Indoor Cycle Instructor Podcast | ICI/PRO Premium Education
ICI/PRO is the Indoor Cycling Instructor Community's resource for free music, Instructor teaching tips, motivational cues, education, entertainment, class profiles, routines and music playlists.
Here is Benjamin Sharp explaining the relationship between power and weight.
Ben is the resident Power Education Specialist for Stages Cycling.
Learn more about Stages and how to train with power at the Stages Website
Originally posted 2018-04-30 09:00:27.
Doug Rusho, Master Instructor with Stages Indoor Cycle provides our latest Audio PROfile: Winch and Plummet
Objectives:
#1: Students will experience the contrast between resistance and cadence, as it relates to steady state power production.
#2: Students will begin to discover what resistance/cadence combination is most efficient for their physiological make up.
Key take away from Doug:
In order to improve fitness we must continually challenge the body with new situations. Everyone has a “comfort zone” resistance/cadence combination when producing power. This profile encourages students to step a little outside their comfort zone for a diverse training effect. It may also be a source of self discovery, where a student realizes where their body works best and/or what their weaknesses are.
I'm experimenting with a few changes to these Audio PROfiles:
Leave a comment and let me know your feeling about these changes.
Winch and Plummet PRO/Playlist in Spotify with a few substitutions. Get it from Deezer here.
Listen to Doug's presentation here.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Originally posted 2012-08-12 10:40:39.
Meet Instructor Krista Leopold – another of our winners in the Ultimate Instructor Profile contest! Pedal-On members will recognize Krista as GroupFitPower.
Welcome to the Jungle – An introduction to Tabatas is a well thought out profile that you can use to bring this form of very high intensity training (HIT) to your studio.
A little bit about me….
I started in fitness as a group fitness instructor and personal trainer. I've taught nearly every style of group class that has been available in the 13+ years I've been teaching. I also have a dance background and have served as group fitness program director in two of the largest clubs in our area. I live in Charleston, SC with my husband Jason and our two children. When Jason and I were dating, the majority of our “dates” were at the gym, where we'd spend our time together lifting weights. Match made in heaven!
It might not come as a surprise, then, that as a fledgling instructor, my classes fell solidly in the category of “aerobics on a bike.” Fortunately, that attitude didn't last, thanks to the incredible team I joined from the beginning. I credit my turnaround and growth as an instructor to my mentor, Spinning® Master Instructor Luciana Marcial-Vincion. Luciana's patience and example have shown me that there is a much better way to both ride the bike, and to deliver class experiences that students want to be a part of.
I'm now a Star 3 Spinning® instructor with a passion for challenging my students to find something meaningful in every pedal stroke. I regularly schedule event rides that explore the mind-body connection. It seems I'm not the only one on a quest for truth and purity and the bike is a wonderful way to explore these concepts. However, the profile I submitted for the Ultimate Instructor Class Profile contest is not one of those rides. The Tabatas profile addresses our students' demands for high-intensity workouts (we have a large Cross-Fit population here in the Lowcountry), but does it in an educational and all-inclusive way. It is exciting and intense and a great challenge for both instructors and students. Just make sure you warn them that it is coming!
Krista teaches at Charleston Ride
Download Welcome to the Jungle
Welcome to the Jungle PRO/Playlist in Spotify
Get this playlist with Deezer.
Click here to join ICI/PRO and have access to 50 more profiles like this one.
Listen to Krista's presentation below or you can subscribe to our free Podcast in iTunes.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Originally posted 2012-07-15 06:52:00.
Besides sporting those fabulous sideburns, Tour de France leader Bradley Wiggins is demonstrating how to climb effectively using a much faster pedal cadence than the riders that surround him. I've been counting his pedal RPM during the climbs and today as I watched, Wiggins climbed the Col de Tormalet in the high 80's. Wiggins reminds me of another successful high cadence climber – Lance Armstrong. I'm going to venture a guess that this year's presumptive winner has a similarly superhuman aerobic capacity.
Climbing hills outdoor as a group requires everyone to develop the same amount of power, relative to the combined weight of the rider and bicycle. When we discuss cuing a climb in class we shouldn't give a random wattage – I want everyone at 300 watts!!!!, but rather normalize each a rider's power output as it relates to their body weight. For example you may say; for us to stay together as a group we all need to be maintaining one watt per Lb.
How a cyclist creates power can vary by changing the two components that make up power; force (pedal torque) and speed (cadence/RPM).
Wiggins vs. Evans
When you see Bradley Wiggins standing next to other riders, it's quite obvious that he doesn't posses the large muscles of many of his competitors. You may actually say that he has “skinny” legs compared to last year's winner Cadel Evans in this picture.
NOTE: If you've got people in your class who are concerned with getting “big legs” from cycling you can show them this picture. Explain that, as a professional cyclist, if Bradley Wiggins could develop the muscular size of Evan's legs, he would… but he probably can't due to his genetic makeup.
So, for Mr. Wiggins to maintain his place at the front of the peloton, while riding alongside Mr. Evans, Mr. Wiggins needs to produce the same watts per Lb (or Kg) as Cadel. No more and no less… the exact same watts per Lb. Not able to develop the same amount of force as others… he makes up for it by applying more frequent (yet smaller) forces on his pedals = higher cadence.
So – how to bring this concept into your class?
If you're teaching with power it's easy. Create a profile that calls for specific watts per Lb at varying pedal RPMs with the intent of exploring which RPM equates to the lowest heart rate, with a fixed watts per Lb. My experience is that each RPM level needs to be maintained for 3+ minutes so your student's effort can stabilize, before making a change.
But what if you don't have power?
As part of my Wine Country Audio PROfile, I added some additional information that I feel will benefit you on days where you're encouraging faster climbing cadences… but don't want everyone's pedals running away with them.
How you cue the addition of intensity is very important in an Indoor Cycling class of any format and its different dependent on the type of Indoor Cycle you’re riding.
– With any Indoor Cycle that uses friction to create the resistance I suggest adding resistance to cadence. Class is pedaling ~ 90 RPM and then add load to reach intended intensity.
– If you are riding a FreeMotion S11, Keiser M3 or Schwinn AC with magnetic resistance you can add resistance to cadence or you can do the exact opposite, adding cadence to resistance. You’ve never heard that before, have you? It’s why I see magnetic resistance as being superior.Here's why
My biggest struggle (besides getting people to be quiet) is how to best communicate load in class. If you have been paying attention, you have noticed that with a friction based resistance system as you slow your cadence the pedals get heavier. We have all seen the person who was supposed to be accelerating out of a climb start bouncing like they have no resistance at all. This happens because as your student pedals faster, the added centrifugal force overcomes the fixed amount of friction, making it easier and easier to pedal, until it’s like they have no load at all. Not Good 🙁 Cycling is all about endurance. We want them to endure it! The solution is to establish leg speed and then adjust load to regulate the work they are doing.Indoor cycles with magnetic resistance (S11, M3 and AC) work very differently. As the speed of the flywheel increases, the Eddy Currents that create the load increase as well. So these Indoor Cycles actually get harder to pedal as cadence increases, just like a real bicycle. So with these types of cycles cue your students to set their load at a slower RPM and then simply increase cadence to add intensity.
Give this a try and let me know if it helps
Originally posted 2012-07-18 16:26:11.
Coach Gino gets an assist from a professional statistician.
Let’s Try This Another Way
After testing 14 different bikes, with 6 of them also being repeat tested at least twice, I was pretty disappointed to see the data I reported in our last blog. This was never meant to be just an academic exercise. This had pure practical motivation. I wanted to be able to do real and reasonable competition in class. I wanted to encourage more tantalizing trash talk among my most competitive riders. I wanted to let some of my “little old ladies” throw it down against some of the guys who think bigger is better. I needed the bikes to be on an even scale to do this in good conscience, and handicapping them against a reputable objectively measured power meter seemed like a no-brainer to do just that.
But alas, the numbers from my work up to this point lead me to a conclusion I simply had not anticipated; that each bike within itself may vary day to day with regards to what power it will display given the same force being applied. This was an assumption that myself and many other “defenders of calculated power” have held on to for these past 4 years or so – that it doesn't really matter if the power is accurate compared to what would be measured with a real power meter, as long as that power was consistent. In other words, we could know if our training was making us better or not by pre and post testing on the same bike. It would simply generate a relative value so we could know if we improved a lot, a little or not at all. Each year at Winter Training we would assign bikes so that we could be assured of this “fact”. This was indeed the fundamental assumption that prompted the entire notion that a handicap could indeed be created, if we had a objective way to get at power simultaneous to seeing the bike's power display.
Unfortunately, as you could see from the numbers reported the last time, they varied so much within the same bike, from one testing episode to the next (even despite painfully recreating the same circumstances of a consistent rider, environment, time of day, method of execution and all the like), that this assumption was not true for at least 50% of the bikes. Undaunted by this surprisingly sad turn of events, I started to ask around for an available statistician that might be interested in this research. I wanted a more experienced extra set of eyes and less personally invested perspective so that they could let me know if I am doing something wrong. Was I measuring the wrong way, perhaps working with false assumptions, not controlling enough variables, etc. I didn’t want to give up just yet — I had already invested too much time and energy.
3 More Bikes Tested, 3 Times Each
One of my regulars referred me to Sarah who is both a cyclist and teaches statistics at a nearby university. We met a couple of times to discuss what I had done so far, and she spent some time and thought on the issue, and created a new protocol. We would focus on just 3 bikes, took them out of commission so no one else would ride them, made sure she conducted/directed me as I rode/tested each bike. These trials would be done on three different days, in random order as generated from a random table of numbers. This video takes us through one of those three sessions.
In the next blog post, we will discuss the results of these 9 trials.
Indoor Cycling Power Accuracy & Validation Research from Cycling Fusion on Vimeo.
Originally posted 2014-02-19 03:04:24.
The picture of confidence in her ability.
It's National Eagle Day here in the USA and I thought I should share an experience I had with the bald eagle one morning before class. I actually had this post sitting as a draft from a few weeks ago. As often happens, I got distracted and never finished it. Learning that today is our day to celebrate these majestic birds has me back at the keyboard.
And when I say flew over me this morning, I mean flew right over me! This bald eagle flew directly over my head, and swooped down on one of the many fat rabbits we have around here, quickly dispatching it.
I was walking into the club this morning (it was a Saturday and I was subbing for my partner who doesn't like to wake up in the morning), thinking through my profile when I heard (and felt) this loud swoosh before seeing this massive bird dive in on his breakfast. If you haven't seen one of these strong, majestic birds up close and personal you are missing a great treat. They stand nearly 3 feet tall and with a wingspan of over 6 feet, the sudden presence directly over my head was quite startling and I'll admit a bit frightening.
Side note: this particular Lifetime Fitness sits on the edge of a large swamp/wetlands and only a few blocks from a major shopping mall. Seeing a bald eagle isn't all that surprising around here. It was always very common to see these beautiful birds perched in trees as you drive through northern Minnesota. Now it seems that wildlife of a every sort is moving back to the suburbs to reclaim their place in what was once farms and prairies.
But this beautiful bird had a problem. Despite their reputed incredible eyesight, she (?) (how do you tell the difference?) appeared to have completely overreached, miss judging it's weight and wasn't strong enough to carry away her breakfast. With a firm grasp on her rabbit, she leaped off the ground with wings powerfully flapping. But try as she might, she was only able to get three or four feet off the ground before stalling, dropping the rabbit before she herself crashed back to earth. I watched from about 20 feet away as she circled repeatedly, each time swooping over my head, attempting to grasp the rabbit and fly off. Each time with the same results… and then I realized she had a plan.
With every attempt to carry off the rabbit, she moved it 10 or 15 feet. It became obvious that she wasn't going to sit and consume her catch right there in the middle of a parking lot, but rather her plan was to move it to a stand of trees, which were across the road from the club – across four busy lanes of traffic, I should add.
It was a climbing day, per our class schedule and my plan was to show Epic Beartooth Pass. As I was getting dressed for class, I realized what a fantastic metaphor I just observed. So during the warm-up I told the story of what I had just witnessed. I talked about how impressed I was with the Eagle. How I watched her develop a plan – improvising a strategy, so as not to lose what she was fighting to accomplish.
I asked the class; do you have the confidence to overreach today on this climb?
I mean really overreach… to the point where you're forced to resort to Plan B?
A common strategy out long climbs as to alternate between seated and standing. As you ride along you'll add an extra gear or two, which has the effect of forcing you out of the saddle. Then you remove those gears and returned to the seat. Because we're riding Freemotion cycles with power, I'm able to coach everyone how they find their two, individual, climbing gears. After we're warmed up I have everyone work through a five-minute effort at or very near threshold HR. this gives us a baseline power average to work with. Maintaining a steady 80-ish cadence, seated efforts are just below this wattage number and the standing number just above. There's no break in this climb. The effort is continuous. Over and over we alternate position – adding for standing, remove slightly and back to the saddle.
After class I hurried out to see if the eagle had been successful. It wasn't difficult to figure out where she was. A swarm of angry blackbirds were taking turns diving at her, as she sat perched in the tree looking down at her catch. I walked over and this is where I had the chance to take her picture. Complete confidence 🙂
Originally posted 2012-06-20 07:39:59.
* n'at a “general extender”[2][3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittsburgh_English)
For those of you not well versed in the language of “Pittsburghese”, we use the phrase “n’at” for a variety of reasons, but in this case it means “along with some other stuff”. Consider this a “side-bar” to the story I’ve been building in this Evidence Based Cycling blog. John Macgowan wrote an article on incorporating the “grade of a climb” into your Indoor Cycling classes, and it seemed like a great topic to write a follow up for.
Power, Speed & Grade of the Hill
While writing the first book on Training with Power for the Indoor Cycling environment, it became imperative to create a system that was both practical and easy to teach from Indoors, but that could also be directly applicable outdoors. After all, the mission of Cycling Fusion™ from day 1 has been to bring these two worlds together, and the validation of how our training translates while riding on 2 wheels continues to be a Start Trek level “Prime Directive”.
To that end, my crew and I followed the same approach I have been describing each week through this blog. . So, I purchased an outdoor power meter (the iBike was the cheapest that had about a 5% tolerance for accuracy — plenty for our application. Getting 100% accuracy is absolutely necessary indoors, since we won’t have the same power gauges outside anyway, and we just need to know that we are improving it, not that we are at 200 or 300 or 225 or some other arbitrary power number.
When I would ride outside, I would compare the wattage I was seeing indoors with wattage figures while riding outdoors. This led to a variety of research undertakings with myself and my study participants. This work on Power truly marked the beginning of Evidence Based Cycling, I just had not put a name and more structure to it at that time.
1 Watt per Pound
One of the key principles presented in the book is the notion that if we want to ride outside, or more specifically, if we want to be able to climb typical hills that cyclists normally climb outside, we need to be able to achieve a minimum of about 1 Watt per pound of weight you are carrying up the mountain (rider wt + bike wt).
Through existing math equations, we were able to create a chart that showed how many Watts/lb would be required on hills with specific grades, given specific speeds. It turns out that under 1 Watt/lb there are few hills that can be ridden at a speed of 5 MPH or greater. Below 5 MPH it becomes increasingly hard to hold the bike upright. One can just about walk at 4mph, and that’s not “speed walking”.
Willing Guinea Pigs… er Volunteers
I was lucky enough to have a bunch of regular members that embraced the whole EBC approach to training and learning, and they were more than willing to help with the research. We first wanted to know if the chart and our math seemed to bear itself out in the real world. We used different people, at different riding and fitness levels to climb various hills with differing grades with our power meter, and we found that the numbers seemed to jive. While the testing of our own clients and fellow coaches/instructors would have been enough for us to build our training with, in writing a book for “the masses” we were compelled to go a bit further.
We wanted to establish some early credibility with both the book and our own research, so we commissioned a University Study to validate the formula and the chart in a different state with different riders, and with a Power Tap that would directly measure power instead of our inexpensive model that only calculated it.
Independent Validation
Carl Foster, Ph.D., FACSM; is the director of the Performance Lab at the University of Wisconsin. His team independently validated the chart that our 1 Watt/Lb principle is based upon, and thus we have a solid foundation for using this as a good target Power goal for the average rider. Here are the final excerpts from their published paper:
Results: Predicted PO and measured PO (within the range of 140-400W) were highly related (r=0.989), with an essentially zero value for intercept (Figure).
Conclusions: Without correction for wind, altitude or the effect of additional riders, the relationship between predicted and measured PO during cycling was very strong, supporting the value of published climb equations.
Comparison of Predicted and Measured Power Output During Uphill Cycling
Carl Foster, Ph.D., FACSM; Jacob Cohen, Gene Nacey University of Wisconsin-La Crosse and Cycling Fusions.
Comparison of Predicted and Measured Power Output During Uphill Cycling Carl Foster, Ph.D., FACSM; Jacob Cohen, Gene Nacey University of Wisconsin-La Crosse and Cycling Fusions.
Implications for Indoor Cycling Instructors
Given that there are no real hills and real grades in an indoor cycling room, one must artificially create the feeling by adding resistance. With the spate of power indoor cycles there are now on the market, using the Speed & Power Chart, and specifically 1 Watts/Lb as a target, and the concept of Watts/Lb as a training parameter can provide a ton of useful options for cueing climbs or even entire classes.
Originally posted 2012-06-14 05:42:48.
–
My original objective of the Power blog here in ICI/PRO was to build the case for power precept upon precept, slowly but surely. Good idea, except for folks who already find themselves teaching on power bikes and are anxious to get to the meat & potatoes. So, as the line in Monty Python’s Holy Grail said (whilst preparing to throw the Holy Hand Grenade) “Skip ahead brother…”
The most fundamental principal in power training is that you can sustain higher power output for shorter periods. This is common sense of course, but when trying to train or “hone in” on power levels you will use for different types of riding outside, one needs to identify these time periods, and develop power based on the length of those efforts.
For example, outside of the long mountain passes in Colorado, or Europe, your standard “hill climb” will often be only 3 to 5 minutes. This is also met with generally a steeper grade than those more gradual, longer climbs, and thus there is a measure of power required to climb those that is significantly higher, and requires different training.
In addition, if you race (or simply want to just impress your friends at every opportunity), you may want to develop significant sprinting or break away skills. To do that, you will want power that is even higher than climbing power, but may only be needed for as little as 60 seconds. This may seem quite short, but it is often all that is needed to achieve a real break away, or triumph in a race ending sprint.
Consequently, we have built the Cycling Fusion Power Training system on 3 zones of power; Sustainable Power (7 to 20 minute efforts), Climbing Power (3 to 6 minute efforts) and Explosive Power (1 to 2 minute efforts). These ranges are quite large, and there are 7 power levels within each zone. Rather than bore you with all the details, let’s just jump in and conduct a class that provides a sample of each of these zones.
The class design below is based on the Keiser M3 bike, since it is what we use at my club (Global Ride Training Center) in Pittsburgh. Since we also speak specifically to how we can reset our power numbers, I’ve written this class specifically to this model, and thus I call the class: The Keiser Tour De Power. For those that do not have a Keiser M3, but do have power, simply replace the portion of this workout that speaks to resetting the bike to get your average power numbers for one of the zones, and it will work just as well on any other bike.
Please post any comments or questions here, and I’ll do my best to answer them all.
Originally posted 2010-02-10 05:22:00.
How steep is a 4% grade? 8%? Over 10%?
How do I effectively explain % of grade to my class?
What are the feelings I would experience climbing different % grades on a bicycle?
And finally, how do I effectively communicate that feeling to my class?
Every July we hear commentators Phil Liggett, Paul Sherwin and Bob Roll discuss how the Tour de France is won or lost in the mountains. Just winning one of the popular climbs; Alpe d'Huez, Mont Ventoux, Col du Tourmalet or others can be the highlight of any cyclists career. But when Liggett explains that Alpe d'Huez has an average grade of 8% what exactly does that mean? Based on context, we can assume that this is a very difficult climb… but how difficult? What does it feel like to ride with the professional Peloton as everyone powers up a long climb at 8% grade?
So with the Tour only a month away and many Instructors and students riding outdoors, I felt you might benefit from some cliff notes on Grade and Slope. If you are reading this outside of North America, the concepts that I'm going to present are the same, but how they are noted on street signs varies from country to country.
Simply put, % Grade is gain in elevation (what's called the Rise), over a horizontal distance (the Run) – “typically” 100 feet or meters. The actual distance traveled is the Slope length which is slightly longer than the Run – it's that A²+B²=C² Pythagorean theorem thing you grew to love in highschool 🙂
So…
A 5% grade = a 5′ increase in elevation in 100′ of horizontal travel.
Image from Wikipedia
So you don't confuse the engineer's in your class, be careful not to mix up % of grade and the degrees of angle. They're completely different and roads aren't measured in °. If you feel it would be helpful to your students, you may want to comment that a road at 45° (as if that would be possible) would have a 100% grade, i.e. 100′ forward @ 100′ up.
Wikipedia has an informative page on Grade / Slope if you'd like to learn more.
Alpe d'Huez has an average grade of 8.1% over a run of about 13 km. Click to see the profile. That sounds impressive but it really tells you nothing if you don't understand what it feels like to ride a bicycle up an 8.1% grade. Actually 8.1% is the average. The first kilometer and a half are at over 10%.
If you want to clearly communicate the pain of climbing a 8.1% my suggestion is to find a steep hill, ride up it and experience what it feels like.
So now you may be thinking; “great idea John… but I don't recall seeing the grades marked any of the roads in my neighborhood.” My response would be; go out, find one and measure it.
I made the video below for a different project where I recommend that cycling studios measure and mark the road as a helpful guide to outdoor cyclists. In the video I describe the simple process of measuring the grade of one of the local climbs in your town.
If that went by to quickly, you divide the number of vertical inches by 120 (10′) which gives you the % grade.
How I communicate % grade in my classes.
Discussions of % grade typically come up when I'm teaching a virtual ride using an Epic Planet DVD or Global Ride's Dirty Dozen DVD, the grade of each climb is listed in the information bar at the bottom of the screen and I'll use it to help explain the intensity of each effort. I start by explaining that, although it doesn't sound like much, 4% is a serious climb that will have most of us at Threshold HR or Power FTP if it's of any length. I go on to explain that (at least where I live) most roads or highways rarely exceed 4%.
I'll reference local roads, that I understand the % grade, to my class – my apologies to those of you in flat lands of Iowa or Florida, you're on your own. Some of these roads, on established cycling routes, have steeper grades that I have measured. I'll talk about them by name; “Fox Road Turn” 8%, “Carver Wall” 12% and “Eden Prairie Road” 13.5% as a way to appeal to my cyclists who have experienced these climbs for real.
Other examples:
Once you've measured and ridden a climb with known grade, my guess is you're going to have a new appreciation for how truly difficult those famous climbs in the Tour de France really are and a new respect for the professional cyclists who climb them.
You can find the profiles of every climb, in every major Tour, along with 33,773 others at http://www.climbbybike.com/
Do you have any tough climbs near you?
Originally posted 2012-06-06 11:45:22.
It’s finally time to take a look inside.
First I have to apologize for taking almost 2 months to report on results that were secured after just 4 weeks of data collection. That’s part of the problem with Evidence Based Cycling; once you do herd all those cats on bikes (see last post) and send them on their way to collect data, you have to eventually herd them over again to retrieve the data. I only got the final piece of performance data last week.
I won’t hold you in suspense any longer, the results appear below in summary form — with the bottom line of: “What effect if any did this protocol or riding drill have?“ or perhaps more simply stated “Did we get an better?” or better yet, would it be more appropriately states as “can this protocol be used as a specific prescription for improving Muscular Endurance in cyclists?” Frankly, I want to know that for myself and my own riding, as much as I want to or need to know it for the riders I coach personally.
Summary Results
The summary results shown here simply compared the Baseline Test (our method for determining their power generation and sustainability levels at the start of the test) to their Performance Test that sought to measure the same thing, on the same bike, in the same manner. The results seem to suggest that this riding drill for improving Muscular Endurance works.
|
SUMMARY RESULTS |
Muscular Improvement |
Endurance Improvement |
Efficiency Improvement |
|
Average Change: |
5.03% |
3.35% |
17.29% |
|
Throwing out High & Low: |
5.04% |
5.04% |
13.90% |
The one fact that can, and often does bring seemingly good findings into question is the sample size. While we started with 11, we ended up with only 8 riders who completed the study. There are a variety of reasons for this, none of which had anything to do with the test itself. In any event, to be considered valid by almost any rigorous standard, this type of study would have to be repeated with a bigger sample size. May this preliminary “investigative type research” would inspire some budding graduate student in the physiological sciences to pursue a wider study.
Are The Results Statistically Significant?
In terms of whether we can consider these results meaningful or not, we must first introduce the term or phrase associated with this question; “statistical significance”. In regards to research findings, it has a fairly specific definition. Wikipedia explains it this way: “Statistical significance” is a statistical assessment of whether observations reflect a pattern rather than just chance…” It further defines the level or degree of significance this way: “The choice of significance level is somewhat arbitrary, but for many applications, a level of 5% is chosen by convention.[3][4]”
As you can see from the summary results, by all accounts calculated, only the Average Change in Endurance would come into question. This is quite understandable given the fact that these results were assessed only 4 weeks after the study began. In training other athletes, and in training myself as a semi-retired racer, I can tell you that most real and lasting training effects take 6 weeks to be “established”; established as in the gains are likely to not be reversed any time soon, and that there was a real cause and effect relationship between the work and the result.
The Gory Detail
Below is the table with all the numbers that make up the summary findings above. Data geeks control yourself — these numbers only represent 4 weeks of following the M.E. protocol, and we need much more data to begin to think of implications beyond the obvious conclusions drawn from what we see here. That will be the focus on our next blog post — what all can we see and say about this data and its implications for both training and further research.
Click image to enlarge
Stigler S (2008). “Fisher and the 5% level”. Chance 21 (4): 12. doi:10.1007/s00144-008-0033-3.
Fisher RA (1925). Statistical Methods for Research Workers (first ed.). Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.
Originally posted 2012-10-24 11:49:24.
Please see the full article for complete descriptions and videos of the exercises: https://www.active.com/cycling/articles/11-exercises-to-boost-hip-strength?cmp=18N-PB2000-S20-T9-cycling-AR2&eps=title_1004667
Powered by WishList Member - Membership Software
