The "I should have left the credit card at home" thread

Lumen

ROK ON wrote: »

Just curious - do you have to go back on the hoods/drops to change gear/brake. If so, what do you lose in terms of aero benefit each time that you have to do this?

Proper aerobars are used with bar-end shifters.

Generally you would only brake if you're trying to slow down.

blorg

If you have clip-ons it is a bit of a hassle moving over to shift (and you will probably want to shift frequently enough) but you get pretty adept at it. Generally you just pop your right hand over quickly and do it on the hoods. You won't need to shift the other side. I can certainly appreciate how nice it would be to have the shifter right on the end of the bars.

I don't think I braked at all on the club 25 which is the same course we are doing Monday- I did have to get off the aerobars down into the drops to go around the roundabout halfway though. That would have been the only point I stopped pedalling I think. There are time trials where you might have to brake, if a descent and sharp corner is involved.

The bars I have I borrowed from Daymobrew- they are probably short enough as it is but I think I may get slightly shorter ones (stubbies?) so I can keep my saddle position the same- I am not sure it is a great idea moving that forward, putting me in a different position to the one I do most of my cycling in. I find them very comfortable BTW, I didn't get out of them at all for the TT and did 150km mostly on them last Saturday no problems.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

The bars I have I borrowed from Daymobrew- they are probably short enough as it is but I think I may get slightly shorter ones (stubbies?) so I can keep my saddle position the same- I am not sure it is a great idea moving that forward, putting me in a different position to the one I do most of my cycling in.

You probably don't need stubbies but properly fitted aerobars.

On Steve Hogg's bike fit video he uses the Profile Stryke's to demonstrate fitting for a non-triathlete, i.e. someone who doesn't always train and race on aerobars and therefore ought to maintain their normal seating position.

ROK ON

blorg wrote: »

If you have clip-ons it is a bit of a hassle moving over to shift (and you will probably want to shift frequently enough) but you get pretty adept at it. Generally you just pop your right hand over quickly and do it on the hoods. You won't need to shift the other side. I can certainly appreciate how nice it would be to have the shifter right on the end of the bars.

I don't think I braked at all on the club 25 which is the same course we are doing Monday- I did have to get off the aerobars down into the drops to go around the roundabout halfway though. That would have been the only point I stopped pedalling I think. There are time trials where you might have to brake, if a descent and sharp corner is involved.

The bars I have I borrowed from Daymobrew- they are probably short enough as it is but I think I may get slightly shorter ones (stubbies?) so I can keep my saddle position the same- I am not sure it is a great idea moving that forward, putting me in a different position to the one I do most of my cycling in. I find them very comfortable BTW, I didn't get out of them at all for the TT and did 150km mostly on them last Saturday no problems.

BTW, what was your time in the club TT?

ROK ON

Giro D'Italia 2009 Overall/Pink Bib Shorts (TwistGel Insert)

niceonetom

Did you win the Giro?

Lumen

ROK_ON, I think the flag on the leg technically constitutes a failure according the spirit of Rule 17 (ii), but a greater concern is - what jersey will you wear with them?

Also, you'll probably need a "sack and crack" if you're planning to wear these in the wet.

ROK ON

@Niceone - didnt win the Giro, but I work for an Italian firm - does that count. It feels that every day I work with them that I am winning somethng!!!
@Lumen, I actually have the matching Giro leaders jersey.

blorg

ROK ON wrote: »

BTW, what was your time in the club TT?

1:06:25 in the club TT, on my Litespeed with aero bars- not great but enough to win my group (very bad conditions and turnout was low.)

1:03:53 in the Boards TT, same course in better conditions on my fixed Giant Bowery with aero bars.

Raam

blorg wrote: »

1:06:25 in the club TT, on my Litespeed with aero bars- not great but enough to win my group (very bad conditions and turnout was low.)

1:03:53 in the Boards TT, same course in better conditions on my fixed Giant Bowery with aero bars.

What was the wind like for both?

blorg

Raam wrote: »

What was the wind like for both?

Headwind both ways Seriously, I think it was like that for the first one, it changed at some point out on the course. The second one it was a strong enough cross wind. I paced myself better on the Boards one, found it substantially easier and lower average HR despite going faster. I think I could pace myself better yet though.

Lumen

blorg wrote: »

I paced myself better on the Boards one, found it substantially easier and lower average HR despite going faster. I think I could pace myself better yet though.

What was your average HR?

On Sat night (dry run) I did 1:11/155bpm/223W. On Monday (boards TT) I did 1:09/168bpm/246W.

I therefore think that every additional 10W is worth a minute but costs 6.5bpm, and I could therefore equal your time if only I could keep my HR at 201bpm.

Diarmuid

Lumen wrote: »

I therefore think that every additional 10W is worth a minute but costs 6.5bpm, and I could therefore equal your time if only I could keep my HR at 201bpm.

Do you know your HR @ Lactate Threshold? It's at least 168

Lumen

Diarmuid wrote: »

Do you know your HR @ Lactate Threshold? It's at least 168

AFAIK, without blood tests the best way to get threshold is from a 1hr TT. The middle 60min period from my monday TT was 244W/169bpm (although peak 60min was 247W), so my best guess right now is around 250W/170bpm. Must try harder.

Chips Lovell

My avg HR for the TT was 185bpm:eek:

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

My avg HR for the TT was 185bpm:eek:

+ + =

niceonetom

Ok, so were not even pretending to try to stay on topic. Good.

My avg BPM was 176, though I did spend a fair bit of time over 180. Probably a mistake.

So, threshold... I thought the only way to get a good accurate idea of that was through lab testing, but Lumen, you say it can be estimated for a TT? Is it simply the highest HR you can sustain for an hour? or is it more complicated than that?

Lumen

niceonetom wrote: »

Is it simply the highest HR you can sustain for an hour?

As I understand it, yes.

Since if you go any higher you'll accumulate lactic acid and be forced to go slower.

ROK ON

Lumen wrote: »

As I understand it, yes.

Since if you go any higher you'll accumulate lactic acid and be forced to go slower.

SO, to calculate this, one needs to go as fast as they can, until they actually start slowing down due to LA buildup? SO no matter how fast one is going, push harder to see if you an go faster - is this correct?

If so, I must try it, as I have never ever pushed myself that hard previously. I guess that once you get past the pain, and the endorphins kick in, that it must be fun ( in an S&M sort of way).

niceonetom

@tonto

You'll be fine. Probably.


Ok, so it turns out my threshold is about 8 bpm higher than i thought it was, which means I've been going way too easy on myself while training*. Good to know.


*I still feel a bit uncomfortable using that term.

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

+ + =

Heart attacks are for wimps.

EDIT: You should probably replace the booze bit. I'd say I'm probably one of the most abstemious drinkers on here. Stick a cheeseburger in there instead.

Lumen wrote: »

As I understand it, yes.

Since if you go any higher you'll accumulate lactic acid and be forced to go slower.

OK, what does this mean for me, Dr Science? Because I was definitely forced to go slower in the latter half of the TT on Monday. So is my threshold really around 185bpm? Or is it actually lower because I was forced to slow down a bit? Or would it indeed have been higher if I hadn't slowed down? Because it does seem a bit high, given my max HR is 193bpm

Lumen

el tonto wrote: »

So is my threshold really around 185bpm? Or is it actually lower because I was forced to slow down a bit? Or would it indeed have been higher if I hadn't slowed down? Because it does seem a bit high, given my max HR is 193bpm

ROK ON wrote: »

SO, to calculate this, one needs to go as fast as they can, until they actually start slowing down due to LA buildup? SO no matter how fast one is going, push harder to see if you an go faster - is this correct?

In a 40km TT, you'll probably have a lowish HR right at the start, and max HR right at the end, but otherwise constant. By using the average HR you get a good idea of your threshold, but you could always take the average from the middle bit if your TT lasts over an hour.

If your HR is jumpy you need to work on keeping the effort more steady. I reset the lap timer on my Garmin after each 10km, which enabled me to keep track average power (you could use HR) over that sector and thus stay focused on a short term goal. As it turns out I probably could have gone a bit harder, but I figured that undershooting would encourage me to try harder next time, whereas overshooting would result in suffering and TT-aversion syndrome.

With a bit of practice you should get a better understanding of your maximum steady-state effort. Weekly TTs FTW!

edit: Tonto, to your question "So is my threshold really around 185bpm?", the answer is "I don't know - do it again, and properly this time!" :pac:

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

edit: Tonto, to your question "So is my threshold really around 185bpm?", the answer is "I don't know - do it again, and properly this time!" :pac:

Well, it was consistantly over 180bpm, at least any time I looked. So, it wasn't like I started out at 170 and it got steadily higher.

blorg

175 average the first time, 170 average on the Boards one. My new max is 204 (reached that in the final uphill sprint in the race I won.) I kept it lower at the start of the Boards TT which I think helped but it was pretty irregular overall and majorly dropped off towards the end. I did the club 10 mile at a 185 average.

FrankGrimes

I think another decent way of getting an idea of your threshold is to look at your distribution chart in the Training Peaks WKO+ software (2-week trial here). If you download data for a good few sessions and set the graph to 10 unit increments, you should be able to identify where the biggest drop-off occurs from one bar to the next - that's a reasonable indicator of your threshold over a longer period (i.e. it's the bar before the drop-off).

That'll help to get a feel for whether or not your threshold over a 40km TT was above or below your longer term threshold. E.g. my heart rate monitor was going on and off intermittently on Monday but when it was on it was generally between 160 and 170 bpm and as I was feeling a bit wrecked the legs just couldn't do enough work to keep it at 170bpm. So taking a reading from that would give a threshold that's lower than my real threshold. On ROK I think I averaged 170-175bpm over just under 6 hours and my longer term distribution chart shows that my threshold is around that. So looking at both makes me think on a good day I should be able to sustain 180bpm for an hour and I'll push towards that on next time I do a 40km TT. Just looking at a 40km TT threshold in isolation would only be giving me half that picture.

blorg

Here are some HR charts for recent races I've done, any insight or comments much appreciated. Note on the club 25 I went over 180 right at the start, I think this was a bad mistake I paid for later. Kept it down on the Boards one and I think that worked, although I really lost it in the last 10km. Also included the road race I won, 204 at the end of that sprint! Note the end of the club 10 is around where speed peaks, I just didn't stop the computer.

Lumen

FrankGrimes wrote: »

On ROK I think I averaged 170-175bpm over just under 6 hours and my longer term distribution chart shows that my threshold is around that.

AFAIK, not even Lance can ride at threshold for six hours. It's just not possible. Either your HRM is faulty or you're underestimating your max HR. IMO those distribution charts are only useful if you're racing.

There is a chart in one of my training books (probably Training and Racing with a Power Meter) indicating what % intensity you can sustain for different length efforts. Anything over 3 hours is well down (something like 70% power, off the top of my head).

FrankGrimes wrote: »

So looking at both makes me think on a good day I should be able to sustain 180bpm for an hour and I'll push towards that on next time I do a 40km TT. Just looking at a 40km TT threshold in isolation would only be giving me half that picture.

I think 180bpm is a good target to aim for.

There is no "40km TT threshold". There's just threshold. Your body doesn't know that you're doing a 40km painfest, it either gets rid of the lactate or it doesn't.

As I understand it the basic physiological (rather than psychological) limitation on continuing to cycle at threshold for over an hour is fuelling - you deplete your glycogen stores then bonk. If you have years of endurance training you can defer this by improved fat burning, but not for long, and there's a limit to what you can take on board energy-wise since AFAIK your digestive system shuts down during intense efforts.

Disclaimer: metabolic processes are a bit complicated, and I don't pretend to understand them in the slightest.

ROK ON

Lumen wrote: »

AFAIK, not even Lance can ride at threshold for six hours. It's just not possible. Either your HRM is faulty or you're underestimating your max HR. IMO those distribution charts are only useful if you're racing.

. . .

I think 180bpm is a good target to aim for.

OK, now I am very confused. IIRC, when on spins with you in the past you have often said to me that I am pushing too hard on the climbs, and have asked me what my HR is (usually in the 175-185 range). If I understood you then, I should aim for a lower HR (say 165-170 range), on the basis that it is more sustainable for a long ride with many hills. The burning a mtch concept.
Now you say that 180 is a good target - but for what? Treshold power, or a 40kk TT?
Any spin that I have been on my avg HR is usually 145-155? Does this imply that I am simply not pushing hard enough on the downhill parts of the course?

As an aside, you really are going to have to go back to college to study for PhD. in sports science/physiology. Think about it if Mr Skeff can take a few nixers fixing bikes, I am sure that you could turn a shilling or two dispensing training advice to fat freds like me.
I would willingly open my CREDIT CARD for that. Back on topic again.;)

Nietzschean

i think he means 180 for a TT, its not very sustainable all day...though i do find my HR tends to go up on big descents not down...

Diarmuid

According to Joe Friel a good way to get you HR @ LT is to warm up very thoroughly, then aim to do an all-out-sufferfest for 30 minutes and get the average HR for the last 20mins. You should have felt that you gave it your all and couldn't have done better. It might take you a few attempts (not on the same day) to get the pacing right though.

You should be able to keep this HR for one hour but it's very difficult and generally only done in a race scenario.

I've found that I get really good gains in training, doing 2 (or 3) intervals of 15-20min at this effort or just below it. Generally you have to do this on your own too which makes it harder.

kenmc

Nietzschean wrote: »

hough i do find my HR tends to go up on big descents not down...

Bloody scaredy chicken!

Lumen

ROK ON wrote: »

OK, now I am very confused. IIRC, when on spins with you in the past you have often said to me that I am pushing too hard on the climbs, and have asked me what my HR is (usually in the 175-185 range). If I understood you then, I should aim for a lower HR (say 165-170 range), on the basis that it is more sustainable for a long ride with many hills. The burning a mtch concept.
Now you say that 180 is a good target - but for what? Treshold power, or a 40kk TT?
Any spin that I have been on my avg HR is usually 145-155? Does this imply that I am simply not pushing hard enough on the downhill parts of the course?

A time trial and a hilly training spin are different beasts. For training, it is important to get the right balance between training stress, training frequency and recovery time, but also it depends what you're training for.

If you can throw some hard hill efforts into a 100km endurance run that's fine provided that you're not going to need 3 days off the bike to recover.

If you're training properly you should be on your bike almost every day, even if only for a recovery ride, and you'll have to become more strict about metering our your efforts. If you're doing interval training you must have the freshness to put in hard efforts or you won't get the benefits.

Raam has a coach and a training plan (triggered by a recent seriousness infection), and he's not even allowed to race Freds on his way to work for fear of using up his allowance.

If you're only training twice a week you're not training optimally anyway, so just do whatever feels good.

FrankGrimes

@Lumen - yeh, your questioning those figures made me try harder to remember the ROK readings. I don't have the data to hand but will check later but I think my ROK average HR was actually around 155-160bpm, not 170bpm. First time I did a 40km TT my avg HR was 167bpm so that's what I'm regarding as my threshold HR in practice and I think I was probably overestimating things by about 10bpm.

@Nietzschean - what does your HR go from and to on a descent? Much as I try to work hard on slight downward slopes to keep the power output up, on a long proper descent the speed is so high I just can't pedal fast enough to keep power output high so I end up coasting much of the way and HR would drop to around 120 or even lower depending on the length of the descent. Are you sure your HR really does drop? I know the adrenaline might add a few beats but would be mad to feel your heart is doing more work going downhill than uphill.

ROK ON

@ Lumen. Thanks for that. clears it up. I think for the moment I will stick to racing freds.

Diarmuid

blorg wrote: »

Here are some HR charts for recent races I've done, any insight or comments much appreciated. Note on the club 25 I went over 180 right at the start, I think this was a bad mistake I paid for later. Kept it down on the Boards one and I think that worked, although I really lost it in the last 10km. Also included the road race I won, 204 at the end of that sprint! Note the end of the club 10 is around where speed peaks, I just didn't stop the computer.

Did you warm up well before each TT, were you sweating at the start line already? The pacing in the 10 looks good, started out not too high and upped the intensity after 3k. On the 25 the HR seems very jagged. Why was that? Was it due to the course?

ROK ON

[quote=FrankGrimes;61462859
@Nietzschean - what does your HR go from and to on a descent? Much as I try to work hard on slight downward slopes to keep the power output up, on a long proper descent the speed is so high I just can't pedal fast enough to keep power output high so I end up coasting much of the way and HR would drop to around 120 or even lower depending on the length of the descent. Are you sure your HR really does drop? I know the adrenaline might add a few beats but would be mad to feel your heart is doing more work going downhill than uphill.[/quote]

From observation of my own effort, I would tend to agree. There comes a time on most long descents that it makes no sense to pedal and push hard - difficult to see how HR could rise in those conditions. However a technical descent on bad roads with many hairpins and a lot of pothols, sheep and shhep crap on the road. Then maybe yes.

blorg

ROK ON wrote: »

Now you say that 180 is a good target - but for what? Treshold power, or a 40kk TT?

Any spin that I have been on my avg HR is usually 145-155? Does this imply that I am simply not pushing hard enough on the downhill parts of the course?

Again I think he means a 40km TT here, where you are attempting to absolutely murder yourself for an hour and have nothing left at the end for any more riding. Longer stuff you would want to do slower.

There is no point pushing on a downhill, you should push up the hills and use the downhills to recover. This is because of the aerodynamic effect, there is less air resistance going up so you get more for your effort. Joe Friel advises this even for time trials BTW, harder up and ease off down.

There is also a point at which pedalling becomes inefficient as it disturbs the airflow; also in a proper aero position on a road bike you cannot pedal. The key to a fast descent down a steep gradient is a quick (pedalling) acceleration over the summit of the hill, sustained hard for the initial seconds of the descent to get up to speed as quickly as possible and then getting as aero as possible. This presumes sufficient gradient and lack of headwind of course.

Raam

Lumen wrote: »

Raam has a coach and a training plan (triggered by a recent seriousness infection), and he's not even allowed to race Freds on his way to work for fear of using up his allowance.

I suppose I should point out that none of that is actually true.

blorg

@Nietzschean - HR rising on a descent, presuming you are not riding a fixie, is probably a flapping jersey interfering with your heart rate monitor. Are you even pedalling when this happens?

Lumen

@Frank, one more thing, since you have a powermeter (ish). My average power on a 3-4 hour hilly "training" spin is usually around 180-190W, if I'm on my own and going at a decent pace. My FTP would appear to be around 250W, which gives me "Coggan" zones of up to 190W for endurance and 190-225W for tempo.

I realise now that almost all of my riding until recently was at endurance pace, and that I need to focus on shorter tempo rides to improve faster. I'm therefore committed to a strategy of "tempo commuting" where I try and spend an hour a day with normalised power over 200W, and I'll use the longer rides in the mountains for some easy endurance pace with a few short hill efforts.

Frank, according to my rule of thumb and your recorded FTP you should be able to do a 40km TT in around 1:04 with some aerobars and no hangover. This would be bloody impressive given your lack of cycling history. If you can convert your theoretical performance into reality you may be able to knock Scott off his perch as "most epic newbie of 2009".

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

I suppose I should point out that none of that is actually true.

Sandbagger.

blorg

Diarmuid wrote: »

Did you warm up well before each TT, were you sweating at the start line already? The pacing in the 10 looks good, started out not too high and upped the intensity after 3k. On the 25 the HR seems very jagged. Why was that? Was it due to the course?

I warmed up most for the Club 25. Note the HR scale on this is actually quite a small range so it is maybe not as jagged as it looks. It is a rollling course, there is elevation data in there. The Boards 25 I did on a fixed gear, not so warmed up, but took over 2:30 out of my time. I think a lot of this was thanks to consiously trying to keep my HR low for the first 20km. It is genuinely a lot choppier though, I felt I was not putting very much into the downhill bits due to the fixed wheel. Towards the end I was losing it, I made a few extra efforts to pass people earlier on (the peaks over 180 are all overtaking) while I think I should have just maintained pace and gone past them slower.

FrankGrimes

blorg wrote: »

Here are some HR charts for recent races I've done, any insight or comments much appreciated. Note on the club 25 I went over 180 right at the start, I think this was a bad mistake I paid for later. Kept it down on the Boards one and I think that worked, although I really lost it in the last 10km. Also included the road race I won, 204 at the end of that sprint! Note the end of the club 10 is around where speed peaks, I just didn't stop the computer.

I'll defer to Lumen for the more scientific analysis but I think the general view is that you shouldn't just look at the overall average to calculate your threshold: you should also look at the pattern of the line graph to understand how much time you spent above and below that average. A spike early in the workout can lead to a drop-off later in the session (as one of your graphs shows). Removing that spike and keeping a steadier level would likely decrease the rate of drop-off later in the workout, thereby increasing the overall average. Guess that's a long winded way of saying an early spike can really cost ya. But either way, from looking at your charts it seems your threshold HR is in the 170-175 ballpark.

Nietzschean

blorg wrote: »

@Nietzschean - HR rising on a descent, presuming you are not riding a fixie, is probably a flapping jersey interfering with your heart rate monitor. Are you even pedalling when this happens?

My HR tends to rise if i go between alot of bends and so am pedaling @ 120rpm between them like on the luggala descent, or just out of some form of panic doing 84km/hr down from djouce afraid my tire will blow up... So normally my HR goes up on steep inclines/tight corners but like everyone else if i'm just lightly spinning or on a moderate descent it tends to drop...

Nietzschean

kenmc wrote: »

Bloody scaredy chicken!

Yep thats mostly it, 4 punctures while >60km/hr in the past few months will do that to you

Diarmuid

Nietzschean wrote: »

Yep thats mostly it, 4 punctures while >60km/hr in the past few months will do that to you

That would do it all right. You might want to look into why you are getting so many though. Doesn't sound normal to me.

Nietzschean

Diarmuid wrote: »

That would do it all right. You might want to look into why you are getting so many though. Doesn't sound normal to me.

went through a spree on my previous tyres, seems to mostly have been it, only one on the new set.... mind you I have discovered ultremo's seem to have horrific grip in wet which helps my HR stay nice and high!

FrankGrimes

Lumen wrote: »

@Frank, one more thing, since you have a powermeter (ish). My average power on a 3-4 hour hilly "training" spin is usually around 180-190W, if I'm on my own and going at a decent pace. My FTP would appear to be around 250W, which gives me "Coggan" zones of up to 190W for endurance and 190-225W for tempo.

I realise now that almost all of my riding until recently was at endurance pace, and that I need to focus on shorter tempo rides to improve faster. I'm therefore committed to a strategy of "tempo commuting" where I try and spend an hour a day with normalised power over 200W, and I'll use the longer rides in the mountains for some easy endurance pace with a few short hill efforts.

Frank, according to my rule of thumb and your recorded FTP you should be able to do a 40km TT in around 1:04 with some aerobars and no hangover. This would be bloody impressive given your lack of cycling history. If you can convert your theoretical performance into reality you may be able to knock Scott off his perch as "most epic newbie of 2009".

It's probably getting dangerous for me to quote figures without having the data in front of me cos I've been wrong already today but I have to admit that I only adhere to/believe in the recommended approach to training in levels to a certain degree. I basically only have the discipline to work in one of two modes:

1. Pushing really hard: I do this in TTs (well, all 2 I've ever done ) and when doing hill sprint intervals (up Stocking Lane or Edmonstown Road a few times). Generally do those hill intervals at around 170bpm and at I'd guess 320-350w.

2. A 'Decent Sustainable' Pace: this is what I do in sportives and long training rides. There's a certain speed/HR/wattage I just can't stay below for any long periods as it feels like I'm not working at all and to be honest, the saddle gets uncomfortable when I'm not putting much power through the pedals. So I just don't have the discipline to do recovery rides and at a guess I'd say what I call Endurance rides are actually Tempo rides. Will check my data but at a guess I'd say any time I look down and see less than 150bpm or 240w (except when going downhill) I know I can sustain more than that and up the pace a bit.

I'll probably give that Batterstown TT one more go in a couple of weeks time and I'd be more than happy with getting to 65mins on a relatively calm day. Won't be getting aero bars as I doubt I'd use them more than once or twice and I'd have the hassle of repositioning the gadgets on my bars just for those. And the only title I'm interested in for the forseeable future is 'Successful Finisher of La Marmotte Route Within One Calendar Day'.....note the leeway 'one calendar day gives'

blorg

FrankGrimes wrote: »

I'll defer to Lumen for the more scientific analysis but I think the general view is that you shouldn't just look at the overall average to calculate your threshold: you should also look at the pattern of the line graph to understand how much time you spent above and below that average. A spike early in the workout can lead to a drop-off later in the session (as one of your graphs shows). Removing that spike and keeping a steadier level would likely decrease the rate of drop-off later in the workout, thereby increasing the overall average. Guess that's a long winded way of saying an early spike can really cost ya. But either way, from looking at your charts it seems your threshold HR is in the 170-175 ballpark.

Yes, I think that was the key thing I did to get faster in the second 25, less spiking early on. There were still a few mind, I am wondering if I can get rid of those maybe I could be going faster at the end... I also am able to bring it up a fair at the very end on both those 25s which suggests I might have been able to go harder overall in the last quarter (I believe you should not really be able to raise it that much for the final bit.)

Lumen

FrankGrimes wrote: »

Will check my data but at a guess I'd say any time I look down and see less than 150bpm or 240w (except when going downhill) I know I can sustain more than that and up the pace a bit....And the only title I'm interested in for the forseeable future is 'Successful Finisher of La Marmotte Route Within One Calendar Day'.....note the leeway 'one calendar day gives'

IMO if you try and do the Marmotte at an average of 240W you'll bonk miserably. You need to ease off and dance on the pedals a bit more.

If you haven't already, check out the TDF power data on the Saris site (e.g. this). You might be surprised how little power the pros put out much of the time.