Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 467
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

So..

 

The magic 5wpkg+

 

What do you guys think a person would require to achieve this?

 

A lot of time in the saddle, and structured training. It won't happen over night - it takes months and years of constant dedication.

 

I'm currently in the process of getting close to the 5W/kg point and my goal is to be over that. Current FTP is 320W and I weigh 67kg. 

 

I'm spending 6 days a week on the bike (around 15 hours per week) - very structured training with a coach. Also spend 2 hours a week in the gym strengthening (hurting) the legs.

Posted (edited)

So in a nutshell.

 

Coach is a must?

Any recommendations in Cape Town?

 

No V02 test etc done to date, but based on current progression believe I have a small tiny little bit of natural talent.

 

Currently sitting mid 4wpkg( +-14% BF) , and achieved that just under 2 years by just riding bike, nothing really structured , but would like to see how deep this rabbit hole goes.

 

Would doing a V02 test be recommended?

Edited by Stricker
Posted (edited)

My FTP is 3w/kg. Max is 809W seated.

But!!! I weigh in at 84kg with 33% fatness inside.

Quite some improvement to be done here.

 

Then again I was not very fit when test was done. Reasonable fit yes but very, no.

 

I can get to 3.5w/kg with less fat.

Edited by Reden
Posted

Not sure a V02 test is required - I haven't done one.

 

A coach is a must - you need structured training and someone who is able to identify your bodies reaction to training - the trick is not to overtrain. 

Posted

 

An interesting article, but I'm not sure the data supports the confidence in the conclusions. The 'strongest' correlation referred to has an R^2 of only 0.24, which in most fields would be a v poor fit of a straight line.....maybe sports science, and cycling, have differing criteria when it comes to stats?

 

I've played a little with data-mining in another field, and most real-world problems, are multi-factorial (lots of differing parameters to account for), and 'simple' correlations of 1 parameter against another, are normally not very effective. I wonder if the pro teams use neural networks and genetic algorithms to mine their data?

Posted

An interesting article, but I'm not sure the data supports the confidence in the conclusions. The 'strongest' correlation referred to has an R^2 of only 0.24, which in most fields would be a v poor fit of a straight line.....maybe sports science, and cycling, have differing criteria when it comes to stats?

 

I've played a little with data-mining in another field, and most real-world problems, are multi-factorial (lots of differing parameters to account for), and 'simple' correlations of 1 parameter against another, are normally not very effective. I wonder if the pro teams use neural networks and genetic algorithms to mine their data?

I'm biased towards volume and CTL (just based on my own on vs off seasons), so seeing an article supporting that I wouldn't really doubt it much. But you raise valid points.

 

Might not be much value in the pro teams data for us plebs, but if someone could datamine strava or garmin connect. There's been some chatter on golden cheetah about opt in data collection in a future version.

Posted

I'm biased towards volume and CTL (just based on my own on vs off seasons), so seeing an article supporting that I wouldn't really doubt it much. But you raise valid points.

 

Might not be much value in the pro teams data for us plebs, but if someone could datamine strava or garmin connect. There's been some chatter on golden cheetah about opt in data collection in a future version.

 

Re pro teams, I was more suggesting I wonder what data analysis method they use, rather than their conclusions. I agree, for elites, the conclusion may be different than for mamils.

 

Probably a bigger issue in play here, the validity of small study group, controlled studies (same bike, same power meter, etc etc), against large study groups (STRAVA, Garmin) where multiple errors arise from differing bikes, meters, calibration, etc etc. It's hard to believe such extremes of study approach haven't been considered by the sports science community before?

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

Did a 10min warmup, followed by a 3min aerobic test, then a 20min FTP test. Probably should've done the 20min on another day,because my legs kinda hurt after the 3min,hahahaha. Results as per pics, still a lot of work to do.

post-42857-0-53725400-1470078735_thumb.png

post-42857-0-67018400-1470078755_thumb.png

Posted

In my (unqualified) opinion, absolutely! 4W/Kg is not that great an accomplishment athletically. To compete for wins in VA you need to be around 4.5, local elites 5ish, World Tour 5.5 - 6 depending on job....

 

The crap thing though is that there is no shortcut. You need to put the hours in and you need to eat correctly. The biggest limiting factor to getting to 4 is not genetic, its plain old dicipline.

 

When I did my first DC in 2012 (it was my first race too :eek: ), I was 92kg and FTP must have been around 230.. or 2.5W/Kg.

 

Just reading through this thread again and I can tell you that with a moer of a lot of effort I have increased my FTP 16% since 12/3/2016 ... I am now at 3.98w/kg - doubt that I can (perhaps am willing to) do more than that without losing the fun I get out of riding now!

 

Now to just to keep it there or thereabouts .....

Posted

I have an FTP test day scheduled for the 17th this month.

 

Last time I did one it was brutal just going flat out from the start.

 

Is there a way to try and pace it, or should you just go flat out?

 

My coach prescribes a 2x 8min test, then it's avg power between the 2 intervals multiplied by 90% (i think that's the calculation)

Posted

That looks like

 

I have an FTP test day scheduled for the 17th this month.

 

Last time I did one it was brutal just going flat out from the start.

 

Is there a way to try and pace it, or should you just go flat out?

 

My coach prescribes a 2x 8min test, then it's avg power between the 2 intervals multiplied by 90% (i think that's the calculation)

That looks like the Carmichael Field Test. I think the 20 min test is way more accurate

Posted

I have an FTP test day scheduled for the 17th this month.

 

Last time I did one it was brutal just going flat out from the start.

 

Is there a way to try and pace it, or should you just go flat out?

 

My coach prescribes a 2x 8min test, then it's avg power between the 2 intervals multiplied by 90% (i think that's the calculation)

HTFU and do the real test!

 

You should have some inkling as to what your FTP should be (or your threshold HR) - aim to ride at those levels, and if you feel good, go harder.

Posted

 

Last time I did one it was brutal just going flat out from the start.

 

 

 

Its suppose to be brutal. You are suppose to dread your FTP ride...right up until 19:55min into the test when you know you have crushed it and you can mentally relax for 6 weeks.

 

My eyes usually sweat a little bit and you get comfortable with the taste of iron in your mouth around the 12 minute mark.

Posted (edited)

HTFU and do the real test!

 

You should have some inkling as to what your FTP should be (or your threshold HR) - aim to ride at those levels, and if you feel good, go harder.

My Current ftp is 223w @ 64kg.. BUT I tested last year november last, I'm starting to get a NP of around 230w on moderate group rides.

 

Like I said also it's what my coach prescribes.

Edited by Jurgens Smit

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout