Road to 4w/kg, what does it take?

Training
341

Getting to 4w/kg is easy. Seriously, it is a simple recipe:

  1. Follow a structured training program. It doesn’t have to be the “best” scientifically proven program. There isn’t a magic zone or magic intervals. Just a program that provides progressive load and recovery.
  2. CONSISTENTLY. Which means, weekly, monthly, and yearly. You people who talk about 2 month breaks and then wonder why you can’t hit your goals… :man_shrugging:
  3. Progressively increase volume - think of this on the long term scale. If you average 8 hours a week this year, shoot for 9 next year.

Do this for 3-5 years and I bet a large number of folks would hit 4w/kg. Now, if 1, 2, and 3 sounds hard to you, well maybe it is hard. For me, I love doing this and can’t imagine any other way to approach cycling.

9 Likes
342

This is a hot take. Our old forum friend Dr. Coggin has some stuff to say about this.

Screenshot_20240315_082144_Chrome
Screenshot_20240315_082144_Chrome1080×716 114 KB

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/?post=2830698#p2830698

6 Likes
343

For me it was a combination of the following:

  1. Decent genetics? In my pre-cycling days of playing 5-a-side football (soccer) what I lacked in skill I was able to make up in endurance, towards the end of games I’d still be flying round the pitch whilst other players were out on their feet. Also seem to be able to handle lots of volume, never get injured and rarely get sick (touch wood!)

  2. Naturally skinny - what was a curse as a self-conscious teenager becomes an asset as a cyclist!

  3. Volume - years of long commutes of 120-150 minutes a day 4 days a week plus long weekend rides built a wide endurance base. No structured training, no power meter at the time, just consistent riding 5-6 days a week

  4. The above got me a great base, probably 4.5w/kg and then the last few years of more structured training using TR has topped things off. Now I do similar volume as when I was commuting (18-20 hours on the bike per week) but over the winter almost 100% on the trainer with 2/3 interval sessions per week and the rest Z1 / Z2 ‘filler’

TR has me currently around 5.3 w/kg at 46 though I’ve not tested that for a while, Intervals has me at just over 5 w/kg based on a recent 10 mile TT

4 Likes
344

I’d say you have better than decent genetics when it comes to cycling, despite all the other things that you mention.

3 Likes
345

One thing that is important to remember is that athletic ability isn’t a monolith, people have all sort of strengths and weaknesses. I was a state level track runner in high school, football player, and decent cross country runner. Yet I’m a horrifically untalented cyclist.

346

I’ve been watching this thrd; as I have my own w/kg goals, far south of 4, but want to learn more.

I’m sure this is just going to get people to jump down my throat; so I’ll first say; hard pass, please. If you hate it, just silently move on. I’m just trying to provide some genuine info.

I just met a dude through friends who is 3.8 - 4.0, and puts less than 5 hrs / wk on the bike, and has for years. Tall, sorta skinny, but not really. Looked average build [but bulky sweater, so unsure].

He’s a runner., first, and a Triathlete, second. He runs around 100 - 140 km/wk, and has done few half marathons, and full marathons.

We chatted about how odd that is; and that so many ppl put 10+ hrs/wk on the bike trying to get to 4, for years, and can’t get there. We [both] figure that running at a fast pace is just so much more cardiovascularly demanding per minute that he’s got an insanely powerful cardio engine. [He does weekly professionally trained run clinics, sprints, 400s, etc, not just logging miles at Tempo, etc.] So the legs just have to sorta be strong enough to keep up; but he’s got “infinite energy, forever”, sorta thing.

Indeed, he commented that his HR never gets very high on the bike; much much higher running.

Crazy. I found it extremely surprising, and just wanted to share a very different data point than has been discussed.

Again; hate it? Please just pass. I’m not looking to “internet debate”. :slight_smile: Have a great day!

3 Likes
347

Easy might not be the right word, but “possible” for many is probably right.

The back of the napkin calculations mentioned elsewhere are very reasonable. However, consider that the exact degree to which people can increase their VO2 over years of training is not known as it has not rigorously been studied. It is a mystery. My personal anecdote is Ive almost doubled mine.

What I would be curious to see if TR has the data is user FTP as a function of something like total annual TSS and age.

Ie: if you’re under 50 and you’re doing ~10h a week consistently for a year, what percentage of people hit 4w/k.

My best guess based on watching friends development in real life would essentially everyone under 30, and then maybe 50%-80% in the 30-50 range. Who knows if the people I know are a representative sample though.

348

Sure, in cycling I found that my strength was short power. I was a good crit rider back when I raced and now, post 50 years old, I have 3 pages of Strava KOMs most achieved under 8 minutes with the bulk around 3 minutes.

Sadly my strength was never a high threshold. It’s funny but my kid is 13 years old and mirroring my ability. He’s good but not great in cross country. He’s a slow sprinter. But he almost got the school records in the 400/800 and won almost all his track races last season.

1 Like
349

My theory is that this is cycling natural selection in play. In my club of 100 riders, most of the fast guys are all 40-55. Their profile is that they were really good when they were in their 20s and they are the riders that never stopped. They’ve all been training for 20+ years continuously.

Other people find our sport, do it for a few years, and then move on to something new. The few that are rewarded with victories and accolades tend to stick around. It’s natural that people gravitate to what they are good at.

The younger guys in the club are ultimately the fastest but they are hit and miss in consistency. They are getting married, going to school, having kids, whatever.

5 Likes
350

Not hating on this, just not surprised at all. Huge cardiovascular engine. Not just out there jogging. Background in Tri. Wouldn’t take much to translate this to cycling.

Now, put him on a long ride/race against other 4w/kg cyclists who regularly do 10+ hours a week and you may start to see how their fitness differs.

3 Likes
351

I’ve seen this chart many times over the years, and it just doesn’t jive with my own experience riding with other folks. I know that’s a huge personal bias! I guess I question the data set that is used. I wonder what the actual population being used is? Meaning, is this anyone who has an account, or do they narrow it down a little more. What I’m thinking that would make more sense trying to draw these types of conclusions, is we only use the data for folks who achieve a minimum level of compliance. I don’t know what that is, but it would be good to weed out the folks that barely ride and/or don’t follow the plan below a certain level.

I’m no genetic freak, but this chart makes it appear I am, and this doesn’t play out in real life to the same extent…I’m just spit-balling here, so what are others thoughts?

Edit: I just realized that would eliminate me too as I don’t follow any sort of plan, so maybe it’s an either or with hours training and plan compliance.

352

Fwiw, it’s jives very well with what I see on the road

1 Like
353

Sure, having a running background (or any endurance sporting background, really) gives someone a big advantage when transitioning over to the bike.

Very good buddy of mine is a fast runner…has gone 2:37 at Boston in his prime. But while he is an above average cyclist, I can still put the screws to him regularly, sooo… :man_shrugging:t2:

Flip side is that we recently had a kid join our semi-weekly early AM rides…he is on he US National Jr. team for Speed Skating and he absolutely crushes us when he wants to. His watts are immense. Thank god he can’t corner for schitt and doesn’t really grasp tactics yet. But lord help us when he figures it out. :scream:

Point being that any background in endurance / aerobic activities gives one a good base for cycling but is not a golden ticket to huge w/kg.

3 Likes
354

@KonaSS & @Power13 ya, roger that, I guess it translates much better than I thought it would! :open_mouth:

Well, I mean… he has done 1 - 2 full IMs, and a few 70.3s, and finished in “decent” time. So I guess, no, he didn’t win the race; so others were faster, even in his AG… but even going mid-pack AG on something like that at is insane, to me.

I’m never sure what anyone means when they say “longer distance” !! :slight_smile: I mean, to me, that’s long-a$$ distance, esp. after a swim… but some ppl do multi-day ultra rides in the hundreds of miles… so on that, like… no… not that kind of distance!!! :slight_smile:

355

Surely there’s a ton of selection for “the folks you ride with” though? It’s not like that’s an even cross section of the population…

I wonder what the bell curve would look like for watt/kilo[lean mass]. This thread has focused a lot on natural variability of the engine, but I wonder if a lot of the lower end of that curve is people trying to lose weight, i.e. solid watts but too many kilos.

4 Likes
356

It’s usually 200-300 miles per day. The lower number being towards the back and the higher number towards the front.

357

I don’t know, I don’t think people get into cycling because they are ‘good’ at it. They get into it because they like it. I guess it’s fair to say that people that race competitively probably only stick with it if they can achieve at least some sense of progression and/or fun. But I we aren’t out there testing people’s vo2max as children to see if they’ll make good cyclists…

People have a tendency to drift toward their ‘specialty’ and by that I mean the thing they have the most fun doing. I’ve been ‘obese’ according to BMI my entire life (I know, bmi is problematic) and by ‘report’ anyway I’ve hovered around 20-30 lbs heavier than any reported weight I’ve heard from people my height. It’s almost comical and nearly incomprehensible to me that people my height (just over 6’ 2") weigh less than 195 lbs. But I’m at 15% bf now, and 194 lbs. so obviously…who’s right? :smiley:

Anyway, I wasn’t able to compete with my friends that weigh half what I do. (joke, only 25kg less than me) so I tended toward long flattish hard efforts, a lot of miles, tt type stuff. But straight up…I’m not athletically gifted. I’m analytical and dedicated and can be horribly single minded.

The point is. I sincerely believe nearly anyone can get to 4 w/kg. Here we have to play fast and loose with can. Will they want to? Probably not. But I bet with the right motivation anyone could do it. (age > 60 and infirmity possibly excluded). No judgment regarding people that don’t want to prioritize this arbitrary number, life is too short. People have family, and…interests…and can be busy. I think a lot of the reason you see these older dudes rocking the 4 w/kg is their kids might be out of the house, they’ve prioritized training… They have the time and inclination to stave off the specter of old age. :D. Can everyone get to 4 w/kg at 10 hours or less of weekly training? Probably not. I didn’t seem capable. But at 15 hours I’ve fairly ‘easily’ crossed it. 15 hours and 2 years of consistent progressive overload to get to 15 hours. But who among us wants to spend that many hours getting to mediocre power numbers? :D.

4 Likes
358

I read these posts ascribing volume and aside from when I go on a week biking holiday, I feel shocking doing lots of volume. That’s shocking doing easy volume at barely 55% FTP. Felt run down before Christmas trying to up the volume and decrease from 3 intense sessions a week to 2.

So I’ve gone back to standard TR low volume with a long weekend ride plus a few extra recovery sessions.

The year I hit my highest FTP and 4.5w/kg, I was actually down to 2 Intense 1hr - 1.5hr sessions a week (thats sweet spot, not even threshold or VO2) a few easy half hours in the days in between plus a long weekend ride. And a couple of body weights sessions per week.

I’ve tried to replicate that year so much and never has it been such hard witchcraft to get the same results :frowning:

1 Like
359

This is essentially my plan, LV Masters adaptive plan, 2 intensity workouts, 2 low Z2 workouts and 1 long 3-3.5 hour Z2 progressive PL workout. Today will be Marsh.

If I hit Castle Rock and haven’t had a AI FTP increase by then I might do it manually lol.

My intensity workouts at present are VO2 and SS. As I get into race reason that will shift into VO2 and Threshold, VO2 x2 and VO2 and Anaerobic.

3 Likes
360

All relative. I’m 6ft 2 and counting race weight as a about 165lb (normal walking around weight while training normally is around 168)…HOWEVER amongst most of my running friends I’m huge! My ftp (40min recent test) is 285W and 5k time usually around 18:20.