Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Trev] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Trev wrote:
Can you explain what 'Metabolic Control Limit is?

I can, it's a term Coggan made up and has no basis in science, just like FTP, it is another vague term designed to hoodwink the stupid and sell books and software.

Please explain your system of training. We are patient here, but do try to keep it to a few paragraphs.
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [AlexS] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AlexS wrote:
2. Cross posting large slabs of text from other forums isn't particularly helpful.

The really funny thing is that Trev is just regurgitating regurgitation, but undoubtedly doesn't realize it.
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dr Coggan,

If someone put you on a computrainer at 95% of your FTP, when well trained, what would your lactate, measured by a finger prick look like every at 10, 20..60min ?

Would it be steady ? Over 4mmol/L after 20-30min ? Rise by x every y minutes ? I am just curious what the profile would look like, roughly
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [marcag] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
marcag wrote:
Dr Coggan,

If someone put you on a computrainer at 95% of your FTP, when well trained, what would your lactate, measured by a finger prick look like every at 10, 20..60min ?

Would it be steady ? Over 4mmol/L after 20-30min ? Rise by x every y minutes ? I am just curious what the profile would look like, roughly

Assuming that my FTP was established on said CT, then I'd predict my lactate levels to be constant over time, perhaps peaking after 5-10 min then gradually decreasing. It is harder to predict the exact concentration, but considering it was difficult to drive my blood lactate levels above 8 mmol/L, I'd expect them to be rather low.

(I actually did almost this exact protocol back when I was a grad student, but haven't looked at those data in years and years.)
Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Sep 5, 15 19:43
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Andrew Coggan wrote:
marcag wrote:
Dr Coggan,

If someone put you on a computrainer at 95% of your FTP, when well trained, what would your lactate, measured by a finger prick look like every at 10, 20..60min ?

Would it be steady ? Over 4mmol/L after 20-30min ? Rise by x every y minutes ? I am just curious what the profile would look like, roughly


Assuming that my FTP was established on said CT, then I'd predict my lactate levels to be constant over time, perhaps peaking after 5-10 min then gradually decreasing. It is harder to predict the exact concentration, but considering it was difficult to drive my blood lactate levels above 8 mmol/L, I'd expect them to be rather low.

(I actually did almost this exact protocol back when I was a grad student, but haven't looked at those data in years and years.)

Thanks.

That is the exact pattern I see. In fact I measured at 8,16,24,32 and 40. At 8min it was 3.7, highest value was at 16min (4.8) then dipping to 4.5 and remaining there.

The fact it's stable, that's the SS, correct ?
Does the fact it's over 4 provide any insight ?
It may not be MLSS because maybe at 10watts more I would be at a stable 5.6 ?

I may have to try it at FTP rather than 95%.

I do this because I find it interesting to see what's going on under the hood. No other reason.
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [marcag] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
marcag wrote:
Andrew Coggan wrote:
marcag wrote:
Dr Coggan,

If someone put you on a computrainer at 95% of your FTP, when well trained, what would your lactate, measured by a finger prick look like every at 10, 20..60min ?

Would it be steady ? Over 4mmol/L after 20-30min ? Rise by x every y minutes ? I am just curious what the profile would look like, roughly


Assuming that my FTP was established on said CT, then I'd predict my lactate levels to be constant over time, perhaps peaking after 5-10 min then gradually decreasing. It is harder to predict the exact concentration, but considering it was difficult to drive my blood lactate levels above 8 mmol/L, I'd expect them to be rather low.

(I actually did almost this exact protocol back when I was a grad student, but haven't looked at those data in years and years.)

Thanks.

That is the exact pattern I see. In fact I measured at 8,16,24,32 and 40. At 8min it was 3.7, highest value was at 16min (4.8) then dipping to 4.5 and remaining there.

The fact it's stable, that's the SS, correct ?
Does the fact it's over 4 provide any insight ?
It may not be MLSS because maybe at 10watts more I would be at a stable 5.6 ?

I may have to try it at FTP rather than 95%.

I do this because I find it interesting to see what's going on under the hood. No other reason.

Stability is in the eyes of the beholder, but I would agree that the values you describe represent a steady state (i.e., lactate Ra = lactate Rd).

Also as you say, though, you don't know if you were at maximal lactate steady state unless you up the intensity to the point that lactate levels don't achieve a plateau.

Given the range of values at which MLSS occurs in different individuals, the absolute values don't really mean much.
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [marcag] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
marcag wrote:
Andrew Coggan wrote:
marcag wrote:
Dr Coggan,

If someone put you on a computrainer at 95% of your FTP, when well trained, what would your lactate, measured by a finger prick look like every at 10, 20..60min ?

Would it be steady ? Over 4mmol/L after 20-30min ? Rise by x every y minutes ? I am just curious what the profile would look like, roughly



If you are exploring physiological markers then I would keep exploring until you see a conclusion. IE did you stop at 40 minutes? Keep going at the same steady state until you see a rise. Could be 1:15 or :50 etc. assuming you did it on erg?

Maurice
Last edited by: mauricemaher: Sep 6, 15 14:17
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [wahoopride] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wahoopride wrote:
a proper step test would look at the lactate levels in your blood at various exertions and pinpoint where lactate holds steady and where it begins to accumulate faster than you can clear it (the water level in your cup starts to rise). Actually MLSS is no 4.0. That is just a statistical average.

I've been researching lactate testing via Slowtwitch and ran across this thread about FTP. I have a pretty good understanding of the beauty of FUNCTIONAL Threshold Power. I'm not trained as a physiologist by any stretch but I've been using power from the early days. I'm wondering if there would be any value add to me and my cycling team to use a portable lactate tester along with a step test to hone in better on that "threshold" point? Would having this information help with accuracy in setting up training zones? Would it help with knowledge of proper pacing in long events? Any thoughts?

Thanks.

Geoff from Indy
http://www.tlcendurance.com
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [geoffreydean] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
I'm wondering if there would be any value add to me and my cycling team to use a portable lactate tester along with a step test to hone in better on that "threshold" point?

Saw this comment from a week ago.

The real value of lactate testing is not in determining the threshold. Its value is in determining what is behind the threshold and the lactate values which are the result of the strengths of the aerobic and anaerobic energy systems. If you are interested we have several pages on this on our website http://www.lactate.com

Go to http://www.lactate.com/triathlon/index.html. There are several pages of information on lactate testing and its value to an athlete.

Without knowing what is causing the threshold, it may be difficult to train properly to increase it for a endurance event. For short events such as middle distance running or swimming an athlete may actually want to train so that the threshold moves to the left.

Hope it is helpful


-------------------

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom
Last edited by: Jerryc: Feb 8, 19 15:57
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Jerryc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That website is straight from the 90s
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [TriguyBlue] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
That website is straight from the 90s

Yes, that is true. The first version was put up in 1998 based on the success of Luc van Lierde. It was modified 10 years later when Olbrecht presented a detailed description of his ideas for the triathlon.

Actually the ideas first came from the 1980's when researchers noticed an interaction between the aerobic and anaerobic systems. The nature of these interactions were then refined in the 1990's. The implications for training were then drawn up based on how workouts affected each energy system.

These ideas are still being used to train world champions. Why wouldn't they. The body hasn't changed in over 100,000 years.

See

http://bit.ly/2aKNf6e - Jan Olbrecht

http://bit.ly/2ldZzDW - Sebastian Weber

Is there anything you specifically dispute?

-------------------

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom
Last edited by: Jerryc: Feb 12, 19 10:36
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Jerryc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi all
Decided to reply to this thread but hesitated to create a dedicated post...
I am also in exploratory phase to do my own field testing and not only twice a year classic lab test, and am really confused.

I want to start from Treshold ( 2 ) is MLSS.
Studied whatever I could find about MLSS and understood that it means steady state over a sufficiently long interval to point out that lactate production is not exceeding lactate clearance between 2 measurements, AND that the 4.0mmol should not be taken as reference point as the absolute value may vary significantly from one athlete to another ( i.e top pros having LT2 around 3.0mmol and some AG's could be in the range of 6 or even 8.0 mmol.

I also have a good base of lab tests done with both lactate and gas exchange with consistent results + some field test ( CP20 ) and race results to correlate with both FTP and run treshold.
I am also not in peaking or high level of fitness but neither detrained , and probably able to hit my best numbers in CP20 or 10k run.

Took some measurements different days with the following protocol:

- Bike 2X6' at target wattage tested for "steady state"
- Run 3x 2km at previously determined treshold ( lab test - Race - HR ) at 3'50/km

I am confused by the result as basically I get "stready state" but super high absolute lactate.... RPE and HR are matching Treshold references during the test , but the idea of taking lactate is to :
1- Fine tune the treshold and avoid overestimating
2- Monitor metabolic efficiency improvement by seeing ( hopefully ) absolute value reduction at those pace/watt.

Here are the results:

Run : Lab test said LT2 is 3'50(km and 162bpm and 3mmol....( ramp test 5' increment )
2km #1 : 8.1mmol - 153 bpm
2km #2 : 8.4mmol - 158 bpm
2km #3 : 8.2mmol - 160 bpm
Rest in between was just the time to take the measurement
My PB on 10k is 3'45/km
I did last year a MLSS test on my treadmill at 3'50 / k and read 5.2mmol....at 3' and 9'

Bike : last lab test said LT2 280W @153bpm - 4.1 mmol ( 3' increment ramp test )
Day #1 - 270W : 1st 6' : 4.5mmol . 145 bpm - 2nd 6' : 4.4mmol 148 bpm
Day#2 - 280W : 1st 6' : 5.4mmol . 149 bpm - 2st 6' : 5.8mmol . 152bpm
Day#2 - 300W : 1st 6' : 13.1mmol . 156 bpm - 2st 6' : 12.8mmol . 160 bpm

Was confused by value still "steady" but felt like performing a CP20 but not RPE like VO2 max... So recovered a bit and launched another set at 290W one shot
Day#2 - 290W : 1st 6' : 12.9mmol . 158 bpm

Finally in term of data collection I performed 1 week ago a "VLamax" attempt with 20" all out and max value recorded was 7.4mmol before it starts to drop....

So this makes me very confused
- Can't be plausible to have MLSS at 13mmol and this would mean higher than my result obtained in the lab with gas exchange AND with much lower lactate value ( but ramp test with shorter steps indeed )
- Can't be plausible that lactate value at MLSS would be way higher than 20" all out supposed to reflect max lactate production...
- Even the run reads really high despite the effort felt like treshold
- How come that HR is falling in same known ranges for LT2 but lactate would be so high?

In term of monitoring improvement, is it correct to check evolution of lactate value at determined MLSS and seek reduction, or would it be better to track speed / Watt at 4.0mmol ?


The only possible explanation I can think of is that I had covid 1 month ago....but I can now feel I am back to my previous feelings and numbers I can hit in some kind of best effort....
Will there be finally a maximum absolute value in lactate where we have to consider metabolism is definitely anaerobic despite being steady on long steps?...
Did I just turned into a poorly efficient athlete despite having trained and completed an IM back in August with training highly emphasised on below LT1 ( lab and field test using 2.0mmol ) training + able to ride for 2h fasted mid Z2 - just below lab test FATMAX - without taking any ISO or Sugar?...( which makes me believe I was not burning sugar like crazy at that intensity )

Any comments or suggestion will be welcome :)
Last edited by: Petule: Mar 3, 22 12:51
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Petule] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Which meter are you using and what's your testing protocol (i.e. alcohol swab, etc.)? A lot of those readers will be reading higher than lab values

Check one of Cedrik Bakke Christophersen's latest videos (Norwegian junior). He was getting insanely high values post COVID. Could explain (part of) your issues.
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Belgian_Waffle] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Belgian_Waffle wrote:
Which meter are you using and what's your testing protocol (i.e. alcohol swab, etc.)? A lot of those readers will be reading higher than lab values

Check one of Cedrik Bakke Christophersen's latest videos (Norwegian junior). He was getting insanely high values post COVID. Could explain (part of) your issues.

Hello I use Lactate Pro2 and I think correct protocol
- wipe with alcohol
- wipe first drop of blood
- Take measurement

Also values are not all over the place but just high in absolute term when matched in the ballpark of second treshold
When I track LT1 , my reading are coherent with 1.2ish baseline after warm up and 2.xish when LT1 is reached...

I have seen indeed the video of Cedrik and following his channel, but unlike him I do not have noticeable physical consequences that is affecting my training... I took a week off then restarted progressively and did not do intensity until D+15 and waited that HR was not anymore showing higher values than usual.....
Aside this COVID hypothesis I am just wondering if it could make sense to have MLSS with lactate in the 13mmol range?...
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Petule] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I haven't commented here in a couple years. So I don't know if this will post. I will see in a moment what shows up on screen.

Contact us at info@lactate.com and we will try to answer you in detail.

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Jerryc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jerryc wrote:
Quote:
That website is straight from the 90s


Yes, that is true. The first version was put up in 1998 based on the success of Luc van Lierde. It was modified 10 years later when Olbrecht presented a detailed description of his ideas for the triathlon.

Actually the ideas first came from the 1980's when researchers noticed an interaction between the aerobic and anaerobic systems. The nature of these interactions were then refined in the 1990's. The implications for training were then drawn up based on how workouts affected each energy system.

These ideas are still being used to train world champions. Why wouldn't they. The body hasn't changed in over 100,000 years.

See

http://bit.ly/2aKNf6e - Jan Olbrecht

http://bit.ly/2ldZzDW - Sebastian Weber

Is there anything you specifically dispute?

-------------------

Jerry, I think you (deliberately?) misunderstood that comment.
The content in your site is great and there are a lot of good links.
The problem is the design looks like early days Netscape site, to the point that it would be off-putting to people (I think).

Sorry to have taken the thread away from actual lactate discussion.
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Jerryc] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jerryc wrote:
I haven't commented here in a couple years. So I don't know if this will post. I will see in a moment what shows up on screen.


Contact us at info@lactate.com and we will try to answer you in detail.


Sent you an e mail many thanks for feedback.

Did additional measurement that adds to confusion

Run to check plausibility at LT1
Warm up at 5'00/km 135bpm 1.5mmol


2km sets
1- 4'38/km 142bpm 1.8mmol
2- 4'25/km 148bpm 1.5mmol
3- 4'22 150 bpm 2.2mmol

Ride : 30'@22W which I believe is around my LT1 : Read 1.5mmol and 138bpm the last 8min with pretty much no cardiac drift which is "OK" in term of HR and lactate to match below LT1 so here no confusing values

So in a nutshel the lactate figures are consistent as far as LT1 is concerned but "off the chart" when trying to nail MLSS....
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Petule] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There's a new podcast episode discussing some issues with lactate testing you might find interesting..
Kolie also talks about an athlete he consulted with who was confused by his own lactate test results with huge lactate numbers, and why his "lab tested ftp" did not match his real life ftp


tldl; The 3 min steps aren't great for everyone because depending on how much anaerobic capacity you have, it can take a bit to ramp up your aerobic system. With every step in power you have to recruit additional motor units to provide the power output and each time provides new anaerobic stores.


https://www.empiricalcycling.com/podcast-episodes/watts-doc-36-how-power-meters-make-lactate-testing-nearly-obsolete

IG - @ryanppax
http://www.geluminati.com
Use code ST5 for $5 off your order
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Ryanppax] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ryanppax wrote:
There's a new podcast episode discussing some issues with lactate testing you might find interesting..
Kolie also talks about an athlete he consulted with who was confused by his own lactate test results with huge lactate numbers, and why his "lab tested ftp" did not match his real life ftp


tldl; The 3 min steps aren't great for everyone because depending on how much anaerobic capacity you have, it can take a bit to ramp up your aerobic system. With every step in power you have to recruit additional motor units to provide the power output and each time provides new anaerobic stores.


https://www.empiricalcycling.com/podcast-episodes/watts-doc-36-how-power-meters-make-lactate-testing-nearly-obsolete

Thanks I ll check the link , but already can say:
- My run lab test was on 5' increment to avoid this pitfall
- My CP20 based FTP tests are matching pretty closely the ramp test in lab ( 3' steps ) and I am conservatively taking 0.92% not 0.95%, HR at perceived treshold also match and my race results also match ( i.e 85% FTP on a 70.3 with a solid run after )
- This does not explain if it is correct / incorrect to measure steady state with value way higher than the commonly used ballpark of 4.0mmol for LT2/MLSS...

I understood that MLSS was meaning steady for long time, so in theory we should read steady lactate for duration up to and above 30' at this intensity ...
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Petule] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's not actually the point of the podcast. The point is that lactate values alone aren't actually useful. To be useful they have to be correlated back to power. With that in mind, you might as well just test power, since you can find the point on the mean max power curve where fatigue grows exponentially. You can also find threshold through longer test efforts, which have the side benefit of teaching you what threshold feels like
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [imswimmer328] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
imswimmer328 wrote:
That's not actually the point of the podcast. The point is that lactate values alone aren't actually useful. To be useful they have to be correlated back to power. With that in mind, you might as well just test power, since you can find the point on the mean max power curve where fatigue grows exponentially. You can also find threshold through longer test efforts, which have the side benefit of teaching you what threshold feels like

OK but that it is also not my point and even after reading all the related studies listed in the podcast covering CP and MLSS methodology, this still leave me with the confusion wether MLSS can be considered as valid for absolute lactate values of more than 10 mmol which is faaaaaar above the traditional ballpark of 4.0mmol.
And this despite experiencing coherent RPE and Heart rate at what is considered to be Treshold...
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Petule] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Petule wrote:
Ryanppax wrote:
There's a new podcast episode discussing some issues with lactate testing you might find interesting..
Kolie also talks about an athlete he consulted with who was confused by his own lactate test results with huge lactate numbers, and why his "lab tested ftp" did not match his real life ftp


tldl; The 3 min steps aren't great for everyone because depending on how much anaerobic capacity you have, it can take a bit to ramp up your aerobic system. With every step in power you have to recruit additional motor units to provide the power output and each time provides new anaerobic stores.


https://www.empiricalcycling.com/podcast-episodes/watts-doc-36-how-power-meters-make-lactate-testing-nearly-obsolete


Thanks I ll check the link , but already can say:
- My run lab test was on 5' increment to avoid this pitfall
- My CP20 based FTP tests are matching pretty closely the ramp test in lab ( 3' steps ) and I am conservatively taking 0.92% not 0.95%, HR at perceived treshold also match and my race results also match ( i.e 85% FTP on a 70.3 with a solid run after )
- This does not explain if it is correct / incorrect to measure steady state with value way higher than the commonly used ballpark of 4.0mmol for LT2/MLSS...

I understood that MLSS was meaning steady for long time, so in theory we should read steady lactate for duration up to and above 30' at this intensity ...

You should get Skiba's book. There is no CP20, only CP. To avoid confusion, he recommends P20 to represent 20min power.
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Mudge] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Once again....my question is not to debate on critical power and the various duration... But to understand if physiologically it can be correct to measure steady state above 10mmol and if yes how to explain such a gap with the commonly used 4.0mmol to determine the usual change to anaerobic "mode"...
Quote Reply
Re: 4.0 mmol/L. = Functional Threshold Power? [Petule] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Petule wrote:
Once again....my question is not to debate on critical power and the various duration... But to understand if physiologically it can be correct to measure steady state above 10mmol and if yes how to explain such a gap with the commonly used 4.0mmol to determine the usual change to anaerobic "mode"...

Get Skiba's book.
Quote Reply

Prev Next