Is there a good population-level explanation why Coggan Male 5s and 60s power percentiles are so different from 5s and 60s power percentiles among Intervals.icu users?
For example, my watts / kg 5s and 60s power percentiles among all Intervals.icu male users are around 70%, while in Coggan distribution I barely register as a noob?
The Coggan chart is not age group based and I am not sure how the data was derived. I just captured it from screenshots I found on the internet.
The Coggan chart is for all athletes from Elite level down to the beginner, so you can see where you fit on the overall chart of beginner to pro.
The Intervals data only includes registers users (92635 in all males), so comparing two different data sets is not good. Also, you’re only as good as your data, and doesn’t reflect how you can perform in a racing scenario.
Coggan and Allen, who developed the chart, initial intentions were to see if their athletes they were coaching (and Coggan isn’t a coach) were on track with their training. However, it also gave them clues as to the relative strengths and weaknesses of individual riders and their physiological systems. from Training and Racing with a power meter (page 54-55, second edition), but not word for word
The use of the table to compare yourself to other categories is of a limited-practical use as the best measure of performance is performance. Instead, use the chart to improve your weaknesses and maintain your strengths. The chart is not a true reflection of your ability if you aren’t keeping the model up to date, i.e. performing max efforts across the durations.
As I understand it, Coggan’s 60s data is from track cyclists.
I’m a bit older than you, but have decent 5s power relatively speaking:
If you evaluate Ganna’s hour record - approx 450w at 85kg his wkg is about 5.2.
So he is a Cat1 or just about a pro racer? According to Coggan.
Would that be proof that the guys with the highest FTP doesn’t always win the race, but the guys that rides the course the fastest? In this case, it’s the longest distance.
