Old 02-24-19, 07:05 AM
  #18  
fstrnu
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 389
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 231 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
This is true sometimes, but it is hardly a training plan. The book is quite a bit longer. And of course the quote refers to many issues with HR w/r to power - hydration, fueling, temperature, fatigue and on and on. Which doesn't make HR an evil thing, it just carries a lot of information that is subject to interpretation, meaning the rider may not understand what HR is telling them at the time. Sometimes it happens like in the quote, sometimes it's the opposite. I've had HRs 5 beats below LT while standing in the shade and I've had HRs that wouldn't go over 80% of LT no matter what I did. It's an important metric but it helps to know what it's a metric of.
Thanks in general for at least explaining yourself in your posts. And you are correct about confounding factors. Table 5.3 illustrates how "EF changes are not always positive" and "drops could be the result of changes in sleep, diet, weather, traffic, work-related stress, or a myriad of other factors" and "what you are looking for are trends with similar conditions over time. A generally rising EF is a good sign that your aerobic fitness is improving". ERG training with fixed power under controlled conditions can shorten the time required to infer changes. Consistent diet, time-of-day, nutrition, caffeine, sleep, hydration, stress levels, etc. can improve this even more. I also personally believe more reliability equals more sensitivity meaning smaller changes are needed for relevance as well as quicker inferences over a shorter period of time.
fstrnu is offline