How good is the Conconi test, really?

[Phil W]

Which highlights one of the important aspects of testing, consistency.

If you test 20 mins on a turbo, vs. 20 mins outdoors or 60 mins on turbo vs. outdoors, or 60 mins hill climb vs. 60 mins on flat vs. 60 min solo TT vs . 60 min race, you will get different results.  So whatever method you choose to test, stick with it rather than chopping and changing.  The literature does not say you need to train at exactly 100% of Vo2 Max or 100% of Lactate Threshold to improve those fitness markers.  In fact from what I have read there is a reasonable latitude in the range of intensities that will cause certain adaptations to improve your fitness.  So as long as you are in the ballpark, the exact value the test came up with does not really matter, but keep the tests consistent.

Here is an article by Peter Seiler on Interval training from 1996 that explains much of what people do these days.

https://web.archive.org/web/20080215004250/http://home.hia.no/~stephens/interval.htm

His article on the time course of training adaptions is also interesting

https://web.archive.org/web/20080219040347/http://home.hia.no/~stephens/timecors.htm

[mattc]

If you think the rows on here over training/testing protocol are bad you should go and have a look at the time-trialling forum.   One of the key agitators is actually Andrew Coggan who comes over very aggressive/rude to anyone that questions him which I think is a bit of a pity.

I guess it fits the cliché;

can't deal with people? Try spreadsheets, or solo bike-riding!

[Phil W]

From the TT Forum

Maybe some of the objection Dr C has encountered has been more about the man than the work, but It's hard to make a nuanced argument when you're slaying orcs in the TTF dungeon.