That’s a great season Lindsay, nice work. Thanks for the update and lessons learned – I’ve passed it on to my (much-shorter-than-me) partner 🙂
John S
Forum Replies Created
-
ParticipantParticipant
Maybe it’s a strength issue? I imagine your aerobic capacity is good, but if your legs are struggling with the extra load of skis and boots maybe that’s why you end up redlining?
ParticipantI imagine that rTSS is accurate for road runs, but that accuracy declines for runs in terrain where pace decreases but effort remains high – which is probably the case with the Snowdon run.
The rTSS is a function of time, pace, elevation etc and there is a section within your account settings to input your threshold pace. So it is also possible that isn’t accurate. I have never calculated or adjusted this number in my account but Training Peaks will still calculate a rTSS if here is no HR data. I ignore rTSS as I either use hrTSS (I have calculated and set my HR threshold) or I manually input a TSS derived from perceived effort, elevation etc.
ParticipantJohn S on February 10, 2021 at 11:46 pm · in reply to: Ultralight, 4-season sleeping bag recommendation #50706That’s a bummer re availability of WM bags at MEC! I guess we will see some more changes there in the future.
As far as bringing things over the border – it is only illegal if you don’t declare that you have goods in your posession. If the goods you are bringing back exceed the limit, then you have to pay sales tax and/or import duties depending on where the product is made. But there is no handling fee like there is if it is posted. (I paid PST on my WM bag) If you are travelling as a family/couple etc, then the limits are per person and are typically able to be combined.
ParticipantJohn S on February 5, 2021 at 12:19 pm · in reply to: Ultralight, 4-season sleeping bag recommendation #50469From memory MEC carries WM bags at negative single digits and then jumps to the -30 bags. FF is only available direct from the manufacturer. In a regular year you would have the option of a weekend trip over the border to pick one up to avoid the customs fees (if you live close enough anyway).
I’m with Scott in that no one brand is significantly better than the others – you just have to read between the marketing lines. I think Rab focuses on the “survive but too cold to sleep” temperature whereas WM focuses on the “most people will sleep fine” temperature. They all use high end down, so the insulating properties will be similar, a big variation in warmth for a given weight of down is likely to be only there if the trimness of the cut is dramatically different. Although the weight of the fabric can vary signifcantly between models.
Good luck! I reccomend a spreadsheet 😉
ParticipantJohn S on January 29, 2021 at 12:15 am · in reply to: Ultralight, 4-season sleeping bag recommendation #50035I bought a new bag a few years ago looking for similar temperature ratings. Although I did consider that Rab bag, I ended up buying a Western Mountaineering Antelope MF. WM rate it to -15 (to their standard not EN testing) although it’s a bit heavier than the RAB (1160g for the long). I am REALLY happy with it. I don’t think I sleep warm, but I have slept in a tent at -15 with just base layers and been super comfortable. And the anti-snag on the zipper actually works!
That model wasn’t available in Canada at the time, not sure about now, so the international shipping aspect may influence your decision.
ParticipantThat scaling looks like a good approxiimation to me.
ParticipantA glitch in the gps spiked the elevation gain to 22,000 metres. Which is a pretty impressive glitch if nothing else!
Adjust the vert and retry. Hopefully that fixes it!
ParticipantWithin Training Peaks there is the option to create different zones and thresholds for different activities, so it possible that there is something off on your settings, leading to a higher hrTSS than you would expect. However, I think by default there is only one box to enter your thresholds in and it is applied to all activities, so this is perhaps unlikely.
It seems to me (as a punter, not a Coach) that the TSS is pretty high for the effort you descibe. But how does the TSS compare to other activities (run, hike) at that level of effort and/or HR? If the calculated TSS is comparable to the other activities, but there is no correlation for how much effort you feel you put in then perhaps consider cutting the TSS by an amount to reflect that. Take notes on perceived effort, vert, and how much you reduced the TSS and then refine your calculations over time. As well as the impact from the descents, I imagine the algorithms behind the TSS are not able to predict the influence of good technique particularly well.
To answer your specific question, I am a long-suffering Suunto HR strap user and have stopped using a HRM for most of my workouts. I estimate TSS based on perceived effort for the activity, so address any easy skiing as part of that calculation. I have a fairly narrow score range that I apply to XC as my limited skills prevent me from going too hard….
ParticipantI think it would be reasonable to set your AeT at 170, based on that information. And from your description of your workouts, it would seem to me that even though there is more than 10% between the two thresholds, the load on your body when operating at AeT is hard enough that doing most of your workouts in easy zones is the way to go/continue.
I am not running at your pace, but similarly find it difficult to maintain an AeT pace on flat ground. For threshold testing I use a treadmill at 10% grade which makes it more achieveable.
ParticipantI remember reading some time ago on a another thread a comment from Scott Semple suggesting it is best to think of threshold heart rates as 5 beat “buckets” as the tests aren’t super precise and there is also day to day variability, so I tend to round down my threshold HR to the nearest 5. Based on the test you linked I would think it would be reasonable to set your AeT at 135. My reasoning (as just another punter, not a coach) is that your starting HR of 140 gave it slightly more than 5% drift, so figure it would be best set slightly lower.
ParticipantIt is possible to use the free version of Training Peaks to develop a training plan if you are happy with just sketching an outline in advance, and then getting more specific with the workouts on a more day to day level.
Using the TP website (not the app) the “metrics” workout (for want of a better description) can be added to future dates and has a section for notes below the actual metrics of HR, fatigue etc. I have laid out a plan a few times by using one of these at the beginning of each week with a summary of what I plan to do that week (2x strength, 3x Z2 runs etc) for the length of the plan. And then actually created the specific workouts the day before or the day of the actual workout. It’s not perfect of course, but at least all your data is already in TP if you decide to buy a plan or you want the Premium version at a later date. I planned a few cycles this way before buying an UA plan.
The free version of TP will give you a TSS value for each workout but it wont calculate your CTL etc (your increasing fitness based on TSS). Likewise, it will give a breakdown of time spent in different zones etc but it won’t calculate PA:HR, (ie do your drift test), or let you know when you’ve done a PB etc. Whether this is enough depends on how much data you want to be able to crunch!
ParticipantI use Wahoo for recording runs etc but Training Peaks for logging all my training and activities. I categorise ski touring as “Rowing” (credit to Scott Semple for this idea). I wouldn’t use this category otherwise and the paddles kinda look like skis. Just be aware that the distance is in metres/yards rather than km/miles. Nordic skiing I use the XC category but I don’t ski at a resort often enough to have a system for logging it. For climbing I use “Other”.
I don’t geek out too much on Pa:HR (except for a periodic AeT test) so I hadn’t noticed those metrics were not always available. I definitely track TSS, but that is a manual input (for ski touring and climbing) as I am making a guesstimate based on time and activity type because I typically don’t record HR data for those activities.
Note that is that it is possible to choose what information is presented for the different workout categories – time, distance, elevation etc. On the website (not the app) go to “Account Settings”; “Layout”; “Quickviews” to select which metric you want and what display order.ParticipantJohn S on October 21, 2020 at 6:14 am · in reply to: Combining Ice and Mixed Climbing Plan with Mountaineering Plan #46113I am in a similar situation of incorporating ice prep within the longer mountaineering training (I have the same 2 plans), so this response is based on (over)thinking about my own training, but I am by no means an expert!
My thought would be for you (OP) to simply repeat a section of the 24 week plan (rather than completing it to the end) and substitute the strength workouts with the ones from the Ice Plan, and allocate the climbing workout to a day with easy aerobic training. That will give you the structure for the plan but you would need to increase the length of the run/hiking workouts so that you continue to build that capacity. What weeks you repeat would probably depend on what you think your fitness would benefit most from. If you have massive aerobic capacity and think you need more training going uphill, then repeat Weeks 9-16 (the Max strength block, which has more steep hiking and some Zone 3). If you think you could benefit from more low intensity work, then Weeks 5-12. And then to continue the training after your ice course til the August trip, repeat (again!) from Week 5 with the prescribed strength workouts (and appropriate increases in the aerobic volume). And likely some repeated weeks later in the plan – there are a few threads on that topic.
For comparison, I am at the beginnning of the 24 Week Mountaineering Plan and am taking the approach of simply “fusing” the strength work from the different plans by incorporating the extra exercises that are in the Ice Plan into the General Strength workout, but still only doing 2 strength workouts a week. When I get to the Ice Specific part, I will likely just do those exercises though. And I have made the Transition Phase a little longer as well. My current plan (which may change as I progress) is:
Week 1. Core & General
2. Core & General
3. Core & General and Ice Fused
4. REST WEEK Core & General and Ice Fused
5. Core & General and Ice Fused
6. Core & General and Ice Fused
7. Ice Specific Strength
8. REST WEEK Ice Specific Strength
9. Ice Specific Strength
10. Ice Specific Strength
11 Core & General
12. REST WEEK Core & General
13 Core & General
14 and beyond Max Strength as per planJohn
ParticipantYes, I am keepoing the intensity down on the approach so only 40/hr. As my fitness has improved I am trying to reset my default hiking speed to take advantage of a higher AeT but old habits are hard to break.
That sounds like a reasonable figure to use for the TSS.
Thanks for sharing the other thread. Nuggets of good info everywhere!