Coach, looking for a little input after 1st RR for HIM. To give a little perspective: FTP high last year 260, started JOS at 249 and ended at 274. First outside test for HIM plan got me 277 and first 3 weeks of plan hitting NP 215-217 for the 180' rides, with a little trouble hitting Z4 intervals.
Had couple weeks of deep fatigue, with rides suffering the most (runs mostly OK)....180' rides dropped to NP 202-204. Stood-down some and had shortened ABP ride (90' to be safe) week before last at 230 NP, and felt like back on track.
So for the RR ride last Sat. I go into it "playing it by ear", but feel good after initial 20" so I have at it and hit a NP of 232 (.84 IF with a avg pwr. of 230, giving a nice VI of 1.01). Having said all that, here is what is a little fuzzy for me:
1. In my 2nd RR for HIM last year I had a NP of 210(IF .80), and went 4 min.'s quicker than last Sat's RR ride. It was less windy and I had race wheels on (the 2nd one last year that is)....could that be enough to make the difference? BTW, same weight and bike.
2. My bike split at the HIM last year was 2:35, which means I theoretically should be able to do a .84 IF, but my legs were a little shelled for the run on this RR...about 15-20 sec/mile slower on the return 3 miles. My IF for last years RR's and the race was .80, which I seem to do much better at...does that seem normal? The only other thing I would add to this point is that I suspect I'm a "good test taker"....I really turn myself inside out on those FTP tests.
3. Related to the first two points is the fact that my .84 IF RR ride cost me a TSS of 192....hence the shelled legs on the back 3 of the 6 mile run ....But why would a 232 NP/.84 IF ride take me sooooo long, and thus give me the too high TSS? It was less ideal conditions than last year, but not a LOT different.... it just doesn't seem to add up. I would think the increase in NP would still have gotten me in quicker.
BTW, my plan is to do the 2nd RR at .80-.81 IF.
Should I just be happy with the increase in FTP and my sustainable three hr. power numbers, and let the chips fall where they may as far as time on race day, and just stop worrying? Any insight/suggestions appreciated.
Great questions. To be clear your FTP is 6% higher than last years. IOW you are up but it's not like you are in another zip code. you can't look at outcomes from a RR and determine performance -- there are a million things that could have affected the difference. Instead I suggest you look at Normalized Power, Heart Rate for that power, and your VI. If you put up more watts than last year at same or lower HR -- it's a win. IOW I don't care what time your train arrives at the station, I just want your assurances, Mr Engineer, that we'll be traveling faster.
If you are a good test taker, then compare your your 2.5 or 3 hour power curve to last year...if you are only s good test taker than those two lines should converge/overlap.
Increased NP increases your odds of getting there faster but doesn't guarantee it. I just rode Lake Placid course at a lifetime best Normalized Power, and I was 23 minutes slower than my race there in 2011. I am a few LBs heavier and it was windy but I don't care about the time, rather the sustained power!
Coach, "raising my hand" because I'm a little worried/confused. Had FTP test today, and I pretty much suspected it would be a drop from the last one (277), base on level I've been able to hit in TP intervals pretty much the whole HIM plan (started May 2nd with the test that got me 277). Like I said, right from the beginning I couldn't consistently hit the Z4 ranges, but was more like a "race pace plus", ie....was in between Z3 and Z4.
Anyway, was also not to worried about the idea of a drop based on hearing you address how that's not too unusual, but today's test gave me a 254!!! For comparison......and this is why I get worried.....see history from last year in my last post in this thread.
So first question....Is this amount of drop "normal"? I do suspect that part of the reason may be that while I'm typically a "good test taker", that today WAS NOT the case. I just was NOT into taking the test, but did it because of the lack of being able to hit TP intervals, and the desire to have a good working FTP for my race on the 26th. Which leads me to my second question.
I did my first RR (2 weeks ago) at a NP of 232. Now I know that was too high based on how I felt in the run, but my Z3 range now, with the 254 FTP is 203-216. Before this test my intention was to do the 2nd RR at 220-225 NP, but now I'm not sure what to do. Should I go no higher that 216, or try out 220-225 based on my hypothesis that this was just a crappy test?
I was feeling really good about the consistent upward trend, but now!?! Not going to lie, I'm pretty bummed....I mean I would have been totally OK with a 8-10 watt drop, but 23 watts!! Set me straight with your Yoda-like wisdom
Steve - I love that we have a record of this. Seeing your FTP drop is normal, but usually from OS high to RacePrep low...during which time your ability to hold 3- to 4-hour power increases (so a good trade off). Was that an OS or GetFast FTP number? Clearly something about your race prep load is hurting you. How has your run responded to the increased fatigue?
In terms of this weekend / RaceSim, i'd try the 220 and see how that goes. Again, if you can look at you 4-hour power vs last year I'd be curious as to how that has changed!
The 277 FTP was at beginning of HIM plan....1st outdoor test, and done after two easy-leg weeks of swim camp. Didn't do any get faster this year, the swim camp was preceded by JOS, which I ended with a 274(indoors).
Have not done any 4 hr rides this year yet, but the typical 3 hr. last year was 200-204 NP and this year it's been 210-217 NP.
Running wko's have been spot-on! In fact, I nailed the HIM run RR the day AFTER the FTP test debacle this week. My MP is 8:15, and HMP is 7:57, and here are my splits for that run: 1-9:09 2-8:42 3-8:31 4-8:08 5-8:10 6-8:09 7-8:05 8-8:12 9-8:06 10-8:07 11-7:46 12-8:05 13-7:48
So obviously I got the "good trade off" you mentioned, but is that amount of FTP drop anything to be concerned about, or just never mind it given the 3 hr. Power increase? And does it make sense that my run hasn't suffered (the bike actually is more my strength)?
Also, I think given that I found it hard to hit the TP bike intervals RIGHT AWAY after the FTP test, that I might have just "over-achieved" so to speak on the initial FTP test, and may have even caused some undue fatigue trying to hit the possibly "false" TP zones initially in the plan (I had some deep fatigue a few weeks ago and backed off trying to hit those TP intervals, making them more in between Z3 and Z4). Does that make sense?
Really appreciate all your feedback/"coaching" in situations like this
Did long ride day after above post, so quick report on that. With new zones from last FTP test the TP intervals (2X15') during the long ride didn't leave me trashed like before, and I was able to hit them, at the upper end even. I hit the Z3 intervals(2X30') at around 220 (Z3 is 203-216). Started remainder of ride at upper end of Z2, but felt good and just kept bumping it up. Ended the 3:18 ride with NP of 221, feeling pretty strong with increasing watts the last 30 minutes, rather than steadily dropping like other long rides.
So it seems as if I definitely have a higher 3hr. power than last year, WHATEVER my FTP is. And it's interesting that it appears that with this year's HIM build-up, there is a decreasing gap between my FTP and my 3 hr. power.
And I'm definitely going to go for a 220 NP for my HIM RR this weekend!
Steve thanks for digging deeper with me on this. I think you are still in a good place and that long ride experience really proves it. At the end of the day we want a really solid "steady" bike followed by a good run. Right now you have that in you. Keep me posted!
Coach...2nd RR in the books. Was nervous I was going to be stuck in the pain cave because of thunderstorms, and felt like I really needed an outside bike to know where I'm at. Had a 1 1/2 hr. delay d/t lightening, and STILL had pouring rain for all but the first 30 mins, but SUPER glad I went outside, and with the results:
Distance- 56.2 Time- 2:33:25 - had my race wheels on NP- 222 Avg. power- 219 VI- 1.01
And that NP is good I think because followed the ride with this run (MP 8:15)
1- 8:35 2- 8:28 3- 8:36 4- 8:00 5- 8:09 6- 8:19
Super excited and confident now for the HIM in two weeks.....you guys ROCK coach, thanks!!
Coach...Didn't get much feedback from the team on my HIM race plan in the race execution forum, any input would be appreciated. And I know your not a fan of the Bonk breaker bars (part of my early B-fast), but they work well for me.
Coach....FIRST off, man did you ROCK IMMT!!! It really is pretty cool to have a coach lead by example like that.
Now my question. I'm in week 10 on an inter. IM plan and want to get your opinion on a change I'm considering to the pre-long ride run, which I regularly did in training for IMFL last year btw. But last last Sat. I decided (to keep it brief I won't go into the reasons) to dive in and do the ride, and see how I felt as to if I would do a run afterwards.I had had a good post-ride run in the 'big training day" the week before, and had a good ride this last Sat. , so decided to go for 4 easy miles after the long ride....2 out at LRP plus 30" and 2 back at LRP.
Both during the long ride, and after the run....in part because it went well....I had the thought that maybe I would get more of a benefit from doing this type of run as opposed to the one scheduled normally (ie..usually about a 30' run with a mile at TP). In other-words, my "gut" is telling me that for me, having more opportunities (other than just the 2 RR's and the 2 BTD's) to feel what it's like to do make myself go slow of the bike, and then ease into the LRP ....and the MENTAL benefit of knowing I can do it!!...may be more beneficial to me than the one or so extra TP running miles per week I would get with the normally scheduled pre-long ride run.
I know you guys really think these plans out, and I respect that and don't want to tinker around too much with it, but the other side of it is I'm striving to really listen to my body, recognize and act on what will help me the most.So, what do you think about making that change?
Steve - We write plans but you use them. I almost always defer to user expertise unless there's some craziness afoot. The steady run is fine by me, esp if you can get in the full allotted time. Be sure to note your HR on these runs for race educational purposes and you must fuel them like a rock star. No "water only" runs or "I'll just wing it" type stuff.
Totally ALL over the nutrition, as that was the culprit last year at Florida
And yea, the other main reason I want to do more runs after long rides is to track HR, as I'm definitely planning on having that be my main gauge on the run in IMFL. Got soooo into training by pace last year that threw HR by the wayside, but this year been approaching it differently. For TP runs it's ALL pace, don't even bother with HR. For long runs use pace as the whip but keep track of HR, both to see how it compares to zones derived from 5 K TT, and for projecting ahead to the marathon in the IM. For runs after long rides it's ALL HR guided, and let the pace fall where it may (which so far has been at the goal pace zones).
Thanks for the feedback, and again, way to ROCK IMMT......and I'm definitely in the trucker hat camp btw
Comments
Had couple weeks of deep fatigue, with rides suffering the most (runs mostly OK)....180' rides dropped to NP 202-204. Stood-down some and had shortened ABP ride (90' to be safe) week before last at 230 NP, and felt like back on track.
So for the RR ride last Sat. I go into it "playing it by ear", but feel good after initial 20" so I have at it and hit a NP of 232 (.84 IF with a avg pwr. of 230, giving a nice VI of 1.01). Having said all that, here is what is a little fuzzy for me:
1. In my 2nd RR for HIM last year I had a NP of 210(IF .80), and went 4 min.'s quicker than last Sat's RR ride. It was less windy and I had race wheels on (the 2nd one last year that is)....could that be enough to make the difference? BTW, same weight and bike.
2. My bike split at the HIM last year was 2:35, which means I theoretically should be able to do a .84 IF, but my legs were a little shelled for the run on this RR...about 15-20 sec/mile slower on the return 3 miles. My IF for last years RR's and the race was .80, which I seem to do much better at...does that seem normal? The only other thing I would add to this point is that I suspect I'm a "good test taker"....I really turn myself inside out on those FTP tests.
3. Related to the first two points is the fact that my .84 IF RR ride cost me a TSS of 192....hence the shelled legs on the back 3 of the 6 mile run
BTW, my plan is to do the 2nd RR at .80-.81 IF.
Should I just be happy with the increase in FTP and my sustainable three hr. power numbers, and let the chips fall where they may as far as time on race day, and just stop worrying? Any insight/suggestions appreciated.
If you are a good test taker, then compare your your 2.5 or 3 hour power curve to last year...if you are only s good test taker than those two lines should converge/overlap.
Increased NP increases your odds of getting there faster but doesn't guarantee it. I just rode Lake Placid course at a lifetime best Normalized Power, and I was 23 minutes slower than my race there in 2011. I am a few LBs heavier and it was windy but I don't care about the time, rather the sustained power!
Anyway, was also not to worried about the idea of a drop based on hearing you address how that's not too unusual, but today's test gave me a 254!!! For comparison......and this is why I get worried.....see history from last year in my last post in this thread.
So first question....Is this amount of drop "normal"? I do suspect that part of the reason may be that while I'm typically a "good test taker", that today WAS NOT the case. I just was NOT into taking the test, but did it because of the lack of being able to hit TP intervals, and the desire to have a good working FTP for my race on the 26th. Which leads me to my second question.
I did my first RR (2 weeks ago) at a NP of 232. Now I know that was too high based on how I felt in the run, but my Z3 range now, with the 254 FTP is 203-216. Before this test my intention was to do the 2nd RR at 220-225 NP, but now I'm not sure what to do. Should I go no higher that 216, or try out 220-225 based on my hypothesis that this was just a crappy test?
I was feeling really good about the consistent upward trend, but now!?! Not going to lie, I'm pretty bummed....I mean I would have been totally OK with a 8-10 watt drop, but 23 watts!! Set me straight with your Yoda-like wisdom
In terms of this weekend / RaceSim, i'd try the 220 and see how that goes. Again, if you can look at you 4-hour power vs last year I'd be curious as to how that has changed!
The 277 FTP was at beginning of HIM plan....1st outdoor test, and done after two easy-leg weeks of swim camp. Didn't do any get faster this year, the swim camp was preceded by JOS, which I ended with a 274(indoors).
Have not done any 4 hr rides this year yet, but the typical 3 hr. last year was 200-204 NP and this year it's been 210-217 NP.
Running wko's have been spot-on! In fact, I nailed the HIM run RR the day AFTER the FTP test debacle this week. My MP is 8:15, and HMP is 7:57, and here are my splits for that run:
1-9:09
2-8:42
3-8:31
4-8:08
5-8:10
6-8:09
7-8:05
8-8:12
9-8:06
10-8:07
11-7:46
12-8:05
13-7:48
So obviously I got the "good trade off" you mentioned, but is that amount of FTP drop anything to be concerned about, or just never mind it given the 3 hr. Power increase? And does it make sense that my run hasn't suffered (the bike actually is more my strength)?
Also, I think given that I found it hard to hit the TP bike intervals RIGHT AWAY after the FTP test, that I might have just "over-achieved" so to speak on the initial FTP test, and may have even caused some undue fatigue trying to hit the possibly "false" TP zones initially in the plan (I had some deep fatigue a few weeks ago and backed off trying to hit those TP intervals, making them more in between Z3 and Z4). Does that make sense?
Really appreciate all your feedback/"coaching" in situations like this
Did long ride day after above post, so quick report on that. With new zones from last FTP test the TP intervals (2X15') during the long ride didn't leave me trashed like before, and I was able to hit them, at the upper end even. I hit the Z3 intervals(2X30') at around 220 (Z3 is 203-216). Started remainder of ride at upper end of Z2, but felt good and just kept bumping it up. Ended the 3:18 ride with NP of 221, feeling pretty strong with increasing watts the last 30 minutes, rather than steadily dropping like other long rides.
So it seems as if I definitely have a higher 3hr. power than last year, WHATEVER my FTP is. And it's interesting that it appears that with this year's HIM build-up, there is a decreasing gap between my FTP and my 3 hr. power.
And I'm definitely going to go for a 220 NP for my HIM RR this weekend!
Distance- 56.2
Time- 2:33:25 - had my race wheels on
NP- 222
Avg. power- 219
VI- 1.01
And that NP is good I think because followed the ride with this run (MP 8:15)
1- 8:35
2- 8:28
3- 8:36
4- 8:00
5- 8:09
6- 8:19
Super excited and confident now for the HIM in two weeks.....you guys ROCK coach, thanks!!
Now my question. I'm in week 10 on an inter. IM plan and want to get your opinion on a change I'm considering to the pre-long ride run, which I regularly did in training for IMFL last year btw. But last last Sat. I decided (to keep it brief I won't go into the reasons) to dive in and do the ride, and see how I felt as to if I would do a run afterwards.I had had a good post-ride run in the 'big training day" the week before, and had a good ride this last Sat. , so decided to go for 4 easy miles after the long ride....2 out at LRP plus 30" and 2 back at LRP.
Both during the long ride, and after the run....in part because it went well....I had the thought that maybe I would get more of a benefit from doing this type of run as opposed to the one scheduled normally (ie..usually about a 30' run with a mile at TP). In other-words, my "gut" is telling me that for me, having more opportunities (other than just the 2 RR's and the 2 BTD's) to feel what it's like to do make myself go slow of the bike, and then ease into the LRP ....and the MENTAL benefit of knowing I can do it!!...may be more beneficial to me than the one or so extra TP running miles per week I would get with the normally scheduled pre-long ride run.
I know you guys really think these plans out, and I respect that and don't want to tinker around too much with it, but the other side of it is I'm striving to really listen to my body, recognize and act on what will help me the most.So, what do you think about making that change?
Totally ALL over the nutrition, as that was the culprit last year at Florida
And yea, the other main reason I want to do more runs after long rides is to track HR, as I'm definitely planning on having that be my main gauge on the run in IMFL. Got soooo into training by pace last year that threw HR by the wayside, but this year been approaching it differently. For TP runs it's ALL pace, don't even bother with HR. For long runs use pace as the whip but keep track of HR, both to see how it compares to zones derived from 5 K TT, and for projecting ahead to the marathon in the IM. For runs after long rides it's ALL HR guided, and let the pace fall where it may (which so far has been at the goal pace zones).
Thanks for the feedback, and again, way to ROCK IMMT......and I'm definitely in the trucker hat camp btw