Pursuit of Aero

IMG_20180128_122704.jpg

I can tell you that is this is a fairly uncomfortable position and that the power drop disadvantage is clear. I think that my head positioning should be lower, but out on the road, I prefer to see way ahead because I am paranoid about accidents.

My size small Nike Tour De France 2006 (Floyd Landis) Yellow Jersey (gift from sister) is now quite baggy, but even then, my stomach is pretty compressed leaning over with my legs coming up.

Getting my VO2 Max Test with Revvo

As I use TrainerRoad for cycling training and listen to its podcast, I have become more curious about VO2 Max. What are my genetics, what is my ultimate potential?

In general, I like looking at data from TrainerRoad, Strava, Wattsboard, and Stravistix, even though I neither race nor plan to race, unless it’s to be part of a team as a domestique. At best, I want to hit the magical mark of 4 watts per kilogram (I’m currently between 3.5 and 4) and be a potentially good Category 3 racer.

Unfortunately, VO2 Max tests, which measure how much of incoming oxygen your body can process (think of it as oxygen efficiency), are quite expensive at $100+. Thus, when I had a chance to try Revvo‘s simulation of VO2 Max for free in San Francisco, I just thought, why not?

Revvo claims 97% accuracy (P value please!) of the real thing, and since most power meters are +-2%, that seems reasonably good.

My results:

VO2 Max Michael Nguyen 2018-02-08.jpgI was pleasantly pleased with the results as my performance was better than expected. Then, suspicion crept in and I kept reading to think about whether I should believe in them.

The two things I’ll point out are my measured VO2 Max at 61 and FTP (threshold) at 259 watts. 61 is 1 percentile for my age group. Wow! How badass am I? Even if we give Revvo a 5% error (versus claimed 3%) buffer, I’d still be at, worst case, around 58, which is really good. Unless I go pay for an official test, I don’t have much more to dispute, but imagining I can be in the top 1% of anything physically seems unreal.

The FTP test result, is a bit different. Revvo claims that my FTP/kg ratio is already 4. However, since I actively train and use a power meter, I think my actual FTP is perhaps 235. I say perhaps because my indoor FTP with TrainerRoad is 225, and even that is tricky. I always fail my FTP tests and just use that setting for my workouts. 225 works well (kicks my butt) for me except for oddly enough, VO2 Max workouts, which I’ve been reducing by 3-5% of FTP to complete them properly.

There are a few things that suggest my real FTP could be higher than my TrainerRoad one.

1) Indoor trainer power for many people is lower than outdoors. That may sound like I’m making an excuse to feel better (which I would love to do), but I can easily do 250 watts outdoors for a few minutes compared to indoors. For example, take this workout from 9 months ago in which I climbed at 271 watts (4.3 w/kg) for 4.5 minutes. I assume (when I first started using TrainerRoad, I didn’t have a power meter, so I don’t have an apples to apples comparison from one year ago) I am stronger right now, but I don’t think can do that indoors. I’ve read different explanations for this. Some of this could be due to heat (air flow is not as good indoors even with fans), some of this could be due to the type of power you have to use on an indoor trainer versus outdoor roads.

2) My mental endurance is kind of weak. Going through longer TrainerRoad workouts, I really do get lazy and have to fight to avoid stops mid-way through 8, 10, 12, 20 minute bursts. Therefore, as Revvo suggests, perhaps I’m capable of doing much more.

3) I use a Powertap G3 power meter, which measures power at the wheel. Most power meters are pedal or crank based, which means they measure power at the source (your legs and feet). When power is measured at the wheel, this is the real-world power that’s driving the biycle. The difference is power that is lost through that transition from the frame to the drivechain. From different opinions I’ve read, this difference could be 5-10% or around 10 watts.

4) The positioning on my bike right now is quite aero. I’m probably slightly small for the frame (which is an aero-oriented bike already), and this likely means I’m stretched out even more horizontally than normal. How this impacts FTP is that it’s harder to breathe, which affects power. The Revvo bike, however, is more upright and with geometry more comparable to a normal or endurance focused road bike. Therefore, I could be losing significant power due to my position. I’ve been setting aside money to get a new properly fitted (perhaps 49CM) super duper (Specialized Tarmac? Roubaix? Canyon Ultimate SLX?) disc brake road bike, and have set 4W/kg as a performance requirement before looking at a new purchase seriously.

I mentioned some of this to Siva, Revvo’s CEO. He agreed that the power would more likely come out during an extended climbing session such as on Mt. Diabo (which I’ve never done). Revvo’s equipment is built on the Wahoo Kickr.

One thing I confirmed that I had long suspected is that my maximum heart rate is lower than the predicted rate for my age. My predicted max heart rate is 183 bpm. I always felt there could be something wrong with me because I would want to die cycling a little above 170. My friend David’s heart rate (he’s the same age) is mid-180’s. Revvo measured my max at 173. Cycling outdoors, I felt like I could sustain 165 reasonably well, but thinking that my true max was 180+ made me feel that I was just lazy.

I wanted to look more at VO2 Max as a meaure of performance and found this breakdown:

finalwattchart

This chart suggests that I have a lower bound Cat 2 VO2 Max. If I adjust the FTP results for watts/kg, it suggests a 4w/kg power to weight ratio and about 250 watts.

So if we consider my indoor training FTP, wheel-based vs pedal based power measurement differences, and sitting position, is it possible I’m much closer to 250 and 4w/kg than I think? It’s possible. We’ll know more once I start to do more outdoor runs on my own (Strava KOM time!), but I prefer to keep training for the next couple of months to make sure that I’m at that level.

Here’s hope!

Dribblepro Basketball Training Ball [Review]

Recommendation
The Dribblepro (or Dribble Pro) Basketball Training Ball, both from Spalding and its black and red version are worth purchasing to improve your in-game dribbling. While the ball is supposed to help your dribbling, rebounding, and shooting, I think its value is more on the dribbling side, and for under $30, the black and red version is definitely the better buy over the Spalding ball at $60.

Background
Henry Bibby, former head coach at USC and NBA assistant coach, developed the Dribblepro and sent me a ball to review in early 2015, but I only started training regularly with it recently. The ball is a regular size ball that has several rubber “stubs” – when you dribble the ball, the stubs will occasionally hit the ground and cause the ball to bounce in a random direction. This forces your hands (and eyes if you are looking) to predict where the ball will go and control it. The idea is that this unpredictably better reflects real life game situations in which you need to control the ball under intense situations.

It is hard to do an objective analysis of the effects of training (I trained a couple of hours a week for nearly 2 months) with the ball. Over my time with it, one of the stubs broke off and I felt that the ball lost much of its cover surface from use on outdoor basketball courts. However, I can still shoot and dribble with it fine. From the training, I feel that dribbling with a normal ball is much easier – since starting, I only practiced with the Dribblepro and played games with normal balls, so I can feel a clear difference when I switch. In addition, I unexpectedly have more confidence dribbling the ball during games. There have a been a few times where I was dribbling in traffic or lost control of the ball, but I knew I could get it back. Whether this has been due to actual improvement, luck, or the level of competition, I cannot say.

If you can train with both the Dribblepro and Dribble Specs to prevent yourself from looking at the ball as it careens out of control, I think that is a special combination to improving your hands and feel for high-intensity, in-game traffic situations.

To read more of my basketball training reviews, please click here.

Steve Nash MVP Basketball Fundamentals DVD [Review]

Recommendation

Steve Nash’s 20 Minute Workout, a shooting workout featured in his MVP Basketball Fundamentals DVD set, is the most important part of my shooting practice and worth purchasing. Particularly as I am older (35 years old now), I don’t necessarily have hours to put in for a complete practice session. Thus, this workout does a great job of getting me ready for games and really helping me understand what kind of shots I should feel comfortable with in game situations. I have been using it for years, and I appreciate how much it focuses my practice rather than just having me shoot shots around the court.

You can buy the Steve Nash MVP – Basketball Fundamentals DVD set on Amazon (it was released in 2007) with all the training tips, or just watch the shooting workout above.

For more of my basketball training product reviews, click here.

Pro Shot Shooting System [Basketball Training Review]

Recommendation
After over a decade of trying different ways to shoot, reading tips, training with different devices, the Pro Shot Shooting System is the only thing I recommend for experienced shooters (not necessarily great ones, just those who are more mature / set in mechanics and in their playing). It is completely free and resulted in clear results for me, not only in practice, but in games. You can watch the following two videos to learn more as well:


Background
I have been studying shooting in efforts to shoot better on a more consistent level for well over the last decade. Luckily, the Internet has made more of this information accessible. Unluckily, much of the information is opinion and as I would try things, I could not tell what was working.

I have tried numerous devices over the years, all with arguable effect. Overall, I never found anything truly worthwhile until I started reading 10 Shooting Lies on FocusedShooter.com. (Ignore the visual mess of the website) What I really like about the Lies article is that Paul Hoover, the author, does not simply state his opinion. He shows video footage of NBA players (good ones) doing all the things that he discussed. Thus, when one lie is staying square to the basket, he shows how no one actually does this. Same thing for jumping straight up and down during the shooting motion (everyone sweeps their feet).

In addition, practicing the Pro Shot Shooting System does not require any new devices or purchase. You can download a 150 page PDF file (you can read it very quickly to understand what needs to be done) for free.

Once I read the article, and started trying these tips, I immediately (within one session) could see more consistent strength and accuracy on shots. Unlike any training device I have tried, it is indisputable that I am better when I practice under the System. It does not require any training devices, and when I notice myself out of form, I read the PDF again to make sure I have all the key tips in my mind as I shoot and I find that I can quickly rediscover the right form. However, two things I still cannot do are shoot with one finger (like Kobe Bryant) and focus on the ball’s flight path while shooting.

To read more of my basketball training product reviews, please click here.