Cycling Fitness / Training Advice

Yeah I’d use hrTSS. I used to row but now only sit on an erg once or twice a year and my arms and core/posterior chain are definitely the limiters. Also rowing engages far more muscle groups than cycling so typically hr is higher for rowing than for cycling at any given RPE, so whatever you use you would want to base it off some baseline threshold test. I see no reason why a 20 min test wouldn’t get you in the correct ballpark.

I do! paired with intervals.icu you can get all the data

Does it do something clever that means I don’t have to go through the FTP test?
#crossesfingersandtoes

nah you need to do FTP test, it will give you 'intensity' and 'load' which I roughly translate to IF and TSS

Out of interest, if you know yours, how does your rowing FTP compare to the bike?

20% diff, higher on rower, i am going to the gym quite a lot though

#SwoleAmey

higher on rower

That’s a surprise. Been skipping legs day?

its just an alternative way to find out I am bad at cycling

I have gained a a lot of weight

Planning on going to Cadence in Crystal Palace tomorrow night for an instructor led Wattbike session.

Has anyone been and can tell me what to expect? Will I need to know my FTP? (I don't).

No experience of that particular class/locations, but I'm guessing there will be all types there:

a) Those that know their FTP, what they can hold for 1 minute, what they can put out for 6 x 30s intervals with 60s recovery between and not break themselves for the next set, etc.
b) Those that overestimate their abilities
c) Those that can't be arsed and will be twiddling along with the resistance right down
etc

If you have a good instructor they'll know it takes new people a few sessions to get into the swing of things, and they'll also know that if someone smashes themselves in the first 5 minutes they'll likely hate the whole thing and never come back.

As long as you follow the rough outline of what the session is doing, and put in a reasonable but not total effort, then all is good.

Thanks, that’s useful.

I used to train indoors but sold my trainer because I hated doing it at home but have been to a couple of spin classes at the gym and enjoyed them more. I’m just looking for something a bit more structured/power based rather than my gym’s obsession with cadence.

Edit: also I’d rather ride outside so it’s just for when it’s literally freezing - so it doesn’t need to be perfect or part of a plan.

It’s all about durability now.

https://velo.outsideonline.com/road/road-training/the-new-marker-of-elite-performance-why-durability-is-the-new-must-know-metric-in-pro-cycling/

It’s all about durability now.

If that was true I'd be pro

Their terminology needs work.

Surely efficiency is a more apt term for what they're trying to measure?

Similar. My numbers don't really diminish with effort, but they're not big enough to start with! XD

Article needs about three more paragraphs.

Yeah, durability might be a more accurate term for the ability of an ultra racer to set off at a steady moderate power and keep that up for days or weeks. Though their ass and hands etc. have to be durable in different ways too, so maybe muscular durability would be a better wording. Though it would also need to be aerobic durability or whatever.
Fatigue resistance has already been used for what seems to be the same thing they mean here and would seem to describe it better.
https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/the-role-of-fatigue-resistance-at-the-tour-de-france/
https://www.outsideonline.com/health/training-performance/fatigue-resistance-research/
https://www.highnorth.co.uk/articles/fatigue-resistance-durability-cycling
http://jakubsliacan.eu/srmr/2023/09/06/srmr23-training.html

I don't think it's efficiency, to my mind that's how do you ride fastest for the least energy expenditure.

I think this is saying it two riders both ride at 4w/kg or whatever normalised metric for an extended period, who can do more race-winning shit after this point.

Yeah, but if you have 2 guys with the same Vo2max or FTP then the guy who can still put out the winning move at the end is still likely the most efficient, be that skill efficiency (handling, drafting), muscular efficiency (literally having longer levers or whatever physiological trait wins) or ability to turn food into fuel more efficiently. I think what Samuli posted is a better term but I clearly ain't no sports scientist. I can't believe I ride bikes without power meters these days.. whodathunkit?!

It wouldn't surprise me if these other guys haven't used "durability" simply so they don't have to listen to the WKO guys go after copyrights and "own" the phrases on every product/forum/etc.

I don't disagree, a durable or fatigue resistant (pretty much the same thing) racer is more likely to be efficient prior to the latter stages of the race....but they could also just have trained a lot to monster out watts after lots of hours in the saddle, regardless of physical predisposition or racecraft.

In any case, to me it's just describing what has be prescribed to road racers for decades, ie do your long ride then your efforts at the end. The fitter you are the more watts you can do.

I don't even pace TT's to power any more!

The article still needs more text, IMO. If you're FTP doesn't diminish between the start of a GT stage and the end... well no one is interested in that fact if you're FTP is 3.5W/kg.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPkFv9LDopc

If I achieved 97% of my mHR on an outdoor ride (going full gas on a hilly segment), does that mean my mHR is actually higher than 220-age?

Well that depends on whether or not 97% of your mHR is more or less than the value you get from 220-age.

If it makes you feel better my mHR (when I gave a shit) was always higher than any formulas. It's also basically meaningless.