Your power should, in most instances, track with your hip angle(s), both FIST and acute or 'over the top' angles. There are ways to make all of those changes while maintaining your hip angles, and theoretically, your power.

If you were able to go from holding 215 to holding 248 for an IM distance ride with roughly equal runs, then your FTP did indeed go up. That you think it didn't go up simply exposes some misunderstandings of the basic concepts. Further evidence of those misunderstandings is using 'base' to describe some type of physiological adaptation, when in fact it is simply a period of training.

You rode more, your FTP went up and you were therefor able to sustain greater power across all distances. You did not "build base" while maintaining the same FTP and then somehow your bigger base allowed you to hold a greater % of this same FTP over all distances. That is bunk.

As a coach, you do not need an ex-phys degree, though a basic understanding of physiology helps.

Thanks for educating me on "base". I will never bastardize a word on this forum n order to keep the word count down.

I'm not getting in a pissing contest with you just saying if a person trains harder over time they can go faster. Nothing revolutionary there.

I heading out for a run....good luck with your training and racing.

I'm not sure you got the answer you were looking for but I'll give it a shot.

Yes, NP should roughly be the same since it's a reflection of the true physiological cost (assuming you believe in the NP concept). A difference between the two might make sense in cases where you have an athlete who favors more variability in their riding. Having said that, proper pacing in a TT is very much about keeping power relatively steady (yes, even on hilly courses). So, that athlete who likes to ride with more variability should really learn to keep power within a relatively narrow range.

For example, for HIM you should probably target about 10 more watts on the flats than IM (eg 80 - 85%). However, the hills should be relatively the same. Maybe just a tad stronger on the short climbs in HIM:

Long climbs: 80 - 85%
Short climbs: - 85 - 95%

You clearly want to stay under FTP though.

Does that help?

Thanks, Chris

No pissing contest from me. Sorry if I came off that way.

I think it is important to recognize that words have exact meanings. Also important to realize there are many many lurkers here who are just starting out and are using these forums as their sole source of knowledge. If we do not phrase our advice accurately and precisely, we can send literally hundreds of athletes down the wrong path. i.e - chasing 'muscular endurance' or building 'base' as opposed to raising their FTP during the base period of training.

I looked at your website and your results as well as some other posts you have made. I think you know what you are doing. Just be careful...oftentimes you may know what you mean but many here will take things you have written containing some slight imprecision, quite literally.

I truly hope you had a great ride.

I say maybe not. First off, how are you defining micro-accelerations? For example, surges >FTP occurring within a 15sec time period?

I see accelerations of >FTP occurring within this time period as relatively insignificant and the reality is that nobody really rides that way with enough frequency anyway. It sounds like a decent concern in theory but doesn't really pan out in reality. It's actually quite hard to do frequent accelerations at that effort for such a short period of time. The concern you want to focus on is the frequency of accelerations >FTP occurring over a period of >30 secs and VI will show this as long as you understand it.

VI is actually a good indicator of variability occurring over short chunks of time. Honestly, I just think a lot of people don't understand it. I think in many cases they believe it's indicating variability over larger chunks of time (eg large power differences between 1st and 2nd half).

Thanks, Chris

Lets say my FTP is 300 and I am doing a 1hr time trial. 50% of your time may be > FTP. If your power jumps 310-290-310-290 etc. Would someone who is able to do 302-298-302etc be able to put out a few more watts in the hour time period or are these equal since when you sample over 30 seconds the average is the same?

---

Ride Scoozy Electric Bicycles
http://www.RideScoozy.com

Obviously I can't give you an answer with a high level of confidence because I haven't studied that specific situation in detail.

However, I believe this is one of those questions where we have to ask ourselves at what point does the granularity of our execution make a difference? Personally, I look at the above and find it difficult to believe you'd see a significant difference in the result of those two situations. But, again, how do we define "significant"? I would think this level of detail would be difficult to study and apply in reality because no road is perfectly flat either and optimal power is highly dependent on gradient.

You see where I'm going with this? Arguably, some of us tend to over-analyze our power data already. I just find that the answer to proper bike execution in triathlon is not just about power so trying to analyze a single component to this degree of granularity possibly becomes counter-productive, imho.

I hope that doesn't sound disrespectful. That's certainly not my intention. I just don't see value in that level of analysis (assuming I understand your point).

Thanks, Chris

Yes, I think I did get my question answered.

Basically I am not going to make any significant changes for this race.

For the bike I am going to stay right at around 245 for the first half...and if i feel really good at that point I'll bump up to 250-255 depending on how I feel. The goal, as always, is to not get all excited and rip off 270 watts or something I may not be ready for. I'd rather run well and finish a touch over 5 hours then end up walking and finish in 6 hours.

I did make some modifications to my aero bars. I tilted them up a bit and narrowed them as well. I rode on the trainer for an hour in that position and actually thought it felt better than the previous position. I won't touch anything else until I talk to a fitter.

Thank you all, the advice is certainly food for thought.

---

________________
Blogging

Cool. And as far as the head goes, it may be a simple matter of just physically lowering it. You may not need to actually move anything on your bike, just get used to it. I feel the head position is the biggest drag for you.

Going harder uphill will give you a better overall time. Better to use watts against gravity than against air. The range of variability will be determined by your training. The variability you ride with should still yield a low VI.

I think that is me just focusing...kinda like you said.

I think the pics you saw...and the most common ones are me near transition. So I am either not really settled on the bike yet...or I am starting to get ready to come into t2.

However my position certainly needs help too.

---

________________
Blogging

John, I think he's trying to understand the impact of very small accelerations that might occur when someone is supposed to be riding very steady.

For example, if the gradient is flat and his goal is to ride at 83% of FTP then he should obviously do his best at sitting around that number until the gradient changes. Msuguy512 just wants to understand if athlete #1 who's bouncing around that number at +-10w is going to do worse than athlete #2 who's bouncing around that number at +- 2w (assuming all else equal).

Thanks, Chris

I would agree that I don't know whether or not this makes a difference, however, the way VI is calculated now with the 30 second sampling it is hard to differentiate the variability in the program between these two cases. Just wondering if its worth adding another option to calculate it with a smaller time period. The other side of this is the noise in the power meter, if its bouncing around quite a bit also then you couldn't do it accurately.

---

Ride Scoozy Electric Bicycles
http://www.RideScoozy.com

I'm quite certain AC has an opinion on this issue. You might want to try to drag it out of him.

Thanks, Chris

Thanks to all that replied to this last week.

So I did racine...

Swim was slow for me. I had nobody in my wave to go with. I was the 2nd fastest in my heat...but we were right behind some really slow waves...so I lost the lead guy. Often times when swimming alone I get a little lazy. I came out of the water in almost 30 flat and wasn't even breathing heavy.

I started the ride at about 255 watts. I did that for about 10-15 miles and felt it was just a touch too hard. At least given the lack of solid zone 3 efforts under my belt at that time. So I dialed it back a hair and was sitting at 252 by mile 25. I expected to be around 21-22mph at that effort, but I had made some tweaks to my cockpit and aero bars (slight tilt up) and position. I don't know if that played a role or not but at mile 25 I was sitting at 22.5 mph. Quite a bit faster than where I expected to be considering there was a bit of a head wind and it was getting warm. In either case I was happy.
I kept my effort about the same for the last half, but the way back was FAST. So my power actually dropped to a final 248 by the end...but my average speed bumped up to 22.7 and I felt great. So I finished with a 2:28.xx - way faster than I had anticipated.

AND...
I was able to run really well for me.
My first 6 miles hovered between 8 - 8:10's. By then the heat and humidity took its toll and I slowed a bit to 8:20-8:30's. Finished the run with a 1:49.xx. For me, that's pretty darn good. Last season that run would have taken well over 2 hours. I've been running consistently for 8 months thanks to BarryP's plan as well as the advice of many others...and my run times have dropped dramatically.

So I finished the race with a 4:53.13. I was hoping to break 5 hours and did. Had I swam to my potential and not had a little picnic in T1 I probably would have broken 4:50. But I am really happy anyway.

And on another note, I just got a new, professional fitting, on Monday. He made some really big changes. Moved my cleats back as I was on my toes and getting hotspots, moved my saddle forward, moved my aero pads back, tilted my aero bars down and base bar up, and added a spacer under my stem...which shocked me. He was really confident that I'd see some good results with his changes.
He went through a lot of flexibility tests and measured everything and said that raising me up that little bit allowed me to not only be more relaxed and comfortable, but made me more aero as my back was much flatter and my head was much lower while looking up...and the aero helmet tucked perfectly in my back. He said that saddle and cleat changes will help me use more of my quads and in the long run actually generate more power aero than I do now. All that while being much more relaxed in the shoulders/neck and more aerodynamic.

I rode lightly on tuesday. This morning I rode a zone 2 effort and i could really feel the difference. I'm more comfortable in the saddle and shoulders. My feet feel much better and while I have not really tried yet as I want to get used to this fit, but putting more power into the pedals seems easier. But it will take a few weeks to acclimate to the new fit and test that out.

I do have a race on Sunday...it is just a fun one but it will be interesting to see what kind of wattage I can produce and what speeds it generates. It's a flat course, so a decent test.

---

________________
Blogging

There are ways to make all of those changes while maintaining your hip angles, and theoretically, your power.

Are there scientific studies to support the assertion that thigh-trunk (hip) angles are the most important thing to preserve? Because IME I don't lose any power by making this more acute... it is better than the alternatives.

Do you think you could run faster if you wouldve biked slower? It seems like you shouldve run slower in the first few miles then sped up. Great result BTW.
I am tinkering around with my fit every week or two.

One thing I noticed was at 14-15cm of drop I have a good comprimise of power and speed. When I drop down to 16-17 my power decreases by 15-20 watts and my run sucks afterwards. The last fit I had they did the same thing(move me up) which might be more comfortable at first but def slowed me down overall. They had me with 5cm of drop. Since I took my fit over I dropped 10cm, using slowtwitch articles and my powermeter.

You should post a before and after video.

Well, I think it is possible that I would have run faster overall with better pacing on the run. But overall I am still a "new" runner. I was feeling really good and the first two miles were actually under an 8min pace. Was that too quick...probably. But in my defense...while it was warm at that point, it was only getting worse out. And at mile 3 for me, clouds came and a storm rolled in. So I kept that pace during that time figuring I should take advantage of the weather while I could. And that was a decent decision because by the time I got to mile 6 the sun was back and the water on the roads was creating a hot humid sweltering nasty race. So my last 6 miles got pretty hot and humid. I don't know the actual temps...but I'd say at least 85 and it felt like 95 in the sun.
So...the most likely answer is yes, better pacing would have yielded better results. And some day I'll learn that.

As for fitting....I don't know yet. I'm 6'2 and on a large trek Equinox. At 200lbs I've got big legs and shoulders. You can see the pictures on this thread...I'm not sure I necessarily need to drop down more as much as I need to control where my head/arms/shoulders are better. I think the new fit has done that. And the fitter said he put me right on the edge of my functional flexibility.
I've noticed now that even without added drop my head and shoulders are naturally closer to the bars even with them now level as opposed to tilted up. What the fitter said was that by raising up that hair and changing the aero bars/pads I'm now more relaxed and dropping down naturally as opposed to all clenched up in the shoulders and arms.

I will get some photo's going at some point here in the future. I want to try to get used to the fit first.

---

________________
Blogging