In my post yesterday I suggested that Jani Brajkovic of the Radio Shack cycling squad had improved his fitness as a result of his weeklong effort in winning the Criterium du Dauphine stage race a couple of weeks ago. This is a common benefit of an extended, high-workload period of training which I call a "crash" block. A seven-day stage race is, for all intents and purposes, a hard period of training.
So is there any proof that he has improved his fitness other than his reported sensation of feeling like he's "riding with a tail wind all the time"? It appears there is. I noticed in his tweet today that he has improved his CP5 (highest average max power output for 5 minutes) by 40 watts since the race. That's huge and probably on the order of a 7-10% increase (I don't know his power metrics). I would expect to see something in the range of 3-5% after a week of very intense crash training followed by several days of rest.
I consider CP5 to be one of the best predictors of performance in a bicycle road race. That's because the outcomes of road races are typically determined by two- to three-minute episodes in the which the key players work at or about their CP5 power. This is usually breakaways on hills or in crosswinds, or in the lead outs for sprinters.
Don't expect CP5 to improve just because you do a lot of miles on the bike during a crash block. It takes a great deal of high-intensity training at CP5 to see the sort of results Brajkovic is experiencing. He had many such opportunities with Alberto Contador trying get away, especially on the climb up Alpe d'Huez. It will be interesting to see how Jani does in the Tour de France which starts this weekend.
Hi Joe,
I am attempting to implement crash training, as described in the Training Bible, in order to prepare for the 5 day Cascade Classic (I'm a Cat 1 female in my 3rd season of racing). I increased my weekly hours from 12ish to 18ish for 2 2 week build blocks, and now I'm in recovery week after Build 2. The race begins July 20. Crash training calls for 1 peak week, but I have 3 weeks (including this week) until the race. Should I skip recovery week and make it 3 peak weeks, or include another build week into Build 2, then 1 recovery week, 1 peak week, and race week? Without WKO, it's difficult to really know if I'm over-training - I just want to hit Cascade as prepared as possible! Also, if I do a full recovery week, what should that look like?
Thanks, Melinda.
Posted by: Melinda K | 06/29/2010 at 03:28 PM
Joe,
Great articles! Its really fascinating to watch the race and then read your analysis. Really gives me a new level of understanding.
Posted by: Rob | 06/29/2010 at 05:46 PM
Melinda K--Good questions but I'm a bit lost in all of the details. Not really sure I understand the timing of when the crash was and when build 2 was relative to them and how long it was. But even knowing all of that I'm not sure I could tell you the best route to take. I'd need to know a lot more. Let me just say this... You must recover after a crash for a half to full day for every day of hard training. After that you can return to normal training fo a short time which would be best as a peak period probably (if I understand a bit of your timing). The peak period should generally last 1-2 weeks followed by race week in which you just stay sharp with very short, race intensity intervals. I hope you can figure it out from there. If you'd like to consult with one of my cycling coaches ($100/hr) please let me know. Good luck!
Posted by: Joe Friel | 06/30/2010 at 01:59 PM
Mr. Friel,
I was a little disappointed to read your sales pitch to Melinda's question.
I had in the past asked a question about training and got a similar response.
In response to Melinda, I fell behind in the beginning of the year due to work commitments and had to implement a crash training week.
I did the following block: 2 weeks of crash training followed by a week of reduced hours/mileage but still included interval training and then repeated the cycle again. Took a recovery week and was back to my racing fitness. After that I have been following the regular periodization process.
The one tool that I used which you do not have is the WKO Power Management tool. There are 5 basic principles that you need to take into consideration if you are using that tool. I found a link to an article that describes what those 5 rules are. I do not remember all of them at the top of my head, your TSB below negative 20 should be spaced out by a week to ten days, the CTL should not increase by more than 5 TSS/day, your CTL should not drop for two continuous weeks.
It is ok to have a negative TSB throughout the training block and even in recovery week, as long as the TSB creeps towards a lower negative value or zero. Foe example if your TSB goes from -15 to -5 over a 5 day or a week period then it is considered a recovery.
Ideally you would want to go to Cascade classic with a positive value for TSB or atleast zero.
So you should plan out in reverse from the start of Cascade classic. The week leading to the race, no intensity, a day (Mon) before or two days before (Sun) (depending on travel schedule) do some 1 to 2 min VO2max efforts. During that week do a long ride on Wednesday, Thursday do some anaerobic efforts, Saturday do a ride with a 15 to 20 minutes at tempo power. The rest of the rides should be recovery pace and limited to an hour. The week before the race implement a high volume and high intensity week, make that last weekend hard. Add some motorpacing sessions between now and the end of crash training week.
Hope this helps. Good luck. I will be keeping an eye on the results sheet :)
Posted by: FG | 07/01/2010 at 08:34 AM
hey there Joe_
how large of an increase in weekly TSS is advisable for a crash block?
thanks_
matthew
Posted by: matthew | 07/01/2010 at 12:56 PM
Matthew--This is an issue determined largely by the individual's starting point and previous training experience. If well-trained, probably double what you normally do for the same period of time is safe. Just be sure to rest & recover after for a few days.
Posted by: Joe Friel | 07/01/2010 at 01:10 PM
FG--I certainly wish I could have helped her as I try to help everyone who asks me a question. It was simply too complex of a question requiring way too much guesswork on my part forthe missing pieces. You did a good job of writing a small book chapter to help her hoping that you offered enough data to incude an answer to her dilemma. I simply don't have the time to do that. The consultation would help her a lot more than if I just guessed.
Posted by: Joe Friel | 07/01/2010 at 01:46 PM
Thanks to both FG and Joe - I appreciate both of your insights. Melinda
Posted by: Melinda K | 07/02/2010 at 12:55 PM