Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 3      1   2   3   Next
Roger

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 245
 #1 


We ran out of time during the forum so the discussion is continued in this thread.
Roger

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 245
 #2 
Here's a list of Questions that were submitted for Clint that we didn't have time to get to.

  1. Is the initial flight or fight response of HR vs SMO2 completely separated? i.e....will you not see that initial response on a SMO2 graph at all even if the muscle work rate is close to 0? No vasodilation effect?
  2. What device are you using to assess Cardiac function and specfically Stroke Volume? Does it measure SV or extrapolate it?

  3. What kind of knowledge did you get from combining NIRS with EMG?

  4. Have you done any testing/investigation on the correlation and combination of the NIRS and EMG?

  5. Is there any information regarding detraining effects on the off season in measuring SMO2 vs Fitness? What type of indicators would one look for?
clintfreezin

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1
 #3 
Question #1 You may see a response on the SmO2% as an athlete sits on the line before a race/game due to Cardiac output increasing. If the HR (and presumably respiration rate will increase at the same time) speeds up then you would expect to see a slight increase in Oxygen delivery to the muscles. The muscles being monitored are inactive so they won't be consuming very much, as a result a slight bump of a couple percent in SmO2 would be normal.
Vasodilation will (should) already be maxed out because we do our warm-ups before the athletes begin a race/game.
The answer to the question is no, HR and SmO2% are never completely separate. HR effects SmO2, but the point I was trying to make in the initial statement is that you need to be careful when comparing the two data points. People want to use HR to try and gauge intensity of the working muscles, and sometimes this can be very misleading. That's why I used the examples of Wall Sits, and Starts at a race. HR is at best a rough estimation of intensity for endurance athletes who are trying to find a 'zone' during longer rides. Stroke Volume, Cardiac Output, Ejection Fraction, Cardiac Contraction Time, End Diastolic Volume, Vascular Resistance, and circulating Blood Volume are all other factors that affect Heart Rate. That makes using HR to gauge intensity of the working muscles tricky to say the least.

Question #2 We all use PhysioFlow Enduro. Its a great device made in France by Jean Borr and his son Frank. Its one of the more difficult devices to learn how to calibrate and use properly, but when its done right, the results are amazing. You can find more info about that on Juergs website.

Question #3 NIRS and SEMG combined paint us a great picture of what's happening in the peripheral system. (You may also want to combine iStat to dig a little deeper) The big thing we're trying to see with the two is how the recruitment patterns we see in EMG correlate to SmO2%. If we see a sharp drop in SmO2 that happens at the same time we see a spike in EMG, then we have to look at tHb to see if there's an occlusion being created by additional muscle fiber recruitment. If we don't see the spike in EMG activity then we can look at Vo2/Cardiac Output data to see if there was a problem in O2 or physical delivery of blood. If nothing is remarkable there, than we need to explore the options of vasoconstriction due to respiratory metaboreflex. Hope this helps...

Question #4 hopefully the previous response answered this question. Yes, we use SEMG during our lab tests, and have even used it in combination with NIRS on a Supercross race track. We used the BTS wireless EMG system.

Question #5 I'm going to leave this last question for Juerg. I have some very interesting graphs from the last RedBull Endurance project that I can post up if Juerg doesn't have any good examples. But I want to throw this question to Juerg because he has some great stuff on the topic.

Thanks guys... Its fun to keep the discussion going. Keep the questions coming
Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #4 
I know that often it's said that you basically use the monitor for training purposes only but not for monitoring over a longer period. In the case of cycling where there is a lot of data available related to input (SmO2, thb, hr, etc.) and output (wattage) do you have any graphs or something which relates to monitoring the Moxy output related to wattage workouts (and I assume some same kind of workouts (same wattage level, same duration etc) done over a period of time) which could really show that HOW the wattage was produced actually changed (like by seeing a trend in better utilization, better delivery, different thb reactions?)? There must be something to this I believe despite some pushback on this [wink] Anyway. I am (going to) trying (already) to collect this kind of data.
Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #5 
And by the way. Good that these webinars take place. I can imagine specific webinars tailored to learnings out of different sports in the future, but also from strength training/ recovery area. These with specific attention to interpreting the data and how to set up proper assessments and the caveats ("things to consider") that comes with it. Interpreting could be at different levels you guys often describe about (all up to the "full equipment style"). But also some intro webinars on basics of the metrics, what they are and aren't, what occlusions are , how to see them in the data, etc
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #6 
Ruud  as usual  great  to have you  on here. I will let  Clint  give you  feedbacks here. Juts as a  basic  info. . That is all what we  do since  20 plus years . Looking  why  we can perform  on a higher level or  for cyclist, s  why we  can push a  higher FTP  what ever  FTP  you guys  use  or  why  we have a higher CP. That as well is  fun to see the discussion  about negative  W  bal  because  the  estimated  CP  is  too high  or too low. Still try  to wrap  my head around  , why I  estimate  something  when I  can se live  what happens. The fun part of  this estimation  will be  , once  you do  ideas like the  red bull  low level  and altitude, as you will se like   Clint  showed  very different reactions in altitude . All depending on limitations  .
 So  we will have  some critical  ideas on our  own  concepts  after Clint's  great  presentation.
 The question is  of structurally remodel  physiological systems  like cardiac  muscle , capillarisation respiratory    ability  and  so on. So  to your point  of  changes in NIRS  feedback  due to  changes in physiological abilities therefore  a  higher  performance in wattage.  One  example is an athlete  with a  delivery  limitation    than  you train his  cardiac out put  and than you see  that  1  or  2 year  later  5 1 5  assessment  now shows  a utilization limitation. This is the basic  concept in any  cardiac rehab  as we  have a know   delivery limitation or  even damage due to a problem. Train the cardiac system  ( muscle (  and see the performance increase  due to the increase in cardiac ability  or better regain the cardiac  ability.Advantage here is , that we now the limiter  as it   pushed him into the hospital in the first place. So they initially  improve  utilization but than    if properly done  improve    delivery   which finally ends  where  we hope to be   in a utilization limitation again  so  the cardiac system is not  the limiter  anymore.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #7 
Ruud  thanks  again  for your  questions  and I  must  do a terrible  bad  job   by not getting the ideas  over  . So  give me a  chance  to try again  and  come back  whether I still  miss the point  of yore question. Or  other  readers  can step in.
 Here  your  nicely  formulated  point  where I still miss  to  explain it properly

(and I assume some same kind of workouts (same wattage level, same duration etc) done over a period of time) which could really show that HOW the wattage was produced actually changed (like by seeing a trend in better utilization, better delivery, different thb reactions?)?.

Let me try to formulate  a specific  goal  we  may.
  Sport specific  endurance  goal. As  many readers  by now   know is, that we  tend  to  go  more towards   the latest research  , which  throws  us a  heavy load  of explanation to  current  customers  n why  we  change the ideas.

SmO2  is a  sign  of  O2  trends.
 So  drop in SmO2  most often indicates, that we use  O2  nicely  BUT  we  do not deliver   good enough to maintain a  balanced  level  or  even  are not  able  to increase   due to higher delivery than  utilization.
So in all sports  the  key is  to  be able    as long as possible  to deliver  O2  to maintain performance  no matter  how intense  the   performance is.
 All fibers  no matter  which one  w e take    at the end  will use  ATP  as the ultimate  energy  stage.
 The latest  research shows, that the ATP  has  to be  on a critical  level and  once  we  are getting close  we  will have a  softy  situation, where    we will try to  avoid  using  more  or splinting more ATP.  Now  if we believe  and or use the  classical   idea  of  no  ATP  is getting depleted  followed  by Cr.P  and  so on, than the following ideas really can not apply  at all  and that we  have the dilemma  we  discuss or  try to debate  without  any  ego  to defend  current  or  any idea.

 So  in the case of the  possible  newer  studies  we   use the very old  question  discuss   very far back  by Harre. (  I showed  it many times )
  Endurance 
 a)  ability  to sustain  fatigue
 b ) ability  to  recover  fast
 a)would be for example  the   local    persons  we are getting ready again  for a  world record  over 24  hours  run. Here endurance  may be a  question of sustaining  fatigue  as long as  possible    and fatigue  my be  a  huge  work  for many  involved  physiologically  and psychological  challenges in an idea like that.
b)  would be    athletes  we train to get ready for this upcoming ice hockey season. So in this case  the " endurance is  the ability to recover as fast as possible  between shifts.
As  both  need  O2  for ATP  level maintenance  both  have really the  same goal   but  with different challenges.
a)  has a   small " challenge    at least  for  a  while  with utilization, as  the classical   training will focus  on  delivery  system  improvement. The biggest  risk of limitation here is  that one of the delivery system may  reach its limitation  and than    he  has  to  try  to utilize better , but that is a  time bomb  when maintaining performance so he has  to slow  down.
 Remember the two great example  form death valley  and antidotes  with the tip  graph    30 %  less ability ( delivery problem and somewhat    shorty  try to compensate  with utilization. where the  lower  graph  nearly identical  result  on both level s  as  good delivery   and still same utilization.

No w stop here  and back to Ruuds point

which could really show that HOW the wattage was produced actually changed (like by seeing a trend in better utilization



 okay here   a  10 week training intervention. Goal  : Improve  utilization.

MR  smo2 compar  legs.jpg 

 Courtesy  of  Brian Kozak  NEXT LEVEL. Now   you see   easy  what changed.
 Now it is not just a  question of better  or lower utilization but as well of  a better performance. So  cyclist  have wattage  which is  absolutely  great. In this case we  can use a bio harness  as  Brian did  as well  or  speed or  time over distance to see, that in the same time  he  actually covers  a bigger distance  and therefore has  not just improved  utilization but  uses the more O2  utilization  for a  better  performance.  Now  for a  fast  speed we need  a higher muscular  activity   and    many  may recall , that's  where  either a  SEMG  can come in  or  a tHb trend information.  so lets  look  at this  after  10 weeks.

rip in icehockey.jpg 
left  start assessment    and right  end assessment  biased.
 3  points  we look : 
1) tHb reaction.    start  we just have a contraction force  who creates  a compression   reaction so tHb  drops
2. Look at red line  and  recovery  of  O2   in the rest period. This  is  sport specific  endurance the ability to recover  O2  as  fats as possible  so you start again  with a  " full . thank  of O2 ) This  way  we  have a  smaller chance that ATP  levels  drop critically low  and    motor unit recruitment  will be reduced  as well as   possible  H + dysbalance.
3)  look at thb   muscle contraction quality ? What has  changed  there ?
  Let's  take  another example.
 Top class  European  pro  ice hockey player  who  trained  over summer  out  of  specific reasons  with us.

   chnage in  reaction 10 weeeks.jpg 


Top is start   bottom  is  10 weeks later. same   workout   with as you can see different " recovery times  always  same load  time  so   1  is  one  shift  work all out  one shift  recovery  followed  by 1  shift  work all out 2  shifts  recovery  and than  1  work  3  shift recovery
 
So hope this  was  your question  and  a possible answer.
the  second  section :
  Anyway. I am (going to) trying (already) to collect this kind of data.

That is  great  as we have  hundreds  of  data  in this direction  and some collected over a  span  of over 10 years  with some  top  class grand  tour  cyclist.  so  it will be nice  to have data  from outside  our  biased    narrow  minded group  to  compare  and see  what   comes up with this. Great  work.

last  part
 But also some intro webinars on basics of the metrics, what they are and aren't, what occlusions

Wowww that is  a  hard  one  for  me  as I try  so hard  to explain that   in  so many   answers  like in the hurdler    discussion  or the biceps  contraction  discussion. We  use  thB  and occlusion trends  for  workout intensities  so either we like to create  an outflow  restriction  to enhance  for example utilization  or  we like  to  avoid   flow restriction so  we can maintain delivery.
 In simple terms.  very simple :  If you like to  improve  utilization avoid  delivery   If  you like to improve  delivery  avoid  utilization. 
  I need  help  form anywhere  to  try  to  explain  what  occlusion is  and how  we see it  during a live  workout  so we  can sue it now  to correct the  workout  so it fits  our  goal.  So please anybody  come back  and  help  or  ask  for a  further  nice  debate  with  no winners  or losers  but just wines.




Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #8 
Hi juerg. Tnx for your reply. Wrt the occlusion thing I just meant that in general As an introduction for new users as something which can be found easily in a series of (intro)webinars or videos. In a forum information is often scattered all around the place. And yes. I had already seen the hurdle example with the occlusion explanation which was clear to me [smile]
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #9 
Ruud as usual thanks  for the feedback  and excellent  suggestion. I will work over the weekend on a  hopefully  easy  to understand power point  session  for a  webinar  as you suggested  with just thei  idea  on the tHb  trend . Thanks  so much  and you are absolutely  right    forums  are   confusing if you do not follow  daily but it is  even more messy  if  I do it . Sorry  but will  try  to get this one  better. Cheers Juerg
Rachel

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 15
 #10 
Hello All.  I'm new to the forum and fairly new to the moxy.

After watching the webinear I am wondering if anyone can elaborate on some items that Clint mentions for those who have trouble with utilization.  He specifically mentioned mitochondrial density, vascularization, and oxidative enzymes.  I have lots of trouble with utilization.  I can rarely get my SM02 to drop below 90. (I am a runner (up to ultra distance) and triathlete)  Any info you can provide would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #11 
I will be back over the weekend  whit a  great  section and  as so often stimulated  by Ruud.
 Here his  point.
In the case of cycling where there is a lot of data available related to input (SmO2, thb, hr, etc.) and output (wattage) do you have any graphs or something which relates to monitoring the Moxy output related to wattage workouts (and I assume some same kind of workouts (same wattage level, same duration etc) done over a period of time) which could really show that HOW the wattage was produced actually changed (like by seeing a trend in better utilization, better delivery, different thb reactions?)

I like to create a  debate on this  one  to show  how since many years  NIRS   guides  really  workouts  as  an output  as Ruud  puts  it.
I like as well to  increase some adrenaline  in cycling  and wattage  fans  as well as in  all of us  who used  or still use  lactate  and VO2   as  an idea  of  " Output "  and  like to open the  debate on all of this.  It is a fundamental  question on how we    go  toward s    activity  quality over the next  5  -  10 years  or  till we have even more direct  bio markers  or biofeedback..
  Here  just to throw    some stuff out. Cycling really  does n  not have a lot of datas   for in   nor for output. In fact  cycling is  most likely stuck  since many years  in artificial   performance improvement  combined  whit mathematical  calculations of   hope fully to achieve  wattage  numbers.

 How  other  can we  explain the ongoing discussion like  with Froomes  wattage datas  and that we  believe  we can read  out of this datas  whether he  "cheats " or not.
 If we like to understand  exceptional  performance we  have to look above and beyond  physical calculation of watt/ kg body weight and look  at his overall physiological team.
 How  about telling  or comparing  athletes  on cardiac  output  the  ejection fraction  %  and the ability to change LVET  . The ability  to extract O2  in  certain situations  much deeper   due to physiological  differences.  How  much do we look at VE  and the ability to maintain  normocapnia  in an attack on a hill. How about the  capillarisation density  and  in simple terms  how much  to d we   try to  see and explain the   delivery and  utilization  differences  between this  top athletes.
 Short   question to some of the regular  cycling readers  here.
 a) how much is your tire  pressure ?
 b ) how bi\ g is your TV in an all out  sprint.
 How  long is  your  pedal crank
 How    high is your Ef %
  As  we  discuss so often  p[performance is a  must in assessments   and  a must to see   actual performance improvements  but  alone as it is used  with  calculations it looses  a  big part of its  ability  as  we have  ONLY  performance  without  any feedback on why and how. Again  our answer  is . Who cares  as long  we make  progress.
 ? Well that is a  very good point  and if this is  what we care, than any decent open debate  is  most likely of minimal  value. If  we care  as well on a  harmonic  development of athletes and  clients  and patients, than we need performance as an important  motivation   but paired  with some openness, that  you are you  en he  is he  and she  is she  so  accept the  incredible  individual  we all have  and can enjoy  and pair  it  with what we  can add  to a   more advanced  idea  of training.

 Keep in mind  that there  are more  activities out there without  wattage meters  who  have a  very important role to play in the overall health  and fitness movement  we all have the luxury  to enjoy.

 So will be back on this later  on  input  and output.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #12 
Rachel  will  come back  to your  great  information but I  actually hope we get some  additional  feedbacks  and ideas  on what  you experience  and see  with NIRS.
  I had  last night  as  so many times a  great " internal " discussion  with  my biggest  and best  and  most objective critics in this  file d. with Andri  where we  actually  without  your    feedback  where exactly discussion this interesting observations.
 In short  (  with expectations )  we see in hundreds  of assessments   that :
 Extreme  endurance  athletes  and  beginners  show a  very similar  picture  during  load   a  picture , where we see a  an increase in SmO 2 at the start of  a 5/1/5  and than a very high  and  stable  SmO2  with a very small drop in SmO2  even  at the end in an all out  situation.

Here a  typical picture of a  world  class  endurance athlete   in preparation  for a  24  h  world  record.
ian  workout.jpg  if  we look the biased  picture I  like  because  for me  it show s nicely , whether there is a  great delivery  or a great utilization  when  talking positive .

bias  workout.jpg    So there is  again  an interesting dilemma  with NIRS  and classical ideas.
  a)  endurance  athletes  suppose to have a  lot  of mitochondria density  and are very great in using  O2
 versus    explosive  sports  like ice hockey  or  sprints    and so on suppose  to have a lot of FTF  fiber  certain type s and  therefor  do not  use  as easy  O2.
 nevertheless s in   assessments  we see a  much lower  SmO2  level as a sign of great  O2  or  desaturation in    sprint  and interval athletes  versus    endurance athletes. Now  that  what  makes a lot  of  fun  in this  information. When we look at classical  interpretation help of  anaerobe  and aerobe  we  have  some major  bending  to do  so that the fact  fit in out  theory  so  we may have to get some other ideas.
 I will for sure be back in one section of detraining  where it is  even more interesting  on  what we  may see  with NIRS  and what we   learn or get educated on what  suppose to happen. So lot's  of fun times  ahead  and lot' of  open questions  as we  all can see.  >  " cook book  summary "
 what we see as a trend is that  beginners  and  top endurance  athletes  show  often a  very  high SmO2  with  little or  less  low SmO2  drops  even in high intensity  situation (  Some exception  are  with  world  class    cyclists )  versus     so called  classical " anaerobe  ' sport athletes  which   often can desaturate  very low  with SmO2  values.
 What we  at least see as well is that    extreme endurance athletes  show relative low resting SmO2  values versus  beginners   or versus   interval athletes. Now the resting  SmO2    will change  depending on the workout  you may have done  the day before  but  when you collect  regular resting SmO2  values  like we  do with resting HR over a  certain time  and or  HRV  over a certain time  than you can  see  and sue SmO2    values  as  an indication    of your bodies reaction   after workouts  or  in how you  may recover.

juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #13 
,Okay let's  go  to Ruud s great  debate  section. here a  question :
  In the case of cycling where there is a lot of data available related to input (SmO2, thb, hr, etc.) and output (wattage

Why  do you call SmO2  tHb  and HR , as  three of your examples,  input  data  and  wattage  is  an output data ?  Here    my  point  why I ask this question:

Yes  wattage  or  as  we can see,  time  and so on,  are output information   of  a physical performance  caused  by  physiological systems  and the physiological system  have  an output  information on how they created this  physical performance.  So  from my point of  view  a  physical  output  lie wattage  needs a physiological output  to be created.  we  could even argue  that   100 wattage  is  an input    to create a  physiological  output like HR  SmO2  thb  and more  . 

The problem  with the wattage out put , in  cycling  for example ,   tells you  the overall output  of the whole " team." This is great  as  an end result  and super  if  the  team  wins. It is less  helpful if    the team does not win  or  even worse  is when the output  from today is  far  different  and lower than the output  from a race  a  few weeks  back.  With  wattage  as an output information  you are really lost   and  you just  can hope.
 With  physiological  output information  you  do  not hope  you know. 

You will find this  dilemma  in Professional  cycling    in an every  day interview  and it is   interesting to see that  they struggle  with this . will find  for sure  one  from today  and will post it a s an example.

 True  who cares  about the physiological  result  when we  win  or make  progress , as Ruud once    pointed  out , and we  absolutely  agree.  Where we  go different is , that we  have fun    to try to understand  , who in the team  contributed  how  much  for the output  end results,  so we look at  each  team members  output  as well. The fun part   in this  idea is , that we see than  not just in a  race,  but as well in a  workout. So  we may for example  rest  three  team members  as they yesterday  had  to work  very hard  and just concentrate  today on one specific  team member.
 How  do you do this  with wattage as the only output ?

 Example  300 watt is  the all out  output. Who  was pushed  to the limit  and or  above  an who may not even have reached  the limit ? wattage  will not  tell you   anything  on this question. Physiological  outputs  will  show you that.

So   we  work  now  by  an output  of 210 watt . True  70 %  so we  can  open a cook book  and read  what that suppose to   trigger or stimulate..
 What  system  do we let  recover  and what system may still be  triggered  or  even overloaded  due to  extreme overload  and lack of recovery  from yesterday.  Okay  we  overloaded  yesterday the  cardiac  system  and we  like today  to  really  not    load this  system. The output  feedback  in  very easy  equipment is  HR  in more complex  equipment is  CO  SV  EF %  and so on.  HR is simple  and we  could  add HRV  to it. So  goal is  to   relax  HR  but we may  like to  trigger today respiration. Yesterday  the way  we work  was  with an   okay   respiration output  of   a VE  of  80 L  / min  a RF  of  +- 25  and a  TV  of  =- 2.5  L. This are all output information  for the respiratory system. This respiratory  output  contributed  to the 300 watt   performance but  was  only  partially push to a  stimulation.  So  today  relax  cardiac system, but  really  overload  respiration. So we push a 2 x 30 min respiratory  workout  with a  VE goal  of  250 VE  RF  of  40 +-  and TV  of  3 l
 
 What  output  do we  need  in wattage  to create this  reaction  and  are we sure   when we  create this wattage output  that the HR   or  better the cardiac system really does not get stressed  above  100 HR ? How  much value  do we  have  from a performance  output  besides  the result in a race or a  workout so we   actually  understanding the physiological output. Do we need high wattage output  to  create a  high physiological stimulation?  Now  same  question would be  for lactate as  an output  feedback or VO2  as  an output feedback

So  to Ruuds  great  question
 do you have  (  or  some body  has )any graphs or something which relates to monitoring  wattage  as an output  and than  can show that this wattage level  really triggers  a  targeted  physiological system  or  do we only show  an improvement of    performance ( not always )?


and I assume some same kind of workouts (same wattage level, on a  carrtain %  of FTP same duration etc) done over a period of time) which could really show that HOW the wattage (we  choose  as a %  of  an FTP actually  triggered  the suggested   physiological  adaptation.) was produced actually changed (like by seeing a trend in better utilization, better delivery, different thb reactions like by seeing a  tend in a  higher SV  or better  capillarisation  in the output  feedback  of wattage ?

Just kidding. We  all know that  this  does not  work  nor  do we  have great  studies  proofing that  73  %  of  FTP  will create  for  everybody the same  stimulation and therefore the same    change in vascularisation or what ever  we    learn to believe in.

 So  I understand  Ruud s question  as it  was our  question  15  -  20 years back  and I will try to show  you some  independent results    I got sent  from coaches  moving in this direction.
 What I  just like to show is, that we  very very blind  all of  us including  me  accept  classical   indoctrination and  we ar e often afraid  to ask this  questions  why  the  system  is " accepted'    is it perhaps s time  to ask    to be fair the same questions on  what we  do  and what we  try  to  do  and than have a  debate  without    ego  pushed  to the limit. ?




rowing race.jpg 

Make  your own  story  out of the above  picture  and see what   it may tell you . What output  do you really  like to have to design a great  individual program  and what   helps you   more  at the end of a  race .

juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #14 
Okay  was easy to find. Here the    nice feedback  form a Pro cyclist  :

I suffered a lot yesterday, I just felt pretty empty,” Froome said simply.

The temperatures have soared over the past few days in southern Spain, with Friday’s stage played out beneath baking sunshine, but Froome dismissed the idea that the heat had affected his performance. Instead, scarcely five weeks on from the Tour de France, he hinted that he was still feeling the effects of his winning effort.

“No, I’m pretty good with the heat, it’s not really an issue for me. It’s just the legs,” Froome said. “I think especially after the Tour, it’s tough at this stage, but I’m just going to keep pushing on and hope that in the second and third week I start feeling a bit better.”

So  what "output" information  do they had ?
 RPM. Wattage  max  watt  average watt, Duration,  left  and right leg individual  wattage output. ???? Than HR  which most likely  was not  much different perhaps than in any other stage  no matter whether  the  felt  good  or bad.
Exceptions  always possible  that  he  could not increase HR  as  high as usual  or  he  was much higher  as usual   for a given  wattage. So  what  do we  learn  from the wattage output  from this stage.?


 Now look at the  2  main points of the discussion.

 1. heat  as a possible  explanation
 2.  Legs  as  a  feeling.
  What is the outcome  of this 2  options.  just going to keep pushing on and hope .
  An interesting strategy  for a  sport  with a  multimillion $ budget .
  Now  regular  readers  can see   what  the question or the option  for us  would  or could be.
 1. Check heat reaction as  NIRS is  a  really great   option to see  blood distribution change  due  to heat.
 2  legs.
 2.1  legs  as a  loco motor   limitation ion this  day
 2.2or leg  as a  reaction of a  delivery system limitation.
 - cardiac   limitation so  reduction  of motor unit recruitment.
- respiratory  limitation  as a  part of the metaboreflex  so  vasonstriction so the legs  can not steel  blood   form the vital systems.
- actual  respiratory  limitation so  problem to maintain the needed VE  so    slow increase in hypercapnia  and  therefor  shift of  O2  disscurve  which than  creates  an early    safety  restriction  for ATP  breakdown  and again  restriction  of muscle activity.  All can be  at least   ruled  out  or  closed in   due to output  of SmO2  and tHb  as the easiest  option  and than  anything above.
 This can be done  after the race  but much  nicer  during the race    form the athletes  option and  form the   team car  wireless.


 That  are  simple questions  we  do here in our  small town  sometimes  daily  with people  from the street coming in  for rehab. If  I have  a cardiac  patient  or   COPD  patient  and he  has  his individual  workout    plan  and he comes  in  with this  feedback  heat  or  kegs  we can see what it was  and therefor  adjust  the following   workouts. Even better is  that he understand  the situation  and adjusts  the  workout  as he  moves  along  to avoid a   drop in performance  due to a  wrong  overload  of a  system  we may  or may not like to   load  due to  certain risks  and problems.  Summary : How  valuable  is the wattage  outcome   and what  doe sit tell us besides  that fact that he was not able to push the usual %  of  wattage  or  watt / kg  he  normally  is doing ?


Rachel

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 15
 #15 
Thanks Juerg!  I am a client of Sandy and had a great discussion while running this morning as well.  We discussed what she thinks might be the cause of my issues and we will do some training on it.  My 5/1/5 looks pretty similar to that one you posted.  Sandy said I have great delivery but I'm just not utilizing it.  My limiter is respiratory so we are going to do some work with that.  I'm eager to learn, train and see how I can improve with all the great info from the Moxy.  
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net