I have great news for you. If you want to be the fastest cyclist at 100kg … you’ll have no shortage of people who will want to sit on your wheel
Being the best powerlifter and the fastest cyclist aren’t very complimentary. When you say:
That implies that you’re willing to give up some of your strength to be a faster cyclist. But if you intend to stay at 100kg, that will be a limiter for you. It’s a lot of mass to drag around. Ignoring the difficulty in getting there, I’m willing to bet you’ll enjoy cycling more at 80-85kg. If you don’t want to lose weight, you have to accept the cycling trade-offs; slower acceleration and a lot harder going uphill. Of course you’ll have an advantage on the downhill and plenty of muscle mass to grow a big engine. You can make yourself into whatever athlete you want to be, you just have to know what that is.
Cool man. I think 5/3/1 has too much volume, I’d maybe consider only one big lower body movement a week. But you should mix it up and do what works for you
400W is certainly possible, but will take good genes and a lot of training to get there. I know some decent cyclists who weigh 90-100kg. I don’t know any cyclists whose optimum cycling weight is 90-100kg - all of the bigger guys would undoubtedly be faster on the bike by losing fat and/or muscle. Doesn’t mean they should - there’s more to life than cycling and if they’re happy with their training and lifestyle choices that’s fine with me.
If you really want to get to 4W/kg you’re far more likely to do it at a significantly lower weight. And even if you are blessed with the genes to do it at 100kg I’d still say that you’d be better still by losing a chunk of that weight. To put it in context, Chris Hoy is your height and weighs about 93kg, so 7kg less than you and he was competing in the shortest and most power-driven events in cycling. The biggest road riders tend to top out at about 80-85kg, and they’re normally taller than you as well. I can guarantee you that with the right nutritional and training approach you can get well below 100kg without losing anything from your FTP (might lose some 5 second power). If you lost power previously going to 95kg it’s because you did it too fast, or weren’t fuelling rides properly, or something else is going on.
400 4w/kg is a stretch, but maybe you are setting the bar too high for a reasonable goal that can be achieved in e.g. 1 year. I guess you should just work your way up end keep track of your improvements and notice when the lines flattens.
I would go for 300 - 3w/kg as a more realistic goal, by then you will know a lot more about training, your body, capabilities etc. and from there you can set new goals, and maybe 400 is achievable in 2 years
You could conceivably get to 4w/kg at 100kg but it will be a whole lot faster and easier to get there by working on both parts of that fraction. It’s pretty difficult to conceive of anyone being at an optimal weight when their BMI is 31 - in the obese category. (and FWIW, I’m not talking down at all - I’m right there with too with a 31 BMI at the moment.) You and I could both stand to lose 15+ kg.
I would attribute your trouble on a group ride to one or more of the following: not hydrated, not rested, not enough nutrition, cutting calories too fast (which can really tank energy levels for me), or maybe the ride was a little faster than recovery pace?
My $0.02 is to keep at it the training and make good choices about what you eat. The weight will come off and your performance will increase (probably pretty quickly.) I think you’ll find a nice spot around 75 to 80 kg and 300 to 320 watts that will put you over 4 w/kg and I’d plan on it taking about a year to get there.
I would focus on losing weight slowly and continuously. There are good methods on that, and it has been a topic in several threads.
400FTP is attainable for many larger cyclists, but it is domestic pro level. Also, bare in mind that Romain Bardet, who is a Little taller than you, is estimated to have a 400W FTP. He obviously isn’t a hundred kilos, but probably as well trained as a human can be, and a genetic specimen…
Long story short: losing weight is by far the easiest way to attain a certain W/kg.
Currently I am around 85-87kg, I was 100 when i started cycling. I have been slowly loosing weight and gaining power so imo weight does not correlate to power in cycling as much as it does in other sports like rowing for example.
Also I never really focused on losing weight (not yet) but still I lost a decent amount just with the volume I have been doing, so focus on power if you’re heavier and weight will go down, once you hit a plateau, then maybe start calorie cutting or whatever else works for you.
If you lost 10kg and were able to maintain power, you would be an absolute force on the bike.
Do you happen to know German rower turned cyclist Jason Osborne? He made the transition and is likely going to be an international pro right after quitting rowing after Tokyo 2021!
I used to race with a guy named Eric Marcotte. I think 2015 USA national champ (pro!), and he also came from powerlifting. So of course that’s n = 1, but I would say you have a great foundation from which to build, and the consistency and longer, harder efforts (compared with the commute) will give you a really good idea of how much you can improve.
Or Hamish Bond from New Zealand. Beast in rowing but his results in cycling are extremely impressive and guy weights 91 kg. Not to mention pure cyclist, TT machine - Ganna, 82 kg is also not feather weight for someone in pro peleton.
Ganna is 80kg ish, but he has an FTP of scarily close to 500W… which means he has a world class FTP of >6W/kg, despite his weight…
W/kg really favors the short super skinny guy, so if someone is over 6W/kg at 6‘4“/180lbs, it is just depressing for the rest of us
Yes but if you are short, skinny guy (or tall, skinny guy like me) it is better to live in Alps if you want to make use of your high W/kg and low FTP. Pure watts are way more useful for amateurs racers. I want more pure watts
jk