Monthly Testing Protocol

                                               Sports & Exercise Engineering

Monthly Test Protocol

 

 

Time

Description

%FTP

%FTHR

Warm-up

30 min

Easy @ 90 – 110rpm

55-75

70-83

3×1 min  (1 min reco)

Fast @ 100+rpm

<80

<90

5 min

Easy @ 90 – 110rpm

<60

<67

Session

5 min

MAX-EFFORT

MAX

MAX

15 min

Easy @ 90 – 110rpm

55-75

70-83

2 x 1min (5min reco)

MAX- EFFORT

MAX

MAX

10 min

Easy @ 90 – 110rpm

55-75

70-83

3 x 20 sec (3 min reco)

MAX-EFFORT

MAX

MAX

15

Easy @ 90 – 110rpm

55-75

70-83

20 min

TT TEST

MAX

MAX

Warm-dwn

15 min

Easy and Spin Light

55-75

70-83

 MileageIncreaseexample

 The monthly test should be carried out on the second session back after a recovery week on each and every block. It should be carried out in the same location and each test should mimic each and every other test as close as possible. The whole idea of this is to identify whether or not improvements have taken place within the previous block. If they haven’t you should get “Fatigue Profiled” to find out what’s wrong, dump your coach or more to the point get the finger out and start suffering whilst training.

Where MAX-EFFORT is indicated in the “Description” be sure your effort is gauged so that you complete the whole effort without failure before it’s duration has been completed i.e. don’t blow up 3 mins into the 5 min or 10 min into the 20 min TT Test.

Don’t forget to hit the interval marker button for each and every task if your using Power. The same can be done for Heart Rate on the like of the polar units. The HR Test is not great as wind conditions can seriously alter either mileage or pace as you referenced point to HR so it’s up to the individual what they use. Power will always be power and will be referenced to Heart Rate.

If you complete this test and want your session profiled send it onto us at sportsexerciseengineering@gmail.com  and we will return your profile ability which will enable you to target your weakness’.

Remember: “Mindless miles means missed moments……Mmmmm!”

 
Posted in Training | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Winter Training Session 19th & 20th November 2011

Saturday 19th November Session

Session:               Endurance with 8 second bursts

Duration:             150 – 180 minutes

 

 

Time

Description

%FTP

%FTHR

Warm-up

15min

Easy @ 90 – 110rpm

55-75

70-83

Session

120 – 150min

+ 10 x 8sec

Endurance/Tempo + hard bursts @ 110rpm+

70-85

85-90

150

N/A

Warm-dwn

15min

Easy and Spin Light

55-75

70-83

 The 10 x 8 second intervals should be done randomly through the Session at a max of 90% of your full load sprint. This type of exercise will help improve your neuromuscular capacity. Try and keep those watts/hr. consistent through the session, uphill, downhill around corners etc. etc. Be safe! 

Sunday 20th November Session

Session:               Endurance with Tempo

Duration:             255 minutes 

 

Time

Description

%FTP

%FTHR

Warm-up

30min

Easy @ 90 – 110rpm

55-75

70-83

Session

30min

Endurance

<75

<78

120min

+ 10sec interval

Tempo with

 Bursts every 5min

80-85

150

90-93

N/A

60min

Sweet spot

88-93

92-98

Warm-dwn

15min

Easy and Spin Light

55-75

70-83

 The 10sec interval should be in a 53×17 or 16 during the 120min wherever they arrive and when you’ve completed that get a big expresso in a coffee shop, load up and jump on for the last 60mins home(Don’t get cold hanging around talking crap). Clean out the legs with warm down.

%FTP means Percentage of Functional Threshold power FTHR means Percentage of Functional Threshold Heart Rate

Next week I will add another two sessions and your feedback is greatly appreciated.

Posted in Training | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Orthostatic HR Fatigue Profiling

One of the great unknowns in endurance training is how to monitor fatigue so that training load can be adjusted to achieve the desired results. How often have you wondered if you should be doing that quality session today despite being a bit flat? How often have you thought ‘Am I fatigued or just lacking motivation? In order to get optimal adaptations from your training, fatigue is something that needs to be taken into consideration when deciding whether to continue to apply training load or back it off. There are times when fatigue is expected and even required to get the required gains, but there are also times when excessive fatigue will limit the effect of your training session. Having the ability to know this adds a new dimension to training, allowing you to control your training load in order to achieve the desired outcome.

Resting heart rate (RHR) has long been used to give a guide to fatigue state. However, with so many external factors easily able to affect RHR, more effective and reliable methods have been developed. For endurance athletes, a morning orthostatic HR test can be used to monitor RHR, heart rate variability (HRV) and HR response to posture change. Over the last ten or more years many methods have been used to analyse orthostatic HR recordings, with mixed success. Only recently has a method of analysis been used effectively to track recovery and fatigue in elite athletes

What is Heart Rate Variability (HRV)?

Have you ever wondered what controls heart rate? We know that heart rate (HR) increases when we exercise, because the heart pumps faster to supply oxygenated blood to the active muscles. But underlying this is the autonomic nervous system (ANS), which plays a direct role in speeding up and slowing down HR. There are two branches to the ANS that influence HR; the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), responsible for speeding up heart rate, and the parasympathetic nervous system (PNS), responsible for slowing HR. Following long term training, lower resting and exercising HR’s are observed, and most often an increase in heart rate variability (HRV) measures. Heart rate variability is measured as the time between beats, or the RR interval. The RR interval comes from measuring the time points in milliseconds between beats indicated during normal cardiac rhythm (see below). However, during periods of excessive training the SNS can be over-active as the body responds poorly to recovery, resulting in an elevated resting HR.

Orthostasis/orthostatic test

Orthostasis means upright posture, and the change in posture causes a change in blood pressure. Standing upright quickly means the heart has to beat faster to maintain the output of blood required by the brain, otherwise we would faint. An orthostatic test is a reliable test of assessing HRV in athletes, as it combines the resting heart rate with the interaction of the SNS upon standing. Heart rate and HRV parameters have a normal circadian variation of 24 hours. This is one reason why measurements are recommended to be repeated at about the same time every day. To perform the orthostatic test, you will need to be as relaxed as possible, so going to the toilet first is a good idea! To control the influence of external factors, we recommend the measurements be repeated in the same place. As the previous meal, alcohol, caffeine and drugs also influence the results; a good way to control these factors is to take the measurements in the morning soon after awakening and before breakfast. With the HR receiver set to record RR intervals, collect data for a 3 minute lying down period. When this period finishes stand upright immediately and stay as still as possible for a further 2 minutes while continuing to record the RR intervals. Stop recording.

The lying period is believed to be dominated by the PNS with SNS withdrawal, but when we stand quickly, the SNS must snap into action to compensate for the change in blood pressure and redistribution of blood volume. What this means for us is that we can measure the input from the ANS during the overall period, and track the changes over a training cycle.

How information is analysed

The information from the orthostatic test can then downloaded into purpose built software for analysis. The software uses a fast Fourier transform and a power spectral density analysis to describe how the power (or variance) of a time series is distributed with frequency (cycles/second). The software then breaks the information down into the contribution from the SNS and PNS. This is determined by breaking the frequency of the cycles into low (SNS), and high (PNS) as per the graph below. By observing the ratio of low frequency (LF) to high frequency (HF) we gain an indication of the status of the ANS in relation to fatigue and freshness.

What does this tell us?

What this means for the athlete is that they can have ready information about their training status, with respect to how their body is responding. This information can be used to adjust the current days training load to suit the level of fatigue the athlete ordinarily would not know they are experiencing. The system is so sensitive that  it can reveal periods of anxiety and restlessness, which are driven by the SNS, which can impact on the athlete’s performance in training or competition. This is important because all too often athletes will train through periods of staleness (over reaching/overtraining) leading to poor performance or illness. With this system training can be adjusted to suit individual training needs. 

Methods of Analysis

The information from each day is then graphed to create an overall picture of ongoing training stress. The fatigue chart not only includes day-to-day fluctuations in fatigue, but more importantly a rolling average that can be used to gain an idea of overall fatigue. This rolling average minimises the impact of one single day of training, and focus’ on the cumulative effect. This is very useful in predicting racing performance as can be seen in the chart below. Obviously the athlete was in good form during the last few months of monitoring, as a general trend emerges with the ‘excellent’ results occurring as the fatigue ratio begins to rise after a recovery period. This indicates SNS activation, which is required for optimal performance, and highlights the importance of creating an individual profile to establish the ‘optimal’ recovery and activation (training) combination leading into an event. Poor results during this period have not been highlighted but generally occurred when the overall fatigue index is high as indicated by a high LF/HF ratio.

By Paul Montgomery and Ben Wisbey

There are still places available on our Coaching Project 2011 – 2012. Click on Categories to find out more.

Posted in Rider Coaching Project 2011-2012 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tour de France Historical Stats, Team info and more.

 Cadel Evans Tour de France winner 2011 

 

Greatest number of wins

  • 7: Lance Armstrong (Usa)
  • 5: Jacques Anquetil (Fra)
  • 5: Eddy Merckx (Bel)
  • 5: Bernard Hinault (Fra)
  • 5: Miguel Indurain (Esp)
  • 3: Philippe Thys (Bel)>
  • 3: Louison Bobet (Fra)>
  • 3: Greg LeMond (Usa)>
  • 3: Alberto Contador (Esp)>

Greatest number of days in yellow

  • 111: Eddy Merckx (Bel)
  • 83: Lance Armstrong (Usa)
  • 79: Bernard Hinault (Fra)

Greatest number of stage wins

  • 34: Eddy Merckx (Bel)
  • 28: Bernard Hinault (Fra)
  • 25: André Leducq (Fra)

Greatest number of wins on an individual tour

  • 8: Charles Pélissier (Fra, 1930))
  • 8: Eddy Merckx (Bel, 1970 et 1974)
  • 8: Freddy Maertens (Bel, 1976)

Greatest number of podiums

  • 8: Raymond Poulidor (Fra)
  • 8: Lance Armstrong (Usa)

Greatest number of participation

  • 16: Joop Zoetemelk (Ned)

Greatest number of green jerseys

  • 6: Erik Zabel (Ger)

Greatest number polka-dotted jerseys

  • 7: Richard Virenque

Greatest number of white jerseys

  • 3: Jan Ullrich (Ger)

Greatest number of wins per nation

  • 36: France
  • 18: Belgium
  • 13: Spain
  • 10: United States
  • 9: Italy
  • 4: Luxembourg
  • 2: Netherlands and Switzerland
  • 1: Germany, Denmark and Ireland

Greatest time difference between the yellow jersey winner and the runner up

  • Biggest: 2h 49’45’’ in 1903 between Maurice Garin (Fra) and Lucien Pothier (Fra)
  • Smallest: 8’’ in 1989 between Greg Lemond (Usa) and Laurent Fignon (Fra)
  • In 2010, there was a 39-second gap between Alberto Contador (Esp) and his heir apparent, Andy Schleck

Oldest and the youngest winners

  • 36 years Firmin Lambot (Bel) in 1922
  • 20 years Henri Cornet (Fra) in 1904

Spectator number and commitment

  • 12 to 15 million spectators
  • 70 % men and 30 % women
  • 80 % of spectators French and 20 % non-French
  • 130 km travelled on average to come and see the Tour
  • 6 hours of presence at the roadside on average

Medias figures for 2010

  • 121 TV channels, 72 radios, 400 newspapers and press agencies, 54 websites, that is to say 2,050 journalists representing 35 nationalities.
  • Broadcasting in 188 countries of which 60 transmit live coverage
  • Website: 10.5 million unique visitors

Click on a team to get individual Team Stats.

Teams at a Glance
TEAM TDFs Ridden Stages Won Days in Yellow Overall Wins Overall Podiums Pts comp. wins KOMs comp. wins
AG2R 23 1 0 0 0 0 0
Astana 28 4 0 0 1 0 0
BMC Racing 34 6 7 0 2 0 0
Cofidis 20 3 0 0 0 0 0
Europcar 18 2 10 0 0 0 1
Euskaltel 27 0 0 0 0 0 0
FDJ 22 3 0 0 0 0 0
Garmin-Cervélo 43 13 9 0 0 2 0
HTC – Highroad 20 15 0 0 0 0 0
Katusha 13 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lampre 17 6 0 0 0 1 0
Leopard 52 18 40 0 2 0 0
Liquigas 15 1 0 0 2 0 0
Movistar 19 1 0 0 0 0 0
Omega Pharma-Lotto 21 0 0 0 0 0 0
Quick-Step 36 11 6 0 0 1 0
Rabobank 26 3 0 0 0 0 0
RadioShack 41 8 0 0 3 0 0
Saur – Sojasun 8 0 0 0 0 0 0
Saxo Bank 31 8 17 3 3 0 0
Team Sky 31 2 0 0 0 0 0
Vacansoleil 3 0 1 0 0 0 0
Tour de France 2011

 Stats since 2000        

July 1-July 23 Futuroscope-
Paris
3,662 kms 21 stages 39.556 km/hr 180 Starters 128 Finishers
2001
July 7 – July 29
Dunkirk-Paris 3,446 20 40.02 189 144
2002
July 7-July 29
Luxembourg-
Paris
3,282 20 39.93 189 153
2003 July 25-July 27 Paris-Paris 3,427 20 40.940 189 147
2004
July 3-July 25
Liege,Belgium- Paris 3,391.1 20 40.553 188 147
2005
July 2 – July 24
Fromentine-
Paris
3,608 21 41.654 189 155
2006
July 21 – July 23
Strasbourg-Paris 3,657.1 20 40.784 176 139
2007
July 7 – July 29
London-Paris 3,547 20 38.98 189 141
2008
July 5 – July 27
Brest-Paris 3,559.5 21 40.50 180 145
2009
July 4 – July 26
 
Monaco-Paris 3,459.5 21 40.31 180 156
2010
July 3 –
July 25
Rotterdam-Paris 3,641.9 20
plus prologue
39.585 197 170

 

 

Posted in Tour de France | Leave a comment

Tour de France Stage 20 (Individual Tmie Trial + SRM Telemetry)

Grenoble to Grenoble – 42.5 km 

 

 
The moment of truth, can the Schlecks hold off Evan’s? The drag from Vizille to Saint-Martin D’Uriage has an elevation gain of 307 meters and is over a distance of 12.5 kilometers. That give a road  gradient of 2.45% . I don’t think that will do the Schleks and favours. With Evan’s good power output and timetrialing ability he should have no problem in putting 90 to 120 seconds into the Schleck brothers Below is the top ten for this years Dauphine TT, identical to this TT and note where Evans and the company around him.  
 
Grenoble TT in the Dauphine 2011
1  MARTIN, Tony (HTC-HIGHROAD)                                       55′ 27″
2  WIGGINS, Bradley (SKY)                                                     + 00′ 11″
3  BOASSON HAGEN, Edvald (SKY)                                     + 00′ 43″
4  ZABRISKIE, David (GARMIN-CERVELO)                         + 00′ 58″
5  BRAJKOVIC, Janez (RADIOSHACK)                                  + 01′ 17″
6  EVANS, Cadel (BMC RACING)                                       + 01′ 20″
7  THOMAS, Geraint (SKY)                                                      + 01′ 36″
8  RIBLON, Christophe (AG2R LA MONDIALE)                  + 01′ 37″
9  TAARAMAE, Rein (COFIDIS, LE CREDIT EN LIGNE)   + 01′ 56″
10 FARIA DA COSTA, Rui Alberto (MOVISTAR)                + 02′ 00″
 
 
Andy is not an admirer of the TT: 
 
“Beating Contador is not easy, but I tried everything,” he said. “I am happy, and I’ll come back next year to win,” 
That was his comment after last years TDF. I think he can now say that he has beaten Contador but he will have to replace Contadors name in the statement with Evans’s unfortunately.
 
Look below at the people around Schleck in last years Tour de France final TT and note the positions 33 to 48
 
33 Alexander Vinokourov (Kaz) Astana 0:05:32  
34 Dimitri Champion (Fra) AG2R La Mondiale 0:05:38  
35 Alberto Contador Velasco (Spa) Astana 0:05:43  
36 Dries Devenyns (Bel) Quick Step    
37 Carlos Barredo Llamazales (Spa) Quick Step 0:05:48  
38 Jurgen Van De Walle (Bel) Quick Step 0:05:50  
39 Amaël Moinard (Fra) Cofidis, Le Credit en Ligne 0:05:51  
40 Samuel Sánchez Gonzalez (Spa) Euskaltel – Euskadi    
41 Levi Leipheimer (USA) Team Radioshack 0:05:59  
42 Brent Bookwalter (USA) BMC Racing Team 0:06:01  
43 Arkaitz Duran Daroca (Spa) Footon-Servetto 0:06:13  
44 Andy Schleck (Lux) Team Saxo Bank 0:06:14  
45 Daniel Oss (Ita) Liquigas-Doimo 0:06:20  
46 Andriy Grivko (Ukr) Astana 0:06:26  
47 Imanol Erviti Ollo (Spa) Caisse d’Epargne 0:06:29  
48 Carlos Sastre (Spa) Cervelo Test Team 0:06:30 
 
This was last years top Ten in the same TT  at the TDF and if you look at who is in it and look at where Evans finished in the Dauphine TT it makes for a rather close finale. Note the time differences
 
1 Fabian Cancellara (Swi) Team Saxo Bank                           01:00:56
2 Tony Martin (Ger) Team HTC – Columbia                             0:00:17  
3 Bert Grabsch (Ger) Team HTC – Columbia                             0:01:48  
4 Ignatas Konovalovas (Ltu) Cervelo Test Team                      0:02:34  
5 David Zabriskie (USA) Garmin – Transitions                         0:03:00  
6 Koos Moerenhout (Ned) Rabobank                                             0:03:03  
7 Vasili Kiryienka (Blr) Caisse d’Epargne                                   0:03:10  
8 Maarten Tjallingii (Ned) Rabobank                                          0:03:21  
9 Bradley Wiggins (GBr) Sky Professional Cycling Team     0:03:33  
10 Geraint Thomas (GBr) Sky Professional Cycling Team    0:03:38
 
 
Evans lost 1′ 20″ to Tony Martin in the Dauphine and Schleck lost 6′ 00″ to Martin in last years Tour! The time differences relative to other rides like Zabriske, Wiggin and Thomas all generate the same conclusion.
Evans will  be chasing Frank Schleck on the road and Frank will be chasing his brother Andy who will be the last rider off at 16:18. First rider starts at 10:30.Bon Apetite!
 
 

You can view the telemetry for a number of riders live!

Chris Anker Sorensen’s SRM Data from Stage 19 

  • Weight- 64kg
  • Functional Threshold Power- 400w
  • Total Time = 3:27
  • TSS = 254
  • KJ = 3499
  • Average Power = 282 Watts. Avg Normalized Power* = 322 Watts
  • Avg HR = 148 bpm
  • Max HR = 171 bpm
  • Mean Maximal 1-minute power = 518 w
  • Mean Max 5-minute power = 442 w
  • Mean Maximal 20-minute power = 393 w
  • Avg Cadence =  82 rpm
  • Avg Speed =  19.5 mph

View Chris’s full srm file here: https://www.trainingpeaks.com/sw/L4Q6NNBEHN7VICFPO675VRLFAU

Posted in Tour de France | Leave a comment

Evan’s or Schleck

I can only think that Andy has his brother support tonight just in case of nightmares. I’ve had a look at some of the number from Grenoble in the Dauphine and last years TDF TT and compared then to comparisons like Tony Martin, Zabriske, Wiggns and Thomas who were all in the top ten in both. Evans was in the top ten in Grenoble and Andy was nearly 40th in last years tour in comparison to these guys. The number are saying that Andy could lose over 3’00” to Evans. Let’s see who can guess the closest to the actual time, list your time for both a we’ll see who’s the closest at 17;30

Posted in Tour de France | Leave a comment

Alp d’Heuz SRM Telemetry

All telemetry riders on Apl d’Heuz now,

350 watts + 500 – 600 on the bends.

http://data.srmlive.de/TDF/

You can view the telemetry for a number of riders live!

Posted in Tour de France | Leave a comment

Live SRM Telemetry

I’ve just been watch some live telemetry from Christian Knees of Team Sky. He’s 80kg and 1.94m. a big guy but he has been sitting at over 400watts for the last 20mins consistantly. Today is going to see some real watss left on the road no matter wether your a sprinter or a climber.

http://data.srmlive.de/TDF/

You can view the telemetry for a number of riders live!

Posted in Tour de France | Leave a comment

Tour de France Stage 19 & SRM Telemetry Live

Modane Valfréjus to Alpe-d’Huez – 109.5 km
 
 
 
 
  • Km 26.5 – Col du Télégraphe (1 566 m) – 11.9 km climb to 7.1 % – Category 1


 Km 48.5 – Col du Galibier (2 556m) – 16.7 km climb to 6.8 % – Category H

profile Col du Galibier

 Km 109.5– Alpe d’Huez (1 850 m) – 13.8 km climb to 7.9 % – Category H

profile Alpe dHuez

http://data.srmlive.de/TDF/

You can view the telemetry for a number of riders live!

Chris Anker Sorensen’s SRM Data for Stage 18

  • Weight- 64kg
  • Functional Threshold Power- 400w
  • Total Time = 6:21
  • TSS = 383
  • KJ= 5979
  • Average Power =  261 Watts. Avg Normalized Power* =291 watts
  • Avg HR = 146bpm
  • Max HR = 173 bpm
  • Mean Maximal 1-minute power = 528w
  • Mean Max 5-minute power = 373w
  • Mean Maximal 20-minute power = 348w
  • Avg Cadence = 85 rpm
  • Avg Speed = 19.5 mph

Click here:     https://www.trainingpeaks.com/sw/WMUEOKFDBETNULD2ZKIHCDHSQA                    to view Chris’s full SRM Telemetry from yesterday’s monster stage.

According to Allen Lim yesterday’s stage over the Galibier, Angel and the Col d’Izoard was the hardest stage in 3 year at the Tour de France (tdf). If we just take the basics out of  Chris’s Power File the Training Strees Score (TSS) alone is higher than Johan Van Summeron’s TSS for the  magnificent win he had at this year’s 2011 Paris Roubaix. Van Summeron’s TSS was 367 and he took nearly a week recovery after the race and in his next race DNF’d because he was still suffering fatigue over a week after Roubaix. To top all of this off the rider today have to complete stage 19 which consists of  the Col du Télégraphe (1 566 m),Col du Galibier (2 556m) this is from the other side today which is steeper and harder than yesterdays stage and then the mighty Alpe d’Huez (1 850 m).

Watching most of the riders yesterday very few were rehydrating and stocking up on calories mainly due to the fact that they were on their limits and when the body is running at full speed it’s very hard to get food chewed and into the stomach when the riders are close to hyperventilating. Most of the calories consumed yesterday would have been from the likes of gels and liquid calories which will upset some riders stomachs and we might see some weaker riders today because of it.

As was yesterdays stage tactical issues will play out on the earlier slopes but when the riders reach Alp d’Huez if will be every rider for himself. Energy consumption again along with food and drink is the key to bein the strongest in the final.

Climbing these monster ascents is measured in Velocita Ascensionale Mediaand (VAM) meaning Average Climbing Speed. It is measured in meters/hour VAM is measured in metres an hour. Calculating you VAM is done by getting the altitude difference ie :

VAM = (Start Altitude -Finish Altitude X 60minutes) / The time it took to climb

Top class pro’s need a VAM of 1650 and 1800m/h to be Top GC contenders .  Pantani, when climbing Alpe D’Huez in 37 minutes produced a VAM of 1744, one of the highest of all time on Alpe D’Huez. One of the fastest ever VAM’s recorded was by Santiago Perez when he went up Puerto de Navacerrada in the 2004 Vuelta at 2067 m/h. On his way up the 6.5km climb he left the polluted Roberto Heras in flames on the side of the road.

 

Posted in Tour de France | Leave a comment

Tour de France Stage 18 & Live SRM telemetry

 Pinerolo to Galibier Serre-Chevalier – 200.5 km

 

 

 
  • Km 200.5 – Col du Galibier (2 645 m) – 22.8 km climb to 4.9 % – Category H
 
 
 
  • Km 107.0 – Col Agnel (2 744 m) – 23.7 km climb to 6.5 % – Category H

 

profile Colle dellAgnello - Col Angel

 
 
  • Km 145.5 – Col d’Izoard (2 360 m) – 14.1 km climb to 7.3 % – Category H 
profile Col de lIzoard
 

//  

http://data.srmlive.de/TDF/

You can view the telemetry for a number of riders live!

Today’s and tomorrow’s stage will position the GC contenders into their final start number for the TT in Grenoble. The GC riders will be calculating where they need to be in comparison to each other as regard time differences. 

The weather could play a very important part in todays stage as snow might just force the ASO to shorten the stage. hopefully not!. The stage will see a select group from the first climb of the day and this group will thin out as the stage progresses with the main GC contenders fighting for every second on the Galibier, the last climb of the day. With reference to our nutrition and hydration during the first two weeks it is here now that a rider who was very attentive in those first weeks will reap the benefits. An extra 1 – 2% makes a massive amount of difference on these climbs. Minutes could be lost or gained all because the rider paid that little bit extra attention to their liquid and food consumption.

Climbing these monster ascents is measured in Velocita Ascensionale Mediaand (VAM) meaning Average Climbing Speed. It is measured in meters/hour VAM is measured in metres an hour. Calculating you VAM is done by getting the altitude difference ie :

VAM = (Start Altitude -Finish Altitude X 60minutes) / The time it took to climb

Top class pro’s need a VAM of 1650 and 1800m/h to be Top GC contenders .  Pantani, when climbing Alpe D’Huez in 37 minutes produced a VAM of 1744, one of the highest of all time on Alpe D’Huez. One of the fastest ever VAM’s recorded was by Santiago Perez when he went up Puerto de Navacerrada in the 2004 Vuelta at 2067 m/h. On his way up the 6.5km climb he left the polluted Roberto Heras in flames on the side of the road. 

 Power Required for Top Class Sprinting

Greipel’s sprint win power numbers were for 21 seconds he averaged 1356.5 watts (17 w/kg) with a max of 1,680 watts (21 w/kg) and a cadence of max 121 rpm. But in the Tour of Germany a few years ago he averaged just north of 1500w for 20 seconds. Is he slowing or not training correctly? Rider Fatigue Profiling (RFP) would detect this and a program would be designed to prevent it from happening. Greipel is down nearly 10% on power.

Posted in Tour de France | Leave a comment