# power/weight ratio question



## tommyrhodes (Aug 19, 2009)

I was wondering if anyone had the estimate for what kind of ratio you need (watts/kilogram) to be competitive in your local races. This will be my first year racing and I'm trying to figure out where I stand theoretically. I know different areas of the country have different skill levels and such. Just looking for a basic guide. 

I've seen this question answered on here before but I cannot seem to find it using search.

Thanks


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

faster than you are now. significantly.


----------



## muscleendurance (Jan 11, 2009)

you need to beat all the rest to win..worry about that.


----------



## tommyrhodes (Aug 19, 2009)

yea neither of those really help lol guess i'll have to do some more searching. thanks for the added motivation though guys. You guys both answered my question with yogi berra quotes.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Depends on the race.

Long hilly races with climbing finishes will have a different need when it comes to power/weight ratios than flat races with sprint finishes...just as TT's will have a different requirement as well.

Then factor in what category you will be racing in who knows?

Also, learning how to wheel suck will allow you to get by with less power compared to others in races...an important skill to learn if you want to do well.

What it boils down to is...can you stay with the lead group the whole race? If so, you at least have a shot at winning. If not...you need a higher power/weight ratio.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

You will start in Cat 5. Don't worry about your power to weight ratio. If you're lighter, you'll probably climb a lot easier. If you weigh a lot, you might fall a little behind in the hills. Regardless of the hills, you'll probably be dropped, pounded, and/or lapped in your first race. Just train appropriately, don't assume it will be easy and you'll win, and make sure you LEARN.


----------



## wetpaint (Oct 12, 2008)




----------



## tommyrhodes (Aug 19, 2009)

you are THE man!!! exactly what I was looking for.


----------



## scottmoulton (May 12, 2007)

I really hate to be the wet blanket here, but that chart is way off of my experience. Based on it I should be able to compete in Cat 2 races and I'm a middle of the pack 35+ cat 5. As best I can tell racing is about being able to deliver the required power at specific times in a race and that is not something that fits into a chart.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

scottmoulton said:


> As best I can tell racing is about being able to deliver the required power at specific times in a race and that is not something that fits into a chart.



And there is the kicker  

You hit the nail on the head. It doesn't matter how much power you put out...if you can't do it when it matters your power output is irrelevant.

There is a whole lot more to racing than just putting out power. It's about racing smart, conserving energy, knowing when to go and not to go....and when it's time....having the power to stay in the game.


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

tommyrhodes said:


> you are THE man!!! exactly what I was looking for.


Take the chart with a grain of salt for racing categories. On many accounts, it's extrapolated from world class professionals to untrained riders, without exactly taking points in between.

EDIT: At one point, Andy completely removed the "categories" label on the left, as the chart's intention was never to tell you what category you should be in at certain power:weight ratios. The idea is to get a power profile, to better quantify your strengths and weaknesses.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

Sounds like a bunch of people who never turned a pedal in anger or even rode outdoors want a tour jersey based on their PT numbers..


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> Sounds like a bunch of people who never turned a pedal in anger or even rode outdoors want a tour jersey based on their PT numbers..


Are you referring to the OP or the author of the table?

In case of the latter, the author of the chart is/was a US national champion, in either 2008 or 2009.

In addition, the chart is NOT meant to be an indicator of one's racing category but if you look at the chart without reading the accompanying text on how the chart is meant to be used, then it would be easy to make that mistake. 

The principle purpose of the chart is to determine the shape of your power profile and assess your personal relative strengths and weaknesses. 

It is much better for people to link to the entire item on power profiling than to paste a picture of a chart out of context. For more information, see this:
http://home.trainingpeaks.com/articles/cycling/power-profiling.aspx

The only way to determine what race category you are competitive in, is to race.

As an example of how one can use it, here is an item I wrote recently:
http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2010/01/power-profiling-now-and-then.html


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

Not referring to the OP or anyone on this thread..Just a general observation that people are talking up their PT numbers as if they are racing accomplishments..


----------



## Fltplan (Feb 27, 2009)

deadlegs2 said:


> Sounds like a bunch of people who never turned a pedal in anger or even rode outdoors want a tour jersey based on their PT numbers..



Oh, he's back speaking pleasantries again. Must be the life of the party. Short man's complex, what is it? I think there should be a harrasment forum, where if you want bs replies to your post, these guys can go. 

OP, good question, glad it got someone to post up the chart. I was curious myself.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

do take it with a grain of salt - the chart puts mark cavendish at a cat 1 for his sprint (5 sec max).


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

stevesbike said:


> do take it with a grain of salt - the chart puts mark cavendish at a cat 1 for his sprint (5 sec max).


For what it's worth, the sprint numbers are based on track sprinters.


----------



## Dave IV (Jan 20, 2009)

Concentrating on numbers can lead to big disappointments. I do not know the OP's riding history and therefore can not make judgments about his riding experience and competency. If this will be your first year racing I would suggest joining a local racing club. If you already have that is good. Try to find a mentor in that club. Do the training rides. Ask questions and listen to the answers even if they are not the answers you were expecting. If you find that you like racing there will be many other things that will take precedence to power numbers (nutrition, training regimes, bike handling, strategy, etc.).

I would expect that power output should not even be a consideration during your first year or two of racing. Concentrate on the fundamentals. Lear how to race. Learn to develop a training regimen.

I use power output numbers only as a relative indicator of my fitness. If I make a change to my training program, how does it affect my power numbers. The absolute numbers mean little to me.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Wookiebiker said:


> And there is the kicker
> 
> You hit the nail on the head. It doesn't matter how much power you put out...if you can't do it when it matters your power output is irrelevant.
> 
> There is a whole lot more to racing than just putting out power. It's about racing smart, conserving energy, knowing when to go and not to go....and when it's time....having the power to stay in the game.


I think a friend of mine said it best with, "if you're looking at your computer during a race, you're probably off the back".


----------



## FBinNY (Jan 24, 2009)

Power to weight ratios tell only a very small part of the story. In fact this ratio only factors in acceleration and hill climbing. Most of the time the majority of work is done against the wind, and here power to drag ratios become more important. 

Given that we aren't machines, we also have to consider peak power for sprinting, sustainable power for general riding, and the recovery time after peak and near peak efforts.

Lastly, don't forget that skill in riding smarter is another major factor. Knowing your limits, judging terrain, proper gear selection, finding the sweet spot in the draft, and knowing your limits and timing your efforts to maximize speed without exhausting yourself before the finish line are probably as important as power.

It's why often older, more experienced riders can compete effectively with younger riders that at least on paper should be able to beat them.


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

tommyrhodes said:


> I was wondering if anyone had the estimate for what kind of ratio you need (watts/kilogram) to be competitive in your local races. This will be my first year racing and I'm trying to figure out where I stand theoretically. I know different areas of the country have different skill levels and such. Just looking for a basic guide.
> 
> I've seen this question answered on here before but I cannot seem to find it using search.
> 
> Thanks


It is a given (to rational people) that what you are asking is "all other factors being equal--I was wondering if anyone had the estimate for what kind of ratio you need (watts/kilogram) to be competitive in your local races". And that is a good question.

Since you'll often be dealing with a lot of ARPs and DARPs on these forums, you must preface your question with the obvious "all other things being equal" or you'll end up with the kind of drivel you've received here..


----------



## FBinNY (Jan 24, 2009)

*Good question, yes. Right question, maybe.*

Yes, I think most of those who posted understood the implied "all other things being equal".

It may a good question, but also may be the wrong question, which is what I and some were trying to explain. In any case, a power to weight chart was posted some time back, and those posting later were offering comments on interpreting the data provided.


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

FBinNY said:


> Yes, I think most of those who posted understood the implied "all other things being equal".
> 
> It may a good question, but also may be the wrong question, which is what I and some were trying to explain. In any case, a power to weight chart was posted some time back, and those posting later were offering comments on interpreting the data provided.


My point is that there are perhaps 50 good questions one needs to find answers for in order to be competitive in nearly all types of racing. Some of those are subjective and some not. It is important to find answers to all of those questions, not just the most important one. A good place to start is with questions for which the answers are quantifiable. It seems to me that the op was attempting to do just that.


----------



## FBinNY (Jan 24, 2009)

SwiftSolo said:


> My point is that there are perhaps 50 good questions one needs to find answers for in order to be competitive in nearly all types of racing. Some of those are subjective and some not. It is important to find answers to all of those questions, not just the most important one. A good place to start is with questions for which the answers are quantifiable. It seems to me that the op was attempting to do just that.


You're right, and I agree that solid data should trump subjective opinion, and so the OP got his answer to the specific question early on with a link to a chart showing the ratios bracketed by estimated performance classes.

*But data is only useful if it's the right data*. And while power to weight ratios are a rough index of theoretical performance, they're far from meaningful when applied in specific cases. 

The power to weight formula will understate the capability of larger riders and overstate that of smaller riders. So while it's a guideline, it's just that and no more. It's about as useful as BMI is as an accurate predictor of overall health and fitness.


----------



## tommyrhodes (Aug 19, 2009)

Man, look what i've started. I just wanted an idea of what kinda ratios people are looking at other than myself. I'm not basing my life goals on the chart, just using it as a PIECE of the solution to training. I'm not going to ignore tactics and just work on power. I'm not gonna strap a friggin umbrella to my back and ignore drag. I've read a ton of stuff about how power to weight ratios are ONE OF the BETTER ways to compare apples to apples. Is it the only way? NO. But it is undoubtedly one of the ways.Thanks to everyone who answered my question, and thanks to everyone else for giving me and my buddies something to chuckle about.


----------



## rchung (Apr 19, 2009)

tommyrhodes said:


> I was wondering if anyone had the estimate for what kind of ratio you need (watts/kilogram) to be competitive in your local races.


Depends on how competitive your local races are. However,


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

tommyrhodes said:


> Man, look what i've started. I just wanted an idea of what kinda ratios people are looking at other than myself. I'm not basing my life goals on the chart, just using it as a PIECE of the solution to training. I'm not going to ignore tactics and just work on power. I'm not gonna strap a friggin umbrella to my back and ignore drag. I've read a ton of stuff about how power to weight ratios are ONE OF the BETTER ways to compare apples to apples. Is it the only way? NO. But it is undoubtedly one of the ways.Thanks to everyone who answered my question, and thanks to everyone else for giving me and my buddies something to chuckle about.


actually, for your first year of racing your success will depend a lot on your ability to avoid crashes (and heal quickly when you can't); having power to stay near the front is a big plus in the 5's and 4's where the pack goes at full speed all race, there's no tactics, and there's a crash on the first and last lap.


----------



## aussiebullet (Sep 26, 2005)

deadlegs2 said:


> April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.


If you say so LOL!!!


----------



## Fltplan (Feb 27, 2009)

deadlegs2 said:


> April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.



Do tell!


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

Fltplan said:


> Do tell!


You tell fanboi. can you get ready virtually? or does that just count these days.. big talk, PT data dumps,black socks and a LA replica= palmares???


----------



## Creakyknees (Sep 21, 2003)

I stand by my original answer.


----------



## tommyrhodes (Aug 19, 2009)

You people are insane. Believe me, I'm riding plenty. I was simply asking a question. I won't have anywhere near 3000 miles in by april first though lol Because I have a life. At this rate I should break 1000 though, mostly cus the life I have sucks lol


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

Seriously guys, the fights over power meters have been rehashed time and time again. I dont understand why people cant reach a happy medium of:

*A powermeter can help make you a better rider physically, but that will not make you a better racer necessarily. * (or something like that...)

A rider chasing better 5, 10, 20, 60 minute powers is likely to come to the season better prepared physically than someone who "has 3000 miles in their legs", but if they are unable to understand how to race or apply that power when it matters they will not do well. 

I swear, an explanation like that should come standard in every power meter box....


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

tommyrhodes said:


> You people are insane. Believe me, I'm riding plenty. I was simply asking a question. I won't have anywhere near 3000 miles in by april first though lol Because I have a life. At this rate I should break 1000 though, mostly cus the life I have sucks lol


Just get out and race. You'll find out soon enough.


----------



## tyro (May 15, 2005)

chase196126 said:


> Seriously guys, the fights over power meters have been rehashed time and time again. I dont understand why people cant reach a happy medium of:
> 
> *A powermeter can help make you a better rider physically, but that will not make you a better racer necessarily. * (or something like that...)
> 
> ...


Ditto. 

I don't even own a PM, but this is the way I understand it too. It's just a tool that can help if used correctly.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

chase196126 said:


> Seriously guys, the fights over power meters have been rehashed time and time again. I dont understand why people cant reach a happy medium of:
> 
> *A powermeter can help make you a better rider physically, but that will not make you a better racer necessarily. * (or something like that...)
> 
> ...


quoting myself S-L-O-W-L-Y for reading comprehension
""April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.""

10 20 60 is just a little different. Might make a good office park crit rider or TT rider, but road kill in a RR


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

1. people who think a powermeter isn't helpful don't understand them, particularly software like WKO+ 

2. those chasing 5 min power #s - like getting ready for the pursuit - put in some of the biggest miles of anyone.

3. you'd better have a lot more than 3000 miles in your legs by Apr 1 if you want to be competitive in CA.


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

deadlegs2 said:


> quoting myself S-L-O-W-L-Y for reading comprehension
> ""April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.""
> 
> 10 20 60 is just a little different. Might make a good office park crit rider or TT rider, but road kill in a RR


Hmmm...care to explain? I spend most of my winter working on my 5-60 min PT numbers, have nowhere near 3000 miles by April 1st and can't ride a crit or TT worth a crap. I do pretty well in the RR's though, am I the exception?

wayne


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

stevesbike said:


> 1. people who think a powermeter isn't helpful don't understand them, particularly software like WKO+
> 
> 2. those chasing 5 min power #s - like getting ready for the pursuit - put in some of the biggest miles of anyone.
> 
> 3. you'd better have a lot more than 3000 miles in your legs by Apr 1 if you want to be competitive in CA.


The issue is people thinking powermeters replace miles.. 15min warm up 5 min test(indoors no less) ..go sit at the computer, make charts..put on black socks, ready to race.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

stevesbike said:


> 3. you'd better have a lot more than 3000 miles in your legs by Apr 1 if you want to be competitive in CA.


Ummmm, the OP isn't crom CA and is Cat 5. I doubt any of his Cat 5 competition in RI will have that kind of mileage by then.


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

deadlegs2 said:


> The issue is people thinking powermeters replace miles.. 15min warm up 5 min test(indoors no less) ..go sit at the computer, make charts..put on black socks, ready to race.



Well, I have to disagree. I would say too many people think miles replace training. IME guys get dropped because they can't put out the power to stay with the group...not because they can't do (or haven't done enough) a 5 hour ride(s). 

There's no shortage of work showing the correlation between v02max work (5 min pwr) and 40k tt, and of course 5min efforts and a 40k TT is not the same thing as a 60 min effort and a 200k RR, but if I were a betting man I'd put my money on the guy with better 5-60 min power than the guy with 3000 miles in a RR on April 1st.

That being said...back to the OP. Power/weight is important, but I regularly finish in front of guys with better power/weight ratios as well as often getting beat by guys with lower power/weight ratios. I could jump into a cat 5 race, ride like a moron and get dropped, so don't put too thought into the idea that you can finish in the top ten if you put out 5 watts/kg....

wayne


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> The issue is people thinking powermeters replace miles.. 15min warm up 5 min test(indoors no less) ..go sit at the computer, make charts..put on black socks, ready to race.


I certainly agree that having a powermeter does not replace actual training itself. If a rider is doing what you are describing they will not improve. If they are using the powermeter this way they are completely missing the point of having one. A rider who doesn’t understand (or have a coach who understands) how to use the data to train better has basically purchased an expensive speedometer that reads random numbers. 

When used properly a powermeter can easily cut down on the amount of time to reach a good amount of fitness. I spent most of last winter on the trainer doing 12-14 hours a week with focused power training and I came into the season much much fitter than guys who just went and rode their bikes. Riding long hours with no focus is doing nothing more than adapting your butt to sitting on a saddle for a long time.


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

No one was ever arguing that a powermeter makes you a better racer. We are arguing that it's better than HRM, or other forms of measurement.

Distance on a bike means jackshit. I just put in a 5hr ride and only went 70mi. Was climbing 7500ft worthless?


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

IKnowYouRider said:


> Well, I have to disagree. I would say too many people think miles replace training. IME guys get dropped because they can't put out the power to stay with the group...not because they can't do (or haven't done enough) a 5 hour ride(s).
> 
> There's no shortage of work showing the correlation between v02max work (5 min pwr) and 40k tt, and of course 5min efforts and a 40k TT is not the same thing as a 60 min effort and a 200k RR, but if I were a betting man I'd put my money on the guy with better 5-60 min power than the guy with 3000 miles in a RR on April 1st.
> 
> ...


The chart posted in this thread was 5 min...If you were a betting man you'd be a cheater.


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

I don't know if you're trying to be an ass but the chart was actually for multiple durations up to 1 hr (ftp). I'd also suggest that theres a greater correlation between 5 min pwr, ftp and race performance than miles...


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

IKnowYouRider said:


> I don't know if you're trying to be an ass but the chart was actually for multiple durations up to 1 hr (ftp). I'd also suggest that theres a greater correlation between 5 min pwr, ftp and race performance than miles...


Just trying to be an ass


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

deadlegs2 said:


> Just trying to be an ass


So what's your point...FT = 1 hr


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

IKnowYouRider said:


> So what's your point...FT = 1 hr



nuh uh


----------



## duc042 (Jan 19, 2009)

My personal opinion, i wouldn't worry about power to weight just yet. Are you in a training group ride at least once or twice a week? (sort of race simulation). That would be very helpful for your first race. It will help you most of all to get used to the surges, stratigies, drafting, pulling and when to conserve energy. (there's a game to play). I personally trained for a year to get in shape dropped 50lbs. and did my first race but never got into training group rides before that. I did my first race and led for 6 laps and blew up. I didnt know any stratigies. I feel that when training in group rides you can see the different talent and set a goal and be able see if your personal training progam is working, plus you can pick guys that are faster than you and try to set them as markers for the next ride. I ride with guys that are well over 200lbs. and they kick butt. Most importantly have fun with it, you don't get paid to do this. (like the cyclists training bible says,"Train on your weaknesses not your strengths").


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

deadlegs2 said:


> quoting myself S-L-O-W-L-Y for reading comprehension
> ""April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.""
> 
> 10 20 60 is just a little different. Might make a good office park crit rider or TT rider, but road kill in a RR


BS

I successfully prepared for a road season doing most of my training on the track one year. The idea that the only way you can get fast is to ride tons of a miles is a myth its ONE way not the only way.

Have enough endurance to get through a race is important but the real test is have inthe ability to go when the surges come and recover after them. You can train those systems with miles or with shorter intervals both ways work.


----------



## Fltplan (Feb 27, 2009)

deadlegs2 said:


> quoting myself S-L-O-W-L-Y for reading comprehension
> ""April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.""
> 
> 10 20 60 is just a little different. Might make a good office park crit rider or TT rider, but road kill in a RR



Got it in writing from the man himself, I'll be competitive come April 1st based on miles alone. Are you sure, I live in CA. Couldn't you have just told me I'd be competitive in that other thread? Could've saved a lot of heartache you know.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

32and3cross said:


> BS
> 
> I successfully prepared for a road season doing most of my training on the track one year. The idea that the only way you can get fast is to ride tons of a miles is a myth its ONE way not the only way.
> 
> Have enough endurance to get through a race is important but the real test is have inthe ability to go when the surges come and recover after them. You can train those systems with miles or with shorter intervals both ways work.


BS you too...

PTing without base miles is the subject. 200 mile a month beginners with PTs shooting for cat 3 numbers before their first cat5 race.. 50 lbs overweight. never used front brake. proud of recent pedal uncliping skills...but GFD read the prophet Chris Carmicheal's book.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

This thread is entertaining.. quick pro

""It would be damn hard for the OP to get a 400 watt FTP without a little EPO help but its possible he could get to 350-360. Combine that with a 30lb drop in weight and he would be damn quick pro.... Keep the weight and he would be a mid pack CAT 3""

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=164391


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

deadlegs2 said:


> nuh uh


http://home.trainingpeaks.com/articles/cycling/power-profiling.aspx


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

deadlegs2 said:


> The issue is people thinking powermeters replace miles.. 15min warm up 5 min test(indoors no less) ..go sit at the computer, make charts..put on black socks, ready to race.


I read these forums pretty often and I don't think I've ever seen a claim that could reasonably be summarized like that.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

IKnowYouRider said:


> http://home.trainingpeaks.com/articles/cycling/power-profiling.aspx



FT…………………….FUNCTIONAL THRESHOLD
The average wattage that you can sustain over a 20 minute test

FTP…………………..FUNCTIONAL THRESHOLD POWER
It's generally agreed that your Functional Threshold Power is the maximal power output you can sustain for the duration of one hour. Many riders attempt to define their FTP using a shorter duration (possibly in some cases to avoid having to grind away for one hour on a trainer)


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

You'll be AWESOME DOOD


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

deadlegs2 said:


> FT…………………….FUNCTIONAL THRESHOLD
> The average wattage that you can sustain over a 20 minute test
> 
> FTP…………………..FUNCTIONAL THRESHOLD POWER
> It's generally agreed that your Functional Threshold Power is the maximal power output you can sustain for the duration of one hour. Many riders attempt to define their FTP using a shorter duration (possibly in some cases to avoid having to grind away for one hour on a trainer)



Either you're ignorant or your a troll, but i'll humor you one last time. FT is functional threshold. It can be any number of things measured as it relates to a 60 minute effort Power (cycling), Pace (running), heart rate...whatever. 

FT = FUNCTIONAL THRESHOLD (60 minute power, hr, pace)
FTP = FUNCTION THRESHOLD POWER (60 minute power).


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

IKnowYouRider said:


> Either you're ignorant or your a troll, but i'll humor you one last time. FT is functional threshold. It can be any number of things measured as it relates to a 60 minute effort Power (cycling), Pace (running), heart rate...whatever.
> 
> FT = FUNCTIONAL THRESHOLD (60 minute power, hr, pace)
> FTP = FUNCTION THRESHOLD POWER (60 minute power).


""""April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.""
""

what part of "chasing 5 (FIVE) min PT numbers" don't you understand? These beginners are not pruning 5 min or 30 sec from hour tests.


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

deadlegs2 said:


> """"April 1st ,,,those who are competitive will have 3000+ miles in their legs this year...Those chasing 5min PT numbers, not so much.""
> ""
> 
> what part of "chasing 5 (FIVE) min PT numbers" don't you understand? These beginners are not pruning 5 min or 30 sec from hour tests.


Yes, change the subject...but you are the one who indicated 5 min power not the OP...what don't you understand?...The question dealt with pwr/weight and the Coggan chart was introduced into the discussion. Your ignorance of the chart and terminology brought the 5 minute duration into the discussion. I'd assumed your were using chasing five minute power as an example but I obviously overestimated you.

Not to mention the volume of data, correlating v02 max work with FTP. You've already demonstrated you're clueless so give it a rest...


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

IKnowYouRider said:


> Yes, change the subject...but you are the one who indicated 5 min power not the OP...what don't you understand?...The question dealt with pwr/weight and the Coggan chart was introduced into the discussion. Your ignorance of the chart and terminology brought the 5 minute duration into the discussion. I'd assumed your were using chasing five minute power as an example but I obviously overestimated you.
> 
> Not to mention the volume of data, correlating v02 max work with FTP. You've already demonstrated you're clueless so give it a rest...


You're the one that added parameters to fit your argument. I said 5 min and meant it. could be 30 sec 10 min or 20 min for all I care.. Powermeter charting sessions alone are not going to replace mileage nor are they going to exempt anyone from paying their dues in lower categories.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> You're the one that added parameters to fit your argument. I said 5 min and meant it. could be 30 sec 10 min or 20 min for all I care.. Powermeter charting sessions alone are not going to replace mileage nor are they going to exempt anyone from paying their dues in lower categories.



Where did anyone say otherwise? 

No, having good peak power will not necessarily make you a good racer, but it can go a long way. For the most part any rider can be taught how to race if they have good physical ability. 

Unfortunately you cannot be given a bigger engine than what you were born with. A powermeter will help you get the most out of the engine you have. Nothing more nothing less. 

How about this, what do you consider good winter training? Just riding? Structure? You seem to have the answers on how to be fast, how about sharing


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

deadlegs2 said:


> You're the one that added parameters to fit your argument. I said 5 min and meant it. could be 30 sec 10 min or 20 min for all I care.. Powermeter charting sessions alone are not going to replace mileage nor are they going to exempt anyone from paying their dues in lower categories.


Last one I promise  Actually you're the one who stipulated 5 min, I was referring to the durations on the chart. Now you're changing your tune to it could be any duration and you're obfuscating the point again with some nonsense about paying dues in lower categories. 

To the OP...work on improving your power numbers, learn how to race and you'll do fine.


----------



## tommyrhodes (Aug 19, 2009)

Just to clear some things up. I started tracking my mileage last year in late july, early august and put in over 1000 miles by november. Not an incredible number, but it should show that I'm not sitting around a computer. I don't really understand the carmichael comment earlier, but I'm in the process of doing his 7 week program and that program calls for 10 hours a week of training. Add to that the spin classes I take and strength training I do. I'm clearly not sitting around a computer. 

To make things more interesting I DO NOT EVEN OWN A POWERMETER!!! Nor am I certain that I ever will. But the spin bikes tell me my wattage and my gym as "intereactive" bikes that give me wattage. I was CURIOUS as to how my weight (a little high at 180 lbs) balanced out with my avg watts. I have no clue what my FTP would be, I can only guesstimate. 

As far as group riding, I ride every sunday (with half-way cooperative weather recently) with a group. I enjoy training, I like riding a bike. Obviously we all like talking about bikes cus we sure do a ton of it. I got the chart I was looking for, thank you to whoever posted that. It has been saved and printed for future reference.

I don't understand why some people are so reluctant to accept what a huge role power numbers play in bike racing. I don't need to be a racing veteran to know that. Its just common sense that power is a big part of training. You cannot ignore learning proper technique, getting comfortable in a pack, proper dieting and aerobic condition. But lets face it. Without power your gonna get dropped. All of these things need be present in a bike racer. 

So lets all kiss and make up. We can start working on those 3000 miles!!!!


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

tommyrhodes said:


> Just to clear some things up. I started tracking my mileage last year in late july, early august and put in over 1000 miles by november. Not an incredible number, but it should show that I'm not sitting around a computer. I don't really understand the carmichael comment earlier, but I'm in the process of doing his 7 week program and that program calls for 10 hours a week of training. Add to that the spin classes I take and strength training I do. I'm clearly not sitting around a computer.
> 
> To make things more interesting I DO NOT EVEN OWN A POWERMETER!!! Nor am I certain that I ever will. But the spin bikes tell me my wattage and my gym as "intereactive" bikes that give me wattage. I was CURIOUS as to how my weight (a little high at 180 lbs) balanced out with my avg watts. I have no clue what my FTP would be, I can only guesstimate.
> 
> ...



""I don't understand why some people are so reluctant to accept what a huge role power numbers play in bike racing."" You do know that powermeters haven't been around very long? You can do meaningful structured training without even a watch..That guy grinding out 50 or 60 miles a day, complete with intervals, sprints and hill repeats is not going to be at any disadvantage to the PT owner.. In fact he will be resting instead of making charts after he is done.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I'm assuming you're basing your dismissive opinion on your intimate knowledge of TSS, CTL, ATL and the other quantitative metrics you get with a powertap. Personally, I've been racing since 1980 just about every season (my first heart monitor was wired), have been using power for 3 years, and still look forward to learning something new about training methodology because it's a lot more than just riding hard.


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> ""I don't understand why some people are so reluctant to accept what a huge role power numbers play in bike racing."" You do know that powermeters haven't been around very long? You can do meaningful structured training without even a watch..That guy grinding out 50 or 60 miles a day, complete with intervals, sprints and hill repeats is not going to be at any disadvantage to the PT owner.. In fact he will be resting instead of making charts after he is done.


If he is competing against someone who trains properly with a PM, yes he will be at a disadvantage. 

Current performance targeted nutrition has not been around a super long time, are you suggesting racers are not benefiting from the use of new methods? Should we go back to the days of eating a steak before a major race? (see "A Sunday in Hell)

What level of racing are you at that you can speak down on powermeter use?


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

deadlegs2 said:


> ""I don't understand why some people are so reluctant to accept what a huge role power numbers play in bike racing."" You do know that powermeters haven't been around very long? You can do meaningful structured training without even a watch..That guy grinding out 50 or 60 miles a day, complete with intervals, sprints and hill repeats is not going to be at any disadvantage to the PT owner.. In fact he will be resting instead of making charts after he is done.


Actually, powermeters were available since the 1970s/1980s for lab testing. It was not very mobile, though. SRM, the first portable powermeter, was created in the late 1980s and was used on the road since ~1989/1990. Two decades.

Of course you can do meaningful, structured training without a powermeter. Much harder without even a watch, but I suppose still feasible.

However, you are completely wrong by saying someone doing 50-60mi/day with intervals, sprints, and hill repeats is not going to be at any disadvantage to someone with a PT. All things being equal, you will be able to quantify, better pace, better predict, better adjust, and better analyze training demands with a powermeter.

Is it enough to turn the donkey into a racehorse? Of course not. But, ceteris paribus, the person not using the powermeter is at a disadvantage.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

chase196126 said:


> If he is competing against someone who trains properly with a PM, yes he will be at a disadvantage.
> 
> Current performance targeted nutrition has not been around a super long time, are you suggesting racers are not benefiting from the use of new methods? Should we go back to the days of eating a steak before a major race? (see "A Sunday in Hell)
> 
> What level of racing are you at that you can speak down on powermeter use?


I am speaking down to powermeter use for beginners who have little base miles..Also speaking down to powermeter use for cat 5s who tell anyone that will listen that they are really cat1/2 according to their power numbers. Why do you take this personally?? I wonder.

Should we go back to steak NO...Just get some EPO


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> I am speaking down to powermeter use for beginners who have little base miles..Also speaking down to powermeter use for cat 5s who tell anyone that will listen that they are really cat1/2 according to their power numbers. Why do you take this personally?? I wonder.
> 
> Should we go back to steak NO...Just get some EPO


For the most part I agree. Riders who are just beginning should ride, get pack experience, and really decide if they like the sport before investing in a powermeter. Buying a PM is probably a better idea for someone in the Cat 3 range and up, but will help someone at any level, regardless of category. 

Maybe if you had said the above right off the bat people wouldn’t be jumping on you :thumbsup:. (BTW I don’t take your comments personally, considering I get paid to ride my bike.)


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

iliveonnitro said:


> Actually, powermeters were available since the 1970s/1980s for lab testing. It was not very mobile, though. SRM, the first portable powermeter, was created in the late 1980s and was used on the road since ~1989/1990. Two decades.
> 
> Of course you can do meaningful, structured training without a powermeter. Much harder without even a watch, but I suppose still feasible.
> 
> ...


but all things are not equal.. doing strictly powermeter runs to avoid mileage is not a magic bullet..especially for a beginner . The mileage junkies are still mileage junkies, and they may just have powermeters too..It is not one thing at the exclusion of the other..


----------



## Fltplan (Feb 27, 2009)

Eventually, power meters will be built into all racing bikes and it will all be a moot point. Of course you won't be able to buy one unless you are a cat 3 according to Mr. Know it all.


----------



## kb1dqh (Oct 28, 2007)

Wow. W/kg DOES matter quite a bit in a hilly race. Heck, most of the early season NorCal races are hilly and although the best w/kg may not win, it certainly determines who's there at the end. In Cat 4, I'd say you need over 4 w/kg to win, prob 4.3 or so... more if you're talking something with 2k foot hills, less if you're talking about a 5 min hill where FTP isn't always the limiter...


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

deadlegs2 said:


> but all things are not equal.. doing strictly powermeter runs to avoid mileage is not a magic bullet..especially for a beginner . The mileage junkies are still mileage junkies, and they may just have powermeters too..It is not one thing at the exclusion of the other..


Mileage is never a good way to train, anyway. Your body does not know what a mile is.

You're also right by saying all things are not equal. This is why using a powermeter is better -- because it gives the advantage to a properly informed user over someone training with any other metric.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

iliveonnitro said:


> Mileage is never a good way to train, anyway. Your body does not know what a mile is.
> 
> You're also right by saying all things are not equal. This is why using a powermeter is better -- because it gives the advantage to a properly informed user over someone training with any other metric.


at the exclusion I guess??? EPO would be even a better short cut..go for it..I bet you would in a heartbeat.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

iliveonnitro said:


> Actually, powermeters were available since the 1970s/1980s for lab testing. It was not very mobile, though. SRM, the first portable powermeter, was created in the late 1980s and was used on the road since ~1989/1990. Two decades.


Goes back even further. The first power measurement device on an ergo bike was over a centrury ago.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> ""I don't understand why some people are so reluctant to accept what a huge role power numbers play in bike racing."" You do know that powermeters haven't been around very long? You can do meaningful structured training without even a watch..That guy grinding out 50 or 60 miles a day, complete with intervals, sprints and hill repeats is not going to be at any disadvantage to the PT owner.. In fact he will be resting instead of making charts after he is done.


Power output happens irrespective of whether or not you have a power meter measuring it.

Functional Threshold Power in W/kg is the most important _physiological _determinant of success in endurance cycling.

But as always, the following Pithy Power Proverb applies:
_"The best predictor of performance is performance itself" - A.R. Coggan_


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

There have been many watts (per kg) wasted in this thread regarding starting to race in cat 5


----------



## SwiftSolo (Jun 7, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> at the exclusion I guess??? EPO would be even a better short cut..go for it..I bet you would in a heartbeat.


Now, that thar is one fine argument! Thousands of power meters will be hitting the land fills today because of this Powertap / EPO slippery slope argument. 

Just say no to power training! It's going to be hard to throw that 303 powertap wheel away since it's just arriving today.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

SwiftSolo said:


> Now, that thar is one fine argument! Thousands of power meters will be hitting the land fills today because of this Powertap / EPO slippery slope argument.
> 
> Just say no to power training! It's going to be hard to throw that 303 powertap wheel away since it's just arriving today.



congrats on your PTd 303...now you can get all your training done in an hour and a half. What is the next short cut?


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> congrats on your PTd 303...now you can get all your training done in an hour and a half. What is the next short cut?


So tell us Mr. No shortcuts, how many miles did you ride today?


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

chase196126 said:


> So tell us Mr. No shortcuts, how many miles did you ride today?


I skated 12 miles..


----------



## saird (Aug 19, 2008)

I have come to the conclusion that deadlegs2 is an absolute cock :thumbsup:


----------



## chase196126 (Jan 4, 2008)

deadlegs2 said:


> I skated 12 miles..


Skating? I hear thats just a begginers way of avoiding putting the work in on their bike. By getting ski's (or blades?) you are simply looking for a shortcut to avoid riding those long long miles that will have you ready and prepared for the coming season.


----------



## deadlegs2 (Oct 3, 2009)

chase196126 said:


> Skating? I hear thats just a begginers way of avoiding putting the work in on their bike. By getting ski's (or blades?) you are simply looking for a shortcut to avoid riding those long long miles that will have you ready and prepared for the coming season.


yup..5 wheel inlines.helps my low cadence power. working on my weakness.less wind chill too. long long miles are just too much of a hardship


----------



## Fltplan (Feb 27, 2009)

saird said:


> I have come to the conclusion that deadlegs2 is an absolute cock :thumbsup:



+1, he can't help himself obviously. just watch....


----------

