I plan to race Unbound 200 in the Spring. Previously I was planning to target something like 0.65-0.7 intensity factor for the duration (12-15h). This is generally in line with Coggan’s convention on pacing for this duration. With the changes to reported AI FTP, should I still be thinking about pacing the race in the same way?
1 Like
Yes NP / IF can still be valuable for pacing, but you can’t necessarily rely on your AIFTP. You’d need to make sure you have a sense of if it’s correct, or estimate / test your FTP in some other way.
That’s in the ballpark, but it’s definitely something you want to test in training. You don’t need to go ride for 12+ hours at .7 IF, but go do a 6+ hour ride and see how it feels, how your fueling holds up, etc. So much of it depends on execution, fueling and hydration, how hot it gets on race day, etc. It also depends on how you approach the race. If you want to get with some fast trains early, that strategy can pay off, but often requires some punchy power early. That approach won’t give you the best possible power number for the day, but may get you to the finish line the fastest. Or can also result in blowing up if you try to hold onto a group that is above your pay grade.
My race last year was .71 IF for ~11.5 hours. But that wasn’t steady, it was ~2 hours at .85 to stay with groups, then had a long mechanical issue stopped on the side of the road, then rode solo pretty much the rest of the day (~9 hours) at .66 IF. I had a little power drop during the hottest part of the day, but road pretty strong all day other than that. Made up over 100 spots after my mechanical and finished strong. Fueling, hydration, and cooling are key.
I am doing a 240mile gravel in August, I have been strava-stalking power files of the top 20 to see how things were early in the race vs middle/end. Especially reviewing power for first hour.
The idea of doing .85 IF for more than 30minutes ….for that long of event…. seems risky.
Very unsure if/what power limit (if at all) I would plan for to keep with a group that would be within my capacity for a 12-14hr event. Luckily the new TR.AI predicted FTP is gas lighting me for what kind of gains I am looking at this spring! LOL Confidence inspiring
Absolutely comes with risk, but it’s a risk the comes with significant potential rewards. I did the same kind of analysis for male Unbound podium winners over a couple year period and found that almost everyone had a very lopsided pacing strategy with big efforts early and then settling in after couple hours. That doesn’t make it the right strategy for everyone and there are exceptions to the rule, but going hard early is certainly the most common way to get on the podium at Unbound based on my analysis. And I think that is largely true for any gravel race. They are much more like road races than TT’s, so not getting dropped by your competitors is key. The challenge with mixed age group racing is that it can be tough to know who is in your age group when things start breaking up. I really wish they would color code number plates or something (like they do for some MTB races with age group and/or category marked on your leg).
And if you build the fitness required, there is no reason you can’t push .85 for a couple hours and still have plenty in the tank to keep riding strong for 10+ more hours. At some point, it’s just a matter of staying on top of fueling, hydration, and cooling if you have the fitness.
2 Likes
Agree. One way or another you need that way to sort out if you’re AI FTP value is accurate for use when determining IF.
I did a gravel race yesterday and used the AI FTP and used that for monitoring my IF for pacing and it worked out very well for me. But obviously could be different for others
This is something I heard* regarding ultra distance running recently. They were saying they are generally always positive split. Their opinion was that times won’t drop drastically in the coming years but the times will come closer to 50/50 as they chip slowly way at the records.
I can see how this makes sense when going for a podium especially when a check is involved. But many that could go wildly wrong for the average joe.
- Human performance outliers podcast.
Interesting. I’m surprised to hear that phenomenon happening in running, but I guess the ultra stuff is a different beast.
I do think a part of this strategy is “making hay when the sun is shining”. I don’t care how well I pace a ~10+ hour effort, the sun isn’t shining too bight for me that deep into a race and I’d likely struggle with long efforts above threshold. So, if those kind of efforts can be helpful to the race, I think you burn them while you still have the ability to burn them. And I think the potential benefits in long bike races would be much greater than running since drafting in a strong group is such a huge benefit for cycling. Sure, a big early effort will probably have some effect on your ability to maintain endurance pace late in the race, but at that point the surges often subside and the group becomes more about working together rather than ripping apart (until closer to the end). For a 10 hour gravel race, you are probably going to get a better result doing a couple hours at ~.85 to get in a good group and then settling into ~.65 rather than just holding a steady ~.7 all day.
Certainly a riskier approach, but I think it can work whether someone has podium aspirations or not. It’s mostly about having the right level of fitness/endurance to go hard at the start and then hold Z2 for the rest of the day. Part of that is experience to know how hard is too hard, but mostly it’s just building the right type of fitness. If you have a big enough endurance base, it’s very hard to kill your ability to settle back into endurance/tempo regardless of how hard you push the start.
2 Likes