What’s a critical force test?
Quote from: Wood FT on February 14, 2021, 08:41:13 pmWhat’s a critical force test?The idea is that there's some level of force output you can sustain for a long time (think 1hr plus), and broadly speaking this is closely related to how much work your aerobic energy system can sustain. This is an interesting value to know because if you're working above that line then the clock is ticking and you will definitely fall off, but if you're below that line you'll (theoretically) be able to keep chugging away almost indefinitely.It's a model more commonly used in cycling (also called FTP) where the test setup is fairly straightforward. In climbing the test is typically adapted to use a 7:3 repeaters style protocol because it's more relevant (vs. a continuous hang).There's some links in Stu's github repo with the details.
It's just as unpleasant as an FTP test, just in a different way
Stu, where did you find any docs on the API for the Tindeq? I had a look at doing something similar last year but couldn't find any info.
Quote from: jakk on February 15, 2021, 01:21:20 pmStu, where did you find any docs on the API for the Tindeq? I had a look at doing something similar last year but couldn't find any info.I emailed Tindeq and asked. I've documented it in my code as well, so you can look in the tindeq.py files for notes on how it works.
In cycling you would use your FTP to plan your training as well; for example using Coggan's power zones. We don't do this in climbing right now, but perhaps we should?
Perhaps best practice would be:1) Measure your CF.2) Do a few aero sessions on the FB at the "right" intensity to understand how it feels3) Recreate the same sensations when doing aerocap on the wall
The main reason this isn't that much use, is that most climbing training is not as quantifiable as dead hanging, and no-where near as quantifiable as cycling.
QuotePerhaps best practice would be:1) Measure your CF.2) Do a few aero sessions on the FB at the "right" intensity to understand how it feels3) Recreate the same sensations when doing aerocap on the wallAlmost like a benchmarked 'perceived effort'? I can see the novelty but struggle to think it'd offer much more than a descriptive scale from "can't feel it, Barrows has his feet on the floor for this" and "forearms feel like lava".
but it would be interesting to experiment and see, and might give a guide that someone is always going a bit too hard or too easy?
RPE works well at the higher end - most people have an instinctive feel for what a 7/10 or 9/10 effort should feel like. I think it's less useful at the bottom of the scale. The thing I see most often in people new to training is an uncertainty about how hard the exercises should feel, especially for aerocap, or confusion about what each exercise actually is training. So I think it would have some application there.
I'm not sure what your point about the 4DP stuff is; you are obviously right that climbers won't have the same performance profile (in this case you'd measure time to failure against load). But is this useful to know?
I can't work out if you are advocating for using a more complex approach or not. To me, the fact that climbing is so much less quantifiable about cycling makes me wonder about the merits of more complexity. Or, put another way, if you had that information - what would you do with it?
If I took a large sample of people and told them the RPE description of Z1 and asked them to sit at what they thought it was, and then took a second group and showed them what Z1, Z2 etc. felt like and then asked them all back several months later, I'm doubtful there'd be much difference in the group's ability to get it correct. This is based on nothing but opinion and the feeling that if it was useful (or exploitable) people would be selling it to road cyclists.
I’d agree with Stu that at the top end it’s easy enough, but the difference in between Z2 (good) and Z3 (OMG junk what are you doing you’d be better sat on the couch) for example wasn’t that east for me to spot to start with.
Sorry I thought you were saying an HRM to indicate effort zones wasn’t required as RPE was a good enough measure, but I think I missed your point!
1) Alex and I have the same project - a 45m endurance sufferfest to a V10 crux at the top
Well I disagree on that, from my own experience. After some time pissing around on a turbo trainer I'm now pretty confident what zone I'm cycling in based on feel alone, and it turns out to be about right based on heart rate when I get home and look at my phone. I can imagine the same idea being useful in climbing.
Also, I think we are getting sucked into just talking about one potential use case. There are others:
It was all so realistic until you forgot that enduro routes with V10 cruxes at the end are too hard for either of us
Z1 - Can singZ2 - Can talk in complete sentencesZ3 - Can talk but it isn't comfortableZ4 - Talking is pretty challengingZ5 - Cannot talkZ6 - Breathless, ragged breathingZ7 - Can't even manage a single word