This article is the first of what we hope will be many by esteemed Medical Director and Physiologist Iñigo San Millán of the Saunier Duval-Prodir Pro Tour Team. Wanna get really scientific about your training? Consider getting the man himself in your corner here.
Power in Professional Cycliing.
Everyone is talking nowadays about power output. We all know that power is critical in terms of cycling performance. There are two ways to categorize power: Maximum Absolute Power (MAP) and Maximum Relative Power (MRP). In general terms, Absolute Power is the maximun amount of work achieved over time and Relative Power is the Absolute Power output per kilogram/pound of body weight. I would like to share some of the numbers that I have observed while working with several top european professional teams as well as top cyclists throughout these last 10 years.
First of all, it is important to remark that since power is a measurement where time plays an important role, we have to take into account the time in which that power is sustained for. We cannot sustain the same maximum power output for 5km vs 50km. In the same way, when we measure cyclists in the lab, the protocol is important. It is not the same to measure the Maximum Power in a protocol lasting 20 min than in one lasting 1h. Obviously the longer the protocol the lower the MAP.
In the Laboratory, a typical professional can have an average Maximun Absolute Power (MAP) in a test of about 450 watts. A top professional can have a MAP of about 525-550 watts. These numbers are usually seen in traditional incremental ramp protocols. These protocols last about 25-35 min. But these numbers differ between protocols. For example, a few years ago, I created a new incremental protocol focusing more on steady state loads and could see lower MAP´s. With this test, the average for a medium pro is about 400W and about 475 Watts for the top pro. That is why the election of protocol will elicit different numbers.
On the other hand, one of the essences of cycling is the fight against gravity. Most races have climbs, hills or mountain passes along the way. In these cases a high relative power is critical to be on top of the climb. For that the 2nd Power indicator, Maximum Relative Power (MRP) is essential. Typical MRP observed in professionals start at about 5.8-6.0 watts/Kg (depending on the protocol), with 6.4-6.8 being typical of a top climber. The highest MRP I have ever seen was on a TDF podium cyclist being 7.0w/kg! This value is just really amazing!
Probably many readers are wondering what is more important: MAP or MRP. It all depends on the race course you are racing.
In any race where gravity is not an issue of course MAP is what matters. But at a professional level and even at any competitive level a right equilibrium is what counts the most. I know of many professionals with MAP in the neighborhood of 475-500 watts who are very “average†pros as well as professionals with MRP of 6.5 w/Kg who are average also. For example: an 80 Kg cyclist with a MAP of 475 Watts will have a MRP of 5.93W/Kg, which is an average/low value for a professional. This cyclist will be very strong on the flats and TT but would get dropped right away on the climbs. On the other hand, a 55Kg cyclist with a MRP of 6.8 W/Kg will have a very impressive MRP but will only have a MAP of 375 watts which is low for a professional cyclist. Therefore and obviously an equilibrium of both a high MAP and MRP are observed in the Top professionals. A top professional, nowadays weighs an average of between 68-72 Kg and will typically have a MAP (with my protocol) of 450-460 watts with a MRP of 6.4-6.6 W/Kg. Both MAP and MRP are well compensated being in the high levels but not necessarily within the highest levels for MRP and MAP. One exception to this was Miguel Indurain who had one of the highest MAP, 530W, and also had, compared to the top light-weight climbers, one of the highest MRP with 6.8 w/Kg!! Something similar happens with Lance Armstrong. I don´t know his exact numbers but he would be close to 500W for MAP and close to 7-7.2 w/Kg for MRP.
I mentioned earlier “nowadays†when I was describing the typical numbers for a top pros. And I point this out because until a few years ago, the numbers where different. Todays cyclists are taller, heavier and more powerful. A while ago, many Tour de France winners and contenders where small and very light. In the last TDF, out of the top 20, only 6 riders were below 69 Kg, whereas this concentration would be the other way around 10 years ago. One of the reasons for this is that years ago, TDF stages, especially 1st week of the race, were done at a slower pace, therefore less watts of power output. This means that pure climbers with high MRP and low MAP did not suffer much on the flat and could save plenty of energy for the mountains. Nowadays, the pace is extremely fast on the flats and especially during the 1st week , with this last TDF edition averaging 48km/h in the 1st week!. This hurts pure climbers a lot since the power output they need to stay in the peloton is quite high compared to a heavier cyclist with higher MAP. As a consecuence of this, many pure climbers loose too much energy on flat stages and get to the mountain stages without enough energy left to be up front. However, in the Giro we see the opposite situation, where most top 20 GC cyclists are quite light and the mountain stages are for the most part dominated by pure climbers. The reason for this is that the pace in the Giro is slower than in that of the Tour as well as that there are not as many flat stages in the 1st week. This allows light riders to “travel†better throughout the first stages and get with more reserves for the mountains.
So, with all these confusing numbers of MAP, MRP, kilograms, average speed…etc, I hope that some readers can get an idea of the real picture about the importance of power and the different situations where a specific rider can “reign†or be a “slaveâ€.
Anyways, I always like to say that an ant has a lot more MRP than an elephant…..but still is an ant…..
Best Regards,
Iñigo San Millán, Medical Director and Head Physiologist
Saunier Duval-Prodir Pro Tour Team.
www.saunierduval-prodir.com
So what’s your testing protocol?
Hi Inigo, glad to see you will be contributing to this website. Very good article. One point however–in the first sentence of the fifth paragraph you state “[i]n any race where gravity is not an issue of course MRP is what matters.” Shouldn’t this state in any race where gravity is not an issue MAP is what matters?
Art
Hello, Art,
How are you doing?.
Yes, I meant MAP (mean Absloute Power). I had a typo there. Thanks for the correction!.
I hope you are doing well.
Take care,
Inigo
Note: corrected in the body now.
Doctor,
Are the duration of the protocol intervals described above the same as those you use when you test amateurs? i.e. 8 minutes on, 1-2 minutes rest, 35w increments to failure?
Hope all is well with you, let’s catch up when you’re back in the city.
Best,
PL
What the doc means to say is don’t quit your day jobs CRCA suckers
So if I put out 420-430W max sustainable and a lactate threshold of about 350-360W and weighed 73kg, would that mean anything significant to any pro team anywhere in the modern wolrd?
So if I put out 420-430W max sustainable and a lactate threshold of about 350-360W and weighed 73kg, would that mean anything significant to any pro team anywhere in the modern wolrd?
360w / 73kg = 4.93 w/kg = Pro shrapnel
4.93w/kg at threshold is probably domestic pro shrapnel
My online coach says that I should be tearing up the park with my 2.22298 w/kg
irrelevant.