This graph was pointed out to me the other day. It is rather interesting because the 'small' increase in power is approximately 9% ( 25 watts). This isn't a small increase. The graph also shows that to increase the time to fatigue shown, at approximately 275 watts, FTP has to increase approx 25 watts to approx 300 watts. This is exactly the point I was making earlier in the thread. If you increase time to exhaustion or fatigue you must increase FTP ( note the graph shows 60 minutes as FTP and I use the term only because that is the term used on the graph.)
I also use the word approximately because on a small IPad it's hard to see exactly the watts and seconds, but the point is, looking at that illustration, the so called small increase in power is about 25 watts, about 9%.
Another point is how the graph illustrates how the power duration curve in that area, from 1800 seconds to 7200 seconds drops smoothly and shows no sudden tailing off, no thresholds, no elbows or kinks in tails - there is no visible threshold.
Obviously specific training can alter the shape of the curve but if you improve time to fatigue / exhaustion, say from 40 to 70 minutes, you will almost (I use the word almost because you might be using duff data or software) certainly have increased your power at 30 minutes, 40 minutes and 60 minutes.
TTE@MLSS was increased for the same wattage by training 2-3 times a week at MLSS. Power at MLSS itself hardly changed.
Alex understood perfectly. You are the one who seems to have missed his point:
(From https://www.facebook.com/.../?type=3&theater)
ETA since your link to Billat's review seems to be broken:
"Unpublished data recently collected by our team confirmed this estimation in non-elite middle aged (41 ± 5 years) long-distance runners. Time to exhaustion at MLSS was increased after 6 weeks of training (two sessions of 30–50 minutes at MLSS per week) from 40 ± 10 to 62 ± 16 minutes (+50%) while MLSSw was only increased by 3.4%."
I also use the word approximately because on a small IPad it's hard to see exactly the watts and seconds, but the point is, looking at that illustration, the so called small increase in power is about 25 watts, about 9%.
Another point is how the graph illustrates how the power duration curve in that area, from 1800 seconds to 7200 seconds drops smoothly and shows no sudden tailing off, no thresholds, no elbows or kinks in tails - there is no visible threshold.
Obviously specific training can alter the shape of the curve but if you improve time to fatigue / exhaustion, say from 40 to 70 minutes, you will almost (I use the word almost because you might be using duff data or software) certainly have increased your power at 30 minutes, 40 minutes and 60 minutes.
Andrew Coggan wrote:
liversedge wrote:
I think you misunderstood Alex, TTE@MLSS was increased for the same wattage by training 2-3 times a week at MLSS. Power at MLSS itself hardly changed.
Alex understood perfectly. You are the one who seems to have missed his point:
(From https://www.facebook.com/.../?type=3&theater)
ETA since your link to Billat's review seems to be broken:
"Unpublished data recently collected by our team confirmed this estimation in non-elite middle aged (41 ± 5 years) long-distance runners. Time to exhaustion at MLSS was increased after 6 weeks of training (two sessions of 30–50 minutes at MLSS per week) from 40 ± 10 to 62 ± 16 minutes (+50%) while MLSSw was only increased by 3.4%."