I like to start a series of thoughts here from some great data's sent to me by a SWINCO (Swiss innovation company ). customer..
I like the datas as it is a reminder on how we started this ongoing journey many years back by using our common knowledge and believes from VO2 and lactate testing and than first added a simple additional data collection (NIRS) information into it. We as well added direct cardiac feedback from Physio flow and SEMG and than had a complete overload of data and a very expensive set up , which clearly was very useless for any coaches out there or for sure for any practical use for athletes .
We needed this data collection ability before we where able to downsize back to where we are now. One or 2 small simple NIRS devices ( MOXY ) and I like to show you how this work with all this data collection finally paid of to have a very different picture on what we can do in any activity planning.
We are very happy , that we did this and we are pretty sure it is still unique in the combination and is done in some small pockets world wide still form some out of the BOX coaches and thinkers.
Unfortunate very few of the Institutions use this combination and therefor often still create conclusion and speculation due to some datas missing to shine more feedback's to many questions.
Before I give a very very short feedback and insight on the earlier assessments ideas a WARNING
If you hate or believe that I have some "pay back" against lactate users or VO2 equipment , than please not even start this series as it will be a question and question situation on all what I did and why and where I had some hard discussions with myself and friends on why we did what we learned or why so many still do it.
I hope the readers who can handle that , that they engage and come back and shoot back if I take some of my own old believes apart as I like to keep the same critical mind for NIRS and all the other things we do. Only this can open up more questions to get us ready to do more research for possible answers.
Below a picture some already saw on the forum. This is a few years back in a Swiss seminar where we had coaches from different European countries for the first ever presentation of all the toys we used.
As a summary:
It was a live presentation so people could see live what is going on and we could show live in certain situations how we can see changes due to different manipulations of any of the physiological system.
What you see on the picture is a cardiac live feedback , a VO2 live feedback , blood sampling, NIRS live feedback.
The beauty of all this live feedback is, that we can really surprise initially the people. We can manipulate, that we have suddenly a VT1 or VT 2 showing up on the VO2 equipment, we can first create a VT2 and after that in a higher intensity a VT 1. We can create a desaturation in a very low intensity by showing a drop in SmO2 when we never would expect it. We can increase SmO2 when we never expect it.
We can increase lactate at the beginning and than let it drop some wherry later to screw up thee lactate curve.
We can increase stroke volume or drop it
This was thee reason why we changed from calculated power or intensity based training programs to actual planned physiological simulations.
So we would find a strange result and had no clue why so we would start playing around till we where able to actually create the trend on the equipment.
Here just one off many as a comparison of two world class cyclists.
And below to close up the intro a set of data s synchronized from all the toys we used. Below respiratory feed back collected in Norway and presented with a SWISS/Italian program . VO2 equipment and lactate sampling
Below the cardiac feedback during the same assessment where they used a Physio flow.
Followed by the NIRS feedback, where they used a Portamon.
So about 100'000 $ later we had the question on how to use this in the field and who the heck would use it anyway.
Well here the picture I love most .
Duncan and Marcel in the UK on a lonely road doing somebody never did before and most likely not will do.
So the goal was clear :
Can we downsize from all the hundreds of data s, so it is easy to use , yes needs some brain work and physiological open thinking, but it is or will be the future of smart coaching in fitness centers and clubs and personal trainers.
It may be the difference between looks from "outside" and looks from inside when you choose a coach. The same old Greek idea applies here.
The unseen real and the unreal seen
Happy NEW YEAR.