Whats wrong with my RR's IF/TSS numbers?
I had stopped trying to make sense of these a while ago but recent discussion on the main board over Kurt's RR got me thinking again.
Here are my last 4 RR's. 2 for IMLOU and 2 for IMFL
10/8 5:21 106miles IF.77 TSS 319 NP 171 AP 165 VI 1.036 no run brick but ran 20 long run next day 8:10 pace.
9/21 5:39 108 miles IF .76 TSS 325 NP 168 AP 160 VI 1.05 ran 6 8:30 pace
8/19 5:41 108 miles IF .82 TSS 379 NP 178 AP 170 VI 1.047 ran 6 8:15 pace (note highest if/tss/np and fastest run???
7/19 5:40 107 miles IF .79 TSS 351 NP 172 AP 165 VI 1.042 ran 6 8:30 pace
I can't seem to reel myself in anymore than that while doing a RR and I was very happy with the runs on on RR my EP is 8:50. The couple of tests I did wear my HR it was in the bottom of Z2 for the average.
Unfortunatley I do not have any data for IMLOU race as PM broke but biked and ran a PR. I also had a PM failure right before my best century every a few weeks ago ( I woulda loved to have that data).
The two races I do have data for are.
OLY 13 days after IMLOU IF .91 TSS 97 NP 201 AP 193 VI 1.041 ran 6 at 7:40 and PR course and distance.
Mooseman HIM early season IF .88 TSS 240 NP 181 AP 166 VI 1.108 ran the 13.1 at just over 8 min pace PR course and crushing PR run.
I have a variety of FTP tests ranging from 20 min to 1:10 and tests all appear valid. 11/27/10 42 min ftp 175 , 12/26/10 42 min ftp 185, 2/07/11 42 min ftp 195 , 3/22/11 42 min ftp 201 , 5/25/11 23 min ftp 206 , 6/16/11 1:10 ftp 214 , 6/30/11 42 min ftp 218 , 8/11/11 20 min ftp 221. I honestly believe that every test is accurate I found it extremely hard hitting my FTP workout before and after these tests and races. For instance my last ride before last test was 2 hour ABP ride and I barely got IF .80 and yet a couple days later I do IF .77 for 106 miles I dont get it?
I have checked and FTP is correctly reflected and updated in Power Agent in each of my RR tests. Everything I have read suggest thest numbers cannot be! Somewhere along the way WKO stopped accepting my updates and I gave up trying to figure it out but all the data comes from PA this is why I do not have VI numbers.
It is what it is , but what is wrong? Can anyone offer and explanation?
Thanks Tim,
Comments
The bottom line on all this, is you want to know what to do at IM FL on race day, right?
Ok I have done some detective work here Tim and determined......that the TSS is correct for your RRs above. You just went too hard. That is all. The math all works out. I found your IM LOU race report where you said your RR were 5:40. So given that I calculated that the TSS given the IF above is correct. IMHO I don't think that you ran faster than EP + 30 after your RR tells us anything. I know I, and many others, COULD run faster in the RR brick, but we are not supposed to as that is not what we are supposed to do on raceday.
My suggestion is to race your numbers and save your legs for the run.
EDIT - here is the calcualtion for TSS (IF)^2 x workout duration in hours x 100 = TSS score.
Tim , I looked at your IMLOU race report and it had your weight at 120LB,using the FTP of 221 in your post above it yields a w/kg of 4.0 which is solid!! Your IM Lou bike time was ~5:31 which is good and was a PR for you. You had a good ~4:00 run ( on target for your 47 vdot) after that bike so how does the bike effort at LOU compare to the race rehearsals? That level of effort worked.
Your VI levels in your RRs are good. As Tucker points out the TSS numbers are correct and your IF levels are what most people would ride a ½ IM at not a full.
Al had the question of how were the times for your RR’s posted above. If those were all 6 hour rides then you must have a ton of climbing to do 106 -108 in 6 hours vs IM LOU which is hilly in 5:31. Or something else is different with the RR #s. What is your RR course like? Flat, rollers or heavy climbs?
The only other angle is that with you being at 120 lbs you may have a different power profile than at 150 – 170 lb typical athlete. An IF of .75 - .8 may work for you but most 150-170lb peps would be walking the run if they tried those IF levels.
@ Tucker thanks for veryfying the TSS calcs. I will say I bike IMLOU via RPE and felt good. I also felt good on the run. Very similar to RR's . I won't say great cause ya never do after 100 plus miles no matter what. In my IMLOU race report I acknowledge maybe I overbiked since I didnt hit my EP of 8:50 on the run but came in at 9:19 pace. But once I looked at the heat and porta potty stops based on my VDOT that and my RPE of the run it still feels like a good run to me. I been trying to reel myself in and will be hard in IMFL. That and the fact I will be tapered and well rested for IMFL makes it even harder. I hate to slow down just because a number on a computer tells me too but I hear ya. Thanks again.
@Matt most of your questions were already answered to Al and Tucker... When you say VI is good do you mean correct or in the right range good?.... We want them in the low 1.0-1.04 range right? The RR's done in JULY and AUG were on the exact same course Timberman HIM x2 and were only 1 minute apart (both even had the same 6 minutes of refueling and pee stops) .... I dont know the verticle comparison to IMLOU but consider this course harder than IMLOU.... The ones in SEPT and OCT were done on different and much easier terrain trying to duplicate IMFL with the total ride times coming in similar but overall time took longer due to interuptions in traffic, etc.
I know there is a huge advantage on the run for us little guys. Your heat app with BMI built into it should show that I think. Everything I have read to this point says those numbers would reduce you to walking but they didnt. I did overbike the Timberman HIM on a very hot day (no HR and no PM data) 2 years ago so I do know what it feels like. I wasnt reduced to the deathmarch around me but I did walk a few times and after the race I thought my world was gonna end so I have remembered that RPE and kept it in somewhat of a control.
Additional info----again no data due to broken PM but couple weeks ago biked 112 in 5:17 21.1 mph and ran 3 afterwards... I could tell that was too fast the run would not have been pretty. Damn PM cause me to miss 2 races and 2 other pertinent days this being one of them.
Thanks for the replies and thoughts. I think if I can bike correctly I should be able to run EP or better in IMFL.
So, Tim, to the question Patrick and I asked, "What will you aim for at FL?":
It's hard to imagine a successful race for you with an IF higher than 0.75, and that would require a VI of 1.03 or less (very possible on the flat FL course.) Use the Joule interval button/function, and keep it under 0.7 for the first 30-60 minutes, then let it go to 0.75. If you're not feeling trashed in the last hour, you can add 0.01-0.02 to the IF at the end. Even those numbers might be a touch high, but you've shown you can nail a good marathon in an IM, so you can push on the envelope a bit to see what happens if you want.
You did 106 mi RR in 5:21; with race day mojo, aero gear, and IM drafting, I can imagine a 5:30 split is well within your capability.
@ Al I think you are right and even though all of my RR's have come in above .75 I am gonna try my hardest to keep it below .75. Being tapered and pumped for the race I am sure I will find this difficult. With all the inadvertent drafting , slingshotting , and unavoidable drafting on a flat IMFL course I am certainly hoping for a PR bike of better than 5:30 since IMLOU was 5:31 but my real goal is to RUN really well and that means applying your advice.
This weeks 2 rides.
tues - 4:30 , 92 miles , Z4 intervals, Z3 intervals, remainder Z2 , HR 141, IF .81 , TSS 299 , AP 170 , NP 180 , VI 1.06 , and felt good afterwards
thurs - 1:45 , CT trainer , ABP , HR 140 , IF .81 , TSS 115 , AP ,178 , NP 180 , VI 1.01, barely finished and felt trashed afterwards
I don't get it?
I think I will get in one more FTP test this weekend to make sure I'm still in the ballpark.
AP 235 NP 234 and AVG HR 172 (highest ever) using NP234 times 95% gives me a FTP of 222.3 old FTP was 221.35 LOL. New W/KG 4.1 old 4.0. I don't know why I got 1 watt higher of AP vs. NP????? But if calculate using AP would get 223.25 another whopping watt.
OK seriously 1 watt is not enough to make up the difference in my IF and TSS numbers so I have definitely remained in the ballpark and zones are correct. Its even quite possible I just tried harder this test since HR was so high. I suppose for now I stay the course and plan on IF .75.
I see Dusty Holcomb just did a RR with IF and TSS off the charts. Also found the Quadrant Analysis Info thread very interesting specifically Tom Glynn's comments.
Anyone know why I would get a higher AP than NP ?
Quarq PM . Its a brand new one being replaced after my first one failed pre-IMLOU. Battery New. I looked on the Joule and it had AP/NP both the same at 234. In PA it had AP 235 NP 234. So maybe just an anomoly in the confuser called Joule/PA???????
The interval looks solid , with the exception of a huge power and HR spike at the very beginning of interval (small hill and overamped to start, maybe this cause the anomoly but as you can see below all are pretty close). I also had a garmin 500 onboard but I did not interval this on the garmin but the 30 minutes or so that encompassed the 20 min test was AP of 210 on Garmin. Total ride was 1:13 with AP 163 NP 189. Appears PM working fine to me?
Below is the record of my FTP tests. So all my tests AP/NP pretty close? This doesnt really mean anything does it? I have used various time tests and find them all to be pretty accurate.
10/16 20 min test the one in discussion AP 234 NP 234 95% ftp 222 w/kg 4.1
8/11 20 min test same course as 10/16 AP 232 NP 233 95% ftp 221
6/30 42 min test AP 214 NP 218 ftp 218
6/16 1:10 test YES OVER 1 HOUR AP 211 NP 214 ftp 214
5/25 23 min test hill time trial AP 217 NP 218 95% ftp 206
3/22 42 min CT test NP 201 ftp 201
2/07 42 min CT test ftp 195
12/26/10 42 min CT test ftp 185
11/27/10 first FTP test ever , beginning EN CT 42 min ftp 175 w/kg 3.0
Does the ratio of AP/NP appear correct????
Anyway much more info than you asked for but thought you maybe interested in 1 years of EN training results. At this point I plan on riding .75 of 222 at IMFL.