First TT w/ PT (ride log)

frenchyge said:

Conclusions - 1) Even though the return leg hurt and I wasn't able to hold my target power, I still achieved a negative time split (which I certainly didn't do in June) and the pacing strategy was probably a good one. 2) Over-estimated my target power @340W, and was only able to achieve 307W NP. 3) At first glance, my ride seems to have the typical "start too fast, slack off in the middle, finish strong" profile of an amateur TT-er, but after thinking about it that was kinda my strategy because of the slightly uphill outbound leg. 4) Time to go buy a 9-speed chain for my trainer bike before winter hits.

Hope this was somehow helpful. If anyone knows how to upload an image of the power/speed profile, let me know. Cheers. 🙂

That's cool stuff.😎 You can make an image file (e.g., jpg) out of the power/speed graph with a screen capture program (I use SnagIt - techsmith.comdefault.aspOpen ↗). Or, if you have Adobe Acrobat (full product) you can print to Acrobat Distiller and then attach the pdf file. Either way, the resolution isn't great, but if you make a separate wko file of just the TT it won't be too many minutes and it won't be too bad. I want to take your wko file and overlay the course and wind and then work on some optimization pacing strategies subject to your FT (sounds like it was ~310w).

You are very, very detailed.

Keep up the good work!!!😄

frenchyge said:

3) At first glance, my ride seems to have the typical "start too fast, slack off in the middle, finish strong" profile of an amateur TT-er, but after thinking about it that was kinda my strategy because of the slightly uphill outbound leg.

First off great result.

secondly, irrespective of the course profile, this is not an amateur mistake -- i have data from elite senior world male champions who make exactly the same 'mistake'.

ric

frenchyge said:

At first glance, my ride seems to have the typical "start too fast, slack off in the middle, finish strong" profile of an amateur TT-er, but after thinking about it that was kinda my strategy because of the slightly uphill outbound leg.

Actually, I think your only "mistake" was in overestimating your sustainable power at 340w. Any TT is ridden with an explicit or implicit pacing strategy. Some pacing strategies are founded on inaccurate assumptions (e.g., constant power will result in fastest time) and some pacing strategies require competencies that the cyclist has not developed (e.g., a highly variable power pacing strategy of, say, 150w-500w). But, your pacing strategy was founded on sound principles (ride at higher power on uphill and upwind segments) and you had solid course and environment data (topography and wind). The only problem was that your pacing strategy assumed you could ride for the required duration at an NP of 340w, which was about 30w above your present fitness. Given that, it was predictable that you would ride the 1st leg too hard and wouldn't be able to maintain your target power on the 2nd leg. So, I don't fault your pacing "strategy." It just points out the importance of having very precise knowledge of one's sustainable NP for a given duration and the benefit of practicing variable power pacing. One more point. If I was a little uncertain of my sustainable NP for a given duration, I would probably take it out a little more conservatively and then gradually ramp it up if I found that I could go harder.

Agree, that was definitely an over-statement of my ability. That was based on a 5-min interval from 3 weeks ago where I held 361W, which I reduced based on being 15-min vs. 5-min. I've probably suffered some detraining in the last couple weeks as well - welcome to August. 🙁

RapDaddyo said:

One more point. If I was a little uncertain of my sustainable NP for a given duration, I would probably take it out a little more conservatively and then gradually ramp it up if I found that I could go harder.

That's a good idea, which I also considered, but when the outbound leg is uphill and/or against the wind there is little opportunity for that. You have to go hard from the start or you lose time. I guessed 340W, but I was riding at ~360W for most of the outbound leg because of the push, which compounds the problem. In the case where the outbound leg is your high-power leg, I'm guessing that you're better off to overshoot on the way out, and hold on to what you can on the way back. That's pretty much what happened to me and I still ran a negative split, so I'm okay with my pacing (aside from my poor assessment of 15-min power).

Were you planning to project what my time would have been if I'd just held a steady 310W for the entire time? It'd be interesting to see what the difference would be.

frenchyge said:

when the outbound leg is uphill and/or against the wind there is little opportunity for that. You have to go hard from the start or you lose time. I guessed 340W, but I was riding at ~360W for most of the outbound leg because of the push, which compounds the problem. In the case where the outbound leg is your high-power leg, I'm guessing that you're better off to overshoot on the way out, and hold on to what you can on the way back. That's pretty much what happened to me and I still ran a negative split, so I'm okay with my pacing (aside from my poor assessment of 15-min power).

Well, that's the toughest scenario. When the early part of the course calls for a push (due to grade or wind) and the latter part of the course calls for a float, it requires the greatest knowledge of one's sustainable power. You can easily push too hard and pay the price the rest of the way. And I agree that, even with an overestimation of your sustainable power, your pacing strategy was sound.

frenchyge said:

Were you planning to project what my time would have been if I'd just held a steady 310W for the entire time? It'd be interesting to see what the difference would be.

Well, if I get my model fully operational, I'll be able to simulate multiple pacing strategies for that specific course under that specific wind condition and I will compare your pacing with an "optimal" one. I am of the view that there is absolutely an "optimal" pacing strategy for a known course with known wind and with a relatively high degree of knowledge of one's sustainable power. It's actually not very hard to derive the optimal pacing strategy, even within the NP constraint. The hard part is implementation of a strategy, any strategy. I am working on that part as well.