Consistently doing >100 TSS/hr & NP way above FTP

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

cheapvega
Posts: 380
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2019 1:12 pm

by cheapvega

TobinHatesYou wrote:
Tue May 16, 2023 6:05 am
cheapvega wrote:
Sun May 14, 2023 2:31 pm
@bobones I tried Xert but wasn't crazy about it. I forget what the focus was from these rides. I use intervals.icu.

@Andrew69 that is my background as well. My #s are nowhere near as impressive but here is my power curve from all rides over the last ~3 months.

Image

Not sure what the flatness of the curve from 5 minutes on indicates. It does include some max efforts. Part of it is the rolling hills here prompt surging but I also feel like I've trained around that riding style.

This is what I am focusing on in your MMPC screenshot:

- A 39ml/kg/min VO2max is that of a virtually untrained / sedentary individual
- You MMPC has a very sharp decline and is fairly jagged, so you don't have enough data points at various interval lengths nor do I believe these are maximal efforts.
- A TTE of 28min is unrealistically low. We almost never see people with <30min TTE and most people are safely >35min. Again this suggests that there isn't enough quality data to go on.

If you want a better understanding of your capabilities, you're going to have to try harder. Do 15s all out. Do 60s all out. Do 5 minutes all out. Do 20-30 minutes all out.

In short, your >100 TSS and >1.0 IF are bogus because there's no way your other metrics are that low unless you're a literal potato.
Fair enough. I do think my FTP is accurate, but I'm guessing everything between that and 60s or less is garbage.

Is there some kind of testing protocol like an FTP test to get all out efforts at different intervals? I keep seeing the Full Frontal test being mentioned but I can't find the actual protocol. Or any ideas on how to test specific intervals. I feel like 3-5 minute power is the best match for the roads around me.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12443
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

Most of those compound metrics are based in part on FTP. According to intervals you’re only good for 28 minutes at FTP. I think you need a better understanding of what all these numbers mean before you start using them for training purposes. Just ride your bike. Ride longer, faster, harder every week.

garbageman
Posts: 213
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2020 6:08 am

by garbageman

Full Frontal (4DP Test) is a Wahoo Systm/Sufferfest fitness test that's available in the free workouts library. It goes
  • 15ish minute warm up
  • Neuromuscular Power (NM) test: 2x 7s maximal sprints with 4 minutes active recovery in between - take the highest 5s avg power as the result.
  • 2 min rest/active recovery
  • MAP test: 5m maximal effort - aim for the highest power you can hold for the entire 5 minutes. keep cadence high, don't surge, don't get out of the saddle or grind a huge gear.
  • 5 minutes rest incl 1m off the bike - "walk it off"
  • FTP Test - 20 minute maximal effort. You're given a target of ~83% of your MAP but instructed to ride by feel. Adjust your effort after 10 minutes to what you can hold for the remainder. Use whatever cadence is comfortable. Take 100% of your average power as the result. Take 98% of avg HR as your threshold heartrate.
  • 5:30 rest/active recovery incl. 1 min off the bike again.
  • Anaerobic Capacity (AC) test: 1 min all out- Start sprinting for the first 15s and try to hold on. "Peak and fade" pacing. Take average power as the result
I find the test to be difficult and I've quit before finishing it on multiple occasions. I usually still want to die 5 minutes after the MAP portion when the FTP test begins-HR still elevated, tasting blood, light headed. Maybe I go too hard, but you are instructed to do so and warned that sandbagging will ruin the results of the entire test. I get the feeling they've tried to cram a little too much into a 1h session. I think a longer warm up and recovery periods between the sprints and between the MAP and FTP test would be nice.

The results can be useful but they won't really fill in your power curve on intervals.icu very well past 5 minutes since you'll be quite fatigued during the 1- and 20-minute tests and you'll be able to do possibly much higher power for those durations when you're fresh. I'd probably just skip the 4DP test if you don't plan to use SYSTM workouts (which base the intervals on the results) - it's a lot of unpleasantness in 1hr. I'd find it much more enjoyable to do max efforts of various durations outside in a less structured way to fill in your power curve.

robertbb
Posts: 2179
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 3:35 am

by robertbb

Anything that requires a series of tests is antiquated, IMO. If you're slightly sick, slightly dehydrated or perhaps not fully rested/recovered at the time you're testing, you'll be training to targets that aren't correct. Further, if you re-test only every 8-12 weeks you are missing out on improvements achieved along the way where your targets should be adjusting.

The power duration curve is so elegant in its simplicity and so powerful in its potential - it should form the basis of all inputs to a training workload.

The answer should be: "feed the model by riding your bike". The more you ride, the better the model gets to reflecting your true potential, and your training zones and targets adapt according to which part of the curve you're working on improving (noting that different types of training stimulates different kind of adaptations).

Time in zone is what's important at this point...

AJS914
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

I think you have to feed the model with a little more intention than just riding your bike. Some people may never do a 2, 4, or 8 minute interval or a longer continous effort left to their own devices.

I use WKO5 and it tells me which parts of the curve have the most time decay and need some touch up. Every now and then I'll toss in an effort in my regular training that maintains the model.
Last edited by AJS914 on Sun May 21, 2023 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Andrew69
Posts: 593
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:52 am
Location: ɹǝpunuʍop

by Andrew69

AJS914 wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 6:14 am
I think you have to feed the model with a little more intention than just riding your bike. Some people may never do a 2, 4, or 8 minute interval or a longer continous effort left to their own devices.

Exactly
GIGO - Garbage In, garbage out
If you dont feed in good data, then the output will also be poor
AJS914 wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 6:14 am
I use WKO5 and it tells me which parts of the curve has the most time decay and need some touch up. Every now and then I'll toss in an effort in my regular training that maintains the model.
It does?
Where?
Cant say Ive ever seen that. Must be a chart I dont currently display

AJS914
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

It's in the main Power Duration Model chart. You have to scroll to the bottom to find Normalized Residuals for Testing for Cycling. It gives you the most decayed short, medium, and long duration targets to keep the model up to date.

conradhughes
Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2022 9:18 am

by conradhughes

The VO2 max on Intervals is calculated from a single maximal 5min effort. At 89kg/426w last year for 5 mins it gave me 59 at 34 years old. Best way to update that figure on Intervals is to go all out for 5 mins!

Andrew69
Posts: 593
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:52 am
Location: ɹǝpunuʍop

by Andrew69

AJS914 wrote:
Sun May 21, 2023 4:43 pm
It's in the main Power Duration Model chart. You have to scroll to the bottom to find Normalized Residuals for Testing for Cycling. It gives you the most decayed short, medium, and long duration targets to keep the model up to date.
Maybe Im wrong, but I dont think the Normalized Residuals chart are the most decayed targets.
My understanding of that chart is that it gives the short, medium and long duration targets that fall most below the power duration curve.

Again, more than happy to stand corrected, but Im pretty sure my reading between the Power Duration Model chart and the Normalised Residual chart Ive got that right

When you mentioned the decay chart, I went looking through the available charts and found one titled "Imminent Peak Loss" and the description is as follows,
"The power-duration model is driven by a rolling 90 days of data.
Each day new data is added (when training), and each day old data drops off the back. This chart gives you insight into the data that is about to drop off the back and affect the model. This can be helpful for testing and can give insight into subtle shifts in fitness over the rolling 90 days"
If Im reading that description correctly, this is the chart you want to look at when looking for data that will require re-testing due to decay.

TobinHatesYou
Posts: 12443
Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2017 12:02 pm

by TobinHatesYou

^ Exactly this. It wants you to fill in the area under the modeled curve.

AJS914
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

I see the distinction. Of course, the area under the curve can get gaps from old data dropping off. I can't seem to find Imminent Peak Loss. Is it on a certain Dashboard?

Andrew69
Posts: 593
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:52 am
Location: ɹǝpunuʍop

by Andrew69

AJS914 wrote:
Tue May 23, 2023 5:52 am
I see the distinction. Of course, the area under the curve can get gaps from old data dropping off. I can't seem to find Imminent Peak Loss. Is it on a certain Dashboard?
On the Power Duration Model page, click on the down arrow next to the heading and then click on the Add an Existing Chart button
Either scroll through the charts or just search for Imminent and it will come up.
Then simply add it to your page

Post Reply