Turbo, HR etc

Green&Red

BTH wrote: »

I would argue that 170bpm on the road is not the same as 170 on the turbo under any circumstances. I can "easily" get my HR up to 170 on the road. I'm near vomiting to do so on the turbo.

I would suggest that anyone using a LTHR tested outside as a basis for turbo sessions is doing it wrong, in the same way as using a 400m TT SC isn't a basis for working out sessions in a LC pool.

I have a real issue getting above 150bpm out on the road unless I'm on a relatively steep climb, I can manage it no problem with good resistance on the turbo, can hold 170+, I'd be in bits if I was to do that on the bike for any length of time

Chartsengrafs

I got a strap for the Garmin, as I have a watch already and can't bear the idea of wearing two watches when training (i.e wearing a basic Polar too).

In terms of zones, can anyone please suggest the best way of working them out? There are a multitude of zone calculators online. I tend not to trust some of these one-size-fits-all calculators such as McMillan etc. For instance, is max HR as simple as (220-age)? Seems a bit simplistic? Or should I flog myself on the turbo and use this my max hr? Resting is around 52.

Green&Red

A simple test on the turbo is

Warm up for 10 mins
Big ring and as close to cross chaining as your bike is comfortable with
2 mins @ 95rpm in this gear
2 mins @95rpm in the next gear

and so on, no breaks, stop when you fall off the bike.

The point at where you fall off the bike is your max HR, when you plot out ur HR for the session it should increase, increase, increase, flatten out and then increase again. That flattening out is ur LT


Oh and warm down

tunney

Basster wrote: »

I got a strap for the Garmin, as I have a watch already and can't bear the idea of wearing two watches when training (i.e wearing a basic Polar too).

In terms of zones, can anyone please suggest the best way of working them out? There are a multitude of zone calculators online. I tend not to trust some of these one-size-fits-all calculators such as McMillan etc. For instance, is max HR as simple as (220-age)? Seems a bit simplistic? Or should I flog myself on the turbo and use this my max hr? Resting is around 52.

220-age is nowhere near accurate for MHR.

Anyways you should work zones out off LTHR.
If you have a nicely cooled turbo set up do an all out best even effort 30 minute TT (after a warm up) Take a lap 10 minutes in and at the end so you can determine you AHR for the last 20 minutes of the 30 minute turbo. This is an approximation of threshold (not arguing which threshold). Plug this into Friel or Coggan's formula and there you go - 5 plus training zones.

tunney

Green&Red wrote: »

A simple test on the turbo is

Warm up for 10 mins
Big ring and as close to cross chaining as your bike is comfortable with
2 mins @ 95rpm in this gear
2 mins @95rpm in the next gear

and so on, no breaks, stop when you fall off the bike.

The point at where you fall off the bike is your max HR, when you plot out ur HR for the session it should increase, increase, increase, flatten out and then increase again. That flattening out is ur LT


Oh and warm down

Looks like we will be having the "which threshold are we talking about" chat after all.

Green&Red

Go on Tunney

Oryx

Serious question: How do you find out thresholds without a power meter?

The test G&R mentions comes from Pete Reid, from a time before PMs, I presume.

Green&Red

I think, and I could be wrong it comes from Ken Doyle - Weight training for cyclists, I just have a pdf of it

http://www.amazon.com/Weight-Training-Cyclists-Program-Endurance/dp/1934030295

pgibbo

Oryx wrote: »

Serious question: How do you find out thresholds without a power meter?

The test G&R mentions comes from Pete Reid, from a time before PMs, I presume.

Personally I've always used the method tunney referenced above for HR zones on the bike and run. This is outlined in Friels books.

sconhome

pgibbo wrote: »

Personally I've always used the method tunney referenced above for HR zones on the bike and run. This is outlined in Friels books.

The handy part of it is if you're using Training Peaks the Friel and Coggins formulae are in the zones portion of your profile so updating there works across your sports. Keep all your testing consistent so they are relative to each other.

Must be time for a new FTP table? Worth highlighting the common testing protocol again.

Oryx

Green&Red wrote: »

I think, and I could be wrong it comes from Ken Doyle - Weight training for cyclists, I just have a pdf of it

http://www.amazon.com/Weight-Training-Cyclists-Program-Endurance/dp/1934030295

Its deffo in the black book too.

Diamond_25

Its not going to be a waste of time (turboing without HR or PM) - just probably not as effective. PE will vary by how you feel at a particular time (mentally and physically) but it is still a useful guage.

I turboed by way of HR and PE for two years and each year saw large bike gains. In the first winter of turboing by HR and PE I went from 2hr.24min for 80k down to 2hr.15mins so certainly not a waste of time, no bike or equipment changes. 2nd winter of training (just gone) knocked 4 mins of over olympic distance aided by some better equipment.

This will be my first winter on power for training and it will be interesting to see how it goes (got a PM in May). This year i rode olympic distance at 280 watts average and hope for 300+ averages next year.

anyway best of luck with the training.

pgibbo

Diamond_25 wrote: »

I turboed by way of HR and PE for two years and each year saw large bike gains.

I think this is the important thing - having more than one point of reference for training and racing.

peter kern

pgibbo wrote: »

I think this is the important thing - having more than one point of reference for training and racing.

certainly very true, interstingly in kona only for 33 % of people its a power meter, I would have thought by now we would be close to 50 %.

pgibbo

peter kern wrote: »

certainly very true, interstingly in kona only for 33 % of people its a power meter, I would have thought by now we would be close to 50 %.

Along similar lines I found it very interesting that BMC is now racing off feel - no PM or HR apparently

peter kern

pgibbo wrote: »

Along similar lines I found it very interesting that BMC is now racing off feel - no PM or HR apparently[/QUOTE

he want to be like kienle ;-)