FTP - what the numbers indicate

mloc123

Tunney, do you really think you can gain 100w and drop 17kg at the same time in less than 8 months?

tunney

mloc123 wrote: »

Tunney, do you really think you can gain 100w and drop 17kg at the same time in less than 8 months?

Certainly 50watts and 10kg anyways

peter kern

sub 4.30h for an ironman my respect that jordan rapp numbers and even a bit more.

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

peter kern wrote: »

sub 4.30h for an ironman my respect that jordan rapp numbers and even a bit more.

??? why whats with JRs numbers?

peter kern

Messiah Cuddly Silverfish wrote: »

??? why whats with JRs numbers?

daves goal numbers would be like jrs numbers and since dave could sling shot he would go nicely sub 4.30 h in an ironman .( in hawaii in fact )

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

daves goal numbers would be like jrs numbers and since dave could sling shot he would go nicely sub 4.30 h in an ironman .( in hawaii in fact )

350 is not high. been at 320 before. The difference between a good bike and a great bike is not the FTP but the percentage of that you can hold. Low 70% for me, for others I know 80%+

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

peter kern wrote: »

daves goal numbers would be like jrs numbers and since dave could sling shot he would go nicely sub 4.30 h in an ironman .( in hawaii in fact )

Difference though is those guys can hold 85%+, is it Luke McKenzie can hold 90%+ of his number or something crazy like that on an IM bike? For mere mortals (like most of us on here) 70% of FTP is a realistic number to hit. Thats a 50w difference between JR and Dave if he did get his FTP up to that, about 25/30min gap as a guestimmate assuming weight/equipment the same.

peter kern

Messiah Cuddly Silverfish wrote: »

Difference though is those guys can hold 85%+, is it Luke McKenzie can hold 90%+ of his number or something crazy like that on an IM bike? For mere mortals (like most of us on here) 70% of FTP is a realistic number to hit. Thats a 50w difference between JR and Dave if he did get his FTP up to that, about 25/30min gap as a guestimmate assuming weight/equipment the same.

it would be 80ish for rap ( http://blog.quarq.com/post/49294133471/analysis-of-jordan-rapps-ironman-texas-perfor there might be some other useful stuff in for this thread) and no i didnt think anybody could holed 90 % if so they work with a 98 % chance of wrong numbers . ( does it really matter not for the athlete )
I think luke MC was also very close to 80 % of ftp ( i think last year he was a bit over this year he might even have been a bit lower as he paced first half v smartly)

still even at 70 % that would be 250 watts and him sling shotting and a drafting distance that is shorter than pros would get him sub 4.30 in frankfurt lets say. if he swim 1. 14. ish
that would get 900 times an draft effect and at some stage he would find people he could pace of and take a bit of rest .
ps for 5.35 watts per ke you have to train like a pro ;-0

mloc123

peter kern wrote: »

it would be 80ish for rap ( http://blog.quarq.com/post/49294133471/analysis-of-jordan-rapps-ironman-texas-perfor there might be some other useful stuff in for this thread) and no i didnt think anybody could holed 90 % if so they work with a 98 % chance of wrong numbers . ( does it really matter not for the athlete )
I think luke MC was also very close to 80 % of ftp ( i think last year he was a bit over this year he might even have been a bit lower as he paced first half v smartly)

still even at 70 % that would be 250 watts and him sling shotting and a drafting distance that is shorter than pros would get him sub 4.30 in frankfurt lets say. if he swim 1. 14. ish
that would get 900 times an draft effect and at some stage he would find people he could pace of and take a bit of rest .
ps for 5.35 watts per ke you have to train like a pro ;-0

This is what stands out to me, 5.35 watts/kg... I just can't see anyone with a full time job and commitments hitting that.

mloc123

tunney wrote: »

350 is not high. been at 320 before. The difference between a good bike and a great bike is not the FTP but the percentage of that you can hold. Low 70% for me, for others I know 80%+

You hit 320 before in 2009? What were the 2-3 years lead up to that like compared to now?

tunney

I've asked the mods to move the last good few threads to my blog or another post. I just wanted an FTP thread...........

hf4z6sqo7vjngi

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/Kona
Some interesting data from this years Kona
Luke was 82% this year on a safely paced bike by his standards, i have read somehwere else him holding up to 90% in some races. For me a 4:30 bike would require closer to 270/280w than 250w.

peter kern

you are right 82% for luke 2013
2012 it was 78 %

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

daves goal numbers would be like jrs numbers and since dave could sling shot he would go nicely sub 4.30 h in an ironman .( in hawaii in fact )

peter kern wrote: »

sub 4.30h for an ironman my respect that jordan rapp numbers and even a bit more.

I know you don't like power meters and don't promote them so perhaps a lack of understanding of them and training with power is behind your posts. Maybe we need a "Training with Power" sticky?

Yes I admit that 350 is possibly (probably) unattainable but soft targets don't work for me. I find it hard enough to get out of bed without thinking "mah its not that hard to get to 280".

As for 350 being "wow wee" in general. I disagree. I have three lads north of 350 and two closer to 400. Its a really great number alright but not "wow wee you should go pro".

For me the really impressive numbers are the %FTP that can be held while keeping a fat oxidisation rate below 2.0g CHO a minute. That's what makes the difference.

duffyshuffle

tunney wrote: »

I know you don't like power meters and don't promote them so perhaps a lack of understanding of them and training with power is behind your posts. Maybe we need a "Training with Power" sticky?

Yes I admit that 350 is possibly (probably) unattainable but soft targets don't work for me. I find it hard enough to get out of bed without thinking "mah its not that hard to get to 280".



As for 350 being "wow wee" in general. I disagree. I have three lads north of 350 and two closer to 400. Its a really great number alright but not "wow wee you should go pro".

For me the really impressive numbers are the %FTP that can be held while keeping a fat oxidisation rate below 2.0g CHO a minute. That's what makes the difference.

Did you not go 4:59 on the bike off 200w? So what do you think you'll do if you hold 245w?

peter kern

For me the really impressive numbers are the %FTP that can be held while keeping a fat oxidisation rate below 2.0g CHO a minute. That's what makes the difference.[/QUOTE]
I would suggest follow your own words then and make this your focus rather than dreaming up an unattainalbe ftp in your state. Just be realistic with you having kids now, it would be already fantastic if you got back to where you were at your best.

tunney wrote: »

I know you don't like power meters and don't promote them so perhaps a lack of understanding of them and training with power is behind your posts. Maybe we need a "Training with Power" sticky?

Yes I admit that 350 is possibly (probably) unattainable but soft targets don't work for me. I find it hard enough to get out of bed without thinking "mah its not that hard to get to 280".

As for 350 being "wow wee" in general. I disagree. I have three lads north of 350 and two closer to 400. Its a really great number alright but not "wow wee you should go pro".

For me the really impressive numbers are the %FTP that can be held while keeping a fat oxidisation rate below 2.0g CHO a minute. That's what makes the difference.

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

I would suggest follow your own words then and make this your focus rather than dreaming up an unattainalbe ftp in your state. Just be realistic with you having kids now, it would be already fantastic if you got back to where you were at your best.

But.....But.....But..... that means no Haribo............

tunney

duffyshuffle wrote: »

Did you not go 4:59 on the bike off 200w? So what do you think you'll do if you hold 245w?

I was holding 240watts for 5 hours and running well off before that race.
However race day plan was 220watts AP to have some safety
On the day I made a call to ride at 205 AP as I saw that would give me sub 5 bike and I'd be fresher for the run. Bad call #damnCups

Based on my analysis 245 (Cda/Crr etc) would have yielded a touch under 4:48
Speed power is a cube function. Power increases with the cube of speed increases.