FTP for a 30 minute TT

There are two separate questions in your question. The first question is how to train during the next couple of months. The second question is when and how to establish your target power for the predicted duration of the ride. The answer to the first question has more to do with the nature of the course than the duration. If the course is relatively flat and the normal winds for the event location and time of year are light, then there is little opportunity for a variable power pacing strategy and you will ride at or close to your target power for the duration. If the course has some climbs or if the winds can be strong, then you may want to develop a variable power pacing plan. The difference is this. In the former case, you can largely ignore your anaerobic capacity and work almost exclusively on your aerobic capacity with standard SST/L4 efforts. In the latter case, you may want to allocate part of your training time to your anaerobic capacity with L5/L6 efforts.

As to when and how to test prior to the race, you will definitely want to do a constant power test at a duration equal to your estimated duration for the event, within about 10 days of the event. The purpose of this test is to give you a solid target power for the first half of the event. Often, a rider will take it out too hard in the first half and has to back off in the second half. Normally, this is a sub-optimal pacing strategy. If you have done a recent test to establish your max power for the estimated duration, you will ride the first half at the right number and with confidence. If you feel really good after the first half (i.e., better than in your test ride), you can always pick it up a bit in the second half.

If you don't know how to pace your 30 minute TT then do a few 30 minute tests and figure out your race pacing from that.

In terms of setting training zones:

- Your FTP is likely to be within a few percent of your best 30 minute power so 30 minute power, especially if it's repeatable across multiple days with varying levels of background fatigue, is a good first order estimate and good enough to ballpark appropriate training levels.

- And once you've ballparked those levels all you need to do is go out and train with the goal of hitting at least the low end of each level but once you're out there train as much by RPE as hard and fast numbers. Glance down at the start of longer intervals to make sure you're not going crazy hard in the opening minutes when everything feels easy and glance down a bit in the middle and end to keep yourself honest and not get lazy. But for the most part just ride for the chosen durations or to fixed landmarks (like the top of a climb) but then review the power data after each ride to see what you did, how well you paced and look for opportunities to improve your efforts. Feed that information forward to future workouts and strive to improve the quality of your efforts. It won't take long using an approach like that to hone in on your current fitness and find out what you can handle in training without blowing up. This method also allows you to bump up your target levels as your fitness improves and not require a formal test prior to increasing training intensity.

Basically it comes down to training 'with' power or 'descriptively' instead of training 'by' power or 'prescriptively'. Use the power meter to 'meter' your efforts and not as a governor to strictly regulate your efforts to predefined zones. Sure go out with reasonable targets like 90% of your FTP (or 30 minute power, close enough) as the low end for pure Threshold (L4) work or perhaps 90% of your recent best 5 minute interval when doing 5 minute VO2 max repeats. If you can't do your intervals at 90% as a minimum then perhaps it's a bad day and you need more recovery or perhaps you need to back down the targets a notch in future workouts. Conversely if you're having a great day and can complete say a 2x20 set well above 100% and can get through the entire set then go for it and think about bumping up your targets for future sessions. Just a few sessions like this and you'll have a very good handle on what you can manage for different durations.

But in terms of your upcoming event, do a few 30 minute sustained efforts on the same bike and in the same position (e.g. aero bar position not road bike up top) and you'll figure out pretty quickly what you should be able to handle on race day. Stay at or very close to that (or a tad below) for the opening minutes of your TT but after about five minutes you should be able to go by feel and not have to rely so heavily on the meter.

Good luck,
-Dave

Thanks guys! Much appreciated!

Dave, you mentioned something interesting about not relying so heavily on the power meter. I find myself watching the numbers all the time, but recently during another time trial, my back wheel blew on the course. I borrowed another rider's wheel that was there watching. As a result, I lost my Power Tap and subsequently my power data feedback for the last half of the ride. I rode exclusively by feel (pretty much ignored heart rate data). I found that I was a slave to the numbers. I was able to push my body harder when going by feel. And, I felt better doing it. Maybe it was just me, but I felt more in the 'zone' and in touch with how I was feeling.

You might want to do some testing of this theory before you use it to manage your intensity of effort (power) in a target event such as your upcoming TT. Speaking only for myself, I do a terrible job of managing my power without my power meter. I inevitably end up with a wave pattern in which I go harder than I intend to, then easier than I intend to, then harder, then easier, sort of bouncing off the walls of a tube rather than staying on the center line. The net result is a higher ratio of NP to AP. In a TT, this is a sub-optimal pacing strategy. In a flat TT with no wind, you would want a ratio of NP to AP of very close to 1.0. There is obviously a benefit to not having to look at the PM frequently, but I have taken a different approach to that problem. As a glider pilot, I grew accustomed to an audio variometer so I built on that concept.

Yeah, I will definitely test anything before my event.

I have 44 hours flight time - never finished my license up though. It just became a very expensive hobby so I gave up on it for now. Tell me about that concept you came up with.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by awilki01 [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Yeah, I will definitely test anything before my event.

I have 44 hours flight time - never finished my license up though. It just became a very expensive hobby so I gave up on it for now. Tell me about that concept you came up with.

Riding a bike with a power meter has a lot in common with flying a sailplane, in that you need to keep your eyes up but you want information from your instruments. For soaring, the key piece of information is whether you are in air that is going up (lift) or down (sink). Sailplane instrument manufacturers came up with a simple solution to this problem, an audio variometer. This gives you information on your vertical speed audibly. I just adapted this concept to power meter output, but with the zero point being the target power rather than zero. Here's an example of a sailplane audio variometer: vimeo.com624960Open ↗

Clever idea RappDaddy!

To the OP: Personally, my biggest pacingconcern in steady flat TTs is the first five minutes where it's really easy to go out way too hard until RPE catches up with you and then you've found you've dug too big a hole. In variable paced rolling terrain TTs pacing is more complex and harder to get right (which is where RDOs idea is so brilliant).

But mostly I was talking about training intervals (which is also where you'll develop your pacing skills). Specifically a lot of folks feel they 'need' to know their FTP and from it their power training ranges to be able to 'train with power'. It turns out it's not really all that important, pick your durations or distances of interest to target different energy systems (e.g. 12 to 60 minutes for Threshold work, 3 to 6 minutes for VO2 Max work, 45" to 2 minutes for Anaerobic work...) ride those efforts as hard as you can steadily ride for the chosen durations. Yeah ideally your L4 work will be 90% of FTP or greater and your VO2 Max work will be somewhere around 110% of FTP or greater but you do what you can do and then review the data after your ride to both assess the quality of today's workout and to use what you learn to improve the quality of future workouts. You'll figure out your training levels very quickly using a method like that and it does not require any formal testing before you get started.

Bottom line for the purpose of training, knowing exact FTP isn't all that important. It can be useful for things like calculating TSS, CTL, and ATL for workload tracking and it's always nice to have a recent estimate of FTP but from a pure training standpoint it's not all that essential. And from that standpoint your 30 minute TT result is a very good first estimate of FTP as almost everyone's MMP curve starts getting pretty flat once you get out as far as 30 minutes, perhaps your FTP is a couple to a few percent lower but likely not much more.

I have struggled with this issue training indoors. I feel as if I am doing better outside on the road pacing with an occasional glance to see if RPE is matching what I estimate as real based on the PM reading. So I have kind of struggled with the "train with power, not by power" concept for shorter indoor intervals (less than 60 minutes). As soon as I take my eyes off the PM my output drifts down quickly and I am below target (L4 drops to L3). I thought maybe it was due to the lack of maturity with training at level. The more time passes (months of indoor training), I am experiencing a better match between RPE and true output. For now I still feel as if I need to stick with the "train by power" while training inside for the short intervals otherwise I end up with 85% instead of 91%+ on those specific short intervals. Hopefully I will improve mental focus and toughness as time passes.

I like RDO's audible tone concept.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by Felt_Rider [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

I have struggled with this issue training indoors. I feel as if I am doing better outside on the road pacing with an occasional glance to see if RPE is matching what I estimate as real based on the PM reading. So I have kind of struggled with the "train with power, not by power" concept for shorter indoor intervals (less than 60 minutes). As soon as I take my eyes off the PM my output drifts down quickly and I am below target (L4 drops to L3). I thought maybe it was due to the lack of maturity with training at level. The more time passes (months of indoor training), I am experiencing a better match between RPE and true output. For now I still feel as if I need to stick with the "train by power" while training inside for the short intervals otherwise I end up with 85% instead of 91%+ on those specific short intervals. Hopefully I will improve mental focus and toughness as time passes.

I like RDO's audible tone concept.

I don't think this has anything to do with maturity with training at level. I can't ride a target power worth a hoot without my PM. When I have tried it, my power graph is one long sine wave and my NP/AP ratio is high. When I ride by referencing my PM, my power curve is flat with the usual saw blade look and my NP is within a couple of watts of my AP. What I actually do is to ride by cadence, which for some reason I can better manage without referencing my PM, and use the PM for power mainly when the resistance changes due to grade or wind and I have to settle into a new groove at my target power.

Regarding audible tone input. Here is an audible and visual feedback that fits on cycling glasses. Neat concept:

4iiii.com4iiii.comOpen ↗

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by RapDaddyo [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

When I have tried it, my power graph is one long sine wave and my NP/AP ratio is high.

The question however is, does this really matter?

In some instances yes, but in others, it won't.

I usually recommend people learn to ride without relying on their PM for pacing (still have it to record the data of course), because one day, the PM will fail at a race and one needs confidence they can in fact pace/race well without it.

As Dave says, the data is still recorded in the legs (and after all, that's where it matters most).