Other Resources Challenge Me! » Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012 Rss Feed  
Moderators: the bear, kaqphin, tinkerbeth, D001, k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 33
 
 
2011-11-12 7:30 PM
in reply to: #3899617

User image

Expert
1192
1000100252525
Oak Creek, WI
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
windandsurf - 2011-11-12 1:59 PM

Here's Test Week!  (Be sure to enter your CP and 20 MP on Sheet 1, your guess for your 5 MP on sheet 3).

 

Enjoy!

(Please double-check for any errors, I think I proofed it)

Got my 20 min TT in today... That was a bit more difficult than expected... Ended up higher than I thought... Good news bad news i suppose... I guess that means the workouts get harder now...


2011-11-13 10:59 AM
in reply to: #3744433

Champion
9430
50002000200010010010010025
No excuses!
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
hopefully an easy spin tonight after my long run today and then all he!! breaks loose tomorrow with test week Yell
2011-11-13 3:03 PM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Royal(PITA)
14270
50005000200020001001002525
West Chester, Ohio
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
Preweek 2 completed, the pain is yet to come? Man today was tough!
2011-11-13 4:06 PM
in reply to: #3900361

Expert
691
500100252525
Cape Elizabeth, Maine
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
I am going to go thru the prep period again...I have and have had something wrong with my right leg, I have been getting lots of therapy.   The good news is riding doesn't aggravate it as much as running, but, I can't hold high power for a long time without it locking up/acting up, some of the hard riding is HTFU, but when you notice the differences in power between your legs on the bike, or when you walk up the flight of stairs but never fear, I am not giving up!...so test week will wait till week of Dec 1 for me.   Press on my friends.    
2011-11-13 4:35 PM
in reply to: #3744433

Veteran
139
10025
Surrey, BC
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
During Test week, are we recording, for those of us taking the HR route, the avg HR during the 30min test and establishing an new FT for the rest of the program?

Thanks
2011-11-13 5:57 PM
in reply to: #3744433


37
25
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

You re-test every month and adljust accordingly.  I followed HR plan last year,  my HR never really changed much  test to test but performance at the given HR seemed to improve. 



2011-11-13 9:41 PM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Regular
99
252525
Bartlett, IL
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
Another question about the HR plan 30 min test - if I start recording my HR at the beginning of the WU (like starting a normal workout), should I reset my HR monitor at the start of the actual test in order to get the average HR only during the 30 min test?  Or is it the average over the whole session, WU-MS-CD?  Thanks for the guidance!
2011-11-13 10:14 PM
in reply to: #3900495

Veteran
139
10025
Surrey, BC
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
mopeypat - 2011-11-13 3:57 PM

You re-test every month and adljust accordingly.  I followed HR plan last year,  my HR never really changed much  test to test but performance at the given HR seemed to improve. 



Thanks.


SEwantstobeFe - 2011-11-13 7:41 PM

Another question about the HR plan 30 min test - if I start recording my HR at the beginning of the WU (like starting a normal workout), should I reset my HR monitor at the start of the actual test in order to get the average HR only during the 30 min test? Or is it the average over the whole session, WU-MS-CD? Thanks for the guidance!


In order to adjust your FT, you only want the avg HR from the 30 min, main set, test.
2011-11-14 4:25 AM
in reply to: #3900719

User image

Extreme Veteran
532
50025
Northampton, UK
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

HR 30min test done!

There is a distinct possibility that I died at around the 25min mark and my body hasn't noticed yet!

I had reached week 13 of v3 of the cycling plan before v4 started so I have done the test twice before. Last time I did the test I averaged 20.85mph for the whole session with a HR of 178 for the 30mins. Today - 21.97mph with a HR of 173!

2011-11-14 4:49 AM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Master
2468
20001001001001002525
Muskego, Wisconsin
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

Good gravy my legs are cooked.  My avg. HR went up one beat from 158 at my last test to 159, avg. speed  19.7, cadence 73.

Here's my question.  I ride the trainer with a lot of tension and for these tests I usually push the big ring to make it hurt more.  Should I be doing this test at a higher cadence since I ride at a much higher cadence, or does it matter?  On the rode I usually ride at 90-95rpms.

2011-11-14 5:15 AM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Elite
7783
50002000500100100252525
PEI, Canada
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
20' test done, AP was 232w which is a bit lower than my best test last year but I'm happy with it considering the minimal hard training I've done on the bike lately.


2011-11-14 7:13 AM
in reply to: #3900803

Expert
691
500100252525
Cape Elizabeth, Maine
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
papson14 - 2011-11-14 5:49 AM

Good gravy my legs are cooked.  My avg. HR went up one beat from 158 at my last test to 159, avg. speed  19.7, cadence 73.

Here's my question.  I ride the trainer with a lot of tension and for these tests I usually push the big ring to make it hurt more.  Should I be doing this test at a higher cadence since I ride at a much higher cadence, or does it matter?  On the rode I usually ride at 90-95rpms.

 

73 seems too low if you ave 90-95 on the road.   Just tighten it to were there is zero slippage.    You can always do some bigger gear work on your hard intervals.

2011-11-14 11:21 AM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Expert
906
500100100100100
Prattville, AL
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
Week 2 Day 1 complete.... felt good!
2011-11-14 11:36 AM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Pro
3804
20001000500100100100
Seacoast, NH!
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
Quick question.  In the CP calculator spreadsheet, it says "interval 1, 3-5 mins" and "interval 2 12-20 mins".  Why is it 3-5 and 12-20 minutes?  Are we supposed to take the average power for mins 3-5 for the 5 min test and 12-20 for the 20 min test?  Seems weird to me...never used this method before.
2011-11-14 12:00 PM
in reply to: #3901314

User image

Extreme Veteran
590
500252525
Northern Virginia
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

jgerbodegrant - 2011-11-14 12:36 PM Quick question.  In the CP calculator spreadsheet, it says "interval 1, 3-5 mins" and "interval 2 12-20 mins".  Why is it 3-5 and 12-20 minutes?  Are we supposed to take the average power for mins 3-5 for the 5 min test and 12-20 for the 20 min test?  Seems weird to me...never used this method before.

There are 2 numbers the spreadsheet needs: the "short" interval (interval 1), and the "long interval" (interval 2).

Jorge's test last year was 3 min. for interval 1, this year it's 5 min. (whimper).

The long interval (interval 2) is 20 min., but it looks like the spreadsheet will allow for a 12-20 min. range.

Just input the average power for entire 5 min test in one field, and the average power for the entire 20 min test in another field, and you'll get your CP.

2011-11-14 12:54 PM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Expert
4953
200020005001001001001002525
Middle River, Maryland
Silver member
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
Day one from week one complete.  Dealing with a residual knee problem so I set my 100% @ 230 watts on the Expresso trainer (getting a Fluid 2 next week), which realistically is probably all my lack of fitness will allow for anyway.  Seems about right...my legs are trashed!


2011-11-14 1:49 PM
in reply to: #3900394

User image

Coach
10487
50005000100100100100252525
Boston, MA
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

Blueraider_Mike - 2011-11-13 4:06 PM I am going to go thru the prep period again...I have and have had something wrong with my right leg, I have been getting lots of therapy.   The good news is riding doesn't aggravate it as much as running, but, I can't hold high power for a long time without it locking up/acting up, some of the hard riding is HTFU, but when you notice the differences in power between your legs on the bike, or when you walk up the flight of stairs but never fear, I am not giving up!...so test week will wait till week of Dec 1 for me.   Press on my friends.    

be careful and follow your MD/PT advice in order to get your knee back to normal. even if you need to start the program later on, is better to let the leg heal 100% 1st and then get back at it. Good luck!

2011-11-14 1:52 PM
in reply to: #3900415

User image

Coach
10487
50005000100100100100252525
Boston, MA
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

Lukasz - 2011-11-13 4:35 PM During Test week, are we recording, for those of us taking the HR route, the avg HR during the 30min test and establishing an new FT for the rest of the program? Thanks

yes. once you have your avg HR you can use it to define your training zones and follow the workouts. Since your LTHR won't change much over the course of the plan I suggested a way to track improvements is by setting up your trainer in the very same way every time you test. That includes, the same resistance, tire pressure, cooling/ventilation, etc. that way, you'll see even when your LTHR remain fairly the same what improves is: 1) your speed at the same effort level and 2) your ability to go longer!

2011-11-14 1:58 PM
in reply to: #3900803

User image

Coach
10487
50005000100100100100252525
Boston, MA
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
papson14 - 2011-11-14 4:49 AM

Good gravy my legs are cooked.  My avg. HR went up one beat from 158 at my last test to 159, avg. speed  19.7, cadence 73.

Here's my question.  I ride the trainer with a lot of tension and for these tests I usually push the big ring to make it hurt more.  Should I be doing this test at a higher cadence since I ride at a much higher cadence, or does it matter?  On the rode I usually ride at 90-95rpms.

while newer trainer models are of better quality allowing for a better ride indoors resembling an outdoors effort, still, there is difference between one and the other. I find it more challenging to sustain power indoors and usually I am a bit lower. in terms of my cadence, I tend to decrease it a bit in order to maintain power, while outdoors I tend to increase it while decreasing torque. I do this naturally without thinking much about it.

That said, I would advice you to choose the cadence that 'feels' easier at a given power whether it is higher or lower. Still, be careful with forcing a lower cadence via a greater torque. On the trainer we tend to place more strain on our knees since we are not balancing ourselves on the the bike and since the trainer is static, it doesn't allows for a natural movement for the legs. So be careful and adjust accordingly!

2011-11-14 3:26 PM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Extreme Veteran
875
500100100100252525
Issaquah
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

I did the 20 min test this morning and basically broke it out like this

1st 10min: at a pace I thought was agressive, but still something I believed I could hold for the duration

Next 5 minutes: Up the pace if I could

Last 5 minutes: Hold on, or up it again if I could.

Basically my 20 minute test looks like a ramp, increasing power the entire time. At the end I was certainly done and don't think I could have given more.

I was reviewing my logs on Trainerroad this morning and I noticed someone else did the test this morning and nearly held the exact same power the entire 20 minutes. Their graph looks like a square wave...

Is there a preferred way to ride this? I chose to ride this slightly less aggressively at the beginning so that I knew I would have enough for the duration, and continued to increase when I thought I could spare the extra wattage. Or would it be better to shoot for something I think I may not be able to hold and if necessary let the power fall if I can't indeed hold it for the full 20 min?

2011-11-14 8:51 PM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Royal(PITA)
14270
50005000200020001001002525
West Chester, Ohio
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
I thought I was going to die on my test.  Definitely went easier than I dould have cause my legs had some ugly words for the process and I have uglier words for the thought of going back to PT as a patient.


2011-11-14 9:03 PM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Pro
3804
20001000500100100100
Seacoast, NH!
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

I have a similar question to that posted before.  Does my graph below show that I should have been going harder throughout??

 

2011-11-14 9:25 PM
in reply to: #3744433

User image

Extreme Veteran
487
100100100100252525
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
I'm sure this is somewhere, and I'm just not seeing it, but to calculate HR zones, we take our average from the last 20 min. of the test and multiply by .97 and that is 100%? Do I have that right?
2011-11-14 10:43 PM
in reply to: #3902194

User image

Pro
3804
20001000500100100100
Seacoast, NH!
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012
QueenZipp - 2011-11-14 9:51 PMI thought I was going to die on my test.  Definitely went easier than I dould have cause my legs had some ugly words for the process and I have uglier words for the thought of going back to PT as a patient.
. Haha... Nice work!
2011-11-15 4:24 AM
in reply to: #3902226

User image

Extreme Veteran
532
50025
Northampton, UK
Subject: RE: Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012

neweyes - 2011-11-15 3:25 AM I'm sure this is somewhere, and I'm just not seeing it, but to calculate HR zones, we take our average from the last 20 min. of the test and multiply by .97 and that is 100%? Do I have that right?

It was 97% of your average for the whole of the 30mins in v3, so I assume it's the same now.

New Thread
Other Resources Challenge Me! » Cycling program v4.0 2011-2012 Rss Feed  
 
 
of 33