Recent content by Steeplechase

And then we raced up it.......okay, it's a hard climb.

IMO...For a 20-22 minute climb, fully fresh, those numbers for Wiggins are achieveable especially if his weight really is down to 71kg as he reports. 71kg *6.2watts/kg = 440 watts 22 minute power at crank (SRM power) so 425-430 watts PT power. That is well within his FTP of 410 watts estimate...

Bingo...put out big numbers and who gives a ****! It's all about going FAST and winning races. In all reality, in a race situation you VERY RARELY IF EVER do an all out 1 hour effort. Also...I've seen a lot of guys who put out the big watts but don't actually go fast...what's the point in...

131313...I agree that efficiency cannot be improved by a measurable amount through bike fit, pedaling technique, etc. It may improve your performance on the bike (comfort, symmetry, etc) but actual efficiency has to do with your muscles firing...fast twitch vs slow twitch and muscle contraction...

Calculate your MAXIMUM POSSIBLE FTP based on Vo2 max and full time training and MAXIMUM EFFICIENCY of 25% here: http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pvrDEHoxsANfk8pR8W0AYUw 170 lbs and 88ml/kg...FTP maximum 433 watts. Makes sense versus 420 watt rider example. For Greg Lemond Type...

Example of big watts, big rider (94kg) http://www.fascatcoaching.com/goopages/pages_downloadgallery/download.php?filename=4400_1053676.wko&orig_name=R041208A.wko You need TrainingPeaks WKO+ to open the link 34 minutes at 470 watts calibrated SRM = 455 watts PT.

....AND the efficiency of the rider in question. Of course this is assuming a rider weight of 73-80kg, or a larger rider in general...430 watts FTP for a 65kg rider would be an unheard of Vo2 Max. Take a look at this article from the Journal of Applied Physiology titled "Determinants of...

Woah, 72kg and 430 watt FTP? 83ml/kg? That is possible I suppose going back to the beginning of the thread when we were discussing metabolic efficiency and it's effect on FTP power. Theoretically a lower Vo2 Max combined with a high efficiency of 22-23% could yield this type of power. It is...

72-74kg sounds correct after looking into Eddy Merckx's race weight a bit more. As for the hour record, well, that number was a calculation based on 1) Assumed CdA 2) Assumed RR 3) Assumed atmospheric conditions 4) Assumed weight 5) Assumed "smudge factor" for calculating sea-level equivalent...

Bigboat, your attitude does seem to be far different. A larger rider produces incrementally more power, but weighs more. Just by saying a rider produces 420 watts at FTP peak (we're talking when HCT is high from resting and tapering) does not mean he is doping. The big guys in the Tour...well...

Agreed. Mreckx was 65-68kg...again, big difference. 429 watt / 68 kg = 6.3 watts/kg....yeah. A rider such as Tom Zirbel winning all the US TT's the last 2 seasons has a confirmed 20 minute power of 480-500 watts. But he weighs 88kg and is 6'5'' tall, so giving a conservative estimate of 450...

Correct, recovery is tougher at altitude. Over 9K feet is quite high. However, it is very possible to train a high FTP even at altitude. The altitude simply shifts the BLA curve up and to the left...lower power and higher lactate levels. Train right at OBLA and one should see power levels...

BibBoat....Isn't it possible to have a high-ish crit without blood doping/epo? Altitude training and REST have a huge effect...I have a crit of 44.5-46.5% mid season with no altitude work when recovered. Really really. Without recovering beforehand it's 40-41%. Big difference, ala "Peaking"...

It is true that Vo2 Max is what decreases...but the point I was making is that POWER will always decrease with altitude >5000 feet. Regardless of the effect on decreasing Vo2 Max, Power at FTP will also be lowered. I'm not sure of the exact amount one would expect power to decrease. But it...

Right, we're comparing a difference in percentage to difference in absolute numbers. That being settled...a difference in mechanical efficiency is probable cause for a significant power gain at FTP. Now the previous study in this thread showed a ~1% increase in efficiency over the course...