login
Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED (Page 17)
-
No new posts
|
 2015-02-19 6:57 PM in reply to: Ryan Mac |
Veteran  286   Brisbane, Australia |  Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSEDOriginally posted by Ryan Mac Originally posted by ligersandtions Yeah I agree, actually I did do a slow walk for that 1 minute as I look to move a little bit as opposed to just standing. That is just how my coach wrote it. Originally posted by Ryan Mac 8 miles on the treadmill today with a main set of 4 miles at 6:04pace (1' standing recovery). Really felt good to nail this. The first half of each mile kinda sucked but then I seemed to find a groove and was able to maintain. I am pretty pumped with that considering its February. Just out of curiosity, why a standing recovery versus a slow run or walk recovery? I'm not a great runner, so I won't pretend to know what's best, but I know for biking, my legs are much more receptive to starting another interval after doing an easy spin out of the legs on the recovery intervals. I've done my running that way....maybe a minute is not so bad, but I can't imagine doing a hard interval, standing around for a couple minutes, and then trying to jump right back in at the hard pace again. Pretty darn impressive regardless! I only wish I could do a single 6:04 mile! Agreed. I'd be more inclined to do a slow walk recovery rather than standing. Even a slow walk will help to return blood to the heart and help flush lactic acid. A standing recovery results in all the blood getting pumped to your legs (because your body/heart takes some time to realise you've stopped) and can lead to a drop in blood pressure and a dizzy/faint feeling. Better to keep moving slowly. 6:04/mile is 3:46/km, that's fast! Was that 4x1 mile, or 4 miles straight? |
| 2015-02-20 7:41 AM in reply to: stuart_little_9 |
Expert 1260 Norton Shores, MI | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by stuart_little_9 Originally posted by Ryan Mac Agreed. I'd be more inclined to do a slow walk recovery rather than standing. Even a slow walk will help to return blood to the heart and help flush lactic acid. A standing recovery results in all the blood getting pumped to your legs (because your body/heart takes some time to realise you've stopped) and can lead to a drop in blood pressure and a dizzy/faint feeling. Better to keep moving slowly. 6:04/mile is 3:46/km, that's fast! Was that 4x1 mile, or 4 miles straight? Originally posted by ligersandtions Yeah I agree, actually I did do a slow walk for that 1 minute as I look to move a little bit as opposed to just standing. That is just how my coach wrote it. Originally posted by Ryan Mac 8 miles on the treadmill today with a main set of 4 miles at 6:04pace (1' standing recovery). Really felt good to nail this. The first half of each mile kinda sucked but then I seemed to find a groove and was able to maintain. I am pretty pumped with that considering its February. Just out of curiosity, why a standing recovery versus a slow run or walk recovery? I'm not a great runner, so I won't pretend to know what's best, but I know for biking, my legs are much more receptive to starting another interval after doing an easy spin out of the legs on the recovery intervals. I've done my running that way....maybe a minute is not so bad, but I can't imagine doing a hard interval, standing around for a couple minutes, and then trying to jump right back in at the hard pace again. Pretty darn impressive regardless! I only wish I could do a single 6:04 mile! 1minute recovery between miles, if you can call it that, more of a short mental recovery period. |
| 2015-02-20 9:03 AM in reply to: Ryan Mac |
Master 4119 Toronto Bronze member | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by Ryan Mac Originally posted by stuart_little_9 Originally posted by Ryan Mac Agreed. I'd be more inclined to do a slow walk recovery rather than standing. Even a slow walk will help to return blood to the heart and help flush lactic acid. A standing recovery results in all the blood getting pumped to your legs (because your body/heart takes some time to realise you've stopped) and can lead to a drop in blood pressure and a dizzy/faint feeling. Better to keep moving slowly. 6:04/mile is 3:46/km, that's fast! Was that 4x1 mile, or 4 miles straight? Originally posted by ligersandtions Yeah I agree, actually I did do a slow walk for that 1 minute as I look to move a little bit as opposed to just standing. That is just how my coach wrote it. Originally posted by Ryan Mac 8 miles on the treadmill today with a main set of 4 miles at 6:04pace (1' standing recovery). Really felt good to nail this. The first half of each mile kinda sucked but then I seemed to find a groove and was able to maintain. I am pretty pumped with that considering its February. Just out of curiosity, why a standing recovery versus a slow run or walk recovery? I'm not a great runner, so I won't pretend to know what's best, but I know for biking, my legs are much more receptive to starting another interval after doing an easy spin out of the legs on the recovery intervals. I've done my running that way....maybe a minute is not so bad, but I can't imagine doing a hard interval, standing around for a couple minutes, and then trying to jump right back in at the hard pace again. Pretty darn impressive regardless! I only wish I could do a single 6:04 mile! 1minute recovery between miles, if you can call it that, more of a short mental recovery period. Awesome workout!! And, yeah, 1' really isn't much of a rest - just enough to mentally get you through the mile. |
| 2015-02-20 9:07 AM in reply to: juniperjen |
Master 4119 Toronto Bronze member | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Happy Friday everyone! So, planning to run at the gym at lunch. I was planning to do the run HR test but my ribs are sore this morning so it's probably best not to push the effort too hard today. The soreness had been clearing up quite nicely but between 'power stations' at swim and my trainer ride yesterday (very easy) I seem to have aggravated it. I am SO over winter. Today is frigid cold again - -16C as the daytime high. I realize it's February but it's way below average temperatures for this time of year. I really need to start running outside again - mostly for my mental health. I love getting fresh(ish) air (let's be honest, running in the city, the air is not always the best!). |
| 2015-02-20 9:19 AM in reply to: juniperjen |
Expert 1260 Norton Shores, MI | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by juniperjen Happy Friday everyone! So, planning to run at the gym at lunch. I was planning to do the run HR test but my ribs are sore this morning so it's probably best not to push the effort too hard today. The soreness had been clearing up quite nicely but between 'power stations' at swim and my trainer ride yesterday (very easy) I seem to have aggravated it. I am SO over winter. Today is frigid cold again - -16C as the daytime high. I realize it's February but it's way below average temperatures for this time of year. I really need to start running outside again - mostly for my mental health. I love getting fresh(ish) air (let's be honest, running in the city, the air is not always the best!). I am with you Jen. I ran the other day in -9F wind chill with snow blowing sideways and it was miserable. That afternoon an ad for a free 30 day pass to the gym down the street came across my facebook feed and I jumped on it. Tough to get in quality run training with the cold and we have been getting dumped on with lake effect snow off Lake Michigan. |
| 2015-02-20 9:21 AM in reply to: Ryan Mac |
Expert 1260 Norton Shores, MI | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Anybody have tune up races coming up? I am considering a 5K on March 7. I ran a trail 5K in November (my first standalone 5K) and it was incredibly painful. Just lung searing pain. It is funny how every race distance seems to be painful in one way or another whether its long or short. |
| 2015-02-20 10:36 AM in reply to: Ryan Mac |
Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by Ryan Mac Anybody have tune up races coming up? I am considering a 5K on March 7. I ran a trail 5K in November (my first standalone 5K) and it was incredibly painful. Just lung searing pain. It is funny how every race distance seems to be painful in one way or another whether its long or short.
I fear trail running. I would hit every root and come out with broken ankles. Just finished up a 1 hour run. Warmup for 15 minutes then run a 5K at Z3. Felt good. I haven't been able to play in that zone for 12 weeks. FTP test tomorrow! |
| 2015-02-21 1:39 PM in reply to: Ryan Mac |
Extreme Veteran 5722  | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by Ryan Mac Originally posted by GAUG3 That was my understanding when it came to establishing HR zones for the run. First 10 minutes and the heart rate is still climbing. I'm due for another FTP test since I'm done with my 12 week base plan. Next week starts 11 week build\peak\taper plan. In December, I did my first ever FTP test on the trainer since 90% of my workouts are on it. Not sure I did it "right". Right being did I go all out for 20 minutes? I actually think I was on the conservative side. Throughout the training, it was all HR in Z1 and Z2 rides. Some had 4x6x 3minute hardest gear @ 60-70 rpms HR in Z3 stuff. Not many though. Tell me about the critical power vs FTP and the 5 minute test. It is just another term to confuse you - I am only half kidding. Marc can likely explain this better than me, but CP 60 is essentially the same as your FTP or 60 minute power. The 5' and 20' test is used to calculate your CP60 or critical power. Basically, it makes corrections to your FTP (or CP60) based on how you perform each test. The different tests also provide some data as to what you need to work on to improve your CP60. Typically, the 5' test is around 120%FTP and 20' is around 95%FTP for somebody with all around fitness. If your 5' test came out to 110%FTP than your VO2 would definitely be an area to concentrate on to improve your FTP or another way to term it is 'raise the ceiling' to allow for the 60' power improvement. If your 20' test was not quite as good then working on longer efforts at FTP would be a better choice to raise FTP. Marc ran a power mentor group last year and goes through this thoroughly. Maybe he can provide a link to that when he pops in. We have what is known as an anaerobic work capacity (AWC) which contributes to a test, no matter the duration of the test. This AWC has to be factored when trying to estimate your 60min power from your 20min test. The problem is we all have different AWCs. So the formula of 95% of your 20' test makes assumptions about your AWC that may or may not be valid. If you have a large Anaerobic capacity, 95% will grossly over estimate your FTP. If you have a very small anaerobic capacity it may under estimate it. One of the reasons of the 5' all out, followed by the 20' test (in the same session) is to factor out the AWC as much as possible. The 5' and 20' tests done on separate days allow to measure both the AWC and your long term power. If this test is done properly, it is IMO, the most accurate. Where it becomes innaccurate is if you do one of the tests at 90% of your ability and the other at 100%. With the CP test you can then calculate the theoretical power you can hold for any duration, ie 30min, 45min, 1hr, 1hr15. In theory the value at 60min is the equivalent of your FTP. The super anal will say "you are not allowed to call it CP60" (although I do call it that). It's actually your 60min MMP (mean maximal power) Also, your CP is basically your power at lactate threshold, and again the super anal would call it MLSS or maxmimal lactate steady state which is the maximum power you can generate without lactate increasing. Zeroing in on your true CP will give you a better number to predict your race pacing. |
| 2015-02-21 4:15 PM in reply to: marcag |
Expert 1260 Norton Shores, MI | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by marcag Thanks Marc. Great explanation.Originally posted by Ryan Mac We have what is known as an anaerobic work capacity (AWC) which contributes to a test, no matter the duration of the test. This AWC has to be factored when trying to estimate your 60min power from your 20min test.The problem is we all have different AWCs. So the formula of 95% of your 20' test makes assumptions about your AWC that may or may not be valid. If you have a large Anaerobic capacity, 95% will grossly over estimate your FTP. If you have a very small anaerobic capacity it may under estimate it.One of the reasons of the 5' all out, followed by the 20' test (in the same session) is to factor out the AWC as much as possible. The 5' and 20' tests done on separate days allow to measure both the AWC and your long term power. If this test is done properly, it is IMO, the most accurate. Where it becomes innaccurate is if you do one of the tests at 90% of your ability and the other at 100%.With the CP test you can then calculate the theoretical power you can hold for any duration, ie 30min, 45min, 1hr, 1hr15.In theory the value at 60min is the equivalent of your FTP. The super anal will say "you are not allowed to call it CP60" (although I do call it that). It's actually your 60min MMP (mean maximal power)Also, your CP is basically your power at lactate threshold, and again the super anal would call it MLSS or maxmimal lactate steady state which is the maximum power you can generate without lactate increasing.Zeroing in on your true CP will give you a better number to predict your race pacing.Originally posted by GAUG3 That was my understanding when it came to establishing HR zones for the run. First 10 minutes and the heart rate is still climbing. I'm due for another FTP test since I'm done with my 12 week base plan. Next week starts 11 week build\peak\taper plan. In December, I did my first ever FTP test on the trainer since 90% of my workouts are on it. Not sure I did it "right". Right being did I go all out for 20 minutes? I actually think I was on the conservative side. Throughout the training, it was all HR in Z1 and Z2 rides. Some had 4x6x 3minute hardest gear @ 60-70 rpms HR in Z3 stuff. Not many though. Tell me about the critical power vs FTP and the 5 minute test. It is just another term to confuse you - I am only half kidding. Marc can likely explain this better than me, but CP 60 is essentially the same as your FTP or 60 minute power. The 5' and 20' test is used to calculate your CP60 or critical power. Basically, it makes corrections to your FTP (or CP60) based on how you perform each test. The different tests also provide some data as to what you need to work on to improve your CP60. Typically, the 5' test is around 120%FTP and 20' is around 95%FTP for somebody with all around fitness. If your 5' test came out to 110%FTP than your VO2 would definitely be an area to concentrate on to improve your FTP or another way to term it is 'raise the ceiling' to allow for the 60' power improvement. If your 20' test was not quite as good then working on longer efforts at FTP would be a better choice to raise FTP. Marc ran a power mentor group last year and goes through this thoroughly. Maybe he can provide a link to that when he pops in. |
| 2015-02-21 5:52 PM in reply to: marcag |
Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Thanks for the explanation. However, I did the 20 minute test before seeing this. I did one on the trainer on Dec 30th. It was whopping 191. Don't laugh. I just took 100% of it and plugged it in. Didn't know about the 95% rule. Today, I did the same test and setup just to keep it simple. It went up to 203. Now I will look into this 5min and 20min test. |
| 2015-02-21 6:29 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by GAUG3 Thanks for the explanation. However, I did the 20 minute test before seeing this. I did one on the trainer on Dec 30th. It was whopping 191. Don't laugh. I just took 100% of it and plugged it in. Didn't know about the 95% rule. Today, I did the same test and setup just to keep it simple. It went up to 203. Now I will look into this 5min and 20min test. And that's fine. If you do another 5' all out test in say 2 days, you can calculate a CP, AWC, your 60min number.. Golden Cheetah has a built in calculator. Edited by marcag 2015-02-21 6:30 PM |
| 2015-02-21 7:25 PM in reply to: marcag |
Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED I will do the the 5 minute test in a couple of days. Just a good warmup, high RPMS a few times then hammer hard for 5 minutes? |
| 2015-02-21 8:45 PM in reply to: GAUG3 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by GAUG3 I will do the the 5 minute test in a couple of days. Just a good warmup, high RPMS a few times then hammer hard for 5 minutes? So based on your 203 test I would guess your 5' will be round 230. I would start at 230, and if at 3' you think you won't make it, you are on track. If you feel it's under control, crank it up a bit. At 4' you close your eyes and hammer thinking, "hey, it's only 1 minute" Yes I would do a good 20min warmup, in the form of 10' easy, some 30' sprints, another 5' easy and go. |
| 2015-02-22 5:04 PM in reply to: marcag |
Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by GAUG3 So based on your 203 test I would guess your 5' will be round 230. I would start at 230, and if at 3' you think you won't make it, you are on track. If you feel it's under control, crank it up a bit. At 4' you close your eyes and hammer thinking, "hey, it's only 1 minute" Yes I would do a good 20min warmup, in the form of 10' easy, some 30' sprints, another 5' easy and go. I will do the the 5 minute test in a couple of days. Just a good warmup, high RPMS a few times then hammer hard for 5 minutes?
Is this the same calculator: http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/training/cycling-zone-calc.asp I was playing with the numbers. Interesting how the higher the 5 minute test is the lower the CP drops. I plan to do the 5 minute test tomorrow. |
| 2015-02-22 5:18 PM in reply to: GAUG3 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by GAUG3 s this the same calculator: http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/training/cycling-zone-calc.asp I was playing with the numbers. Interesting how the higher the 5 minute test is the lower the CP drops. I plan to do the 5 minute test tomorrow. Yes. Also notice, the bigger the 5' number the smaller the CP (as you observed), but the bigger the AWC. Exactly why the 95% rule is not as accurate. However the two tests have to be done at 100% |
| 2015-02-22 5:26 PM in reply to: Ryan Mac |
Veteran 286 Brisbane, Australia | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by Ryan Mac Anybody have tune up races coming up? I am considering a 5K on March 7. I ran a trail 5K in November (my first standalone 5K) and it was incredibly painful. Just lung searing pain. It is funny how every race distance seems to be painful in one way or another whether its long or short. I've got an Oly on March 15. I'm really looking forward to it as it is such a great race. I've done it 3 times before I think (maybe 4) with a best time of 2:37. It's an ocean swim normally, except if it is rough they move it to a canal. Long straight ride down a freeway with a small bit of hills at the start and end (out and back), then a run mostly flat, with a bit of a hill on each lap. I'm hoping to PR, as my training has so far been going really well. Even under 2:35 I'll be happy with, but I know it depends on the day. I've just come off my biggest run week since my marathon mid last year and am feeling pretty tired today. 49.3km for the week. I also did 4 sufferfest workouts this week - I've never done these before and I loved them. Used Golden Cheetah too - finally figured out how to work it, and it was good too. 2 more hard weeks to go to really dig a deep hole, then 1 week recovery heading into the Oly distance in mid-March. |
| 2015-02-23 8:48 AM in reply to: Ryan Mac |
Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED What HR zone do you run in during your 70.3 race? If you don't wear a monitor and go by RPE or pace, what HR do you think you are in?
|
| 2015-02-23 9:09 AM in reply to: GAUG3 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by GAUG3 What HR zone do you run in during your 70.3 race? If you don't wear a monitor and go by RPE or pace, what HR do you think you are in?
I actually go by HR in a race. I divide the run in 4 and try to go up around 3 beats per quarter. So I average 148 for the first quarter, 151 second, 154 third and then whatever is left in the tank. 148 is probably near the top of Z2 for me. This is my target, I usually go a little over it. Once my HR goes too high up for too long, it doesn't come back down to where it should be, even if I slow down. |
| 2015-02-23 1:35 PM in reply to: marcag |
Master 3058 South Alabama | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by GAUG3 I actually go by HR in a race. I divide the run in 4 and try to go up around 3 beats per quarter. So I average 148 for the first quarter, 151 second, 154 third and then whatever is left in the tank. 148 is probably near the top of Z2 for me. This is my target, I usually go a little over it. Once my HR goes too high up for too long, it doesn't come back down to where it should be, even if I slow down. What HR zone do you run in during your 70.3 race? If you don't wear a monitor and go by RPE or pace, what HR do you think you are in?
That is an interesting way to break down the run. Do you see much creep upward with warmer temps? I am 52, I think we are about the same age, and I would bet my HR at top of Z2 would be around 148. It has been almost 2 years since my last HIM. Looked back at race report for Galveston 70.3 and I made a note that HR was bumping up toward 180 over the last two miles of the run. Not surprisingly, those were the slowest miles of the whole run. May have overdone it a bit too early on the run. Also, thanks for the breakdown on the power info. Really interesting |
| 2015-02-23 3:13 PM in reply to: slornow |
Master 4119 Toronto Bronze member | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Hey - happy Monday, i think, everyone! So, it is week one of my Be Iron Fit half program. Seems do-able this week. Except that i still have soreness in my ribs. I am going to give swimming a try tonight and probably suck it up and go to the doctor tomorrow. Really, there's probably nothing she can do for it but I want make sure to get it checked out in case there's anything going on there. And then I may book a massage ... trying anything at this point. Still stupid cold - a semi reprieve from the bitter cold but we just got more snow instead. I am being optimistic that this is our last week of true actic air and we can go back to semi-regular winter after that (ie, stay in the normal temperature range) - plus, getting my daughter into her snow suit every morning is sucking the life out of me. She loves to go play outside when she's at daycare but getting her into it to leave is pure torture. And it sounds like it in our house ... sigh. It's no fun wrangling a sobbing, squirming toddler into a two piece snowsuit. Next year we are definitely buying a one piece. Marc, i know you're even more frozen than me, so i need to stop complaining ... |
| 2015-02-23 4:47 PM in reply to: slornow |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by slornow That is an interesting way to break down the run. Do you see much creep upward with warmer temps? I am 52, I think we are about the same age, and I would bet my HR at top of Z2 would be around 148. It has been almost 2 years since my last HIM. Looked back at race report for Galveston 70.3 and I made a note that HR was bumping up toward 180 over the last two miles of the run. Not surprisingly, those were the slowest miles of the whole run. May have overdone it a bit too early on the run. Also, thanks for the breakdown on the power info. Really interesting Yes, It is definitely higher in heat which is why HR in a race. It's more to set a nice smooth increase over the entire run distance. I find it hard to go by pace coming off the bike. I am a poor judge of pace in those conditions and if I over cook the first few kms, I am in trouble. My best HIM runs have been negative or even split. The key to a good HIM run is a gradual increase in pace. |
| 2015-02-23 7:53 PM in reply to: juniperjen |
Regular 135 Spokane | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by juniperjen Hey - happy Monday, i think, everyone! So, it is week one of my Be Iron Fit half program. Seems do-able this week. Except that i still have soreness in my ribs. I am going to give swimming a try tonight and probably suck it up and go to the doctor tomorrow. Really, there's probably nothing she can do for it but I want make sure to get it checked out in case there's anything going on there. And then I may book a massage ... trying anything at this point. Still stupid cold - a semi reprieve from the bitter cold but we just got more snow instead. I am being optimistic that this is our last week of true actic air and we can go back to semi-regular winter after that (ie, stay in the normal temperature range) - plus, getting my daughter into her snow suit every morning is sucking the life out of me. She loves to go play outside when she's at daycare but getting her into it to leave is pure torture. And it sounds like it in our house ... sigh. It's no fun wrangling a sobbing, squirming toddler into a two piece snowsuit. Next year we are definitely buying a one piece. Marc, i know you're even more frozen than me, so i need to stop complaining ... Have you followed the half program previously? How does it differ from the original Be Iron Fit full program? I followed the original last year loosely up to the 20 week point for my half iron race. It seemed to work ok for me from a duration point of view. I didn't really follow any intensity levels stated. I did have a difficult time figuring out my taper. How do you guys manage your training without a coach? Do you use programs such as this and learn what works and what doesn't? |
| 2015-02-23 7:53 PM in reply to: 0 |
Regular 135 Spokane | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED |
| 2015-02-23 8:32 PM in reply to: marcag |
Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by GAUG3 So based on your 203 test I would guess your 5' will be round 230. I would start at 230, and if at 3' you think you won't make it, you are on track. If you feel it's under control, crank it up a bit. At 4' you close your eyes and hammer thinking, "hey, it's only 1 minute" Yes I would do a good 20min warmup, in the form of 10' easy, some 30' sprints, another 5' easy and go. I will do the the 5 minute test in a couple of days. Just a good warmup, high RPMS a few times then hammer hard for 5 minutes?
You were close. 5 minute was 246. 20 minute was 203. Not sure what that means in terms of AWC. Now the CP dropped to 189. |
| 2015-02-24 11:50 AM in reply to: GAUG3 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Ryan Mac’s HIM Focus Group - CLOSED Originally posted by GAUG3 Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by GAUG3 So based on your 203 test I would guess your 5' will be round 230. I would start at 230, and if at 3' you think you won't make it, you are on track. If you feel it's under control, crank it up a bit. At 4' you close your eyes and hammer thinking, "hey, it's only 1 minute" Yes I would do a good 20min warmup, in the form of 10' easy, some 30' sprints, another 5' easy and go. I will do the the 5 minute test in a couple of days. Just a good warmup, high RPMS a few times then hammer hard for 5 minutes?
You were close. 5 minute was 246. 20 minute was 203. Not sure what that means in terms of AWC. Now the CP dropped to 189. It sounds like you are a person that would be better using something like 92-93% rather than 95. This is pretty typical. It also looks like you need to work more on your threshold than your VO2max, although there is probably lots of room to improve both. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK