# Lance Armstrong Comeback Plan 12 weeks pdf



## ifreedom (Jul 7, 2016)

I'm hoping you can help
 
There used to be a pdf at the link below of a great plan but it's been removed. It was by Chris Carmichael with the same terminology as his TCTP book, but toned down.  I think it had to plans, one was a back in the saddle plan and one was more race orientated.

Any chance someone has a copy or know where this link lives now?

Thanks in advance!

http://bikeacrossus.chipeta.net/


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

What did the plan look like?

Week 1: Inject XX ml of EPO
Week 2: See week 1
Week 3: See week 1....

On the real thought...the following plan (bottom of the page) closely matches the plan I believe you are talking about.

The Proven CTS 9-Week Holiday Cycling Training Plan - CTS

BTW - OverUnders are an awesome interval. I saw huge gains when doing those.


----------



## ifreedom (Jul 7, 2016)

aria_speed thanks. it is similar but not quite. In fact I just found it on Scribd. It used to be free! I suppose I can get the free 1 month trial and cancel out to get it. 

https://www.scribd.com/document/42574433/Comeback-Training-Plan


----------



## Dream Plus (Feb 4, 2004)

ifreedom said:


> I'm hoping you can help
> 
> There used to be a pdf at the link below of a great plan but it's been removed. It was by Chris Carmichael with the same terminology as his TCTP book, but toned down.  I think it had to plans, one was a back in the saddle plan and one was more race orientated.
> 
> ...


I remember some Charmichael articles from back then detailing Lance's long Tempo rides in the mountains of NC with Bob Roll. Basically long efforts at Tempo up mountains. I guess down too, extending the rides out. Maybe it was average power at Tempo putting the climbs @ FTP or higher. The one caveat I do remember is CC's warning that these efforts required Recovery and added more training stress than you would think.

I think it's fair to assume drugs were a large part of the recovery process.


----------



## DaveG (Feb 4, 2004)

Dream Plus said:


> I remember some Charmichael articles from back then detailing Lance's long Tempo rides in the mountains of NC with Bob Roll. Basically long efforts at Tempo up mountains. I guess down too, extending the rides out. Maybe it was average power at Tempo putting the climbs @ FTP or higher. The one caveat I do remember is CC's warning that these efforts required Recovery and added more training stress than you would think.
> 
> I think it's fair to assume drugs were a large part of the recovery process.


Taking this on a thread tangent but has Carmichael ever admitted he was aware of Lances's doping or even supported it?


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

ifreedom said:


> aria_speed thanks. it is similar but not quite. In fact I just found it on Scribd. It used to be free! I suppose I can get the free 1 month trial and cancel out to get it.
> 
> https://www.scribd.com/document/42574433/Comeback-Training-Plan



https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/5986741/lance-armstrongs-comeback-training-plan-bicycling


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

DaveG said:


> Taking this on a thread tangent but has Carmichael ever admitted he was aware of Lances's doping or even supported it?


Seeing as how Carmichael was doping juniors before Armstrong...

In any case, Carmichael didn't train Armstrong. Michelle Ferrari trained Armstrong and set up his doping regiments and every other thing related to his performance (his pivotal teammates, too). Ferrari is a mastermind in that regard. Carmichael just used his name to make millions. Scum bag human being of the nth degree.


----------



## ifreedom (Jul 7, 2016)

arai_speed said:


> https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/5986741/lance-armstrongs-comeback-training-plan-bicycling


That’s the one. Thanks! I’ve never heard of yumpu but it looks cool. Especially browsing other magazines.

Cheers!


----------



## ifreedom (Jul 7, 2016)

Having read wheelmen and cycle of lies, it does sound like Ferrari did most of the work, but I got the sense Carmichael still did some programming for him. I have Carmichael's TCTP and have done the plan twice. The first time I estimated my ftp based on RPE and my fitness went through the roof. Novice gains we almost maximized in my opinion. I took 5 wks of chill and hit it again but had a power meter and tested ftp using his 8min protocol. Well my ftp was up by 20 points from the start of the first time I did it. At that point, I couldn't handle it after about week 5 or 6, around when power intervals started. it was impossible for me to recover and i starting tanking very fast. I bailed at week 7, just couldn't handle the mental anguish of the SEPI and PFPIs. I say all this because, yeah, i think you need some extra edgar allan to sustain his programs and I believe he knows it. Especially since the premise of TCTP is people that have busy lives as it is and then we pile on workouts. Recovery from TCTP with 2 young kids and a full time job was not possible for me based on his 8min FTP test. The 12 week comeback though, is more for natties as i've done upto 4 wks of that program before switching to TCTP. It has the awesome OUs and PIs aren't until the very end.


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

Or it could simply be that taking a vo2 max effort (8 mins) and trying to base an ftp off of that (seriously, wtf?!!) led you to some very unrealistic zones in which you attempted impossible workouts. 

So yeah, if you get an accurate estimation of ftp based on an 8 min effort and some sort of algorithm or formula, it's pure dumb luck. 

Another knock against the junior doper.


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

For the record.

The TCS 8 min test is _*NOT *_an FTP test.

They never claim that in the book and I've verified that with their coaches.


----------



## ifreedom (Jul 7, 2016)

arai_speed said:


> For the record.
> 
> The TCS 8 min test is _*NOT *_an FTP test.
> 
> They never claim that in the book and I've verified that with their coaches.


 100% He claims FTP is 90% of that, if I read his content correctly. He has a section on it about coggen’s being 95% using 20min test and that his 8’ protocol is based on lots of actual lab results they’ve collect. Something like that, I’m going by memory, but yeah, I did his 8’ test and used that in his chart to figure out my power levels. I definitely, did not use that number to be my ftp. 

I’ve read coggen’s and I believe they speak to 20m test as 95% of FTP. Again, just going by memory here.


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

ifreedom said:


> 100% He claims FTP is 90% of that, if I read his content correctly. He has a section on it about coggen’s being 95% using 20min test and that his 8’ protocol is based on lots of actual lab results they’ve collect.Something like that, I’m going by memory, but yeah, I did his 8’ test and used that in his chart to figure out my power levels.I definitely, did not use that number to be my ftp.
> 
> I’ve read coggen’s and I believe they speak to 20m test as 95% of FTP. Again, just going by memory here.


No. 100% incorrect. And Coggan would berate you incessantly for claiming he said that (seriously, he's quite abrasive).

And just like 95% of 20 mins will mean different things to different people, 90% of 8 mins even more so (personally, calculated out my FTP is closer to 80% of 8 min max).


----------



## arai_speed (Aug 19, 2003)

pedalbiker said:


> No. 100% incorrect. And Coggan would berate you incessantly for claiming he said that (seriously, he's quite abrasive).
> 
> And just like 95% of 20 mins will mean different things to different people, 90% of 8 mins even more so (personally, calculated out my FTP is closer to 80% of 8 min max).


ifreedom is correct in his recollection of the book. I'm not sure why you think he is wrong here.


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

So maybe too much hyperbole on my part in that previous post. But anyway Coggan has expounded on that a lot in the last few years. Here's one:



> AndyCoggan wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Coggan's quote about the definition of FTP is out there amongst the myriad of other posts, and I'll try to find it soon, but this is from Cusick and is the same thing:


> mFTP is the model-derived *highest power a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady-state without fatiguing.*



FTP has never been defined as a number that is exactly any percentage of any other number. It's seemingly been regurgitated as being this or that and able to be found using this or that test procedure, all with varying results. 

95% of 20 mins can get you in a ballpark (but again, various testing protocols, 20 mins on its own probably a less accurate ballpark than 20 mins without the 5 min clearing) but 90% of 8 mins seems way less accurate. And evidenced by op's inability to complete workouts?

This is good (and recent):




> For anyone reading this thread:
> 
> 1) FTP has *never been defined as the power you can maintain for exactly 1 h. You should question the understanding of anyone who has told you that it is.
> 
> ...




​


> Again, yes, a long-ish maximal effort is still the best way to estimate FTP - that's a point I made about 10 y ago:



http://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/FTP_Testing_Experiences_P6163895/


----------



## pedalbiker (Nov 23, 2014)

So back to the point of hand, based on the OP's failure at the workout plan, I surmise that it is a safe assumption that his FTP is not 90% of 8 min power and he should back off a lot on the numbers until he can meet the training plan goals. 

Or, as I alluded to earlier, just throw anything from Carmichael in the garbage where it belongs and try something else.


----------



## ifreedom (Jul 7, 2016)

This is really good info, thanks for the quotes. Just to clarify though, TCTP does not have you calculate your ftp at all. What he does is have you run the CTS test which is 8' then take that value and through it in his tables to determine the power zones that fit the TCTP descriptors, EM, Tempo, SS, OU, etc. Then you execute his workouts following his plan. I just couldn't recover the second time through it and there is probably more than one reason for that. The Back in The Saddle plan is good IMO for a generic plan to get me out from winter flub to riding on the trainer with some purpose before the roads clear up in the next month or so.


----------



## Dream Plus (Feb 4, 2004)

I seem to recall Andy Coggan saying the 20 min test in TARWAP was Hunter's protocol. That test also included a lot of work and some shorter tests before the 20min test to exhaust any Anaerobic Work Capacity and establish some other Max over different times. I've only done it a couple of times. It's a hard workout.
From the book: 
Monthly Training Protocol
15min Easy Riding
3 x 1 minute fast pedaling 100+RPM / 1min RI
3 min Easy Riding
5 min All Out
10 min Endurance
2 x 1 min Anaerobic Capacity / 5min RI
5 min Easy Riding
3 x 20 sec Super Jumps / 3min RI
10 min Easy Riding
20 min Test
15 min Cool Down


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

arai_speed said:


> ifreedom is correct in his recollection of the book. I'm not sure why you think he is wrong here.


All that image tells me is the author of that piece has made a series of incorrect leaps and poor assumptions about what was written in _Training and Racing With a Power Meter_. But they are not alone, this has been consistently misunderstood and misapplied for many years by many people.

The 95% ROT and the test protocol in TARWPM is something Hunter Allen designed and was not an approach ever recommended by Andy Coggan.


----------



## No Time Toulouse (Sep 7, 2016)

I would assume that any "comeback plan" for L***e A*******g would have to include pigs flying...


----------

