Humon Hex

I have to be honest, part of the reason I love cycling is that it allows me the chance to pursue my inner geek and play around with new bits of technology.

Ofc the main thing has been power but there is always something new.

Latest is Humon Hex   

If this works it will complement power measure very nicely as it will give a physiological metric that should correlate with my watts.

Time will tell but it will be fun to have a new toy to play with

February target 300W

Target for February is to hold 300W for a full 60 minutes.

Ideally I'd like to do this on one of the new AR routes on Rouvy as chasing another rider, even if it's not real is way more motivating than riding solo.

What a difference a carb makes

Interesting couple of days.  Using Myfitnesspall to track my calories and made conscious effort to up CHO % to above 60.

Friday I did 4.5 hours, yesterday 3.5, both upper end of Z2. 

They went remarkably well. Key thing was RPE, both felt much easier than previous attempts and in both I was able to put in late surges up in SST.

Going Mental

I'm a firm believer that mental toughness is every bit if not more important compared to physical ability.

Pretty much every time I have excelled it has been because I was feeling 110% good in my mind.

That's not to say that I was not hurting, rather my brain accepted the pain but pushed past it.

Conversely almost every time I have failed at something it's my mind that's cracked first telling my legs to stop rather than the other way round.

I'm far from alone. The quite excellent book  Endure  is full of examples. 

I reckon I'm pretty good in some areas of mental toughness but weak in others and this is a key area I'd like to work on this year.  

Having a Goal

The first rule of training is know what you are training for.

I must admit that the past couple of years  I have been a bit vague on this score. I have sort of tried to do time trials but tbh I really don't like them.

This year I am revisiting one of my first major goals, the Marmotte. I've entered but not even sure if I will take part.

Still the fact the race is in my diary and the fact that the clock is ticking has given me renewed vigour, making my training real fun. Which at the end of the day is what I really want

Weekly Focus

Another new thing I am trying out this year is to have a weekly focus. This will be one of 4 things: weight, power, recovery or race.

The last 2 are usual in any plan but the first 2 are not. 

They are nothing complicated, all it means is that during weight weeks I will be especially trying to burn fat mainly through skipping lunch. As a result I will just be looking to maintain power rather than build it. 

During power weeks I will eat plenty of carbs prior to and during rides, aiming to hit season power PBs. 

Week 1

Hit my goal for the first week of the year.

Aimed to do accumulate 15 hours in level 1 and managed it with time to spare. 

Periodised Nutrition

The main change I'm making regards weight management is to follow a periodised nutrition plan.

This is pretty simple in practice. It just means only eating high carbohydrate food (rice, pasta, wheat and the like) during exercise or in the 12 hours before a high intensity session. 

Otherwise I'll eat a mixed diet with plenty of protein, vegatables and fruit. 

The only exception to this is a bowl of porridge for breakfast before a long low ride.

One key thing about this is that I will not be trying to replenish my glycogen post workout. I'll just take a small amount of high GI carbs along with protein.

Polarised Training

The main change in terms of training approach this year will be to use a polarised training plan.

I heard an interview with Stephen Seiler on the Velonews podcast and later was lucky enough to have a chat with Trevor Connor who is a fan of this approach (and a role model for those of us aiming to stay fit despite father time)

Aspects of this approach resonated with me as I think, just by chance, I have sort of been doing this for much of of my time riding. 

My initial Tour de France is a pretty extreme version of doing lots and lots and lots of low intensity riding.

The hardest thing about this training is keeping the low days low and I already sense myself trying too hard. Still I will keep at and be interested to see how it turns out.

 

Racing Rouvy

I've tried a variety of indoor training products, including Zwift where I was part of the beta. It's not a surprise to me that these have become so popular. I like riding bikes but really, now, only under a blue sky and up mountains and I'm clearly not alone.

My first indoor software came with a Powertap trainer I bought over 5 years ago now. It's since morphed into Rouvy. This is one of the lesser known products but it's my firm favourite.

The reason for this is that it allows me to do what I like doing most...as above riding up big mountains under a blue sky.

Coupled with a smart trainer the experience is astonishingly real. 

Last year I tried Trainerroad and, while the plans/workouts are good, the presentation is not my cup of tea so I cancelled my sub and this year its back to Rouvy.

Luckily they have introduced a really nice upgrade, so called "Augmented Reality" or AR. Basically this just allows you to select a previous ride(s) (yours or others) and an avatar will repeat this on the course. (If anyone else happens to be riding the same course at the same time you also see them)

So I can race which is great motivation. 

What's especially good is that it means I can train to power targets without actually needing to constantly check my garmin. I can just select a rider at the target w/kg for the training zone and so long as I stay ahead of them it's job done.

Intervals are similarly easy. Just do one ride using a power to set zone/duration and then reride, just tracking the avatar.

 

Training with power without power

I'm trying out a couple of new things for my workouts this year.

One of them is to stop looking at power numbers.

I've been training with a power meter for over 10 years now. While it has been a great aid I am concerned that it may also be a limiter.

I have developed a Pavlovian reaction to seeing certain numbers on my Garmin..

2xx is easy
3xx is hard
4xx is painful

It may be that my body really does change dramatically when I hit 300W but I don't really think it does. Rather I think it's my mind that's the issue.

The single biggest piece of evidence for this is a 20 minute test I did a couple of years ago.

I recorded an ATB of 346W but the key thing was the way I did this. I did a Sufferfest workout (Hell hath no fury) and set my "FTP" to 500W or so. I then set the workout level to around 65% and nudged this up by 1% several times through the workout if I felt OK.

So I ended up riding power blind. My eyes were seeing numbers that it associated with long steady workouts so my brain didn't get stressed out by seeing numbers it associated with VO2 efforts.

I didn't really build on this experience last year but plan to this. 

I'll be using Connect IQ to display power level data in a new, neutral way so I never see the raw numbers and have to ride more on RPE.





 

Xmas feel good

Over Xmas week I just aimed to do shortish sweetspot workouts each day.

I didn't hold back on the indulgence so expected these to be a bit tough. To the contrary they felt remarkably good.

The power numbers were OK but the key thing was RPE. Even with a bit of a hangover felt fine, indeed much better after than before.

Garmin VO2 nudged up to 66.

Squaring the Triangle

This years require squaring a triangle of goals that can be contradictory.

I want to

• Maintain/improve my FTP and cycling stamina
• Lose weight
• Start doing strength training regularly

I have an approach that I think will work towards managing to balance these, time will tell if it works.

System Reboot

I'll be notching up another decade this year and I feel strangely re-invigorated to train hard.

So I thought I'd restart this blog both to record how I get on and to look back on my 2006 tour.

Just testing

Just testing

Guesstimating Climb time from power

If you have access to a power measure and are planning a ride involving lots of climbing or if you just want to measure yourself up against the pros then this application may be of interest.

http://bikecalculator.com/index.html


By plugging in some basic info about yourself and the climb it comes with an estimate of the time to climb. I have found it to be remarkably accurate. 

By way of illustration the table below shows some numbers for a variety of different riders on the principal climbs used on the Marmotte. (The "pro" is David Lopez, data from the 2013 TDF stage where they climbed the Alpe twice, shows the difference between "tempo" and taking it "easy")

The difference between actual and calculated is small. Even where they are "wrong", on the Glandon, it illustrates an interesting point. This climb as a vicious little V valley midway up that will slows you up. It is also the first climb in the event so it gets congested and time is lost working your way through the field. Those going faster and/or starting at the front suffer less from this.

Rider	Kg	Climb	Distance	Gradient	Power	Act Time	Calc Time	Difference
Pro	67	Alpe D'Huez	13	8	360	45	43	2
Pro	67	Alpe D'Huez	13	8	288	55	52	3
RiderA	74	Alpe D'Huez	13	8	313	54	52	2
RiderB	71	Alpe D'Huez	13	8	222	70	69	1
RiderC	70	Alpe D'Huez	13	8	247	64	65	-1
RiderD	70	Alpe D'Huez	13	8	263	58	59	-1
RiderA	74	Galibier	18	6.6	306	66	65	1
RiderB	71	Galibier	18	6.6	224	84	81	3
RiderC	70	Galibier	18	6.6	223	82	81	1
RiderD	70	Galibier	18	6.6	241	74	75	-1
RiderA	74	Glandon	23	4.8	331	64	62	2
RiderB	71	Glandon	23	4.8	254	83	74	9
RiderC	70	Glandon	22	4.8	274	74	69	5
RiderD	70	Glandon	23	4.8	245	81	75	6
RiderA	74	Telegraph	12	6.9	335	40	41	-1
RiderB	71	Telegraph	12	6.9	250	50	51	-1
RiderC	70	Telegraph	12	6.9	259	50	49	1
RiderD	70	Telegraph	12	6.9	241	48	52	-4

Criss Cross Progression

Did third criss-cross of 2015 yesterday and showed some nice progression

Ride here 
https://app.strava.com/activities/249537733/overview

Cut the rest interval and extended the work ones, especially the last so that it took just over 60 minutes. For focus I concentrated on the calves, really pushing through to the bottom of the stroke and "scraping the mud off the cleats". I expected at some point they would burn but didn't even on the overs, upper leg gave the biggest pain. Will push them even harder next time.


Comparing to first one

Latest session
Interval Time  9:25 (last 13:15)
Interval Power 283W/328W avg 300W
Hour stats: 279W/290NW HR avg 152bpm HR peak 161bpm

First session
Interval time 9:11
Interval power 280W/325W avg 294W
Hour stats 259W/278NW HR avg 152bpm HR peak 168bpm

So power up and HR down, latter reflected in fact that latest session felt easiest yet. Average power for the workout was enough for a sub 60 minute ascent of Alpe D'Huez.

 

CrissCross - favourite turbo workout

Over the course of the last 10 year or so I've tried lots of different workouts. There is one that stands out, both because it works and is enjoyable to do. It's especially good for turbo sessions and I would recommend everybody try it out.

This is the "crisscross" or OU workout. See here for a basic guide http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/3-top-indoor-cycling-workouts-under-1-hour



There are a number of reasons why it's excellent:

• It's at threshold. There is no getting away from the fact that if you want to improve your power you need to spend time in this zone. The standard workout for this is "2x20" or variant that requires you to hold threshold power steady for an extended period of time. When done on a turbo I find these pretty mind numbing. This workout is more fun since it breaks the long interval down into more manageable "very hard"/"slightly less hard" chunks. In terms of the end result the average power/training benefit will be the same.
• It's very time efficient. In terms of training stress/minute or calories burned/minute it's amongst the highest. Because the first part is slightly under threshold you can get away with a short warmup (or even skip warmup altogether and do the first 2 minutes as a fast ramp up to threshold. The first 5-6 minutes will feel very tough but by the end of the first interval you should feel normal). Also if pushed for time you can cut recovery, the description recommends 4 minutes, I find 3 is more than enough.
• It's good race preparation.  The article mentions one, working in a small race group, but that's not the only example there are others. In the real world any course  will have some bits that are tougher than others. The best way to pace these once they start requiring 20 minutes or so+ of effort  is go a bit harder on the hard bits and a bit easier on the less hard bits. In the case of TTs the reason for this is basic physics, for long climbs its better not to change gear every time the gradient shifts since this wastes  power.Also starting slightly under threshold is not a bad idea for events 20 minutes and up. You are unlikely to win them during the first 60 seconds but may lose them if you go off too hard and have nothing left for the hard bits/end.
• It's good mental training. Since it's more like real life its possible to imagine doing a real ride. If there is a particular course, e.g, a 10TT then you can set the O/U to correspond to its contours. 
• Also the U sectors will feel, comparatively, easy. This helps with pacing as you can push harder for a bit if you know you will have a bit of a "rest" shortly. Having this in mind is also handy for the inevitable occasion when you pop during a threshold effort. If you can fall back to an effort that's still comparatively  high then you finish better than if you crash right down to your endurance pace. You can see this happen on long climbs when some riders apparently drop off  but then claw back and rejoin.
• It's hugely adaptable. You make lots of tweaks to keep the sessions varied/interesting and/or extend the area being changed. Just some e.g.s
• > Make the U lower (around top of Temp) and the O higher (well above threshold).This really will feel like being in a tiny group trying to get to the finish ahead of the pelaton.
• > Make U high sweetspot and O low threshold and increase the length of each work interval and reduce/eliminate  rest. Eventually it's possible to do a full 60 minutes this way, I have found this to be the "easiest" way to do a sol one hour at close to FTP. 
•  > Make some of the Os much higher than the others and imagine you are in a race. The first could be first is trying to get a gap with a couple of others then hold it. The last is the final effort to hit the finish first. 
• You can use the different sections to work on other things as well. E.g. varying cadence. One set can be done by keeping cadence constant and increasing resistance. The next vice versa. Or start the first section at 50rpm then increase 5 rpm each time until you max out. Or try getting the extra power for the Os through a specific muscle group, e.g. push harder with your glutes or concentrate on "scraping the mud of your soles" a la Some combinations may feel more comfortable than others, which ones may surprise you. Even if not just doing this will  make the time pass quicker.

 As an example here is a recent example. The main session consists of 5x9 minutes criss-cross. Power ranged from 90% under 105% over, so not too extreme as main objective was just to accumulate threshold time and set a benchmark for the future. I'll include a session like this each week, firstly increasing to 5x12minutes then reducing recovery with target being non-stop 60 minutes.

The first set of 3 was done increasing power by increasing cadence, then a second set of 2 keeping cadence more constant and varying resistance (which felt easier). Interestingly the HR for each set shows how each U has a bit of recovery following it being pushed up by the O. Quite apart from anything else this gives a handy check of my current FTP guesstimate. 

https://app.strava.com/activities/243530337/analysis/1574/5150

 

And now the good news

It's the last day of 2013. Time for a bit of reflection and the BBC web site is full of reviews of the year. 

One is here The Year in Numbers 

First bullet is a real good news story and one that flies in the face of the torrent of horror stories/depression/cynicism that forms the bulk of most comment for most of the time.

When asked how happy they were, on a scale of 1-10, the average Briton rated themselves 7.3. Only 10% rated themselves 4 or less.

I'd say this was pretty much the best news of 2013 and a fitting way to end it. 

(FWIW, I wasn't asked but had I been I think I'd score a 9)



 

No food needed

I've got to the point in my training plan where I am starting to do some long “sweetspot” workouts as described by Hunter Allen here,.http://www.hunterallenpowerblog.com/2013/11/four-keys-to-powerful-winter-training.html?utm_source=November+2013+Power+News&utm_campaign=November+Power+News&utm_medium=email

I thought I would use these to take the opportunity to check my previously stated assertion that you don't need to take any calories in the form of sports nutrition for workouts less than 2 hours long, moreover doing so will often be a mistake. (You do ofc need to drink, but water is fine)

So yesterday I did a 2+ hour workout comprising a warmup, 90 minutes of sweetspot at around 90% FTP and a warmdown.

I had some porridge for breakfast around 2 hours beforehand and during the workout nibbled one apple just to keep my mouth fresh and not have an entirely empty stomach. I drank around 2l of water.

Stats for the workout were:

Warmup 30 mins averaging 205W (bit longer than planned due to some setup issues)

Sweetspot 90 minutes averaging 268W/153bpm (FTP c 300W atm, HR@ FTP 166bpm) so spot on in terms of target power and HR zone

Warmdown 20 minutes averaging180W

The sweetspot session was reasonably intense, equating to just over 1.5 climbs of Alpe D'Huez at 57minute pace.

Looking at energy use the total for the ride was just over 2000kj=pretty much same kcal. ( Using the results of a recent ramp test I can guesstimate roughly 1500kcal of this came from carbohydrate mostly glycogen with around 80kcal for the apple and maybe a bit from the porridge.)

This is not just an n=1 example. Some aspects of the workout are, I would argue, broadly applicable to most riders regarding the question of whether and how much needs to be eaten during a workout in order to achieve a workout goal.

Reason for this is that most folks should have ample stores of glycogen to fuel such efforts, easily enough to do a 1-2 hour session at a quite strenuous level. Maths are that it is usual to have around 400-500g of glycogen are available for use, 1G of glycogen = 4kcal. So immediately, for a 2 hour session you need to be doing a workout burning more than 800kcal per hour which is pretty tough (Note these are real calories as measured by a powermeter or similar, not the inflated figures some products produce to make their consumers feel good). Further, not every kcal burned will come from glycogen. Some will come from food in the process of being digested, some from fat. Fat only contributes a significant proportion at low intensities but still even the hardest of most workouts will include times of low intensity.

Taking all this into consideration bottom line you need to be capable of and actually do around 280W+ non-stop for a full 2 hours before you need to worry about feeding to accomplish a training objective for short <2 hour="" span="" workouts.="">

If you are not doing sessions as hard as this

• If weight loss/control is one of your objectives I would absolutely recommend not taking in any significant calories during such workouts. Sports “nutrition” is mainly just junk food in the form of sugar. The calorie deficit short hard workouts produce will be far better filled by larger portions good healthy balanced meals at normal mealtimes that will stop you feeling hungry and/or allowing yourself a treat or two to make dieting more tolerable.
• If weight loss/control is not an issue. I would still advise not using any sports products as a default. Rather do without for a bit then, perhaps, introduce some in a controlled manner to see if they actually do for you what they claim on the label. Alternatively they can be an option if you hit a plateau level where you cannot improve when you can try using something to see if it helps. It may (though chances are reason will be as much psychological as physiological) in which case great, but then I'd advise weaning yourself off it to reserve for the next training plateau or as a boost for race use.