How much do you weigh?

Likely answer is "no". 400W is TdF pro territory.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

I am 163lbs

Good job - but unfortunatley this is when you experience the diminishing return of training time vs gains. Also - 400w ftp would require not only 3/4/5x the workload, but having chosen your parents wisely..

As points out - 400w would be a pro(fairly good one too)- at your weight its 5.4w/kg..

Aim lower- even from 300 to 320 is a huge improvement

No.

No^No

Great job going from 190 to 300, but now the best OP can probably hope for is <10% improvement without reversing time and changing parents.

 
only one way to find out ...

Maybe...most probably not. It doesn't matter. Do the work, enjoy the journey and you'll get your answer.

If you shoot for the stars you might only make it to the moon. But that will still be further than 99% of your peers. Never let anyone tell you that a goal is impossible. That's for you to find out. Give it 100% and come back in two years and tell us far you made it.

One thing is your first test could have been under estimated. 400w is another level, it took me 3 yrs to go from 210 to 294. This yr i have not seen my FTP go up that much but endurance seems to be better so a high FTP is not everything. But hell man keep doing those FTP builders and see how high you can get it!

---

2024: Bevoman, Galveston, Alcatraz, Marble Falls, Santa Cruz

I'm 163 lbs. I went from off the couch to 300 watts in about 3 months. Taken 3.5 years to crack 340 averaging about 10k miles a year. 400 is not possible for me.

Very likely not possible for you, either.

I tested 400 at sea level when I was fully trained. Closer to 370 where I live at elevation, but I weigh 30 lbs more.

If you can get to 400 at your size, you can win the elite nationals TT.

How many hours a week does that 3-4 rides add up to?

What are you using to measure power?

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

It's really easy - just buy a kickr

That was really cruel. Kick's only read high by 40 watts.

Part of the question is also if you are a pure cyclist or a triathlete, and of course also how old you are. But as others have said, now comes the real work and genetics will play a role. 400 Watts is pro level and not many make it there so statistically it will be difficult. Now don't let that stop you - go for it and see where you end up.

That's excellent progress and you should be very happy (assuming your numbers are accurate, that is). If you learn to pace yourself well and really work on your aerodynamics you can achieve very good results in triathlon on 300 watts at your weight, and you can certainly consider bike racing as well. Whether through lack of proper training or genetics a majority of triathletes will never reach your level. You likely can improve more and even modest improvements at this point will have significant impact on your results. By all means keep working at it and see where you can get but the likelihood of reaching 400 watts is very, very low.

First year of bike training my kickr-ftp went from 200W to 300W.

This year I installed a power2max and found my kickr 300 was more like 270. Months of hard training to close that kickr-delta.

At present he is only just above the 50th percentile (of those who actually train).

Exactly! Sounds like some killer motivation. Maybe your the guy who proves everyone wrong.

GET AFTER IT. :)

Well, if 300 watts only gets you to the 50th percentile of this sport then I'm probably at the bottom 10th percentile. That's interesting since I usually finish top 3 in the bike leg of most local duathlons/triathlons. Looks like the top 50th percentile are at the bottom 10th percentile when it comes to having a good aero position. Raw power, as you obviously know, isn't everything.

What's the data set? I'd believe that number if it's licensed male USA Cycling competitors of say age 18-40, which is a very self-selecting group, but not those that actually do cycling training of some sort or another. It certainly isn't representative of triathlon competitors based on everything I see, not just myself but triathletes I follow on Strava that have actual PMs.

Didn't Jensie post 418w for his hour record?

---

no sponsors | no races | nothing to see here

That might be Zirbel? I think Jens was a bit lower for some reason. But I can't easily find either # with my Google-fu.

Cancellara/Wiggins were in the 430-440 range, and represent the known upper bound for non-weight-scaled power.

You should go read the stuff Dave Luscan posted on how he went from something like 58 to 52 min for 40k in < 1yr

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

This link says 412w:

http://www.brisbanecyclist.com/...ts-a-new-hour-record

it's taken me 8 years to go from 300w FTP to 360w FTP with weight fluctuating from 70-71kg in the winter to 66-68kg in the summer - confident I'll be at ~370w by August. The first variable I've really been able to pinpoint is time, which includes accumulated miles. strength and VO2max have fluctuated quite a bit, with VO2max actually decreasing from a lab tested 78 to a current lab tested VO2max of 74; that corresponds with less running mileage (high run mileage, for me, corresponded with the higher VO2max) allowing me to maintain cycling specific muscle strength. The second variable, for me, has been less racing. The more I race, the more my FTP from year to year plateaus - but I'm ready to get back to a heavy race schedule!

but wait, maybe the lesser run mileage was the second variable - didn't Frodo reduce his run mileage when he went from ITU to long course, and his bike times from first to third year on the long course scene drastically improved? Of course, he increased his cycling mileage (I'll assume) and he is racing less now than he was in his ITU years, though that's a conflicted variable due to the nature of long course... so using Frodo as an anecdotal example for supporting the two (or three) variables I provided is pretty questionable.

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

He is at ~4.1 W/kg. I have previously estimated that the average young, healthy male can get to ~3.9 W/kg by training diligently. What your typical jack-of-all-trades triathlete can do is a different story.

That would be an appropriate reference group, yes.

IOW, ~4.1 W/kg is only slightly above what the average cat. 3 can do.

Hello Iwant2gofast and All,











Good Luck, Mr. Gorsky! ........

---

Cheers, Neal

+1 mph Faster

Well, that puts some context on the "those who actually train" description. As I said, a self-selected group, as individuals of relatively low aerobic talent tend to either never bother trying bike racing or they wash out quickly. Triathlon is a participatory sport with a larger range of both training levels and genetic potential among participants. Based on what I've seen, a slightly above average Cat. 3 is a FOP triathlete cyclist (at least on a regional level), given reasonable attention to aerodynamics.

go for it

January 2014 I restarted training after a 6 month lay off following fracturing 4 vertebrae; at this training restart FTP was ca. 220 W. 6 months later it was 310 W. Scraping out another 10-15 W took two years. Obviously this is not a fully equivalent situation since I had a lot of training history before 2014, but still ultimately fitness gains are not linear.

I'm with you. I just did the sufferfest 10 week intermediate road plan and my FTP went up a measly 10 watts, 240 to 250. (Race weight is 173ish). Despite practically being rated as 'untrained' I finish top 20% of most local triathlon bike legs and do reasonably well at the local club time trial.

I guess you can't fight bad genetics, hearing about people who go from the couch to a 300 watt FTP in 3 months is pretty discouraging.

Iwant2gofast,

I tried to enumerate some factors that I think have contributed to my progress, which is along the lines of what you're aiming for - maybe a bit better than just telling you that you can't do it, or telling you that anything is possible. Thoughts?



So, here's four variables:

1. body weight
2. time and mileage and smart training - time at 87-92% of FTP & some bone aching slower long rides
3. balancing other two sports so that they do not have too large a negative impact on muscle endurance gained from point 2
4. less racing in favor of more training (questionable, though an observation I've made for myself)

---

wovebike.com | Wove on instagram

How is it affecting your other power curve?
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/?post=5736663#p5736663

---

http://www.cyclecoach.com
http://www.aerocoach.com.au

---

http://www.cyclecoach.com
http://www.aerocoach.com.au

Wouldn't a 400 w ftp be the cycling equivalent of a 60min halfmarathon? (At least at the weight you are)

But bloody hell, train and see where it goes.

---

10k - 30:48 / half - 1:06:40

no

Big difference between tri/duathlon and bike racers re. what it takes to be competitive. Last year I wasn't doing that much focussed riding and went down and ran top 10 for bike splits. Went out the following week to a crit and got my ass absolutely handed to me. Dangling of the back for the last half of the race once it blew apart with some wind.

I've never raced a tri when I've been bike race fit, but I'd anticipate is I was bike race fit I'd be significantly faster in a tri bike split that what I have been. However no doubt my run would suck big time

OP here
Thank you all for your kind and honest comments!
I do have a kickr but I use my quarq mainly cause its what I use outside.
Right now im riding at sweet spot medium volume 1 4x a week that comes to about 5hrs a week. Ive also up my running to 50miles running 7x a week. No intensity.

Hi
Im curious about your bike training regimen.

At his weight this is like asking if he can turn into a sub 30 min 10k runner, or let's say a 4:30 400m swimmer. I don't know what it is with biking, but people think that magic can just happen on the wattage front. It seems runners and swimmers are much more realistic about their potential ceiling. Maybe it's just because you can just look at a fast runner or a fast swimmer and say, "Nah, I don't have a chance to do that". On the bike you can "look" just as good as a pro since there is nothing technical (relatively) going on to differentiate visually, elite-ish level performance from competitive local person

Nothing outside the norm, indoor intervals during week, long rides on weekends. Last year really tried to bump FTP up so did lots of zone 4-5 short intervals at start of the year. This yr not done those as much but have done more 1/2IM and Full IM pace work something that i felt was lacking last yr. This year also really committed to 200 miles a week. Lowering your CDa may make you faster then increasing your FTP as well.

---

2024: Bevoman, Galveston, Alcatraz, Marble Falls, Santa Cruz

sometimes focusing on 1 number will yield slow gains over time that you can't maintain.

There are other ways to stress it... that continually mix up the training stimulus and result in continued adaptations. Don't get locked in solely on FTP. yes its the end goal, but again... there are other modes to make progress that result in your end goal.

Can you do it? Maybe. I'd never say no. I just know that locking into 1 thought process could pigeon hole yourself and result in a plateau eventually.

---

--------------------------------------------------------------------
COROS Sports Science

x2. Keep it fun, keep challenging yourself, and avoid periods where you get completely out of shape. It's easy to get overly fixated on FTP.

I thought I was a 300W lifer (which isn't the worst thing in the world), but unintentionally have gone through several breakthroughs since then. Even at age 44

Go for it but honestly I think it will be hard. Hell I went from 164 to 255 in a year of indoor cycling but I measure that on a hour of riding and not the 20 minute test.

While I like the 20 min test I rather measure my ftp on an actual hour ride. To each their own though.

I beg your pardon...I was at 430w at age 45...now at 55...slightly under 400w
And I still weigh the same 168lbs. 5.63 w/kg at 45 years old.

Tom Zirbel got 2nd at the US PRO time trial last year on 375W for under 50min. at 175lbs.

Based on your W/kg you should be in contention for both TdF stage wins and a shot at the hour record for your age group.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)

I agree that ~4w/kg is "average" - in the sense that 50% of young healthy males man reach it with hard training.

However, Looking at the legs and bellies of people in categories 4-5 I would say that most don't "actually train".

People who do actually train, in my experience, end up in cat 2 at least. Your own power profiling chart, where 4,1w/kg is in the region where cat 2 and cat 3 overlap, suggests the same.

You should be winning everything, no excuse.

Might want to read this thread.
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/A_question_for_the_physiology_experts%3F__P6152321/#p6152321

I was on my way there last year but have since spent half a year unwell. Coming out the other side now and would be lucky to hold 250 I reckon at the moment.

I didn't get into measuring my power until a fair few seasons of ironman racing had passed. First one I did about 5 years ago no was 290. I raced last year with an FTP of 363. I've never strung a block of multiple years together, so I'll get fit, race and then get drunk for a few months / kick back before doing it all again. I think I could have hit 400 had I put together back to back years but that's me - don't have the mental motivation for that. It's a hobby not my lifestyle per se.

Anyway. I'm a heavier guy at around 200lbs race weight so my FTP needs to be that much higher. It was good enough for a 5 hour dead bike split in Roth last year, so just having a high number isn't the whole picture - think aerodynamics and equipment too.

Can you get to 400? Given you are a racing snake I'd say it's unlikely unless you have an amazing set of genetics. Unless you are doing hill climb championships I would say don't get too infatuated with that number. It's about what you can sustain over a distance, can you stay tucked down, can you put that power down in an aero tuck for instance etc etc. As others have mentioned, only one way to find out. Lots of pain. Good luck.

Who are these unicorns who go from couch to 300 watts in 3 months? Seriously?!!!
I have been sitting on 260 watts for years at around 7hrs week biking. And i won't even hit that figure during a sprint tri so I'm probably overestimating my own ftp. I'm a fop biker but all these 300 watt bastards I assume are topping their age group bike splits

Who are all these guys that are sitting on 260 watts? :-)
I am down much lower with 9 to 10 hours for most weeks in cycling. :-)

Oh well I had my day in the limelight competing and winning in something different years ago. Nevertheless, I do love training and staying in shape.

1. The denominator also enters into the equation. IOW, yeah, if you're overfat, you won't achieve your true potential.

2. I didn't consult the power profiling tables before I made my original comment - in fact, I haven't looked at them in several years, as they have been made obsolete by the power-duration stanards in WKO4 - but as it turns out, 3.9 W/kg is smack-dab in the middle, with 4.1 W/kg of course just above it.

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/power-profiling/

The "still weigh the same" is a giveaway that you are not Greg Lemond!

Maybe it is 50% of people who actually train seriously and who also eat properly to get to lean body mass. Most people never do enough of both. If that is the 50 percentile of those that actually do both (train seriously, eat seriously), then this makes sense. I think what he's saying is that it is within the genetic ability of 50% of humans, its just that most people don't do the work to get to their genetic potential. It's like passing high school math is easily in the genetic potential of 50% of humans and probably 1st year and 2nd year calculus is too, but nearly everyone gets through high school math, but they don't apply themselves in math further to get through second year calculus....but they can probably do it with enough time/effort.

People who actually train end up as Cat 2? Funny how most of the Cat 3s I know train hard and are permanently stuck there and unlikely to ever move higher. It's kind of hard to find hard stats, but I did find that there are about 2,700 Cat 1s & Cat 2s in the US. I couldn't find how many USA cycling members participate in road races, but there are 66,000 members, if we assume that half of those are road racers, that means that 92% of the membership are Cat 3 or lower. So if most of those 92% were to train properly they'd make it to Cat 1 or 2? Not buying it at all.

OK, let's hear some race results. What's your method for estimating FTP? And what power meter do you use?

I follow a local guy on Strava whose numbers are almost as good as yours, about the same FTP, and he weighs significantly more. He's a current master's track world champion.

Agreed. Training and good power numbers does not mean that you can actually race well. And generally you need to have some modicum of racing sense to become a 2.

Just "training" isn't going to cut it.

I completely agree. That was what I thought was included in "actually train".

Think it depends on your definition of "train". If you mean doing some sort of cycling most days and cycling hard a couple of times per week, then yes I agree plenty of those people will plateau at Cat 3 or below. If you define it as somebody following a high volume, structured, progressive training programme, sticking at it consistently for a couple of years or longer, and also paying close attention to their diet and recovery, then I don't think many people do that and it wouldn't surprise me to know that those who do ought on average to be able to get to ~4W/kg.

4 w/kg does not equal cat 2. You have to actually go out and win/podium bike races to make it to that level.

Yes! That was what I was trying to say. Most don´t work hard enough for long enough to reach their true potential. Cat 3 is "average" but an average person who trains 20h/w for ten years (which I thought you meant by "actually train") will, in my experience, reach higher than mop cat3.

Sorry I should have put that in quotation marks. In the context of "achieving your true potential" I took Coggans expression "actually train" to mean "training 20h/w for ten years and doing 40 races per year".

If everybody did that then of course the goal posts for reaching cat2 would move.

Yes, he knows it's a necessary-but-not-sufficient condition. We're talking about training FTP here, not the entire suite of bike racing skills. I don't think the OP is even a roadie.

Yeah, got him confused with fb, who seems confused about what a cat 2 actually is.

The US is not my primary racing scene, but I've done about 20 races in the most competitive region of the US (in categories ranging from cat 3 to cat1) so I do think I have a decent grasp of the level of a cat2.

With an FTP of ~4w/kg I would gather enough points in cat3 over a season to qualify for cat 2. Granted, since I've done about a 1000 races in Europe I have more race craft than most.

Otoh 4 w/kg would get you dropped in most cat2 races no matter your skill level.
To be in any way competitive there my guess is you would need at least 4.4 w/kg, a decent sprint and good race craft. Does that sound about right?

I'm the same way. :(
Road racer on and off for years with very minimal and non-structured training. Started training properly on TR 2.5 years ago, I've gone from 225 ftp up to about 270, but haven't really improved that over the past year (7-9 hours per week riding TR). I'm 43, weigh 175 at race weight. I've accepted the fact that I probably am not gonna get much higher ftp, so now focusing on some longer endurance training rides and try to diet better.

:(

Yeah one of my buddies is a Cat 1 and roughly 380w FTP at same weight. Just got 2nd Overall at a stage race in Northern California.

---

_________________________________
Fit Endurance Coaching - Head Coach|Facebook
USAT L1 Coach | BikeFit Certified Fitter | Contributing Writer - Triathlete Magazine | ROKA

Going from memory on the cadence vs. power vs. rpe thread he started a while back, there was a photo of him in his youth with Greg Lemond and others at a worlds or similar event. His stats probably aren't representative for discussion of the OP's training status.

The level of a cat 2 was not your initial assertion. Your initial assertion was that which would seem to imply that anyone that hasn't made it to a cat 2 (the overwhelming majority) simply haven't trained. Obviously those that have made it are not representative of those that haven't, but again, those that haven't are far more representative of bike racers than those that have.

Thus, I think your initial assertion is wrong and as you allude to in your second paragraph, far more comes into play than ftp.

I don't think it takes that much. More like 2 h/d for 5 y...after that you'd be looking at really marginal gains (or if you started young enough, the benefits of maturation).

Dean??? If so, he's a beast! I've gone up against him in a few indoor TT's - our w/kg are pretty similar but the overall power almost always wins (unless we're talking Mt. Washington or the like).

---

Blog: http://262toboylstonstreet.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/NateThomasTri
Coaching: https://bybtricoaching.com/ - accepting athletes for 2023

Yes you are right. I was wrong in saying that everyone has the potential to get to cat2. What I should have said was that 50% has the potential.

My comments here were in regards to Andy Coggans definition of "actually training" - which I took to mean "getting the absolute max out of yourself with many years of brutal training and diet". The very few who do this will aquire both the physical and mental skills to at least *get to* cat2.

But I still believe that the 4.1w/kg of the OP are closer to getting him to cat2 than to be an average cat3. (Given that he aquires decent technical and tactical skills).

Most of these guys hitting 300w are heavy.

320 watts, 145 pounds. Heavy?

3-4x a week of structured riding and keep run volume to 20 mpw.

Ha..Ha...Paul...I already told you that.
I hope that all is well with you...

I am...maybe this year

Beach to Battleship cycling course record...many years old.
At 55 years still over 30mph for 10miles.
med. ride today on Strava...and I'm 168 lbs

I hate my genes - maybe I should be riding 12 hrs a week and not 7 😔

I don't ride much more than you...but yes...and sorry...I suppose I got good genes. At 41 years...I was still at 83 VO2 Max...ha...ha.

Brilliant!

There are a lot of replies about what you "can" do and whether or not it's possible.

While some of them may be right, you're not going to get anywhere accepting defeat from the get-go. Get to work.

I started 2016 with a weight of 70 kg and FTP of 242W. Built that to 296W over 5 months. Crashed my bike in August and broke my collarbone, bought a smart trainer and got to work indoors in early Sept. FTP dropped to 275W after the crash and I built back to 296W after a month of hard work and volume. I've been riding 7-8hrs/week since September. November test result: 315W. Tested again this morning and resulted in 330W. My gains are getting smaller and smaller, but they are gains.

Spend some time building your 2x20 power, do some long (2.5-3 hr) rides with 4-5x20-30min in sweet spot, and just embrace the suck.

Only way you'll find out if you can get to 400W is to harden up and get after it.

TR was quoted as saying "If you think you can, or, can't, you are right"
That's on my key chain that holds my gym membership card.

I would suggest "smart" work which does include hard work. You are taking a journey that will take you to destinations unknown (today at least).

If you enjoy the whole journey, then you'll "win" no matter what your peak FTP is.

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

I guess I was lucky to be one of those 'off the couch' guys on the bike. I got to around 310 or so watts at the end of my first season and 340 by the second season. Since then (about 7 years now) I've plateaued and been 'stuck' around an FTP of 340. That said, I haven't done a ton or harder work to make many gains, but I think getting to 400 (at least for me) would be damn near impossible. High VO2 max, genes, and other variables are what is needed to get to that level (along with lots of consistent, hard training).

---

Blog: http://262toboylstonstreet.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/NateThomasTri
Coaching: https://bybtricoaching.com/ - accepting athletes for 2023

Congrats

Did you run and swim and to what extent during those periods where you boosted ftp?

Thanks! Been a lot of hard work and suffering, but definitely worth it.

I couldn't swim until December because of the collarbone break, but my run mileage dropped to about 25 MPW for November/December. I'm back up to 35-40 MPW now and have been there since late January. Starting to ramp that up more now to around 45-50 MPW. Swim volume has been higher than previous years so far in 2017. Still building.

I wouldn't claim to be an "off the couch" cyclist, but within 2.5yrs of pretty casual bike training (probably avg 4-6hrs/wk on the trainer), I was at 300w for 20' @ 70kg.

Now, with some guidance and 4-6hr/week, I'm at 343w for 20' for 4.78w/kg. It helps being 19yrs old (started casually riding at 16). Next goal is 5w/kg.

400w seems like another world at this point. I don't ride nearly enough to even consider it a possibility. I could see 370 for 20' being possible. If I get there, I'll consider ditching running and swimming a lot less, slimming down the upper body and cycling exclusively.

To the OP - FWIW I don't consider myself to be exceptionally talented. Consistency over time is key.

---

"Don't you have to go be stupid somewhere else?"..."Not until 4!"

Don't ask, just do it, you never know, maybe you are one of a million talent+great DNA, it is all in our heads, work hard believe, and it will happen.

Who cares about 50% of 90% statistical jerk-off analysis paralysis. That stuff only mentally limits you, If all people would look an numbers we would be society of average dudes, not a single super dude...

You must not make it to the gym that often since the quote is Henry Ford's; not TR's.

---

Straightenin' the curves; Flattenin' the hills
------------------------------------------------------------
Coached by Mike Plumb @ TriPower MultiSports
https://www.strava.com/athletes/1149072 - https://www.instagram.com/thoswoods/

OOPS. well, I knew it was someone who accomplished more in a day than I will in a lifetime. HF doesn't seem as quotable as TR; I should'da looked it up. :-|

since I failed on this one, I shall embrace the opportunity to begin again, more intelligently

---

I saw this on a white board in a window box at my daughters middle school...
List of what life owes you:
1. __________
2. __________
3. __________

smh re: all the self-appointed internet police who cast doubts. dude may not be Greg Lemond, but dude raced with Lemond on the national team. He is certainly not an average joe by the virtue of being in the following picture.

The guy behind Dave

http://www.newsobserver.com/...article10288739.html

Haha this made my day.

---

https://twitter.com/mungub

Interesting you hit your near peak with that amount of training. I'm probably about 5 years

From reading this I'm not expecting to get much better :(

I did a similar progression in a few months. And that was it. I thought I was going to be pro level in no time at the rate I was improving...

Not casting doubts, just generally interested. When some dude on the internet posts those kinds of numbers you expect there to be some real race results to back them up and it sounds like that's the case.

I've been at cycling for about 12 years, and reached what I thought was a permanent ceiling a few times....then busted through unintentionally. I'm 44 so the odds of another breakthrough are probably none at this point. But I was stuck at about 300W for like 3 years...I was fully resigned to being a Cat 4 lifer. Then a switch flipped in my physiology (not a doping euphemism, I'm clean), and I was 40-50W higher and Cat 2 within a year. It wasn't just training, because I've always been methodical at training. And I've been an endurance athlete since the age of 12 or so. (running and rowing before cycling), so 20-30 hour training weeks were never a foreign concept to me. But something became more efficient in my physiology because now my cycling Watts are close to what my rowing Watts would suggest I'm capable of.

I'm sure there is some variance depending on where you live, but those numbers seem to match with what I've seen. However, 4w/kg is about the price of admission to cat 3 in my neck of the woods, I don't think it'll get you out of the 3's. 3.5 to 3.7 is a pack finisher in the 4/5's in my neck of the woods which is a bit higher than the chart would suggest. I really should just go back to running, I got much better results on the same amount of training. I don't see any of the fluff that others have mentioned even in the 4/5's. With few exceptions, everyone that lines up can ride hard.

I was surprised at the plateau, but that was ~28 years ago and nothing I tried made a difference at FTP and shorter efforts. Unlike you I didn't have outstanding performances in other sports prior that would indicate a higher potential.

What's that supposed to mean? LeDuc was a doper and I could still ride him off my wheel " anyday"...I won that race...(solo 1 min ahead of 2nd)
LeDuc was also Masters World Champion.

If you can sprint and/or have high 1min and 5min power, you can get out of the 3s just fine on an FTP of 4w/kg.

---

Amateur recreational hobbyist cyclist
https://www.strava.com/athletes/337152
https://vimeo.com/user11846099

I find it sort of interesting how many name changes you've gone through on Slowtwitch. It's very strange. But each time it takes a little bit to figure out who you are and a lot of times it's because you continue to mention the B2B course record like it's a big deal. It was a triathlon...relay. And you went real fast. Congrats!!!

Why don't you race anymore? Lots of good race results but nothing in the past couple of years. You could clearly still be winning at the national level.

http://www.usacycling.org/...ex.php?compid=198878

Hey James ...Hope that you are well !
I'll try to answer all of your questions...
1.I find it sort of interesting how many name changes you've gone through on Slowtwitch. It's very strange. But each time it takes a little bit to figure out who you are and a lot of times it's because you continue to mention the B2B course record like it's a big deal. It was a triathlon...relay. And you went real fast. Congrats!!!
Simple...I got banned and used another IP address and username.
For me, B2B was a big deal...for an old guy with a headwind for 60 miles...I rode 308 watts average for over 4 hours.
2.Why don't you race anymore?
I do...I am involved in a bi-weekly time trial in Rock Hill SC every year..plus I still do Lowes every now and then. Got the 55+ record last year.
3.Lots of good race results but nothing in the past couple of years. You could clearly still be winning at the national level.

Frankly James...I just got burned out on racing. Every race the same story. Myself against the field. Everyone would just wait for me to make the move and work in a concerted effort to bring me back. It got to the point where I had to solo counterattack many times to finally bury everyone.
It got very old and wasn't challenging nor fun anymore.

Take Care,
JP

Single-handedly burying the entire field isn't fun?! You poor cupcake, that must have been awful, being the geezer version of Peter Sagan. :)

The only other kind of fun I can think of is burying the entire field with teammates.

Oh...don't get me wrong...it was a blast for a while...but the field's learning curve rapidly increased.
When you are one on one against a whole field with intelligence increasing...I needed to have my best "game face" on for every race. If you did it...believe me...you would understand...it eventually got old.

No, I understood you. I'm just making fun of you because I've done something like that exactly once against good competition...repeatedly attacking until no one was left. And I've been trying desperately to recapture it ever since.

I've found this discussion quite interesting. My Tri training group measures and tracks our athletes' FTPs monthly and we have a leaderboard on W/kg basis. Here are the results for triathlon-focused athletes (guys focusing on IM distance):

Top AGer (No.1 in the country, wins or podiums every race including IM regional championships): 4.5 w/kg
Pro: 4.33 w/kg
AGers who have KQ'd: 4.1 - 4.2 w/kg
IM Top-10 AGers: 3.85 - 4.0 w/kg

Most of the guys above are training 24+ hours per week, with 15+ hours per week cycling.

Savan...do those guys not work or just work part time?

Nope - all work full time (Pro works part time).
Some have fairly flexible jobs.
The no. 1 trains like 30hrs a week, with a full time career and family with two kids. He is insane though - up at 3am to ride kind of crazy...

Those numbers are so low they don't even make sense.

I know. I mean, you need an FTP of 5.0w/kg just to allowed to post on slowtwitch right? :)

How the hell does a "pro" have an FTP of 4.33 w/kg? The Kona pro field rode at 4.0+ w/kg!

I'm an average athlete with an FTP of 4.65. Should i be crushing people??

Never said he's a Kona-level pro.

If you can swim and run, you should be crushing and winning your AG.

As per your link, Hoffman rode at 3.4 W/kg at an IF of 0.79.

If that data is correct, that translates to an FTP of ~4.35W/kg?

Huh, i guess so! I just remembered looking at Van Lierde's file the other day and knew it was 4+.

I need to work on my swim and run I guess!

IF is relative to NP, not AP. That puts his FTP at 4.59W/kg and even that seems suspiciously low.

I was serious with my comment. At 4.6W/kg and I've never had the fastest bike split in any triathlon, even in local events. I don't see how any "pro" triathlete could be at 4.35W/kg, that's just ridiculous, even for a second-tier pro.

Your race results don't support an FTP of 4.65

 
search is failing me, can you post that link if you happen to know it?

thanks!

Last race I did I had a 2:27 split on 211 AP. My FTP at the time was 296W but I was using the 2x8 method to estimate, so I know my FTP was overestimated.

Broke my collarbone in August and have beat the shit out of myself on my trainer after buying a Tacx Neo.

Aiming to ride 260-265W in June to a 2:17 on a hillier course.

How come you never answered the last question here?

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/..._BOOM%5D_P5822236-2/

Per the tips in at thread, I increased my cycling endurance due to my poor 70.3 running. Haven't tested it in a race yet, but I'm pretty sure I'll PR my run split by a good amount considering the training bricks I've put down in the last 4 months.

Jaretj was very correct about TTT being too much TSS that close to my "A" 70.3, but that race also ended up being 95+° and 90% humidity, so everyone blew up. Freshly asphalted run course turned into an oven.

I laid down some big rides over a month after and went at another 70.3 in July, PRing with a very MOP 5:13 due to walk/running the run. Don't think I was ready to run off larger watts at that point.

As of now, I've consistently ridden high power (80-85%) for 2:15 and run a least 45-60 min off 5-6 times. So I'm pretty confident I can pull that off in a race situation.

Follow me on Strava if you don't think I've got it in me and we'll see on June 4th!

That explanation is good enough for me

You should be pacing Ben Hoffman then at 4.6. Seriously, you should be FOP.
Not very aero? Maybe you need to have your position checked out?

The top AG'er at 4.5W/kg FTP went 4h40 at IM Arizona last year (and he does not have the most aero position I have ever seen). He did 2h10 at Dubai70.3 in January (2nd fastest AG bike split). The "second-tier pro" with his puny 4.35W/kg did 2h11 at the same race. The top male pros were in the 2h01 - 2h03 range.

I do however agree with you that most pros are closer to 5 W/kg than 4.

I was a "pro" triathlete with an FTP around 4.35. I split some 2:11s-2:15s on flat to rolling courses @ 220-240w. I wasn't even a second tier "pro."

I think you really only understand ONE component of going fast.

I think he was happy to have a more efficient ride at 2016 Kona. His bike position and equipment is extremely well thought out (more so than many top tier pros). I would guess that his focus is on how hard he needs to ride at Kona to stay with the front group and then also run well. Which is probably somewhere between 265-295w.

There is a strong focus on FTP among "regular Joes" (including myself) but I think at a certain point you just stop worrying about that one number and focus instead of what you know you need to do in terms of power duration for your races (i.e. 2hrs @ 70.3, 4:15hrs @ 140.6, etc).

The good news is if your FTP is 4.6 w/kg, then you probably just need to work on your position/aeroness because 4.6 w/kg is enough to ride with the best amateurs in the sport. My peak FTP was 4.8 w/kg, and that was good enough to produce the 3rd fastest bike split overall in an Ironman with professionals.

Alright, so I'm at 4.65 W/kg right now after testing on Monday. I posted for advice on my fit last week but it got buried pretty quickly.

Any advice for someone looking to race a 70.3 in June? My swim and run don't really match up to my bike fitness, but i'll probably swim a 30 min 1.2 mile, and can run a 1:35-40 if the weather isn't above 85-90 degrees and humid.

Practice riding at 85% of your FTP for 90-120 minutes once a week with a run off the bike. who cares what your FTP is if you can't hold 80-85% for HIM.

I ride TrainerRoad's Gibraltar/Polar Bear 1-2 times a week which are 90/105 minutes at 80-85%, no recovery. Additionally, I'm currently building my 2x20 power w/ 5 min "rest" at 75%. Started my 2x20 at 315, then 318, then 323W over the last 3 weeks.

All of those key bike rides have a 30-60 minute run immediately after.

Looks good to go then! So what is your 85%? Is that what you'll target in the HIM? What do you think that will get you speed wise?

I'm targeting 245w (FTP 292, 3.95 w/kg) and should get just north of 25mph on a flat course if it's not super windy.

Well, before my test on Monday that was 267W. I was going to ride at 260W to be a tad conservative. With the new result, we'll see if my body can handle 275W, but if I have a hard time adapting I'll just stick to 260-270W. Should leave some gas in the legs for the run.

The course I'm riding will have 1,900ft of elevation change over rolling terrain and a good amount of wind (Central Kansas). Last year's OA winner rode 2:34. Best Bike Split has me at 2:17 on 262W, so just shy of 25mph.

Nice, sounds like you'll crush it. Your fit passes the eyeball test from me but I'm no expert. Just stay relaxed and keep your head down.

Bit of a tangent but out of interest what sort of relationship would you expect between cycling watts and rowing watts? I'm an ex-rower as well and ride with a lot of ex-rowers, rowers definitely make good cyclists (and the big ones are great for following in a headwind!) which isn't a surprise given the similarity in both physiology and psychology required for both sports, but I've never tried to quantify the watts.

Doing some quick back of an envelope calculations, at my best when rowing I could hold ~1:42 splits for 20 minutes, which equates to ~330W, which gives an FTP of 300-315W. (I actually think the lower cadence in rowing leads to more muscular fatigue, and I'm not sure I could hold 300 watts for an hour, but I never tried...). Given how inefficient rowing is with so much time being spent on the recovery portion of the stroke, I guess you'd expect cycling watts to be significantly higher? My cycling FTP at the moment is 320W, I've only been using power for 6 months but based on previous RPE, Strava times, relative performance to guys I ride with, etc it feels like there's not a lot of room for improvement. But then I'm also 41 now, and I probably got a lot closer to my potential as a rower than I have as a cyclist given that I was doing it in my early 20s as a student with no job or family.

I was going off Concept II ergometer Watts. It actually uses power to then calculate split times. And in terms of power duration (Watts for 6, 10, 60 minutes, etc), it's pretty similar for me now. I'm 43 and also comparing to collegiate rowing, so that's not a perfect comparison. But I don't think I've lost a ton from age, at least beyond the ~6-minute power duration. But no way in hell I'm getting back on an erg to do an erg test. I just use those to warm up for weight sessions now. :)

As for efficiency, I'm not sure that rowing is that physiologically inefficient. Every endurance activity has a recovery phase. Cycling has the upstroke for each leg. Kind of the nature of how muscles work. Rowing's recovery does seem to be much larger % of total time though, except maybe in starts and sprints.

I think going from 300 to 400 would be similar to going from a 6min pace for a marathon to a 5min pace for a marathon.

Ah well, I guess if your breakthrough meant your cycling watts roughly equalled your Concept 2 rowing watts then that may confirm I'm already at or near to the plateau I thought I was!

I do reckon that all things being equal then you ought to be able to put out a higher wattage cycling than rowing. Just googled the Concept 2 lightweight world record for 5000m and it's 16:05 which is about 395 watts so implies a rowing FTP of about 350 watts. Chris Froome's estimated FTP is about 420W, and he's also probably a few pounds lighter than a lightweight rower. Of course 20 years, a job and a family mean that things aren't at all equal, but maybe if my 21 year old self had spent as much time cycling as I did rowing I might have got close to 400W!

By far the most common cause of race results not matching "FTP" is inaccurate testing. I guess I am a bit of a doubting thomas when it comes to internet FTP's, but anyone who is not a giant should really be regularly breaking 1 hour for 40K in a triathlon and 2:18 in a HIM split with a FTP of 300 or W/KG of 4. When I first started triathlons years ago, I had a budget triathlon bike with stock wheels and no other aero equipment. My FTP was 270 watts at 6 feet 1, 165 lbs. I was riding 1:01-1:02 for 40k triathlon with this FTP. My FTP when I was at my fastest was about 325 watts with the same weight, and I was riding 56-57 minutes for 40k triathlon. Upgrading my equipment made a small but noticeable difference.

My point is, if you have even decent equipment and a bike frame that is about the right size, you will be riding pretty predictable times based on your power. If you are not riding those times, chances are the way you are testing and evaluating your power is flawed.

One lesson I have learned from training over the years is that the key to great performance is accurate assessment of where are at, so you can know what you need to do to get better.

Just my two cents.

I think most people don't put the effort into actually ensuring they're aero in all ways or have a bike that fits. I had a peak FTP between 405-410 but never broke 58 minutes in an Olympic going between 360-370 (I'm a big guy at 6'7", and typically raced between 205-210). I got ~57 minutes on a "40k" (24.5 mile course) on ~360 the one time I raced State TTs. After going from an old P2SL to a new P2 and working on optimizing position, I went ~55mins the one Oly I've done since and dropped almost 5mins (52:09) on the same State TTs course with a ~355W FTP.

I don't write to brag (because even at my absolute peak, my FTP was ~4.3 w/kg with a run that can only be described as... recreational), but rather to emphasize that despite triathlon suffering from chronic onset equipment fetishization, too many people still lose time failing the basics of aero optimization.

Surely, whether you break 1 hour for 40kms or 2.18 for HIM on those watts is also course dependent? Is your assumption that the course is dead flat?

If you want to use the 6 min and 5 min parameters for running...I'd up the wattage on both parameters ...(330-430)
Previously being a runner...it's seems a better fit.
Riding 300 watts is a heck of a lot easier than running a marathon at 6 flat pace.

An anecdotal demonstration of what JH is implying. Local monthly TT here with high participation. Fastest guy on the course (excluding the occasional drop-in neo-pro) is not a wattage cottage. He has a good but not astonishing FTP and W/kg considering the time he puts in to training. However, his rideable (and demonstrated) CdA is well south of 0.2.

I suspect those are not examples of athletes that go fast off of a low FTP, but rather examples of athletes that race at a low percentage of their FTP, and/or athletes that underestimate their FTP. If you're a pro or a top amateur, train a lot, and also run fast, then most likely your true FTP is well north of 4.6 W/kg. Or maybe your position is costing you a lot of watts, but then maybe you should call that your "aero FTP" and not your FTP if you're going to compare it to others.

solid advise here!

ride on the bars 85% for 2hrs and then try to run at least 10k and see how it goes.

---

The entire event (IM) is like "death by 1000 cuts" and the best race is minimizing all those cuts and losing less blood than the other guy. - Dev

do you have any more info or even photos? that's an enviable cda!

Again, misguided.

Wattage cottage :)

---

2017 races: St. George 70.3 May 6 | Madison 70.3 June 11 | IM Zurich July 30 | Chicago Marathon October 8

I'd suggest better pacing as well. Those splits and your tone on the forums sound like you're training for a bike race, not a triathlon. Perhaps your mandated 85% FTP or whatever it is may not be optimal for the best overall race? Makes for a sexy bike split though. HR data would be interesting too.

---

2017 races: St. George 70.3 May 6 | Madison 70.3 June 11 | IM Zurich July 30 | Chicago Marathon October 8

My mentality of late has been to focus on my bike, but i've always put a run of at least 30 minutes after all my key bike rides, up to an hour, so I'm definitely making sure I'm prepped to race that combo.


260W for 105 minutes puts my HR at 151 bpm (my max HR is 194), so I think its a pretty reasonable expectation to ride at, assuming I can get my HR to come down out of the water. I haven't done many swim-bike workouts so maybe I should look into incorporating that.

My HR at my 7:30/mi cruise pace off the bike sits around 155 bpm on the treadmill--outside in heat will be a different story that I'll find out in the coming weeks now that it's warming up.

From your stats it seems like you're on track for a solid race. Either you will breakthrough (hopefully) or as pointed out, flawed testing protocols, lack of specificity (doesn't seem like the case but maybe need heat training if all your races are hot?), poor aero or poor race execution (which includes nutrition). Good luck brother

---

2017 races: St. George 70.3 May 6 | Madison 70.3 June 11 | IM Zurich July 30 | Chicago Marathon October 8