Why the hell was I so much slower?

Aug 28, 13 6:47

Post #1 of 32 (5577 views)

Raced IMKY on Sunday and had a good day but I am thoroughly perplexed as to why my bike split was so much slower than 2012. The numbers are telling me it was a much "better" ride, but the time was significantly slower. I have been wracking my brain to figure out the disconnect but just can't make any sense out of it.

2012
Equipment- XL speed Concept, Firecrest 808 front, Zipp 900 Rear, Quarq powermeter 53/39, 11/26 rear cassette, Rudy project wingspan
Race day weight: approx 182
Ride Time: 5:13:24
Avg Power 207, Norm Power 234
VI: 1.13
Avg HR: 140
Avg Cadence 82
Avg Temp per Garmin- 87 (high humidity)
Big Tailwind on the way out of town...big headwind back into town....Felt super hot during the ride

2013
Same equipment except 11/28 cassette
Race day weight: approx 182
Ride Time:5:24:32
Avg Power 242, Norm Power 249
VI: 1.03
Avg HR: 143
Avg Cadence 92
Avg Temp per Garmin- 85 (lower humidity)
Virtually no wind, temperature was warm but not overly so, no overheating issues.

Note: my rear shifter broke at about mile 90 and I was stuck in one gear for the run back into town. I spent about 2 minutes on the side of the road trying to fix it with no luck. Ended up just spinning as best as I could back into the city. It looks like the mechanical cost me about 5-6 minutes total. Even without the mechanical I probably still would have only been 5:18 under the best case scenario....wtf

Changes: 11/28 v. 11/26 cassette. My position is improved over last year (re-visited my fit mid summer). Have been working on spinning at a higher cadence....10 rpm increase over last year and a 5 rpm increase over my ride at IMCDA in June.

Here is a screenshot from my position taken from a video from my wife on the second loop through Lagrange

I started much farther back in the swim line last year and was getting much more sling shot effect as I progressed through the field. Could that really account for 5 minutes?

With better conditions and objectively better data I was targeting something in the 5:08 range, what went wrong?

Any thoughts would be appreciated....very confused

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 6:54

Post #2 of 32 (5555 views)

do you think the 40 watt higher average was real? Has you fitness this year indicated you were capable of that?

I notice norm power was almost == average power this year but not last.

did you intentionally pace much more evenly this year?

Maybe you ISO-powered the hills this year rather than raising power a bit for hills, which is slower.

Or the powermeter was wrong.

or a confluence of small factors like the draft from other competitors, road surface, wind, heat conspiraed to make you slower. (hotter and high humidity is faster for a given power)

or you have a bad bearing somewhere =)

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [jackmott] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:02

Post #3 of 32 (5518 views)

jackmott wrote:

do you think the 40 watt higher average was real? Has you fitness this year indicated you were capable of that?

I notice norm power was almost == average power this year but not last.

did you intentionally pace much more evenly this year?

Maybe you ISO-powered the hills this year rather than raising power a bit for hills, which is slower.

Or the powermeter was wrong.

or a confluence of small factors like the draft from other competitors, road surface, wind, heat conspiraed to make you slower. (hotter and high humidity is faster for a given power)

or you have a bad bearing somewhere =)

I think the fitness gains are realistic. I rode IMCDA in June at 238 Avg and 245 Norm. So either my fitness has improved or my powermeter is consistently wrong as compared to last year.

I definitely have made a conscious effort at more even pacing this year as opposed to last in the hopes it would result in a better marathon. I probably spun much easier uphill this year in an effort to be more consistent I tried to cap my wattage on the uphills in the 270-280 range. Last year I did not give as much thought to the wattage caps on the hills as evidenced by the much higher VI.

I haven't tested my FTP in several months but I am pretty confident it is right around 315-320 based on some sprint tri's earlier in the summer. If memory serves my FTP was closer to 300 last year at this time.

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:07

Post #4 of 32 (5488 views)

It might be the more even pacing up hills combined with some environmental factors then. Any new chip seal? Wind might not actually have been better even if it seemed like it, etc.

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:09

Post #5 of 32 (5474 views)

Have you looked at the averages between the different sections from last year? I know that with a good tailwind I can cook along at really low watts, it may have skewed the average towards the low side, and you're looking at a somewhat artificially low average from the previous year.

John

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [jackmott] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:12

Post #6 of 32 (5459 views)

jackmott wrote:

It might be the more even pacing up hills combined with some environmental factors then. Any new chip seal? Wind might not actually have been better even if it seemed like it, etc.

The roads were comparable, maybe even slightly better in some sections....

Maybe it was environmental conditions?!?!?! Just seems crazy that you can be so much fitter but slower at the same time.

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:15

Post #7 of 32 (5436 views)

Did you place better?

IM_Roycer81 wrote:

jackmott wrote:

It might be the more even pacing up hills combined with some environmental factors then. Any new chip seal? Wind might not actually have been better even if it seemed like it, etc.

The roads were comparable, maybe even slightly better in some sections....

Maybe it was environmental conditions?!?!?! Just seems crazy that you can be so much fitter but slower at the same time.

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [jackmott] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:18

Post #8 of 32 (5421 views)

jackmott wrote:

Did you place better?

IM_Roycer81 wrote:

jackmott wrote:

It might be the more even pacing up hills combined with some environmental factors then. Any new chip seal? Wind might not actually have been better even if it seemed like it, etc.

The roads were comparable, maybe even slightly better in some sections....

Maybe it was environmental conditions?!?!?! Just seems crazy that you can be so much fitter but slower at the same time.

My marathon times between the two years were almost identical. I was about 30 seconds faster this year but it was better executed. This year I ran 8:30's consistently for the whole marathon with my last two mile splits being the fastest. whereas last year I started much faster and dropped off badly. So even though the times were similar it was a better run performance this year off the bike.

I placed slightly worse overall. Last year I was 10:00 and 9th in the AG. This year I was 10:03 and 11th in the AG.

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:30

Post #9 of 32 (5368 views)

I suppose looking at the normalized power, you only did a few watts more in terms of physiological strain just more evenly paced and thus a higher average power.

So maybe next time, go harder up the hills again!

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:33

Post #10 of 32 (5355 views)

I could guess too, perhaps you ran a gear lower eventhough you had a higher cadence than previous year... my guess is that your avg. gear ratio based on avg. speed from 2012 was 53/15 to 16, while perhaps eventhough you had a higher average cadence of 10 rpm, you fell into a lower gear, the 53 / 17. Based on a gear chart, your avg. moving speed was around 22.33 in 2012, and your avg. moving speed in 2013 was 22, a loss of 1/3 mph avg. You felt stronger because you were spinning, but lost a gear. In order to have improved the speed, you'd have to stay in the 2012 ratio at 53/15 with a 90 cadence and you would have seen an increase of 2 mph avg., but your legs are probably not strong enough to push that gear at that cadence (sorry no disrespect, just analysis). I noticed a same thing with biking when I worked on higher cadence this year, I didn't drop speed but stayed around the same, so I've been really working on keeping the same gearing at higher cadence... higher cadence is GOOD, but it means that you need to push the same gear at the previous slower cadence, and not drop back... in order to have kept the same speed avg. in the easier ratio, you'd have to spin at close to 100 rpm for the race.

My .02

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:34

Post #11 of 32 (5353 views)

More Draft with the increase of wind in 2012 on the way back, obviously you were behind some guys and didn't need to pedal hard as the avg vs normal power shows. This year the didn't have as much protection from the wind you had to ride constant. Plus weather makes everyday a different ride.

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:41

Post #12 of 32 (5297 views)

I think the fitness gains are realistic. I rode IMCDA in June at 238 Avg and 245 Norm. So either my fitness has improved or my powermeter is consistently wrong as compared to last year.

I think that is Jack's point... your PM could be out of calibration, which would result in the numbers being off consistently.

Regardless, you should have been seeing a discrepancy in your training results this year compared to last... ie the speed vs power relationship. If you are really stronger and putting down more power in training, you should have seen a commensurate speed increase. If your power went up but not the speed, then something is wrong... either the PM or some mystery drag source on your bike. Surely you have this data? You shouldn't have to rely only on your race results.

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:43

Post #13 of 32 (5285 views)

The weather the day before predicted the wind would be SE changing to SW by the time we were off the bike. The wind felt very light, but this would mean there may have been a very slight headwind the entire ride.

FWIW, I was on a P3C, 163 pounds, and I think I was 205 watt avg power, 223 watt NP and rode a 4:58... and then melted on the run :)

edit: I was on an 808 firecrest front with an almost new GP4000s and latex tube. I forgot my disc cover at home, so I borrowed my friend's extra cycleops powertap wheel (enve rim with a g3 hub) and calibrated it in transition the morning of the race before I headed to the swim start.

Last edited by: sxevegan: Aug 28, 13 7:45

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [rruff] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:51

Post #14 of 32 (5243 views)

rruff wrote:

I think the fitness gains are realistic. I rode IMCDA in June at 238 Avg and 245 Norm. So either my fitness has improved or my powermeter is consistently wrong as compared to last year.

I think that is Jack's point... your PM could be out of calibration, which would result in the numbers being off consistently.

Regardless, you should have been seeing a discrepancy in your training results this year compared to last... ie the speed vs power relationship. If you are really stronger and putting down more power in training, you should have seen a commensurate speed increase. If your power went up but not the speed, then something is wrong... either the PM or some mystery drag source on your bike. Surely you have this data? You shouldn't have to rely only on your race results.

Looking back at my long training rides, the power data is consistent with what I rode at IMCDA and IMKY. My last two centuries before Kentucky were 235 and 240 Avg power respectively. I will have to go back and look at the training ride speeds from last year as compared to this year but it seemed that I was riding slightly faster in training then ever before. Maybe that was not actually the case and just faulty perception. Maybe in my efforts to spin at a higher cadence I got used to settling into too easy of a gearing resulting in lower avg speed

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:52

Post #15 of 32 (5237 views)

power is power. gearing won't slow you down if the power is the same.

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [sxevegan] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 7:54

Post #16 of 32 (5225 views)

To the OP, why don't you plug your numbers into a Chung cda analysis, like Golden Cheetah and see if your aero actually actually improved or maybe it'll give you insight to other environment or physical things?

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 8:40

Post #17 of 32 (5125 views)

Maybe in my efforts to spin at a higher cadence I got used to settling into too easy of a gearing resulting in lower avg speed

That isn't an issue... power is what is driving you.

I'd check your PM (stomp test) and equipment first. Really shot bearings can be a big source of drag. If that is all good and you didn't change your position, then the environment might have been it... though if that was true you should have placed significantly better this year on the bike leg.

I doubt that a high VI was the faster way to go... unless this is a super hilly course.

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 10:02

Post #18 of 32 (5047 views)

Just want to add an observation: the AP difference of 35watts is huge! If that's real you should have been on the order of at least 15 minutes faster the second time after accounting for the weather. That course isn't all that hilly and remember that AP is actual power to the wheels whereas NP is not, so I just don't think pacing could make up for that kind of difference. That suggests a power meter issue and it could be either this year or last. All other possibilities (less aero position in 2013, better draft in 2012, slower tires, etc) can't explain that big a difference, at least not without adding them all together, so I think the power meter is the likely explanation (or at least has to be part of the explanation).

So add my voice to those saying you need to get the PM checked. Did you zero it before the race both years? Was it set to auto-zero?

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 10:18

Post #19 of 32 (5008 views)

lanierb wrote:

Just want to add an observation: the AP difference of 35watts is huge! If that's real you should have been on the order of at least 15 minutes faster the second time after accounting for the weather. That course isn't all that hilly and remember that AP is actual power to the wheels whereas NP is not, so I just don't think pacing could make up for that kind of difference. That suggests a power meter issue and it could be either this year or last. All other possibilities (less aero position in 2013, better draft in 2012, slower tires, etc) can't explain that big a difference, at least not without adding them all together, so I think the power meter is the likely explanation (or at least has to be part of the explanation).

So add my voice to those saying you need to get the PM checked. Did you zero it before the race both years? Was it set to auto-zero?

Actually now that I think about it, I was using a quarq on both occasions but a different quarq. Last year I was on an older quarq sram s500. This year I was on a newer Riken.

I appreciate everyone's thoughts. I manually calibrated the quarq on race morning and do so before every ride. The calibration number is pretty tight. I have a Riken...the calibration number is usually the range of -10 to 10

Maybe the quarq from last year was putting out bad numbers and I actually rode much higher than 207??? My newer quarq was checked within the last two months by my LBS and the calibration value is always consistent. Maybe that is the source of the problem....I guess I was assuming quarq=quarq but maybe not

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 10:23

Post #20 of 32 (4989 views)

lanierb wrote:

Just want to add an observation: the AP difference of 35watts is huge! If that's real you should have been on the order of at least 15 minutes faster the second time after accounting for the weather. That course isn't all that hilly and remember that AP is actual power to the wheels whereas NP is not, so I just don't think pacing could make up for that kind of difference. That suggests a power meter issue and it could be either this year or last. All other possibilities (less aero position in 2013, better draft in 2012, slower tires, etc) can't explain that big a difference, at least not without adding them all together, so I think the power meter is the likely explanation (or at least has to be part of the explanation).

So add my voice to those saying you need to get the PM checked. Did you zero it before the race both years? Was it set to auto-zero?

And as an aside, if I were to assume that the old quarq data wasn't right...shouldn't an avg of 240 watts for this year on that course with a reasonably aero position yield a better time than 5:18-5:20. I'm big, but Im pretty light for my size

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 10:35

Post #21 of 32 (4957 views)

IM_Roycer81 wrote:

And as an aside, if I were to assume that the old quarq data wasn't right...shouldn't an avg of 240 watts for this year on that course with a reasonably aero position yield a better time than 5:18-5:20. I'm big, but Im pretty light for my size

If my math is right, you averaged about 2.93 watts/kg. I averaged about 2.77 watts/kg and went 4:58.

You are bigger, so i guess you would have a higher cda if all else was equal. I was [gasp] running a butyl back tube, a round bottle in an aluminum cage on my p3c, no disc, and a fizik saddle bag -- so not the most aero configuration for sure.

At 2.93 watts/kg i would definitely say you should have turned a faster split.

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 10:38

Post #22 of 32 (4950 views)

IM_Roycer81 wrote:

And as an aside, if I were to assume that the old quarq data wasn't right...shouldn't an avg of 240 watts for this year on that course with a reasonably aero position yield a better time than 5:18-5:20. I'm big, but Im pretty light for my size

Assuming that you didn't stop for breaks at all, a time of 5:18-5:20 at 240 watts would correspond to a very high CdA -- 0.35 or so but that's a loose estimate. That's pretty unrealistic for aero bars even for a big guy, so yeah 240 seems high.

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [IM_Roycer81] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 10:42

Post #23 of 32 (4940 views)

Could it be something as simple as a brake pad was rubbing?

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [hugoagogo] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 11:50

Post #24 of 32 (4871 views)

hugoagogo wrote:

Could it be something as simple as a brake pad was rubbing?

nope....checked and double checked

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Re: Why the hell was I so much slower? [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Aug 28, 13 11:52

Post #25 of 32 (4860 views)

lanierb wrote:

IM_Roycer81 wrote:

And as an aside, if I were to assume that the old quarq data wasn't right...shouldn't an avg of 240 watts for this year on that course with a reasonably aero position yield a better time than 5:18-5:20. I'm big, but Im pretty light for my size

Assuming that you didn't stop for breaks at all, a time of 5:18-5:20 at 240 watts would correspond to a very high CdA -- 0.35 or so but that's a loose estimate. That's pretty unrealistic for aero bars even for a big guy, so yeah 240 seems high.

No breaks other than those to try and fix the mechanical issue. It sounds like your calculations would indicate that my quarq is putting out data that is higher than what I am actually pushing. The unit is virtually new, approx 3 mos, with consistent calibration numbers. How do I test to see if the numbers are effed up?

https://www.strava.com/athletes/773280
http://imroycer81.blogspot.com/
teamemj.com
everymanjack.com

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.