Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Power meter numbers, trainer versus road

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Power meter numbers, trainer versus road

Old 05-03-17, 07:10 AM
  #26  
chaadster
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 11,677

Bikes: '15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, '76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, '17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, '12 Breezer Venturi, '09 Dahon Mariner, '12 Mercier Nano, '95 DeKerf Team SL, '19 Tern Rally, ‘21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, ‘19 T-Lab X3

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2177 Post(s)
Liked 1,214 Times in 744 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Improving your relative speed is ultimately all that matters.

Races are won by going the fastest at just the right times, regardless of how much power is put out.

Using power in training to figure out how to maximize speed is the opposite of useless.
Originally Posted by redfooj View Post
what if one is trying to improve ones fitness rather than win races?
Maximizing speed does not mean the same thing as winning races. No serious training regimen is soley focused on making more speed, not one. The rider must be fit and strong to go faster, and that is why all pros train with power; ability to make more power will mean they will be able to go faster when they need to.
chaadster is online now  
Old 05-03-17, 07:36 AM
  #27  
RShantz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 609
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 278 Post(s)
Liked 29 Times in 19 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster View Post
That's because they don't.


Maybe his PM just isn't happy inside & decides to act up. Obviously his PM likes the feel of wind in it's hair.
RShantz is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 07:38 AM
  #28  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2620 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by redfooj View Post
And if that speed is out on the open road with varying traffic and wind condition from ride to ride?
There's no question there.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 07:42 AM
  #29  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2620 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster View Post
Maximizing speed does not mean the same thing as winning races. No serious training regimen is soley focused on making more speed, not one. The rider must be fit and strong to go faster, and that is why all pros train with power; ability to make more power will mean they will be able to go faster when they need to.
The assertion was that speed is useless, not whether or not people train with power.

As for your fit and strong comment, how is it at any given time trial you can have some people going so much faster than others on significantly less watts? I mean, if you just need to be fit and strong and all?
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 09:05 AM
  #30  
Doge
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,409

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3345 Post(s)
Liked 354 Times in 240 Posts
Originally Posted by redfooj View Post
what if one is trying to improve ones fitness rather than win races?
I spent the weekend with a collegiate bike team and their officer in charge, a former top elite college runner and rec cyclist.

He introduced the discussion on power meters contrasting cycling to running and training vs racing and that he just didn't get how they would help train better than another structured program.

We shared the view that training to perceived effort is as good of a tool as fixed power.
A rested rider in a familiar altitude, humidity, temperature can ride and train to a consistent power, but all those things change due to behavior, fatigue, environment etc.

I see this same debate with weight/body builder trainers. Some have set weights and reps (like training to power) and some are into training to failure/effort. I favor the latter in that to.

Effort, while subjective, takes change into account.
Doge is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 09:07 AM
  #31  
Doge
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,409

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3345 Post(s)
Liked 354 Times in 240 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster View Post
... that is why all pros train with power;...
Source?
I know Sagan lifts weights, I had not seen he trains with power. I'd like to. That would be a good test case.
Doge is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 09:09 AM
  #32  
RChung
Perceptual Dullard
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,987
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 625 Post(s)
Liked 662 Times in 272 Posts
Originally Posted by whitemax View Post
I'm thinking that power numbers may be less accurate on a trainer due to there perhaps being more flex or give versus the unforgiving surface of the road. I'm using the Stages crank arm power meter. Thoughts?
My thoughts are that surprisingly often people who are adamant that consistency is the only thing that matters in a power meter eventually wonder about accuracy.
RChung is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 10:16 AM
  #33  
Kopsis
Senior Member
 
Kopsis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 1,258
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by laf View Post
In my case, im nearly 100% sure that my power meter (power2max) is reading lower indoor. ... The best example was last saturday when I did my first ride outside. It was so easy to do 500-600w seated vs indoor where its nearly not possible.
I suspect the PM isn't actually reading lower, but that what you're seeing is the effect of measurement noise. Unlike the trainer where resistance is smooth and controlled, on the road there is lots of irregularity. The momentum of your legs will carry you through much of that without really even feeling it, but the effect is lots of little spikes (both up and down) in the power curve.

So if you're looking at your "max" for anything less than 3s averaged power numbers (and the fact that you say you see this in just a few pedal strokes tells me that's the case), the differences are "real" but meaningless. Set your computer to show you 10s averaged power and I it's likely the trainer and road "10s max" will match nicely. I never display anything less than 3s average on the road because below that the numbers bounce around too much to be of any use.
Kopsis is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:10 AM
  #34  
laf
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 17 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Kopsis View Post
I suspect the PM isn't actually reading lower, but that what you're seeing is the effect of measurement noise. Unlike the trainer where resistance is smooth and controlled, on the road there is lots of irregularity. The momentum of your legs will carry you through much of that without really even feeling it, but the effect is lots of little spikes (both up and down) in the power curve.

So if you're looking at your "max" for anything less than 3s averaged power numbers (and the fact that you say you see this in just a few pedal strokes tells me that's the case), the differences are "real" but meaningless. Set your computer to show you 10s averaged power and I it's likely the trainer and road "10s max" will match nicely. I never display anything less than 3s average on the road because below that the numbers bounce around too much to be of any use.
My powermeter is at 3s average power. The readings inside are lower inside no matter what Im doing.
laf is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:12 AM
  #35  
chaadster
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 11,677

Bikes: '15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, '76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, '17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, '12 Breezer Venturi, '09 Dahon Mariner, '12 Mercier Nano, '95 DeKerf Team SL, '19 Tern Rally, ‘21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, ‘19 T-Lab X3

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2177 Post(s)
Liked 1,214 Times in 744 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
The assertion was that speed is useless, not whether or not people train with power.

As for your fit and strong comment, how is it at any given time trial you can have some people going so much faster than others on significantly less watts? I mean, if you just need to be fit and strong and all?
The assertion was that speed is useless as a training metric, which is true. I've never heard of any training program soley built on speed targets, and I cannot imagine how such a program would work effectively, either.

My "fit and strong" comment was clearly indicated as referring to a given rider, not as a way to compare various or multiple riders one to another. A rider who is fit and strong will perform better than if they are not fit and strong.
chaadster is online now  
Old 05-03-17, 11:15 AM
  #36  
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,157
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18537 Post(s)
Liked 10,329 Times in 5,872 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Improving your relative speed is ultimately all that matters.
Seattle Forrest is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:25 AM
  #37  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2620 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster View Post
The assertion was that speed is useless as a training metric, which is true. I've never heard of any training program soley built on speed targets, and I cannot imagine how such a program would work effectively, either.

My "fit and strong" comment was clearly indicated as referring to a given rider, not as a way to compare various or multiple riders one to another. A rider who is fit and strong will perform better than if they are not fit and strong.
You're getting all fallacious here. No one has said anything about what your focal assertion.

If you choose to ignore speed elementss in training, then that's your prerogative, but that does not in anyway undermine its importance.

Your fit and strong comment is misinformed and ignorant of how performance can be addressed and manipulated. Aero positions are a perfect example of that. As I said before, the only thing that matters in a race is speed. If you don't race, then that's not relevant, but if you do, it very much is. And even if you don't race, most every club rider and weekend warrior (with the exception of a touring group) know is interested in going faster. So relevant there, too.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:26 AM
  #38  
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,157
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18537 Post(s)
Liked 10,329 Times in 5,872 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster View Post
The assertion was that speed is useless as a training metric, which is true. I've never heard of any training program soley built on speed targets, and I cannot imagine how such a program would work effectively, either.
This is an interesting tidbit, not disagreement.

Runner's training programs are based on speed. Some on HR but most runners consider their pace to be a better metric and to make better training targets. Of course runners don't have access to a broad range of speeds like cyclists do, so air resistance is basically constant for them. They also generally choose flat courses with minimal traffic interruptions, which is a lot easier to do with such shorter distances, and they never coast. For a lot of people, running is an idealized and simplified kind of physics. And runners tend to use pace as if it's power. In fact, runners have a threshold pace and measure rTSS = (avg pace / t pace) * duration.
Seattle Forrest is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:32 AM
  #39  
reggieray
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 221
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Improving your relative speed is ultimately all that matters.

Races are won by going the fastest at just the right times, regardless of how much power is put out.

Using power in training to figure out how to maximize speed is the opposite of useless.

Hey bro, you do realize that you completely reversed what I said, right?

I was talking about training: Speed is not useful as a training metric....

And then here you bring up racing, for some reason.


Then you bring up using POWER in training...which is exactly what I said in the first place.


What color is the sky where you are, homie?
reggieray is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:33 AM
  #40  
Kopsis
Senior Member
 
Kopsis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 1,258
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by laf View Post
My powermeter is at 3s average power. The readings inside are lower inside no matter what Im doing.
Then either you have a defective PM (perhaps road vibration is causing erratic performance of an electronic component) or you're actually not able to put out as much power indoors due to some change in fit when your bike is on the trainer or due to performance psychology (perception of effort on a trainer can be much higher than on the road at identical power levels).

FWIW - I have both a Power2Max type S and a Power2Max NG and I see no significant difference between indoor and outdoor 3s power readings on max effort type intervals.
Kopsis is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:39 AM
  #41  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2620 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by reggieray View Post
Hey bro, you do realize that you completely reversed what I said, right?

I was talking about training: Speed is not useful as a training metric....

And then here you bring up racing, for some reason.


Then you bring up using POWER in training...which is exactly what I said in the first place.


What color is the sky where you are, homie?
You stopped reading too soon. Keep going.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:40 AM
  #42  
reggieray
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 221
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
The assertion was that speed is useless, not whether or not people train with power.

As for your fit and strong comment, how is it at any given time trial you can have some people going so much faster than others on significantly less watts? I mean, if you just need to be fit and strong and all?
This is for the same reason that I KOM'd a forty mile segment on Strava with a 24mph avg @ 225w: I was on a recumbent.

Do you really think I train on my bent based on speed? Come on, man.

There were slight uphills and downhills on that segment; did I pace myself over them based on speed? There was wind, too; did I adjust my effort by looking at my speed?

Ridiculous, inane.

This forum causes me to lose hope for cycling.
reggieray is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:45 AM
  #43  
reggieray
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 221
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by RChung View Post
My thoughts are that surprisingly often people who are adamant that consistency is the only thing that matters in a power meter eventually wonder about accuracy.
Shane Miller broke this down. Short version of the video is, "Power meters aren't useful without both."

reggieray is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 11:51 AM
  #44  
chaadster
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 11,677

Bikes: '15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, '76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, '17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, '12 Breezer Venturi, '09 Dahon Mariner, '12 Mercier Nano, '95 DeKerf Team SL, '19 Tern Rally, ‘21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, ‘19 T-Lab X3

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2177 Post(s)
Liked 1,214 Times in 744 Posts
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
Source?
I know Sagan lifts weights, I had not seen he trains with power. I'd like to. That would be a good test case.
Current ride has 4iiii:



Sagan was riding SRM power meters back in the Liquigas C-dale days, and plenty of his power data can easily be found online going back to at least '12. Pictures of his '10 Liquigas-Doimo bike on which he won Tour of Romandie clearly show an SRM headunit, and the crank looks like Cannondale SRM, but it's hard to see that. Anyway, it would be unusual if he used an SRM head unit without the power element at the crank, so I think it's pretty safe to conclude Sagan has used power training since his World Tour debut days.
chaadster is online now  
Old 05-03-17, 12:13 PM
  #45  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2620 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by reggieray View Post
This is for the same reason that I KOM'd a forty mile segment on Strava with a 24mph avg @ 225w: I was on a recumbent.

Do you really think I train on my bent based on speed? Come on, man.

There were slight uphills and downhills on that segment; did I pace myself over them based on speed? There was wind, too; did I adjust my effort by looking at my speed?

Ridiculous, inane.

This forum causes me to lose hope for cycling.
This reply really has nothing to do with anything, does it? A single ride on a recumbent with a tailwind? As an attempted rebuttal to using speed as a useful element in training? Really?

It's replies like this that cause me to lose hope for logic and reasoning.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 12:13 PM
  #46  
Doge
Senior Member
 
Doge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,409

Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753

Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3345 Post(s)
Liked 354 Times in 240 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster View Post
Current ride has 4iiii:



Sagan was riding SRM power meters back in the Liquigas C-dale days, and plenty of his power data can easily be found online going back to at least '12. Pictures of his '10 Liquigas-Doimo bike on which he won Tour of Romandie clearly show an SRM headunit, and the crank looks like Cannondale SRM, but it's hard to see that. Anyway, it would be unusual if he used an SRM head unit without the power element at the crank, so I think it's pretty safe to conclude Sagan has used power training since his World Tour debut days.
My kid has ridden with power since age 10 on and off. We don't use power for training. Just record it. He generally does not race with power.

Esp for a UCI bike that has to meet weight I'd expect a PM on every bike, but just like riding with a HRM does not mean the rider is using HR for training.

Training with a PM means the rider is going for a training ride and putting out an effort based on the numbers on that meter. I know pros - this weekend, that do not do that.

What is is your opinion of weight training/body builders that train to fatigue and also record how much they lifted vs
those that train to lift a certain amount?
Doge is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 12:20 PM
  #47  
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,157
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18537 Post(s)
Liked 10,329 Times in 5,872 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster View Post
... so I think it's pretty safe to conclude Sagan has used power training since his World Tour debut days.
He'd be at a competitive disadvantage not to, and his job is competing.

There are a lot of contrarians in the world. But there's reality, too.
Seattle Forrest is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 12:21 PM
  #48  
alathIN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 496

Bikes: Volagi Viaje (rando/gravel/tour), Cannondale Slice 4 (tri/TT), Motobecane Fantom PLUS X9 (plus tires MTB)

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
I spent the weekend with a collegiate bike team and their officer in charge, a former top elite college runner and rec cyclist.

He introduced the discussion on power meters contrasting cycling to running and training vs racing and that he just didn't get how they would help train better than another structured program.

We shared the view that training to perceived effort is as good of a tool as fixed power.
A rested rider in a familiar altitude, humidity, temperature can ride and train to a consistent power, but all those things change due to behavior, fatigue, environment etc.
This would be an extreme outlier opinion among cycling coaches.

RPE is a useful thing to pay attention to, but it's not objective and it is subject to many, many other variables.

My experience is that power is a useful check to RPE. Sometimes I feel great and I'm actually putting out watts that will not be sustainable for the intended training session. Sometimes I feel like I'm working myself really hard, and the "tattle tale" power meter tells me, no, I'm not working that hard, HTFU and get to work.

Power is also an objective way to compare progress over time. Sure, I can also see that I completed my 40k TT loop on a known course 1 minute faster... but was that the wind? Or my new tires? Or was I just super motivated and crushed it? If my FTP goes up, I know my training program is working.

Good article on this topic:
3 Ways To Measure Fitness - TrainerRoad Blog

Of course you can also get fitter just by riding a lot. But if you're using a structured training program to achieve specific goals, power measurement is an extremely valuable tool.
alathIN is offline  
Old 05-03-17, 12:32 PM
  #49  
chaadster
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 11,677

Bikes: '15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, '76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, '17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, '12 Breezer Venturi, '09 Dahon Mariner, '12 Mercier Nano, '95 DeKerf Team SL, '19 Tern Rally, ‘21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, ‘19 T-Lab X3

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2177 Post(s)
Liked 1,214 Times in 744 Posts
Originally Posted by Doge View Post
My kid has ridden with power since age 10 on and off. We don't use power for training. Just record it. He generally does not race with power.

Esp for a UCI bike that has to meet weight I'd expect a PM on every bike, but just like riding with a HRM does not mean the rider is using HR for training.

Training with a PM means the rider is going for a training ride and putting out an effort based on the numbers on that meter. I know pros - this weekend, that do not do that.

What is is your opinion of weight training/body builders that train to fatigue and also record how much they lifted vs
those that train to lift a certain amount?
Although the notion that power and HR would just be recorded just for piss-n-giggles and not used for training at the pro level is strange to me, I do not know World Tour pro riders as you do, and will accept the truth in that if you say so.

The one World Tour pro I'm acquainted with, is Alexy Vermuelen on Lotto-Jumbo, who did power based training with the same coach I use, and rode in the same club during his junior days. I do not know what he does with power now, if he uses it all.

Peter Sagan, however, apparently does train with power:

The secrets behind Peter Sagan's recent success | Cyclingnews Forum
chaadster is online now  
Old 05-03-17, 12:45 PM
  #50  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2620 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by alathIN View Post

Power is also an objective way to compare progress over time. Sure, I can also see that I completed my 40k TT loop on a known course 1 minute faster... but was that the wind? Or my new tires? Or was I just super motivated and crushed it?
And another reason why speed is useful. Same power, less speed, why? Same power but more speed, or same speed but less power, again, why?

Positioning, equipment, pacing, can all be tuned and improved by utilizing speed measurement in training AND racing. Just saying, "Oh, ftp is up so I'm faster" isn't always true (a lot of the time?!) Relying on a singular measure to gauge performance is leaving a lot on the table.
rubiksoval is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.