LPP is Used 100% of the Time During the Test

The conditions of this test were more difficult than those of the two previous tests because Stephane faced a moderate cross wind condition with a South-East component during the outbound portion of the track. This forced him to fight an angled headwind in portions of the test track that were exposed to it. As can be seen on the terrain profile image, the outbound portion of the track is where most of the climbing occurs, thus adding a wind stressor to an already challenging task. Even though the environmental circumstances required him to work harder to achieve the posted test time, the results produced a set of very positive values that were unexpected but very welcomed! Stephane used LPP 100% of the time throughout the test run and his level of adaptation to the technique is demonstrated by the quality of the test results.

Test Results

Terrain Profile

The Cross wind impact was felt at different sections of the profile between miles 1 and 8.

Power Data Values

Heart Rate Data Values

Overall Performance Data

Second LPP Utilization Test Summary (LPP T2)

What is interesting about this Test run is that although it’s time became third out of the three fast runs ( The test times were 51:09 for LPP Run 1 (LPP T1), 52:15 for Baseline Fast Run 2 (BFR 2) and 52:58 for LPP T2), the actual power generation and all related performance factors were the highest for LPP T2, while the heart rate values for this test run were the second lowest for Heart Rate Average and the lowest for Max Heart Rate of the three runs. It is important to note that the difference in watts of Normalized Power (NP) between the fastest runs was 3 watts with LPP T1 at 307 watts and BFR 2 at 304 watts, which accounted for over 1 minute of speed increase between then. LPP T2 yielded the highest NP wattage yet it was 1 minute and 48  seconds slower when compared to the time of LPP T1. it is also important to note that LPP T1 and BFR 2 were performed in wind conditions that were light enough to not to be a factor during the performance of the tests. This was not the case of LPP T2, where the wind was crossed with a headwind component of moderate and varied in intensity.

My sense is that Stephane was forced to adapt to variances of angular headwind conditions and pace himself within that framework to a best possible time that allowed him to move fast and finish strong. When the results were analyzed, the Variability Index (Normalized Power/Average Power) indicated that at 1.07 this performance factor had exceeded that of the two previous runs and became indicative of race efforts found in a Flat Criterium even though Stephane climbed 1,066 feet in the process. I’m fairly certain that under similar environmental circumstances to that of the LPP T1 and BFR 2 runs, this run could have yielded a time at or below the 50 minutes mark. We shall see how low Stephane can go under similar circumstances to those of LPP T1 and BFR 2.