Lance's FTP?

I have a document my coach gave to me last year which shows the following figures for LA:

LT wattage = 483 watts
LT HR= 178 bpm
Watts/kg at LT = 6.75

I have no idea how dated these figures are, but they're sobering nonetheless.

GONE4ARIDE said:

...but they're sobering nonetheless.

Not sure what's 'sobering' about those numbers. We're talking about not just a professional, but one of the top professional cyclists. Do you get sobered if your golf game doesn't match Tiger Woods or your basketball game isn't on par with Michael Jordan in his prime? These guys are at the very tip of the iceberg in terms of sports ability. They're supposed to blow the average athlete out of the water.

-Dave

40% of that is due to using PowerCranks. So if your FTP is ~290W prior to using PowerCranks and you weigh the same as he does (or less), you too can become a TdF winner.

GONE4ARIDE said:

I have a document my coach gave to me last year which shows the following figures for LA:

LT wattage = 483 watts
LT HR= 178 bpm
Watts/kg at LT = 6.75

I have no idea how dated these figures are, but they're sobering nonetheless.

Is LT wattage the same as FTP?

Is LT power the same as FTP? Could be in some people. Probably not in most people. The answer inexorably is "it depends"...LT is usually arbitrarily set at 4mmol. Some people can ride for much longer than an hour at 4mmol.

I imagine Lance's FTP is over 400 at most times of the year. How much depends where he's at in prep for the TdF - aka, where he's at in his "program" (and you know what I mean by "program"😉...

GONE4ARIDE said:

I have a document my coach gave to me last year which shows the following figures for LA:

LT wattage = 483 watts
LT HR= 178 bpm
Watts/kg at LT = 6.75

I have no idea how dated these figures are, but they're sobering nonetheless.

I think they were higher than that. During the Dauphine Libre in 2003 he was reportedly averaging 495 watts on the final climbs (~40 minutes long) after many hours in the saddle and several hard days of racing...

... now, that's sobering.

Here are some of Lance's earlier numbers. These are from a seminar given by Carmichael years ago.

Lance Armstrong's Physical Development
Year LT power (watts) VO2max
1993 342 78.9
1994 364 74.2
1995 381 73.8
1996 403 72.2
1997 263 64.1
1999 416 77.1

I guess I need to choose better parents. 😉

Bailsibub said:

Here are some of Lance's earlier numbers. These are from a seminar given by Carmichael years ago.

Lance Armstrong's Physical Development
Year LT power (watts) VO2max
1993 342 78.9
1994 364 74.2
1995 381 73.8
1996 403 72.2
1997 263 64.1
1999 416 77.1

This all looks strange to me. The progression above would be amazing in itself, but turning that into 483, in a guy who'd trained massively for many many years to get to 416? Also, why did his V02max drop 10% between 93 and 96?

lanierb said:

This all looks strange to me. The progression above would be amazing in itself, but turning that into 483, in a guy who'd trained massively for many many years to get to 416? Also, why did his V02max drop 10% between 93 and 96?

It isn't his Vo2 max that you are seeing, it his Vo2 at LT power.

What you could be seeing is a rider whose efficency is increasing (doesn't need as much oxygen to do the same amount of work) but threshold as a percentage of Vo2 max is decreasing.

The large jump in threshold power in the later years would be due to an incease in efficency and the ability to operate at a high percentage of Vo2 max. The "training" methods used to achieve these gains are known only to a few.

lanierb said:

This all looks strange to me. Also, why did his V02max drop 10% between 93 and 96?

It looked strange to me, too. Seems like the numbers should be higher...especially for '93 when he won the worlds. But then again, Lance's LT and his FTP could be significantly different.

And regarding the VO2 issue, Carmichael was making a point about efficiency increases (and how Lance's efficiency increases led to wattage increases with a declining VO2).

Bailsibub said:

It looked strange to me, too. Seems like the numbers should be higher...especially for '93 when he won the worlds. But then again, Lance's LT and his FTP could be significantly different.

Yeah there's no way he won the worlds on FTP=340.

lanierb said:

Yeah there's no way he won the worlds on FTP=340.

Yep its a little hard to believe hey! 😕

swampy1970 said:

I think they were higher than that. During the Dauphine Libre in 2003 he was reportedly averaging 495 watts on the final climbs (~40 minutes long) after many hours in the saddle and several hard days of racing...

... now, that's sobering.

Go Big Lance Go !!!

lanierb said:

Yeah there's no way he won the worlds on FTP=340.

How is it impossible?

lanierb said:

Yeah there's no way he won the worlds on FTP=340.

342 wasn't his FTP, it was his LT.

lanierb said:

Also, why did his V02max drop 10% between 93 and 96?

Put on weight?

I wouldn't put too much cred in VO2 values.

You have to take any numbers you see on Lance with a barrel full of salt. We don't even know if what they call "power at LT" is the same as FTP. And when were those measurements taken? In January? July?

It's pretty clear to me that his (and all top pros'😉 FTP blows even my 5 min. power away. They're way up in my anaerobic power.

http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/images/powerprofile_v4.gif

tonyzackery said:

Is LT power the same as FTP? Could be in some people. Probably not in most people. The answer inexorably is "it depends"...LT is usually arbitrarily set at 4mmol. Some people can ride for much longer than an hour at 4mmol.

Oupss, I got corrected by Dr. Coggan on this recently. I'd like to share this knowledge with you.

OBLA is (not so arbitrarily) set at 4mmol/L. LT, I believe, is defined as being an increase by 1mmol/L over one's baseline.

If I understood my lesson correctly, Lance's OBLA (4mmol/L) is believed to be higher than his MAXLASS.