Training at Altitude?

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
User avatar
LeDuke
Posts: 2022
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:39 am
Location: Front Range, CO

by LeDuke

This summer, I've been lucky enough to temporarily move to the Front Range of Colorado. I'm living at ~6500ft/2000m, having lived at ~500m in Virginia for the last year. At that lower altitude, my FTP is set at 325w based on 20min, 30min and 60min efforts.

Obviously, at the new location, I'm simply not producing the wattage that I did before. I've only been here a week, and I'm slowly getting used to it, but O2 pressure being what it is, I'm always going to produce less power up here than down at lower altitudes. Websites like CyclingPowerLab.com, etc. confirm how I feel on the bike; my FTP is probably around 300w up here.

So, my question is this:

If I adjust my power zones, and train at them accordingly, am I actually going to be weaker once I return to that lower altitude? In theory my TSS should be the same if adjusted properly, but isn't "wattage is wattage" applicable here?

Thanks.

benzebub
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu May 07, 2015 1:24 pm

by benzebub

I am absolutely no expert in this matter, so don't pay too much attention to this, but I would think that you need to adjust.
if your FTP test produces different numbers, I would guess you need to adjust training zones to this new result. TSS is a good guideline to follow here I think
You could also take RPE into the mix; although not an accurate way to measure your effort, it could be a guideline/reference to compare the training and numbers between the 2 locations.

as I've said before, I'm not an expert in this and I'm sure there are others who have the right qualifications and scientific background to give you a better answer.
But I could be wrong

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



TheKaiser
Posts: 653
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:29 pm

by TheKaiser

It is absolutely possible to lose power as a result of an extended stay at altitude. It is also possible to gain power through increased hematocrit and/or greater efficiency. Ultimately, you hope that any gains more than offset any losses, but that isn't a given.

The science is very mixed on the topic, but the problem that you point out is the very reason for the "live high/train low" concept, whereby you live at altitude to drive adaptations that improve oxygen delivery, but descend to a lower altitude for training sessions to allow greater intensity and prevent power loss. Kind of a best of both worlds kind of thing.

That isn't really feasible where you are, but in spots like Tenerif or Hawaii it is easy enough to manage.

There is also some evidence that training in a rarefied atmosphere will stress certain systems more and perhaps drive complimentary adaptations that would be missed if simply living "high" and doing every training session "low" so mixing it up may be an even better best of both worlds.

And there is also evidence that the stresses of living at high altitude can slow recovery, which can necessitate a reduction in training density, so there is that in the mix as well.

Given that the situation is, in my mind, clear as mud, it is tough to predict what the best course for you is. If you are finding that you can't sustain your current plan and ranges based on sea level FTP, then there isn't much you can do about it other than redo your FTP test, and reset your zones. If you don't neglect max intensity short intervals, then you should be able to minimize altitude related losses, and can return to sea level "super charged" with the additional o2 capacity that we all hope to gain from such a stay.

User avatar
WMW
in the industry
Posts: 893
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2012 2:59 pm
Location: Ruidoso, NM

by WMW

LeDuke wrote:If I adjust my power zones, and train at them accordingly, am I actually going to be weaker once I return to that lower altitude? In theory my TSS should be the same if adjusted properly, but isn't "wattage is wattage" applicable here?


If you are at 300W now vs 325W at sea level you've acclimated better than average.

I wouldn't worry about losing ability when you go back, and there will likely be some positive gains. Most elite athletes seem to benefit from altitude training.

From wiki:

"Principles and mechanisms

Altitude training works because of the difference in atmospheric pressure between sea level and high altitude. At sea level, air is denser and there are more molecules of gas per litre of air. Regardless of altitude, air is composed of 21% oxygen and 78% nitrogen. As the altitude increases, the pressure exerted by these gases decreases. Therefore, there are fewer molecules per unit volume: this causes a decrease in partial pressures of gases in the body, which elicits a variety of physiological changes in the body that occur at high altitude.[20]

The physiological adaptation that is mainly responsible for the performance gains achieved from altitude training, is a subject of discussion among researchers. Some, including American researchers Ben Levine and Jim Stray-Gundersen, claim it is primarily the increased red blood cell volume.[21]

Others, including Australian researcher Chris Gore, and New Zealand researcher Will Hopkins, dispute this and instead claim the gains are primarily a result of other adaptions such as a switch to a more economic mode of oxygen utilization.[22]
Increased red blood cell volume
Human red blood cells

At high altitudes, there is a decrease in oxygen hemoglobin saturation. This hypoxic condition causes hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF1) to become stable and stimulates the production of erythropoietin (EPO), a hormone secreted by the kidneys,[23] EPO stimulates red blood cell production from bone marrow in order to increase hemoglobin saturation and oxygen delivery. Some athletes demonstrate a strong red blood cell response to altitude while others see little or no gain in red cell mass with chronic exposure.[24] It is uncertain how long this adaptation takes because various studies have found different conclusions based on the amount of time spent at high altitudes.[25]

While EPO occurs naturally in the body, it is also made synthetically to help treat patients suffering from kidney failure and to treat patients during chemotherapy. Over the past thirty years, EPO has become frequently abused by competitive athletes through blood doping and injections in order to gain advantages in endurance events. Abuse of EPO, however, increases RBC counts beyond normal levels (polycythemia) and increases the viscosity of blood, possibly leading to hypertension and increasing the likelihood of a blood clot, heart attack or stroke. The natural secretion of EPO by the human kidneys can be increased by altitude training, but the body has limits on the amount of natural EPO that it will secrete, thus avoiding the harmful side effects of the illegal doping procedures.
Other mechanisms

Other mechanisms have been proposed to explain the utility of altitude training. Not all studies show a statistically significant increase in red blood cells from altitude training. One study explained the success by increasing the intensity of the training (due to increased heart and respiration rate).[15] This improved training resulted in effects that lasted more than 15 days after return to sea level.

Another set of researchers claim that altitude training stimulates a more efficient use of oxygen by the muscles.[22] This efficiency can arise from numerous other responses to altitude training, including angiogenesis, glucose transport, glycolysis, and pH regulation, each of which may partially explain improved endurance performance independent of a greater number of red blood cells.[5] Furthermore, exercising at high altitude has been shown to cause muscular adjustments of selected gene transcripts, and improvement of mitochondrial properties in skeletal muscle.[26][27]

In a study comparing rats active at high altitude versus rats active at sea level, with two sedentary control groups, it was observed that muscle fiber types changed according to homeostatic challenges which led to an increased metabolic efficiency during the beta oxidative cycle and citric acid cycle, showing an increased utilization of ATP for aerobic performance.[28]"
formerly rruff...

Post Reply