me saying i am correct on this.....i believe that it is sometimes good to "overdo" it so that you can get more endurance strength/power? your legs get "use" to some hard workload....but this is only done SOMETIMES.... No problem with that - in fact it has a name: "Block Training" where you do three or four days of very high training load - then take two or three days to recover. What is very important to understand though, is that your body does not improve while you are training, it improves while you are recovering. If your training load was higher than what you are previously used to, then you will recover to become fitter than you previously were. The golden word is RECOVERY - the bigger the training dose, the more the recovery required!
  20. You are not going for a hard ride the next day, it just feels hard because you have not recovered. Muscles adapt to intensity (power), so if you aren't able to reach the required power, you should be resting until you can. So, you are doing poor quailty training when you should be resting, meaning that when you should be training you are too tired - hard sessions are done too easy, and easy/recovery sessions are done too hard - everything just becomes mediocre and you don't get the gains that you should.
  21. Thanks Bruce, so where to from here. The difficult thing for me to admit is where my limitations are and how cleverly to address them. So possibly the best route for to take is push the big gears which i am used to and to stop trying to ride the easier gears. I am going to fatigue on a hilly course anyway, i may as well do it on my own terms Is there a way for riders with fast twitch muscle fibres to be there at the end of a hilly race with rider with slow twicth muscles of equal fitness? Firstly, train and race at the cadence you are most comfortable with! Secondly, there are actually three types of muscle fibre - Type I, Type IIa, and Type IIb. The Type IIa's generally adapt to the type of event you are training - so, if you do endurance training, these fibres will generally become more like Type I (slow twitch), whereas if you were to do weight training these fibres would generally become more like Type IIb (fast twitch). Fortunately, in S.A. we actually don't have very long climbs - so being a bit more of a fast twitcher you can get away with it, because you can have good 5minute and 1 minute power that is required for the climbs that we do - i.e. good anaerobic power will get you through these - too many of them and you are going to have problems. But, train your 60minute power plenty and you will optomise the Type I and Type IIa that you do have to enable you to stay with the bunch - then kill them in the sprint
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout