Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [lightheir] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You are interested in marginal gains now ?

No, forget that.

It is useless.

As a MOP, we (and you) don't have objectives, neither expectations, neither interest in efficiency.
Dumb training, dumb fiting, dumb equipment, dumb racing, dumb result, this make us happy :-)

We love lowering our results using crap equipment, position, nutrition, ...

It is so good to destroy the efforts we put in training.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Pyrenean Wolf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pyrenean Wolf wrote:
You are interested in marginal gains now ?

No, forget that.

It is useless.

As a MOP, we (and you) don't have objectives, neither expectations, neither interest in efficiency.
Dumb training, dumb fiting, dumb equipment, dumb racing, dumb result, this make us happy :-)

We love lowering our results using crap equipment, position, nutrition, ...

It is so good to destroy the efforts we put in training.


Here we go with the straw man arguments...apparently I used crap equipment, crap nutrition, and have no interest in that stuff, sure whatever you say!

Let's stay on topic and actually answer the question of 'what marginal gains did you use that actually made a difference for you and how much?" for everyone as opposed to the tired old ad hominem 'attack the messenger while avoiding the question outright' which doesn't help anyone.

I'm comfortable enough with my performance and knowledge in the sport to not get up in arms over it, but I'm always interested in stuff that people honestly believes has made a difference in their performance, whether I agree with it or not. And I have definitely changed my mind on some several major items in the past (I went from advocating 100% minimalist shoes to full-out cushion maxi due to ankle arthritis), so I'm not just saying this to be a good sport.
Last edited by: lightheir: Mar 15, 19 16:41
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [RChung] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
there are a finite amount of decisions to be made about bikes and bike equipment. It's possible to check them all and collect all the gains right?

How many choices are we actually making? You have to wear something, you need tires on your wheels, you need a chain. Might as well be right.

RChung wrote:
I've had the luck to work with a handful of record-setting efforts. The commonality is that they worked on everything. As Tolstoy would have said, happy record attempts are all alike; every unhappy record attempt is unhappy in its own way.

Eric Reid
AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Chapel Hill, NC
Aerodynamic Optimized Bike Fitting, Retul Pre-Purchase Bike Fitting, USAT Level 1 Triathlon Coaching, Nutrition
Ask me: Scody Optimized Speed Suits | CeramicSpeed Oversized Pulley Systems | HUUB Skinsuits and Wetsuits | Ventum Bicycles and Frames
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [lightheir] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm right on topic, IMO

I have an objective on 70.3.
It is my pleasure to have a relatively sophisticated training plan, and to use all marginal gains I can get, with a limited budget of my choice.

Any statement such as "you can ignore this gain because... whatever blabla", I consider of little interest.

Instead of ignoring some accessibles marginal gain, I prefer to ignore this "10 watt rule".
After 3 pages of thread, have not seen a single good reason to consider it.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Pyrenean Wolf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Pyrenean Wolf wrote:
I'm right on topic, IMO

I have an objective on 70.3.
It is my pleasure to have a relatively sophisticated training plan, and to use all marginal gains I can get, with a limited budget of my choice.

Any statement such as "you can ignore this gain because... whatever blabla", I consider of little interest.

Instead of ignoring some accessibles marginal gain, I prefer to ignore this "10 watt rule".
After 3 pages of thread, have not seen a single good reason to consider it.



Annnd still dodges the question of what those nice upgrades you did and how effective they were.

It's not a hard question, and no, I'm not asking it to be obtuse.

If someone says they made marginal gains they were happy with and had good results, I and sure many others are all ears, even if we ourselves aren't currently interested in certain equipment upgrades (like a faster Tririg front brake or hidden front cables or new aero helmet) ourselves.

I myself have aero helmet, aero wheels (FLO), carbon aerobars, Cervelo P2c frame, aerobar-BTA bottle. I wouldn't be heartbroken or not make the podiums I made if you took any of those away from me, or even made me go road bike sans aerobars. Again, I'm not a FOPer, if you were contending for KQ etc, you'd better max out all the aero goodies.
Last edited by: lightheir: Mar 15, 19 17:08
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ericMPro wrote:
there are a finite amount of decisions to be made about bikes and bike equipment. It's possible to check them all and collect all the gains right?

How many choices are we actually making? You have to wear something, you need tires on your wheels, you need a chain. Might as well be right.

RChung wrote:
I've had the luck to work with a handful of record-setting efforts. The commonality is that they worked on everything. As Tolstoy would have said, happy record attempts are all alike; every unhappy record attempt is unhappy in its own way.

Actually, in one attempt at the hour record, we'd been fiddling with a certain fit adjustment. We figured that the rider could gain about a couple watt advantage with one setting but the rider was worried that it might be unsustainable for 60 minutes. I did some calculations for the predicted distance at a range of air densities and powers and the rider decided to eat the watts in favor of a more sustainable position. Being able to have some confidence in the estimate was pretty handy.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [RChung] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
RChung wrote:
ericMPro wrote:
there are a finite amount of decisions to be made about bikes and bike equipment. It's possible to check them all and collect all the gains right?

How many choices are we actually making? You have to wear something, you need tires on your wheels, you need a chain. Might as well be right.

RChung wrote:
I've had the luck to work with a handful of record-setting efforts. The commonality is that they worked on everything. As Tolstoy would have said, happy record attempts are all alike; every unhappy record attempt is unhappy in its own way.


Actually, in one attempt at the hour record, we'd been fiddling with a certain fit adjustment. We figured that the rider could gain about a couple watt advantage with one setting but the rider was worried that it might be unsustainable for 60 minutes. I did some calculations for the predicted distance at a range of air densities and powers and the rider decided to eat the watts in favor of a more sustainable position. Being able to have some confidence in the estimate was pretty handy.

Oh for sure. I was talking Jim Gourley level decision not RChung level decisions.

Eric Reid
AeroFit | Instagram Portfolio
Chapel Hill, NC
Aerodynamic Optimized Bike Fitting, Retul Pre-Purchase Bike Fitting, USAT Level 1 Triathlon Coaching, Nutrition
Ask me: Scody Optimized Speed Suits | CeramicSpeed Oversized Pulley Systems | HUUB Skinsuits and Wetsuits | Ventum Bicycles and Frames
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [RChung] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I like the idea of chasing down all aspects of it.
As long as I can prove it actually helped.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What if other people have proven that something is faster?
Last edited by: jimatbeyond: Mar 16, 19 12:42
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [jimatbeyond] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I ment can I prove it's an improvement for me.

CHUNG!!!!!!
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And Jim Gourley is who? :-)
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 



Hambini, What does that mean????


https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/Updated%3A_A_Comprehensive_(But_Controversial)_Wind_Tunnel_Wheel_Shootout_P6710888/?search_string=flo%20lawyers#p6710888






and




https://www.hambini.com/




.


Once, I was fast. But I got over it.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If someone has proven that a specific tire is two watts faster, why would you need to prove that it is an improvement for you?
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jeebus what a stupid concept. It’s not rocket science. Use the best data available to make the best equipment decisions that you can justify in terms of $ and risk aversion (for instance, some fast tires come with increased risk of puncture)...whatever. It’s a quick decision and then move on.

Fast tires aren’t hard.
Latex tubes aren’t hard.
Position improvements aren’t hard.
Cleaning up aerodynamics of equipment choices isn’t super hard.
Choosing a saddle that allows a proper aero position isn’t hard.
Finding effective race wheels isn’t hard.

Marginal gains available on most AG setups I see total far more than 10 watts, even if individually some don’t meet this stupid arbitrary level of efficacy.

I don’t support dumbing down of multisports. There is A LOT to learn and incorporate. Actively discouraging athletes from assessing aspects of their sport is ridiculous.

1st Place, 50-55 2018 USAT Duathlon Sprint Duathlon National Championships, National Champion; 2nd Place Overall, 2018 Virginia Duathlon; 3rd Place, 50-54, 9th overall, USAT Long Course Duathlon (Miamiman); 4th Place Masters, 10th overall, 2018 Kiawah Island 1/2 Marathon
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [TriBriGuy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TriBriGuy wrote:
Jeebus what a stupid concept. It’s not rocket science. Use the best data available to make the best equipment decisions that you can justify in terms of $ and risk aversion (for instance, some fast tires come with increased risk of puncture)...whatever. It’s a quick decision and then move on.

Fast tires aren’t hard.
Latex tubes aren’t hard.
Position improvements aren’t hard.
Cleaning up aerodynamics of equipment choices isn’t super hard.
Choosing a saddle that allows a proper aero position isn’t hard.
Finding effective race wheels isn’t hard.

Marginal gains available on most AG setups I see total far more than 10 watts, even if individually some don’t meet this stupid arbitrary level of efficacy.

I don’t support dumbing down of multisports. There is A LOT to learn and incorporate. Actively discouraging athletes from assessing aspects of their sport is ridiculous.

Dude - I just saw your sig line.
You’re back!!
When the hell did that happen?

You coming out to play at AmZof this May?


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [jimatbeyond] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jimatbeyond wrote:
If someone has proven that a specific tire is two watts faster, why would you need to prove that it is an improvement for you?

It’s 2 watts faster under what conditions, with what setup? What was the margin of error?

Swimming Workout of the Day: http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ost=5784860#5784860;
Favourite Swim Sets: http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...m.cgi?;post=5004659;
Unattainable goals for 2019/2020 season. https://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ost=6944848#p6944848
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [jimatbeyond] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not necessarily talking about tires per se.
But look at thing like the AC chain catch. It claims a couple watts over a open FD
Hanger. This is the stuff others have tested and found to be useless regardless of the companies claims.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
To be fair, I just listened to a podcast about the book. He doesn’t sound like an over the top guy or line in the sand guy.

I’m sure if he was aware of this thread he would be agreeable with most points....at least the common sense ones.

Never read the book though, so not sure of the context of 10 watts or don’t bother.

Maurice

http://www.multisportsolutions.com
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Doesn't fraise it like that. But say 10 watts is the number to focus on. And 5 +/- watts or less you can't be sure the changes are what it giving you the results .
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fair enough, I haven’t read the book.

Maurice

http://www.multisportsolutions.com
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [tilburs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tilburs wrote:
I find that 80% of world class performance is getting the basics right, 15% is paying attention to sensible but important smaller details, 10% is marginal gains like cleaning your chain properly before a race and waxing, 5% is in the mind and finally 2% is the secret sauce / plan only a few world class coaches are privy to that will rock your world for massive gainz

My 3.5c.......


If only world class coaches could do math :)
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A company's claim is not proof.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [Fishbum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A previous post said it eloquently - it is a trade-off between watts vs effort. (I believe it was jasonInHalifax). Effort can be measured in time (research, changing, purchasing, installing), cost, etc.

I would also add that it wattage is dependent upon probability of achieving those gains (all of us assume it is 100%, but in reality it isn't); also probability and value of loss if you get it wrong (there COULD be downside if one is fairly optimized).

My n = 1 experience of a FOP AGer, though not KQ level (eg 3rd in AG at 70.3), many of my attempts to optimize has also resulted in me seeing a downside that I was oblivious to seeing when I started the quest to save X watts. Examples of unsuccessful optimization:
+ Lower elbow pads = loss of comfort. Not worth it
+ Laceup shoes with elastic laces = shoe shape didn't fit my feet. Not worth it. Staying with Sidi

The other thing to add to the equation (for MOP, but frankly anyone) is ones desire to be the best irrespective of where one stands on the rankings. Everyone assumes FOP care about ranking but MOP don't. But that is an assumption.

Bottom line (IMHO) - if the equation [wattage improvement > effort + downside] then go for it.

Hope this philosophical response is useful
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [ejd_mil] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the response. I agree the changes we make to any part of our racing set-up do not happen in a vacuum.
Quote Reply
Re: Jim Gourleys 10 watt rule. [ericMPro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
^This. I mean some people in here area acting like there are endless decisions. For me, there are handful of things I look at: helmet, wheels, tires/tubes, chain, cage/bottle/flat kit choice/placement, trisuit and maybe shoe choice. Add all the potential positive or negative gains (or losses) and they are non-marginal, difference-makers, in my opinion. And my decision on what I use has zero impact on my training time/effort.
Quote Reply

Prev Next