It would depend on weight but say 6.0-7.0 watt per kg??

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

442 W at 69 kg. Isn't it funny what w/kg number that leads you?

~6.4? What's funny about that?

Theoretically? Well an 80kg rider with a partial O2 utilisation at FTP of 90% of VO2max, a VO2max of 90ml/kg/min and GME of 24% ~= 550W and those are not the maximum measured values. Just not all at the same time for the same rider.

Indurain was estimated to have averaged 510W.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11007591

---

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

This is the only logical line of thought for this question IMO

Look at the biggest/highest/most optimal values achieved by individuals for each component of the fitness, and then picture the stars aligning with all those values all in the same individual.

Agreed - and if you follow it through to its conclusion, you end up w/ a figure of >9 W/kg.

Boardman's record has been topped.

when's the last time you looked at Dr. Coggan's w/kg chart?


out of curiosity, when did this happen?

Rohan Dennis, i presume?

Ferrari has written that Rominger averaged 462 - 468 watts, at 65 or 66 kg.

perhaps i'm being pedantic, but the original phrasing was "has been topped," suggesting someone who did it afterwards. I guess most of these "records"should probably have an asterisk next to them, right?

I believe Bjorn could have held about 460 or so, he could confirm or deny this from his prime. And his was absolutely non doped, and i think he was in the high 70+ kilo range, maybe even 80. He didn't even use caffeine!

I come up with this number from his record climb up our little mountain here. To this day only one pro bike racer has beaten it, the guy that won the mountain top finish in the TOC when it went up the same road. He averaged 465 watts on his tri bike for 45.12.

You mean this one?

Indeed, that is always an issue - or as Rumsfield put it, one of the known unknowns.

I've never looked that high up the chart. :)

I love this Chart. When you plot my abilities it goes downhill, which is exactly the type of riding I prefer.

---

I talk a lot - Give it a listen: http://www.fasttalklabs.com/category/fast-talk
I also give Training Advice via http://www.ForeverEndurance.com

The above poster has eschewed traditional employment and is currently undertaking the ill-conceived task of launching his own hardgoods company. Statements are not made on behalf of nor reflective of anything in any manner... unless they're good, then they count.
http://www.AGNCYINNOVATION.com

when was the chart last updated? and to whom is the 6.6 anchored?

Well, this is version #8, but I'm not sure which version was the last one I shared with the public. I do know that the one on TrainingPeaks is out-of-date, and has been for quite some time (even compared to our book).

Of course, the whole concept of power profiling (and it's off-spring, fatigue profiling) has now been made obsolete by the auto-phenotyping made possible by the WKO4 power-duration model. This version will therefore be the last one ever produced (by me, anyway).



Sorry, I cannot say.

Have I ever (offered to) modeled your power-duration data? If not, I'd be happy to do it...sounds like you know that you're a sprinter, but it might be interesting to see what an objective analysis shows.

There are plenty of athelets in the 240-250lb (110kg) range ( not many cyclists) so at 6.6W/kg that is 726W for an hour.

Are you saying you think the 6.6W/kg could hold true even for a larger hypothetical athelete

Not likely, as allometric scaling clearly demonstrates that, e.g., VO2max scales with body mass^X, where X is a value <1 (0.67 theoretically; ~0.75 in practice). Most people aren't used to non-integer exponents, though, plus when it comes to transporting your body mass against gravity or up a hill, it is kg^1 that belongs in the denominator.

I made a google sheet to map power duration records if anyone is interested in playing around with it, just a quick representation for ease on the eyes.

Here is the link

I'm not going to say that I've been living and dying by this chart, but getting a 5s W/kg value in the "world class" range has been a fascination of mine for a while and I reference this thing after pretty much every ride! I've been curious though--can you say who the 5s value tied to? The 25+W/kg is high, but given the power numbers I hear getting thrown around for track cyclists and BMX'ers I am surprised it isn't higher.

I've also come to the conclusion that I'm a sprinter, though I haven't properly tested a maximal effort at exactly the intervals specified on the chart in a while.

---

__________________________

I tweet!

Confused by this (bold bit). Frontal area scales to mass^0.67-0.75, if VO2max did likewise then the small guys would be as fast on the flat as the big guys (W/CdA the same), give or take that their bike is probably a greater proportion of total drag. If VO2 scales to mass ^1 then the big guys are faster on the flat, but can also climb as well as the, er, climbers (identical W/kg). Somewhere (and it regularly annoys me that I can't find where I've saved it) I have a paper indicating that W/kg scales to mass^~0.9 IIRC, which would explain climbing vs flat speed, assuming drag coefficients of riders are similar regardless of size. Any thoughts?