Winter Cycling Plan Official Thread (Page 8)

I did my LT test today.  My average HR was 176.  Calculated zones as (using Jorge's formula on the web):

z1	120 or lower
z2	120 - 148
z3	148 - 167
z4	167 - 185
z5	185 or over

Does that look right?

I did the 20 minute power test today. These tests are always so tough. I was happy though that I beat my last FTP numbers by about 20 watts, so was very happy with the improvement. I've been focusing before this program and really just started using the PT as a training tool. Last year I didn't really put it to good use.

Thanks for the plan. I'm looking forward to using the PT as a really useful training tool over the loooong winter.

Did the 30 minute hr test today.  yes, that was a big ouch.  Had to talk myself through those last 10 minutes.  My average came out to 146 and I definitely felt like I left it all out there.

It seems that some of the posts on this thread imply that the higher the avg hr/ the more 'fit' you are.  I think there are many more things than fitness that go into where your LT is.  Am I right or way off on this thinking?

My husband just ran a sub-3 hour marathon 3 weeks ago and when he did his 30 minute test today his average was 133 .  I know you want to get your LT higher, but it seems relative to where you are rather than just generally HIGH.

On a side note: I just got accepted into the Boston marathon 2010 after missing my qualifying time by 15 seconds.  I sent them a letter, and just heard back yesterday.  So excited to be running Boston in April.  It is a huge dream of mine that I have been chasing for years!!

Did my test.  Fan was useless.  I ended up with a LT of 161 but I am not 100% sure I left it all out there.  For sure my limiter was my legs.  I was stuck between not wanting to sandbag it but not wanting to falter at the end.  I stayed pretty consistent throughout.  At least I know what to expect next time.

Congrats on the getting into Boston!

As for HR - someone correct me if I'm wrong, but HR is just a number as it correlates to each person and not to be compared to others.  Just because one person has a higher HR does not mean they are in better or worse shape than another with a lower HR and visa versa.

This user's post has been ignored.

This user's post has been ignored.

I believe consistent cadence is what is important.  When I did my test tonite I maintained about 89 - 92 cadence.  Here were my coaches instructions:
Keep the test even and at an effort that can be sustained the entire duration.

My wife and I are starting the program a week late.  We did Q1 last night - brought back fond memories of last winter!    It's great having her as a training partner this year while doing the workouts as we can encourage each other.  She's on the trainer and I'm doing it on rollers this year - that should be an adventure when I get really tired! 

when i read this i was thinking it would just need to be a route that is repeatable for the retests. 

not as in, i kicked some serious a$$!!???  cuz that applies too!  i want to come do my test on your computrainer!

Did mine outside, data from the 20-min TT portion:
HR 152 avg. (right at my LTHR per last field test)
Power 269 watts

Now I'll have to learn what that means.

Other stuff from that 20 minutes:
Avg. speed 24.85mph
Avg. Cadence 95rpm

OK did the 30m test this morning. Wupped me. 
My avg HR was 157, so *97% gives me ~152 for LTHR.
MY question is, do I use this number for a 100% LTHR value and recalculate the zones based on that?  I just got the HRM this month and so far have been using the simpler "Age Adjusted" model from the dashboard, where the LTHR number falls in the upper range of Z4.
Or do I used the max HR attained so far observer with the HRM, which is 164?

This user's post has been ignored.

This user's post has been ignored.

I'll agree to disagree.  If you really want to know if you're making improvements relative to a certain starting point, then you should try to mimic the test enviornment each time.  I don't have a PT, but my Tacx trainer gives me my power numbers.  Those numbers may not be as accurate as a PT, but they are consistent.  So if my first test is 270, and next is 280, I know there has been an improvement.

As soon as you add in the outdoors as a variable, no matter how consistent the route is, other things can intefere - road conditions, traffic, weather, etc.  I think the idea should just be to bury your head for 20 minutes and suffer...without any distractions.

This user's post has been ignored.

Edited by trotpntbll 2009-11-11 1:31 PM

This user's post has been ignored.

the point to my post was not advice whether to do it inside or outside, it was simply to say that if he does it outside, picking a course that is repeatable would be his best shot to measure improvement (meaning not picking a course with a stop light where he may hit the light differently the next time he tests).

i think Fred has a great post above about the limitations of both.

I definetly agree that indoor, as outdoor testing, has it's limitations.  However, my point was that if you want the most repeatble environment, then indoor is going to trump outdoor.

1. It is not a real-world test. ie; none of race or triathlons indoors.
The point of this initial test is to see where you stand for beginning of the winter training plan - I'm not looking at it as anything more than that. 
2. The sweat/heat of indoor trainier riding is not like that of the outdoors.
3. There are variables that affect your performance on the trainer as well... fatigue, illness, training load etc.
Agree, but the point of testing with power is to compare watts to watts.  If you just don't have it one day, then testing indoors or outdoors is not going to help you.
4. Trainer riding is fundamentally different than riding outdoors.
Maybe so, but for the sake of this 20 minute test, you're not changing positions, compensating for road conditions, etc.  You'll bury your head for 20 minutes, and at most you may change gears once or perhaps twice. 

I'll stand by my initial point, that for the most repeatable results, you'll want to test indoors.  That said, for those who can train all year round outside, it makes a lot of sense to be able to test outside - I just think it still allows for more variable factors.



As to this statement, I think the fact that we will test 3-4 times over the course of the program, you'll definetly see a curve in improvement if only by 3-4% at a time.  During last year's program I started out testing at 270, and my final test was at 297 - but I went up in increments of 3 to 4% each test.  I saw the progress + I knew I had limited (but not eliminated) outside variables by testing on the trainer.

agreed you are able to eliminate variables fairly easily if not more so on the trainer.  but in my mind i always thought the primary purpose of the test (at least the initial one) was to establish your baseline fitness to compute your zones to train in, whether it's your watts or HR zones.  so if it were me, and i was going to do 95% of my workouts on the road, i would want to do my test on the road, so it was a more realistic match for setting up my zones for what i'll be doing my workouts in.  If the purpose of the test was solely to gauge improvement, then i would do all the tests on the trainer regardless of if all the workouts were outside.   Jorge could say the difference between the watts/HR zones you'd get indoor/outdoor is insignificant...i'm not sure...just stating what seems to make sense to me.  Nothing to back it up though.

i am planning to do 100% of my workouts on the trainer, therefore it makes the most sense to me to do my testing on the trainer and have my zones established from that.

Q2 done tonight....follwed the HR zones pretty well.  Starting to get the hang of this biking thing!!!

Agreed - that's why I said this.



Did my test tonight.  283 Watts Avg, 171 HR.  This is down compared to March where I was 297 watts with 166 HR, but I haven't been doing much on the bike for the past 2 months so I can't say I'm disappointed.

Oh...and I so hate these tests.  They just plain suck.  PennState, you can keep the 1 hour test.  I've zero interest in suffering like this for a whole hour.  Jorge's back to back 20min suffferfest later in the program is more than enough for me.

Week 2, Workout 2 done.  I liked stepping up the intensity each 10' rep.  Tough, but in a good way.  Great session.