The concept of time is so subjective. Consider the cycling time trial. We all relate to it differently based upon empirical experience, education, spirituality and plain old pragmatics. However, with the hundreds of athletes I have had the pleasure of testing and training, a most interesting phenomena is beginning to emerge as a concept of value (the exercise physiology counterpart to a person of interest) that I believe warrants additional inspection. The initial premise is one we have all experienced at one time or another, in a spin class, on a sustained climb or during a FTP test. We all know, we all perceive, time to pass far slower when the load is approaching maximum as compared to the ‘time flies’ perception when the going is easy. Begging the question, why is this? And additionally, can we game the phenomena for our performance advantage?
Not being satisfied with the lazy I don’t know, that’s a good question, knee-jerk response, I spent some time with the Google tool yesterday and came away with a few interesting data bits. Here is the good news-bad news conclusion. Which really isn’t any conclusion other than additional data is necessary. So the testing will continue until moral improves. But…..
How would you respond if I was to announce a new ftp protocol that reduced the test time by half? Yes, that gruesome 20 minutes of all-out effort that by default separates those in the serious camp from all others, the 20 minutes that has been described as ‘that dark place where one must enter to find one’s true character’ and the one that prompts so many creative and artistic excuses? AND gives the same (in range) results? Would you, like the test subjects I sampled yesterday with this extraordinary news, jump for joy and thank me financially for my kindness, generosity and benevolence?
Immediately let's considered the challenge. What obstacles, negatives, outliers or logistic difficulties might be encountered along this brave new path to enhanced fitness and optimum cycling health?
The first, I think is the subjective nature of the human animal in response to condition change. Specifically, (and you can play at home along here), what is your immediate response, how would you strategize your approach in the form of having a game plan (and a back up) to the new protocol requirement asking for half of the former duration? With the over 50 athletes we currently have FTP data on, I will estimate that 50% of them would be super pumped and instantly think about killing all 10 of the testing minutes in a Herculean output of raw explosive power. After all is it only half of what we have been doing these many years, truly a testing piece of cake. Done deal, bring it on.
The other 50% would, again as noted in yesterday’s plausibility study, put the gaming component into play. One such response was, understandably, the ‘save about 5% of available octane for a strong finish, just in case’, tactic. ‘Cause ya just never know what will happen out there. Wise but safe.
This dichotomy led me to consider how the two attitudes might affect the outcome. Eventually a pattern began to emerge asking for a label. I call it the Athlete’s Character Quotient (ACQ), where attitude, character, personality type, experience, acumen, fears and bias and association with suffering (and subsequent joy) are parts of the ACQ definition. Surely the Type AAA athletes will outperform those not quite so driven. Yes? No? Maybe? Sometimes?
We will launch this new training and testing protocol next week with the riders currently involved in our summer camp. With the specific goal of comparing 10 minute testing times to their established 20 minute times. Won’t THAT be fun?
As if that wasn’t enough, there is also a LOT of talk these days about testing for drugs in cycling, most recently as a result of Chris Froome’s otherworldly effort in the Giro. There are proposals and new protocols already in play. They postulate that the same methodologies we currently use to measure and manage cycling power might also clean up the sport of professional cycling. I am all for that.
Time, as we have seen, is a perception, varying from one person, one athlete, to another. Perception is subjective, therefore, contrary to popular cliche, perception is NOT reality, just one’s extremely judgmental view of it. The only reality is truth.
We call it the trial of truth for a very good reason.
No comments:
Post a Comment