A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Racing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Longer crankarms



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old March 17th 04, 09:41 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

"chris" wrote in message
m...

"Andy Coggan" wrote in message

hlink.net...
"chris" wrote in message
om...
I hate to break this to you, but the USOC lab in CS has been doing

this
kind
of thing for years...about all that has been learned as a result is

that
the
Conconi test (proposed/developed/popularized by somebody with a

background
very similar to Ferrari's or Testa's) is total crap.

Well I guess some of the coaches in NE haven't gotten wind of this

yet!
;~`)

Are you referring to Cycle-Smart? I thought that they had given up on

that
approach.


In all fairness, I was not not specifically pointing to any one group,
but I've seen the term "Conconi test" batted around by a few coaches
and on some websites. It is possible these sites are out of date.


It's also possible that by 'Conconi test' these coaches/websites simply
meant an incremental exercise test to fatigue. Many people seem to confused
the two.

Andy Coggan


Ads
  #122  
Old March 17th 04, 09:41 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

"chris" wrote in message
m...

"Andy Coggan" wrote in message

hlink.net...
"chris" wrote in message
om...
I hate to break this to you, but the USOC lab in CS has been doing

this
kind
of thing for years...about all that has been learned as a result is

that
the
Conconi test (proposed/developed/popularized by somebody with a

background
very similar to Ferrari's or Testa's) is total crap.

Well I guess some of the coaches in NE haven't gotten wind of this

yet!
;~`)

Are you referring to Cycle-Smart? I thought that they had given up on

that
approach.


In all fairness, I was not not specifically pointing to any one group,
but I've seen the term "Conconi test" batted around by a few coaches
and on some websites. It is possible these sites are out of date.


It's also possible that by 'Conconi test' these coaches/websites simply
meant an incremental exercise test to fatigue. Many people seem to confused
the two.

Andy Coggan


  #123  
Old March 17th 04, 09:46 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

"warren" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Andy Coggan wrote:


a single blood lactate measurement at a fixed power output is
just as predictive of performance ability as assessing the entire curve:


I've seen otherwise. Max and Mike Carter (he's now at UC Davis Sports
Performance) could tell you far more than I can about this but they
have specifically addressed this topic with me and you are quite
simply, wrong.


No, I'm not - and rather than having to rely on my own unpublished
observations, or, worse still, just what others have told me, I can point to
peer-reviewed articles supporting my position (as I did).


Andy Coggan


  #124  
Old March 17th 04, 09:46 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

"warren" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Andy Coggan wrote:


a single blood lactate measurement at a fixed power output is
just as predictive of performance ability as assessing the entire curve:


I've seen otherwise. Max and Mike Carter (he's now at UC Davis Sports
Performance) could tell you far more than I can about this but they
have specifically addressed this topic with me and you are quite
simply, wrong.


No, I'm not - and rather than having to rely on my own unpublished
observations, or, worse still, just what others have told me, I can point to
peer-reviewed articles supporting my position (as I did).


Andy Coggan


  #125  
Old March 17th 04, 09:52 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

"chris" wrote in message
om...
OK, BREAK guys!

I would like to add that Andy has brought up some very good points
here, which is why one needs to be cautious when utilizing testing.
I, however, still use lactate testing and do find it very useful, but
I no longer use LT testing because of the aformentioned problems. In
fact, I use only a handful of samples, one submax (~4 mM +/-) and one
max. In my experience, I've been able to control training and
"predict" performance rather well from this method. HOWEVER, the
biggest help I've seen has come from continuous use of a power meter.

Overall, I would contend that riders don't use the thing properly at
all. Always afraid its too heavy, or they don't know what to do with
the data. I have an SRM that makes my bike 0.1 lbs heavier, which is
nothing compared to the data it provides me. So taken as a whole, I
think the argument for or against lactate testing is moot if you don't
know how to utilize what you have. I'm sure you'll find many who
agree with Andy, many who don't, but few who can argue why?


Don't get me wrong...despite certain limitations I do think that there are
times when measuring blood lactate (or other physiological parameters, e.g.,
VO2max, efficiency) can provide additional insight into the factors
determining a person's performance, and hence can be useful in planning
training. It's just that I (like you, apparently) don't think there's
anything to be gained from obsessing over the exact shape of the
lactate-power curve, esp. since lactate concentration can vary significantly
due to extraneous factors (e.g., muscle glycogen stores).

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the best predictor of performance
is performance itself.

Andy Coggan


  #126  
Old March 17th 04, 09:52 PM
Andy Coggan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

"chris" wrote in message
om...
OK, BREAK guys!

I would like to add that Andy has brought up some very good points
here, which is why one needs to be cautious when utilizing testing.
I, however, still use lactate testing and do find it very useful, but
I no longer use LT testing because of the aformentioned problems. In
fact, I use only a handful of samples, one submax (~4 mM +/-) and one
max. In my experience, I've been able to control training and
"predict" performance rather well from this method. HOWEVER, the
biggest help I've seen has come from continuous use of a power meter.

Overall, I would contend that riders don't use the thing properly at
all. Always afraid its too heavy, or they don't know what to do with
the data. I have an SRM that makes my bike 0.1 lbs heavier, which is
nothing compared to the data it provides me. So taken as a whole, I
think the argument for or against lactate testing is moot if you don't
know how to utilize what you have. I'm sure you'll find many who
agree with Andy, many who don't, but few who can argue why?


Don't get me wrong...despite certain limitations I do think that there are
times when measuring blood lactate (or other physiological parameters, e.g.,
VO2max, efficiency) can provide additional insight into the factors
determining a person's performance, and hence can be useful in planning
training. It's just that I (like you, apparently) don't think there's
anything to be gained from obsessing over the exact shape of the
lactate-power curve, esp. since lactate concentration can vary significantly
due to extraneous factors (e.g., muscle glycogen stores).

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the best predictor of performance
is performance itself.

Andy Coggan


  #127  
Old March 17th 04, 11:32 PM
Kyle Legate
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms


"warren" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Andy Coggan wrote:

"warren" wrote in message
...


What is my power output at 1m/Mol? 1 m/Mol vs. 2 m/Mol? 2 vs. 4? Is it
changing? How much? What is the shape of the curve between 1 and 2, 2
and 3, 3 and 4, 4 and 5,?


I don't know and I don't care, but I can tell you this: all of the

various
power values are highly intercorrelated, with R values 0.9:


I've seen the tests that show otherwise. Some were my own.

You forgot to post the Pubmed link.


  #128  
Old March 17th 04, 11:32 PM
Kyle Legate
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms


"warren" wrote in message
...
In article .net,
Andy Coggan wrote:

"warren" wrote in message
...


What is my power output at 1m/Mol? 1 m/Mol vs. 2 m/Mol? 2 vs. 4? Is it
changing? How much? What is the shape of the curve between 1 and 2, 2
and 3, 3 and 4, 4 and 5,?


I don't know and I don't care, but I can tell you this: all of the

various
power values are highly intercorrelated, with R values 0.9:


I've seen the tests that show otherwise. Some were my own.

You forgot to post the Pubmed link.


  #129  
Old March 18th 04, 01:37 PM
chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

I concur...too bad riders are obsessed with weight to the point they
avoid using their power meters at all costs in a race.

CH
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the best predictor of performance
is performance itself.

Andy Coggan

  #130  
Old March 18th 04, 01:37 PM
chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Longer crankarms

I concur...too bad riders are obsessed with weight to the point they
avoid using their power meters at all costs in a race.

CH
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the best predictor of performance
is performance itself.

Andy Coggan

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Longer rides not with husband? Claire Petersky General 20 July 10th 04 05:48 AM
Not Just a MTBer Any Longer andrew smith General 4 May 8th 04 12:56 AM
Harder, stronger, longer mojo deluxe Mountain Biking 23 April 23rd 04 04:02 AM
Finally bought a bike - not a Monocog - but I am no longer a depressed sack Lobo Tommy Mountain Biking 4 April 12th 04 02:08 AM
Longer Parcours=Lower UCI Rating B. Lafferty Racing 6 August 26th 03 05:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.