Yesterday you talk about the central and peripheral adaption. Today i did the 4x3.5min starting with 20sec 370-350w,
40sec 350-330w
3min 330-315w.
I noticed that at a certain point my legs found it heavier than my heart-lungs. So i think that indeed peripheral factor is at this moment a bottleneck…
After this central adaption phase, i will go back to sst/FTP and in the period before my first goal (first goal 4 june) so around half April i will do some work on peripheral adaption. Do you have some workouts? what can i think of to work on this?
VO2.wko5chart is the file you want to download and import into WKO5. That should give you a new dashboard with the charts. Let me know if it works, and if not, I’ll fix and upload a new version to GitHub.
I’m telling you what you know, but this is one of the issues with VO2 max intervals in ERG…
Your legs got to the point where you could no longer hold X%FTP, the death spiral kicks in and you can no longer pedal. If you were going all out in resistance mode and reached this point, your power would be able to start to drift down. This means you could do more interval time, and I’d bet you’d still be breathing like a fish out of water as long as you were still going all out, and holding power over FTP. VO2 max is the only time I’m an anti ERG zealot
With 4.5 intervals done this time, you probably know how to pace it next time. Good luck!
This was an FTP test result validation ride, and I had just completed my threshold climb literally minutes before. I had also done this shorter climb many, many times in the past, and I have usually been at around 117 % when I gave it the beans. So my FTP is accurate, and I was doing best VO2max power for the duration.
The other option is that my heart rate at VO2max is simply a bit lower than for most. (That’d be consistent with my past rides and workouts, too.)
Yes, but not all data gives you useful, actionable information. You could either measure the speeds of all molecules in the air — or measure the temperature. The latter is likely much more important even though the former contains more information.
Just to be clear: I’m not dismissing the utility, I am asking what actionable data these additional data points give you?
90 % HR max is just as “arbitrary” as aiming 120 % being the basis for many VO2max workouts. In my case, heart rate at threshold and VO2max tends to be lower than average, so if I were to aim at 90 % VO2max, I’d likely have to put out much more power than intended to reach 90–95 % heart rate, especially later in the season. Plus, there are many formats for VO2max workouts: you can have few, but longer intervals at lower power (e. g. 110–115 %), the standard 5–7 x 3 minutes at 118–122 % FTP or 30-30s. Speaking from N = 1 experience, but my heart rate reacts very differently to each of these formats.
I do use heart rate quite a bit, but as a secondary metric. My favorite one is heart rate recovery time in recovery intervals. But this is mostly relevant in the moment, e. g. to re-assure me that I’m only struggling mentally and that my body is fit and ready for the next interval.
So if I set power rather than heart rate targets, what actionable info do you get out of graphs like this. (I’d honestly like to know and learn, I’m not arguing against it — you do what works for you.)
What actionable information can you glean from that?
I’d expect that if you zoom out and review a season, you would want to rely on more macroscopic data points. Plus, in my experience in order to interpret heart rate data you need a lot of context. E. g. if i wanted to look at average heart rate or heart rate creep in endurance workouts, I’d have to treat endurance workouts post hard workouts separately.
(Again, I’m trying to learn what you are doing, not trying to argue.)
In WKO 90% of vo2 max I have mentioned relates to your power at VO2 max time (so 90% of your modelled vo2 max) not time over 90% of your HR. This is a huge difference. Time over 90% of your HR has no use for me. Like this: VO2 Measured to Modeled – Spare Cycles
Thanks for your reply. I know the “problems with ERG” but thats why i work with ramp down during the block. Yesterday i dont have problems with the death spiral, only after the block when iam gasping for air and problems with 130w…so next time i will in the rest phase ramp up from 80 to 130.
The only problem i had was the first 60sec so i adjust the ramp a little bit for the next time:
Huh? ok, so you look only at high cadans + breathing rate and not worrie about % HRmax? Yesterday during a interval HR going quick to 188 and sometimes during the interval its going down to 187…but breathing like a fish out of water. (Max HR is 198)
For me HR is only an indicator of how tired I am during the block, not indicator of VO2 max workout. My 90% HR max is my threshold HR so every threshold workout is vo2 max when it comes only to HR When I breathe like I am waterboarded, I am doing vo2 max work. I do not look at the power during the workout, nor HR. Just pedal fast and hard and pray for survival. For the analysis I only look at hr ramp rate curve. I do not judge my vo2 max workout in any other way than RPE and breathing. All parameters are for data gathering only and time spent over 90% and 95% vo2 max in WKO are for me only a part of the bigger picture to review how my eventual gains were influenced by this parameter.
To be honest, after a lot of listening and reading, the basic principles work the best. Everything additional is just fluff and something that is interesting for me as a hobby (love numbers). Just work hard, pedal hard and fast - everything will be resolved by itself and your body. Training principles are not so complicated as some people want them to be - that’s like I like KM approach. It provides all the knowledge to explain “why” but then it’s basic logic and no magic intervals.
I think we are on the same boat. My max is 198 and all above 178 is >90%. But when iam doing a FTP test of 25min i ride the whole test around HR 185…so all above 93%.
yesterday after +/- 60sec i breathing like i get waterboard and can only get my eyes closed and hoping that the 2.5min was over quickly.
Ok, but if you are statistically “average” in the sense that FTP = 75 % MAP, then 90 % MAP = 120 % FTP. So is that really different from the “default” approach to VO2max? How is that “new” or a metric I haven’t heard of?
Let you know when I have listened. Or have a listen yourself. Just flagging So far it’s not really about it being a new metric to be honest, but the validity of it as an approach for optimal gains. Jury’s out.
I’ll fully dedicate time to listening it properly later but from what I did here I think the jist was. Some folk say that VO2MAX workout triggers the mist/fastest stimulae, so time in VO2MAX zone is a good measure of a workouts effectiveness going by that. But others say that rather than looking at one metric focusing on one zone an more balanced ir polarized approach is better, so time in VO2MAX isn’t a good measure of that
One aspect not mentioned here is regarding the duration of the “fish out of water” breathing. I don’t have a good record of these numbers, but I do remember the times I kept pushing through extending the pain……my heart was sore for 24-36 hours afterwards.
I got it checked out, it’s all good. The Doc was a cyclist, he said, “yep that can happen when you dig deep”
When I breathe like I am waterboarded, I am doing vo2 max work. I do not look at the power during the workout, nor HR. Just pedal fast and hard and pray for survival. For the analysis I only look at hr ramp rate curve. I do not judge my vo2 max workout in any other way than RPE and breathing. All parameters are for data gathering only and time spent over 90% and 95% vo2 max in WKO are for me only a part of the bigger picture to review how my eventual gains were influenced by this parameter.
So far it’s not really about it being a new metric to be honest, but the validity of it as an approach for optimal gains. Jury’s out.
