CCF wrote:
jsmith82 wrote:
Are you coasting the descents or hammering down them until you're spinning out the big gear? Why I ask, if you're spinning it out climbing up trying to keep your AP low for your NP % goal (which is a good thing) but you're getting up to 25-30mph on the down side then coasting, theoretically you're coasting earlier than you should, so you have a longer "powerless" segment in your ride, which could be skewing your numbers.
I mention mph on the downhill and not a power % because it seems a lot of AG's don't stop pedaling on downhills because they have spun out the 11 tooth cog and are now in a scenario to tuck low and aero, they are starting to go fast and stop pedaling because fast can be scary, or they are very eager for a break after the climb.
Yep, I think this may be the winner here. I rarely hammer until I spin out the 53/11, usually opting to rest. For that reason, I rarely look at AP, and I think that having a VI close to 1.0 on a hilly course is really not the best way to ride it. I'm not really concerned with having power lower than my goal per se, what I'm actually concerned with is having my overall speed so much less, losing 10 minutes to my goal time. I know that those 'plans' I make with best bike split having me putting out much more power on the descents that I do/can, but I wasn't thinking that would make a 10 minute difference in my actual race time.
What's the right way to combat this? Go harder than planned on flats and climbs and then rest on the descent?
Hi CCF. So I am not going to say my advice is right, or is wrong, but it is how I was taught to manage my power on a course.
The idea is we "level" a hilly course in power metrics by staying as close to our normalized power goal as possible, right? This is my opinion, but I feel I see more people coast early on a decline then they actually should, be it they want a break for the legs or once they hit 30mph they go from pedal to death grip because fast can be scary. Everyone though has a point where they max their 50+/11 out without blowing up their power and you're not gaining any more speed, this in my opinion is where you've earned your coast, and if you're properly managing your power going up the average joe hill, you shouldn't need to have a break because your legs are hitting the goal you intended.
So the attached image below demonstrates what I am talking about, for the sake of example we're going to say our power goal is 50 watts. On the flats we're hitting 50 no brainer, but let's say on the climb up the hill we gear it out and manage to average 75 watts climbing. 50% over power goal is high IMO, but again, for sake of example. Now comes the downhill. On top you have your coaster, they average a few watts going down then let it ride for the decline. Below that, you have your number junky who immediately is back to 50 watts on the crest and gears out to the 11 before coasting the last section seeing as they are no longer adding any speed and have maxed their gear capacity. Last, you're back to the flats and we're back to 50 watts easy.
The attack strategy of example 1 gets you an average of 44.6 watts. The attack strategy of example 2 averages 50. Strategy 1 gives you a longer break, slower descent and less momentum to carry into the flat. Strategy 2 adheres to your power goal and if properly assessed and managed, you have just crushed strategy 1 with your descent as well as the extra momentum you carried into the flats, and you did it without blowing up your legs. Likewise you stuck to your power goal which revolves around what you CAN do on a bike course to exit with good run legs, so strategy 1 will not be running you down on foot in a normal scenario, depending your run fitness.
Regards,
J. Smith