Related, Alan Couzens ideas on the relationship between volume and performance.
https://www.alancouzens.com/blog/volume-vs-intensity.php
3 Likes
In the first article he has managed to diss 50% of the TR users
āSimilarly we also see relatively unfit athletes - folks with FTPs of 3w/kgā
His FTP model is way off for me. He has my 56 CTL indicating 3.75 w/kg and an FTP of 299. It is 3:01 and 240
Not bothering with the next two articles
1 Like
Off for me as well, but within his range ā my CTL is 100 right now, FTP 4.5 w/kg.
Just wonderingā¦is there a diminishing returns cut-off point to hours/TSS and gains in FTP (or other power curve #s)?
1 Like
Out of curiosity I ran my stats through the model. Didnāt read the article, but:
36 CTL, 68.4KG.
Estimated: 3.61 W/kg, 247 FTP
Actual: 3.71 W/kg, 254 FTP
Not too far off. As I tried to scale up though based on where Iāve been at in the past, it progressively got less and less accurate.
Seems there is:
You can see the power of this sort of model to explain non linear relationships, e.g. the relationship of ādiminishing returnsā between more work & the performance gain that it bringsā¦
Increase the volume from 40-60hrs per month and you get ~0.5 w/kg. Increase it by another 20 to 80hrs per month and you only get an additional 0.2 w/kg, i.e. the relationship between work & performance is non-linear.
and
Most athletes significantly underestimate the benefit of volume on performance and significantly over-estimate the value of intensity on performance.
Might be useful for the 80/20 crowd.
20% of athletes are āintensity respondersā;
20% of athletes are āvolume respondersā;
30% of athletes are āaverage respondersā;
30% of athletes are ālow respondersā.
Looked at the paper for a bitā¦kinda ran some numbersā¦and his thesis on V:I:P is pretty much reflected in how TR design a complete Base:Build:Specialty phase. In other words, doing TR will most likely make you a faster cyclist. 
3 Likes