Cycling Program v3.0 - 2010 - 2011 (Page 15)

You want to use an intensity you would be able to sustain for an all out 5 min effort. Usually will be between 120% of CP and 3MP.

In this case it seems 'c' would be the wisest choice.

Jacques is correct. Remember CP is a mathematical model which attempts estimating what your power could be for roughly 60 min maximal effort, nothing more nothing else and it is not perfect. Yes, if athletes have a greater anaerobic capacity the result can skew the CP somewhat as your 20MP will most likely be lower. But some of you are missing the forest for the trees. But the model ends up been robust enough that it works for most athletes and it is one of the models which has been extensively tested. I can share some of the research if you want to.

The idea of testing 3-5MP and 20 is to see the variance in your power curve and identify the areas (weaknesses) that you need to work on. Those with higher 3-5MP and lower 20MP just means you currently need to work on your sustainable power over long durations and that will be where you will obtain the greatest power gains.

As we move into those areas in coming weeks you will begin to notice the difference and after the program is over hopefully your 3MP, 20MP and CP all will become tighter of what they are today. Even after the programs ends you will have the knowledge to keep addressing this weaknesses.

The good news is that if your 3-5MP is high, in theory you have that much range for your CP to improve. So if the model is giving you a variance of 5-10 watts for the time been, don't sweat it as much. Power and fitness are rather variable and it is constantly fluctuation based on our accumulated fatigue and other life 'stressors' so even if you were to have the most accurate number, still it would be moving every day and that's why the CP is just a number to give you an idea as to where your fitness is at a given point, we used that to roughly define training zones and the why I suggest doing some sets 'blind' to develop your RPE.

As you develop your experience training with power, it will almost become second nature to guess what your CP should be based on your trainign rides and when testing you will be within a few watts.

True, pacing is very important to get accurate results and learning how to do that takes a few attempts. Still, once this is accomplish then it is relatively simple to do. I should try adding more emphasis on this for coming weeks and future versions of the plan.

"Blow out" tests like MAP tend to be good when done far in between because even though you don;t require the pacing skills as a 20MP for instance, it does takes incredible physical and mental strength to get yourself to dig that deep to obtain the best possible result. This in my experience is not something athletes are willing to do routinely, even the 5/20 tests get mentally tough every 6-8 weeks.

But as I said, if you find this something you enjoy and are willing to do, I think is a great way to test. Whatever that helps you stay on top of it is a good thing

Which is why I gave the right answer after the funny ones. ;-)

I didn't question the Monod model. I pointed out that the spreadsheet incorrectly implements the Monod model by including an arbitrary third datapoint in addition to the two that we provide in testing.

Explain how the 0, 0 datapoint can possibly fit.  What would it represent?  Do the calculation by hand (as shown on p17 of Dr Skiba's book) or by using the CP calculator available in GoldenCheetah (under "Tools") and note that it does *not* match the CP as calculated by the spreadsheet. In my case, the uncorrected spreadsheet produces a CP that's 5% higher than the Monod model predicts.

I did week 3, Day 1 Monday morning and I almost lost the night before dinner. It was by fare the toughest workout that I have done in a very long time. How anybody keep a greater than 106% HR  for 2 minutes consistently is beyond me.

Not good.  I'm a week behind and 1 minute at 106%+ 5x was brutal.  I was seeing stars.  Oh well, no heart attack so far means I'm probably good to go :-).  I have done a couple LT test previously.

wk2d1 done.  not as bad as i was expecting.  a little annoyed that the lap data in my garmin 405 doesn't reflect what the speed showed during the workout.  the last interval at 3-5w higher it was showing 19-20 mph, yet when i downloaded it it shows a lap avg of 17.5????  well, i know the speed on both my sigma and garmin matched up while actually riding the trainer, so i'm sure i did the workout properly.  anyone else have this issue (using the gsc-10 sensor).  oh well.

looking forward to going forward.  great workout.  so much better than just the steady state trainer rides i've been doing.  keeps it more interesting.

Let me review the excel sheet when I get a chance and I'll let you know.

I agree about week 3 day 1.  Closest I have come to puking yet.  Verps are no fun.

I'm trying to find an alternative to the optional long bike session.  I'm racing IMLP 2011 and the bike is my weakest so I'm looking to really hammer the bike this winter.  However, anything long and steady that has me riding undisturbed for longer than 10' (except the tests) is just too boring.  I could never be able to do a two hour trainer ride with intervals of 1 hr at the same intensity.

On the other hand, I LOVE the intense sessions.  They make me feel strong, and I'm only 19 years old so my body recovers well.

I was thinking about just doing another session like day 2 instead of the long bike and maybe lengthen it.  I WANT to get some long sessions in but they need to be broken up into small intervals to break up the monotony.  What should I do?

Do what you just said.  Take day 2, and repeat 2-3 times (or as long as you can stand).  The other option is set yourself up in front of the tv, put in a movie and zone out for a while.  Check you cadence, HR, watts, whatever, every few minutes and then pay attention to the movie.

For me, I'll ride outside as long as I can, so that includes when the thermometer dips below 0.  Once I'm forced inside cause of snow then I'm lucky enough to have a Tacx trainer where I can ride mountains in Europe and watch the video of the hill that's taking it's toll on me.  Keeps me interested, and I don't need to watch TV.

That's just the problem.  When I zone out on a long interval, I can't keep my power up.  It then becomes a waste of time to even be on the trainer.  I'll try to think of a longer session that includes many sets that resemble the warmup structure.  For some reason, the warmups just seem to fly by for me.

Anyone know how many TSS points one of the longer rides usually racks up?  The weekly sessions have been about 60TSS/hour(only in the first actual week of the program just yet) so far which gives me a good workout.  Am I right in assuming that the long rides aren't as intense?  More like 50TSS/hour?

I just want to have an idea of what I should shoot for for an equivalent workload to achieve the same stress throughout the program.

TSS is pretty easy to estimate.  It's just the overall intensity factor (50% is .5) squared, times 100, times the number of hours.  A 2 hour ride at 70% would be .7*.7 = .49 *100 *2 = 98.   Be aware though that different types of workouts that happen to produce the same TSS aren't necessarily equivalent in how they really impact the body. 

I too find a long steady ride on the trainer to be pretty mind numbing. Playing various mind games such as ramps or pyramids (increase intensity by 5 watts every 5 minutes for a while, then go back down), watching TV or listening to music (do 20 - 30 seconds standing or sprinting at every commercial or new song) and adjusting your cadence (alternate 5 minutes at 100, 5 minutes at 70 or something like that) all help, but it's still almost impossible for me to do over 90 minutes indoors.  

Cycling videos might help.  Find your favorite Ironman course on DVD.  I've read pretty positive reviews of the videos available at http://thesufferfest.com,but they're not that long.  Haven't tried them yet, but price is cheap enough that I'll probably give it a shot.  I'm fortunate to be able to get outside a fair amount during the winter months.

I know HOW to calculate TSS, but seeing as how I haven't done any of the long rides and don't plan on it, I want to know If others can throw out some numbers from their WKO+ files.

I have plenty of distraction options but the long intervals just aren't going to happen.

Finished W2D1. Good workout.  Did four at 320 and managed to do the last at 335.  So, I guess that is progress.   Next week W3D1 is going to be tough.

Now, just to be clear, for W2D2 (75, 80, 85%) those are percentages of my known CP, right?  I'm not using that 335 until next week, yes?

Pretty sure that's right.  I think Jorge said in an earlier post that a percentage in a workout is always relative to your current CP.

correct!

Just a quick note only for those training with power - thanks to flagstaff I went back to check the excel sheet on the link provided to estimate CP and the new version it seems I might have used the incorrect version an the formula for this program is not adequate, given we are only doing two data points (tests). Because of this, your CP estimation might be slight higher (~2-3+ %) depending on the variance of your 3MP and 20MP.

Since it is early in the program is something that can be easily corrected and not a big deal because we haven't done any long specific sets at CP, the focus right now is 5MP and the short sets we are doing more as a % of 3MP. Anyway, the good news is that it is an easy fix and nothing that will alter your currently plan or training levels significantly (prob ~5 watts on average), though the bad news is that your CP for the 1st round of testing might be a tad lower of originally expected for some.

But it can be a good extra motivation to get it much higher by the end of the program! I'll update the excel sheet before the weekend and if you want me I can update the Google spreadsheet as well.

Thanks Jorge.  In addition to the method I suggested earlier for modifying the spreadsheet, I think we could also simply duplicate one of the test results as the third datapoint.  Since you'd have two points in the same position on the CP line, you'd get the correct results.

I agree that for most people, and particularly for this month's workouts, the difference isn't really significant.  In my case, it's 5%, but I have a high 3 to 20 minute ratio.  When we get to doing longer intervals at 100%, I might feel that.  I'd also say that for those who are estimating power based on trainer speed, there's probably more than a 5 - 10% variance from day to day anyway.

Thanks, Jorge (I think).

Does this mean my REAL CP sucks even more than what's on the spreadsheet.  At least I have MORE room for improvement

After going back and looking at mine I borked the arithmetic when I said my CP would go up a bunch.  Typical engineer - give me calculus and I have no problems.  Give me arithmetic and I'll screw it up.  My CP drops by a whopping 5 watts.  That is within the precision of the PT (+-2%), thus is in the noise.

For the record, I still don't see the problem with 0,0 as a valid point. 

Frankly, my biggest problem is going to be the second 20 minute test.  I have no clue how I am going to match effort level on the trainer that I can accomplish outside.  It is so much easier to hammer away on the road.

Jorge, Can I get access to the google sheet so I may record my results?

Thanks

shoot me an email!

Jorge PBMC: Cycling Plan v3.0 - Week # 4 - http://jorgepbmcoaching.blogspot.com/

For those training with power - I updated the excel file that you can use to estimate Critical Power, please use this new version to update your current CP and training levels. You'll be able to differentiate each other by our new PBMC Logo. You can disregard the old file.

Once you do don't forget to update the Google doc spreadsheet! Thanks.