Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Lumen's winter TT prep plan

1356

Comments

  • #102
    rottenhat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,352 ✭✭✭rottenhat


    ROK ON wrote: »
    Enjoyment is gone to be replaced from the strange sense of satisfaction that pain cold and desolation brings.
    ;-)

    ...and the dizzying highs offered by sleep deprivation and total physical exhaustion.


  • #103
    hynesie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 245 ✭✭hynesie


    Raam wrote: »
    Yeah we have the turbo, but I'm waiting until I have been infection/cough/snot free for a month before I attempt a threshold test.
    What turbo did you go for?
    I've been looking at the Tacx Flow but I've found that some people have calibration issues with after a while, i.e. the power readings go a good bit off after a couple of months.


  • #104
    Raam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    hynesie wrote: »
    What turbo did you go for?
    I've been looking at the Tacx Flow but I've found that some people have calibration issues with after a while, i.e. the power readings go a good bit off after a couple of months.

    This one
    http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=9756


  • #105
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    One more thought on power measurement now that the pain has fully ebbed away...

    There appears to be some disagreement in the sports geek community about what constitutes "threshold". A common acronym is "OBLA" (onset of blood lactate accumulation), which is the point at which your blood fills with pain. Unfortunately it appears that different cyclists have different lactate tolerances, so commonly used thesholds (e.g. 4mmol/L) are not universally indicative of maximal aerobic endurance performance.

    Therefore FTP ("functional threshold power"), the average power you can sustain for an hour (also called CP60), has been widely adopted as an empirical test of useful aerobic performance.

    From my own experiences, however, CP60 (and certainly shorter period power) is quite dependent on position. Taking the idea that aerobic performance is limited by muscle demands and not oxygen supply, all that matters is how hard you can work your muscles on the bike. In terms of power production: out of the saddle > top > hoods > drops > aerobars, and varying position allows different muscle groups to recover.

    This means that it is much easier to hit bigger numbers on a 20 minute hillclimb than 20 minute TT, because on a hill you can hop in and out of the saddle, activating different muscle groups without suffering significant aero loss. Arguments about whether climbing seated or standing is more "efficient" are only relevant if you're doing an event which is long enough for efficiency to matter.

    Which makes analysis of historical power files a bit tricky. My biggest numbers (e.g. 300W for 10 minutes) have been on hills. Trying to replicate the same whilst seated on a static trainer is futile. Testing is specific.


  • #106
    lukester
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,901 ✭✭✭lukester


    Raam wrote: »
    This one
    http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=9756

    Was it as hard to assemble as internet reviews say?


  • #107
    Raam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    lukester wrote: »
    Was it as hard to assemble as internet reviews say?

    If one was a clueless idiot, yes.
    Otherwise, simple.


  • #108
    lukester
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,901 ✭✭✭lukester


    Raam wrote: »
    If one was a clueless idiot, yes.

    's funny, I didn't think there were many clueless idiots on the internet.


  • #109
    Raam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    lukester wrote: »
    's funny, I didn't think there were many clueless idiots on the internet.

    I put my engineering degree to good use.


  • #110
    hynesie
    Closed Accounts Posts: 245 ✭✭hynesie


    Raam wrote: »
    I put my engineering degree to good use.

    Any other comments on it?


    sorry for hijacking your thread Lumen .... maybe you should merge the entire cycling forum into this thread :p


  • #111
    lukester
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,901 ✭✭✭lukester


    Raam wrote: »
    I put my engineering degree to good use.

    I bought some Tacx kit, and indeed the instructions were useless, but anyone above Forrest Gump's intelligence would have no problem with the assembly.


  • Advertisement
  • #112
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    hynesie wrote: »
    sorry for hijacking your thread Lumen .... maybe you should merge the entire cycling forum into this thread :p

    LOL, it makes me feel a little embarrassed but I don't mind, honestly :)


  • #113
    Raam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    hynesie wrote: »
    Any other comments on it?


    sorry for hijacking your thread Lumen .... maybe you should merge the entire cycling forum into this thread :p

    I haven't used it much yet to get enough of an impression.


  • #114
    lukester
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,901 ✭✭✭lukester


    Raam wrote: »
    I haven't used it much yet to get enough of an impression.

    Sandbagger.


  • #115
    Raam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    lukester wrote: »
    Sandbagger.

    Alas, this time it's true.


  • #116
    lukester
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,901 ✭✭✭lukester


    Raam wrote: »
    Alas, this time it's true.

    Sure it is. :pac:

    Interested to hear how it works out though, wondering if having the power measurements and other info make it any more enticing to get on than other turbos. Cheaper than a power meter for sure.

    @Lumen I feel bad for thread-jacking, but then this is a cosy extra geeky corner of boards. You should feel proud.


  • #117
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    Lumen wrote: »
    One more thought on power measurement now that the pain has fully ebbed away...

    There appears to be some disagreement in the sports geek community about what constitutes "threshold". A common acronym is "OBLA" (onset of blood lactate accumulation), which is the point at which your blood fills with pain. Unfortunately it appears that different cyclists have different lactate tolerances, so commonly used thesholds (e.g. 4mmol/L) are not universally indicative of maximal aerobic endurance performance.

    Therefore FTP ("functional threshold power"), the average power you can sustain for an hour (also called CP60), has been widely adopted as an empirical test of useful aerobic performance.

    From my own experiences, however, CP60 (and certainly shorter period power) is quite dependent on position. Taking the idea that aerobic performance is limited by muscle demands and not oxygen supply, all that matters is how hard you can work your muscles on the bike. In terms of power production: out of the saddle > top > hoods > drops > aerobars, and varying position allows different muscle groups to recover.

    This means that it is much easier to hit bigger numbers on a 20 minute hillclimb than 20 minute TT, because on a hill you can hop in and out of the saddle, activating different muscle groups without suffering significant aero loss. Arguments about whether climbing seated or standing is more "efficient" are only relevant if you're doing an event which is long enough for efficiency to matter.

    Which makes analysis of historical power files a bit tricky. My biggest numbers (e.g. 300W for 10 minutes) have been on hills. Trying to replicate the same whilst seated on a static trainer is futile. Testing is specific.

    Have you done a 30 minute test on the TT bike in position on the trainer? Seems like this would be the best way to work out your FTP for the races(TT) you are planning on doing.


  • #118
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    mloc123 wrote: »
    Have you done a 30 minute test on the TT bike in position on the trainer? Seems like this would be the best way to work out your FTP for the races(TT) you are planning on doing.

    Not yet. I've been hiding from my TT bike for two weeks now. Hamstring tightness is a real problem.

    Better get back on it this week, as I have a duathlon on Sunday (if it ever goes ahead).


  • #119
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    I went to enter race 2 yesterday and saw it was sold out :( ohwell. How do you find the stealth? I am kinda thinking about buying a frame and swapping parts over.


  • #120
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    mloc123 wrote: »
    I went to enter race 2 yesterday and saw it was sold out :( ohwell.

    It seems they've shortened the newbie race to a ridiculous degree. 8.6km is a bit of a silly distance for a full TT rig. I might try and get bumped to the proper race.
    mloc123 wrote: »
    How do you find the stealth? I am kinda thinking about buying a frame and swapping parts over.

    No complaints, although it's only seen turbo duty so far. There are prettier options out there, but not at the price. I'm sure its potential greatly exceeds my abilities, which is just how I like it.


  • Advertisement
  • #121
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    Lumen wrote: »
    It seems they've shortened the newbie race to a ridiculous degree. 8.6km is a bit of a silly distance for a full TT rig. I might try and get bumped to the proper race.



    No complaints, although it's only seen turbo duty so far. There are prettier options out there, but not at the price. I'm sure its potential greatly exceeds my abilities, which is just how I like it.

    Are you in the newbie race? My understanding was it was the same as the normal one but n00b friendly... now it looks more like a try-a-duathlon


  • #122
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    mloc123 wrote: »
    Are you in the newbie race? My understanding was it was the same as the normal one but n00b friendly... now it looks more like a try-a-duathlon

    Indeed. My pointy hat will look ridiculous. :pac:


  • #123
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    Lumen wrote: »
    Indeed. My pointy hat will look ridiculous. :pac:

    On the up side you probably have a very good chance of winning it :D


  • #124
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    The tyranny of the training log. There is no hiding. Lazy, fat, soft, undisciplined, useless. Need to drop a couple of kg and get some proper training done.

    I hate training on the TT bike. Legs feel uncomfortable, can't produce the power. Not giving up yet.

    Why is it harder on the TT bike? To the graphs...

    104346.png
    Figure 1. 30 minute tempo interval, road bike, 203W average

    104347.png
    Figure 2. 10 minute tempo interval, TT bike, 206W average

    Both intervals had the same warmup.

    On the road bike, my HR takes 20 minutes to hit 160bpm, and levels off around 158bpm.

    On the TT bike, my HR takes less than 7 minutes to hit 160bpm, and levels off at 164bpm.

    Why is there a faster HR ramp up and higher sustained HR on the TT bike for the same power output?

    I can think of three possible explanations:

    1. Day to day HR fluctuations render the comparison meaningless. Need more data to eliminate this.

    2. HR is a meaningful indicator of effort, but there is something grossly inefficient about my TT bike efforts (same power out but more muscle activity).

    3. HR is a meaningless indicator of total muscular effort, but indicates something else (like how much I am suffering).

    I'd need a lab to test 2 vs 3 (oxygen uptake would give a true indicator of actual energy used).

    Sessions...
    Mon/Tue: nothing.
    Wed: TT/Turbo, 0:25, 254kJ, 10@125W, 10@206W, 5@140W. In the tempo interval, my HR rose to 164bpm.
    Thu,Fri,Sat: nothing.
    Sun: Duathlon. 14 minutes @240W on road bike with clip-ons, 4km run in about 20 minutes..

    Summary:
    TT bike: 0:25
    Road bike: 0:14
    Running: 0:20
    Total: 0:59.
    Pedalling@Z3+: 0:24.

    A pretty crap week, but another race notched up.


  • #125
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Fig 1 shows half an hour? Is it the first 20 minutes or last 20 minutes you are comparing?


  • #126
    Raam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,317 ✭✭✭✭Raam


    Lumen, I think you only train so that you have some data to analyse ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    el tonto wrote: »
    Fig 1 shows half an hour? Is it the first 20 minutes or last 20 minutes you are comparing?

    Sorry, yes it's half an hour on the road bike (I've edited to correct).

    I am comparing the whole 10min TT interval against the first part of the road bike interval (I'm not yet ready to do 30 mins at >200W on the TT bike).

    It maybe something to do with restricted breathing, but it doesn't feel like that. The difficulty feels muscular.


  • #128
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Hmmm, they are pretty similar after two minutes, after which your TT bike interval is about 5 to 10bpm above. That isn't massive and could be down to daily fluctuations as you say. If they were my numbers I wouldn't give it a second thought. The fact though that you say you feel more uncomfortable on the TT bike indicates that it could be position?


  • #129
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    el tonto wrote: »
    Hmmm, they are pretty similar after two minutes, after which your TT bike interval is about 5 to 10bpm above. That isn't massive and could be down to daily fluctuations as you say. If they were my numbers I wouldn't give it a second thought. The fact though that you say you feel more uncomfortable on the TT bike indicates that it could be position?

    This shows it better (to same scale and superimposed)

    104348.jpg

    I just find it interesting that comfort and heart rate are apparently correlated, whereas power and heart rate are not.

    The standard advice for the casual TTer is "don't change your saddle position", along with lots of hand waving about breathing being harder and muscles not working the same way. It'll be interesting to see if I can train away this effect.


  • #130
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    OK, when they're superimposed like that the difference appears a bit more stark. More than 10bpm at a lot of points. I'm swaying more towards less efficiency when I see that.

    Changing your position though also effects how aerodynamic you are so you also have to factor that in. No point being more efficient if the gains wiped out by being slower.

    I see your goal is March 1st. How close are you to hitting it do you think?


  • #131
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    el tonto wrote: »
    Changing your position though also effects how aerodynamic you are so you also have to factor that in. No point being more efficient if the gains wiped out by being slower.

    Exactly. I need to do some testing out on the road (not quite ready for a wind tunnel yet).

    I don't really want to start compromising my position (yet), since I think it will be more interesting to establish whether the power and comfort can be pulled up towards road bike levels by training.
    el tonto wrote: »
    I see your goal is March 1st. How close are you to hitting it do you think?

    No idea, but I am not filled with optimism! If the weather holds I'll try and do some weekend road spins on the TT bike and see if this helps.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    Are you too flat on the TT bike? This can cause breathing restrictions... also your arms being more narrow than on the road bike can restrict breathing too.


  • #133
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    mloc123 wrote: »
    Are you too flat on the TT bike? This can cause breathing restrictions... also your arms being more narrow than on the road bike can restrict breathing too.

    My breathing is quite calm - I don't feel out of breath at all. The problem feels muscular. 200W on the TT bike feels like 250W on the road bike, in terms of leg suffering.

    I didn't have the same kind of issues with the same aerobars on my road bike, so narrowness isn't the problem.

    It's lowness, or forwardness, or something. Annoying but interesting.

    It might plausibly be "breathing efficiency" (Steve Hogg talks about this, I think).

    10bpm is a lot, though. I don't understand how HR is regulated.


  • #134
    niceonetom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,833 ✭✭✭niceonetom


    Lumen wrote: »
    My breathing is quite calm - I don't feel out of breath at all.

    I know breathing is essentially automatic, and that you shouldn't have to take any conscious part in it but... have you tried breathing harder? I know it sounds strange but I often find that this helps me get my HR down a bit if I'm feeling it. Making a conscious effort to breathe like a bellows (deeper not faster (leave it!)) seems to have beneficial effects for me (though I have no data to back that up). It would seem likely that in TT position you might not be breathing as deeply, or using more muscular effort to breathe, and this added stress has to have some effect, though 10+bpm seems drastic.

    When it comes to balancing ease of power production with aero concerns, have you thought about using the track in Sundrive? I'm sure you could come up with a good testing protocol to see if any tweaks in position have a beneficial effect...

    Great training log btw Lumen, fascinating.


  • #135
    ROK ON
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭ROK ON


    +1 Tom. Quite often while climbing I need ti get some control back over my HOUR which gets too high too quickly.
    Slow deep methodical breathing works for me.
    Only thing while climbing I am going slowly so it is easier. On a TT you guys will be going pretty quickly so maybe more difficult. But it is worth trying.


  • #136
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    OK, so I did a bit of reading and it seems that heart rate is somewhat controlled by breathing (something relating to the vagus nerve).

    Higher breathing frequency elevates HR but does not apparently indicate a higher level of actual aerobic activity (i.e. oxygen consumption). I think it's just one of those autonomous nervous things.

    In other words, the leg power defecit and discomfort is caused by the position (to which I have not yet adapted), but the HR variations say nothing about muscular efficiency or effectivess.

    Breathe slower and HTFU.


  • #137
    ROK ON
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭ROK ON


    @Lumen. Its not just slow breathing but concious controlled breathing. In thru nose with deep slow breaths. Hold then exhale slowly.
    It works for me on the bike (when I remember it) but have also used it when snorkelling just to calm my breathing. After a few minutes you can go back to breathing normally as your HR should have settled.


  • #138
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Right, but are you actually achieving anything apart from lowering your HR?


  • #139
    ROK ON
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,831 ✭✭✭ROK ON


    Well yes. For me my HR gets highly elevated on steep gradients longer than say 1km. Now if I can't get my HR back under control I will not complete the climb due to running out of breath. When I slow my breathing down leading to a more controlled heart rate (less than 175 as opposed to greater than 184) then I can continue climbing and enjoying the pain as opposed to blowing up.


  • #140
    blorg
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,995 ✭✭✭✭blorg


    ROK ON wrote: »
    Well yes. For me my HR gets highly elevated on steep gradients longer than say 1km. Now if I can't get my HR back under control I will not complete the climb due to running out of breath. When I slow my breathing down leading to a more controlled heart rate (less than 175 as opposed to greater than 184) then I can continue climbing and enjoying the pain as opposed to blowing up.
    That's unpossible, heart rate is never a limiting factor. :pac:


  • #141
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    ROK ON wrote: »
    Well yes. For me my HR gets highly elevated on steep gradients longer than say 1km. Now if I can't get my HR back under control I will not complete the climb due to running out of breath. When I slow my breathing down leading to a more controlled heart rate (less than 175 as opposed to greater than 184) then I can continue climbing and enjoying the pain as opposed to blowing up.

    I don't dispute your personal experience, but I also don't understand how (psychological factors aside) breathing slower will improve your climbing performance. That said, it is not uncommon for coaches to recommend breathing control - I just don't know what the physiological basis is for this recommendation.
    blorg wrote: »
    That's unpossible, heart rate is never a limiting factor. :pac:

    Exactly! ;)


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    niceonetom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,833 ✭✭✭niceonetom


    Lumen wrote: »
    I don't dispute your personal experience, but I also don't understand how (psychological factors aside) breathing slower will improve your climbing performance.

    Not faster. Not slower. DEEPER!


  • #143
    Chips Lovell
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,269 Mod ✭✭✭✭Chips Lovell


    Lumen wrote: »
    I don't dispute your personal experience, but I also don't understand how (psychological factors aside) breathing slower will improve your climbing performance. That said, it is not uncommon for coaches to recommend breathing control - I just don't know what the physiological basis is for this recommendation.

    This discussion is rapidly going beyond my scientific pay grade, but it is possible that he's taking slower deeper breaths rather than short shallow ones?

    EDIT, beaten by Tom


  • #144
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    niceonetom wrote: »
    Not faster. Not slower. DEEPER!
    el tonto wrote: »
    This discussion is rapidly going beyond my scientific pay grade, but it is possible that he's taking slower deeper breaths rather than short shallow ones?

    Whatever. I don't see any evidence that fancy breathing makes you faster, only that it changes your heart rate. :)


  • #145
    DirkVoodoo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,504 ✭✭✭✭DirkVoodoo


    1. Image and style shall be your primary concern. When suffering, one must focus first on maintaining a cool, even composure, and second on performance. Winning races is an added talent, and only counts if said Euro cyclist wins with appropriate style.

    2. Training is based solely on feel, while racing is to be guided by sensations and instinct. The Euro Cyclist will never accept tried or tested scientific training methods.

    I refer you to laws one and two, and demand that this conversation cease immediately.


  • #146
    mloc123
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,454 ✭✭✭mloc123


    anyway, Sunday... newbie or full race? TT or road?


  • #147
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    mloc123 wrote: »
    anyway, Sunday... newbie or full race? TT or road?

    The prospect of being passed on my TT bike/pointy hat combo by hairy people on mountain bikes is pushing me in the direction of the road bike, regrettably.


  • #148
    pmg001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41 ✭pmg001


    Lumen wrote: »
    Whatever. I don't see any evidence that fancy breathing makes you faster, only that it changes your heart rate. :)

    Surely an elevated HR at a certain wattage indicates that your body is working harder to produce that wattage and therefore a lower HR indicates that your body is working more efficiently?

    I read before that athletes performing for an extended period of time are recommended to exhale and inhale deeply every so often in order to "clear out" stale oxygen from the lungs. It was stated more scientifically than this with bigger words but this was the general gist of it, seems to make sense and I can notice my HR drop when I do it which is maybe because more oxygen gets into my blood?


  • #149
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    pmg001 wrote: »
    Surely an elevated HR at a certain wattage indicates that your body is working harder to produce that wattage and therefore a lower HR indicates that your body is working more efficiently?

    I don't think so, HR is affected my more than muscular effort. If I held a knife to your throat your HR would rise, but that wouldn't indicate anything about what your muscles were doing..
    pmg001 wrote: »
    I read before that athletes performing for an extended period of time are recommended to exhale and inhale deeply every so often in order to "clear out" stale oxygen from the lungs.

    That makes sense, and would affect performance if getting oxygen into the blood was a limiting factor. :)


  • #150
    pmg001
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41 ✭pmg001


    Lumen wrote: »
    I don't think so, HR is affected my more than muscular effort. If I held a knife to your throat your HR would rise, but that wouldn't indicate anything about what your muscles were doing..


    That makes sense, and would affect performance if getting oxygen into the blood was a limiting factor. :)

    Hmm thats a fair point. Maybe over an extended period though?

    Is it not a limiting factor? Or is it the transport of oxygen to the muscles that is a limiting factor?

    I suppose the best way to see if you are working harder on the tt bike would be to take lactate levels- pity garmin don't make a computer with a lactate measuring device!


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    Lumen
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,138 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    pmg001 wrote: »
    Is it not a limiting factor? Or is it the transport of oxygen to the muscles that is a limiting factor?

    I don't know, but we argued extensively over the issue here.

    None of the resident physiologists have seen fit to jump in, yet. :)


Advertisement