Question about GW/GW+5%/Gw+10%

morpheus

Just did my RR#1 for Wisconsin.

Went pretty well.  Some small things to tweak for #2, but overall I was OK with the results.

One of those tweaks....

as we've learned from the Race Day Power strategies, goal watts (GW) on the flatter stretches, GW + 5% on the longer climbs, and GW +10% on the shorter steeper climbs.

I executed this on the RR, at least for the first 2/3 of it.  BUT, it seemed (and verified with WKO) that I spent practically all riding that wasn't descending (and watts way down) in the GW + 10%.

Very little time to settle in at 68-70%.  So, I felt fine for the first 2/3 of the ride, GW +10% is still alot easier than most of our workouts, but the last 1/3 of the ride brought some fade to my power and interest.  But, after the RR, I 'feel' like had to spend too much time 'over' GW over the course of 100miles, which ultimately zapped my legs for the run.

Run was OK.  Not easy by any stretch.  Loosened up on the 4th mile but legs were pretty tired at the start, felt like it would've been a grind had I gone the longer run distances.

Is GW +10% a 'Have To'?  

I do feel like my FTP is accurate right now.  WKO graphs show that my 1-1.5 hr harder bike efforts agree with FTP tests.  Tho, I do think I'm gonna swag it down about 10w on the next RR just to see 1) how my legs feel and 2) how much time is lost over the bike.

Nutrition probably played a factor in this, too.  I took in a little bit less than I had 'planned'.  Wasn't a big dropoff in cals/hr.  But, anytime you're looking at fading power/interest over 6-7 hours, you have easy dots to connect.  That, too, will be better on the next RR.  But, for now, what do you think about the power question?

 

morpheus

BTW, not sure if it tells me anything, but the next day's ABP ride was an absolute CRUSHfest. PR on a very hilly course. 1:32, ridden in a bit of anger.

robin sarner

good question.   look forward to what the smart folks have to say.

for IM Canada, I am planning on Goal Watts of 72.5% of ftp.       And planning on ALL uphills adding 10%.         This seemed to work out ok when I rode the course a couple weeks ago.    Lots of the hills steep so hard to do less than +10%.    But, Wisconsin and Canada are a lot different.      Lots of long downhills at Canada. 

anyhow, so I guess two main options.     

1)Do your short hills at 5% (Wisconsin with lots of small hills adds up to effective long hills).     

2)Or bring the Goal Watts down.   

Peter Greagg

I guess that it all depends on how long the hills are.
FWIW, I use a 30 min interval and make sure I hit that NP target for that period — in other words, I don't strictly follow the +5%/+10% rule, but rather push a bit higher on the ups to even out the impact of the downs and associated coasting. Thus I know that if I stick to that approach that over an HIM or IM bike I will fish exactly with the NP I want.
BTW, once the interval is gone I ignore that — If I finish an interval with an NP different from my target, I ignore that in the rest of the race.

Al Truscott

Posted By Peter Greagg on 06 Aug 2013 05:36 PM


I guess that it all depends on how long the hills are.

FWIW, I use a 30 min interval and make sure I hit that NP target for that period — in other words, I don't strictly follow the +5%/+10% rule, but rather push a bit higher on the ups to even out the impact of the downs and associated coasting. Thus I know that if I stick to that approach that over an HIM or IM bike I will fish exactly with the NP I want.

BTW, once the interval is gone I ignore that — If I finish an interval with an NP different from my target, I ignore that in the rest of the race.

+1 to all this. This is how I do my "Saturday Rides", RRs, and races. Although I am toying with shortening the interval to as little as 15 minutes. But I'm finding that doesn't work as well as about 30 for me. I do hit the interval button sooner or sometimes later depending on terrain changes. But the general idea of ignoring the "gear" recommendations, and just aiming for an overall interval NP (I actually use IF, but same thing) while keeping as steady and close on my current power (3 second watts) to my target power as possible. In other words, no powering up hills unless I absolutely have to to avoid falling over. I'm getting an 11-32 put on my rear wheel today, along with a 53/39 up front on 650 wheels, to hopefully keep spinning even up 10% grades.

Peter Greagg

Excellent to hear Al regarding the cassette.
IM Australia has a longish 15% hill (near the end of the loop on a 2 loop course) that really knocked me this year with a compact and 11/26, so I have got a 11/30 just for this race (Also plan to be 4 kgs lighter for next ear's IM Australia).

morpheus

Thanks for the input.

Work in progress.

Gordon Cherwoniak

Chris,

I can't argue with the input you have already received.  I also typically look at overall power and don't stick to the +5, +10 but I also ride in very flat terrain generally. 

Given your follow up crush it ABP ride and your confidence in your FTP number I might not dial down the 2nd RR by 10 watts.  Perhaps just limit the time pushinng at GW +10 or maybe back that number off to GW + 5 for all hills.  My though process here is to get you riding with the lowest IF not lowering your GW and then still adding 10W up the hills.  IIRC Coach Rich has a 1.03 IF on IMWI course and mentioned you will pass tons of people in the last 20 miles of the bike just riding steady.   

Gordon