W/kg ranges corresponding to PPA road seeding

[Fat Boab]

Why does this come to mind when reading this thread...?

 

Man: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.

Mr. Vibrating: No it isn't.

Man: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.

Mr. Vibrating: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.

Man: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'

Mr. Vibrating: Yes it is!

Man: No it isn't!

Man: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.

(short pause)

Mr. Vibrating: No it isn't.

 

 

One of the great, but at times frustrating, things about social media, in general, and in this case BikeHub, is that we interact with largely anonymous people. Most of the time we have no idea of someone's background or skillset, so once a discussion starts subjectivity and objectivity can meet personal opinion and consensus opinion head-on with most none the wiser!

 

(I must store your Man-Mr Vibrating dialogue....classic!)

[Jewbacca]

I am not disagreeing with any of the studies Fat Boab was kind enough to create links through to (and many other similar ones)  (I think they are fundamentally correct, although I suspect (an opinion) that there is greater variability in FTP drop than shown in those studies) - there are no studies I am aware of that show that athletes have higher FTP's at altitude that at sea level - but John says I am wrong, and that he has athletes that show better performance at altitude - and that I don't know about studies done that show this (not an impossibility, but fairly improbable (if I say so myself))

 

All I am saying is he should show the evidence that athletes have better performance at altitude than at sea level... if it exists.... because there is no good physiological explanation of improved performance at altitude that I am aware of (events that air resistance is considered a factor due to density excluded of course - sprints and very high speed events for example)

I completely see where you are coming from and I actually do agree with you on that.

 

Why an athlete who lives, trains and tests in Lesotho would have a higher FTP to an equal specimen in Cape Town doesn't make much sense, but that same Lesotho athlete would almost definitely be able to push a higher wattage for longer if he decided to quickly go to the coast for a day and do an FTP test.

 

My comment was more centred around disagreements being settled conclusively by both parties.

 

The thing is, John is also exposed to a lot more FTP tests/results from athletes at various altitudes and training levels, so there may be some correlations he has been able to draw using his own information.

 

It may not be 100% fool proof, but being his area of concentrated expertise there may be some merit in discussing it rather than disagreeing.

[Fat Boab]

 

 

It may not be 100% fool proof, but being his area of concentrated expertise there may be some merit in discussing it rather than disagreeing.

 

You must be reading a different thread, in a parallel universe, from the one I've been reading. V12man appears, to me, to be trying to discuss the topic, in part because he disagrees with the postulate...

 

Edit: The thing about things not being 100% fool-proof, is at what point below 100% do they become merely a security blankie?

[J Wakefield]

Last thing anyone needs is a argument, fight, Hub friday (something I picked up by posters) over FTP. Without going into huge post on this, something small that is not being looked at here is a small variable such as comfort. When I mentioned tests are better at altitude for some athletes that is 1 element I was talking about. Know of 2 athletes that prefer doing their tests in the same lab / environment every time. when they have some to CT they have "hated" it and not performed and expressed why. Yes, not rocket science ground breaking info but it plays a big part for them personally. 

I try add info to threads with information and facts I have to help answer questions Hubbers have. Without sounding like I'm blowing smoke up my ass but I have so much athlete data from years of work, as a company we have even more and that isnt just studies or published info, its also personal 1 on 1 dealings with athletes and personalities over the years that no study will ever be done on that as you cant study it so to speak. Athletes aren't just data machines. So to try bait me or for me to prove I am wrong in the long term isnt really the way to go.

 

So anyway I am sorry if this has gone right at the fork in the road but when looking at performance its not always black and white. 

Thanks.

[V12man]

I completely see where you are coming from and I actually do agree with you on that.

 

Why an athlete who lives, trains and tests in Lesotho would have a higher FTP to an equal specimen in Cape Town doesn't make much sense, but that same Lesotho athlete would almost definitely be able to push a higher wattage for longer if he decided to quickly go to the coast for a day and do an FTP test.

 

My comment was more centred around disagreements being settled conclusively by both parties.

 

The thing is, John is also exposed to a lot more FTP tests/results from athletes at various altitudes and training levels, so there may be some correlations he has been able to draw using his own information.

 

It may not be 100% fool proof, but being his area of concentrated expertise there may be some merit in discussing it rather than disagreeing.

"Why an athlete who lives, trains and tests in Lesotho would have a higher FTP to an equal specimen in Cape Town doesn't make much sense"

 

Actually this makes perfect sense They aren't equal specimens.... the fact is that you cannot compare 2 different people to each other (and I don't think John tried to do that) - all you can compare is 2 different tests from the same person - done at different altitudes with all else being equal (which is scientifically pretty hard to do)

 

So - the science related to FTP measurement shows that individual athletes FTP test measurements  show lower FTP scores as altitude increases (for the same person) - so for example that person might show a test result of 4w/kg at sea level and in Jhb, approximately 3.8w/kg.

 

It is generally accepted that FTP test scores can be normalized to sea level numbers if the test is done at altitude - there is a table in the article that Fat Boab posted that shows the approximate adjustment amount - based on athlete testing numbers obtained during a scientific study done, and published in a reputable journal.

 

My one and only opinion is that that adjustment calculation is not perfect for each individual and I would hesitate to take it as an absolutely correct number because of the variability around individuals scores and the difficulty of doing repeatable tests of this nature.

 

"but that same Lesotho athlete would almost definitely be able to push a higher wattage for longer if he decided to quickly go to the coast for a day and do an FTP test."

 

This is correct - and the scientific evidence for this exists

 

The science DOES NOT show that individual athletes FTP scores go up with increasing altitude - but Mr Wakefield has stated that he has athletes that perform better at altitude - and I would like to study that - thus my request for the evidence /articles that support that statement because I have never seen such.

 

Mr Wakefield contends that just because I don't know about such evidence doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, but has not provided any evidence that it does exist - I am still waiting for something... and I certainly can't find anything easily referable online that supports his contention - in fact the opposite, so it's really difficult to discuss without a level of disagreement. If he has evidence that supports his contention, then he should really write it up for a peer reviewed journal.

 

Mr Wakefield has contacted me via pm about my calling him a "pro" coach - he seems to feel he is not a pro coach (and didn't say that he was) - and I have offered to withdraw my statement publicly.

[Pure Savage]

The poor OP just wanted to know if he would get an 1A start at the Argus

[pe3nguin]

The poor OP just wanted to know if he would get an 1A start at the Argus

 

Shoo well then thats his fault really. If you have more than 3 posts you should by now that asking questions on the Hub gets you no where, slowly.

['Dale]

The poor OP just wanted to know if he would get an 1A start at the Argus

Hehehe

Too true

 

Any topic that has w/kg in its opener post though is a bit of a seductive thread ????

[Pure Savage]

Shoo well then thats his fault really. If you have more than 3 posts you should by now that asking questions on the Hub gets you no where, slowly.

Especially when you include things like FTP in the title. 

[JeffK]

Was hoping for some nice arithmetic and curve fits, but obviously that was out the window by the 2nd page

[pe3nguin]

Rather than assessing the relationship between watts and PPA seeding, what we really need is the average number of posts required in a thread before the title has lost all meaning.

[Fat Boab]

Rather than assessing the relationship between watts and PPA seeding, what we really need is the average number of posts required in a thread before the title has lost all meaning.

 

n<=107

[pe3nguin]

n<=107

 

Oh you

[Patchelicious]

The poor OP just wanted to know if he would get an 1A start at the Argus

He should have known better. He's lucky that somebody hasnt given him financial advice yet or told him his winky is small for riding an expense bike or that Mr X has rocked up and moaned about the lack of rain in the Cape.... 

[J Wakefield]

"Why an athlete who lives, trains and tests in Lesotho would have a higher FTP to an equal specimen in Cape Town doesn't make much sense"

 

Actually this makes perfect sense They aren't equal specimens.... the fact is that you cannot compare 2 different people to each other (and I don't think John tried to do that) - all you can compare is 2 different tests from the same person - done at different altitudes with all else being equal (which is scientifically pretty hard to do)

 

So - the science related to FTP measurement shows that individual athletes FTP test measurements  show lower FTP scores as altitude increases (for the same person) - so for example that person might show a test result of 4w/kg at sea level and in Jhb, approximately 3.8w/kg.

 

It is generally accepted that FTP test scores can be normalized to sea level numbers if the test is done at altitude - there is a table in the article that Fat Boab posted that shows the approximate adjustment amount - based on athlete testing numbers obtained during a scientific study done, and published in a reputable journal.

 

My one and only opinion is that that adjustment calculation is not perfect for each individual and I would hesitate to take it as an absolutely correct number because of the variability around individuals scores and the difficulty of doing repeatable tests of this nature.

 

"but that same Lesotho athlete would almost definitely be able to push a higher wattage for longer if he decided to quickly go to the coast for a day and do an FTP test."

 

This is correct - and the scientific evidence for this exists

 

The science DOES NOT show that individual athletes FTP scores go up with increasing altitude - but Mr Wakefield has stated that he has athletes that perform better at altitude - and I would like to study that - thus my request for the evidence /articles that support that statement because I have never seen such.

 

Mr Wakefield contends that just because I don't know about such evidence doesn't mean that it doesn't exist, but has not provided any evidence that it does exist - I am still waiting for something... and I certainly can't find anything easily referable online that supports his contention - in fact the opposite, so it's really difficult to discuss without a level of disagreement. If he has evidence that supports his contention, then he should really write it up for a peer reviewed journal.

 

Mr Wakefield has contacted me via pm about my calling him a "pro" coach - he seems to feel he is not a pro coach (and didn't say that he was) - and I have offered to withdraw my statement publicly.

 

 

Please stop putting words in my mouth and making statements that are not true. I approached you offline in a civil and mature way to understand. Nothing like you mentioned above. But here we are.

 

You need to stop whatever witch hunt you are on with me or trying your hardest to discredit me or make it out you are right and I am wrong.

 

I am not being roped into whatever it is you are trying to achieve here. Flame and keep doing what you doing.

 

Im not apart of it sorry.

[Patchelicious]

Please stop putting words in my mouth and making statements that are not true. I approached you offline in a civil and mature way to understand. Nothing like you mentioned above. But here we are.

 

You need to stop whatever witch hunt you are on with me or trying your hardest to discredit me or make it out you are right and I am wrong.

 

I am not being roped into whatever it is you are trying to achieve here. Flame and keep doing what you doing.

 

Im not apart of it sorry.

 

John, with all due respect, you can't claim that people "put words in your mouth" and then imply they have an agenda each time somebody challenges you. V12 is not a bully, never has been, but he simply asked for the studies you spoke of, nothing more nothing less.

 

I respect both of your and V12s opinions and posts, as I am sure many Hubbers do, so why not just debate the scientific claims and leave the personal jabs out of it. There is nothing wrong with two men of science having a robust debate. The people following this thread will be more educated and better informed if you guys do.

 

I for one would love to learn from from a discussion of this nature.