As a rule of thumb, for IM I generally try to cap the hills at 80% to 85% of FTP.

---

Team Kiwami
Instagram

I'm not sure I can climb a hill with power that low, would that suggest a gearing issue? My cadence drops down towards 20 and I eventually stop moving.

Probably. Do you have a compact on the front ? What are your cassette specs ?

Unless you have low FTP, are very heavy or are climbing massive hills (or a combination) if you have a compact on the front and an 11-28 on the back you should be able to keep your power in check.

Knowing your weight, FTP, grades and gearing people might help you narrow it down.

Would say that it could be a gearing issue. I try to maintain the same cadence on the climbs as on the flats.

Also, I try to stay seated (and in aero position) as much as possible.

I have found that I can easily overshoot the power targets when I stand up to climb.

---

Team Kiwami
Instagram

What are your watts per kg? (FTP / weight in KG)

What gearing is on your bike?

My recommendations:

• $: 28-27/11-12t cassette, or...
  
• $$: compact crank (50/34)
  
• $$$: compact + a 26-11 or 27-11 or 12t

I raced last year at 4.25w/kg with a compact and 26-11. Never got below 70-75rpm (the w/kg helped with that) and I wanted the 11t to keep my speed up on the downhills.

But the short answer is that it sounds like your bike is overgeared?

--------

---

Rich Strauss
Endurance Nation Ironman 2013 and 2014 World Champion TriClub, Div I
Create a FREE 7-day trial membership

I've got a Felt B16 that came with a 52/36 in the front and an 11/25 in the back. I swapped on the cassette from my old bike which has a 28 on it so I'll see how that goes.

I'd rather not admit to my w/kg...let's just say it's lower than I'd like it to be.

Understood. 28t will certainly help. If you have the $$ to flip for it, selling / swapping out your current cranks for a compact would help as well. No such thing as too many gears in an Ironman, especially Wisconsin :-)

------

---

Rich Strauss
Endurance Nation Ironman 2013 and 2014 World Champion TriClub, Div I
Create a FREE 7-day trial membership

A compact helped me huge at IMWI. If you are in the area of Madison, I have an Ultegra compact in 175 that I can sell you dirt cheap or let you borrow.

---

_________________________________________________

Rather than look back and say "why?", look forward and say "why not?!"

You can find compact cranks for less than $150 bucks. Check what type of bottom bracket you have on your bike when looking around.

Are you a 6, 6.5, 7 or 7.5+ hour IM bike split guy?

First IM I rode compact + 11-28 at LP
Next IM I rode compact with 11-32 at Canada. Shimano parts changed to MTB 9 sp derailuer to gear ratios right on a 10 speed bike.

4 extra gears was nice.

Best solution for me is to lose weight, get stronger on bike, but if those are givens, more easier gears will make a significant difference.

You've got yer'self a compact crank (52/36) so a big cassette is your best recourse.

Wiggle bikes has Tiagra (4600) cassettes for CHEAP... I'm using one on my road/commuter bike and it's good stuff. Not sure how big you can go with your rear derailleur.

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/...0-10-speed-cassette/

---

The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important.

-Albert J. Nock

I did IMWI in 2010 and rode 7:26. That was on an aluminum road bike with the 11/28 rear and a granny gear in the front!

This year I'm racing IMCanada and feel pretty confident now that I'm closer to a 6 hour bike split--if and only if--I can keep from burning myself out on the hills.

This weekend I'm going to see if I can spin up some hills around here keeping to 85% FTP. It would be nice if I could get my w/kg up but with 50 days left a better gear ratio is likely my only option. Better to save the legs for the run...

50 days = 4-7kg if you do it right (allowing for taper time.)

Thanks! How do I know how much my rear derailleur will allow?

Assuredly the 12-28 will work (does on my 7800 short cage), but my B-screw is all the way out.

Usually the tech specs for your RD will tell you the range that it can handle.

---

The question of who is right and who is wrong has seemed to me always too small to be worth a moment's thought, while the question of what is right and what is wrong has seemed all-important.

-Albert J. Nock

Derf wrote:

You've got yer'self a compact crank (52/36) so a big cassette is your best recourse.

Well, I wouldn't quite say you've got yourself a compact. Technically you do, I'm pretty positive the FSA Omega Felt's been shipping is 110BCD. But in reality you've got yourself a 'tweener.

Typical double is 53/39T, and typical compact is 50/34T. So at a 52/36T you fall right in the middle. It's a really unusual crank choice to say the least, but while I sorta question the decision not to just go all the way and spec a 34T I still applaud Felt for at least spec'ing that over a normal double.

Anyway, point being if you were going to spend $$$ to get a whole new crank, it makes a lot more sense when you are going all the way from 39T to 34T. Going from 36T to 34T would be less of a profound difference. Of course, you wouldn't necessarily have to get a whole new crank. Since I'm pretty sure your crank is 110 BCD you could probably just get a 34T inner ring.


But all that said, I agree with Derf anyway. If you are already sitting at 36T on the inner ring, just get a 27 or 28T cassette for the rear and try your best to stay sensible on the climbs. Your cadence is going to be pretty low within those power zones and you're just going to sort of have to deal with that or lose weight whilst simultaneously gaining some power. Just how it goes with climbing.

Thanks for piping in, Rich.

So, related to the OP's question, I know that EN suggests a x% of FTP for hills that are less than 3 minutes long, and x% of FTP for hills that are longer than 3' long.

What about hills that are 2 miles+ long and take 10 minutes+ to climb like the new IMCDA course?
Or Richter Pass at IMC that is 11K long and will take much longer to climb?

On really long climbs like that, do you still stick to the same % of FTP as a 4-5' climb?

If so, it seems if one did that in a race like those 2 races (IMWI doesn't really have super long climbs like that), you would be doing a decently long tempo interval in the middle of the ride, more than once probably. Though well below FTP, this still seems like it would burn a lot of energy.

Thanks.

I'm not Rich, but I have been in EN for a few years and I'll venture a guess that you should lower your target wattage for the climb. Your %FTP target for specific climbs is just a micro component of your overall macro goal to ride the course at target NP with a low VI. Any long climbs above goal watts are going to increase VI and put you at greater risk to having a poor run.

Keep in mind that risk is a pretty key word in that statement. Being conservative on the climbs is going to cost you some time against the FOP, so if you are in the hunt for a Kona, or say racing a half-distance where you can pace a little more aggressively, you have to make a conscious decision to weigh the risk of cooking the bike versus the opportunities you have to gain on your competition. In you are high W/kg rider and the bike is your silver bullet, sometimes it makes sense for you to take advantage of your strength to gain some time against your competitors.

EN provides great guidance, but ultimately you need to know both your strengths and your weaknesses as well as your goal for every race in order to determine the proper pacing strategy. All that said, I can honestly say I have never finished a long course race and thought "oh boy, I really had too much left over for the run!". When that day comes, I'll consider riding more aggressively on the bike.

This is where I'm at and what worries me about IMC. At the moment I just can't imagine climbing for 7miles at 70-80% of my FTP, I'd be soooooo slow. And looking back and IMWI I flew up and over the first 100 hills (probably at 200% FTP), but by the 200th I was in rough shape, and thought about walking by the time I got to the 300th. And I know that took its toll on my run.

You could just swim faster.........

Our overall guiding principle is that you want to finish the bike with a low VI. I'd say from 1.02 to 1.04. It will be a little higher if you don't have the w/kg to get up the steeper climbs without going significantly higher than your goal watts for the race, or if the course / your style of riding means that you'll be coasting a lot on the downhills.

For example, if your FTP is 280w and you determine that your goal watts for the race are 200w (didn't do the math on that, just made it up), then I would probably ride these longer hills at about 220-230w. But I would also stay on the gas on any downhills, not coast, etc.

---

---

Rich Strauss
Endurance Nation Ironman 2013 and 2014 World Champion TriClub, Div I
Create a FREE 7-day trial membership

I get the point of low VI, but I always assumed it was referring to going too high, and burning matches. Why would you suggest "not coasting?" Wouldn't there be some advantage to resting a bit when the opportunity is there?

I can see how if you are riding steady at 70% FTP, and then hit 110% on a couple of hills your VI would go up. Likewise if you were steady at 70% and you coasted a bit your VI would also go up. But wouldn't the two efforts be considerably different?

Good question. I would say it's a function of your overall goals for the race, for the bike leg second, and that a relatively strict "no coasting" rule would be in effect the bigger your race goals are.

For example, I raced Ironman Wisconsin last year and hosted a training camp on the course last July (doing the same this month, shameless plug), during which I rode the course twice as full-on race rehearsals both days. For Day One I managed the hills very well but coasted whenever I got above about 33-34mph, I think. I think my VI was about 1.03. After the ride I realized this was very much a "conservation of momentum" course -- stay on the gas, all the time, never coasting, conserving as much momentum as I could on downhills, into and out of corners, etc. I rode that way on Day Two, probably turned things down a hair on the hills, and went about 4' faster on about 3-4 fewer watts, I think my VI was 1.02. Sorry, I don't have the files on this machine.

These days my guidance for pointy end folks would be to not coast. Stay on your goal watts until you spin out, then coast until you can start pedaling again at your goal watts.

For others...yes, it's hard to argue with coasting any time your speed goes above about 34mph. Just get very aero, coast, rest, drink, get your HR down, and turn a 112 mile bike ride into 108 or less.

Hope this helps!

--

---

Rich Strauss
Endurance Nation Ironman 2013 and 2014 World Champion TriClub, Div I
Create a FREE 7-day trial membership

It did! Thanks.

I agree. I did a 5:16 at IMWI in 2010 with a VI of 1.05 and spent less than 6% of the ride coasting (felt great coming off the bike and ran well). My effort on the hills was very moderate and I got passed by a ton of people on the hills early in the race, but I absolutely smoked them on the downhills and flats. A lot of triathletes attack the hills and don't power through the top of the hill (they shut it down and start coasting too early) and ride below goal watts on the flats. Staying steady with your power goes a long way.

I live just off the IMWI course so I ride it a lot and I've been able to improve upon my 1.05 VI and I think it's going to help me improve upon my 2010 bike split. I've found that pancake flat rides help (even for hilly courses like WI). A lot of triathletes have a hard time holding IM power for a long time. I spent a lot of time working on this by riding very flat courses that have very few stops so I could learn to stay aero and hold power for a long time with no breaks. It's tough. It's relentless. You still need to practice the hills, but part of what you're practicing on the hills is controlling your effort rather than learning to hammer the hills.

Even if you don't go above threshold, but ride all the hills right at threshold, on a course like WI you'll spend about an hour (maybe more) at threshold over 112 miles. I don't think too many people can do a 5-7 hour ride with 1 hour at threshold and run a good marathon.

The way Rich tells people to ride works and works well. The problem with it is that it takes a lot of patience and discipline, especially early in the ride. You will get passed by a lot of people on the hills and it's hard to let them go. But if you're patient and follow the plan, you'll eventually drop them and pull a big gap and then run well (I noted a few numbers of people who smoked me on the hills early in the ride and I ended up riding 30 minutes faster than some of them - I put all of that time on them on the second half of the ride).