In what ways was was the 1/2/3 easier? No sketchy folks, no crashes, but really the consistent power always seems to make my legs happier than a really mixed effort (coast, surge, coast, surge, blah blah blah) like in the 3/4 races.
The yellow line is, again, at 300W as a reference point. Any increase in the HR was either me going with a move or just a steady predictable surge in the race intensity. It was a superfun workout and race. The track is cool and the 1/2/3 field is just a great place to race, it seemed like people were going pretty hard; I saw some attacks that were quite furious.
Link to the ONLINE GARMIN DATA: http://connect.garmin.com/activity/25807032
The 3/4 race:
since getting a mention here I realized I didn't mention that my teammate got a stellar 5th in the 3/4! good job TB
I had time to refill my water bottles. Then line up again, I was shivering at the start. Looking around the 3/4 field after a 1/2/3 race is quite revealing; people look different. In the race, there was all kinds of sketchyness going on, I used my brakes frequently. I thought there might have been times where I could have done some efforts, but the 1/2/3 race left me with just more steady effort. Generally, I just rode safe and surfed the pack.
Of course you see lower heart rate and power (line at 300W) through the entire second race. I did not have the ability to do much more than what you see here, I felt it in my quads.
http://connect.garmin.com/splits/25807024
I was hoping the weekend would launch my Training Stress Score/TSS into outer space, but no. The shortness of the races kept them low: 131.6, and 52.2. The Intensity Factor was good for the 1/2/3 race at 1.025. This may indicate that I need to re-assess my FTP. I never did a fresh test of power at the end of January. I need to revisit the rules on Intensty Factor... Robb? Mike? any input?
I think you're right - if your IF was over 1 for 1:15, then the FTP you used to calculate IF is too low. Congratulations - you get to work harder from now on!
ReplyDeleteTSS calculations are inscrutable to me, but IF I think is just a linear calcuation. If your FTP is 300 and you work at 300W, your IF for that work is 1.00. If you work at 250 W, your IF is 250/300, or .83.
I'd take the hottest 60 minutes of the race and see what the NP is for that. That's your new FTP, right? Your IF for those 60 minutes should be 1.0 if you were right on the rivet.
Before grabbing that NP for your new FTP you may want to read this.
ReplyDeletehttp://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2008/05/seven-deadly-sins.html
People often ignore the original definition of FTP: quasi steady state for 1hr. A crit is hardly quasi steady state. All of those spikes in power equate to a higher NP and therefore a higher IF. TSS is based on a combination of AP, NP and IF in relation to your current FTP. If you raise your FTP the TSS for the same ride goes down and visa versa.
The NP calculation is also inherently flawed to a degree, read about NP busters.
I have the WKO on the home PC. I'll look at 60min NP
ReplyDeleteI read the article Chris H linked to; thank you. My worry is an artificial chronic training load RELATIVE to how I have done it in the past. My goal is tracking progress over time, which means that this years mid-season FTP, CTL, ATL, TSS, etc, needs to be achived in a method comparable to last year's. My last FTP test was Dec 17 (see my blog post from roughly that date), I have had 2 months of semi-good training. Me thinks another 20 min effort up Skyline is what I need. Someday I will break 350W while weighing 30 pounds less than I do right now.