Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 10, 18 15:10

Post #51 of 112 (3396 views)

Revisionist history: FTP has never been defined as exactly 60 min power, at least not by anybody who really knew what they were talking about.

If anyone reading this has ever believed otherwise, they should blame the source that misled them (or their own reading comprehension).

Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Jun 10, 18 16:14

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 10, 18 15:21

Post #52 of 112 (3388 views)

Steve Irwin wrote:

What I'm arguing against is the claim that there is some sort of "threshold", a feature in the power duration curve, that is unique to the region around 60 minutes.

Clearly you haven't been paying attention to anything that has been said in this thread (or the similar one on wattage).

The use of the term "threshold" refers to the physiological responses, which dictate the shape of the power-duration relationship.

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 10, 18 15:45

Post #53 of 112 (3378 views)

Steve Irwin wrote:

gregf83 wrote:

If I look at my CP curve a 5% increase in power results in a 50% decrease in TTE. That feels very much like a threshold I shouldn't go over if I'm trying to complete a 1 hr effort.

We can make similar statements about other durations, though. If I add 5% to my 20 minute power, I see an approx 50% decrease in TTE. If I add 5% to my 100 minute power, it gives an approx 50% decrease in TTE. So 60 minutes doesn't differ from many other points on the PD curve in this respect.

You need to stop thinking of threshold in terms of the slope along a PD curve.

Why? Because the PD curve is an integral of the energy supply from all metabolic pathways (sustainable and non-sustainable), not just the sustainable metabolism which supports power at threshold.

At sub-threshold power we are getting along fine with energy demand supplied wholly via sustainable (i.e. aerobic) metabolic processes.

As power demand increases (and TTE reduces), at some point the non-sustainable energy sources begin to supplement the sustainable sources to a not insignificant degree.

At 20-minutes it's reasonably significant, in the vicinity of 5% of total energy demand (but there is obviously individual variance). At 4-minutes it's in the vicinity of 25% (or more) of the total energy demand.

What you describe as a feature of a PD curve is that hard to recognise difference in slope as the non-sustainable energy contribution drops from minor but significant, to negligible.

Just because the slope doesn't display an apparent significant change in that duration range does not mean threshold can be just anywhere in that range.

http://www.cyclecoach.com
http://www.aerocoach.com.au

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 10, 18 17:40

Post #54 of 112 (3355 views)

Steve Irwin wrote:

gregf83 wrote:

Everyone (almost) has adopted and understands FTP. There's no value in changing now. What would be the point?

Until not that long ago (basically when WKO4 shipped), most people who had adopted FTP were regarding it as interchangeable with 60 minute power or 25 mile / 40km TT power. Threads like this one didn't exist at that time, as there was no need for discussion of these issues when FTP essentially meant the same thing as P60 (60 minute power was described as the best way to estimate FTP).

What changed with WKO4 shipping is that FTP was no longer equivalent to 60 minute power or 25 mile / 40km TT power. Now it has a floating duration, it might be your 40 minute power one day, then you feed it another file and now it's your 70 minute power. To be able to choose this point, it is claimed that there is a characteristic in the power duration curve that is unique to where FTP is located. Some people, and I am one of them, dispute that such a point exists in that region, with a characteristic that is unique to that region and doesn't exist outside that region. When challenged to provide a definition that would allow their claim to be tested, they will not provide one.

Re your question of what would be the point of using 60 minute power or 25 mile / 40km TT power as a metric instead of the WKO4 concept of a floating pair of numbers, (duration, power) - for me, it would better match my actual performance, as I don't really want to have to wonder whether xW for y mins represents better or worse performance than aW for b mins, and I've seen my WKO4 mFTP move significantly in the opposite direction to my actual performance, even when the duration it has picked hasn't changed significantly.

When you look at the paper that was published fairly recently that appears to support the concept of FTP, it's actually using FTP as a synonym for 60 minute power, not the floating (duration, power) concept of WKO4. So there is an example of a group that is still in fact using P60 rather than FTP, even though they described P60 as FTP.

I understand. Your beef is really with WKO4. I just use Golden Cheetah and Strava and have a reasonable idea what my FTP (old definition) is although I no longer test in any structured way.

Given you're an experienced cyclist/racer, does it really matter what WKO4 says your FTP is? Do you use it for more than a general guide when racing?

Re: TTE / FTP Question [gregf83] [ In reply to ]

Jun 10, 18 18:40

Post #55 of 112 (3349 views)

Reality is too complex for some people.

Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Jun 10, 18 18:46

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 1:50

Post #56 of 112 (3306 views)

Steve Irwin wrote:

gregf83 wrote:

Everyone (almost) has adopted and understands FTP. There's no value in changing now. What would be the point?

Until not that long ago (basically when WKO4 shipped), most people who had adopted FTP were regarding it as interchangeable with 60 minute power or 25 mile / 40km TT power. Threads like this one didn't exist at that time, as there was no need for discussion of these issues when FTP essentially meant the same thing as P60 (60 minute power was described as the best way to estimate FTP).

What changed with WKO4 shipping is that FTP was no longer equivalent to 60 minute power or 25 mile / 40km TT power. Now it has a floating duration, it might be your 40 minute power one day, then you feed it another file and now it's your 70 minute power.

40km TT power or maximum power sustainable for 60-min have always been ways to estimate FTP. So has performance of regular long intervals, so has the use of the Critical Power model. Various ways to estimate. Never has it been defined as being exactly 60-min.

Don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it.

Steve Irwin wrote:

Now it has a floating duration, it might be your 40 minute power one day, then you feed it another file and now it's your 70 minute power. To be able to choose this point, it is claimed that there is a characteristic in the power duration curve that is unique to where FTP is located. Some people, and I am one of them, dispute that such a point exists in that region, with a characteristic that is unique to that region and doesn't exist outside that region.

Neither has anyone suggested FTP is defined as a specific point along a curve.

The use of power duration models (e.g. "classic" Critical Power) is another way to estimate FTP, as is the WKO4 PD model.

In the first instance, CP is one of two parameters which describes the PD curve (in this case a hyperbola), the other being W'. Now you wouldn't consider CP to be a point along the curve. It's a model parameter.

In the latter instance the modelled FTP (mFTP) is one of three parameters of the WKO4 PD model (the others being FRC and Pmax). Like CP, mFTP is also a model parameter.

http://www.cyclecoach.com
http://www.aerocoach.com.au

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 4:13

Post #57 of 112 (3296 views)

Andrew Coggan wrote:

Steve Irwin wrote:

What I'm arguing against is the claim that there is some sort of "threshold", a feature in the power duration curve, that is unique to the region around 60 minutes.

Clearly you haven't been paying attention to anything that has been said in this thread (or the similar one on wattage).

The use of the term "threshold" refers to the physiological responses, which dictate the shape of the power-duration relationship.

Then why doesn't the shape of the power duration curve show a threshold?

If the physiological responses dictate the shape of the power duration relationship then the shape of the curve must also be dictated by those responses. Therefore it must be possible to define threshold as a shape on the curve or give a clear definition of percentages or ratios or something unique and specific which identifies the threshold, eg, a rate of decline over the first few minutes and power at later durations. Once FTP has been given a specific number it then has a specific point on the power duration curve. Obviously everyone's curve will be different and the same persons curve can change, but there must be a clear definition of what identifies threshold on the power duration curve.

Last edited by: Trev: Jun 11, 18 6:04

Re: TTE / FTP Question [AlexS] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 4:26

Post #58 of 112 (3291 views)

"Neither has anyone suggested FTP is defined as a specific point along a curve. "

The original definition was,

"FTP is the highest power that a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady state without fatiguing for approximately one hour. When power exceeds FTP, fatigue will occur much sooner, whereas power just below FTP can be maintained considerably longer".

The original area on the power duration curve where FTP was claimed to be found was approximately 60 minutes duration. Once you give FTP a number e.g. 300 watts, then that number only occurs at one specific point on the curve.

mFTP is clearly marked on the curve as a specific power number and a specific duration. Time to exhaustion is a specific power number and a specific duration.

So you can't claim FTP has not been claimed or defined as a specific point on the power duration curve.

The original definition didn't give a specific point along the curve but a vague approximate area along the curve, at approximately 60 minutes. This was then stretched to be even more vague and unspecific as somewhere along the curve between 30 and 70 minutes.

Re: TTE / FTP Question [AlexS] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 5:25

Post #59 of 112 (3273 views)

"Don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it. "

People, and certainly not Steve, don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it. It is the lack of a clear precise vigorous definition which forces people to look at ways of estimating it, e.g., when people do studies and use power over 60 minutes as FTP or take 95% of 20 minute power.

You only have Andrew to blame for the lack of a proper definition. And it's time people stopped hiding behind vague imprecise definitions and pathetic statements like " don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it".

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Trev] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 5:39

Post #60 of 112 (3266 views)

Trev wrote:

"Neither has anyone suggested FTP is defined as a specific point along a curve. "

The original definition was,

"FTP is the highest power that a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady state without fatiguing for approximately one hour.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/a

a

[uh; when stressed ey]

indefinite article

a certain; a particular

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/approximately

approximate

[adjective uh-prok-suh-mit; verb uh-prok-suh-meyt]

verb (used with object), ap·prox·i·mat·ed, ap·prox·i·mat·ing.

to come near to; approach closely to:

Related forms

ap·prox·i·mate·ly, adverb

Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Jun 11, 18 5:46

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Trev] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 5:43

Post #61 of 112 (3267 views)

Trev wrote:

"Don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it. "

People, and certainly not Steve, don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it.

Irwin's very own words disprove your statement:

"FTP was no longer equivalent to 60 minute power or 25 mile / 40km TT power"

FTP was never equivalent to 60 min/25 mi/40 km TT power. Hence the PPP:

~40 km (or ~1 h) power is to FTP as s is to σ

Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Jun 11, 18 5:45

Re: TTE / FTP Question [AlexS] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 5:51

Post #62 of 112 (3261 views)

AlexS wrote:

40km TT power or maximum power sustainable for 60-min have always been ways to estimate FTP. So has performance of regular long intervals, so has the use of the Critical Power model. Various ways to estimate. Never has it been defined as being exactly 60-min.

Don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it.

Right there, in the very text you quoted, I said "FTP essentially meant the same thing as P60 (60 minute power was described as the best way to estimate FTP)". If the best way to estimate it was 60 minute power then it did mean essentially the same thing as 60 minute power, as nothing else provided a better way to estimate it. If you wanted to make use of FTP in your training, then you needed to quantify it, so if the best way to estimate it was 60 minute power and you knew your 60 minute power, why would you use any other figure as your FTP?

AlexS wrote:

Neither has anyone suggested FTP is defined as a specific point along a curve.

What is your definition of FTP?

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Trev] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 5:53

Post #63 of 112 (3260 views)

Trev wrote:

Andrew Coggan wrote:

Steve Irwin wrote:

What I'm arguing against is the claim that there is some sort of "threshold", a feature in the power duration curve, that is unique to the region around 60 minutes.

Clearly you haven't been paying attention to anything that has been said in this thread (or the similar one on wattage).

The use of the term "threshold" refers to the physiological responses, which dictate the shape of the power-duration relationship.

Then why doesn't the shape of the power duration curve show a threshold?

Because the physiological responses dictate a ceiling or plateau in sustainable* power, above which you can continue only by supplementing this "baseline" by drawing upon non-sustainable reserves.

If not for such reserves, "threshold" would be the maximum power that could be generated for any length of time.

*Recognizing, of course, that even BMR can only be maintained for a finite period of time, which is only made to seem interminable by Trev's constant trolling.

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 5:54

Post #64 of 112 (3259 views)

Steve Irwin wrote:

I said "FTP essentially meant the same thing as P60 (60 minute power was described as the best way to estimate FTP)". If the best way to estimate it was 60 minute power then it did mean essentially the same thing as 60 minute power

See the PPP in red above.

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 5:58

Post #65 of 112 (3253 views)

Andrew Coggan wrote:

Irwin's very own words disprove your statement:

"FTP was no longer equivalent to 60 minute power or 25 mile / 40km TT power"

FTP was never equivalent to 60 min/25 mi/40 km TT power. Hence the PPP:

~40 km (or ~1 h) power is to FTP as s is to σ

From a dictionary:
equivalent - something that has the same amount, value, purpose, qualities, etc. as something else

I'd say that if 60 minute power was the best way to estimate FTP, then they were equivalent in the above sense.

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 6:12

Post #66 of 112 (3246 views)

The bolded part below is why they are not equivalent. FTP is a concept; 60 min/25 mi/40 km TT power is just a way of numerically estimating its value.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

e·quiv·a·lent

əˈkwiv(ə)lənt/Submit

adjective

1.

equal in [ . . ] meaning, etc.

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 9:13

Post #67 of 112 (3182 views)

Andrew Coggan wrote:

The bolded part below is why they are not equivalent. FTP is a concept; 60 min/25 mi/40 km TT power is just a way of numerically estimating its value.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

e·quiv·a·lent

əˈkwiv(ə)lənt/Submit

adjective

1.

equal in [ . . ] meaning, etc.

Give a clear definition of FTP. Not the usual vague rubbish. As it is the definition of your unproven concept is so vague as to be utterly useless, this is why people are forced to use various estimates of FTP, even when they are doing scientific research.

e.g., "When power exceeds FTP, fatigue will occur much sooner, whereas power just below FTP can be maintained considerably longer."

This statement, apart from being extremely vague, is misleading, because it sets FTP apart as if it is the only power at which this occurs. You could say the same for any duration on the power duration curve beyond the first few minutes.

As to ' approximately ' 60 minutes, please explain what you mean by approximately 60 minutes. Do you agree 55 to 65 minutes is approximately 60 minutes? Do you also agree 30 to 70 minutes is approximately 60 minutes? How far do you want to stretch approximately, as far as 15 minutes to 90 minutes? Please give a clear definition of how far you think it is acceptable to stretch approximately 60 minutes. Most rational people would say approximately would be within +\- 10%, but you seem to think it should be +\- 50% which is ludicrous.

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Trev] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 12:55

Post #68 of 112 (3144 views)

Trev wrote:

Give a clear definition of FTP. Not the usual vague rubbish.

Well, since you don't like the original definition, you could say that it is a power that can be sustained for a very long time without fatigue, and is an inherent characteristic of the aerobic energy supply system. Alternatively, you could say that it is the greatest metabolic rate that results in entirely-oxidative energy provision. You might even say that it is is an integral feature of integrative biological exercise performance.

Happy now?

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 15:06

Post #69 of 112 (3097 views)

Steve Irwin wrote:

AlexS wrote:

40km TT power or maximum power sustainable for 60-min have always been ways to estimate FTP. So has performance of regular long intervals, so has the use of the Critical Power model. Various ways to estimate. Never has it been defined as being exactly 60-min.

Don't confuse FTP with ways of estimating it.

Right there, in the very text you quoted, I said "FTP essentially meant the same thing as P60 (60 minute power was described as the best way to estimate FTP)". If the best way to estimate it was 60 minute power then it did mean essentially the same thing as 60 minute power, as nothing else provided a better way to estimate it. If you wanted to make use of FTP in your training, then you needed to quantify it, so if the best way to estimate it was 60 minute power and you knew your 60 minute power, why would you use any other figure as your FTP?

Well, yes, the best indicator of performance capability is performance and a TT-like effort of about an hour would be darn good. But there are few reasons why we might consider alternative or supplemental methods. For example:

If you are not fortunate enough to have roads handy which safely permit an uninterrupted maximal effort of about an hour, e.g. a ~40kmTT, then it might be better to consider alternative options for estimating FTP. e.g. in Australia there are only a few TT courses of ~40km which are used.
You may be able to ride for about an hour uninterrupted but the terrain or course you have available is not conducive to executing a suitable quasi-steady state effort. Highly variable gradient, or technical elements which might impact average power and require the use of and recharge of non-sustainable energy metabolism (and so we might use an alternative indicator of aerobic metabolic capability in the form of Normalized Power).
To avoid being reliant on a single data point. Hence use of suitable alternative methods can be helpful to provide some validation. Of course if you are in good health on the day, are confident the power data is accurate and you gave it best effort with nothing which would have unduly impacted performance, then great, you have an excellent data point!
But what if you embarked on some training which involved doing some longer intervals near that threshold value but you consistently couldn't do them, or they were too easy? Hence an alternative estimation method such as what you can repeatedly do in longer interval efforts is also a good way to estimate/validate FTP.

Some people might be better off using one or more alternative methods due to the nature of the racing they do, or the goals they are focused on, or the environment in which they are training.

Some might not be ready to do any testing due to their health status, or being in poor condition such that undertaking hard efforts may be unwise. In such a case they might be better to use an experience-led guesstimate for a while (e.g. if they want to have reasonable ballpark estimate of things like TSS) until they are in better condition to do some tests.

We have multiple means to estimate FTP, some may be more readily useful or practical to implement for a particular individual's circumstances.

Steve Irwin wrote:

AlexS wrote:

Neither has anyone suggested FTP is defined as a specific point along a curve.

What is your definition of FTP?

The same as the original definition. I wrote about it here:
https://wattmatters.blog/.../2018/6/5/wtf-is-ftp

http://www.cyclecoach.com
http://www.aerocoach.com.au

Last edited by: AlexS: Jun 11, 18 15:09

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 15:47

Post #70 of 112 (3081 views)

Andrew Coggan wrote:

~40 km (or ~1 h) power is to FTP as s is to σ

I'm am *very* reluctant to jump into this thread, but now that Andy is speaking my language I can't resist :-).

In the case of s and \sigma, we have a very clear definition of what \sigma is. It is the standard deviation of the population of interest - I can give you an exact formula for it that hinges on knowing the population distribution. Sure, I typically can't know the population distribution in real world applications, which means I can't compute \sigma exactly, but the thought experiment of how I would compute \sigma if I had infinite amounts of data is important and tells me how to estimate \sigma.

I see Steve's question as (approximately) this: suppose we knew the whole population of MMP curves for one particular cyclist. E.g., suppose we knew the distribution of MMP across all possible days (to the extent that it varies, which it does). How could we compute FTP from this information? It seems like you have to know the answer to that question before you go trying to estimate FTP. Is it possible to compute FTP from this information? If not, what additional information would we need?

Re: TTE / FTP Question [lanierb] [ In reply to ]

Jun 11, 18 16:33

Post #71 of 112 (3072 views)

If logic is your language, then yes, I am speaking it. :) I would argue, though, that you are carrying the analogy a step too far.

Sigma is a statistical concept, and as such, can be expressed as a formula even if the data are rarely available to solve for it.

FTP, on the other hand, is a physiological concept, and as such exists apart from any mathematics used to estimate it.

ETA: The renal threshold for glucose is another physiological concept comparable to FTP. Similarly, over in the field of climatology man-made global warming is a concept that exists independent of any math used to quantify it.

Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Jun 11, 18 16:57

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Andrew Coggan] [ In reply to ]

Jun 12, 18 6:27

Post #72 of 112 (2975 views)

Andrew Coggan wrote:

The bolded part below is why they are not equivalent. FTP is a concept; 60 min/25 mi/40 km TT power is just a way of numerically estimating its value.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

e·quiv·a·lent

əˈkwiv(ə)lənt/Submit

adjective

1.

equal in [ . . ] meaning, etc.

That is as useful as if I were to criticise your use of the word 'bolded' by saying that you didn't make the words fearless before danger.

Your training zones used to be defined as %s of FTP, but I see that in 2016 you were instead defining them as %s of power at LT:
https://www.trainingpeaks.com/...wer-training-levels/
How would you describe the relationship between FTP and power at LT? Is the best estimate of FTP also the best estimate of power at LT?

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Steve Irwin] [ In reply to ]

Jun 12, 18 6:52

Post #73 of 112 (2965 views)

Steve Irwin wrote:

Your training zones used to be defined as %s of FTP, but I see that in 2016 you were instead defining them as %s of power at LT:
https://www.trainingpeaks.com/...wer-training-levels/

TP may have posted that web page in 2016, but they lifted the text from the chapter that I wrote for USA Cycling back in 2003:

Coggan AR. Training and racing using a power meter: an introduction. In: Level II Coaching Manual. Colorado Springs, CO: USA Cycling, 2003, pp. 123-145.

Hunt around the web, and you should be able to find a copy. Once again, though, the giveaway that I didn't have control over what's on the TP website is the way that they have incorrectly listed my name (use of "Dr." and "Ph.D." is redundant).

EDIT: Here is an electronic copy:

http://www.ipmultisport.com/...ggan_Power_Meter.pdf

Steve Irwin wrote:

How would you describe the relationship between FTP and power at LT? Is the best estimate of FTP also the best estimate of power at LT?

As I have pointed out numerous times before, people in the field of exercise physiology often use the term lactate threshold (or the acronym LT) to refer to both the general concept and to a specific value obtained using a particular protocol. The chapter was written at around the same time that I started referring to it as FTP, to try to get people to stop confusing themselves by thinking about lab-based lactate measurements. I still tended to use them somewhat interchangeably back then, though, i.e., it is in reference to the concept and not a particular value that "LT" refers to in that chapter.

The above is the long answer. The short answer is, it depends on precisely how LT is defined. If you go by Ed Coyle's criteria (i.e., a 1 mmol/L increase in venous blood lactate above exercise baseline, measured during a discontinuous protocol using 10 min stages), however, the FTP is typically about 5-10% higher (you can work out an exact conversion from his 1991 MSSE paper).

Last edited by: Andrew Coggan: Jun 12, 18 6:53

Re: TTE / FTP Question [Trev] [ In reply to ]

Jun 12, 18 14:20

Post #74 of 112 (2906 views)

Trev wrote:

The original area on the power duration curve where FTP was claimed to be found was approximately 60 minutes duration. Once you give FTP a number e.g. 300 watts, then that number only occurs at one specific point on the curve.

mFTP is clearly marked on the curve as a specific power number and a specific duration. Time to exhaustion is a specific power number and a specific duration.

So you can't claim FTP has not been claimed or defined as a specific point on the power duration curve.

mFTP, one method of estimating FTP via use of a power-duration model, is reported along with an error of estimate, as is TTE. The values are shown on charts already. That you might have looked at a random chart without that displayed is neither here nor there.

You criticise those who describe physiological reality rather than provide a false sense of precision.

No matter what method of threshold power estimation you use (lactate, O2 motnitoring, gas exchange, breathing rates, PD models such as CP or WKO4), the reality is there will be a estimate range within which the "true" value most probably lies. All of them have an associated error. None of them ever know what the "true" value is. But good estimation methods can narrow it down pretty well, and to a precision level that is useful.

It's a physiological reality. So get over it.

http://www.cyclecoach.com
http://www.aerocoach.com.au

Re: TTE / FTP Question [AlexS] [ In reply to ]

Jun 13, 18 3:00

Post #75 of 112 (2856 views)

Trev.
Thick as a post.

Everybody else.
Amazingly tolerant and patient of somebody that just doesn't get it.

Trev mate, you really need to learn a bit more about the underlying physiology.
All will be clear then.

This is actually a good thread because everybody is going to great pains to try and educate somebody that knows naught about the subject and in doing so, creating some of the most accessible to layman descriptions and information found anywhere.

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.