Ok David thanks for the tip, it’s changed.
MSS is a field that I have been testing with my athletes, where I was looking for an intensity that was really more stable in terms of lactate generation, rpe, etc… FTP/CP for me is not a steady state as some define it, if it were a steady state the TTE would be much higher than it usually is in all athletes. MSS can be used to climb long mountain passes and knowing the heart rate at threshold 2 and threshold 1 we can regulate very well with those intensities. The MSS is the value that I have considered maximum, we can use a lower range of 15-20w. I want to make it clear that with all this there is no scientific evidence, I have simply tried to investigate and analyse a lot of data from athletes to create this. Of course we will still have to improve the calculation but little by little with everyone’s help we will do it. Thanks
6 Likes
Thanks for this.
Looking at my data, the power AeT power would look to be closer to reality than the AeT HR (about 4-5 bpm higher than estimated based on feel and breathing). While higher would be great, I don’t think it’s correct.
MSS is interesting, and I would like to spend some time checking this.
3 Likes
My Aet (Power) has some variation and while lower than I’d like at the minute it’s hard to argue it’s incorrect. I’d say it’s absolutely within ballpark of where I am now.
However AeT HR is too high at 146 beats. I think my AeT is lower.
The 2 estimates don’t align then. If my AeT HR is actually 146bpm then my AeT power is under estimated.
If AeT power is correct then AeT HR is over estimated.
1 Like
It is calculated with several calculations that is based on 30 days, the value can change if we modify the days, I am going to take out another field that makes another calculation. As for the heart rate estimation we would have to add another calculation, I have generated the programming logic in wko5 scripting and python. The problem is that I have to revise Javascript to be able to access several fields. The idea is to be able to access the best maximum heart rate records in 90 days and then apply a correction factor. This access has to be continuous so that it adjusts.
Regarding the calculation by power, unfortunately and when using only the power that is in the curve next to the modelling if there is much difference between the modelling and the mmp, that value may have some error but not much because the tests we did took this into account.
The problem is that the values are continuously updated as the days go by. It is also important to have an updated weight as it is another parameter that enters into the equation to calculate the vo2max.
2 Likes
I have found the numbers to be very realistic.
eFTP of 211
FTP set to 218
But hard to see my PVO2max 
I have tried it. While power in AeT changes over time, AeT HR does not, which makes me think something is not right here
1 Like
Hello @Luisma_Gallego_Soy_P …
I have added the fields to my training in the last 2 months.
AeT HR looks OK… first threshold on the lab around 150-155 bpm (2nd threshold around 173 bpm), but AeT, MSS and PVo2max look way off…
On easy training, with HR approximately between 130-135 bpm I am able to push around 190-200 watts, so 145w for my AeT seems very underestimated. Not sure what MSS means, but I can hold around 300-310w for 60 min and 380w for 4 min.
Power curve on intervals is not that updated as I almost never do all out efforts… maybe that could be the reason?
Marcelo
1 Like
You must have the curve wrongly updated, for the calculation it also uses the weight, so you should have it well updated as well. At the moment there is no filter for other sports so I don’t know if it will use any other curve. Those values that it gives you and the values that you tell me that you move have to be something strange because the deviations are not so big, there are verified data of 100 sportsmen and the deviations were minimum, perhaps I will give him a review to the calculation it is not that on having passed it to Javascript I have done something wrong.
The heart rate will have little variation, in my case 3 beats, the most extreme case we saw was 7 beats, unless you are a sedentary person who starts training that heart rate will vary little.
1 Like
Check values at 30d, 42d and 90d of your 5 minute and 3 minute mmp and let me know.
Not complaining at all.
Just facing reality 
It should be right 
Tks for this.
I have adjusted several things in pvo2max, if you can check if it is closer to reality, it is calculated at 42 days. You will have to re-process the activities.
I would like to know if you think it is wrong so that I can make adjustments. That’s why I asked you for that data to check one thing, I’ve just adjusted it, check it and give me feedback. Thanks
1 Like
At 63 years old I’ve mostly trained only z1/z2 with some few intervals at z4 up at end of the season and it seams the numbers are in line.
For me is looks like way off, but like you said is based on a few days, and the last month i only ride some intervals and LSD …
Reprocess the activities and check if the value is more correct.
Like any modelling if you don’t have quality data, the model will go down. This also happens with eFTP, this is the biggest handicap of any estimation based on a data model. This has been estimated with our athletes who all compete so we have had fairly consistent data. Those who did not compete and did not have a correctly updated power curve varied a little, although these athletes did not have a bad power curve.
1 Like
My cycling power curve is definetely not updated on intervals… I am doing only very easy workouts as my main focus lately is running…
Your estimations make sense looking the data intervals has avaiable…
But… the AeTHR estimation looks very good… not sure if it uses my running data as well or not.
It’s way off now for me for power at VO2 Max. Much lower than before the change, which I already suspected was a small bit low.