jorge's winter cycling program (Page 7)

Goosedog - 2010-10-13 2:21 PM I've got the Kurt Kinetic Power Computer on the way.  I understand it has limitations, but for $50, I figured it might be better than nothing.  At some point, I seem to recall someone posted a spreadsheet that did something related to this computer that sounds useful.  If I'm remembering correctly, does anyone happen to recall this or have it available?  Thanks.

windandsurf - 2010-10-13 2:45 PM

Here you go.

http://www.kurtkinetic.com/documents/Power_Curves419.pdf

windandsurf - 2010-10-13 2:18 PM Jorge, can you answer a question about Functional Threshold (FT) as used in your power-based workouts?

A few days ago I did my first 20-min and 3-min. tests to calculate Critical Power (CP) for 60 min., per your instructions on your blog at
http://jorgepbmcoaching.blogspot.com/2008/11/how-to-calculate-your-critical-power.html

I then divided the difference between the total joules (between 20-min and 3-min), divided by the difference in time to get my Critical Power, let's call it "CP1" (because I'm too embarrassed to post the actual number :-)

Just for kicks, I also input the values into your spreadsheet at
http://www.mediafire.com/?3e6raoaffunb6bl
and got a different number (let's call it "CP2"), which is 20 watts lower than "CP1".  By the way, I got the same value for "CP2" using Golden Cheetah (if I recall correctly, it uses Dr. Skiba's formula).

Also, your spreadsheet gives a projected power for 60 min. (FTP) which is slightly higher in watts than CP2.

Which value should I use as my FT value for workouts, CP1, CP2, or FTP?

TIA,

windandsurf.

aswimr - 2010-10-13 9:45 PM Jorge,
I don't own a power meter and unfortunately it isn't in the budget this year. I do have a Fluid2 trainer though and I am wondering if I extrapolate the powerband for the trainer and convert that into mph, and subsequently the watts, would I be better off for the program or should I just use HR?

As an example, when I set up the spreadsheet with the formulas, 14mph=153.44 watts, 15mph=169.2 watts, and so on. Since a fluid2 trainer is supposed to simulate a power curve where 25mph=400 watts, I feel confident that my formula works, as I am less than 1% off in my calculations.

I am thinking the training approach for the winter would be better in watts than HR since there are so many things that can make the HR be different on any given day. Any thoughts?

JorgeM - 2010-10-13 4:56 PM

windandsurf - the formula on the blog is a simple way to calculate CP, the excel file uses a more robust formula which considers your weight, anaerobic work capacity, etc. if you check the R^2 it will tell you how accurate the model is (closer to 1.0 the better) hence for sure use the excel file as it will provide a better estimate for your critical power.

Now, I am guilty in creating confusion regarding the use of the terms CP and FTP. We tend to use those interchangeably when referring to the power we can generate for 60 min at a maximal effort. The reality is that FTP is the only definition for that; IOW FTP = 60 min max effort. Any time someone defines FTP of a 20 min test a 2x20 min test, etc are just estimates of FTP.

Critical Power refers to the estimate of what we could do for 60 min using Monod's critical power model. Hence CP = to the estimate obtained using 2 or more short maximal test (longer than 3 min, shorter than 30 min) and the result of that is Critical Power.

Anytime I refer to FTP on the plan I am really referring to CP and I will make an effort to communicate this clearly moving forward. So, anytime you see a session based on a percentage of Critical Power I am referring to the estimate each of us obtained using 2 tests; a 20 min and a 3 min maximal efforts.

windandsurf - the formula on the blog is a simple way to calculate CP, the excel file uses a more robust formula which considers your weight, anaerobic work capacity, etc. if you check the R^2 it will tell you how accurate the model is (closer to 1.0 the better) hence for sure use the excel file as it will provide a better estimate for your critical power.

Now, I am guilty in creating confusion regarding the use of the terms CP and FTP. We tend to use those interchangeably when referring to the power we can generate for 60 min at a maximal effort. The reality is that FTP is the only definition for that; IOW FTP = 60 min max effort. Any time someone defines FTP of a 20 min test a 2x20 min test, etc are just estimates of FTP.

Critical Power refers to the estimate of what we could do for 60 min using Monod's critical power model. Hence CP = to the estimate obtained using 2 or more short maximal test (longer than 3 min, shorter than 30 min) and the result of that is Critical Power.

Anytime I refer to FTP on the plan I am really referring to CP and I will make an effort to communicate this clearly moving forward. So, anytime you see a session based on a percentage of Critical Power I am referring to the estimate each of us obtained using 2 tests; a 20 min and a 3 min maximal efforts.

jsiegs - 2010-10-14 11:49 AM Jorge - just curious as I make plans for this program: on the outline, do the total hours per week include the optional workout(s)? 

JorgeM - 2010-10-14 1:09 PM

Yes it does

Plissken74 - 2010-10-14 10:45 AM
Jorge, yes you are!
This new Excel sheet brought a lot of confusion, at least in my head. Especially I see now amazing numbers which I can eventually trust for outdoor training. I explain you why.
I have 336w and 288w for 5mins and 20mins tests. This brings 272w FTP and this year I raced quite well with this numbers. My training zones are reasonable indoor, meaning I don't die doing the typical training sessions indicated by you and other books.
Now, if I apply these numbers to your new sheet with 68kg body weight I get an FTP of 290w which is higher than the 20mins test (done outdoor). Moreover, if I look at CP5, I see 330w which is lower than the test I did!
I think something must be reviewed in the formula because the risk is that with the new method, most of the people training indoor will be killed by the new table. I am pretty sure about that.
For example, now I am going to do an indoor 4x6mins 95% session and if I apply the 290w FTP, my girlfriend has to call the ambulance right after...I know the feeling of 275w...especially indoor.
For outdoor I can sustain better the effort, not meaning that the FTP is much different but for sure few watts more.
Anyway, being conservative IMHO is always a protection against burnout on the run in a HIM or an IM. so I keep 272w for indoor and outdoor analysis.
Finally, my opinion is that you should be very careful on suggesting such new table here in this thread. I prefer to keep the linear interpolation (I apply an exponential regression which works better, secondary approximation )

jsiegs - 2010-10-14 1:20 PM

Thanks....and "phew"[/QUOTE]

x2 I was having a freak out moment...

wbayek - 2010-10-15 9:40 AM I don't have a power meter or the extra $$ to get one.  Donation accepted if anyone here has too much, or a spare power meter.

Since I'll be on a trainer, and the wind/hills/temp/etc are no issue, isn't speed essentially the same as power if I put a cateye (or whatever) on my rear wheel?  In other words, on the trainer, 20 mph means I'm pulling watts today, and 20 mph means I'm pulling the same watts tomorrow and every day thereafter.

I know the actual power numbers won't be accurate, but I'm thinking I can use relative watt numbers based on speed and power programs, and then use my MPH to at least get relative power.

wbayek - 2010-10-15 8:40 AM I don't have a power meter or the extra $$ to get one.  Donation accepted if anyone here has too much, or a spare power meter.

Since I'll be on a trainer, and the wind/hills/temp/etc are no issue, isn't speed essentially the same as power if I put a cateye (or whatever) on my rear wheel?  In other words, on the trainer, 20 mph means I'm pulling watts today, and 20 mph means I'm pulling the same watts tomorrow and every day thereafter.

I know the actual power numbers won't be accurate, but I'm thinking I can use relative watt numbers based on speed and power programs, and then use my MPH to at least get relative power.

Donto - 2010-10-15 10:44 AM
This is basically what I do.  I have a Kurt Kinetics fluid trainer and made a spreadsheet that uses their mph to power formula to give me the appropriate mph ranges based on the CP test results.  So for example, I know what 70-80% FTP means in MPH, etc.  So if you have a fluid trainer this could be done too, I'm more than willing to share the spreadsheet.

BTW, the power numbers measured on a KK fluid trainer using a KK computer (which uses the mph to power formula) measured within the tolerances of a Powertap power meter, so using a spreadsheet method would be just as accurate.  The formula may or may not be exact for another fluid trainer (CycleOps, etc) but it should still be valid as any error would be constant.

JollyRoger - 2010-10-15 7:58 AM Just to make sure that I'm understanding things properly.....

The next two weeks are general "build-up" weeks to prep. for getting started on "the real thing" - correct?   I will be in Europe on business next week and won't have a bike but I'm hoping that my hotels will at least have gyms with bikes.

I don't have a power meter and will be using heart rate (Garmin 310xt).  Am I right in thinking that during the first "real" week we will be doing testing in order to establish our training zones?

Sorry to be such a newb about this stuff!

Thanks.

Donto - 2010-10-15 9:44 AM
This is basically what I do.  I have a Kurt Kinetics fluid trainer and made a spreadsheet that uses their mph to power formula to give me the appropriate mph ranges based on the CP test results.  So for example, I know what 70-80% FTP means in MPH, etc.  So if you have a fluid trainer this could be done too, I'm more than willing to share the spreadsheet.

BTW, the power numbers measured on a KK fluid trainer using a KK computer (which uses the mph to power formula) measured within the tolerances of a Powertap power meter, so using a spreadsheet method would be just as accurate.  The formula may or may not be exact for another fluid trainer (CycleOps, etc) but it should still be valid as any error would be constant.