lower power at altitude?

marmatt said:

I read in hunter and andys book about an athlete who was peaking but the book said his numbers were lower than expected because he was racing at altitude(in park city for natls)..so I live in Utah,does this mean my FTP would test higher if I lived at sea level...and how much higher?....not that I really care but its always nice to be able to blame something other than genetics for my FTP😉

In general terms, your FTP in terms of absolute # should be higher at sea level, but you need more power to go the same speed… no free lunch since you fight the greater air density (which is responsible for your increased power). I’m an engineer and I’m not sure the body is the same, but a naturally aspirated internal combustion engine will generally produce reduced power in a linear fashion with altitude, roughly 3%/1000’ due to 3% less oxygen/1000’… seems to be if you were at 6000’ in Utah, your power could be reduced ~18% over what it could be at sea level.

wilmar13 said:

In general terms, your FTP in terms of absolute # should be higher at sea level, but you need more power to go the same speed… no free lunch since you fight the greater air density (which is responsible for your increased power). I’m an engineer and I’m not sure the body is the same, but a naturally aspirated internal combustion engine will generally produce reduced power in a linear fashion with altitude, roughly 3%/1000’ due to 3% less oxygen/1000’… seems to be if you were at 6000’ in Utah, your power could be reduced ~18% over what it could be at sea level.

That relationship does not correlate to the human body. A person with a 325 watt threshold at 6,000ft will not cruise down to sea level and suddenly have an FT of 383. Maybe they will get some boost in FT, but 3%/1000' is way too high.

midweekclub.capowerFAQ.htmOpen ↗

jbvcoaching said:

midweekclub.capowerFAQ.htmOpen ↗

That is a good chart... Makes sense that the body isn’t the same as an engine since the body can probably scavenge more oxygen since its “burn” process is a bit more complex…but what about the inverse of this case do the findings in this example go the other way as well?

wilmar13 said:

but what about the inverse of this case do the findings in this example go the other way as well?

I'd search Pubmed:
ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗

Probably start with Bassett and Peronnet as authors, altitude or hypoxia as search terms.

In my experience, it varies from individual to individual. For example, some people see a negligible drop in sustainable power up to some elevation (e.g. - 5000' - 9000'😉, but then they start dropping power at the expected rate after that. Those same folks ("non-responders"😉 also tend not to see any sea level "boost" after a training period at high altitude.

It's individual enough that you really just need to take your powermeter with you to different elevations & see.

This is a good resource on the topic: humankinetics.comshowproduct.cfmOpen ↗