It does work......now there are MORE questions!

Here's the question you should ask yourself: "Where does the 270 number come from?"

Do you have any 1hr figures in that vicinity, or any 20min figures that would be appropriately higher than that figure? Does you power distribution show a marked dropoff at 270w? What's the basis for using 270w?

If you're just pulling the 270w number out of the hat, then I'd suggest doing a test or some structured workout which would check your performance at that level before trying to estimate.

ok....I just realised the mistake. Over-exhuberant after the 2 races.

I forgot that FTP derived from 20min results are lower than 1hr FTP.

The 270 comes from looking at 20min power in the last few races + training races.

Just checked 60min figures. Sat = 250NP and Sun = 259NP

If I take the 20min values * .95 it's 257

giannip said:

My last lab test showed a lactate threshold of 243. I therefore decided to set my FTP at 250. I received my PT in January and started training using the workouts in Andy's book.

OK - couple of things here:

The workouts would most likely be Hunter Allen's, not Andy's, not that it matters much, you're doing good workouts, right😉 . (Also the 5 + 20 minute testing protocol in the book is also Hunter's).

2nd point about your lab test (and Ric will know why I'm doing this):

The general definition of lactate threshold is the work rate that elicits a 1 mmol/L increase over exercise baseline levels (Coyles definition) - resulting in a lactate of 2.x mmol/L, or the workrate that elicits a fixed lactate of 2.5 mmol/L (Coggan's definition).

In practical terms, this is a power level that could be sustained for approx 3 hrs, or 10-15% less than the power you could sustain for 1 hour (and 1 hour max sustainable power is otherwise known as FTP). Now individuals vary in terms of the exact ratio of their power at LT v power at FTP but the main point is the power at LT & FTP are different.

So was your lab "lactate threshold test" determining the 2.x mmol/L mark? If so, then your FTP is likely to be higher than that.

Going by the actual experiences you post, it sounds possible the lab test was giving you power output at a much higher concentration of lactate than 2.x mmol/L.

Hi

I said I was "doing the workouts from Andy's book", not "doing Andy's workouts" but to be fair let me rephrase that. "Doing the workouts from Andy and Hunter's book " 🙄 and yes they have definitlet helped me a lot !😄 as I tend to be mosre focused when following a plan.

I was under the impression that Lactate Thershold was estimated at around the 3.9mmol/L region ?? and that's the value at which my LT power was given.

giannip said:

Hi

I said I was "doing the workouts from Andy's book", not "doing Andy's workouts" but to be fair let me rephrase that. "Doing the workouts from Andy and Hunter's book " 🙄 and yes they have definitlet helped me a lot !😄 as I tend to be mosre focused when following a plan.

I was under the impression that Lactate Thershold was estimated at around the 3.9mmol/L region ?? and that's the value at which my LT power was given.

LT is _usually_ as Alex described, however, you had a formal lactate test, and should ask the technician who performed your test how LT was determined, and what it means. There's little point having tests if you don't understand them or what they mean in terms of your training.

Secondly, you've stated that your peak (NP) for 20-mins in a RR was 270 W and wanted (initially) to use that as your FT (i know you've since changed that thought). However, it's worth bearing in mind that the peak 20-mins from your RR may not have been the hardest 20-mins you could do (or the hardest 60-mins). That is, you may be able to generate more power in a 20-min (or 60-min) test. For me, personally, i've ridden stacks of RR and the NP is rarely >85% of my FT.

Train hard, race easy, and put in a killer effort only when needed.

Ric

ric_stern/RST said:

LT is _usually_ as Alex described, however, you had a formal lactate test, and should ask the technician who performed your test how LT was determined, and what it means. There's little point having tests if you don't understand them or what they mean in terms of your training.

Ric

My LT was determined at the 4mmol/L mark.

I do understand what the data from my tests means and it was explained very well.

My initial problem though, was how to correspond the LT figure to FTP.

I guesss if I really want to compare like with like I should do the same lab test again.

I may use some upcoming TTs to conduct an FTP test so I can get closer to the mark.

ric_stern/RST said:

Train hard, race easy, and put in a killer effort only when needed.

Ric

Tried that on Saturday.....killer effort was 200m short of the line, but getting there! 😄

giannip said:

My LT was determined at the 4mmol/L mark.

I do understand what the data from my tests means and it was explained very well.

My initial problem though, was how to correspond the LT figure to FTP.

I guesss if I really want to compare like with like I should do the same lab test again.

I may use some upcoming TTs to conduct an FTP test so I can get closer to the mark.

At the 4 mmol/L marker, that's OBLA (onset of blood lactate accumulation) which is _really_ just an arbitrary point. I guess it was originally hpothesized that this was where everyone can exercise maximally for an hour or so, but this isn't the case (some will be above, and some below).

None of that is helpful though for you to set your training zones, and FTP. For setting zones i suggest using MAP test, which is the way we do it at RST but there are other ways (for other zones).

Ric

ric_stern/RST said:

At the 4 mmol/L marker, that's OBLA (onset of blood lactate accumulation) which is _really_ just an arbitrary point. I guess it was originally hpothesized that this was where everyone can exercise maximally for an hour or so, but this isn't the case (some will be above, and some below).

None of that is helpful though for you to set your training zones, and FTP. For setting zones i suggest using MAP test, which is the way we do it at RST but there are other ways (for other zones).

Ric

Ok thanks. Yes I was advised that this was a "general" point so to speak and that's why I had difficulty in trying to figure out what my FTP COULD be according to that test.

This is also the reason why I am not really in much of a hurry to repeat the test.

The test I did was an incremental test (20w every 3 minutes I think, sorry don't have the data sheet with and it was way back in Nov) with the last portion measuring VO2mx. This was the protion where the W was increased untill exhaustion. Peak 60s was measured at 343w.

I see you're ihn the UK, so who knows if I can get a chepa flight form ireland I may just do the MAP test 😄

giannip said:

Ok thanks. Yes I was advised that this was a "general" point so to speak and that's why I had difficulty in trying to figure out what my FTP COULD be according to that test.

This is also the reason why I am not really in much of a hurry to repeat the test.

The test I did was an incremental test (20w every 3 minutes I think, sorry don't have the data sheet with and it was way back in Nov) with the last portion measuring VO2mx. This was the protion where the W was increased untill exhaustion. Peak 60s was measured at 343w.

I see you're ihn the UK, so who knows if I can get a chepa flight form ireland I may just do the MAP test 😄

You've got a Power Tap (i think) or some other power meter, and, while you could come to me for a test, you could likely just do one yourself and save yourself some money (see http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=powerstern). It's likely that with some extra motivation (me shouting etc) you'll do slightly better, but i'm not certain that it's worth the cost of travel as well as a test for that little bit more.

Ric

Thanks.

Do you have a suggestion regarding the days after the test?