Physiological testing???

[peterpen]

I guess it depends on how long you spend at each power level. Spending a lot of time above 400 watts would definitely be a world of hurt (for me anyways), but unless I'm mistaken, you wouldn't need to spend that much time above your LT before it could be visibly shown on a graph (assuming you were collecting lactate levels at frequent enough intervals) that your LT had been reached... right? I'm just trying to understand the process.

I had a lactate test done last month. It began at 100watts and went up every 3 minutes by 15 watts. It was technically not a "too-exhaustion" test, and I felt I could have gone a bit more at the end, but we already had the info we were looking for, so we stopped. It was nice to stop.

Six months ago I had a VO2Max test done at the same facility (UC Davis Sports Med) and also began at 100 watts but ramped up 15 watts every 1.5 minutes. Shorter, but still uncomfortable, especially due to the mouthpiece.

Anyway, have fun! Even if I had a SRM, I'd still go to a good lab just for the experience. I'm a firm believer in the motivational benefit (or in less kind terms, placebo effect) of working with trained professionals.

 

[robkit]

Anyway, have fun! Even if I had a SRM, I'd still go to a good lab just for the experience. I'm a firm believer in the motivational benefit (or in less kind terms, placebo effect) of working with trained professionals.

Couldn’t agree more. That’s really why I signed up to be part of the efficiency research - it gets me into a sports science lab several times throughout the winter.
The motivational aspect, expecially at this time, is going to be far more invaluable than any numbers themselves.

 

[robkit]

Anyway, have fun! Even if I had a SRM, I'd still go to a good lab just for the experience. I'm a firm believer in the motivational benefit (or in less kind terms, placebo effect) of working with trained professionals.

Couldn’t agree more. That’s really why I signed up to be part of the efficiency research - it gets me into a sports science lab several times throughout the winter.
The motivational aspect, expecially at this time, is going to be far more invaluable than any numbers themselves.

 

[acoggan]

I do have a PowerTap Pro. But I don't necessarily "trust" my guess for my LT.

So why not just use one of the myriad field tests to quantify your sustainable power?

"The best predictor of performance is performance itself" - A. Coggan

Also, how do I know for sure that my PT is calibrated correctly?

Put your bike in the lowest gear you can, lock up the rear wheel, and apply a large force (e.g., your body weight) to the crank when it is horizontal. The torque displayed by the PT should agree with the actual torque being applied, taking into account the gear ratio.

 

[fergie]

So why not just use one of the myriad field tests to quantify your sustainable power?

For anything over 30sec you need to pace yourself. I had riders do 60sec tests and those how paced themselves well did better times. I expect this to be more graphic over longer tests.

I also think time trialists would be better suited to this type of test. Can you imagine a crit or track rider having the temperament to do a 30 and 60min test?

This is why I prefer to use a ramped test.

Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

 

[HammerHead]

OK, all of this has me thinking. (OK, I was thinking about all of this before I read this thread.) I think my 30 min or 60 min power is low compared to say - my 5 min power. I have held 350 for 5 minutes. I can actually do that a few times in one ride, with enough rest between. But - I can only hold about 270 for 30 min to an hour. It doesn't really change for either duration. 270 just seems to be what I can do for any longer duration. From all these percentages I've seen thrown around, that seems low, compared to my 5 min power (?) I've wondered if this means I have lots of room for improvement in my 30 min+ power, or if I just have a higher anaerobic capacity? I've been training (real structured training) for about three years now, and I've improved just over 5% since last year. I was hoping that also meant I had lots of room to improve.

I'm probably not the only one who has stuff like this float around in my head. I also think it probably doesn't matter and I just need to ride and results are results.

 

[frenchyge]

I also think it probably doesn't matter and I just need to ride and results are results.

If that's the approach you prefer, that's fine. If you'd like to try and piece together some of the questions floating in your head, then here's a good start toward what you asked about: http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/profile.html

As Andy points out in the first sentence: "It is simply human nature to wonder how one compares with others for any measurement..."

 

[HammerHead]

If that's the approach you prefer, that's fine. If you'd like to try and piece together some of the questions floating in your head, then here's a good start toward what you asked about: http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/profile.html

As Andy points out in the first sentence: "It is simply human nature to wonder how one compares with others for any measurement..."

Holy Cow! I'm never gonna be a Div III time trialist or Masters Champ at 3k. I might have a chance as a good Cat 3

 

[TRD609]

Long story about LT testing here.

http://www.nyvelocity.com/content.php?id=283