well played
Donāt really disagree, but there is a use case or two where lactate data helps.
A problem with using performance as a metric, while clear outcome, depends on qualitative inputs and mental capabilities. Lactate isolates a physical parameter irrespective of the brain.
As Iāve described before, some athletes get faked out by sensations. In those cases, their RPE is much higher then their actual output. Their FTP is not what they are capable of physically.
I believe it is worth a cheap test to calibrate an athletes feelings to a quantitative measure. If aligned, then no need to retest and carry on. If not aligned, you have a new opportunity to help the athlete improve. Aligned in this context would be FTP close to MLSS.
I donāt have enough data to know how many athletes would significantly benefit from quantitative data. But of the 4-5 guys I have multiple tests on and interventions, three were spot on, one continually overshot in TTs until MLSS was defined and explained and one was significantly under FTP at his max RPE. Iād love to have data on a couple dozen good riders (all these guys I test are cat 2 or 3 level riders so experienced).
FWIW, my FTP from just power testing was spot on MLSS. One of my best buddies, I found him an extra 20-25 watts by showing him he wasnāt at FTP and giving him a training plan to āfixā the mental part. Once he believed, then he performed. The lactate data was critical.
That saidā¦ for the amount of money and time people spend on this sport, is it really a burden to spend a couple hundred dollars/Euros/Pounds for data? A lactate meter is $300 and it costs about $25 in supplies to run a test. Split that cost with 3-4 buddies and its nothing. Heck, if I knew you guys and we lived close enough Iād test yāall for free just so we could look at numbers instead of speculating 
My professional training - Data is always better than guessing or estimating or using proxies. Does it matter? Well in this forum we are mostly amateurs so of course it doesnāt matter. But given the amount of time we spend discussing it and what we spend training, racing, clothes, equipment, food, coaching ā¦ get data guys!!!
I still have no idea what LT2 is or what I would do with it if I could find it on my curve.
That was fun. Carry on
Your Pal,
Darth
8 Likes
And if you donāt know LT1, all that training is a complete waste. 
4 Likes
You would LOL at my coach convosā¦
that uneasy feeling that Iāll actually like the Michelob Ultra that guilt ridden dude gave me after he dropped off his kid for baseball and parked in front of my driveway, and I came back from a rideā¦
2 Likes
This is real, another Kolie Moore concept (used by him in the EC podcast anyway) is āwearing a rut in your RPEā, sure I experienced this after a (very successful) FTP block last year; I floundered a bit in moving on (or failing to move on?) from there.
yes, or, how to know when/if to move on, or up, āprogressā or whatever. Beyond, āJust keep raising your FTP.ā I have to imagine this ācallousingā RPE effect is going to build up in any method that prioritises training at a given intensity.
This discussion has me hoping I can keep RPE ācalibratedā better without purchasing a lactate meter! Maybe next winter thoughā¦ 
4 Likes
I think so (I mean, Iām just parroting Steve on this one, as you can probably tell). So LT1 is not always the right end of the fatmax zone. But generally itās close for most and if youāre not going to actually measure %Fat / %CHO util (like most ppl on this thread) then you have make an educated guess somehow. Steve has the advantage of actually gathering data (mostly) from athletes who are not going to push back with ābut how can I figure that out with just powerā. Well, there are still some things you cannot get with just power. And I think weāre guilty of ācanāt measure it, must not be importantā.
In this discussion, I have just been thinking about within a single athlete. What you ask is potentially an interesting question for a coach (as in, knowing how to handle your two riders). For me as an individual athlete, Iād be happy just knowing what/where it is, how to improve it, and how to track that change.
I think the fact that you would want to improve it is not in dispute (for reasons sryke outlinedā¦especially long endurance events, etc), but figuring out a way to ātreat it like FTPā, as it were. āClose enoughā measurement, field test, etc.
As someone mentioned up-thread, many coaches and physiologist have just ignored or glossed over this area in favor of figuring out FTP/CP āanaerobic thresholdā or effects of high intensity.
they performed a 20-minute time trial and 95% of the mean power output (P20) was defined as FTP.
Still? After 20 years? Boy, it must suck to be Coggan.
And when someone finally talks about how to actually test ftp it becomes Xās protocol(!)
1 Like
Iāve been thinking of doing an Aerotune Power Test to see what that yields. Itās a bit like the. iNSYD one but CONSIDERABLY cheaper.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CaVErO5s7Ad/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
2 Likes
Please share results. Test protocol (indoor or outdoor, 1 day or 2 daysā¦). And if you get specific training plan/recommendations (those recommendations listed on the last side cover multiple blocks (?)).
(If testing indoor and you have power from trainer and from power meter would be interesting to compare both results (for example if trainer reads sprint lower)).
I do this test at home and the sprint is tricky to get right. Part of the problem is that some power meters are too slow to respond, so your first couple seconds of power wonāt be representative of the effort. For example, the powertap hub provides much better sprint data than a P2M NGEco despite both recording at 1-second intervals. A power meter with magnets and reed switches reading at several crank positions would be best. Thats why certain power meters are required for track cycling.
The calculation is not too sensitive to VLaMax, so itās ok if the sprint isnāt 100% perfect.
1 Like
Ditto - been quite interested in this and would love to know if it yields usable training recommendations. Iād love to know what you get out of it please.
However, I have heard several far smarter people than me suggest these tests are both simply algorythms that produce data that is far from scientifically proven. The Aerotune test is cheap enough to take a punt on but Iād really like to know what actual recommendations come from it and how they may be used.
This is what the creator said in a podcast. He said āDonāt worry if your sprint is 600wā
Itās just their flavor of the CP model.
Indoor is a ramp test, outdoor is a 4 min max 
Both tests have sprint and 12min max
Ramp test and 4 minute max power both provide approximations of VO2Max. Itās hard to do a ramp test outside, so I think thatās why they use 4 minute test outdoors.
The sprint is for VLaMax and the 12 minute effort is to provide another point for CP evaluation.
I wonder if the model gets better data with the ramp
I suppose whichever model estimates closest to your actual abilities would be best.
Hereās somethingā¦check out page 10. Itās one equation to estimate VO2Max from 4-minute power. I wish I could read German. I have several papers and dissertations that I can only skim through.
So sprint then 4min/ramp then 12min?
I think I heard you could split some efforts over 2 daysā¦or I remember wrong?