What percent of FTP is the most effecient for a great run?
If there is a effecient number for the FTP for HIM if there is a winning number, that is the percent I would like to use. My FTP is 230, but find it hard maintain 80% of that when you got hills, and wind, cold. Somedays I can do great, when not tired and 80% is not a problem.
My new VDOT is 45.7 from the last test. With the new numbers I got, I find its hard to maintain those paces off the bike, and sometimes on running days only.
0
Comments
Everyone is going to be different regarding % of FTP. The range is 76% to 82%. Thats really what the RR's are all about. Try an Intensity Factor on RR1 and if your runs tanks then you know you should dial it down for RR2. If you can hit your expected paces then maybe dial it up a notch.
On this page (read the whole thing if you haven't already), go down a bi to the heading "Bike Pacing", and click on "Half and Full Ironman Bike Execution". Download the file (a PDF), look for the pretty colored matrix chart for HIM and follow the instructions on it to tell you what your IF (% of FTP) should be for the race. There is no theory here, just a reflection of the experience over the years from ENers who have had successful races, and those who haven't. The starting piece of information is your expected time for the bike leg of the HIM, which you should estimate from your RRs
Patrick, That is what Im finding out. My VDOT went up and I can't imagine holding these new paces for HIM in two weeks. I think the last testing was several weeks ago. Then I got sick for 10 days. I can hold the new paces for about 1/3 of the time required. So you are indicating I need to got back to old VDOT and use those numbers for my pacing on HIM.
Does this hold true for biking as well. My FTP went up about 20 watts?
Thanks
@Tucker, I think maybe 2 things are going on.
When I have a tail wind or going down small hill, I see my % of FTP at 45-60. So then I change gears to make it get to 80%, next thing I know Im going 25-30mph. Then Im in a head wind(15-25mph against me), then I change into a lighter gear trying to get up to 80%, but its hard to get to 80%, unless I use a harder gear. We don't have a lot of long hills, just short intervals hills at the beach, but the wind is always a factor.
Does it matter if pushing a harder gear/ higher or lower cadence during a race?
For the race I would stick with the correct wattage and let the cadence sort itself out.
I just did Bike RR on Saturday. I was holding about 80% of FTP of 220. However my run after that was so terrible on trying to run 6 miles or one hour as required. I had to stop several times and ended not doing the 6 miles. That run pace was based on my new VDOT numbers, and I see Patrick indicated that I need to use old VDOT numbers. Even with those numbers I legs were so heavy. I ended up doing 67 miles, cause of missing turn. So two things come to mind, after reading some notes on WIKI, I should of use 95% of FTP for training number, but I did not during training for the last 10 weeks.
Since I felt bad off the bike, I ihinking I should use 220 times 95% would be 209 and then 80% of 209 would be 167.. Maybe this should be my starting point on racing. Cause 80% of 220 is 176 and I have not had any 3 hr bike rides averaging over that number and having to run one hour plus.
I feel like all my pacing numbers having gotten weak lately, starting in week 15. Cause my VDOT number went up and it was difficult maintaining those new paces. Then running off the bike in those new numbers were probably causing a lot of fatique.
Also, I had been training 10 weeks before the 20 week started with Trainright program, before I started endurance nation.
If I did not have to run after the bike, I would old numbers of a 230 I did with Trainright.
But if you are using a 20' effort, then yes take 95%. Now for your half I would take less than 80% as you are not running well off the bike. I would go closer to 75%.
I would forget that Trainright stuff. It's garbage. If they are telling you your FTP is 230 when you can't get above 220 for 20' I would be very suspect of everything there. Plus you are not running well off the bike which is the biggest thing in racing tris.
Also, I'd suggest dialing back the run pacing for the race unless you start hitting your paces in your training. Did you have a big Vdot bump?
The normalised power for 2 x 20 mins (with a 2 min very easy between intervals) is the way to estimate your FTP for racing purposes.
The best % of FTP for a race involves a swag, and the swag should be informed by the charts that Al T pointed to, as well as testing in a RR — with experience you get better at working out what power you can sit on in a race.
And remember, there is no such thing as a good bike split followed by a bad run — the bike has to set up the run. So for those with little experience of power and pace, it pays to be conservative. You can always push the run in the last 3 miles (or earlier if you are feeling super good).
Using the 95% of pnorm for 20 minutes to estimate your FTP is only useful for OS and short course training.
Cheers
Peter
I did the test that was suggested by EN. But I forgot to take 95% of that number. However I was using Trainright prior for 12 weeks doing their training before signing up with EN. So I have been training 30 weeks now for this HIM.
I was running really good off the bike until week 15. But those runs were less than 30 min most of the time, as indicated from the plans. I think there was only one long run in plan. I could easy do a 8:00 pace off the bikes.
When I got a new VDOT and started using those new numbers, It appear things started to fall apart.trying to hold new numbers.
Is 220 FTP a weak number for a 47 year old. I would like to know what would be a target goal for me to strive to?
Just wondering if not enough recovery days in the plan? So maybe fatique is setting in, after all this training.
Please check out the wiki on Alternative FTP. The 95% of 20' is really only recommended when you have significant experience and data on one particular ride. See here:
http://endurancenation.us.dnnmax.com/Resources/Wiki/tabid/108/Default.aspx?topic=Alternate+Means+of+Determining+FTP
Since you appear to be struggling in finding the proper number you probably should do the 2x20 so that you have a solid number that you know is correct. Fatigue will definitely settle in, but you can take a rest day before you test so that you are somewhat fresh.
Re: 220 being a weak number- All FTP #s are subjective as to who it applies to. w/kg is a much better gauge as to your cycling abilities, however, you shouldn't really get caught up on the numbers.
I'm a firm believer that anyone, of any age, in any physical condition, can and should be able to improve themselves. E.g., the little 88y/o lady recovering from a hip replacement can work on first walikng down the hall, then out the door, then around the block. And a 47 y/o otherwise healthy man, (?just strating out on a tri career?) can expect to see actual improvement for maybe 10-15 years in absolute speeds and power. After that, it's a question of slowing down as little as possible. As Jennifer says, W/Kg is a better measure for comparison than absolute FTP watts. E.g., is your 227 the same as my 225-230 FTP? I dunno, what do you weigh? W/kg eliminates that question.
Also, it pays to make no assumptions about how good you can get; just keep your eye on the next level up, and you'll discover there is potential in you you never imagined (I've found this applies to all things in life).
Yes, it matters. You want to pick a gear that allows you to keep your cadence within a narrow range around your natural cadence (whatever that is).
Regarding some of your other comments, I've said this a million times on this forum in the past but I think a majority of athletes who train with power need to spend way more time training by RPE (and then look at the numbers afterward). There are times when you definitely want to sit at or close to a specific number but most of your time should be spent training based on RPE. You will never develop a close relationship between RPE and power otherwise.
Thanks, Chris
Chris, has your opinion changed/alter or additions to the Sept 23, 2007 article. As I have been riding with power, as RPE is deceiving. I know I have felt good at the beginning doing a certain speed, just to find out what you indicated in your last sentence.
Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE)
While power and heart-rate tools provide objective measurements, RPE is harder to quantify. Regardless, it is probably the primary meter for determining proper pacing on the IM bike. RPE is simply that "feeling" of how hard you believe your body is working. There have been several attempts to quantify RPE with the use of scales, but I’m not here to tell you the IM bike should be done at a specific number on Borg’s scale. IM RPE is something that is fine-tuned through hours and hours of long ride training. Leveraging this experience can be the most significant tool in helping you determine what RPE is appropriate for the IM bike. Unfortunately, race-day excitement and ego can have this strange psychological impact on your pace-judgment skills. In addition, even for those who are known to be well-disciplined overall, RPE can still be very deceiving at times. For example, how many of you have felt totally fresh in the first 20 or so miles yet have been guilty of riding well above the effort you could sustain for 112 miles? That type of effort will always come at a cost later in your race.
Sorry, let me clarify.
There's the issue of training by RPE vs racing by RPE. Clearly the article is very specific about *racing* by RPE (in addition to power and HR). When racing, I believe you're always watching your power but there are times when it should be your primary meter and there are times when I think it should be your secondary meter. In the first 20 or so miles, power is definitely more important than RPE since the latter will usually be out of whack, ie, quite low for the same power:RPE when training. Keep in mind, at any point during the race where your RPE is high, I think you should back down independent of what your power is showing you.
When training, I believe that RPE is always primary because 1) you're constantly in a situation where you trying to balance training stress and mental stress is a significant piece of that pie 2) I just think it's the only way you're going to develop a tight relationship between the two. If you're constantly or mostly focused on power first then you're not focused on RPE. I think you need to focus on RPE first because it's a sensation or feeling. Power is just a number. Hard to explain on (electronic) paper.
This relationship between power and RPE is definitely hard to quantify in writing. As I'm sure you can tell, I wrote the article with emphasis on how to use a PM when racing but I still think RPE and HR are critical when racing. I summarize it best in the following manner:
If RPE is high then back down
If RPE is fine or low then look at power
If power is high or low then adjust according to your power plan
If power is fine then look at HR
If HR is low then don't worry about it
If HR is high then you have a tougher decision to make -- For example, if it's in the first 20 minutes on the bike then back down a bit to get HR down. If it's middle of
the bike then probably let it go for a bit, drink some water and calories and see if it drops. If it's really getting up there then back down.
Training is just a different beast. I don't spend much time worrying about power so much. Even when I do intervals I do them by feel. Now if I was relatively new to a PM I would definitely focus on power during my intervals but still do longer rides based primarily on RPE. I think once you develop a tight relationship between power and RPE then you can really spend less time focusing on power. Now don't ignore your power because it's a wonderful whip when training. Just don't focus so much on achieving a power number that you're ignoring your RPE. I will use power to hold me back on days when I'm feeling overly zealous though. I'm a big believer than you want to finish all of your long rides stronger than you start (neg split). So those days where I'm feeling really good in the first hour and pushing some good watts I'll probably use my PM to hold me back slightly.
Ok. Now you're introducing the run into the conversation so we've expanded the scope. Talking strictly about the bike, you could argue that RPE will rise slightly toward the end of the bike but it should never feel "really hard." If it does then you're in trouble, imho, and should definitely back down.
The IM run is a different beast. You can easily feel like shit for the first 5K or more on the run but it doesn't mean too much (in relation to feeling like shit for the first 20 miles of the bike). For example, my worst miles on the run at IMC this year might have been 1 through 5. I felt horrible but I was patient and eventually felt much better after mile 5. That's likely not going to happen on the bike so you can't have this conversation about power:RPE and assume the logic applies equally to pace:RPE.
Plus, there's this whole mental piece when it comes to the run. Bottom line, if it feels too hard on the bike it is too hard in reality. If feels too hard on the run then the answer might just be to "suck it up, buttercup."
Chris,
The Garmin 800 had a new update to the unit: It now includes:
Power Balance 10s avg, 30s, 3 second avg
balance avg,
balance lap,
power IF, KJ,NP , NP lap, , NP last lap,
Power TSS
Which of the ones listed above would you use if any in a HIM and how would you use it? What do they mean to me?
Thanks,
Here is what I would use with the new fields if I were you but first I would set the unit so it auto-laps every 10 miles:
IF - Intensity Factor This is the percentage of FTP you want to race at. You shouldn't go over 80% IF. This is the IF of the whole ride!
IF LAP - This is the IF of just the 10 mile section of course you are on
NP - Normalized power This gives the NP of the whole race
NP LAP - This gives the NP of the 10 miles you are on right now.
I assume you will also have real time power showing on the screen as well. Monitor that as you will want to keep that close to the gears that you calculated from the race execution link in the wiki.
I highly suggest you you buy the power webinar and study it as these terms are pretty basic if you have read it.
You really, really, really need to stop worrying about what to display on your Garmin, step back, and read the HIM execution link I shared with you yesterday.
I hear you loud and clear Rich. HIM execution link as been memorized. Game plan is has been written out. The garmin update is great, I wish I had this 20 weeks ago to get a better understanding of TSS/IF/NP to see it at work and to see it charted out.
Great! Next step:
go hereand post a race plan for the squad to critique. You'll find many examples. This is an extremely valuable exercise!
Ahhh, ok, that was my mistake applying it to both the bike and run. I have definitely been intrigued by your feelings on this (since you post them frequently
Why do you think that feeling horrible the first 20 miles of the bike is not the same as the run? Because the run is the last leg and the bike you are kind of just getting started so you should feel pretty good? For me, the reason I never wanted to apply this before is that the bike is not my favorite leg, so it takes me a while to get into the groove and I have distinct highs and lows across a bike of feeling good and feeling not so good. I've always thought that by going by RPE vs. power would really just be more in my head than actually something wrong where I should back down.
1) ONE of the rolling average power settings. 3-second power average. 10 second is probably ok too. The longer the average, the smoother the data will look (less variation in the display) but also the less responsive to your actual changes in power. I would advise against either the unaveraged power (too variable) or the 30 second average (too unresponsive)
2) Lap NP or Lap average power, preferably Lap NP Put this next to the current power that you've got from above. This allows you to see what you've been doing for the last X minutes on average. Most of us think that hitting the lap button every 30 minutes or so to reset that average is a good idea. (You could also set it to auto-lap if you want.) If you decide, for example, on a 20 minute lower power start, you hit the lap button at the end of that 20 minutes and then you'll have a new set of "average" data for the next segment of your ride.
During a race, I think you're asking for a lot of unnecessary brain work that will contribute little to your performance with the rest of the power metrics. Put distance and time and speed to make yourself happy. HR if you use it. If you have 6 fields, I would use the two power metrics, plus distance, time, current speed, and one other thing you want, whether that be HR, average speed, or whatever.
Good luck