Training & Nutrition - Was considering a power meter, then I read...

...this. (http://www.zinio.com/pages/CycleSport/December2010/416143978/pg-132) Is the case he makes for HR a sound one?

HRM's and RPE are certainly still relevant means to train

I train with an HRM

but HRM's do have the limitations of being near useless for short bursts and they are heavily influenced by external factors, hydration and temperature for an example

that doesn't mean you can't reach peak fitness using an HRM but that with a power meter you do not have to worry about external factors

an example 2 nights ago I was warming up for my LTHR test dong 1 minute intervals at 95% effort... it took 20ish seconds for my HRM to tell me my heart rate was in the 170's but I was hurting with in 10 seconds.. after i finished the 1 minute interval I immediately began to soft pedal and it took the better part of a minute for my HRM to report I was taking it easy

another neat factor I've found with power meters is the number of tests available to help determine where you are strong and where you are weak.

I use both a PM and HRM for training. Once you have a PM you'll see how inaccurate HR is. Not only does hydration and temperature affect HR vs power by a large amount, but fatigue does too. Or just having an off day.

But, a PM (or HRM) is not required to be fast. Some of the faster guys I ride with don't even use bike computers. If you're thinking of getting a PM I suggest reading "Training and Racing with a Power Meter" by Coggan and Allen. If you finish the book exited to use a PM, get one. If you get bored and stop reading, then don't bother with a PM unless you're going to be getting coached. You won't be willing to deal with the data and the PM will be wasted.

I love BikeSnobNYC's view on power meters:

" If you're an amateur, buying a power meter to train is like hiring an accountant to tell you how broke you are or like buying an iPhone just to check your Cannondale stock. Yet amateurs not only buy power meters, but they think $1,000 for a power meter is actually cheap. Clearly then, I will make a fortune when I introduce my own power meter at next year's Interbike, since it will be the cheapest and most accurate one ever. Yes, for $5 you'll get an LCD display which constantly flashes the message, 'You suck.'"
http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2009/09/power-struggle-sucking-and-sucking-it.html

I love BikeSnobNYC's view on power meters: http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2009/09/power-struggle-sucking-and-sucking-it.html

Haha. Love BikeSnobNYC's way with words. Seriously though, I'm not sure whether the Zinio viewer that's linked to to preview the article is too much trouble for y'all, but I'm surprised that the coach of a successful ProTour team like QuickStep basically shuns power for HR. He insinuates that HR is a more reliable metric. Looking at the graphs that accompany the article, it's clear that he's not simply a luddite either. He's definitely analyzing the data and using it to develop riders training plans. The old adage, "whatever works " comes to mind.

Well, if you really want a power meter, get one by all means.

Having one will not automatically make you a better or faster rider. But then again, it probably will not make you a worse one either. It is just another tool to use.

Remember, years ago before either power meters, or heart rate monitors or even bike computers, there were cyclists who were so good that they were scary. So getting really good can be done without any of that stuff.

Well, if you really want a power meter, get one by all means.

Having one will not automatically make you a better or faster rider. But then again, it probably will not make you a worse one either. It is just another tool to use.

Remember, years ago before either power meters, or heart rate monitors or even bike computers, there were cyclists who were so good that they were scary. So getting really good can be done without any of that stuff.

A good rider is going to be good pretty much no matter what. A power meter and/or HRM helps get more out of more limited resources, when those limited resources are time and potential rather than money...

Think about it...
PM and HRM measure different things...
if, the plan is to use them as tools to improve 'performance', then you'll really want to use both.

PM helps measure how much WORK' the engine does. doesn't tell you thing one about how the engine is actually doin.
HRM indirectly (the best indirect method at this point in time...) measures how hard the effort is to do that WORK... so it indicates how well the engine is working.

you need both, in comparison
to
see how efficiently the engine is getting the job done. HR compared to Power. There certainly can be a lot more used to tuning the package, but this is the cornerstone.

a rider could be grinding out 300 watts and be ready to detonate
OR
could be puttin out 300 watts and just be cranking strongly along...

Power alone tells you not too much, HR alone only gives an indication how hard the engine is working.
Empircally, you can get the same info in a group when you look over and see the rider next to you chattin away while you're chuggin like a steam engine...

no numbers, but the story is the same

from Wikipedia: "In physics, power is the rate at which work is performed or energy is converted"
it says nothing about the engine involved, or its condition.

as to being totally wired or 'Mr/Ms Natural'
there's a whole universe between the rider who doesn;t care how fast or how far they ride and those who need all the numbers, all the time.
There is no 'correct' - just pick your place on that continuum.

...this. (http://www.zinio.com/pages/CycleSport/December2010/416143978/pg-132) Is the case he makes for HR a sound one?Sure. Just hire a world class full-time coach and get a lab test every two months to monitor progress. Not cheaper than a powermeter but would probably be effective.

A good rider is going to be good pretty much no matter what. A power meter and/or HRM helps get more out of more limited resources, when those limited resources are time and potential rather than money...Isn't that the truth! :(

I have followed the PM debate at length and would love to try one but just can't justify the cash. I would rather sink it into travel to races, race entry fees, wheelsets and food.

I will sometimes wear a HRM maybe moreso this year than last and though I understand that HRM results are affected by hydration etc isn't that what matters? If you know where you are strong and try to put yourself there but are dehydrated/under nourished would it not be impossible to achienve the numbers your PM says you should do? I am not trying to be ignorant I just don't understand PM's well enough. I do know if given the choice between an SRM and a set of Lightweights - my decision is easily going to the Lightweights.

I can assure of one thing - if you race more you WILL be faster computer/hrm/pm or not.

BTW I use my computer mainly for the clock :)

I will sometimes wear a HRM maybe moreso this year than last and though I understand that HRM results are affected by hydration etc isn't that what matters? If you know where you are strong and try to put yourself there but are dehydrated/under nourished would it not be impossible to achienve the numbers your PM says you should do? I am not trying to be ignorant I just don't understand PM's well enough. I do know if given the choice between an SRM and a set of Lightweights - my decision is easily going to the Lightweights.

The problem is that HR can make it look like you are "hitting your numbers" when power would tell you that you are off.

The problem is that HR can make it look like you are "hitting your numbers" when power would tell you that you are off.

Especially when you live where it's Africa-hot.

The problem is that HR can make it look like you are "hitting your numbers" when power would tell you that you are off.

Shouldn't heartrate still somewhat correspond to workload? Is hitting a wattage number really a better goal than hitting a target heartrate (intervals aside)? I'm no expert, so this is an honest question.

I've been doing the time crunched cyclist training program, and while the heart rate is annoying for the short intervals, for the longer rides and intervals it seems workable. On the other hand, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't checking powertap prices every few days. I'm a numbers geek, the more stats the better.

Sure, it somewhat corresponds to workload, but one number is telling you many different things and you don't necessarily know what that is.

Shouldn't heartrate still somewhat correspond to workload? Is hitting a wattage number really a better goal than hitting a target heartrate (intervals aside)?

"somewhat", in that they're both numbers. On long climbs when I have a sustained HR of 165-170 I may be putting out 260 watts or 160. The latter if it's really hot and I am overheated. Here's numbers from three climbs (3300-3600' each) that I did last year:
Climb Time Avg Power Avg. HR
1 1:10 220 143
2 1:13 211 157
3 1:20 182 156

By the HR numbers the second two climbs were at a higher effort than 1, but I can guarantee that wasn't true. Climb 2 is generally agreed to be about 2 min longer than 1 and 2 (it's 3600' vs 3200', but slightly shorter). So climbs 1 and 2 were close to the same pace, which shows on the average power. On the last one I overheated (it was 110 degrees) and went much slower. But by the HR numbers it was a higher output interval than #1.

Sure. Just hire a world class full-time coach and get a lab test every two months to monitor progress. Not cheaper than a powermeter but would probably be effective.

No doubt. However, can the amateur get good results with an approximation of this approach sans the full-time pro coach and lab visits? Cheaper than a powermeter but probably effective?

"somewhat", in that they're both numbers. On long climbs when I have a sustained HR of 165-170 I may be putting out 260 watts or 160. The latter if it's really hot and I am overheated. Here's numbers from three climbs (3300-3600' each) that I did last year:
Climb Time Avg Power Avg. HR
1 1:10 220 143
2 1:13 211 157
3 1:20 182 156

By the HR numbers the second two climbs were at a higher effort than 1, but I can guarantee that wasn't true. Climb 2 is generally agreed to be about 2 min longer than 1 and 2 (it's 3600' vs 3200', but slightly shorter). So climbs 1 and 2 were close to the same pace, which shows on the average power. On the last one I overheated (it was 110 degrees) and went much slower. But by the HR numbers it was a higher output interval than #1.

Would not perceived rate of exertion tell you this in approximate terms absent a PM?

"somewhat", in that they're both numbers. On long climbs when I have a sustained HR of 165-170 I may be putting out 260 watts or 160. The latter if it's really hot and I am overheated. Here's numbers from three climbs (3300-3600' each) that I did last year:
Climb Time Avg Power Avg. HR
1 1:10 220 143
2 1:13 211 157
3 1:20 182 156


I guess my point was, isnt training by shooting for a certain exertion level more valid than shooting for a wattage? Even though your 3rd climb was at 40 watts less than the first, it seems like it would have been as beneficial as your first climb, or more so.

I guess my point was, isnt training by shooting for a certain exertion level more valid than shooting for a wattage? Even though your 3rd climb was at 40 watts less than the first, it seems like it would have been as beneficial as your first climb, or more so.

No. You should make your last one MORE work than your first just to ensure that you aren't doing less. If you are doing climbing intervals, the purpose is to maintain a certian muscle work level. If you drop the wattage, you are no longer working at that level and not getting the resonse you are training for. - TF

No doubt. However, can the amateur get good results with an approximation of this approach sans the full-time pro coach and lab visits? Cheaper than a powermeter but probably effective?You can definitely get good results with a HR meter. A powermeter is just another toy. A fun one if you're obsessive about numbers but at the end of the day the only way to improve is to do the work. Neither a powermeter nor HR monitor will do the work for you. I like a powermeter because of the convenience for doing short intervals and tracking performance gains during the course of the year but there are work arounds to this.

If you have access to hills (which by your location I assume you do) and a GPS you can easily time your climbs and monitor your performance that way. Measuring HR and monitoring TRIMP will also give you a good indication of your training load.

If you train seriously and have done a field test to determine your LT then a power meter is the only way to go. Heart Rate lies. If you are half way through an 8 minute TT interval and stop pedaling for 10 seconds your heart rate will be unchanged, your power will be 0. Heart rate zones are only a suggestion, Power zones are science.

The problem is that HR can make it look like you are "hitting your numbers" when power would tell you that you are off.

Hear, hear!

I'm strictly a hobbyist/fred/wannabe, but a Power meter has been utterly helpful in my improvement and enjoyment.

There are some things you can do with a power meter that cannot be done with only an HRM.
After only one year of use, the best things I've learned from my power meter are:
a) to resist the tendency to clench up when putting the hammer down, and that remaining relaxed & supple during intervals enables me to continue conscious, deep, yoga-style breathing (rather than clenching up & letting my breathing just happen) lets me increase the watts dramatically toward the end of the interval, without the corresponding spike in HR.
b) higher-rpm is a great way to generate more power, BUT you must get accustomed to spinning at that higher rpm first. This might sound lame, but a power meter can teach you how to be a more efficient engine, rather than just stomping on the pedals.

When I was only using the HRM, I could jack my heart rate way up, just by spinning faster than I was accustomed, or by clenching up. But without knowing my power output in either of those situations, I was just :rolleyes: doing cardio :rolleyes: without really improving.

HRM and PM are both helpful tools. Looking at Eric's posted climb numbers, the thing that strikes one is that his last two climbs are at the same HR. So that's what he went by, not the PM. So when that happens, you know your power is off, but what are you going to do? You still have the rest of the ride to do. If you try to hold power, you'll crack and really lose time, so you watch your HRM. So they're both useful.

In place of a PM, I used my competitors. I learned how to ride fast by watching my HRM and figuring out how to ride with and then beat people who were better and younger than I was. There's a major stimulus to figure it out when the wheel in front of you is inching away. Group rides are the real deal, IMO. Then you can apply what you learn with the group to your solo rides. But if you have the bucks and don't mind the disadvantages - one on every bike? - weight? - limited component selection? - then get the PM, too.

I have a friend of the same weight who ran a PM on his bike so that was kind of cool. He'd holler at me to fergawdsakes back it down off 300 would you?

Looking at Eric's posted climb numbers, the thing that strikes one is that his last two climbs are at the same HR. So that's what he went by, not the PM.

He wasn't necessarily "going by HR". He could have just been doing all he could do and it happened to be the same HR. That's often what happens when I fade, my HR stays consistent and high but my power just drops off.


So when that happens, you know your power is off, but what are you going to do? You still have the rest of the ride to do.

This is not a given. You can often cut a ride short, and/or back way off. If you are doing intervals, that is a good sign to stop doing them. You aren't getting the training effect and you are just making yourself more fatigued.

He wasn't necessarily "going by HR". He could have just been doing all he could do and it happened to be the same HR. That's often what happens when I fade, my HR stays consistent and high but my power just drops off.



This is not a given. You can often cut a ride short, and/or back way off. If you are doing intervals, that is a good sign to stop doing them. You aren't getting the training effect and you are just making yourself more fatigued.True, but you don't jack up the HR to try to hold power, do you? So you know you're slow, but the PM is just telling you what you already know, not what to do about it. Meanwhile, your HRM confirms that you are fed and hydrated, or if it's dropped off 5 beats at the same RPE you are not fed, or if it's up 5 beats you're dehydrated, etc.

And that last depends on whether you are off on a fun training ride or staring at the bottom of Cayuse pass with 100 miles and 7000' already in your legs . . . What's the PM going to do for you then? What you'll really want is lighter wheels. On an interval training ride, I go home when my time to the point on the hill is longer than the last time, or my stopping point at the interval time is below my last. Not that hard to figure out.

True, but you don't jack up the HR to try to hold power, do you?

Well I don't go by HR, so the question is irrelevant. If I am holding a high power my HR will probably drift up. I'm not "jacking up the HR", the HR is following not leading.


So you know you're slow, but the PM is just telling you what you already know, not what to do about it. Meanwhile, your HRM confirms that you are fed and hydrated, or if it's dropped off 5 beats at the same RPE you are not fed, or if it's up 5 beats you're dehydrated, etc.

wut


And that last depends on whether you are off on a fun training ride or staring at the bottom of Cayuse pass with 100 miles and 7000' already in your legs . . . What's the PM going to do for you then? What you'll really want is lighter wheels.

I'm not sure why you are under the impression that a PM must be used to dictate all actions in all situations. Sometimes I train by power, sometimes I just like to record it and look at it later.


On an interval training ride, I go home when my time to the point on the hill is longer than the last time, or my stopping point at the interval time is below my last. Not that hard to figure out.

That's great for you if all of your intervals are on the same hill all the time. But a power meter allows you to have the same consistency with more flexibility. I do some intervals on flat ground, some are hill repeats, some are climbing but along a continuous route. Good luck trying to do something like and over/under using that method.

umd, I'll tell you a fun story, just for the sake of telling war stories. I was on a long favorite climb a few years ago, back when I was stronger. I had a system for that climb where I'd ride high zone 3 until a certain switchback that was about 45 minutes below the last switchback, where it eased off. At that first switchback, I'd kick it up to LT and hold that HR up to the last switchback. That was about 10 minutes from the finish, so I'd take it up then and go anaerobic for the last 10. So I had begun that last 10 minutes one year and some guys on the Mercury team started to go by me. They were out for a training ride, too. First the skinny guys, then finally what looked like one of their sprinters. I always enjoyed a good sprint and I was going good, so I grabbed his wheel. A couple miles later and with a couple hundred meters or less to go, I shifted up and went around him. He was cool and held my wheel just right and went around me into the parking lot. He'd heard me shift of course. But the team gave me a hand when I came up to the cars. I was probably 59 at the time, white beard.

So the HRM can be pretty useful. Sorry, no power numbers or graphs. MHR at the parking lot was 174, LT was 158, 164-165 was the HR for the last 10, IIRC. I obviously couldn't have stayed with him all the way from the bottom!

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying that the HR can't be useful. But power definitely has undeniable benefits over HR. Whether that is worth the extra expense is up to everyone to decide for themselves.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying that the HR can't be useful. But power definitely has undeniable benefits over HR. Whether that is worth the extra expense is up to everyone to decide for themselves.Agreed. :thumb:

I've never trained with power, so I can't speak to what it's like after 12 hours or so, but I measure my effort by my HRM the whole way on every ride, whether it's 20 miles or 400k. It's probably possible to acquire the experience to do the same thing with power.

To show how many things affect HR, check your HR right after a car pulls in front of you or you get hung-up trying to unclip your feet. I have several hills I try to relax before I climb. My HR always climbs as soon as I see them, even if I'm coasting.

Hear, hear!

I'm strictly a hobbyist/fred/wannabe, but a Power meter has been utterly helpful in my improvement and enjoyment.

There are some things you can do with a power meter that cannot be done with only an HRM.
After only one year of use, the best things I've learned from my power meter are:
a) to resist the tendency to clench up when putting the hammer down, and that remaining relaxed & supple during intervals enables me to continue conscious, deep, yoga-style breathing (rather than clenching up & letting my breathing just happen) lets me increase the watts dramatically toward the end of the interval, without the corresponding spike in HR.
b) higher-rpm is a great way to generate more power, BUT you must get accustomed to spinning at that higher rpm first. This might sound lame, but a power meter can teach you how to be a more efficient engine, rather than just stomping on the pedals.

When I was only using the HRM, I could jack my heart rate way up, just by spinning faster than I was accustomed, or by clenching up. But without knowing my power output in either of those situations, I was just :rolleyes: doing cardio :rolleyes: without really improving.You've hit the nail on the head in this debate.

I didn't get faster just by chasing stronger riders on group rides. The first thing I bought after I bought my 30 lb. Nishiki road bike when I was 50 was an HRM. The second thing was shoes, pedals, and clothes. The third thing was a set of rollers with resistance. I have literally thousands of miles on those rollers. This isn't as silly as it sounds, since I live in the PNW. But here's the thing. I never ride them randomly. I always have a workout objective. So I ride those rollers and do my workout, watching my speed and HR. I could also be watching my PM and HRM, but I don't need a PM because I have speed on the $30 computer which I have on all my bikes. So I adjust my pedaling, my position, my breathing, my relaxation, my mental state, everything one could think of, in pursuit of a faster speed at the target HR.

I never, never, never watch TV or videos or anything distracting when I'm on the rollers. I concentrate the entire time, one hour, two hours, whatever. Perfect pedaling, perfect position, perfect breathing, perfect relaxation. There are a good dozen things to pay attention to, all at once. When I'm out on the road, I'm the same way. Constant concentration on those same fundamentals that I've been practicing, but with the addition of strategy, tactics, position, road condition, situational awareness, etc. It's much easier on the rollers, but once it becomes habitual, it's possible to take it on the road.

HR is a great measurement of physical stress. It's flawed, sure. But it's cheap and accessible. If you can learn to reduce your stress at each power output level and during each pedaling drill, you'll become more efficient. And becoming more efficient is a major goal of training. It's how you can transform a person with crappy VO2max into a reasonably competent cyclist, or a good talent into a winner.

but I don't need a PM because

Nobody needs a PM. These threads always set up a false dilemma.

The bottom line is that you improve by doing the work. A power meter is just a more precice and consistent way to gauge that work. Nothing more.

I'm reading the Allen/Coggan book, and started pricing having some wheels built (HED) using PowerTap hubs. You can spend, well, quite a bit. Being new to this, I'm curious about how powermeters factor into the overall issue of bike logistics. I currently have only 1 road bike. I use it to commute, I use it for solo training rides, and I use it for group rides. When I begin competing next year, well, I either use it for that or invest in N+1. I haven't weighed it since I first got it, but it would come in somewhere around 22-23 pounds. PowerTap adds another half pound. Rotating weight isn't considered a good thing. So... do most people use their power meters only on their training bike, or on their racing bike as well, accepting the extra weight? If you are using a wheel-based power meter, do you swap your wheels around?

The extra weight in the powertap is in the hub, not the rim. Even if you beleive that rotating weight adds any significant intertia, weight in the hub won't.

I swap my PT wheel to the bike I'm riding. I often race on it. I have other non-PT race wheels that I use for some races.

The extra weight in the powertap is in the hub, not the rim. Even if you beleive that rotating weight adds any significant intertia, weight in the hub won't.

I swap my PT wheel to the bike I'm riding. I often race on it. I have other non-PT race wheels that I use for some races.I've always wondered the same thing, not about the hub weight, no problem there, but wheel design and choice. So you train with power, but then if you want to race Zipps, you ride without? I've done hard rides without my HRM, but it felt like I was fighting crippled. So how does that work? I see a Quarq is $2745, and that's just for one bike, so that's out for most of us. Climbing bike, TT bike, training bike, or probably a do-all road bike and a training bike. But if you go the Powertap route you can't swap wheelsets. I guess the Metrigear or Look/Polar will be the best thing, if someone ever brings them to market. Changing pedals is pretty easy.

I'm just curious about what people do now.

I see a Quarq is $2745

No, A Quarq is $1500. You will pay more if you also buy a crank, but if you already have a crank, you only have to buy the CinQo part, the actual power meter strain gauges and electronics pack that replaces the standard spider on a variety of cranks.


and that's just for one bike, so that's out for most of us. Climbing bike, TT bike, training bike, or probably a do-all road bike and a training bike.

You can move it between bikes. It only takes a minute or two. A little more work than moving a wheel between bikes, but not a huge deal. All you need is a compatible bottom bracket on all bikes. And since you can only ride one bike at a time anyway...


But if you go the Powertap route you can't swap wheelsets.

People either buy powertaps in multiple wheels, using training wheels for racing, racing wheels for training, or accept that they won't have power data for racing. Unless you are time trialing, power data generally isn't very useful to see while racing, but it's nice to analyze after the fact. Especially if you subscribe to the performance manager concept and want to track all of your training stress.

OK, thanks.

I started using TRIMPS last year, but don't know a good source of information on periodization of same, etc.

Great info here for those of us trying to sort out an approach. Thanks.

Also worth reading:

Just started training with Power? Post your questions/comments here! (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?488667-Just-started-training-with-Power-Post-your-questions-comments-here!&daysprune=7)

Great info here for those of us trying to sort out an approach. Thanks.

Yup. Agree.

PM's are great tool..........I agree that they need to be used in combo with a HM. The prices for PM's are still crazy to tell you basically a number.....giving it helps you train and it is very helpful if you TT but still its just a number. The person that invents and sells a PM for under $500 will be rich.....they would sell a ton of them. For the life of me I can't figure out why they cost so much.

I think the issue here is simply one of cost. Powermeters are great. HRM is great as well. In a perfect world, we would all use both, and one day, when the technology cheapens, we will all use both and fondly remember the quibbles we used to have over PM vs. HRM. I remember when Polar HRMs seemed like an arm and a leg, the argument was HRM or nothing. The story is the same as it ever was.

People either buy powertaps in multiple wheels, using training wheels for racing, racing wheels for training, or accept that they won't have power data for racing. Unless you are time trialing, power data generally isn't very useful to see while racing, but it's nice to analyze after the fact. Especially if you subscribe to the performance manager concept and want to track all of your training stress.

This is me. I have been on the PM fence as well but have decided to get one in time to reap training benefits before next season. My only races are time trials. I have two bikes -- regular road bike and TT bike. I like the quarq option b/c it would allow me to use crazy-aero wheels on race day. However, once I buy the PM I won't have any money to buy crazy-aero wheels, so the idea of a powertap wheel built on a 50mm rim platform for use in training and races seems appealing. I can race the wheel as-is on race day or slap on a wheelbuilder disc cover, wind conditions permitting.

Re: the rest of the debate, I have been racing and training with HR/cadence (garmin edge 305) for a year. I had an excellent result in my first TT of the season in May. It was a chilly day, no danger of overheating, HR was overall higher at every effort level as expected for a race. I managed to pace myself properly and build the effort (20k) so that I could give it all I had the last half mile.

In August I did a 40k, it was nearly 100 degrees F, I didn't warm up properly, did not hydrate properly. My HR spiked at the very beginning of the TT and stayed at red alert level for the duration of the race. I felt horrible the whole time and had to sit up for two miles toward the end just to stay alive and finish. I don't think a PM would have made a difference in that race, but I believe that training properly with a PM will help me avoid a similar situation next time around.