My recent bike block: implications for 5-hour power and IM target watts??
Ok, so I have been following intently the discussion on the
'5-hour power' concept with the key issue in my mind being how to put some
science behind it (see other posts http://members.endurancenation.us/Forums/tabid/57/aft/17648/Default.aspx
and http://members.endurancenation.us/Forums/tabid/57/aft/19159/Default.aspx
for excellent prior discussions). I realize both coaches at this point are discouraging
the effort to make this too "paint by numbers" but I'm trying to come
up with some ranges at the very least.
To my mind, the question raised by Rachel H and discussed in
some detail by Coach Rich is critical…"how do you know if your 5hr power is correct?".
And, I would add, "what % of your 5-hour power should you be riding on
race day?".
The
catch here is that there is no "test" for 5-hour power. So an
empirical approach is really tough. The approaches based on FTP are pretty easy
to benchmark, because most folks test their FTP in a standard way. But even in
the 5-hour power discussions so far it is apparent that some people do training
rides like "could splits" and some go easier. In the absence of a ton
of people "testing" 5-hour power I think this will be really tough.
The
one data point we have: John W rode hard on Saturdays then was lower the following
day by 10-15%. Then he rode the race at 35 watts lower than the Saturday rides
which he did really hard, although targeted 20 watts lower before the start of
the race.
Aside – why am I obsessing about this? Because I have a
belief that fundamentally I'm built for endurance and not speed, that my 2x20'(2')
tested FTP isn't a great metric on which I should anchor and that the concept
of "5-hour power" may be something that advantages me. I have a few
datapoints:
- Never run a sub-19 5k or sub-39 10k yet PRs for HM and
marathon are 1:24 and 2:53, respectively
- Rode IF 0.88 at Steelhead 2014 based on 2x20' tested FTP,
netted 8-10' on the bike split for a 2:12 compared with prior 2 races riding
0.85 and gave up 3' on the run (and to this day I believe it was due to issues
unrelated to bike intensity…feel free to read race report)…it was a PR at 4:28
overall and should have been sub-4:25 if I could swim worth a damn
- I have a bizarre ability to ride really long at high z3
intensity
I also have zero Ironman experience. SO I WILL PLAY MY FIRST
IRONMAN CONSERVATIVELY. If you don't believe me, read the race report from my
frist-ever half-iron where I executed to the EN tables, PERIOD. Or when I
negative-split my first-ever open marathon. However, this isn't to say I'm
not looking for a method of execution that plays to my strengths.
So, where does this leave me? For the past week I've been in
a rented vacation house in Michigan with my family. There are hundreds of miles
of great roads for bike training and I took full advantage. In short, I did 5
rides in 6 days totaling ~425 miles and ~20 hours. There were 2x "5-hour
rides". Other than a flat tire during one ride, these rides all featured
minimal stops. Two days I rode hilly courses not unlike IMWI and the other days
were flatter or more easy-rolling terrain. I rode "execution Ninja style"
with constant power and very low VI. Each day I targeted z3 "ABP"
which should be in excess of IM target watts, although I didn't go out to
totally bury myself for 5 hours (mostly for fear of sabotaging the rest of the rides).
Every ride was solo.
A summary of the rides is below:
A few other notes:
- Negative splits power-wise in most rides. For example,
Saturday the second half was NP 203 vs. 201 for the ride overall. Tuesday the
second half was NP 207 vs. 204 overall. both of those were 5-hour rides.
Wednesday I started very tired but the second half was NP 208 vs. 199 for the
ride overall
- Lower speeds on similar watts for the last 2 rides were
partly due to replacement tires after the flat that were wire-beaded
monstrosities!! Also I had a bearing problem in the rear wheel that made it not
rotate totally freely…sort of like a brake pad rubbing
I didn't do much running during this timeframe but all of
the runs I did were good efforts and didn't seem impacted by the biking:
- A really hard run on the day before starting all the rides
– 60' in 85 degree weather avg 6:40/mi with HR above 180 for half the run
- A short run after the second ride, 33' @ 6:50/mi (first 5'
at 7:17/mi, most of the run at 6:40 pace)
- A run the morning after the final ride, 75' @ 6:53/mi in 80's
temps
My takeaways:
- Perhaps it was due to not truly burying myself on any
ride, but I was able to ride IF 0.8 or better day-in and day-out
- My HR was rock solid for the targeted power output…i.e.
200-205 watts = 135-137 bpm. A bit higher if hotter. A bit lower if cooler.
- These rides were a picture of consistency
So what does this imply about target power for IM???
Certainly not that I should be targeting 0.80 IF, right? If my IMWI bike split
is in the 5:00 to 5:20 range, the famous EN tables would say to ride at
0.73-0.74. That would be ~185 watts, or ~15-20 watts below these training
rides. Sort of consistent with Withrow's idea to target 20 watts below
"5-hour power" but maybe not if Withrow was burying himself in those
5-hour rides to the point where the next day was 15% lower and I was just doing
the same ride the next day and the next and the next, etc.
My next step will be to ride hard on the IMWI course with
Rich et al next week. I don't know that will give me any good data since riding
with others will probably yield more drafting, higher VI, etc. My goal there is
to just get in a lot of miles and some great fitness-building workouts. The
race rehearsals will then be the real time to test some ideas.
I really welcome advice and thoughts on this.
Links:
Saturday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/843384684
Sunday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/838278727
Tuesday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/842069256
Wednesday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/842069301
Thursday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/842511917
Comments
If I were you, I'd do the following at WIS camp: Forget the group on the first day... Ride the course (with good tires and rear wheel), but aim for 210W or so. My guess is that you'll hit it and you'll verify a 200W or 200W+ goal race watts.
Then after that, ignore VI and just see if you can keep up with Strauss for a day. Translation, just bury yourself for the rest of camp. Btw, back-to-back big bike weeks will also be great for your training at this point in the schedule! Awesome!
What JW said. The 200w becomes one of many data points you'll gather between now and the race. Next weekend is a good opportunity to take it for a spin, ride low VI on the course, experiment with wattage caps on the hills, etc.
I think you did 2 really well executed Race-Rehearsal rides, but don't have the right data yet to determine your race goal wattage yet... Let's say you would have targeted a 195NP and nailed all of your rides with the same HR and stats, etc... probably would have been the result if you targeted 195... you would have learned that you can successfully ride for 5hrs with no downstream effects at 195W. It wouldn't have told you that you could "also" ride successfully at 204W.
So I really think you found your "lower bound" of 5hr power. Now you have ~8 weeks to find the upper bound. Then you can dial in your goal Watts for the race.
Keep in mind that I was NOT riding at a low VI last yr, but we were trying to do different things. I was trying to push the maximum amount of work into my legs for a given amount time and simply using my Avg Normalized Power as a carrot and I was always gunning for a higher number each ride. Think of a "Maximum 5hr Power" number as doing the Bike leg of an IM relay. A real TT with no run afterwards. I "was" running after all of my long rides, so technically I still had more in the tank.
You still have like 6 weeks of hard training to find your upper bound and really set a Goal race wattage. I would suggest you keep pushing and see what happens. You'll know you went too far when you can't finish your last hour stronger than your average or when you can't match your effort the next day. Also, don't limit yourself to 5hrs... More riding is More better! Imagine the confidence you will have for race day if you can hold 215W for 6 hours and still have a low HR and finish your last hour strong and run well after. Just sayin'. Not to mention the TSS points you are cramming into your legs.
Note to all of the lurkers:
Matt Aaronson is not a normal 1st time IM, so DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME. He has been training and racing for many many years. He has qualified for and raced in the 70.3 World Championships and went Sub-3Hrs on his First Ever Marathon. He will be qualifying for Kona this yr and it is because of his methodical approach, crazy (above plan) training, and he is just plain ole fast.
You are a monster.
Ok. go back to training now.
The whole issue of upper bound is an excellent question. But my concern is overcooking because I don't have the IM experience to know the feel of how hard is too hard. Hence my multiple attempts to inject some "science" to execution.
Consistent with the above I think the right thing to do for the camp is:
- Target 200-205w for the RR. See how I feel and how the 6-mile run goes. It will be my first-ever IM RR workout.
- Go hard the rest of the days and get a crapton of TSS into the legs. If I can't get higher than 200 - or even get back to 200 - it will be telling about the toll that the RR took out of me and that the 200 may be close to or even beyond the upper bound.
- In subsequent training rides I will press harder: 210, 215, 220. Can I hold that and what are the implications for the next day's ride? This will help find that "upper bound" and validate how close 200-205 is to the upper bound.
- Aug 15-21 I have another vacation in the same rental house in Michigan. I'm planning a final epic bike volume push during that week. I can see how much fitness I've built and put it all to the test and come up with what I think are the right numbers
- RR #2 will be on Aug 29 where I can test the final numbers
As to the other comments, I think anyone can and should take an analytical and methodical approach like I am taking. But of course my 5-hour rides are IM distance rides in the 21-22.5mph range so data will have different meaning then data from the 5-hour rode of someone who will ride 6-7 hours on race day. So that is true. But I believe that everyone can and should push hard in training...that is the pathway to improvement.
And regarding Kona, I'll bet you a hundred bucks I don't qualify. The lack of experience will be a huge difference-maker...maybe "the" difference-maker. I was not much fitter in my second half-iron compared with my first but I was a lot faster because I knew what my body could do. Likewise on my second marathon vs my first. Or my PR half-iron where I biked IF 0.88 because I had the experience to know I could do that. For my first IM I'd rather cross the line having run the marathon and left something out on the bike course compared with a "long walk talking about what a great bike split I had".
Now why do I even give a crap? I guess I'm trying to push some of my Kona passion onto you. Maybe I just wish I could be in the same speed stratosphere as you and am secretly wishing I could combine my IM experience with your size and speed... If we could do that, then people might start calling us Tim Cronk... But I think threads like this and all of the EN wisdom you have absorbed over the years make you dangerous to the competition. Because of this, I think you already have more IM experience than most 3 or 4x Ironmen. So don't sell yourself short.
If that is not your passion, then just tell me to get lost and go enjoy your race. But somehow I feel that if your goal was just to "finish" then you wouldn't be going through the detailed analytical analysis above. I'm imagining you are doing that to have a really efficient and FAST race. With that said, here's how I can potentially see your race playing out.
Swim: 1:12-1:14 (please do not discount the downstream effect of a 2.4mi swim on the rest of your race day. If you are not crushing your swim workouts for the next 6 weeks and especially in the last 2-3 weeks before the race, you are making a rookie mistake)
T1: 5:45-6:30 (T1 is long, but you know how to race...)
Bike: 4:55:00-5:25:00 (with all of your aero gear and legal drafts, you will race faster than your RR. but which end of the spectrum will you be on?)
T2: 2:00-3:00 (this "could" be on the 2:00 side. don't lolligag here)
Run: 3:15-3:40 (Coach P experience/execution would give you a 3:15 at your pure run speed ability... But to your earlier point, you do NOT have this experience so how you set up this run with your bike BUT ALSO YOUR SWIM will be important. To your other point, if you are walking, this could be a 4:30 marathon...)
So if I add up the "faster" end of every one of those splits, I get ~9:30:00 and if I add up the slower end it gives me ~10:28:00. This is a pretty wide range, but a very realistic one... You did Steelhead in 4:28:32 and you are a fitter faster guy now (but Steelhead is also much flatter/faster bike). If I take your Steelhead time x2 +30mins gives 9:27:xx Steelhead x2 +60 mins gives 9:57:xx. You can ABSOLUTELY be within 60 mins of 2x your 70.3 time. And this puts you right in the context of a Top 10 of your AG. Which is why I am so damn insistent that you don't miss a Kona slot by 5 mins if you actually have the possibility that the faster race is already in your legs on race day (and also why I am NOT giving this advice or anything close to it to the "other" 99% of people on the cusp of competing in their 1st Ironman).
Last yr in the M40-44 AG, you would have gotten 5th with a 9:53:25. You would have gotten 9th with a 10:01:49. And you would have gotten 11th with a 10:06:25. A 10:28:xx would have put you 22nd in your AG.
So what "could" a 9:53:xx look like for you...? (setting aside the fact that this is a full half hour faster than my fastest ever IM race out of 7 attempts and a full 2hrs faster than my first ever IM, so do as I say, not as I do...)
S: 1:13:00 T1: 6:00, B: 5:08:00, T2: 2:00, R: 3:24:00
Sooo.... If you have a good swim and crush your Transitions, you'll still need to have a sub 3:30:00 Run to be in the Top 5 (provided the normal people show up and all that normal disclaimer stuff)....
Wouldn't you like to have the chance...? And if you blow yourself up and suffer through some 9:30 or 10:30 min miles for the last 10 miles, you'd still suffer your way to a 10:30ish finish time which is still stupid ridiculous fast by all normal people standards for a first IM.
Stepping back off my soap box now...
1. On the RR / target / etc. I have ~15 hours to think about that and I will. I guess if I go too hard on the first day the worst that will happen is that I can't get good wattage on the second day, i.e. not the end of the world. But stepping back let's remember that 200w is IF 0.80. At 210w I'm riding 0.83. If that is my number and I can pull it off, then we have definitively proven the 5-hour power concept…said another way, it is evidence that a 2x20(2) tested FTP is not the right way to measure and set targets for someone at the end of the endurance vs. short speed spectrum. IT would be interesting to be sure. But it is incredibly risky. I guess I I can do a 5-hour TT at 220 watts, perhaps 210 watts really is an IM target. These are things I have time to try in the coming weeks and will load my legs with TSS in the process, so all good.
2. Regarding other first-timers, yes, I get there is a difference. But to be clear, right now I am – unlike many of the faster folks doing specialized Coach P plans or whatever – am following the EN plan. Period. Yes I have 2 well-placed vacations that allow me to insert extra biking as anyone following the wiki can do. But I also have a 60+ hours-per-week job and am replying to this on inflight wifi on the way back from my second trip to London in 3 weeks. In my observation a lot of people lack self-motivation and consistency. EN is great because you can hold yourself accountable to others and that helps with the motivation. But deep down you need to have the drive. Stuff doesn't happen to you, rather you make stuff happen. Today I will go from the airport to an evening meeting in downtown Chicago then to Madison (or maybe sleep and leave for Madison at 5am). While in the UK Monday afternoon through this morning I managed to get in 2 swims for ~5800 yd and 2 runs for 14 miles. I sacrificed some sleep to be sure, and I was confident about doing that because I have targeted when I'll have a couple good nights of sleep (Thursday for example). So I agree that physiology and things like that really do make a difference, in particular as you approach the ends of the distribution. But people overestimate that. Honestly, I think a massive percentage of males on our planet are capable, with the right training, of running a ~45' 10k (maybe even 40'). When you talk like this, you get howls of protest from lifetime 9:00-10:00/mi runners that physiological gifts are required and they could never run that fast. People would think that's 3, 4, 5 standard deviations from the mean. But I don't think it is. I think a 38 or 37' 10k starts to get to the thin end where physiology gets really special. Probably someone has the real numbers on this (I'd love to see them) – but the point is that way more people can perform at a higher level if they have the desire and are willing to make more tradeoffs. Sort of off topic but you got me thinking.
3. Swim. It was a small comment you made but let me say I am a huge believer in the downstream impact of swimming on the rest of the race. This was super-apparent at Steelhead 2011 when the swim was cancelled and I set massive PRs in the other disciplines and apparent again in 2012 when I had my best swim fitness ever and was therefore able to not only swim a couple of minutes faster but also, more importantly, get out of the water with a low HR and immediately go to work. So my plan is a lot of 4000yd swims starting next week. It is important, I get it.
4. Ahh, the "what will define success in this race". Look, I have some numbers in my head of course. I think with perfect execution that sub-10 would be possible for me on the Madison course. I have no idea of the transition layouts but I think your numbers are pretty much right in the ballpark of my thinking:
- Swim 1:15 for the swim and maybe worse because I'll be in the scrum for sure. In 2012 I swam half-iron races at 34' and would have confidently targeted 1:10, but the reality (see point #2 above) is that I've made tradeoffs here and I will be slow in the water as a result
- Bike 5:10 or better. While sub-5 would be nice, I don't think I could pull it off on that course. In moderately hilly and technical terrain when carrying a lot of fatigue I do ~108-109 miles in 5-hours flat. Race setup is worth a lot, maybe even 1.5mph. So there is upside to be sure. But I think that's the ballpark.
- Run…who knows. Maybe 3:20? This is where it mostly depends if I end up walking because I biked 5:10 and not 5:20 because I hit 100 watts not 190, etc. Plus there's always the freakish quad cramp like what I got in Vegas in 2011, Kansas 2012 and Steelhead 2014. Or the GI distress that I've never experienced but many people do at the Ironman distance. So a lot of question marks and no experience to give me confidence I can predict.
The above adds to 9:45 which would be a sub-10 finish for sure……………….but a LOT of things can cause that not to happen, not the least of which is a 4:30 "marathon"……………
Now as to the Kona question, that depends on who shows up. Maybe less so in M4044 where there are enough slots that one dude doesn't skew the whole thing, but if a handful of fast dudes show up then you're hosed with a 9:50 or better probably. Obviously anyone who misses by 5, 6, maybe even 10 minutes (depending on the circumstances) will be pissed and wonder where they lost that minute or two here or there. Sure, I get that. But let me give you even more of a window into how I think: if I'm high-5ing people down the chute then even if I got a Kona slot I'd be pissed – that's not the race I'm looking for. My vision is to leave it all out there. If I missed Kona by 1 minute but I ended up in the hospital via ambulance with a non-life-threatening condition after collapsing at the finish I'd probably be pretty damn happy as long as I knew I didn't do something really dumb execution-wise along the way. Perfectly truthfully, I'd rather go to IMFL and pursue a lifetime PR of sub-10 or even sub-9:30. If I could do two races this year it would have been IMWI for the experience so that I could then go to IMFL or IMAZ and go for a really fast lifetime PR. I would honestly value that more than KQ. That's just me and how I think and what I value, I guess. It's just like me not giving a crap about running a faster marathon since I got a sub-3 in the bank and being REALLY PISSED when I ran 3:00:03 in Boston this year. The schedule and life tradeoffs didn't work for 2 races so I picked WI…not because I think it gives me a KQ shot, nope, that wasn’t the reason at all. Rather, it was because I figured if I showed up to FL or AZ for my first IM race, I wouldn't have the EXPERIENCE to get the PR I would want. So IMWI becomes the vehicle for that experience, and with some good fortune I'll be hitting refresh on registration opening day for FL or AZ 2016 and hoping bigtime for light wind and 60's temps on race day. In fact, due to the role of conditions, I might just sign up for both of them…………..
Man, re-reading this you all got quite a window into my head, eh? This flight is too long!!
How 'bout this...? I'll buy you a beer after the race regardless of your total time, or if you KQ or not, or if you walk half of the marathon. That is provided you are upright by the time I eventually finish and if you can wait that long for me to finish (and don't judge me too harshly for doing an IM on my fat bike even though it doesn't make any sense to you). Now log off of EN and GO TO SLEEP!
Ok will this thread took a bit of an off-topic turn but I'm
back on topic now armed with data on this weekend's rides. I did as you
suggested John and treated my RR not as a conservatively-paced RR but rather a
chance to aim 10-15 watts higher than the ~200w I was doing for my prior 5-hour
rides and see what happens.
Summary data:
There was a 6-mile brick after the Thursday ride @ MP (6:48/mi)
and a 4-mile brick after Saturday's ride @ EP (7:30/mi)…I wrote another thread about
the runs in the race execution forum.
Additional notes:
- On Thursday it was HOT. I felt decent but not
"fresh". The "stick" out to Verona was warmup ~35' @NP 202.
Then loop 1 was NP 217 / HR 141 and loop 2 NP 215 / HR 148 then a big fade NP
203 / HR 152 for the "stick" home.
- On Friday I felt like crap and totally toasted from Thursday's
ride + hard brick. Loop 1 was NP 197 and loop 2 194 and felt brutal. Strange
rally at the very end for the "stick" home…31' @NP 204.
- Amazingly on Saturday I felt a lot better. The power
numbers don't show it but I FELT 100x better than on Friday. Perhaps the lower
temps had something to do with it. Finished strong with NP 201 for the last
~hour and NP 204 for last ~30 min.
My takeaways:
- I am capable of riding the IMWI course at ~215 watts. I'm
sure of that. Maybe even ~220 (or higher, if the temp wasn't into the 90's by
the end of the ride). Perhaps that is my max "5-hour power". I was
able to do that and run 6 miles off the bike at my open marathon pace. So it's
good to know I can do that even if I won't be doing it in an Ironman!
- I followed that Thursday workout with 2 days of riding 5.25
and 4.2 hours on the same tough course and putting up NP 196 (IF 0.77-0.78) both
days. One day felt brutal and the other day was only "started feeling harder
than usual" with a strong finish. That NP 196 is only a few watts lower
than the ~200-ish power I was riding for the 5 rides I did on my Michigan
vacation (see first post). So this all seems to validate that the Thursday
intensity didn't totally kill me.
Implications for IM pacing on the bike? Honestly, I come
right back to the ~200 number. It seems like the power number I can ride day-in
and day-out. It's ~15-20 watts lower than my a number that I was able to
achieve when going harder but not all-out. It's something like 3.1-3.2
watts/kg.
Thoughts??
Btw, Garmin links:
Thursday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/850580084
Friday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/850580150
Saturday: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/851507136
Random fun fact: max speeds each day were 45.1, 47.4 and
46.5 mph. Love it!!
Here's why I don't think the fade on the return stick was fitness or ability related. When most people bonk or blow up or fade at the end of a long ride, it is because their legs just don't have it anymore (or their spirit breaks) and in either case their drop in power runs parallel with a drop in HR. You see this a lot on an IM run also. It took me 5 IM's before I was able to make my HR go up during the last 8 miles of the run instead of fading with my pace (back to your original "experience" comments). Your file showed a steady HR climb throughout your ride and especially in that last hour or so. This tells me that your body was working a lot harder to shed heat and therefore had less ability to put up the same Power numbers. But you were still doing the "same" amount of work.
I'd suggest for your next Race Rehearsal (first day of your next vacation for instance), try to hit the 212W number again. Assuming the temps are less crazy, see if you still "got it" in the last hour or so. Then see what you have for run legs after. Given that you are so much faster of a runner than most other people out there, I might also suggest running for 60 mins in your RR instead of just 6 miles. If you can safely and comfortably run EP (or maybe even something between MP and EP for like 7:10-7:15 pace for you) AND you don't fade in the last hour on your bike, then you can "safely" target 210-212W during the race (provided the high temps of the ride are below 80 degrees).
BUT, if you fade again in the last hour (even with lower temps) OR you have a lot of trouble on the run, then you fall safely back to the 200-205W target on race day which you already know you can crush.
I also suggest asking Coach P in your Micro thread about running 60 mins in your next RR (given your faster run pacing than most normal people). He's usually uber conservative versus me. If you haven't figured it out already, I am admittedly on the more aggressive end of the spectrum for everything training related.
My notes for you and for everyone else who is in this place in their season where they are trying to sort this stuff out:
What you haven't experienced is the extreme pain and difficulty of the last 6-8mi of the IM run. If I were Matt, with a not-so-great swim, high watts/kg bike, and super strong run in my first IM I would be 100% on "racing humble" until mile 18. Seriously. If you have a choice of doing more or less on the bike course on a terrain feature...do less. You'll be going fast regardless, as a function of w/kg, frontal area, and likely some legal drafting you'll get in the first 40mi as you work through the field. Same on the run...do less vs more until mile 18.
I'm not saying to cheese all day, but if in these "what should I ride on race day" exercises if you find yourself stuck within a 5w range...pick the lower number, done. Same on the run.
Also...
- JW you are for sure right that temp probably had a lot to do with the fade. But I think it was also the overall output and "pushing the boundaries". This was a 5+ hour ride @ 0.84 on a tough course. It was hot. I faded. My legs didn't feel fried and as you noted I was able to run pretty well. So it was not a bonk or a blow-up. It was a fade. It tells me that riding that hard for that long is at the boundary of what I'm cap able of doing (in those conditions). Btw I don't think I was behind on fluids. I drank a crapton of water and also a moderate amount of Gatorade.
- I don't think I will try that again in my next Race Rehearsal. For my next Race Rehearsal I'm going to go out at my true target race pace. It won't be an experiment…it will be a validation. That said, I do see the value in doing another 5-hour ride pushing the boundary. Not a Race Rehearsal but a training ride for sure. My next vacation starting Aug 15 I will target ~450 miles in 5 rides over 6 days and I think the first one will be ~215 watts for 5 hours.
- I cannot agree more with Rich on "racing humble". JW will say this carries a massive risk of high-fiving people down the chute and leaving too much out on the course and I understand that's a risk. But I don't think it's too much of a risk. One thing the bike numbers from this weekend seem to indicate is that ~200w is a good target – the day after doing 105 miles @ 212 (with most at ~215) plus a hard run I then did the same course at 196 and then the day after that I did 80% of that ride again (including all the hardest parts) @ 196 with a super-strong finish of over an hour at >200 followed by a really easy-feeling brick. So even with all the fatigue, ~200 watts really isn't killing me at all. Now JW may say this is too conservative, but let's remember that 200 watts is 0.80 IF for me. That is not a conservative number, and frankly without the 5-hour power concept we all wouldn't be talking about that number in the first place.
- I wasn't really riding group-ish on Friday / Saturday. I think 1.02 VI all three days on that course is indicative of good behavior!!!
- I like the idea of some longer bricks and possibly a longer brick for RR#2. It think if I could nail a 1-hour brick feeling good in RR#2 looking only at HR and taking it really easy and seeing a good pace after the fact then it would be very confidence-inspiring.
Explore the boundaries of discomfort all you want...in training. Go for it. Knock yourself out, bring a cell phone so you can call a cab if you end up under a bush at mile 90 of a 110 mile ride. But on race day, save the extreme discomfort for the last 6-8 miles of the run. Hear me now: if you do things on the bike and in the first miles of the run that put you in the discomfort zone at about mile 15-16...and by this I mean struggling, not simple discomfort, you're pretty much screwed at that point. The wheels WILL come off, in a big way.
And the numbers that you're (Matt) pointing out are throwing up some flags for me. Specifically you're ~200w = .8 IF feeling comfortable for a 107mi ride. That just doesn't match what my perceptions of that ride would be. Likewise, .84 @ 212w (or whatever) for the same distance. For me to get those some numbers I'd have to absolutely be hammering on the gas for the entire 112mi.
Just pointing those out as an item you may want to look at more closely, with regards to FTP settings, etc.
Rich,
your are identifying the heart of why 5-hour power is interesting to me. The
FTP numbers aren't wrong in TrainingPeaks or my Garmin. I tested a few months
ago at 253 watts and my z4 interval work tells me I'm still firmly in that
ballpark. As pointed out in the initial post, my entire interest in 5-hour
power is that I'm looking for alternative ways to develop IM target watts –
something that is more endurance-based rather than a % of a 2x20(2) FTP test at
which I chronically "underperform". I'm trying to understand if 200
watts is a reasonable IM target assuming:
-
I rode the IMWI course at 212 watts with a strong brick, then the next day
again at 196 then the next day 2 loops at 196 with strong negative split and
>200 watts in the last hour feeling great (and with a brick afterwards)
-
The week before I did 5 rides in 6 days covering ~420 miles hitting over 200
watts NP, day in and day out, on all of them (see the first post in this
thread)
In
other words, with the data I'm accumulating in these long training rides – both
the "5-hour" efforts as well as the consistency over multiple days of
long rides, I want to be able to discern a target wattage that doesn't depend
on % of a 42' test. Fundamentally I believe I underperform the shorter stuff.
My fastest 10k is in a half-marathon! My best-ever VDOT is in a full marathon!
I really believe I need a target based on other, longer, endurance-based
things.
Matt, I concur with your self assessment. Over the years, as I have watched your reports on your OS workouts, and others, I've noted, "Hmm, either his FTP is too low, or he;s got a fairly flat power curve (the opposite of a sprinter)". Its just who you are. Your method should work *for you*. But we should caution others "not to try this at home", unless they also over perform at longer distances (like a marathon) and underperform at shorter (like a 5K). Most of us should NOT be considering racing an IM at such a high Intensity Fraction of a tested FTP; we'll blow up somewhere along the way.
BTW, this attribute of yours is one reason (along with your work ethic , your racing discipline, your size and your running speed/endurance) which bodes well for the IM distance. It's a gift, one I know you won't squander.
BTW - I bet your @ 5hrs and 205W.....
- It is consistent with getting a lot of biking in "3 big doses", all pretty close together…just the reality of my work schedule. For example, since last Saturday in Madison I haven't been on the bike at all, and this weekend I'm pretty sure to be doing Bike/longrun not bike/bike (see my micro thread). Not ideal but it's what I have to work with.
- Based on my experience, the recovery won't be a problem. If I was a week closer-in to race day I wouldn't do this.
- I agree I need to do the Friday swims. That is one thing that I have had trouble getting in because when I travel it's hit-or-miss to find a pool. I'm getting nervous about the swim…not about my swim time which will suck regardless, but rather about having enough fitness that the metabolic cost of that 2.4-mile swim doesn't bite me. I did back-to-back days of 4300yd swims this week (both of them as the second workout of a day that started with a hard run), and they were ok. Both had a pace fade after ~3500 yd but included some hard intervals on the front-end. My target is 1200-1500 yd in the form of 4 swims/week from here to race day. I need to over-index on swim training for sure. HOWEVER, my vacation doesn't include a lap pool so I may have to drive to a nearby town to get in a good swim workout.
Matt, I am a smaller , older , slower , less powerful version of you.... IOW within the EN house I am probably your best correlation as far as size/body type and similar ability to hold a higher IF on an IM ride, with equal Vdots from 5k to HM.... However that younger, stronger, faster version of you , has many traits I do not and one of them is recovering from those bikes (I need to prepare myself physically and mentally before a hard 5hr bike and then recover, this is why I will only do 1 per week and usually only 3-4 before an IM) .... Since your pretty much approaching that window (another week or two) of not being able to do much from here that will make you faster on race day but there is plenty that can be done to make you slower like digging a hole....use caution and listen to your body ... Awesome job finding a balance of all this work while juggling your crazy schedule of work/family on top of it...
I was going to mention the swim but see you have addressed that concern here , another thread, and I observed your recent long swims via STRAVA.... Definitely vote for as much swimming as you can get between now and race day.... Like you said it probably wont get you out of the water any sooner but it will get you out of the water fresher and the metabolic downstream cost will be less for the remainder of your day....
I will be doing a follow up soon for the FOP AG thread with some of my observations and training thoughts!
If I exclude the crappy riding getting out of the city, the bulk of the ride was in chunks of "ABP" with 2-3 minute recoveries:
40'@ NP 221 / HR 144 / cad 90 / VI 1.00
20'@ NP 211 / HR 134 / cad 87 / VI 1.00
60'@ NP 223 / HR 138 / cad 88 / VI 1.01
64'@ NP 213 / HR 139 / cad 86 / VI 1.01
56'@ NP 223 / HR 150 / cad 87 / VI 1.01
The second of three hours at 213 sticks out given the hour before and the hour after were 223...it started low due to some strange corners then I just lost focus for a bit. The second half of that hour was a lot better. I finished strong once back in the city:
11'@ NP 212 / HR 148 / cad 86 / VI 1.00
16'@ NP 219 / HR 149 / cad 85 / VI 1.02
I did a brick run after this which was fine. So overall I chalk this up as "another Withrow-like ride in the books" and I note that sustained NP for the ride overall was ~15 watts ahead of the "provisional IM target" of 200 watts and I certainly didn't feel like I was killing myself during this ride.
So, the training continues...
https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/859013159
Please post all of your big ones here going forward, this is fun to watch!
The people chiming in are way smarter, more experienced and more analytical than myself. I think you are being smart and hope you are heeding warnings like R.
That said, the one comment that really resonated with me was JWs statement of how much reading, writing, analyzing & contributing you have done on EN. You have way more knowledge than most people at the FOP, finishers or not. Looking forward to seeing how this plays out on race day and who shows up.
Please remember on race day that there is a difference between strategy and tactics, per coach R, tactics don't really come into play until the end of the Marathon. I think you are doing as best a job as anyone can to come up with a great strategy for the 132 miles before that.
Lurking and learning ---- any way you slice it you are doing some legit work!
Matt...Since I rode with you on your 3rd ride in Madison and rode yesterday with you for 30", here are my thoughts. As we both know you rode away from me in Madison the last 5 miles on that 3rd ride. You were super strong after two big days. And yesterday you looked fresh as a daisy. I think you have found the ability to ride 5 hours at 200 watts and still run extremely well off the bike. I think for the race it will be a matter of how you meter out those 200 watts. Per Rich's post, I suggest you go sub 200 w for the first 10 miles and drink/eat to replentish fuel used in the swim. Then go to 200 target watts. I KNOW you can sustain that power for 5 hours. Then for the run, be conservative for the first 18 miles, then drop your hammer. You will be amazed at how many people you will pass at the end.
I'm planning to ride a ton this week - 5 big rides in 6 days - and promise not to flood your inbox by posting all of them. But I figured I'd let you know that ride #1 of 5 is in the books: 114 mi in 5:15, 21.7mph. The entire return trip was with a headwind 2mph slower than the outbound so it took mental fortitude. Overall NP 216 / VI 1.01 / HRavg 138 / cadence 86. Temp at the end was 84 degrees. Elapsed time was over 5:50 but that's because I forgot my credit card and had to go home at get it right at the beginning of the ride. After the first ~40 mins there was only ~10min of stopped time for the entire rest of the ride. Most of that was to reload fluids at a gas station at the 4-hour mark which took extra time because I hammered a Mexican Coke during the break. Rather than practice for the race I went low on the calories with only 3 gels and 2 Clif bars, i.e. 950 calories for 5.25 hours with the Coke included...180/hour and I was feeling the lack of energy in the last 30 minutes to be sure. Garmin link: https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/866511114
The NP 216 appears good but the ride was actually even better. Due to the return home the warmup was really extended. If you exclude the upfront crap then you get NP 220 on a ride time of 4:38 (VI 1.01) and peak 3-hour power of NP 224. Structurally, the "main set" was:
33'(2')@ NP 215 / HR 135 / cad 85 / VI 1.00
79'(2')@ NP 224 / HR 140 / cad 87 / VI 1.00 (elapsed time for the recovery 5')
86'(3')@ NP 226 / HR 145 / cad 88 / VI 1.00 (reload and Coke made it 9' elapsed time for the recovery)
39'(2')@ NP 216 / HR 145 / cad 88 / VI 1.01
24' @ NP 207 / HR 141 / cad 86 / VI 1.01 (tough finish)
Of note, the 79' and 86' "intervals" were elapsed time of 80' and 87', respectively. So they were straight-shot, essentially nonstop other than for a couple of traffic lights. That was SOLID WORK.
Total power output was >4000kJ so that's a lot of calories I get to eat, right??
Now onto the next 4 rides which I promise not to rehash in great detail but will post a summary table on Thursday when I'm all done. If I can hold 200 watts tomorrow for 3.5 hours after the hammering today than it will be a real confidence-boost.
Cheers!