BT Development Mentor Program Archives » SBR "U" Rss Feed  
Moderators: alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 97
 
 
2015-06-24 12:46 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

User image

Master
2912
2000500100100100100
...at home in The ATL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by axteraa

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by brigby1

And Finally got something in. Just a recreational ride, but it was an organized event and I paid for it. Been watching more of the stats from the power data now. 4,719 kJ on this one. TSS of 340. And it actually doesn't feel too bad. Has me wondering about some others I've done in the past.

ETA: It's the KJ that has been getting my attention more recently. Why do we eat so much? 1kJ=1kcal=1Cal. Takes a fair amount of food to get to that.

Ha! Did our conversation inspire you???

That's great. So glad to hear you are jumping back in some events. 

Ha! I'd had this down as maybe, depending on how I felt between some other things that were planned. So from the conversation was just more appreciative of getting something in.

Hey - great to hear, Ben! I am guessing that must have been some sort of fast century? Were you able to crush some souls like only a good triathlete can?

Um, this was a recreational ride and I just wanted some cookies?

I thought it was pie?

Pie was after, cookies were on course.

Ben - I have been paying attention to KJ as well for the past year-and-a-half. The closest i have come to that kind of burn was at Mt. Mitchell back in May. 4446Kj, but that was a TSS of 483.2 - all part of that height and weight differential - ha.. FWIW I needed more than cookies and pie after that. immediately after I had 2 cokes, 2 BBQ sandwiches, slaw, and yes, a piece of pie. For dinner I had a steak, asparagus, mashed potatoes, a martini, and more than my fair share of a bottle of red wine. Finished with a bread pudding made out of Krispy Kreme doughnuts (being in the home town of KK and all). I have my MFP account synced with my TP account and after the ride the first message I got from my coach was "WTF did you eat afterwards????"

Wish Salty wore a smart recorder - would love to know what her burn was on her circumnavigation of Mt. St. Helens...

Ok sorry guys, back up a minute. So a "smart recorder" (as the youngun here I feel a little embarrassed that I am the least tech savvy...) records the rate at which you are burning calories in KJ?

The "smart" part here is somehow getting power output, or energy rate. Power output is the energy rate. Watts equate to Joule/sec (or J/s). 1kilojoule (or kJ) is 1 kilocalorie, otherwise known as 1 Calorie (yes, the caps matters here). So it's working with the relationship of the big pool of energy (Joules or Calories), the rate of expenditure (power in Watts), and the duration or time spent.

The energy expressions go directly to the power values, whereas the TSS is less direct as that is stress and needs to have a reference for how hard something is. This reference is FTP. Quantifies how hard something was as a percent of this point and how long you did it for.

In running, it's one thing to establish baselines on a relatively flat and windless conditions and applying that to other similar conditions but how do you translate that to all the different scenarios?

 

there are fairly good inferences that can be made correlated to HR, especially over long efforts and in very fit people (I think you are a case that qualifies as both - heh.). With metrics set accordingly I have found my Garmin to do very good job of this, at least as Ben has pointed out when calibrated against power on the bike. It is not so good with short spiky efforts as HR doesn't track well enough with power output. I think the correlation via HR on long runs is good.



2015-06-24 12:54 PM
in reply to: TankBoy

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by axteraa

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by brigby1

And Finally got something in. Just a recreational ride, but it was an organized event and I paid for it. Been watching more of the stats from the power data now. 4,719 kJ on this one. TSS of 340. And it actually doesn't feel too bad. Has me wondering about some others I've done in the past.

ETA: It's the KJ that has been getting my attention more recently. Why do we eat so much? 1kJ=1kcal=1Cal. Takes a fair amount of food to get to that.

Ha! Did our conversation inspire you???

That's great. So glad to hear you are jumping back in some events. 

Ha! I'd had this down as maybe, depending on how I felt between some other things that were planned. So from the conversation was just more appreciative of getting something in.

Hey - great to hear, Ben! I am guessing that must have been some sort of fast century? Were you able to crush some souls like only a good triathlete can?

Um, this was a recreational ride and I just wanted some cookies?

I thought it was pie?

Pie was after, cookies were on course.

Ben - I have been paying attention to KJ as well for the past year-and-a-half. The closest i have come to that kind of burn was at Mt. Mitchell back in May. 4446Kj, but that was a TSS of 483.2 - all part of that height and weight differential - ha.. FWIW I needed more than cookies and pie after that. immediately after I had 2 cokes, 2 BBQ sandwiches, slaw, and yes, a piece of pie. For dinner I had a steak, asparagus, mashed potatoes, a martini, and more than my fair share of a bottle of red wine. Finished with a bread pudding made out of Krispy Kreme doughnuts (being in the home town of KK and all). I have my MFP account synced with my TP account and after the ride the first message I got from my coach was "WTF did you eat afterwards????"

Wish Salty wore a smart recorder - would love to know what her burn was on her circumnavigation of Mt. St. Helens...

Ok sorry guys, back up a minute. So a "smart recorder" (as the youngun here I feel a little embarrassed that I am the least tech savvy...) records the rate at which you are burning calories in KJ?

The "smart" part here is somehow getting power output, or energy rate. Power output is the energy rate. Watts equate to Joule/sec (or J/s). 1kilojoule (or kJ) is 1 kilocalorie, otherwise known as 1 Calorie (yes, the caps matters here). So it's working with the relationship of the big pool of energy (Joules or Calories), the rate of expenditure (power in Watts), and the duration or time spent.

The energy expressions go directly to the power values, whereas the TSS is less direct as that is stress and needs to have a reference for how hard something is. This reference is FTP. Quantifies how hard something was as a percent of this point and how long you did it for.

In running, it's one thing to establish baselines on a relatively flat and windless conditions and applying that to other similar conditions but how do you translate that to all the different scenarios?

 

there are fairly good inferences that can be made correlated to HR, especially over long efforts and in very fit people (I think you are a case that qualifies as both - heh.). With metrics set accordingly I have found my Garmin to do very good job of this, at least as Ben has pointed out when calibrated against power on the bike. It is not so good with short spiky efforts as HR doesn't track well enough with power output. I think the correlation via HR on long runs is good.

Very interesting. I have been reluctant to use HR data, ok, any data really, but this is intriguing.

When we were summiting Mount Adams last week my friends resting heart-rate at our 10,000' basecamp was double. 

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

2015-06-24 12:57 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

User image

Master
2912
2000500100100100100
...at home in The ATL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Have I told you guys about the run I am doing in August?

It's 105 miles on the PCT in 3 days. Next to the JMT portion (which has Mt. Whitney...) it is the hardest. There will be 25K elevation gain and loss.

So, speaking of burn,  I am starting to think about the food I will be bringing. More important, how much food.  Something I have noticed about myself is that I don't seem to have many issues eating while running but when I am done, and the day after, I am not hungry at all. For instance after a marathon I eat really normally and maybe even less than usual the following day. But that third day, for some reason, is when it hits me. So I am not sure what it will be like for a multi-day adventure like this. 

adrienne - I am fortunate in that I seem to also have a cast-iron constitution and can eat pretty much anything, especially when going long. Back in my adventure racing days the longest race we ever did was 3 days. I am a little embarrassed to say that my "go-to" food was pretty junky back then: nuts, chips, and chocolate. our late nighttime meals were always the most important (not sure if they qualified as late dinner or early breakfast). in racing you have a crew that can feed you, but in training I would always pre-make a couple of egg/bean/rice/salsa burritos to carry with me. Easy to eat on the go, especially in the dark when you are going slow.

2015-06-24 12:58 PM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Have I told you guys about the run I am doing in August?

It's 105 miles on the PCT in 3 days. Next to the JMT portion (which has Mt. Whitney...) it is the hardest. There will be 25K elevation gain and loss.

So, speaking of burn,  I am starting to think about the food I will be bringing. More important, how much food.  Something I have noticed about myself is that I don't seem to have many issues eating while running but when I am done, and the day after, I am not hungry at all. For instance after a marathon I eat really normally and maybe even less than usual the following day. But that third day, for some reason, is when it hits me. So I am not sure what it will be like for a multi-day adventure like this. 

That was one of the first things I had thought about. had trying to figure out to get someone to carry in a Sams Club size box of Cliff bars every day (48 count?)! I eat a lot after the bigger training days and it does help though other factors may still have me tired and wanting the next day. Also guessing that I'm at least 35% bigger so need at least that much more food or be that much more economical in movement.

Haha well, that is why we are doing this supported vs unsupported. 

I am lucky, in being smaller - sort of. Although, I wonder how the numbers will pan out for the amount of weight (in food) we carry as a proportion of our body weight. 

The amount of water I drink will be my biggest disadvantage. But also an advantage in some ways I guess. 

2015-06-24 1:01 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

User image

Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Have I told you guys about the run I am doing in August?

It's 105 miles on the PCT in 3 days. Next to the JMT portion (which has Mt. Whitney...) it is the hardest. There will be 25K elevation gain and loss.

So, speaking of burn,  I am starting to think about the food I will be bringing. More important, how much food.  Something I have noticed about myself is that I don't seem to have many issues eating while running but when I am done, and the day after, I am not hungry at all. For instance after a marathon I eat really normally and maybe even less than usual the following day. But that third day, for some reason, is when it hits me. So I am not sure what it will be like for a multi-day adventure like this. 

No advice.  Just damn

2015-06-24 1:03 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

User image

Master
2912
2000500100100100100
...at home in The ATL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Haha well, that is why we are doing this supported vs unsupported. 

Sweet! That changes everything! oh, and you will find that mouthwash is your friend....



2015-06-24 1:04 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Ok sorry guys, back up a minute. So a "smart recorder" (as the youngun here I feel a little embarrassed that I am the least tech savvy...) records the rate at which you are burning calories in KJ?

The "smart" part here is somehow getting power output, or energy rate. Power output is the energy rate. Watts equate to Joule/sec (or J/s). 1kilojoule (or kJ) is 1 kilocalorie, otherwise known as 1 Calorie (yes, the caps matters here). So it's working with the relationship of the big pool of energy (Joules or Calories), the rate of expenditure (power in Watts), and the duration or time spent.

The energy expressions go directly to the power values, whereas the TSS is less direct as that is stress and needs to have a reference for how hard something is. This reference is FTP. Quantifies how hard something was as a percent of this point and how long you did it for.

In running, it's one thing to establish baselines on a relatively flat and windless conditions and applying that to other similar conditions but how do you translate that to all the different scenarios?

 

there are fairly good inferences that can be made correlated to HR, especially over long efforts and in very fit people (I think you are a case that qualifies as both - heh.). With metrics set accordingly I have found my Garmin to do very good job of this, at least as Ben has pointed out when calibrated against power on the bike. It is not so good with short spiky efforts as HR doesn't track well enough with power output. I think the correlation via HR on long runs is good.

Very interesting. I have been reluctant to use HR data, ok, any data really, but this is intriguing.

When we were summiting Mount Adams last week my friends resting heart-rate at our 10,000' basecamp was double. 

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

All of these methods "work". It's more the person understanding what that info is saying. Different things go into the different measurements of HR, speed (or pace), and power. HR does lag, but it does take in everything too. And for what it's worth, Daniels does give some rationale for using it. 

Rusty, that's good to hear that some of the devices can do reasonably well for running too. What are you having to input for that and how up to date have had to be with it?

2015-06-24 1:07 PM
in reply to: TankBoy

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Have I told you guys about the run I am doing in August?

It's 105 miles on the PCT in 3 days. Next to the JMT portion (which has Mt. Whitney...) it is the hardest. There will be 25K elevation gain and loss.

 

So, speaking of burn,  I am starting to think about the food I will be bringing. More important, how much food.  Something I have noticed about myself is that I don't seem to have many issues eating while running but when I am done, and the day after, I am not hungry at all. For instance after a marathon I eat really normally and maybe even less than usual the following day. But that third day, for some reason, is when it hits me. So I am not sure what it will be like for a multi-day adventure like this. 

adrienne - I am fortunate in that I seem to also have a cast-iron constitution and can eat pretty much anything, especially when going long. Back in my adventure racing days the longest race we ever did was 3 days. I am a little embarrassed to say that my "go-to" food was pretty junky back then: nuts, chips, and chocolate. our late nighttime meals were always the most important (not sure if they qualified as late dinner or early breakfast). in racing you have a crew that can feed you, but in training I would always pre-make a couple of egg/bean/rice/salsa burritos to carry with me. Easy to eat on the go, especially in the dark when you are going slow.

It's hilarious you say that because I tend to do a lot of the crappy simple calories when I am doing bigger events. I was at the grocery store buying a pile of snicker bars, sour patch kids, plain bagels and cookies and the woman asked me if I was having a party. I laughed and said, "No, actually, I am climbing a mountain."

I think burritos are a great idea, actually. I need to write this down. I am not sure I knew you did a bunch of adventure racing type stuff. Please let me know if there are things you think about as I am new to all of this. 

 

2015-06-24 1:10 PM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Ok sorry guys, back up a minute. So a "smart recorder" (as the youngun here I feel a little embarrassed that I am the least tech savvy...) records the rate at which you are burning calories in KJ?

The "smart" part here is somehow getting power output, or energy rate. Power output is the energy rate. Watts equate to Joule/sec (or J/s). 1kilojoule (or kJ) is 1 kilocalorie, otherwise known as 1 Calorie (yes, the caps matters here). So it's working with the relationship of the big pool of energy (Joules or Calories), the rate of expenditure (power in Watts), and the duration or time spent.

The energy expressions go directly to the power values, whereas the TSS is less direct as that is stress and needs to have a reference for how hard something is. This reference is FTP. Quantifies how hard something was as a percent of this point and how long you did it for.

In running, it's one thing to establish baselines on a relatively flat and windless conditions and applying that to other similar conditions but how do you translate that to all the different scenarios?

 

there are fairly good inferences that can be made correlated to HR, especially over long efforts and in very fit people (I think you are a case that qualifies as both - heh.). With metrics set accordingly I have found my Garmin to do very good job of this, at least as Ben has pointed out when calibrated against power on the bike. It is not so good with short spiky efforts as HR doesn't track well enough with power output. I think the correlation via HR on long runs is good.

Very interesting. I have been reluctant to use HR data, ok, any data really, but this is intriguing.

When we were summiting Mount Adams last week my friends resting heart-rate at our 10,000' basecamp was double. 

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

All of these methods "work". It's more the person understanding what that info is saying. Different things go into the different measurements of HR, speed (or pace), and power. HR does lag, but it does take in everything too. And for what it's worth, Daniels does give some rationale for using it. 

Rusty, that's good to hear that some of the devices can do reasonably well for running too. What are you having to input for that and how up to date have had to be with it?

I'd like to see a side by side comparison of your guys' power data and HR data.

I apologize,  you have probably covered this a million times I just tend to tune data stuff out

I don't really care about data most of the time but it's much harder to gauge performance with the mountain running I have been doing lately. 

2015-06-24 1:11 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Have I told you guys about the run I am doing in August?

It's 105 miles on the PCT in 3 days. Next to the JMT portion (which has Mt. Whitney...) it is the hardest. There will be 25K elevation gain and loss.

 

So, speaking of burn,  I am starting to think about the food I will be bringing. More important, how much food.  Something I have noticed about myself is that I don't seem to have many issues eating while running but when I am done, and the day after, I am not hungry at all. For instance after a marathon I eat really normally and maybe even less than usual the following day. But that third day, for some reason, is when it hits me. So I am not sure what it will be like for a multi-day adventure like this. 

adrienne - I am fortunate in that I seem to also have a cast-iron constitution and can eat pretty much anything, especially when going long. Back in my adventure racing days the longest race we ever did was 3 days. I am a little embarrassed to say that my "go-to" food was pretty junky back then: nuts, chips, and chocolate. our late nighttime meals were always the most important (not sure if they qualified as late dinner or early breakfast). in racing you have a crew that can feed you, but in training I would always pre-make a couple of egg/bean/rice/salsa burritos to carry with me. Easy to eat on the go, especially in the dark when you are going slow.

It's hilarious you say that because I tend to do a lot of the crappy simple calories when I am doing bigger events. I was at the grocery store buying a pile of snicker bars, sour patch kids, plain bagels and cookies and the woman asked me if I was having a party. I laughed and said, "No, actually, I am climbing a mountain."

I think burritos are a great idea, actually. I need to write this down. I am not sure I knew you did a bunch of adventure racing type stuff. Please let me know if there are things you think about as I am new to all of this. 

 

"Junky" stuff is great here because it tends to be fast acting! Funny seeing seeing in all these bike events people going for the "healthy" stuff, but it's going to take so long to get through they'll be done before it has an effect! Then here I am chowing down on cookies at each stop. I like peanut butter & bagels too, but that's been more of a before or after food for me, not during.

2015-06-24 1:21 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

User image

Master
2912
2000500100100100100
...at home in The ATL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

I am guessing that there are probably varying viewpoints on this, but for me the holy grail of measurement would be someway to get an accurate reading of "input" or what we normally call "effort." While over short intervals HR is pretty junky as a metric in this regard, over the long haul I find HR to be the best proxy for effort. All of the other metrics we use (power, pace, etc) are actually just "outputs" that have varying degrees of variables to contend with (even power is a function of at least two variables) to infer input. HR is an input, and it does have its own variables to contend with as well, but they are things like heat, hydration, fatigue, illness, etc, again all things that directly affect input, and subsequently output. That is why I find it an important metric to bracket input metrics against other output metrics. For me it helps to paint a much more robust picture of what exactly is going on. 



2015-06-24 1:25 PM
in reply to: TankBoy

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Haha well, that is why we are doing this supported vs unsupported. 

Sweet! That changes everything! oh, and you will find that mouthwash is your friend....

Yeah. Well, I should say supported at night. So they will bring in dinner/breakfast/camp necessities (mouthwash, apparently) and then lunch/snacks for the next day.

We will have to carry everything we use during the day but that is much less of a burden. 

2015-06-24 1:32 PM
in reply to: TankBoy

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

I am guessing that there are probably varying viewpoints on this, but for me the holy grail of measurement would be someway to get an accurate reading of "input" or what we normally call "effort." While over short intervals HR is pretty junky as a metric in this regard, over the long haul I find HR to be the best proxy for effort. All of the other metrics we use (power, pace, etc) are actually just "outputs" that have varying degrees of variables to contend with (even power is a function of at least two variables) to infer input. HR is an input, and it does have its own variables to contend with as well, but they are things like heat, hydration, fatigue, illness, etc, again all things that directly affect input, and subsequently output. That is why I find it an important metric to bracket input metrics against other output metrics. For me it helps to paint a much more robust picture of what exactly is going on. 

If only we could isolate each of the inputs and outputs better.

Also, I don't really see HR as an input. You don't control or change your HR directly. It changes in response to something else. You change your effort and then HR will respond accordingly, for example. It's also not really an output as it really doesn't do anything. Changes in HR is still something that happens, but it's the power or pace that comes from it that is the output.

2015-06-24 1:37 PM
in reply to: ChrisM

User image

Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by ChrisM

Originally posted by Asalzwed

Have I told you guys about the run I am doing in August?

It's 105 miles on the PCT in 3 days. Next to the JMT portion (which has Mt. Whitney...) it is the hardest. There will be 25K elevation gain and loss.

So, speaking of burn,  I am starting to think about the food I will be bringing. More important, how much food.  Something I have noticed about myself is that I don't seem to have many issues eating while running but when I am done, and the day after, I am not hungry at all. For instance after a marathon I eat really normally and maybe even less than usual the following day. But that third day, for some reason, is when it hits me. So I am not sure what it will be like for a multi-day adventure like this. 

No advice.  Just damn

Yup...that pretty much sums it up.  

2015-06-24 1:42 PM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

I am guessing that there are probably varying viewpoints on this, but for me the holy grail of measurement would be someway to get an accurate reading of "input" or what we normally call "effort." While over short intervals HR is pretty junky as a metric in this regard, over the long haul I find HR to be the best proxy for effort. All of the other metrics we use (power, pace, etc) are actually just "outputs" that have varying degrees of variables to contend with (even power is a function of at least two variables) to infer input. HR is an input, and it does have its own variables to contend with as well, but they are things like heat, hydration, fatigue, illness, etc, again all things that directly affect input, and subsequently output. That is why I find it an important metric to bracket input metrics against other output metrics. For me it helps to paint a much more robust picture of what exactly is going on. 

If only we could isolate each of the inputs and outputs better.

Also, I don't really see HR as an input. You don't control or change your HR directly. It changes in response to something else. You change your effort and then HR will respond accordingly, for example. It's also not really an output as it really doesn't do anything. Changes in HR is still something that happens, but it's the power or pace that comes from it that is the output.

I guess that is how I would see HR, too.

And I have a really good handle on effort (although it's a bit subjective and not very scientific) so between knowing that and having the HR data it would be pretty useful.

Do you guys say HR doesn't work well for shorter interval type stuff because of the lag? 

2015-06-24 1:45 PM
in reply to: Jason N

User image

Elite
7783
50002000500100100252525
PEI, Canada
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

So, Jason is climbing a volcano, Adrienne is running for 3 days straight, Rusty is doing a 42k TT with 1600 feet of climbing, Ben is burning 4500 cals in a ride..... You guys are all nuts - makes my 20k TT tomorrow evening with a couple hundred feet of elevation seem a bit tame.  



2015-06-24 1:53 PM
in reply to: axteraa

User image

Seattle
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by axteraa

So, Jason is climbing a volcano, Adrienne is running for 3 days straight, Rusty is doing a 42k TT with 1600 feet of climbing, Ben is burning 4500 cals in a ride..... You guys are all nuts - makes my 20k TT tomorrow evening with a couple hundred feet of elevation seem a bit tame.  

Of all the stuff I do, the short, all out type of efforts are still the hardest and you can hardly justify cookies, pie and sour patch kids.

2015-06-24 2:15 PM
in reply to: ligersandtions

User image

Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by ligersandtions

Had my "A" race 40k ITT last weekend....didn't go well (like not at all).  I have a RR posted: http://beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=533379&posts=1#M5124501

But if you want the tl;dr version, here you go: started out well for the first 15 minutes, started to fall apart, hit turn around and renewed my desire to push hard and try do well, completely fell apart, got a flat and was unable to finish

 

Pretty sure I've identified my biggest limiters for this race: confidence that I could actually hold my estimated FTP for an hour and mental strength to allow myself to hurt that badly for an hour. 

Going to start working with a coach shortly, so hopefully I can remedy some of this and salvage this race season, which has been a series of disappointments so far.  Hoping we can turn it around because I really do enjoy training and racing, and want to do well.

Sounds like just a bad day.  Having power drop off by nearly 30% halfway into an effort is not a sign of mental weakness.  Is there anything in your training/racing that you can point to that may have lead to this off day?  Sometimes they just happen...but more times than not you can at least find clues.  Maybe lack of sleep the past week or so?  Were any of your training rides leading in suggesting anything?

As far as mental confidence though, it really is a big leap to go from 5 and 20 minute tests to an hour or more.  I think a 20' test is a good way to ballpark your FTP to set up power workouts...but I much rather use something like a 2x20' workout to better estimate a 40k.  It's also easier to do in training believe it or not.

I had pretty good success this year doing three sets of 2x20' in the weeks leading up to my 40k.  Did them every Thursday...started off the first week pretty conservative and built them up week to week as I gained confidence and my fitness progressed.  My last 2x20' ended up being 281 and 282...and my 40k ended up at 281 for 57:47.

 

 

2015-06-24 2:39 PM
in reply to: Asalzwed

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by Asalzwed

I'd like to see a side by side comparison of your guys' power data and HR data.

I apologize,  you have probably covered this a million times I just tend to tune data stuff out

I don't really care about data most of the time but it's much harder to gauge performance with the mountain running I have been doing lately. 

Since Rusty & I have fairly similar threshold HR values, so this might work out without a table or graph (although is that Marc we hear in the background working on one?). My power at threshold is somewhere past 300. I think Rusty still needs a little more time to get there. If we keep HR the same between us, My power will be higher. Similar HR with similar threshold HR will mean about the same intensity, but different outputs. If we keep power the same then Rusty's HR will be higher. He'll be working at a higher intensity to achieve the same output. Training Stress depends on Intensity. Energy usage depends on the actual power used. So we can work just as intensely as each other, but the one putting out more power is burning through more energy.

Even though we look at power so much, in order to know who is actually going faster it's necessary to factor in the resistance. And because I'm bigger I will have more to overcome to go the same speed. More rolling due to weight and more air resistance due to punching a bigger hole.

2015-06-24 2:42 PM
in reply to: axteraa

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by axteraa

So, Jason is climbing a volcano, Adrienne is running for 3 days straight, Rusty is doing a 42k TT with 1600 feet of climbing, Ben is burning 4500 cals in a ride..... You guys are all nuts - makes my 20k TT tomorrow evening with a couple hundred feet of elevation seem a bit tame.  

That hilly TT will be interesting to see. All the ups and downs really add something to the execution.

2015-06-24 2:42 PM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Master
2912
2000500100100100100
...at home in The ATL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

I am guessing that there are probably varying viewpoints on this, but for me the holy grail of measurement would be someway to get an accurate reading of "input" or what we normally call "effort." While over short intervals HR is pretty junky as a metric in this regard, over the long haul I find HR to be the best proxy for effort. All of the other metrics we use (power, pace, etc) are actually just "outputs" that have varying degrees of variables to contend with (even power is a function of at least two variables) to infer input. HR is an input, and it does have its own variables to contend with as well, but they are things like heat, hydration, fatigue, illness, etc, again all things that directly affect input, and subsequently output. That is why I find it an important metric to bracket input metrics against other output metrics. For me it helps to paint a much more robust picture of what exactly is going on. 

If only we could isolate each of the inputs and outputs better.

Also, I don't really see HR as an input. You don't control or change your HR directly. It changes in response to something else. You change your effort and then HR will respond accordingly, for example. It's also not really an output as it really doesn't do anything. Changes in HR is still something that happens, but it's the power or pace that comes from it that is the output.

Yep - it is not a direct input, but just a close proxy. Here is where Friel talks about this concept a little more in depth: http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/efficiency-factor-and-decoupling



2015-06-24 2:51 PM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Master
2912
2000500100100100100
...at home in The ATL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Asalzwed

I'd like to see a side by side comparison of your guys' power data and HR data.

I apologize,  you have probably covered this a million times I just tend to tune data stuff out

I don't really care about data most of the time but it's much harder to gauge performance with the mountain running I have been doing lately. 

My power at threshold is somewhere past 300. I think Rusty still needs a little more time to get there.

hahahahahahahaha - ah. That is awesome right there! I did manage to hold 300w for just a skosh over 3 minutes yesterday on one of my tap-out intervals, so, yeah, juuuuuust a little more time should do it...

2015-06-24 2:55 PM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Master
2912
2000500100100100100
...at home in The ATL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by axteraa

So, Jason is climbing a volcano, Adrienne is running for 3 days straight, Rusty is doing a 42k TT with 1600 feet of climbing, Ben is burning 4500 cals in a ride..... You guys are all nuts - makes my 20k TT tomorrow evening with a couple hundred feet of elevation seem a bit tame.  

That hilly TT will be interesting to see. All the ups and downs really add something to the execution.

These words from Nicole's race report are ringing loudly in my brain:

Originally posted by ligersandtions

Confidence that I could actually hold my estimated FTP for an hour, and

Mental strength to allow myself to hurt that badly for an hour

2015-06-24 3:20 PM
in reply to: TankBoy

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by axteraa

So, Jason is climbing a volcano, Adrienne is running for 3 days straight, Rusty is doing a 42k TT with 1600 feet of climbing, Ben is burning 4500 cals in a ride..... You guys are all nuts - makes my 20k TT tomorrow evening with a couple hundred feet of elevation seem a bit tame.  

That hilly TT will be interesting to see. All the ups and downs really add something to the execution.

These words from Nicole's race report are ringing loudly in my brain:

Originally posted by ligersandtions

Confidence that I could actually hold my estimated FTP for an hour, and

Mental strength to allow myself to hurt that badly for an hour

But will it really be best to hold right at your FTP the whole time for this one? The breaks on the downhills should make this much easier to accomplish, right?

2015-06-24 3:29 PM
in reply to: TankBoy

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: SBR "U"

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by TankBoy

Originally posted by Asalzwed

It got me thinking that HR really does seem to be the best at taking into account all over the variables including how your body handles different weather conditions and temperature, altitude, terrain etc.

Now the trouble is finding one that works

I am guessing that there are probably varying viewpoints on this, but for me the holy grail of measurement would be someway to get an accurate reading of "input" or what we normally call "effort." While over short intervals HR is pretty junky as a metric in this regard, over the long haul I find HR to be the best proxy for effort. All of the other metrics we use (power, pace, etc) are actually just "outputs" that have varying degrees of variables to contend with (even power is a function of at least two variables) to infer input. HR is an input, and it does have its own variables to contend with as well, but they are things like heat, hydration, fatigue, illness, etc, again all things that directly affect input, and subsequently output. That is why I find it an important metric to bracket input metrics against other output metrics. For me it helps to paint a much more robust picture of what exactly is going on. 

If only we could isolate each of the inputs and outputs better.

Also, I don't really see HR as an input. You don't control or change your HR directly. It changes in response to something else. You change your effort and then HR will respond accordingly, for example. It's also not really an output as it really doesn't do anything. Changes in HR is still something that happens, but it's the power or pace that comes from it that is the output.

Yep - it is not a direct input, but just a close proxy. Here is where Friel talks about this concept a little more in depth: http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/efficiency-factor-and-decoupling

I think I see what he's trying to say, but still don't really agree with it. Just in the first paragraph, power and pace can also be used in the same manner to describe how a workout felt. They do move around more as fitness changes, but once they are anchored they still do much the same thing as HR can in that regard. Then later it seems that he goes with the assumption that because HR isn't really an output yet still is related that it must be an input. I mean, I do see the differences in all three, but not how power and pace can't also be used as a proxy for effort which seems to be his basis for saying HR is.

New Thread
BT Development Mentor Program Archives » SBR "U" Rss Feed  
 
 
of 97
 
 
RELATED ARTICLES
date : March 15, 2013
author : writingrunner
comments : 1
The science behind the reasons that triathlons make us feel so good.
 
date : January 9, 2013
author : MultisportWorld
comments : 0
Jarrod Shoemaker, 2012 US Elite National Champion, discusses the importance of recovery for injury prevention.
date : December 12, 2004
author : Team BT
comments : 0
Ultraman champion, Shanna Armstrong, to ride across USA for science.
 
date : August 31, 2004
author : Ron
comments : 0
Everything you want to know (and then some).