Have been trying to use the race analysis function of BBS to see what power I would have needed to bike on par with the winner of my AG at IM Lanza. Something is definitely not quite right, this feels like one of these Zwift races were some people are pushing 9W/KG. Here is what I have done - feedback welcome, I must be doing something wrong:
- I biked 5'57, 203W AP, 218W NP. BBS gives me an average CDA of 0.34 which is bad, that said I had no disc wheel, a road bike front wheel (side winds - it helped on descents), and obvs there was a lot of climbing and sitting up
- The winner of my AG (45-49) biked 5'20. Now I am decent cyclist, have been in the wind tunnel and I have won and podiumed at other Ironman races but I can accept that maybe my choice of equipment wasn't ideal (so say CDA of 0.31 - 10% better), and maybe I could be a couple of KG lighter (my fat percentage must be 14%, I know it could be a bit lower)
- Still if I do that, I would have needed over 320W to match his time, according to the race analysis function of BBS. That is over 50% higher than my power on the day. To be clear I biked 2.9W/KG at 0.81 IF, this is telling me that I would have needed 4.6W/KG (at 0.8 IF that is an FTP of 5.75 - Pogacar's estimated FTP is around 6W/KG!). I remember Dan Plews in his course record at Kona biked 3.5-3.6W/KG
- My confusion is further compounded by the fact that the same guy who won my age group (45-49) reports in an interview of having finished 12th AG in Kona in 2022 with a bike time of 4'42 - for which I would only have needed around 3.1W/KGS - fully achievable for me on a good day.
Where are my calculation letting me down?
I suspect the BBS analysis function is just completely wrong. Even with 0.28CDA (impossible with all the climbing) and 5KG lighter (at some point you become a skeleton cam't be healthy), the required watts still make no sense.
- I biked 5'57, 203W AP, 218W NP. BBS gives me an average CDA of 0.34 which is bad, that said I had no disc wheel, a road bike front wheel (side winds - it helped on descents), and obvs there was a lot of climbing and sitting up
- The winner of my AG (45-49) biked 5'20. Now I am decent cyclist, have been in the wind tunnel and I have won and podiumed at other Ironman races but I can accept that maybe my choice of equipment wasn't ideal (so say CDA of 0.31 - 10% better), and maybe I could be a couple of KG lighter (my fat percentage must be 14%, I know it could be a bit lower)
- Still if I do that, I would have needed over 320W to match his time, according to the race analysis function of BBS. That is over 50% higher than my power on the day. To be clear I biked 2.9W/KG at 0.81 IF, this is telling me that I would have needed 4.6W/KG (at 0.8 IF that is an FTP of 5.75 - Pogacar's estimated FTP is around 6W/KG!). I remember Dan Plews in his course record at Kona biked 3.5-3.6W/KG
- My confusion is further compounded by the fact that the same guy who won my age group (45-49) reports in an interview of having finished 12th AG in Kona in 2022 with a bike time of 4'42 - for which I would only have needed around 3.1W/KGS - fully achievable for me on a good day.
Where are my calculation letting me down?
I suspect the BBS analysis function is just completely wrong. Even with 0.28CDA (impossible with all the climbing) and 5KG lighter (at some point you become a skeleton cam't be healthy), the required watts still make no sense.
Last edited by:
ItaloBritt: May 19, 24 7:42