Pocono 70.3 now a 69.1 with TT bike start - adjust target watts?
Pocono 70.3 is now officially a 69.1 duathlon due to a cancelled swim (water level and current).
"Start will be TT from T1". I'm not sure of the logistics but wondering if and how I should adjust my target IF watts and TSS? I was targeting about 81% of FTP based on my expected time. Thinking a bump of 2-3% would get me around the bike course faster but still leave enough gas for the run. It's pretty hilly though.
What says Da Haus?
Thanks!
0
Comments
Then hit the bike...plan on the first 20' going easy...say .75 ish...to find your legs and get settled in what the day is handing you in terms of terrain and competition. Then dial it up. I'd plan on your original TARGET WATTS for the remainder of the first 30 miles. Then if you feel good you can bump it up the last 26 miles. Still race hills as we have taught and be as steady as you can.
The ultimate goal of the bike, as always, is to set you up for a great run. All decisions on pacing should be made from that perspective. The run is run the same way....target goal pacing for first 3 easy, then the 7 steady...if you feel great, pick it up for the second half of the run OR at least for the last 3 miles.
The biggest mistake most folks make in this situation is biking into a hole they can't run out of...good luck!
Doing the race also, Thanks Coach for the advice, especially the pre race warmup tip. Definetly going to do that!
At Steelhead 70.3 this year the swim was cancelled and they did a TT start on the bike. Without the swim I set a 6-minute PB on the bike and a 2-minute PB on the run compared with an HIM a month earlier on a similarly flat course (although Steelhead was a lot cooler temps).
I was concerned about warmup as well but the TT start was really disorganized by the time it was getting close to my turn, so all I had time to do was jump up and down to try to get my HR up. Much to my surprise, my HR got up to race levels right off the start line.
In the first 5 miles my IF was 0.93. I had watched Coach P's crucible of my prior HIM the night before and the thing going through my head was his observation that in that race my best hour of power was at the beginning. I determined to pull back on the throttle and make sure that did not happen again. HOWEVER, based on RPE and HR I felt really good and every 5 mile split was coming in at about 0.88 or more. In the last 5 miles my thoughts shifted to how much of an idiot and EN outcast I would be from overcooking the bike and blowing up on the run.
My overall bike IF was 0.897, which was TSS of 183.8. VI was 1.01 and I "negative split" the bike, power-wise. I did not blow up on the run and instead beat the prior HIM's run by 2 minutes. My run was within EN execution guidelines with a large negative split and overall pace for the whole run within 1 sec of MP.
I am convinced that the lack of swim totally changed the accumulated fatigue profile in the race and allowed me to ride harder than the EN guidelines without sacrificing the run.
Two other observations on an HIM with cancelled swim:
1. The start was a sh*tshow. The pro start was very organized with timed intervals between starts, etc. The pro start took a LONG time. But the AG start was chaos. They started folks in pairs. At first it was 10 sec between each pair, but eventually the organizers got nervous that the pros would be back to transition before the AG start was completed. So they just started to fire people off in a steady stream. A lot of people were rushing to their bikes because the line was moving so much faster than anticipated. Combining the start situation with a flat course and not surprisingly there was a lot of drafting at the beginning.
2. I felt a bit unfulfilled about the whole experience. A 70.3 just isn’t a 70.3 without a swim. The "PB" splits are not really "PBs". I trained for the race but I didn’t get to do the race. I was a bit disappointed. Sorry, I know that's totally unhelpful, but I guess I share it only because it might cause you to really relish the moment as best you can this weekend and really have a lot of fun.
Have a GREAT RACE!!!
Cheers,
Matt
@Matt: Thanks and you've got me thinking too. I have a couple of questions if you don't mind (no hurry, this is something I plan to pick up later - after the race.
You managed a very reasonable TSS even though your IF was darn high.... If my math is right, you did the bike in 2:17, is that right? If so... Wow!
I also notice that your VI was amazingly low (1.01). Very well executed. I'm not familiar with the course - is it flat? Do you think you were inadvertently helped by drafting due to the mass start? Pocono is very hilly so drafting uphill should be lessor a factor ;-)
I'm intrigued by this now... With all the cancelled swims at WTC 70.3's this year, maybe we can get enough N to flesh out the variables with member data.
Thanks again all!
@ Paul. Bike split was 2:20 (although I had about 3 mins stopped to water the trees, so it SHOULD have been 2:17!!!). The VI was certainly helped by a pretty flat course -- 900 feet elevation gain in total. I don't think drafting played a role in my VI...I don't know where a 2:20 bike split ranked in the field overall, but averaging 24mph it would have been pretty hard to draft off of anyone. I think the VI was thanks to the EN training all summer long and everyone pounding the concept of "constant wattage" into my head all of the time -- thanks to the "constant wattage" voices in my head I actually managed to ride a 1.02 VI at 70.3 Vegas with over 3300 ft of gain and a lot of up and down (but no 2:20 bike split on THAT course!!). Best of luck in the race tomorrow!!
I'll say it again: Wow! 2:17 is mighty impressive... as is the 1.01 VI. I'm not anywhere in that league.
Yes, the Pocono run was a pretty significant negative split, although my Garmin wasn't working most of the first half of the run, so I'm not exactly sure that was accurate in terms of 6.55 miles. And there were very significant hills on the course but the first half was net gain and second half was net downhill so that may account for some of it. Still.. it was a big negative. I'm working on my RR and hope to be posting it shortly in the Race Report forum. I'd love to hear your thoughts.
And I'm also hoping to pursue this "duathlon" pacing and strategy a bit more so may come knockin' for some more info...
Thanks!
Cheers