Come on, we've been over that one. TIRES! You had a 4:16 in you with better rubber...

Big J,

ROTFLMAO!!

Another Bingo moment on this thred. I just spewd my dinner all over the key board!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

[stop to fix flats etc etc]
Well I do no think having flats is part of the training plan :)

But I agree, I did several SOLO 5h+ ride in preparation for IMLP last year in the backcountry which is pretty much flat (one could argue why I was not in the Gats hitting the hills instead: well not a single traffic light in those 5+ hours) so coasting was not really an option and I usually carried all my nutrition/hydratation with me.. @ the end of the ride, my ass, leg, and brain were fricking happy I was done..

But I made lot of friends, especially cows :)

Fred.

Interesting observation. Thanks.

Haim

---

-------------------------------------------------------
"Sometimes you need to think INSIDE the box!" -- ME
"Why squirrel hate me?"

Fred,

The Gats aren't the best place to train for NAS Ironman events either. Because of the nature of the hills, you are working hard for 2-5 minutes and then doing coasting on the backside. If you recall during the Irontour, I got all you guys to put it into your biggest gear on the downhills and keep pedalling and no coasting....so yes, you can go there and get 6600 ft of climbing in 4 loops from the Gate (~100K) but it offers too frequent coasting...you have to take those coast breaks out and keep pedalling...so your flat rides actually have a lot of merit on a course like Ironman lake placid where you have 2x15 min coasting breaks and aside from that its all pedalling either flat, uphill, or slightly downhill.

Dev

"Can she be ready by IMC?"

Maybe they'd let us do a relay. ;-)

What is his weight and length?

To that, I would add: use a heart rate monitor.

I know, I know, HRMs are sooooo 1990's.

I don't remember. Honestly, I don't pay too much attention to these values. I'm not interested in determining whether his power was good or bad based on his weight/height and time or his w/kg. I'm interested in understanding how the application of that power over 112miles might have yielded a good bike and run time (primarily the former).

I'm not saying this is the case with you but I find too many people get focused on whether an individual's power was good or bad for a given bike split. Power is an individual thing. So many variables. For example, as Jordan mentioned earlier, a PT will likely read about 5% lower than an SRM so how can anyone determine whether someone's power was good or bad if you don't ask what PM they're using too? And which one is more accurate when making this determination (SRM or PT)?

People had questions earlier about Jordan's relatively low TSS. My thoughts are here:

http://www.endurancenation.us/...7027&postcount=8

Thanks, Chris

You're still around? I'll have to start posting in this thread again...

It appears that you have to be a member to read what you said on EN

jaretj

Sorry. Fwiw, this is what I wrote:

First, his TSS at IMC was higher because he was on the bike about 15min longer. Both races had tough bike conditions. IMAZ was probably worse but IMC has tougher terrain. As noted, he ran slightly faster at IMAZ and, you should note, IMC had absolutely perfect run conditions last year, imho. From what I heard, IMAZ had very challenging conditions.

Jordan is a really smart dude, imho. He's very methodical in his approach to IM execution -- much more so than most people I've spoken with. My belief is that he's probably not as genetically gifted as some of the other pros but makes up for it with superior execution.

Steve (Cramer) couldn't have said it better wrt considering TSS in a vacuum. The general TSS recommendation is based on ideal conditions. Your race-day target should ONLY go down from that range when conditions are worse. Still so much is about listening to your body and understand all of the other dynamic elements around you.

I'll leave you with an e-mail Ashburn sent me months ago in response to a question I had about quantifying variability:

Cyclists need to largely ignore the terrain and the wind and just keep going at a steady effort. Does that mean a 100% iso-power effort? No -- it's only natural to coast now and then to stretch, drink or navigate corners and traffic. Otherwise, pick a power level and sit on it. It is almost always preferable to err on the "too steady" side rather than the "too variable" side. The bell curve of the price of mistakes is not symmetrical -- it is highly skewed toward the fact that "too hard/too variable" is far more costly than "too easy/too steady." This is due to two factors at work:

Aerodynamics -- the power cost rises with the third power of speed. You don't get back what you put in.
Physiology -- the metabolic cost of adding power rises with the fourth power of additional power output (according to Coggan's NP construct).

Add these two together and we can say that any rider's "speed efficiency"* is lower at higher power levels. Every time he goes above his goal power level, his speed efficiency drops.

[*Loosely defined as: (average speed/metabolic cost).]

A high degree of variability merely means that the rider is cumulatively reducing his speed efficiency.

We all invoke the "efficiency" argument all the time, but few actually understand what it means. The term "efficiency" merely refers to the output of one thing, per unit of some other thing. Bushels per acre; miles per gallon; etc. Metabolic efficiency is "external work per unit of internal work." The term "economy" is used in running theory as "pace per unit of external work rate" -- and is, technically, another form of stating efficiency. There is aerodynamic efficiency, tire efficiency, all sorts of things.

But, to me, the only one that matters is the one that incorporates all others that we can control: Average speed of the bike, per unit of average Normalized Power. It's easy to see that this measure declines the faster one goes. And -- it declines exponentially. Conversely, it increases exponentially when one goes a little slower. So, when bouncing up and down around a given set point (determined by fitness and/or talent), the cyclist gets a small payoff for going faster, and gives up only a little by going slower. All mistakes on the bike should be to the downside of power output.

It never ceases to amaze me that people instead largely err on the "too hard/too variable" side. They get out there and treat it like a bike race or group ride, where you coast and surge over and over again.

Anyway...more to think about.

Rick specifically talks about the cost of increasing power vs decreasing power. The funny thing is that most people actually increase power in poor conditions when they should be doing the exact opposite.

One more thing I'll pass on because it is probably the single most impressive performance I've ever seen:

http://ironman.com//events/ironman/c...nada/&bib=1134

Note Fred's bike and run segment splits!! My bet is that he was the only guy that day to neg split the bike. I won't even comment on what he managed to do on the run... This was a 42 yo dude who was the first amateur to cross the line at IMC last year.

Patience is everything...

Thanks, I'm allways interested in what you have to say as well as several others.

I keep seeing this TSS stuff for the bike to have a good run afterwards. I've allways trained the run harder than the bike cuz I'm a much better biker than a runner.

After most longer races I've been dissapointed with my run and never really thought it was from my biking but after DATT last year when I used my powermeter during the races for the first time, I had much better runs than the previous year. This just told me that if I want to run well and still bike at the same level, I need to change my priorities on my bike training as well as my pacing.

I created a spreadsheet that calculates TSS where I can change the inputs and figure out what power to sit on. Hopefully my running will get better because of these things.

jaretj

You mean if I have only ever pushed 150W for a 100 mile ride that I can't ride 215W on race day? I don't beleive it.

: )

---

"I really wish you would post more often. You always have some good stuff to say. I copied it below just in case someone missed it." BarryP to Chainpin on 10/21/06

This is very true. I did Miamiman last year and didn't really care how I finished...so I decided to just hammer the bike and see what happened. It was an interesting experiment that would have gone a lot better if it weren't insanely windy. I rode ~235W and hit 2:25 on the bike (23.1mph), best-ever bike split. Earlier in the year I did another half in 2:32 (22.1mph) on 189W (NO WIND!!!). I was expecting to go 2:15, that extra 10 minutes on the bike at that power output really hurt me. I was riding about 20W below the edge of my power-duration curve at 2:10, and very close to the edge at 2:25...big mistake. Interestingly I only lost about 10 minutes on the run. If I had backed off 20W I would have lost about 11 minutes on the bike, so it ended up (most likely) a wash. But that's probably because I am a sucky runner for short distances.

---

---

At one point I did a calculation of when to push on the bike on a flat windy day. 3 cases:
200W average, no wind, 10 miles out, 10 miles back: 22.78mph 52.7 minutes
200W 4mph headwind, 200W 4mph tailwind: 20.5mph/25.2mph = 53.1 minutes
180W 4mph headwind, 220W 4mph tailwind: 19.5mph/26.1mph = 53.8 minutes
220W 4mph headwind, 180W 4mph tailwind: 21.4mph/24.2mph = 52.8 minutes

There are two problems with this calculation, the first is that the average power isn't actually the same. In the 220W into the 4mph headwind case you are spending more time at a higher power output than the other cases. Back when I did it (and now) I don't have the time to spend to figure out on an iterative basis exactly how it would work out with the same average power in all cases. The second problem is that winds are rarely direct headwinds, and most of the time they are crosswinds...so you don't exactly get the same benefit from being in a "tailwind" as you would calculate on a direct headwind/tailwind case. I present it as food for thought...maybe softpedaling in a tailwind is the right thing to do?

---

---

Jordan is a really smart dude

Indeed. He trains with Canadians!! :)

Forget all the fancy/complicated numbers - that's key!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

"Forget all the fancy/complicated numbers - that's key!"

Ummmm, I think the jist of the thread is that Jordan is a really smart dude and as a result he pays attention to the fancy/complicated numbers!

This is a great thread though, I've learned A LOT and after seeing Rappstar's file from AZ, it really paints a picture of how to execute in an IM...comparing his file to mine is pretty eye opening.

I guess you did not see the smiley.

Don't get ne wrong the numbers are important. However, what in my mind is of equal if not greater importance is that Jordan has seeked out an outstanding training group/enviromnent (With Coach Joel Filloil and the Canadian National Triathlon Team Training group), that thrives on hard-work, commitment and excellence. In this type of situation there is an amazing push/pull synergy that develops that can be extraordinarily beneficial. Many athletes who are seriously seeking significant performance improvement would do be wise to seek out a similar group.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Missed the smiley!

Yep, sometimes you gotta disregard the HRM, PM etc. when you're training and try to hang and bang with the best. Reading Coach Joel and his athltetes blogs, it seems like they do a lot of that and define workouts in pretty subjective terms.

Racing IM is a different story and Rappstar clearly has a handle on how to mix the type of training he does with the CNTC with the specific IM stuff.

I've always wondered though, (maybe Jordan can chime in) how an American long-course guy got mixed up with our Nat'l Team. He seems like a great asset to the squad in terms of pushing the bike pace on training rides and clearly Joel has him doing the right things...just curious!

how an American long-course guy got mixed up with our Nat'l Team

I can't speak directly for Jordan, but I suspect the main reason is as I posted - he was seeking out a group that was all about hard work, commitment and excellence - with a little off-the-wall humour courtesy of Whitfield & Co. to keep things light when the going get's tough. Viewed from the outside, it's the perfect training group. Certainly the results speak for themselves - a number of top 10 World Cup finishes, a World Cup win and a 3rd place in a very competitive IM race. Not a bad start to the year!

Also there should be no surprise that a long course guy is training with short-course people - the reality is this is a throw-back to the way people trained for IM years ago with a short course focus for 1/2 to 2/3 of the season then a ramp up in volume for the longer races. People want to make out like there are HUGE differences in the two events (there are some major ones) but the reality is that both are aerobic events and are more similar than people think - build a bigger aerobic engine, however you do that, and you will do better at both short course tris and long course tris.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I understand and agree with the reasons why Jordan would want to join that group but I guess I'm curious why he would be allowed on the squad.
*I want to be clear that it sounds like he is GREAT for that squad and vice versa*

I was under the impression that Joel is employed as a coach with the NTC/National Team - a Cdn. government funded organization and as such was no longer coaching privately (ie. individual athletes). I can't remember where I heard/read that, quite possibly I'm mistaken

...there's a first time for everything ;)

Fleck, that's what we have tried to create here in Ottawa, for old guys with families and jobs...we have an outstanding group of masters triathletes, and we're hammering the heck out of each other and constantly raising the bar. There is always someone who shows up fresh to a workout, while other guys are on a 24 hour training week....but that's no excuse for slacking off....no wonder we get on age group podiums at major races and lots of Kona qualifiers....having a competitive group that pushes each other really is the key...and even when we don't train in person, the email reports of this interval session and that killer run etc etc, drive each of us out the door in snowstorms and sometimes when we're all at the same race, it just pushes each of us that much harder and elevates out performances...but key in this type of enviroment is to also listen to your body....sometimes you just can't keep up with the other guy...my rule of thumb is that if I want to train easy, then train solo. If its group training, then prepare to suffer :-)

The numbers are cool and in long races, they are right, but in training, sometimes it is better to put them away and break through to a higher level rather than limit oneself to what the numbers/zones say we should stay in.

To some extent, this is the underlying theme of Gordo's Epic Camps....pushing yourself beyond what you thought was possible!

Dev

Joel was my coach back when he was a private coach running his own business - Competition Zone. Even while he was a private coach, Joel coached a lot of the Canadian Nat'l Team athletes. If you recall, Simon Whitfield switched to having Joel as his coach at the beginning of 2005. Joel and Simon built a group of other ITU athletes, some of whom no longer train with our group and some of whom have retired from the sport. Since Joel's group was a private group, I was free to come train with them.

My first trip was in the summer of 2005, when I spent four weeks in Victoria. I then joined Simon, Kyle Jones, and Nick Hastie in Flagstaff in February of 2006 for our first recon trip to Flagstaff. Then I spent six weeks in Victoria over the summer of 06, and then another month with Simon in Flagstaff in October of 2006.

Sometime in 2006, Joel became the head coach of the Canadian Nat'l team, but by that point I'd done enough training camps with the group that I guess I'd somehow fooled them into thinking I added some value to the group! So Joel was able to make a case that I was a worthwhile addition to our training group, especially as I was non-competitive in terms of not trying to make the US Olympic team and not racing ITU World Cups. So TriathlonCanada was willing to allow me to train with the group, though I am obviously self-funded as I cannot be an "official" Nat'l Team athlete, due to my citizenship.

Joel has really built an incredible group training environment, which is pretty impressive considering that it means not only coaching athletes, but managing their interactions with each other, which is really the hard part.

So that's how I got *adopted* by the Canadian National Team. :)

---

"Non est ad astra mollis e terris via." - Seneca | rappstar.com | FB - Rappstar Racing | IG - @jordanrapp

Thanks Jordan,
I figured it had to do with the value of your contributions to the group.
We're glad to have you!

...so Joel brings Rappstar into the Cdn National Team training group to serve as cannon fodder, or is he the "derny" setting the motorpacing for the group?