Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #1 
Today’s result is a bit disappointing," van Garderen said in a statement released on the team's website.

"I used to be a specialist in cold and miserable days, and now I seem to struggle more than others when it comes to the cold," he said. "To be honest, it’s the only thing I can put my finger on. I was feeling good all race up until today, so I don’t think it’s so much a question of form. At the top of the first climb I froze up. I don’t know if there is anything else I can attribute it to. It was generally a pretty bad day for a lot of guys and the fact that I wasn’t the only GC guy dropped shows that I wasn’t the only one suffering.

 
If we use FTP  and %  of FTP  or VO2 max  and %  of  VO2  max  and LT  what ver system we choose  and %  of that  for zoning.
  How  come   that he had problems   when he  biked in the proper Wattage  zone  as  calculated ?

 Or  the other way around
 Could it be possible that the  calculated  zoning may not apply  on  any day  based on a  test we did a  few weeks back , Could it sometimes be, that the  wattage may not reflect the physiological ability ? Could it be  that a  LT  found  if   you can find one  on a treadmill or a indoor trainer  may be  very different in performance level than when actually biking outside in real live ?
 Could it be a  direct live feedback on O2  utilization and   delivery  as you go  ahead may be a  possible alternative  closer to reality  than what we  do or did in the past ?

Ruud_G

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 279
 #2 
Probably a bad day. Everyone can have a bad day. Can't imagine it has to do something with improper zoning. He couldn't push what he used to push. We don't have any other data than his statement. Maybe something else was wrong. I don't know what they track exactly at BMC. Maybe his HRV shows an indication as well. Who knows.
bobbyjobling

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 219
 #3 
Perhaps his body is more sensitive to the cold now and has a higher blood flow resistance due to body trying to regulate temperature....mentally perceiving as a higher fatigue?!
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #4 
Ruud  absolutely agree  he had a  bad  day 
   so The math  of his  zoning was still the same     but the  ability  to   use the   properly calculated  zoning  did into work  he was not able  to have  by the same  %  of his   zoning the same   physiological performance . So  reality  on this  BAD  day  the  zoning was out  and if  he had  done a FTP  or  LT  or what  ever the  zoning  for this  day  would have been different  and  physiological  feedback will tell you that  and  you just take it as a  very normal  daily   fluctuation of  physiological systems  we all have daily.
 This is exactly  what I  mean  and   thanks  to Ruud we have the   proper answer. we have good and bad  days  which throw  the   calculated zoning out teh window  if they  are based on a  FTP  I did  a  week agao  or  4 weeks  ago. So   yoru  zone 4  may be a  zone 5  form the physiological effort..
 I will possible be back and show  that  zoning  calculated  are not  what  makes a physiological training   physiological zoning sis where we  can  manipulate  and target  ideas and  stimulation of specific    systems.
 Performance  often hinders  the  specif target to be achieved. I will get today  sent  to me  forma   interesting athlete preparing  for a important event  a  try out, whether he  understand  how he  can decide  what is going on in his body physiologically  and not the wattage he  has  to produce in his  specific  sport of  choice . I will mail him  just now and ask whether I  can  use the  datas  to discuss over the weekend  on here.
 Or back to a  very simple question.
 Woudl  the FTP  or LT of the above  athletes  we talk about  with the bad  dya be the same as his  FTP  or LT  when he  had a good  day.
 If  the answer is yes    well I am at a loss .
 If the answer is NO  he  will show a   different and most likely lower  FTP  but perhaps a  higher LT  as lactate  is not   a good way to go  than  the  Zoning based on the good day will be off on the bad  day  and  if you still use the  zoning intensities  form the good day on the bad  day  than ??????

 And Yes  the lactate curve  can shift to the right   suggesting a better LT   on a  bad  day  so  you are really in a  problem  situation.
bobbyjobling

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 219
 #5 
I'll be surprised if by now they don't know the FTP window (Bad/Good ). On race day what can you do about it? Maybe try to optimise all of your physiological systems before hand?! but this can be effected by many external events too [smile]

I appreciate the use of moxy to plan training but on the big day or days you have little control, perhaps soon after the event it might be possible to find out what was the weakest link.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #6 
Perhaps his body is more sensitive to the cold now and has a higher blood flow resistance due to body trying to regulate temperature....mentally perceiving as a higher fatigue?!

Absolutely agree and I showed a  while back  how FTP  and  many other  values can change in this situations. 
 This is  why the zoning  does not work on this  day  and  we  can ignore  it  and believe we sill have the same physiological  outcome  staying n he same wattage  or we  can look at  keeping in the physiological stimulation we planned but on a lower wattage.
 Nibali had a  stomach problem on the day where he was  20 - 30 wattage below is  "normal"   performance level so again n this  day the zoning was off.

 I'll be surprised if by now they don't know the FTP window (Bad/Good ). On race day what can you do about it? Maybe try to optimise all of your physiological systems before hand?! but this can be effected by many external events too [smile] 

Again absolutely agree   with all. There is nothing you can do about it. If you know it  you have to accept  it and you can try to minimize the loss of  time  if possible by  different interventions and  means  and this is done very successful  chemically  and  biking is one of the sport  where this  works  still well. B Plasma  expansion and other   interesting options including  mechanical  doping  as  it is discussed.
 This reality  check shows.  that we  understand  that we  have good and bad  days  and therefor the performance  100 % is not  always applicable and zoning therefor  will chnage.
 No  again as booby  stets   there is nothing we  really an do  when we  race.
  BUT  there is  everything we  can do when we train  so  using  zoning    and than   not adjusting it in the training if I have a bad  day  is simple  closing  the eyes  to reality , that my FTP  today is not the same  and using the   zone 3  as planned  may end  up in a  zone 4  workout  due to the bad day  I have to day in my  training. o  2 options.
 Keep the  same zoning wattage and understand that the stimulation was  actually a    higher zone stimulation and the  end result  for tomorrows  training  will be different . or  simply  neglect it and believe   200 watt is  no matter what  always the same .
 That is the point I like to  make  so physiological guided   workouts  will adjust to this  so you stress  what you planned  or you knwo your stressed   different than planned . What  you do with it i up to the coach. The only thing  I like to  point out  is. Physiological feedback  will tell you  why and what  limited the performance today.

Summary :  I  believe , but I may be  wrong, that performance  measured in  physical terms  like wattage or  speed  or time  can  fluctuate by  a  lot in different situations. If  I  do a  TEST  I  do not like to  fail so most  lab tests   agree that you have to prepare  for the test so  no  this no that  so be recovered  to have a good test result. This than is  used  as baseline  for zoning., cold and so on. So the  100 %  on this  day may be  10 -  20  %  lower    and therefor the zoning   in my opinion  will be different . I try to adjust the   " zoning  or better  physiological stimulation,  so I  can target  today or tomorrow  what my plan is, but  I  therefor will often have to use different performance levels , respectively I do not care  about   the performance   as I target a  physiological systems  rather than a performance. The only thing the performance tells me  , whether I  am  better or  worse  and  whether this makes sense  due to eh workout I may have done  yesterday  or  not.

 Example.  I  know  in a  220 wattage intensity as a cyclist   and a RPM  of  90 +- 5  and an aero position I  will trigger my   specific   athletes respiration  when I  do a 4/ 4 breathing rhythm. If I do that I  will see a stable SmO2  and a  stable  tHb. and a EtCO2  of 38 mmHg.If  I change the  4/4  to 7/7  I may have a different reaction  and now I se a  43 mm ETCO2  and a  drop in SmO2   but s well an increase in tHb.  The stimulation changed  and I  know and see this . I may accept it  or  I may try to go back to the  goal setting idea. 
. Now  the idea is  that  when I can not get  by 220  the proper  feedback  I  can :
 a)  still go  220  but I stress a different system  perhaps the  utilization  idea  and not the respiration.  Nothing wrong with this. Or I  still like today a respiration workout  as I planned   for tomorrow a  utilization workout.
 So nothing wrong  with anything I just like to know  it  so I do not do  2  x the same  if  I not like to do  that or   I do 2 x  the same as I planned  it.
 That's  all.

If you believe you are  every  day the same performance great  for you as it makes life much easier  as the %  applies  all he  time. No questions  asked no answer needed  and you make  still progress  as most of us will make  progress, when we start moving regular  no matter  whether the plan is build on shoe size or  nose length or  any more sophisticated idea.
 If you believe performance  in  actual  physical info can change  than  the zoning   may have to be adjusted  if you like to understand   why you react the way your react.  Does it matter  whether you adjust it. For most of us not at all as the  amount of training we  do  can  often easy b handled  o recover.
 BUT if I look what so called  amateur  cyclist in camps  we do  actual put out in time and kilometer   than I am not surprised  that they  do not make progress  as they have   times  and km  like many of the top riders but they still do a 40 hour  workweek including family . 
 No  wonder  the rules  stands. If you like to save on a  divorce lawyer start  iron man  as a sport.  BUT  I like to stay  actually focused on NIRS interpretation  and the above discussion is  one option where we can use NIRS in a  warm up  for  our daily  workout  to calibrate the physiological systems  I  as I showed  many times  or  before a  race in the warm up see  hat happens  and than understand  the result  better.

Thanks  for this great   nice discussion. I    just would hope we have  discussions like that  more on physiological  points  like the incredible  interesting view  the  way we  argue  we can find   LT  1   or LT  2  and so on. But never get feedback's  there   hmmm wonder  why ?




juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #7 
Here a  last  comment  form my side on this topic. I was reading my relative stupid  reply's on this  I gave  and I   understand  that I made a mistake  even starting this  discussion.

 It is  not in any connection  with the idea  we have on this forum  to get engaged in a  discussion on how we  can use  and make interpretations   due to the  lates technology  like NIRS  to advance in the understanding  of  coaches in the field  to  actual stimulate  what   we like to target  rather than  to  speculate and hope we  may stimulate  what the  calculations  of %  may  promise.

 I  don't really   care too much  whether  we believe  200  watt is always the same  physiological load . If   somebody is  success full  with any idea  that is great  and   serves the purpose e of   doing  any kind of an activity in a decent controlled    way.  What  the newer technology   is doing  for some of us  is  to  ask  ourselves  some critical questions   on what we did  and why we had many questions    but as well  why we may  have to review  many answers  we daily give to clients  athletes  and patients. In  some cases we may have to   correct  statements  and ideas  as the new  technology   completely  contradicts  the   theory   we had.


I juts like to show  one of the most intriguing contradiction we run now  daily in in mails, where the idea of  what NIRS is doing is getting complete  destroyed  and may   harm  for future  use  of  NIRS in the filed  of sport.

 I like to use   some  back up  from great brains  before I show  you the problem. I  showed it many times  already but seem to  not be  able to make the point clear  .


Richardson et al have concluded that: ‘‘…intracellular pO2 remains constant during graded incremental exercise in humans (50–100% of muscle VO2max)’’ so that: ‘‘With respect to the concept of the ‘‘anaerobic’’ threshold, these data demonstrate that, during incremental exercise, skeletal muscle cells do not become anaerobic as lactate levels suddenly rise, as intracellular pO2 is well preserved at a constant level, even at maximal exercise’’ (p. 63168). They also conclude that: ‘‘Net blood lactate efflux was unrelated to intracellular pO2 across the range of incremental exercise to

exhaustion’’ but was ‘‘linearly related to O2 consumption’’ (p. 62768). Another study confirmed these conclusions: ‘‘…consequently these data again demonstrate that, as assessed by cytosolic oxygenation state (deoxy-Mb) during incremental exercise, skeletal muscle cells do not become ‘‘anaerobic’’ as lactate levels rise, because intracellular PO2 is well preserved

at a low but constant level even at maximal exercise’’


Thirdly, an alternate or a complementary explanation to the pattern of plasma ]La-] response to ramp exercise can be suggested. According to this explanation, lactate is produced in the working muscle: (1) as soon as the exercise begins, as suggested by Brooks (1985); or (2) following a delay, according to the theory of the anaerobic threshold (Davis 1985). Under both hypotheses the onset of lactate production within the working muscles occurs at comparatively low work rates. At that time: (1) the amounts of lactate produced  and the gradient between muscle [La-] and plasma [La-], and the amount of lactate released from the muscle remains small; (2) cardiac output and muscle blood flow are also low and do not favour lactate release

from the working muscles and its distribution into S; and (3) the small amounts of lactate released are diluted within the comparatively large S, thus resulting in a very small increase (if any) in plasma [La-]. Therefore,

a delay could be expected between the beginning of lactate production within the working muscles and the parabolic rise in plasma [La-] in response to ramp exercise in a similar way that, in response to a short period of severe exercise, the peak value of plasma [La-] is only observed following a several-minute delay into the recovery period (see Hirvonen et al. 1987, 1992). Consequently, plasma [La-] concentration at a given t during a ramp exercise does not reflect lactate production in the muscle at that precise t and at the

exact corresponding work rate, but at a previous t minus ~ of unknown and probably variable length, and at the corresponding work rate. This phenomenon might have been overlooked in the development of the theory

of the anaerobic threshold which implicitly assumes that plasma [La-] at a given t reflects lactate production and thus the metabolic state of the muscles at that precise t, and at the exact corresponding work rate. This is very unlikely to be the case, particularly during the exercise protocols of short duration and with steep increase in work rate used for the detection of the anaerobic threshold (Anderson and Rhodes 1989). In this type of protocol, where VO2 significantly lags behind the value expected for the corresponding

work rate (Whippet al. 1981), it may be expected that plasma [La-] also tracks the metabolic state of the working muscles with a significant delay, particularly at the beginning of exercise for the reasons presented

above.

 


Both  lactate and VO2  are  systemic  information's  with a technology  who  has a tiem lag  and the  time lag is hard  to  calculated   nor is it inter  and intra indvidual  allways the same.
 NIRS is  when using one unit  a local  live  feedback with it s limitations as it is local. When we combine it  with some other  non priority    areas we have a better feedback on  systemic  reactions versus  local  reactions.

 This leads us than  to the  NIRS  for Dummies  cook book    which is  a great start  but we have to keep in mind  that SmO2 is a  %  fo   loaded Hb   in connection to the tHb.

So here one more the cook book

1. SmO2 is increasing : The basic  idea  is that we deliver more  O2  than we  currently need  or utilize  so SmO2  is increasing. ( Some exceptions  will apply  and this exception unfortunately  can open the question , whether we  really  use O2   or  whether we  are in a   situation where O2 is  no bioavailable.

 But in general   SmO2   the ide applye s more  in than  used.

2. A  flat  or stable  SmO2  % indicates in many cases that the supply  and utilization of O2  is balanced  or some would use the word  we are in a homeostasis. Some  exceptions apply  and again we  are not completely  sure  that  we may use  optimal O2)

3. SmO2  drops  sharp so clear  use of  O2  meaning we use much more O2  ( utilization )  than we  can supply  at that moment . See  at  any start in a   5/1/5  Now  this  section where we  have a clear   fats drop in SmO2 is the only  time  where we are   really sure without exception that we  now use  O2. That is  what NIRS  shows  a  utilization overload  wi8th a  lack of delivery  but nevertheless a clear use  of  O2  so  very clearly  aerobic  energy  supply  and utilization.
 In fact we  can use lactate with it  and   can show  that in many cases where SmO2  drops  rapidly we  actually see a drop in lactate. As well we have situations , where when  SmO2  drops  rapidly we may see an increase in lactate.


We all may accept    finally that lactate  can be produced  out  of different areas and out  of  much more reasons  a  than  energy supply alone.

Summary.
The only  time we know  we are    for sure NOT  anaerobic  (  well we know   as you see above  we are never really aerobic.) and we for sure use  O2  for ATP  maintenance is  when  SmO2  drops  rapidly.
  Here    the part you  have to explain. below

anaerobic  zone  despoite still SmO2  drop.jpg 



and here the graph  to it

3 zonings.jpg 




bobbyjobling

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 219
 #8 
One more interesting article :

Vastus Lateralis O2 Desaturation in Response to Fast and Short Maximal Contraction

http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Fulltext/2007/11000/Vastus_Lateralis_O2_Desaturation_in_Response_to.9.aspx

In conclusion, the data from this study suggest that the VL muscle of heavy-resistance strength-trained subjects could have a late activation of the oxidative metabolic system, or greater availability of stored oxygen, during a very fast and short isometric maximal contraction. Considering that leg press exercise 1) is a common exercise used by athletes to enhance performance in sport, 2) is responsible for development of the largest and most powerful muscles of the body, and 3) mimics, from the neuromuscular point of view, many athletic movements, the results of this study could give a valuable contribution to exercise science. For instance, NIRS and leg press exercise could be used to identify, noninvasively, in single muscle groups, the contribution of the aerobic energy system during very short and fast intense exercise, and, secondly, to observe the effects of specific aerobic or anaerobic training programs on the starting time of the aerobic energy system activation.

The DISCUSSION section of the article is very interesting:

A delayed VL muscle desaturation has also been observed at the onset of cycling exercise by Grassi et al. (14). The authors consider PCr hydrolysis and anaerobic glycolysis responsible for the delay or the attenuation of the increase in ADP concentration within the cell after rapid increase in ATP demand, thereby "buffering" a more rapid activation of oxidative phosphorylation. In isolated single-frog myocytes, it was found that at the contraction onset, a monoexponential decrease in intracellular PO2 was preceded by about 10 s in which PO2 remained constant (23,39). The results of those studies suggest that there was plenty of O2 available at the mitochondrial level in these cells during the first seconds of contraction (39). Therefore, in the subjects of the present study, the exploitation of the aerobic oxidative metabolism, which uses O2available in the mitochondrial matrix, could not be excluded during the very short exercise. If stored oxygen is greater in the trained subjects, this may partly explain a later onset of TOI decrease.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #9 
Bobby ,
 thanks  for adding this  studies,  as they are a big part of  our library  to  try to show   why  we may have to change  some aspects  of the classical ideas in respect  to  the  simplified idea  of 
 1. first  depletion of ATP  and  CP  than  anaerobic  gl.  than  aerobic.
 The  fact is  that all systems   firing  out of  all cylinders as  soon demand of  ATP   level maintenance  is  the idea of  the survival command  and  what ever  can help to maintain the ATP  and still move has a higher chance of  fight or flight  success.

 The  funny part is  that  the traditional  energy  model was developed of  one of my  early teachers and  a group  around  H. Howald

 Already in the   early  1980   he  as well  had  the  discussion  going on  lactic acid is not the reason of  post exercises  pain but rather possibly  small micro tears  and subsequent  inflammation and swelling. I have to try to find  a letter I wrote  to him  at that time.   Already in  and around 1985  when Brooks  the first time showed I his  thought s on lactate shuttle  the idea  on a LT  started  to crumble    and many   answered  questions reopened.
 The  idea of a simultaneous  energy supply  was even earlier  raised  in  studies  over  LSD  and HIT by Dudely  and Hollowzy and the  question  why in very high intensity  the STF  fiber  activation is again very  active ? .

 So  what  started  early in the  end of the 1980  lactate period  was moved  towards  the mid  1990  and than start of  2000  where  bigger institutions  started  at least gentle  to have the courage  to  ask  or state  some ideas on this.
 

Sports Med. 2001;31(10):725-41.

Energy system interaction and relative contribution during maximal exercise.

Gastin PB.

Author information

Abstract

There are 3 distinct yet closely integrated processes that operate together to satisfy the energy requirements of muscle. The anaerobic energy system is divided into alactic and lactic components, referring to the processes involved in the splitting of the stored phosphagens, ATP and phosphocreatine (PCr), and the nonaerobic breakdown of carbohydrate to lactic acid through glycolysis. The aerobic energy system refers to the combustion of carbohydrates and fats in the presence of oxygen. The anaerobic pathways are capable of regenerating ATP at high rates yet are limited by the amount of energy that can be released in a single bout of intense exercise

. In contrast, the aerobic system has an enormous capacity yet is somewhat hampered in its ability to delivery energy quickly. The focus of this review is on the interaction and relative contribution of the energy systems during single bouts of maximal exercise.

 A particular emphasis has been placed on the role of the aerobic energy system during high intensity exercise. Attempts to depict the interaction and relative contribution of the energy systems during maximal exercise first appeared in the 1960s and 1970s.

 While insightful at the time, these representations were based on calculations of anaerobic energy release that now appear questionable. Given repeated reproduction over the years, these early attempts have lead to 2 common misconceptions in the exercise science and coaching professions.

 First, that the energy systems respond to the demands of intense exercise in an almost sequential manner, and secondly, that the aerobic system responds slowly to these energy demands, thereby playing little role in determining performance over short durations.

More recent research suggests that energy is derived from each of the energy-producing pathways during almost all exercise activities. The duration of maximal exercise at which equal contributions are derived from the anaerobic and aerobic energy systems appears to occur between 1 to 2 minutes and most probably around 75 seconds, a time that is considerably earlier than has traditionally been suggested.

 This  as well is nicely backed  up  with some more sophisticated  technologies  as at the time the  model was developed.  today we know  that ATP levels remain   very stable.

atp crp.jpg 




Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net