Sorry for being very slow in responding to the most interesting debate we have since we run this forum. So thanks so much for all the incredible feedbacks and thoughts and I will be back One reason why I am so slow is that I had to read many times some of the great feedbacks before I just would shoot in with a n answer or some ideas.
The feed backs over the last few days will fill up a month of information's thoughts and cases as you will see. So be somewhat patient but insist if I am unclear or forget some ideas or discussions.
I like the points as all of us, where I can give decent ideas and I struggle with the questions , where we have not yet answers or directions but this are the once I will try to target first. Here a full set handle on the issues. I for sure forgot many other points and I use only the feedbacks from the forum . ( Sorry email friends I will try to answer more and more just on the forum ( Time has some limitations even for a farmer ) Here the list of upcoming debates
By Andrew Coggan
A STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
“A watt is not always a watt” – DAVE HARRIS
“Not all kilojoules are created equal” – ANDY COGGAN
1.Thing is human body variability (due to or not the environmental / mechanical factors) plays a role in these results. As you know. HR will act differently also based on above.
2. I myself am currently doing some long term identical workouts on the trainer in which I can control and trying to control things more easily. Will post on this later this year I can say that in that manner you will see some more identical patterns If you base your workouts based on FTP, but even then its not always that clear. But when you see things coming up x out of y times you might conclude: this is a structural thing or not.
3.And when it comes to actually training based on Moxy I feel that Moxy at the moment can very well add some different flavours to the wattage training. But a training program solely based on Moxy is not the way I would view it
4.Lets just share all and learn.
5.In reply to #10. Yes, I agree with your sentiments and I hope that as time goes by things will become clearer. I guess my frustration is that it's all well and good to interpret Moxy data and to try to come to some sort of sensible, and useful, conclusions. The difficulty arises when, having done that, the next data set is TOTALLY different when everything that can be controlled has been controlled, that to me makes the tool potentially less practically useful.
6.Hopefully in time patterns will emerge, I remain engaged, but sceptical!
7.At the same time when creating the 200 watt and 300 watt al other systems (respiration, etd) wont have the same reaction although at both situations we create occlusions.
8. And people are not training with stroke volume equipment, spo2 tools, respiration equipment etc continuously on their body.
9. One of the things you do with training is to improve "weaknesses".
10. wattage / moxy users should try to find out how repeatable TIPs are.
11. You think you train vo2max at 105%+ and certain time periods combo's, but you don't know. And why you improve (more than probably) has different reasons for person a and person b. And we don't ask the why question. While for NIRS we do (the double standard you talked about).
12. And an additional remark wrt loads 2/3/4. Guys we are looking at 1%-2% differences. IMHO we are looking at some random error. Just a small extra strain or movement left to right or a breath extra or less
The 65% load in both cases is 65% of the same number, the loads were identical during the two workout periods shown, the same .erg control file was used to control the ergotrainer and the wattage of the ergotrainer was cross-references to a PowerTap power meter gathering data simultaneously, the correlation was excellent. The "stimulation" was therefore identical, to within around 0.5% in terms of watts.
b).Thank you for the reply. I guess one thing I need to clarify is that I'm not, as things stand, sharing my raw data files, I'm presently keeping them for my own evaluation.
it's quite difficult at the present time to see how the Moxy can become a PRACTICAL training aid and above all a performance improver.
I have observed so far I expect things to continue to be unpredictable!
e)The same could have been said of wattage measurement but the huge difference I see is that when measuring wattage 50W one day is the same as 50W another day and results from the application of a certain speed/force combination at the pedals. The difficulty with Moxy data, again for me at least, is it's unpredictability.
Effectively same question for the chart that Sandy posted regarding Rachel's (awesome) CO2 Run ? Is it a disrupted loading / supply more so than a local response to "use" more %SmO2 ?
The relationship that I'm looking to get better confirmation with is, is % desaturation a direction indication of increased O2 utilization at the cell ?
Do you monitor your respiration rate or depth ? Or do you measure SpO2 during interval workouts ?
I guess my question remaining is, does a shift over to hypercapnia actually produce an increased utilization of O2 by the cell, or rather does it create some form of dumping phenomena ?
If I only have a MOXY what's the quickest way to determine the decreasing %SmO2 trend is a faster 'utilization' or a supply restraint ?
I would expect that in an occlusion outflow, bloodflow would slowly increase (due to pooling), At the same time, Smo2 would most likely start decreasing as a trend because deoxygenated blood is not escaping. Then at the point where load is removed - blood flow would suddenly increase due to occlusion being released and because deoxygenated blood is now released, Sm02 would increase reasonably quickly
b)Now Rachel's case
In relation to the last few loads that you put up
Comparing the 3rd/4th last loads vs the last loads, the key differences to me seem to be:
1. tHb decreasing in the last loads, but not in the loads before.
2. In the last loads, on rest tHb increases immediately, but there is a lag to Sm02 recovery - it actually continues to fall slightly after the load is removed.