SBR Utopia Season II - OPEN (Page 72)

No, not really.  I guess what I mean in my mind is that given my current training time available, age, injury prone, fatigue, etc., I do not think I could have done more.  Perhaps a sub 4:30 mary was maybe a best case scenario but still pie in the sky and unlikely on the mileage i ran?  I was never a runner so nothing to gauge that to.  I don't really know what "enough" run fitness is, and marvel at guys that consistently put down 40 mpw and still tri train without injury.  So maybe s/b was fun but run light?    But I would have thought based on my long runs (16-17 miles) and that IF, I'd be better for longer off the bike.

I guess my real concern was physiologically how I went from be hydrated (if indeed I was) to dehydrated (if indeed I was) so quickly.  First 7 miles were good then the quads were killing (just clarifying that)

Agreed that probably several factors went in there.

And BTW, I have no problem with people telling me their opinions that it was due to issues going in, rather than issues arising during, the race.  I can take it! 

ETA - the other big elephant in the room as Jason points out below is the drop in power in the second half of the ride in the places where power should be easy to generate, fast flats and a big hill

Chris - first of all congrats on finishing, getting to the line in the best shape of your life, and running a great fundraising campaign.  Well done on all three fronts.

The thing about your bike power numbers that stands out to me is that your VI was really high.  Especially in segments 3-5, and after that your power dropped off.  What makes that even more interesting is that your overall VI was 1.13, despite you the last 3 segments of your race being all below 1.08.  So theoretically, your VI after segment 5 may have been close to 1.20.

Was this part of the plan?  What was your anticipated VI for this course.  I know it's hard since it's a brand new course, but just wondering how close or how far away you were from your anticipated VI.

No, and that's what's been frustrating me (in addition to the run fitness issue).  I have had consistent problems this season (as you know, first with power) riding smooth where the terrain is variable.  You can see if it's a pure climb or pure flat, I can keep it close to 1.  Once you add significant rollers (and these were more a series of climbs than rollers, big ones), I can't seem to ride them very well.  Ascent during a long descent, well that just kills it.  Segment 3 was a 7 mile descent with two climbs, 4 was a series of long rollers, 5 was a 20 mile descent with 3-4 sections of climbing, incliding 1K of 10+%. 

Segments 6 on, the RPE seemed right but the power just wasn't there.  the high VI numbers on that terrain was nothing I hadn't seen in training, and did not affect later power efforts like this did. 

And no, not part of the plan, plan was to be closer to 1.05, so I was way off.  I just have no idea how to ride rollers/climbs on descents,  I shifted earlier, soft pedaled in (well, thought I did), but it just didn't work.  Also, earlier in the ride I may have got caught up in a little race fever and it got a bit out of hand

And thanks 

VI is what jumped out to me too.  How much time (and how many times) did you spend above threshold?

This would have been my next question, but I wanted to know what VI Chris was targeting first.  Given that he was way over his target, and possibly WAY WAY over his target after segment 5, and brought it down to 1.13, I would like to know what the power distribution was over the first 5 segments.  WKO can make a nice chart that breaks down the time spent in each 10 or 20 watt power ranges.  Such as 0-20, 20-40, all the way up to your max power.  I would be interested to see how much time was spent over say...220.  As well as how much time was spent coasting or below 50 watts which is essentially coasting.

Then my next question would be how Chris has handled his long rides.  I think we all know that picking a IF based on FTP for an IM bike leg is not the wisest thing to do.  It may turn out that .68 or .70 is what you should shoot for, but that should be based more on training rides than simply going off FTP, especially if FTP was extrapolated from a 20 minute test.  I know Chris listed out some of his long rides, with their associated NP, TSS and IF, but maybe we need to rehash those rides and their data and compare it to segments 3-5 of the race where VI was extremely high.  Again, it's not so much that the AP, NP, or VI were way off the charts for Chris' IMC performance, just that there was a huge spike in the middle of it. 

My "hunch" is that Chris was hitting his goal numbers up to segment 5...but how he got to those numbers put him in trouble.  Sort of like if I tried to do a 1 hour power test and shoot for 250 watts.  If I have 20 minutes of that hour where my NP is below 200, it's going to be extremely difficult, or almost impossible for me to bring my NP back up to 250 over the remaining 40 minutes.  So the higher your VI, essentially you have to lower your NP target.  Unless of course it's because you're doing a lot of coasting...which doesn't impact NP...AFAIK.  For example you could coast for 20 minutes, then ride at a NP of 250 for 40 minutes, and your 1 hour NP would be 250.  I think...I could be wrong.

Chris, just wanted to say I admire you for putting your info out there and seeking input.  Great discussion.  And....you have to join us at IM M-T

I agree with Fred's line of thinking.  The problems definitely started on the bike -- I think I recall you said that you were having trouble keeping the power up towards the end, but given your FTP, that really 'should' not have happened.  So even though the worst was yet to come, and even though your run goal might have been a little optimistic, I'd suggest, with others, that things were already slipping on the bike.

Number of calories on the bike doesn't seem crazy to me.  It's a little more than I take, but I'm much smaller than you.

Some questions (in addition to Fred's):  Did you take in any caffeine and if so was it an amount that you are used to?  How did you drink the water (not the Infinit, the water) -- infrequent long drags or frequent 'sips'?  Did you feel 'swollen' at all (like swollen fingers or other extremities)?

Something was causing you to pee out water that you should have been retaining.  Your problem could have been caused simply by the resulting dehydration, or they could have been caused by that in conjunction with whatever was causing you to pee rather than retain water (which could be a few different things -- I can elaborate on that if you want).

In any case ,I'm often skeptical when people blame their IM run meltdown on nutrition, but I do think that nutrition is the main culprit here, possibly exacerbated by run fitness.

I agree with Fred's implicit suggestion that by far the best way to figure this out is to do some very long training ('race simulation') days.  I've had nutritional issues in the past, and I think (knock on wood) I've got them figured out by first reading a lot to figure out what the possible causes (and therefore solutions) are, then experimenting on very long training days.  Long rides (like 100-150 miles) are a good place to start, but for IM you should also try to do something like what Fred suggested, IMO

So we're on the same page, what is your definition of "threshold"? 

Not sure if this info answers it, but the power zones data from TP is

2:16   0-164

2:31   165-223

1:02   224 - 267

11:13   268-311

2:25   312-355

:39   356-1000

I've got a little bit of homework to answer Fred's, Rusry's, Michael's and Jason's questions, and will do so tonight/tomorrow.

Just skimming over my long rides since June, they all match a decent Whistler profilem, and they are all in the VI 1.11 - 1.15 range.  It's something Shane and I were working on but the IM ride falls exactly in that range.  But NP on those rides was consistently in the 200-210 ish range

And to answer (maybe) one of Jason's big questions, I was only really monitoring 3s power, even though overall NP was displayed.  i don't recall actually looking at that latter number, but I never actually got a "this is your goal NP for the ride" plan, nor did I have a goal VI (other than to keep it low, but I don't really now how to moniter/affect that during the ride other than shifting early and not hammering up hills/rises during descents), nor did I have a target IF (other than as it relates to NP per section).   I only had goals for the particular terrain, which is why I lapped the ride where I did.   So I wasn't trying to ride "to" a number at any time other than trying to be within the proper power range depending if it was a roller section or a climb or a flat.  I just let the NP fall where it may.

The only time I recall chasing a number was on the flats where my RPE and HR told me I should be riding 200 or so and it was 170 (picking a number, but something in that range).

And now looking at nutrition, my goal was 300 +/- per hour, I didn't even really notice that what I took in was almost spot on, so I think that is not an issue.

Also another data point that may or may not be relevant was that there was something likely over 1 hour of coasting on that course with some long descents, with some minor ascents in the middle of those.  This was primarily segment 3 and 5 (which both have the highest VI 1.47 and 1.29, segment 4 less so but still high).

LOL, a little tough love needed      I am a bit embarrassed at the numbers given the work I put in, but what the heck.  If and when I do another IM I hope to be able to take these lessons and apply them.

^^^This is what caught my eye.

Thanks Chris for putting this out there for group dissection.  Between the discussions on BT and FB I'm learning how much I don't know about power.  My one hope is you don't see your race a a failure, and all of this after action analysis is for doing the next one better.

No more caffeine than usual, in fact a little less.  About 2/3 cup of coffee at 4 ish.  Water on course was frequent sips following Infinit, with the occasional additional sip.  Not long drags,  and no swelling

I would like to read your thoughts on this, this is what it felt like, like my body was not absorbing any liquids I was taking in, but passing them right through.

Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, slow down just a minute!!!

Yes, this. ETA: So we can ALL do the next one better.

PSA: IM Mont Tremblant The Second Annual SBR Utopia Smack-Down is still open for general registration....

Still looking over the more recent posts on Chris's race, but for here, NP will go down. Any time you ride harder than the current value it will go up. Any time lower and it will go down. The amount is different than it would be for AP. Zeroes don't drag NP down as quickly as for AP because of the higher order functions involved to put more weight on the harder sections, but they still have an effect. And for the targeting, testing guides training, training guides racing. So the tests would help to guide what to shoot for in training. And the training would help guide the racing. We know it's for IF and I think it's for VI as well. And more specifically in VI, how much harder and for how long can one handle. It's desirable to keep that down, but how much is necessary will depend on the person and be taken in context of the course.

Yeah, I've looked, but if I were to do one next year (big if), it would have to be a quick in and out, and MT is too far and too $$$ to do that.  I'd be limited to CdA or Whistler.  I've monopolized enough of Wendy's time that I can't make a 2014 IM our vacation.  I've promised her that she gets to pick the trip next year.... for years... then another option always comes up.  Sometimes just my idea, sometimes ours.  She wants to do Costa Rica 2014 so I need to plan around that.   I could do Cda or Whistler by flying out Thursday nite and returning Monday.

Even though we don't have kids it's still a balancing act

How appealing is something like Leadman, with the more swimming & riding, but less running? I wish they had something closer than Bend though. I want to do it, but that's a big trip for me.

Leadman is definitely a race that's on my radar.  Not in 2014, but on the bucket list for now.