diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 30226df..07b2ff7 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -36,6 +36,8 @@ cycling-training/ ├── references/ │ ├── durability.md # Fatigue resistance as a trainable quality + field test │ ├── mtb-xco-demands.md # MTB/XCO demand profile; power governs, HR caveat +│ ├── road-racing-demands.md # Mass-start road/crit: stochastic power, drafting, sprint +│ ├── tt-demands.md # Time trial: aerodynamics/CdA, critical power, pacing │ ├── strength-for-cyclists.md # Heavy strength; masters rationale; from-zero ramp │ ├── vo2max-intervals.md # Maximizing time ≥90% VO2max; work:rest; rep length │ ├── periodization.md # Distribution philosophy; base/build/peak; CTL ramp; taper diff --git a/SKILL.md b/SKILL.md index 1ef29f9..183fb78 100644 --- a/SKILL.md +++ b/SKILL.md @@ -38,6 +38,8 @@ calculators by design — only periodization logic, workout design, protocols, a |---|---| | **Fatigue resistance / durability** — training it, why fatigued-state power matters, the field test | `references/durability.md` | | **MTB / XCO** — race demands, why power (not HR) governs off-road, marathon vs lap XCO | `references/mtb-xco-demands.md` | +| **Road racing** — mass-start road/criterium demands, stochastic power, drafting, fatigued sprint | `references/road-racing-demands.md` | +| **Time trial** — sustained solo effort, aerodynamics/CdA, critical power, TT pacing | `references/tt-demands.md` | | **Strength training** — heavy lifting for cyclists, masters muscle loss, from-zero ramp, in-season | `references/strength-for-cyclists.md` | | **VO2max / high-intensity intervals** — rep length, work:rest, maximizing time ≥90% VO2max | `references/vo2max-intervals.md` | | **Season structure** — base/build/peak, mesocycles, CTL ramp, A-race taper & TSB targets, polarized vs pyramidal | `references/periodization.md` | diff --git a/references/citations.md b/references/citations.md index e83372a..1fb349d 100644 --- a/references/citations.md +++ b/references/citations.md @@ -80,6 +80,98 @@ Fransen J, Dascombe BJ. *Predictors of performance in a 4-h mountain-bike race.* --- +## Road-racing demands (mass-start / criterium) + +**✅ Vogt et al. 2007** — TdF mass-start mean power only ~3.1–3.3 W/kg (218–234 W) despite decisive +higher efforts; stochastic profile. Vogt S, Schumacher YO, Roecker K, Dickhuth H-H, Schoberer U, +Schmid A, Heinrich L. *Power Output during the Tour de France.* Int J Sports Med. 2007;28(9): +756–761. **PMID 17497569 · DOI 10.1055/s-2007-964982.** + +**✅ Ebert et al. 2006** — pro men's tour: low mean power with repeated surges above maximal aerobic +power. Ebert TR, Martin DT, Stephens B, Withers RT. *Power output during a professional men's +road-cycling tour.* Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2006;1(4):324–335. **PMID 19124890 · +DOI 10.1123/ijspp.1.4.324.** + +**✅ Ebert et al. 2005** — women's World Cup power-output profile (SRM). Ebert TR, Martin DT, +McDonald W, Victor J, Plummer J, Withers RT. *Power output during women's World Cup road cycle +racing.* Eur J Appl Physiol. 2005;95(5–6):529–536. **PMID 16151832 · DOI 10.1007/s00421-005-0039-y.** + +**✅ Sanders & van Erp 2021** — updated review: demands strongly shaped by stage/race type. Sanders +D, van Erp T. *The Physical Demands and Power Profile of Professional Men's Cycling Races: An Updated +Review.* Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2021;16(1):3–12. **PMID 33271501 · DOI 10.1123/ijspp.2020-0508.** + +**✅ van Erp & Sanders 2021** — 2,920 files / 20 pros: demands vary by race category and result. +van Erp T, Sanders D. *Demands of professional cycling races: Influence of race category and result.* +Eur J Sport Sci. 2021;21(5):666–677. **PMID 32584197 · DOI 10.1080/17461391.2020.1788651.** + +**✅ Blocken et al. 2018** — CFD + wind tunnel: peloton drag drops to ~5–10% of an isolated rider. +**No PMID — cite by DOI** (journal not MEDLINE-indexed). Blocken B, van Druenen T, Toparlar Y, +Malizia F, Mannion P, Andrianne T, Marchal T, Maas G-J, Diepens J. *Aerodynamic drag in cycling +pelotons: New insights by CFD simulation and wind tunnel testing.* J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn. +2018;179:319–337. **DOI 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.06.011.** + +**✅ Menaspà et al. 2015** — pro road sprint peak ~17.4 ± 1.7 W/kg, preceded by high-intensity +lead-in. Menaspà P, Quod M, Martin DT, Peiffer JJ, Abbiss CR. *Physical Demands of Sprinting in +Professional Road Cycling.* Int J Sports Med. 2015;36(13):1058–1062. **PMID 26252551 · +DOI 10.1055/s-0035-1554697.** + +**✅ Menaspà, Abbiss & Martin 2013** — world-class sprinter Grand Tour performance analysis. +Menaspà P, Abbiss CR, Martin DT. *Performance analysis of a world-class sprinter during cycling +grand tours.* Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2013;8(3):336–340. **PMID 23038704 · +DOI 10.1123/ijspp.8.3.336.** + +**✅ van Erp, Sanders & Lamberts 2021** — maintaining maximal power after high accumulated work is a +key success determinant (durability in road racing). van Erp T, Sanders D, Lamberts RP. *Maintaining +Power Output with Accumulating Levels of Work Done Is a Key Determinant for Success in Professional +Cycling.* Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2021;53(9):1903–1910. **PMID 33731651 · +DOI 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002656.** + +**✅ Etxebarria et al. 2019** — ~1 h prior stochastic cycling cut a subsequent 30 s sprint ~5–6% +(criterium/finish relevance). Etxebarria N, Ingham SA, Ferguson RA, Bentley DJ, Pyne DB. *Sprinting +After Having Sprinted: Prior High-Intensity Stochastic Cycling Impairs the Winning Strike for Gold.* +Front Physiol. 2019;10:100. **PMID 30837886 · DOI 10.3389/fphys.2019.00100.** + +--- + +## Time-trial demands + +**✅ Crouch et al. 2017** — review: aerodynamic drag dominates at racing speeds; the rider is ~80% of +system drag. Crouch TN, Burton D, LaBry ZA, Blair KB. *Riding against the wind: a review of +competition cycling aerodynamics.* Sports Eng. 2017;20(2):81–110. **DOI 10.1007/s12283-017-0234-1.** +> The popular "~90% of power to aero at 40 km/h" soundbite traces to **Kyle & Burke 1984** +> (*Mechanical Engineering*, a trade magazine — **not MEDLINE-indexed, unverifiable, do not cite as +> primary**). Use Crouch 2017 or Martin 1998 as the verifiable anchor and treat the exact % as +> approximate. + +**✅ Martin et al. 1998** — validated mathematical model of road cycling power (R²=0.97); aero +dominates on the flat. **No PMID — cite by DOI** (journal not PubMed-indexed). Martin JC, +Milliken DL, Cobb JE, McFadden KL, Coggan AR. *Validation of a Mathematical Model for Road Cycling +Power.* J Appl Biomech. 1998;14(3):276–291. **DOI 10.1123/jab.14.3.276.** + +**✅ García-López et al. 2008** — wind-tunnel position changes cut pro cyclists' drag ~14%; CdA is +the primary TT lever. García-López J, Rodríguez-Marroyo JA, Juneau C-E, Peleteiro J, Córdova +Martínez A, Villa JG. *Reference values and improvement of aerodynamic drag in professional +cyclists.* J Sports Sci. 2008;26(3):277–286. **PMID 17943597 · DOI 10.1080/02640410701501697.** + +**✅ Swain 1997** — vary power on hills/wind (higher into climbs/headwinds) to save TT time. Swain +DP. *A model for optimizing cycling performance by varying power on hills and in wind.* Med Sci +Sports Exerc. 1997;29(8):1104–1108. **PMID 9268969 · DOI 10.1097/00005768-199708000-00017.** + +**✅ Atkinson, Peacock & Passfield 2007** — updated model: variable pacing on terrain/wind saves +time; even power near-optimal on flat/windless. Atkinson G, Peacock O, Passfield L. *Variable versus +constant power strategies during cycling time-trials: prediction of time savings using an up-to-date +mathematical model.* J Sports Sci. 2007;25(9):1001–1009. **PMID 17497402 · DOI 10.1080/02640410600944709.** + +**✅ Smith, Dangelmaier & Hill 1999** — critical power predicts 17-km/40-km TT (r = −0.77 to −0.91), +more than VT or VO2max. Smith JC, Dangelmaier BS, Hill DW. *Critical power is related to cycling time +trial performance.* Int J Sports Med. 1999;20(6):374–378. **PMID 10496116 · DOI 10.1055/s-2007-971147.** + +*(TT durability draws on Maunder et al. 2021 — see the Durability section above. A dedicated, +verified HR-reliability-in-TT citation was sought but not confirmed; TT HR guidance defers to +`data-confounds.md` rather than resting on an unverified source.)* + +--- + ## Strength training (incl. masters) **✅ Llanos-Lagos et al. 2026 (epub 2025)** — meta-analysis, 17 studies / 262 cyclists: heavy diff --git a/references/data-confounds.md b/references/data-confounds.md index 0865045..54f393b 100644 --- a/references/data-confounds.md +++ b/references/data-confounds.md @@ -16,8 +16,10 @@ factors. Use HR only where it is genuinely informative: - **Aerobic decoupling on steady rides** (Pw:HR drift) — valid only on steady efforts. - **Recovery trends** (RHR, HRV) — as *trends*, screened for the confounds below. -Do **not** use HR to prescribe or judge intensity for **intermittent** efforts — see the MTB -dissociation below. +Do **not** use HR to prescribe or judge intensity for **intermittent** efforts — this covers MTB +(`mtb-xco-demands.md`) *and* mass-start road racing/criteriums (`road-racing-demands.md`), both of +which are surge-driven. See the dissociation below. Steady solo efforts (TT — `tt-demands.md`) are +the exception where HR is more usable, though still secondary to power. ## The confounds (screen every HR-based signal against these) @@ -38,7 +40,8 @@ In intermittent off-road riding, **HR, power, and VO2 dissociate**: VO2 stays el where power drops, and HR lags the short bursts that define the effort. In XCO, %VO2max did **not** correlate with %HRmax or %MAP (Hays et al. 2018, *Front Physiol* 9:1062; PMID 30158873; DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.01062). **For MTB, HR is unreliable for intensity — power governs.** See -`mtb-xco-demands.md`. +`mtb-xco-demands.md`. The same intermittent logic applies to mass-start road racing and criteriums +(`road-racing-demands.md`): HR lags the decisive surges, so prescribe and read those from power too. ## Do NOT hardcode naive rules diff --git a/references/durability.md b/references/durability.md index 8123810..a91a051 100644 --- a/references/durability.md +++ b/references/durability.md @@ -72,5 +72,7 @@ Use `../assets/field-test-durability.md`. In brief: Durability matters for both road/TT and MTB, but **keep absolute numbers discipline-specific.** The 1,500 kJ anchor is a sensible generic default, not a validated cross-discipline constant; a masters -marathon-MTB rider and an elite road pro do not share a durability dose. See `mtb-xco-demands.md` -for how fatigue resistance shows up specifically in off-road racing. +marathon-MTB rider and an elite road pro do not share a durability dose. How fatigue resistance +*shows up* differs by discipline: `mtb-xco-demands.md` (holding power through late off-road bursts), +`road-racing-demands.md` (still having a sprint or matching-move after 4 h — a documented success +determinant), and `tt-demands.md` (a long-TT threshold that doesn't decay to the line). diff --git a/references/periodization.md b/references/periodization.md index 988eb6b..7c90110 100644 --- a/references/periodization.md +++ b/references/periodization.md @@ -36,6 +36,12 @@ quantified finding. Work **backward from the A-race** (backward mapping). Each phase sets up the next. +**Anchor the plan to the A-race's demand profile** — the "race-specific top-end" of the build phase +means different things per discipline. Load the matching demand doc before shaping the build: +`references/tt-demands.md` (sustained solo power, pacing), `references/road-racing-demands.md` +(repeatable supra-threshold surges + a fatigued sprint), or `references/mtb-xco-demands.md` +(intermittent, supra-MAP bursts). Don't build a TT engine for a criterium, or vice versa. + | Phase | Primary job | Emphasis | |---|---|---| | **Base** | Raise sustainable CTL, aerobic base, **durability**, and strength capacity | High volume, mostly low intensity, small hard dose kept alive; build heavy strength | diff --git a/references/road-racing-demands.md b/references/road-racing-demands.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..83f4489 --- /dev/null +++ b/references/road-racing-demands.md @@ -0,0 +1,99 @@ +# Road-racing demands (mass-start: road races & criteriums) + +**Load this doc when:** planning for a mass-start road race or criterium — any bunch event decided +by positioning, surges, and a finish, rather than a steady solo effort. + +**Data/knowledge split:** MCP gives you the power streams, record power profile, and load. This doc +explains the *demand profile* — why road racing is stochastic, what wins it, and how to train for it. + +**Contrast with the other demand docs:** a road race is the near-opposite of `tt-demands.md`. It is +**intermittent, stochastic, tactical, and drafting-dominated** — structurally closer to XCO +(`mtb-xco-demands.md`) than to a TT. Don't pace a road race like a TT; the winning move is a short +supra-threshold effort off a variable base, not an even wattage. + +--- + +## The power profile: low mean, high variance, decisive surges + +Mass-start road racing has a **stochastic power-output profile** — long stretches at modest power +(sheltered in the bunch) punctuated by repeated short efforts *above* maximal aerobic power. + +- Across 148 Tour de France mass-start stages, mean power was only ~**3.1–3.3 W/kg** (218–234 W) + despite the racing being decided by far higher climb and attack efforts (Vogt et al. 2007, + *Int J Sports Med* 28(9):756–761; PMID 17497569; DOI 10.1055/s-2007-964982). +- Professional tour racing showed **relatively low mean power interspersed with multiple + high-intensity surges above maximal aerobic power**, varying by race type (Ebert et al. 2006, + *Int J Sports Physiol Perform* 1(4):324–335; PMID 19124890; DOI 10.1123/ijspp.1.4.324; women's + World Cup: Ebert et al. 2005, *Eur J Appl Physiol* 95(5–6):529–536; PMID 16151832; + DOI 10.1007/s00421-005-0039-y). +- Demands are **strongly shaped by stage/race type and by result** — flat stages load + short-duration maximal mean power, mountain stages load sustained efforts; higher race category + and better placings carry distinct intensity signatures (Sanders & van Erp 2021 review, + *Int J Sports Physiol Perform* 16(1):3–12; PMID 33271501; DOI 10.1123/ijspp.2020-0508; van Erp & + Sanders 2021, 2,920 files / 20 pros, *Eur J Sport Sci* 21(5):666–677; PMID 32584197; + DOI 10.1080/17461391.2020.1788651). + +**Training implication:** average power under-describes a road race. Train the **full record power +profile** — repeated 10 s–5 min supra-threshold efforts off fatigue — not just steady threshold. + +## Drafting changes everything + +Sitting in the bunch is not optional physics — it's the sport. In a tightly packed peloton, drag on +riders mid-to-rear drops to roughly **5–10% of an isolated rider's** (Blocken et al. 2018, +*J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn* 179:319–337; DOI 10.1016/j.jweia.2018.06.011; **no PMID — cite by DOI**). + +**Implications:** +- Watts spent out of the draft (attacking, chasing, riding the front, wind-exposed) cost multiples + of watts spent sheltered — **positioning is a physiological lever, not just tactics.** +- The record that matters is what you can produce *after* hours of surge-and-soft-pedal, not fresh. + +## The finish: sprinting after a hard race + +Most road races and criteriums are decided by a short, very high-power finish thrown *after* the +race has already emptied the tank. + +- Professional road sprints reached peak power of **~17.4 ± 1.7 W/kg**, and power/cadence/speed rose + significantly in the **final minutes before** the sprint — the sprint is launched off a + high-intensity lead-in, not from rest (Menaspà et al. 2015, *Int J Sports Med* 36(13):1058–1062; + PMID 26252551; DOI 10.1055/s-0035-1554697; sprinter performance analysis: Menaspà, Abbiss & + Martin 2013, *Int J Sports Physiol Perform* 8(3):336–340; PMID 23038704; DOI 10.1123/ijspp.8.3.336). +- **Prior stochastic high-intensity cycling impairs the finishing sprint:** ~1 h of variable + cycling cut subsequent 30 s sprint peak and mean power by **~5–6%** vs constant-power riding + (Etxebarria et al. 2019, *Front Physiol* 10:100; PMID 30837886; DOI 10.3389/fphys.2019.00100) — + directly relevant to criteriums and to any bunch finish. + +**Training implication:** train **sprints in a pre-fatigued state**, not just fresh — the race-day +sprint is a fatigued sprint. This pairs with the fatigued-state work in `durability.md`. + +## Durability decides who is there at the end + +Maintaining maximal power *after* high accumulated work is a **key determinant of success** in pro +racing: category-1 climbers and sprinters showed smaller declines in discipline-specific maximal +mean power after heavy accumulated work than lesser riders (van Erp, Sanders & Lamberts 2021, +*Med Sci Sports Exerc* 53(9):1903–1910; PMID 33731651; DOI 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002656). This is +the same durability quality profiled in `durability.md` (Muriel 2022; Spragg 2023) — in road racing +it manifests as *still having a sprint or a matching-move after 4 hours.* + +## Criterium vs road race + +Both are intermittent, but criteriums are **shorter, more relentlessly repetitive** (constant +corner-surge-brake cycles, little true recovery), while road races add **sustained climbs and longer +selective efforts**. The peer-reviewed criterium-specific literature is thin — the strongest indexed +evidence is the intermittent-effort → impaired-sprint mechanism above (Etxebarria 2019); much +criterium-vs-road detail lives in reviews (Sanders & van Erp 2021) rather than dedicated studies. +> ⚠️ **Gap flag:** treat criterium-specific numbers as under-documented; reason from the +> intermittent-effort principles here and verify against the athlete's own race files via MCP. + +## HR is unreliable here — power governs + +Like MTB (`mtb-xco-demands.md`), road racing is intermittent: **HR lags the surges** that decide the +race and drifts over hours. **Prescribe and read intensity from power**; use HR only for steady +sections and recovery trends, screened for the confounds in `data-confounds.md`. + +## Practical emphasis (reason here, pull data from MCP) + +- [ ] **Repeatability** of supra-threshold efforts — train repeated 30 s–5 min efforts off fatigue +- [ ] **Fatigued sprint** — practice the finish pre-tired, not just fresh (Etxebarria 2019) +- [ ] **Durability** — hold power after accumulated kJ (`durability.md`; van Erp 2021) +- [ ] **Positioning** treated as an energy-saving skill (Blocken 2018), not an afterthought +- [ ] Judge intensity by **power**, not HR (`data-confounds.md`) diff --git a/references/strength-for-cyclists.md b/references/strength-for-cyclists.md index ed8b869..742d02c 100644 --- a/references/strength-for-cyclists.md +++ b/references/strength-for-cyclists.md @@ -84,4 +84,6 @@ failure-limited) to protect joints and recovery. - **Build/in-season**: drop to **1×/week heavy maintenance** — see `../assets/plan-template-build.md`. - Strength supports the **anaerobic/explosive** side that predicts MTB/XCO performance - (`mtb-xco-demands.md`) and the efficiency that helps steady TT power. + (`mtb-xco-demands.md`) and powers the **road-racing sprint and repeated surges** + (`road-racing-demands.md`), plus the efficiency and sustained-power that help the **TT** + (`tt-demands.md`). diff --git a/references/tt-demands.md b/references/tt-demands.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f33fdc0 --- /dev/null +++ b/references/tt-demands.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +# Time-trial (TT) demands + +**Load this doc when:** planning for an individual time trial, prologue, or any sustained +solo effort against the clock (road TT, triathlon bike leg, "the race of truth"). + +**Data/knowledge split:** MCP gives you power, critical-power/FTP, and the ride streams. This doc +explains the *demand profile* — what actually limits a TT and how to pace and prepare for it. + +**Contrast with the other demand docs:** a TT is the near-opposite of `mtb-xco-demands.md` and +`road-racing-demands.md`. Those are intermittent, stochastic, and tactical; a TT is **steady, +solo, and self-paced** — a quasi-time-invariant effort where physiology, aerodynamics, and pacing +discipline decide the result, not positioning or surges. + +--- + +## What limits a TT: sustainable power vs aerodynamic drag + +TT performance is a tug-of-war between the **power you can sustain** and the **power the air steals +back**. Both matter, and the second is bigger than most riders assume. + +- **Aerodynamic drag is the dominant resistance at TT speeds.** At racing speeds the rider's body + is roughly **~80% of total system drag**, and overcoming air resistance consumes the large + majority of power output (Crouch et al. 2017, *Sports Eng* 20(2):81–110; + DOI 10.1007/s12283-017-0234-1). The classic validated power model that decomposes road cycling + power into aerodynamic, rolling, gravitational, bearing, and inertial terms — and shows aero + dominates on the flat — is Martin et al. 1998 (*J Appl Biomech* 14(3):276–291; + DOI 10.1123/jab.14.3.276; **no PMID — cite by DOI**). + - *(The often-quoted "~90% of power goes to aero at 40 km/h" figure traces to Kyle & Burke 1984, + a trade-magazine article not indexed in PubMed — treat the exact percentage as approximate; + the verifiable anchors are Crouch 2017 and Martin 1998. See `citations.md`.)* + +- **Reducing aerodynamic drag area (CdA) is the single largest performance lever.** Wind-tunnel- + guided position changes reduced professional cyclists' drag by **~14%**, with corresponding TT + time savings (García-López et al. 2008, *J Sports Sci* 26(3):277–286; PMID 17943597; + DOI 10.1080/02640410701501697). Position first, then equipment. A watt saved on the body is often + cheaper than a watt gained in the legs. + +## The physiological determinant: critical power / threshold + +A TT is run at or near the highest power sustainable for its duration, so the key predictor is +**critical power / functional threshold**, not peak or anaerobic power. + +- Critical power correlated with 17-km and 40-km TT performance at **r = −0.77 to −0.91** — more + strongly than ventilatory threshold or VO2max (Smith, Dangelmaier & Hill 1999, *Int J Sports Med* + 20(6):374–378; PMID 10496116; DOI 10.1055/s-2007-971147). *(Negative r: higher power = faster + time.)* +- **Training implication:** the engine that matters is threshold/critical power and the fraction of + VO2max you can hold for the event duration. Build it with threshold and VO2max work + (`vo2max-intervals.md`) on a high aerobic base (`periodization.md`). + +## Pacing: even power on the flat, variable on terrain/wind + +- On a **flat, windless** course, **even / constant power is near-optimal** — resist the urge to + surge (Atkinson, Peacock & Passfield 2007, *J Sports Sci* 25(9):1001–1009; PMID 17497402; + DOI 10.1080/02640410600944709). +- On **hilly or windy** courses, **vary power with the terrain**: push *above* target into climbs + and headwinds, ease *below* on descents and tailwinds. Because time is lost disproportionately + where you're slow, spending extra effort where it buys the most speed nets a faster overall time + than constant power (Swain 1997, *Med Sci Sports Exerc* 29(8):1104–1108; PMID 9268969; + DOI 10.1097/00005768-199708000-00017; refined by Atkinson et al. 2007 above). +- **Prescribe pacing from power**, not feel — the whole point of a TT is holding a target the + cardiovascular system can't self-regulate under adrenaline. + +## Durability matters for long TTs + +For 40 km and up (and for TTs late in a stage race), **fatigue resistance** decides whether your +threshold holds to the line. Durability is the resistance to deterioration of threshold/economy/ +power over prolonged exercise (Maunder et al. 2021, *Sports Med* 51(8):1619–1628; PMID 33886100; +DOI 10.1007/s40279-021-01459-0). Train it via `durability.md`; for a long TT, your *fatigued* +threshold is the one that counts. + +## HR in a TT: more usable than MTB, still secondary + +Unlike the intermittent efforts in `mtb-xco-demands.md`, a TT is steady-state, so HR tracks effort +more faithfully and **aerobic decoupling is a valid durability signal** on a TT-pace effort. But: +- HR still **lags the first minutes** (don't chase it off the start ramp) and **drifts upward** + from cardiac drift, heat, and dehydration over a long TT. +- **Pace by power; use HR as a secondary check**, and screen the usual confounds + (`data-confounds.md`) before trusting a decoupling or drift number. + +## Practical checklist (pull data from MCP, reason here) + +- [ ] **CdA** addressed — position dialed before equipment (García-López 2008) +- [ ] **Target power** set from current critical power / FTP for the event duration (Smith 1999) +- [ ] **Pacing plan** matched to course: even on flat, terrain-variable on hills/wind (Swain 1997; + Atkinson 2007) — expressed in power, not HR +- [ ] **Durability** trained if the TT is long or late in a stage race (`durability.md`) +- [ ] **Warm-up** appropriate to duration (short TT = fuller prime; long TT = lighter) diff --git a/references/vo2max-intervals.md b/references/vo2max-intervals.md index b95dd15..f637502 100644 --- a/references/vo2max-intervals.md +++ b/references/vo2max-intervals.md @@ -77,10 +77,13 @@ a solved problem. Rønnestad protocols (2016/2020/2021); good for riders who fade on long reps or want more total high-intensity work per session. Not proven superior once total work is matched. - **Long intervals (~4–5 min):** favored by the running time-at-VO2max data (Fleckenstein 2025) - and useful for **sustained** aerobic power and race-specific steady demands; a reasoned choice, - not a cycling-proven one. -- **Prescribe from power.** For MTB especially, HR lags and misleads (`mtb-xco-demands.md`, - `data-confounds.md`). + and useful for **sustained** aerobic power and steady race demands like the TT + (`tt-demands.md`); a reasoned choice, not a cycling-proven one. +- **Match reps to the event:** short/repeated efforts rehearse the surges of road racing + (`road-racing-demands.md`) and MTB (`mtb-xco-demands.md`); longer reps rehearse sustained TT power + (`tt-demands.md`). +- **Prescribe from power.** For intermittent racing (MTB, road/crit) HR lags and misleads + (`mtb-xco-demands.md`, `road-racing-demands.md`, `data-confounds.md`). - **Verify the session worked:** pull the interval stats/streams from MCP and check power held near target across reps. Fading power = too much intensity or too little recovery; adjust work:rest.