3-1/2 years is a long time in tech development, entirely possible they've improved their product since the device being reviewed was manufactured.

Unless it's changed since then, the subscription model for usage would be a turn off for me. The Apple watch I bought about the time this review appeared is capable of a greater number of functions, one of which is its blood O2 readings that I've found to be consistent within 1% of medical fingertip devices used by my PCP when I've visited.

Its HRM function has been useful as well though a couple of weeks back it was reporting HR ~ 195 - 205 BMP during sleep, for hours, that I never noticed. Normal for me is 48 - 65 BPM pretty consistently otherwise. I'm on Day 7 of a Holter monitor check right now after a visit with my cardiologist last Monday, just to be sure there's nothing worrisome going on.

My trainer use has taken a back seat to work last week owing to our annual spring Sales Fair event, been really busy and unusually physically active the last few days, coincident with this HR test. Be interesting to see what it reports back once the data's been interpreted.

I’ve been tracking HR daily for more than a decade, but only started tracking HRV a couple of years ago and I’m totally underwhelmed with that part. I find resting HR quite useful and HR data in general pretty useful alongside power data. One thing I’ve noted is that my HR max hasn’t dropped off at all over the last decade. My resting HR varies by around 15 bpm depending on my fitness and fatigue. My HRV doesn’t appear to add anything more than what I get from resting HR. I certainly wouldn’t use it as my primary metric for fitness and performance.

I started tracking power in 2019 and all my bikes (except my mtb) and trainers since have had power meters, which I have found very consistent with no obvious variation between them. For me, power is the Gold standard for cycling performance. Not just FTP, but the whole power curve. FTP is just a single point that is often used as a barometer or way to set training targets, but I find it more useful to look at the bigger picture. I don’t even do dedicated FTP tests any more. Many platforms will estimate FTP off general power data, along with other power metrics over different timescales. I’ve used various Apps to track my power curve trends and I concentrate on the areas that matter in my target events ie endurance power, V02 max power and recovery time from repeated efforts. Power IS performance measured directly. My estimated V02 max has been in the low 50s for the last 5 years, whilst my power has varied a fair bit over the same period so VO2 max is nothing more than a potential performance predictor. Power is the actual measured performance, independent of bike, road and weather conditions.

I have also used sleep trackers (Fitbit) for over a decade and while they work well enough, they don’t ultimately tell me anything I can’t already feel. I don’t really need a tracker to tell me when I slept badly! But tracking sleep does kind of make me more accountable and I try to get at least a couple of high scores per week. So I do find them motivating.

I agree and I’m surprised they are still on V4 hardware nearly 4 years later. I’m sure the software has evolved over that time, but still.

From what I’ve read, I don’t think Whoop has any real advantage over any of the other trackers and your Apple Watch is probably as good as it gets anyway. I use a cheap Fitbit Inspire 3, which has been pretty reliable. But I also use a Polar HRM on the bike for more accurate HR data. I find wrist trackers a bit erratic when things get sweaty and intense! But the Fitbit is good for sleep tracking and resting HR. It’s also where I get my HRV data.

Thanks for that Pete!

Then essentially where I am with all this. But I'm rather far behind you in years of keeping track. HRV popped up a couple of months ago so adding it to what I follow is simply another data points acquisition activity, to see over time how things develop. It's been less than a year since I seriously got into biking at a level anywhere close to what you've been doing for years.

Exactly!

Never had a formal VO2 max test. Currently estimate in low 40's & comfortable with that number for my age and conditioning. May ask my cardio guy what his take is on that once the Holter numbers come back in a few days, whether it would be something useful.

Tried a Fitbit wrist thing a few years ago, found it less than inspiring and rather short battery life besides being difficult to charge. The Apple watch came next.

Altini agrees with your take on the wrist stuff. He touts the Polar HRM chest device, I'm using a newish Wahoo TrackR that physically looks identical to the Polar and seems to be very reliable for output. Came out last year at a price about the same as the Polar and about twice that of prior Wahoo HRM chest strap things. It's what I now use for HRM during training or outdoor biking with the Apple watch as a back-up 'cause the numbers it reports back aren't quite as granular unless and until I dig into its data files. And because it's a wrist device the numbers it collects may be influenced by being out on an extremity.

They are getting better, but I consider them disposable. I currently have an Inspire 3, which has been pretty good for the last couple of years and was very cheap. The battery lasts about a week. The previous version had a poor screen and HR sensor was less accurate. Sleep tracking is probably it's best feature, but it's not really telling me anything I don't already know at this point!

that would make me a pro rider!

Unless they’re 50kgs and you’re 90kgs ;)

1) w/kg is a lot more useful metric than your actual FTP. Anything above 3.75w/kg is pretty good in my opinion for a serious amateur cyclist.

2) A 300w FTP is achievable - it all depends on how much effort you're willing to put on and off season. The more you suffer, the better you become.

3) A pro with a 200-250 FTP? How much do they weight, 50kg?

IKR. I would still give a 200W 50kg pro a good run for their money, especially on the flats 😂

The 50kg pro would probably sit on your wheel and enjoy the 90kg size wind break 🤣

At 4w/kg, Pogy is in Z2 :innocent:

And Poggy does not have an FTP under 250W, by my clumsy estimations 😄

Pogi's self-reported Z2 range is 4.9-5.2 W/kg.

I'm going to do some VO2 max intervals tomorrow morning that will only be slightly over Pogi's z2 range. Absolutely wild.

But then again, I'm middle-aged and train probably 1/3 as much as he does. Not too bad for a 10 hr/week amateur I suppose.

Neither does any professional male cyclist on this planet! It's one of the weirdest statement I've read so far on the internets. If I recall properly, men are over 400w and women are close to 300w.

I'll admit it sounds low to me. However, a couple of things to consider: 1) FTP is not the be all end all, how important varies by the discipline we're talking about and the specialty of the rider; 2) Psimet actually works with pro riders, so it's not something he randomly pulled from the internet.

Yeah, but 200-250W FTP for any pro racer. What sort of speciality would that be??

200w is too low and is surely an exaggeration
on the flip side, 400w is too high for most pros. maybe mid sized (and up) world tour guys. if you took a sampling of all pro cyclists at all levels, I'd guess 90% of them would be between 300 and 400w at FTP.

I think Mark Cavendish was around 350W, so about 5 W/kg at his weight. The GC type guys would be considerably higher.

Some data here from a heavyweight Tour sprinter. Again around the 5 W/kg mark.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/r...e-years-490513

If we replace 200-250W with 300-350W as a lightweight pro baseline I would believe it. Even I can manage 300W at 75 kg in my mid 50s. It’s nothing special at all.

To my point that FTP is not necessarily the key metric, particularly if we’re not talking sustained climbs, pretty much the only relevance of Cav’s FTP is whether he can climb well enough to make time cuts.

In his case it’s way more about his 1 minute and 5 second power. And even then from what I’ve seen published those numbers don’t stand out enough to explain his results.

the fact that he is very aero on the bike sprinting, is very savvy in picking a wheel and finding the right opening, and is just tenacious, explain his success way more than raw power numbers.

Damn, I could have been a pro…. If I were 50 pounds lighter.

Yeah, but 350W is still way above 200-250W and gives you a good idea of the minimum you would need to stay in the Gruppetto ie around 5W/kg at FTP.

I'm sure you've seen, so I'm preaching to the choir.. But he was also fearless when he knew he was in the mix for a win. Watching his last victory, I saw more than just shades of the younger Cavendish in that regard.

same here except 20 lbs. although I take it I'm a much smaller human. 5'9" and 148-150 lbs. Gained a 2-3 lbs this off season since I started lifting again. It's good weight though - on my chest and my butt. I feel better too and that's worth a lot. Climbs around here are rarely long enough for that to be selective