FTP and cycle racing.

Macy0161

Just done a twenty minute trainerroad test. Nice improvement given I haven't been following a plan for a good few weeks, but fecked up my last test so was probably low.

Anyway my main question is I had the xert app going. Only 3 watts difference (app high). So going forward should I have the app going and adjust as I go, or just stick to the scheduled trainerroad tests?

Not that I'm looking to avoid the tests or anything... But in fairness you can have an off day on test day!

dahat

Macy0161 wrote: »

Just done a twenty minute trainerroad test. Nice improvement given I haven't been following a plan for a good few weeks, but fecked up my last test so was probably low.

Anyway my main question is I had the xert app going. Only 3 watts difference (app high). So going forward should I have the app going and adjust as I go, or just stick to the scheduled trainerroad tests?

Not that I'm looking to avoid the tests or anything... But in fairness you can have an off day on test day!

I also found the Xert app pretty accurate, gave me a reading of 352 following a 22 min effort with a likely accurate figure of 345 when I was fully race fit.
DC Rainmaker also remarked that it was pretty accurate with something as simple as a hard 2 min effort.

equivariant

2 cents

I would say that watts/kg is not as significant as watts on most A4 races in Ireland. Most hills are too short to be completely about about watts/kg and if you position well for a 5 minute climb you should be able to stay in the bunch over the hill even if your watts/kg is a bit low.

Also I would add that confidence plays a big role. I had a bad year this year compared to the previous year (which was my first at A4) - got dropped a lot and never really contended in races this year. I had a couple of crashes at the end of 2016 and I think that they affected my ability to ride confidently in the bunch, so I found myself letting my position slide whereas last year I would have been a touch more willing to defend my position and ride near the front.

Chips Lovell

Weight may matter more on hills, but it always matters.

Mass affects acceleration. The heavier you are, the harder you have to work every time you sprint out of a corner, close a gap, try to bridge, sprint for the line etc.

dahat

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Weight may matter more on hills, but it always matters.

Mass affects acceleration. The heavier you are, the harder you have to work every time you sprint out of a corner, close a gap, try to bridge, sprint for the line etc.

100kg lad here and weight does matter on hills, when I look at the watts I generate to accelerate as above towards others it's heartbreaking.

equivariant

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Weight may matter more on hills, but it always matters.

Mass affects acceleration. The heavier you are, the harder you have to work every time you sprint out of a corner, close a gap, try to bridge, sprint for the line etc.

true but on the flat, it is wind resistance that is by far the dominant factor in determining acceleration and speed, and wind resistance is to a large extent independent of weight

Lumen

equivariant wrote: »

true but on the flat, it is wind resistance that is by far the dominant factor in determining acceleration and speed, and wind resistance is to a large extent independent of weight

But for a given rider of a particular size and shape, 20% more weight requires 20% more watts to accelerate, so you're burning more matches.

Most 100kg+ riders are not made of muscle as much as they'd like to think. 😀

CramCycle

equivariant wrote: »

true but on the flat, it is wind resistance that is by far the dominant factor in determining acceleration and speed, and wind resistance is to a large extent independent of weight

Its not a direct correlation but there would be grounds to argue that typically, a heavier person will have more wind resistance due to being wider or taller.

Not only do they have to put more effort into moving the extra weight around, they also have to deal with more resistance.

My memories of Applied Mathematics tell me climbing will be a pain in the hoop if a skinny rider and a hefty rider have the same Watts. This said, if the riders are both race fit, the heavier rider should have a reasonable amount more wattage.

Macy0161

dahat wrote: »

I also found the Xert app pretty accurate, gave me a reading of 352 following a 22 min effort with a likely accurate figure of 345 when I was fully race fit.
DC Rainmaker also remarked that it was pretty accurate with something as simple as a hard 2 min effort.

It's definitely food for thought, as it can be hard to be as fresh as I'd like for the 20 minute test, but I'd still expect some progress if I had followed the plan. I think I read you should stick to the same test format, so haven't tried the 8 minute version.

Anyway, started sweet spot base 1 low volume, and I don't think there'll be any VO2 Max/ 2 Minute hard efforts until into sweet spot base 2, so probably a moot point at this stage. I've no power meter on the bike (using miruso b+ virtual power on my muin), so won't be getting xert info on the road unfortunately for the club spin sprint*.

*during which I'm routinely beaten by people who I drop on climbs and I've also beaten people in TT's and sprints who go past me like I wasn't moving on climbs. I always took this as absolute watts beating power to weight on the flat tbh. That's my anedcotal/ N=1 evidence!

py

Miklos wrote: »

Is the step test not riding to exhaustion? Wouldn't be any use for calculating what you can sustain over an hour.

No idea if it's accurate, was curious to see how people found it if they did it.

death1234567

Lumen wrote: »

Most 100kg+ riders are not made of muscle as much as they'd like to think. ��

Yeah but even if they aren't doing weight training they'll still have much more muscle power than someone who is lighter. In reality everything is about power vs. weight. Riding on flat roads like we have in Ireland generally you can sacrifice having extra weight for more power but if you have a lot of hills or a proper mountain climb then you can sacrifice power for being lighter.

Conclusion, if you're small and weak = you need it as hilly as possible or low speed + long distance/high endurance, if you're big and strong = you need it pan flat, high speed and short duration/low endurance. In general the racing here suits the bigger/more powerful racers. Don't see too many Colombians winning in A4

Chips Lovell

This is worth reading for anyone interested in what all the variables are.

Lumen

death1234567 wrote: »

Yeah but even if they aren't doing weight training they'll still have much more muscle power than someone who is lighter. In reality everything is about power vs. weight. Riding on flat roads like we have in Ireland generally you can sacrifice having extra weight for more power but if you have a lot of hills or a proper mountain climb then you can sacrifice power for being lighter.

Conclusion, if you're small and weak = you need it as hilly as possible or low speed + long distance/high endurance, if you're big and strong = you need it pan flat, high speed and short duration/low endurance. In general the racing here suits the bigger/more powerful racers. Don't see too many Colombians winning in A4

There's a big gap between "small and weak" and 100kg.

In the range 60-75kg there are advantages for bigger riders on flat and rolling terrain.

Dan Martin (63kg) isn't going to bother Sagan (74kg) in a flat sprint.

Above 75kg there are no real advantages.

equivariant

Lumen wrote: »

But for a given rider of a particular size and shape, 20% more weight requires 20% more watts to accelerate, so you're burning more matches. ...

That is only true in the absence of wind resistance. So I agree that the watts/kg is important for accelerating out of a corner (since starting speed is low) but for accelerations like jumping away from the bunch on the flat or bridging a gap, then wind resistance is high, and that does not increase proportional to weight.

Lumen

equivariant wrote: »

That is only true in the absence of wind resistance. So I agree that the watts/kg is important for accelerating out of a corner (since starting speed is low) but for accelerations like jumping away from the bunch on the flat or bridging a gap, then wind resistance is high, and that does not increase proportional to weight.

Ok, here is a worked example.

You're in a bunch accelerating out of a corner from 30 to 40kph, and you weigh 20% more than the rider next to you.

At 30kph your steady state power is 200W.

The rider next to you puts out 400W to accelerate, you have to put out 440W to keep pace because you are 20% heavier.

That extra 40W is what burns your matches.

For bridging a gap the weight is less of an issue. You might do 45kph to cross a gap between two groups travelling at 40kph, but the only extra cost is a second or two extra to get up to speed as you leave the first group. Unfortunately you've dragged a bunch of lighter riders with you because they could match your acceleration with less effort.

Chips Lovell

Lumen wrote: »

For bridging a gap the weight is less of an issue. You might do 45kph to cross a gap between two groups travelling at 40kph, but the only extra cost is a second or two extra to get up to speed as you leave the first group. Unfortunately you've dragged a bunch of lighter riders with you because they could match your acceleration with less effort.

I don't know. In my experience you need to kick long and hard at the start. Otherwise you look around and the rest of the bunch is lined out on your wheel.

Crocked

dahat wrote: »

100kg lad here and weight does matter on hills, when I look at the watts I generate to accelerate as above towards others it's heartbreaking.

Out of interest as a sprinter what sort of watts are you putting out in an end of race sprint and what would be your maximum sprint power fresh if you don't mind sharing?

Only got a PM towards the end of the season and I would have thought I'd have decent sprint power but looking at some post race numbers the watts hit were quiet low. This is somewhat balanced as after I got the PM i wasn't in position to contest any sprints properly and the one I tried out on a spin I got the gearing horribly wrong on tired legs.

My plan this winter is to add 30-40w to my ftp but also get my sprint power up as based on my previous competitive sport this should be where I am strongest.

equivariant

Lumen wrote: »

Ok, here is a worked example.

You're in a bunch accelerating out of a corner from 30 to 40kph, and you weigh 20% more than the rider next to you.

At 30kph your steady state power is 200W.

The rider next to you puts out 400W to accelerate, you have to put out 440W to keep pace because you are 20% heavier.

That extra 40W is what burns your matches.

Actually I think this is a good example, and your calculation shows that the heavier rider has to put out just 10% more power (than lighter rider) to match his acceleration even though he is 20% heavier.

If the same situation occurs on a hill rather than on the flat, then the lighter rider will have a lower steady state power at 30kph, so, to match his acceleration, big guy's relative power increase will be much closer to 20%

Also, going back to the situation on the flat, if we suppose that both riders are equally well trained and that the weight difference is due to inherent body type rather than excess fat, it is likely that the lighter rider is burning a lot more of his matches just to maintain the steady 200W than the bigger rider.

Of course I am not arguing that being heavy is an advanatge per se - it is an advantage only if the terrain is flat and if the extra weight is due to functional muscle rather than fat.

tuxy

Macy0161 wrote: »

I've no power meter on the bike (using miruso b+ virtual power on my muin), so won't be getting xert info on the road unfortunately for the club spin sprint*.

I have a muin miruso b+ and tested it against a power2max power meter last year. 230 watts on the p2m would should up as 280 on my the miruso b+.
I got a 4iiii left side only power meter this year on saw much the same result.
The miruso b+ did fine for me as a training tool last year but you can't compare your numbers to other people.

dahat

tuxy wrote: »

I have a muin miruso b+ and tested it against a power2max power meter last year. 230 watts on the p2m would should up as 280 on my the miruso b+.
I got a 4iiii left side only power meter this year on saw much the same result.
The miruso b+ did fine for me as a training tool last year but you can't compare your numbers to other people.

You were plus 50 watts on 4iii when compared to p2m?

tuxy

dahat wrote: »

You were plus 50 watts on 4iii when compared to p2m?

No the turbo was the one over reading in both cases.

Daroxtar

I'd say P2M and 4iiii would be close and virtual power a bit off. I've seen a bit of difference between my FSA powerbox (basically a rebadged P2M) and Zwift /Tacx virtual power on my Tacx vortex when I recorded the ride using both just for comparison. Not sure how well calibrated they were but up to about 220 they were close but by 350-400 there was definitely around 30 watts, virtual reading higher.
Dcrainmaker reckons the vortex is accurate and consistent and says the same about the P2M so I'd say it was calibration.
Funnily enough, Xert gives me a very similar FTP result on the road as the Vortex does indoors. I really need to do a proper FTP recording on both, properly calibrated.

Macy0161

I haven't and don't plan too. Once it's consistent I don't really care about the absolute figure to be honest.

When I have a power meter I'll be using that on the turbo not the miruso sensor.

Might explain why I find the sessions I do on a wattbike harder though! Should probably do a quick test with xert no I think of it and compare and adjust if I'm on the wattbike.

tuxy

The muin is a nice turbo, it's smooth and quiet but the miruso b+ sensor for it is way off.
I can always manage a significantly higher ftp out on the road than indoors using the same power meter for both. Even with a fan I still overheat indoor and also find it more difficult to change position on the bike.

dahat

Now that you mention a fan, anyone recommend a cost effective?

py

I'd be interested to hear what (if any) variance people are seeing between indoor and outdoor FTP. Got a smart trainer coming soon so looking to find out what to expect with regards to my power output.

tuxy

tuxy wrote: »

I was A4 last season and was well on my way to getting upgraded when I had to stop cycling at the start of June. I'm just back training 3 weeks now and have a power meter, my ftp is 160!

4 Weeks of 10 hours a week and I'm now up to 235 ftp and down 2 kg to 78

I expect things to progress much slower over the coming months.

72kg and 280 ftp would be the goal for March.
For me the weight will be easy but increasing power will be difficult.

dahat

tuxy wrote: »

4 Weeks of 10 hours a week and I'm now up to 235 ftp and down 2 kg to 78

I expect things to progress much slower over the coming months.

72kg and 280 ftp would be the goal for March.
For me the weight will be easy but increasing power will be difficult.

That's alot of hrs invested so early in the off season, March is 5 months away.

tuxy

dahat wrote: »

That's alot of hrs invested so early in the off season, March is 5 months away.

It is but I recently had 3 months off the bike. I'll be easing back soon. I just wanted to get up to speed so the club training sessions were not complete torture.

dahat

tuxy wrote: »

It is but I recently had 3 months off the bike. I'll be easing back soon. I just wanted to get up to speed so the club training sessions were not complete torture.

Ah, makes sense with 3 months off then.