Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Training & Nutrition
Reload this Page >

(How To) Cardiac Drift - A Different Way of Looking at Indoor Training

Training & Nutrition Learn how to develop a training schedule that's good for you. What should you eat and drink on your ride? Learn everything you need to know about training and nutrition here.

(How To) Cardiac Drift - A Different Way of Looking at Indoor Training

Old 02-14-19, 09:15 AM
  #26  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 srode1 View Post
My understanding of the Training Peaks Metrics that what is displayed on the screen for analysis of a workout as Pw:Hr is indeed Aerobic Decoupling or Cardiac Drift, so I think we are on the same sheet. All my rides right now are indoors on a trainer, so that would include both I mentioned, also not using Erg Mode. Good point on the inflation of odd number intervals which is what I typically do for Steady state (3X Something), so result from the Saturday SS I used as an example is inflated somewhat.
Ah you must mean a chart of pw:hr over time for visual analysis? Slope vs erg mode each has its advantages but fixed power will be much more precise for this purpose. Cadence can also be a factor. I have to fight to keep my cadence up even at low intensity. 3 times X is fine as long as you realize that it is skewed when looking at the data and trends/individuality is important so as long as you are comparing apples to apples you'll be fine.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 09:16 AM
  #27  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 8,718
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 876 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
Your evidence for the efficacy of training by Cardiac drift is a grainy video from an unsuccessful, now defunct business?
gregf83 is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 09:36 AM
  #28  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 wphamilton View Post
I did glance at the video, skipping to 22:25 where she gives a basic explanation of "decoupling" and spends some time on the simple calculation. She then says in a very general sense that looking at decoupling over a large period of time, if she sees "excessive decoupling" she can infer that there is too much fatigue (particularly, she says, when you can't finish a workout). I didn't hear anything I'd think of as "research" nor, frankly, more than a very basic description of what you mean by cardiac drift and one or two of the several factors which contribute to it.

What are you referring to as research in that video, relating to cardiac drift/decoupling? How do you justify, with this video or presumably other research that you're aware of, your use of instantaneous cardiac drift to modify individual training sessions? Apparently the entire rationalization is to train approximately at or near threshold, and in that case why not just train at threshold? Using CD as one of several measures to determine cumulative training stress.
You missed quite a bit. It's a great presentation. I recommend watching the whole thing if you have time. Regarding your other questions, I have no idea where they are coming from.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 09:45 AM
  #29  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 gregf83 View Post
Your evidence for the efficacy of training by Cardiac drift is a grainy video from an unsuccessful, now defunct business?
Nope. And neither is the presentation.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 09:46 AM
  #30  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 14,437

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2460 Post(s)
Liked 27 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
You missed quite a bit. It's a great presentation. I recommend watching the whole thing if you have time. Regarding your other questions, I have no idea where they are coming from.
I don't think I missed anything at all in the video about cardiac drift. I'm asking you, what did you learn about decoupling from it?

Regarding where the questions came from, Hermes said that he'd seen research regarding cardiac drift, and you pointed at that video and said "look again". I did look, and I saw no research, not even a reference to research, regarding cardiac drift. I'm not exaggerating: she gave a quick definition, said that high numbers were related to fatigue, and that's literally it. So rather than suggesting we all just dismiss it, I thought you'd appreciate the chance to elaborate.
wphamilton is online now  
Old 02-14-19, 10:34 AM
  #31  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD
Posts: 11,213

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 282 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked 30 Times in 25 Posts
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
I don't think I missed anything at all in the video about cardiac drift. I'm asking you, what did you learn about decoupling from it?

Regarding where the questions came from, Hermes said that he'd seen research regarding cardiac drift, and you pointed at that video and said "look again". I did look, and I saw no research, not even a reference to research, regarding cardiac drift. I'm not exaggerating: she gave a quick definition, said that high numbers were related to fatigue, and that's literally it. So rather than suggesting we all just dismiss it, I thought you'd appreciate the chance to elaborate.
If you search NIH, there are several published articles that contain cardiac drift discussion. CD was observed in runners where running at a constant pace would cause HR to increase over time. At some point, one runs out of HR and speed begins to drop. So when running a marathon, one picks a pace such that one does not run out of HR and one maintains pace. The theory would be that the fastest time will occur at a constant pace.

The cardiac drift observed in runners was linked to increases in core temperature. So cooling is very important and therefore there is an ideal ambient temperature for distance running.
Hermes is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 12:29 PM
  #32  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 14,437

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2460 Post(s)
Liked 27 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by Hermes View Post
If you search NIH, there are several published articles that contain cardiac drift discussion. CD was observed in runners where running at a constant pace would cause HR to increase over time. At some point, one runs out of HR and speed begins to drop. So when running a marathon, one picks a pace such that one does not run out of HR and one maintains pace. The theory would be that the fastest time will occur at a constant pace.


The cardiac drift observed in runners was linked to increases in core temperature. So cooling is very important and therefore there is an ideal ambient temperature for distance running.

Some provocative points there that may be interesting to go into some some time. I felt like going down the rabbit-hole about the marathons, partly because the pace drop during marathons is also associated with muscle break-down chemical markers, which you might as well associate with cardiac drift if you're associating core temperature with cardiac drift. ie, a couple of things caused by something else which may be itself contributing to cardiac drift. But the marathon is adding some factors that we probably don't want involved IMO.


But back to this OP plan of changing intensity/duration according to whatever drift there was in the prior training session (or even in the training session in progress). Cooling may be a factor in CD. What you ate this morning, how much you've run in the last 10 days, how well you've slept, even emotional stress may also be factors. So you'd be making very specific changes in a single run (ride) based on very general inputs that may or may not have anything to do with the training goals for that session. It doesn't really make sense to me. Sure, you want to keep an eye on physical stress but I don't see CD by itself as doing a very good job of that.


More than anything else, it looks like OP is ultimately merely keeping the whole session in a range somewhere below the aerobic threshold. But finding the pace for that (or power on the bike) will do that without loading up confounding variables, so I don't really see his point.
wphamilton is online now  
Old 02-14-19, 12:34 PM
  #33  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 14,873

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1756 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 16 Posts
Originally Posted by Hermes View Post
If you search NIH, there are several published articles that contain cardiac drift discussion. CD was observed in runners where running at a constant pace would cause HR to increase over time. At some point, one runs out of HR and speed begins to drop. So when running a marathon, one picks a pace such that one does not run out of HR and one maintains pace. The theory would be that the fastest time will occur at a constant pace.

The cardiac drift observed in runners was linked to increases in core temperature. So cooling is very important and therefore there is an ideal ambient temperature for distance running.
Cycling is a little different because of the emphasis on climbing, but much the same in that the idea is to have a climbing pace which can just be maintained on every climb in the ride. Researchers have found that the perfect temperature for cycling is 55°. Nice to live in the PNW. Rain also removes excess body heat, so really a good idea to ride in the rain to get the best workout.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 12:53 PM
  #34  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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
What effects cardiac drift?

There's no shortage of skepticism about the efficacy of using heart rate data because of confounding variables. Let's start a list of them, assess them individually with respect to indoor training at fixed power under controlled conditions and then establish how much comes out in the wash with longitudinal analysis: First, the list (feel free to jump in and I'll add them):
.
  • Variation in power
  • Variation in terrain
  • Variation in cadence
  • Variation in conditions
  • Variation in hydration
  • Variation in nutrition
  • Variation in caffeine intake
  • Variation in stress levels
  • Variation in sleep quality
  • Alcohol consumption
ERG training allows athletes to completely or largely mitigate for all of these such that changes in performance can be quickly and confidently attributable to changes in training status (fitness, fatigue, endurance) and even more so based on trend/longitudinal data analysis.

By definition, the absence of confounding variables means that the relationship between effort and power is due to fitness, fatigue or endurance.

Fatigue can also be added as a confounding variable depending on whether you want insight into fatigue. Personally, I prefer such insight and recent history of CD + HR is all it takes to see clearly enough the breakdown between fitness, fatigue and endurance.

Moreover, allowing fatigue to vary is self-regulating because a decrease in frequency or power will still meet the mission; especially if you are time bound and substituting intensity for duration anyway. But even then, you can still distinguish between fatigue and endurance because fatigue builds and dissipates much more quickly than fitness and especially endurance ; but also because of the clear presence of fatigue-induced heart rate suppression.

Last edited by fstrnu; 02-14-19 at 12:56 PM.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 12:54 PM
  #35  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD
Posts: 11,213

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 282 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked 30 Times in 25 Posts
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
Some provocative points there that may be interesting to go into some some time. I felt like going down the rabbit-hole about the marathons, partly because the pace drop during marathons is also associated with muscle break-down chemical markers, which you might as well associate with cardiac drift if you're associating core temperature with cardiac drift. ie, a couple of things caused by something else which may be itself contributing to cardiac drift. But the marathon is adding some factors that we probably don't want involved IMO.


But back to this OP plan of changing intensity/duration according to whatever drift there was in the prior training session (or even in the training session in progress). Cooling may be a factor in CD. What you ate this morning, how much you've run in the last 10 days, how well you've slept, even emotional stress may also be factors. So you'd be making very specific changes in a single run (ride) based on very general inputs that may or may not have anything to do with the training goals for that session. It doesn't really make sense to me. Sure, you want to keep an eye on physical stress but I don't see CD by itself as doing a very good job of that.


More than anything else, it looks like OP is ultimately merely keeping the whole session in a range somewhere below the aerobic threshold. But finding the pace for that (or power on the bike) will do that without loading up confounding variables, so I don't really see his point.
Also, it is pointed out in one article that during a running race, faster runners i.e. finishing sooner will have less CD than slower runners who are on the course longer. CD is framed in the articles that I read as a variable that may skew results and highly influenced by many factors. In runners, one article pointed out that CD may be linked to lower plasma levels due to dehydration that results in faster HR.

I think OPs point is one cycles indoors at a level of effort for x time and monitors CD. If a CD of X is not achieved then increase the pedal force and or duration. If that motivates a cyclist to cycle and accomplish an objective then great.

The problem I see is lack of a goal. If the goal is to ride indoors and improve fitness, then CD as a metric seems okay for awhile. At some point in time, a cyclist who wants to be fit says, hey, all the time I have is 45 minutes and I do not want to pedal any harder. I could visualize several reactions by athletes to the protocol.

If the goal is to use indoor training as an adjunct to outdoor when the weather is bad then the indoor, IMO, has to have some relationship to the outdoor cycling.

My opinion is that any protocol that a cyclist will do and enjoys is a good protocol.
Hermes is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 01:07 PM
  #36  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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
While my protocol is designed to be systematic, personalized, accessible and effective, it doesn't even begin to fully leverage the power of ERG training. But people need somewhere to start. The reality is that this can be taken to much higher levels but for most only once they can begin to understand the basics and develop belief and curiosity necessary to embrace an empirical approach.

Having said that, cyclists will have to "pedal heard" (I prefer "produce more power") to challenge the body if time is short or they won't achieve adequate stimulus. Additionally, specificity will require increasing intensity as athletes go from general ==> specific. I know you know this and don't mean to insult your intelligence. I'm just saying it in case others don't realize it or don't realize that I realize it.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 02:01 PM
  #37  
Bandera 
~>~
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: TX Hill Country
Posts: 5,733
Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked 28 Times in 17 Posts
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
I am an indoor specialist.
That explains a whole lot.
Using a bicycle like testing apparatus in lab rat mode indoors vs cycling on the roads, paths, trails and tracks of the real world.
I can't think of anything more dismal, pointless and Sisyphean.
Oddly enough any "training" that I've done has been to build the endurance, power and speed to get up and over real hills and to hone the operational control of the machine at pace on open public roads.

As always, suit yourself.

-Bandera
__________________
'74 Raleigh Internat'l. '77 Trek TX900 FG. '90 Vitus 979. '10 Merckx EMX3. '13 Soma Stanyan
Bandera is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 02:23 PM
  #38  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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
For someone who loathes indoor training, you sure spend a lot of time in threads about indoor training
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 02:52 PM
  #39  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SD
Posts: 11,213

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 282 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 530 Post(s)
Liked 30 Times in 25 Posts
Originally Posted by wphamilton View Post
Some provocative points there that may be interesting to go into some some time. I felt like going down the rabbit-hole about the marathons, partly because the pace drop during marathons is also associated with muscle break-down chemical markers, which you might as well associate with cardiac drift if you're associating core temperature with cardiac drift. ie, a couple of things caused by something else which may be itself contributing to cardiac drift. But the marathon is adding some factors that we probably don't want involved IMO.


But back to this OP plan of changing intensity/duration according to whatever drift there was in the prior training session (or even in the training session in progress). Cooling may be a factor in CD. What you ate this morning, how much you've run in the last 10 days, how well you've slept, even emotional stress may also be factors. So you'd be making very specific changes in a single run (ride) based on very general inputs that may or may not have anything to do with the training goals for that session. It doesn't really make sense to me. Sure, you want to keep an eye on physical stress but I don't see CD by itself as doing a very good job of that.


More than anything else, it looks like OP is ultimately merely keeping the whole session in a range somewhere below the aerobic threshold. But finding the pace for that (or power on the bike) will do that without loading up confounding variables, so I don't really see his point.
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
Cycling is a little different because of the emphasis on climbing, but much the same in that the idea is to have a climbing pace which can just be maintained on every climb in the ride. Researchers have found that the perfect temperature for cycling is 55°. Nice to live in the PNW. Rain also removes excess body heat, so really a good idea to ride in the rain to get the best workout.
Check this out below. I found this interesting.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5408286/

This study is also, to our knowledge, the first to demonstrate heart rate differences between mountain running and road running events. Compared to duration‐matched road races, participants in mountain races experienced no increase (MWRR) or a reduction (PP) in HR (both absolute and as percentage estimated HRmax) and slowing pace over the second half of the race. The observed increases in HR in the second versus first half of the half marathon and marathon are not surprising: cardiac drift, an increase in HR without a concomitant increase in work output (i.e., running speed), has been demonstrated in one‐hour (Ekelund 1967; Mognoni et al. 1990) and 4‐hour (Dawson et al. 2005) exercise tests and is likely resultant from lower stroke volume concomitant with reduced plasma volume (Hamilton et al. 1991) and lower diastolic function (Dawson et al. 2005). There is little reason to speculate that these factors do not affect runners at MWRR and PP— races of similar duration to the half marathon and marathon, respectively— so maintenance of heart rate in those events must be attributable to a factor sufficiently robust that it masks the effect of drift. Three potential explanatory factors, not mutually exclusive, warrant further consideration.

Altitude

The PP Ascent begins at 2382 m (7814 feet) and finishes at 4302 m (14 115 feet) while the Mt. Washington Road Race starts at 465 m (1526 feet) and finishes at 1917 m (6289 feet). The marathon and half marathons included in this study are held near sea level. Performance and cardiac function are undoubtedly impacted by the hypoxia encountered throughout the PP race: acute altitude exposure at simulated 4000 m (13 123 feet) increases heart rate and cardiac output during submaximal exercise to compensate for reduced arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), but maximal HR is reduced slightly, possibly due to reduced oxygen delivery to cardiac tissue (Stenberg et al. 1966) or increased production of epinephrine, which may have additional performance effects as it speeds uptake of glucose into muscle cells (Richardson et al. 1998). Wehrlin and Hallen (2006) found a 1.9 bpm decrease in maximal HR per 1000 m–in keeping with Stenberg et al.'s (1966) result at 4000 m– beginning at least as low as 1000 m, encompassing most of the altitudes encountered at MWRR. Thus, perhaps the lack of HR increase observed in mountain races does not reflect a reduction in percent HRmax (reduced aerobic effort), but rather lower HRmax resultant from hypoxia opposes cardiac drift and attenuates (MWRR) or completely negates (PP) a rise in heart rate in the second half of the race. Importantly, most participants in the PP Ascent live at and are ostensibly acclimatized to altitude, so many of their physiological responses during the race are not directly comparable with nonacclimatized runners; however, some HR effects persist even after acclimatization (Vogel et al. 1967).
Hermes is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 03:44 PM
  #40  
srode1
Gravel Rocks
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 172

Bikes: Trek Domane and Crockett, Niner RLT9

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Hermes View Post

The cardiac drift observed in runners was linked to increases in core temperature. So cooling is very important and therefore there is an ideal ambient temperature for distance running.
Makes sense, I looked at my cardiac drift from a 15 hour ride which started at 6am, and when I compared before and after the peak temperature the CD went from double digit positive to almost double digit negative - overall for the ride was a little over 7.
srode1 is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 04:01 PM
  #41  
srode1
Gravel Rocks
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Ohio
Posts: 172

Bikes: Trek Domane and Crockett, Niner RLT9

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
Ah you must mean a chart of pw:hr over time for visual analysis? Slope vs erg mode each has its advantages but fixed power will be much more precise for this purpose. Cadence can also be a factor. I have to fight to keep my cadence up even at low intensity. 3 times X is fine as long as you realize that it is skewed when looking at the data and trends/individuality is important so as long as you are comparing apples to apples you'll be fine.
Pw:Hr is a metric which Training peaks uses to represent CD / Aerobic decoupling - not a chart and numerically equivalent. Here's a link to a high level description - the name for the metric isn't intuitive. https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/h...ic-decoupling/

I do work to keep my cadence steady on my workouts, probably not a factor for mine.
srode1 is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 04:26 PM
  #42  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 14,873

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 84 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1756 Post(s)
Liked 18 Times in 16 Posts
Originally Posted by Hermes View Post
Check this out below. I found this interesting.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5408286/

<snip>
I'd forgotten about that - nearing the summit of Mt. Rainier, this sea level dweller experienced noticeably low HR for RPE. Exactly - there's not enough oxygen to work very hard. Intervals at sea level scarcely drop my oxygen saturation, but at 10,000', jumping jacks will quickly knock it down to 93%.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 02-14-19, 04:38 PM
  #43  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 14,437

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 58 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2460 Post(s)
Liked 27 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
There's no shortage of skepticism about the efficacy of using heart rate data because of confounding variables. Let's start a list of them, assess them individually with respect to indoor training at fixed power under controlled conditions and then establish how much comes out in the wash with longitudinal analysis: First, the list (feel free to jump in and I'll add them):
.
  • Variation in power
  • Variation in terrain
  • Variation in cadence
  • Variation in conditions
  • Variation in hydration
  • Variation in nutrition
  • Variation in caffeine intake
  • Variation in stress levels
  • Variation in sleep quality
  • Alcohol consumption
ERG training allows athletes to completely or largely mitigate for all of these such that changes in performance can be quickly and confidently attributable to changes in training status (fitness, fatigue, endurance) and even more so based on trend/longitudinal data analysis.

By definition, the absence of confounding variables means that the relationship between effort and power is due to fitness, fatigue or endurance.

Fatigue can also be added as a confounding variable depending on whether you want insight into fatigue. Personally, I prefer such insight and recent history of CD + HR is all it takes to see clearly enough the breakdown between fitness, fatigue and endurance.

Moreover, allowing fatigue to vary is self-regulating because a decrease in frequency or power will still meet the mission; especially if you are time bound and substituting intensity for duration anyway. But even then, you can still distinguish between fatigue and endurance because fatigue builds and dissipates much more quickly than fitness and especially endurance ; but also because of the clear presence of fatigue-induced heart rate suppression.
I have to remain skeptical of your claims here. First, the idea that a delta-hr somehow eliminates or diminishes the confounding variables of heart rate seems to me to be unsound both from mathematical principles and from what I know of physical processes in general. You're almost always going to have greater variation due to these factors in the derivative.

Secondly, I doubt that the cardiac drift, unless pretty extreme, presents any insight at all in "the breakdown between fitness, fatigue and endurance" and I would at least need to see that validated other than a bare claim. And in fact, whether or not fatigue can in general cause a suppression in the heart rate (and all that's really clear is a loose sort of correlation), all of those confounding factors mean that you cannot conclude an excessive stress due to a given momentary measure of cardiac drift. IMO.
wphamilton is online now  
Old 02-14-19, 04:46 PM
  #44  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 srode1 View Post
Pw:Hr is a metric which Training peaks uses to represent CD / Aerobic decoupling - not a chart and numerically equivalent. Here's a link to a high level description - the name for the metric isn't intuitive. https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/h...ic-decoupling/

I do work to keep my cadence steady on my workouts, probably not a factor for mine.
Yep. I remember that now. Thanks.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-15-19, 04:09 AM
  #45  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 wphamilton View Post
I have to remain skeptical of your claims here. First, the idea that a delta-hr somehow eliminates or diminishes the confounding variables of heart rate seems to me to be unsound both from mathematical principles and from what I know of physical processes in general. You're almost always going to have greater variation due to these factors in the derivative.

Secondly, I doubt that the cardiac drift, unless pretty extreme, presents any insight at all in "the breakdown between fitness, fatigue and endurance" and I would at least need to see that validated other than a bare claim. And in fact, whether or not fatigue can in general cause a suppression in the heart rate (and all that's really clear is a loose sort of correlation), all of those confounding factors mean that you cannot conclude an excessive stress due to a given momentary measure of cardiac drift. IMO.
Do you remember what 3 x 3 x 3 represents from the video?

Do you believe that the relationship between internal and external load reflects fitness?
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-15-19, 04:12 AM
  #46  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 Hermes View Post


Also, it is pointed out in one article that during a running race, faster runners i.e. finishing sooner will have less CD than slower runners who are on the course longer. CD is framed in the articles that I read as a variable that may skew results and highly influenced by many factors. In runners, one article pointed out that CD may be linked to lower plasma levels due to dehydration that results in faster HR.

I think OPs point is one cycles indoors at a level of effort for x time and monitors CD. If a CD of X is not achieved then increase the pedal force and or duration. If that motivates a cyclist to cycle and accomplish an objective then great.

The problem I see is lack of a goal. If the goal is to ride indoors and improve fitness, then CD as a metric seems okay for awhile. At some point in time, a cyclist who wants to be fit says, hey, all the time I have is 45 minutes and I do not want to pedal any harder. I could visualize several reactions by athletes to the protocol.

If the goal is to use indoor training as an adjunct to outdoor when the weather is bad then the indoor, IMO, has to have some relationship to the outdoor cycling.

My opinion is that any protocol that a cyclist will do and enjoys is a good protocol.
The goal is to build fitness and endurance while keeping fatigue in check. As the title suggests, this is a different way of looking at indoor training ; not the only way to look at indoor training and not the only way to look at training. I'm puzzled at the general hostility about indoor training. Why are people who hate indoor training even in these threads. Do whatever you want, man. It's all good, yo.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-15-19, 04:28 AM
  #47  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,388

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 127 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 41 Times in 30 Posts
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
The goal is to build fitness and endurance while keeping fatigue in check.
But why? For what purpose? For what events?


Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
As the title suggests, this is a different way of looking at indoor training ; not the only way to look at indoor training and not the only way to look at training. I'm puzzled at the general hostility about indoor training. Why are people who hate indoor training even in these threads. Do whatever you want, man. It's all good, yo.
Most cyclists do indoor training as a necessary evil. Many of us do it, but only to keep in shape during a time of year when cycling outside is difficult. Cycling indoor is not the goal ... cycling outside is.

Although that said, occasionally we might have an indoor goal. When I did 4 hours on the trainer, that was my goal ... to try for 4 hours to see how it would go. I did it, it was OK. Just OK. And not something I've had a desire to repeat over the past 15 years.

We might be interested in your suggestions if you could tell us how they might help us ride the local century, do well in the first race of the season, tackle the local climbing challenge, etc. etc. ... outside cycling stuff.

If, for example, you were able to tell me that doing what you suggest for 6 weeks would put me in a good place to be able to cycle to the top of Mt Wellington, a challenging climb, then I might be interested. But if you can't come up with a reason to do what you suggest, why would we bother?
Machka is offline  
Old 02-15-19, 04:28 AM
  #48  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 wphamilton View Post
Cooling may be a factor in CD. What you ate this morning, how much you've run in the last 10 days, how well you've slept, even emotional stress may also be factors. So you'd be making very specific changes in a single run (ride) based on very general inputs that may or may not have anything to do with the training goals for that session. It doesn't really make sense to me. Sure, you want to keep an eye on physical stress but I don't see CD by itself as doing a very good job of that.

More than anything else, it looks like OP is ultimately merely keeping the whole session in a range somewhere below the aerobic threshold. But finding the pace for that (or power on the bike) will do that without loading up confounding variables, so I don't really see his point.
Sorry I missed this one because it started with side conversation. The idea is to minimize variability. Consistent conditions. Consistent diet. Consistent training. Consistent sleep quality. The inputs to the session have everything to do with goals for that session. Pace alone isn't enough. You need to manage all three programming variables.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-15-19, 04:32 AM
  #49  
fstrnu
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
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 Machka View Post
But why? For what purpose? For what events?




Most cyclists do indoor training as a necessary evil. Many of us do it, but only to keep in shape during a time of year when cycling outside is difficult. Cycling indoor is not the goal ... cycling outside is.

Although that said, occasionally we might have an indoor goal. When I did 4 hours on the trainer, that was my goal ... to try for 4 hours to see how it would go. I did it, it was OK. Just OK. And not something I've had a desire to repeat over the past 15 years.

We might be interested in your suggestions if you could tell us how they might help us ride the local century, do well in the first race of the season, tackle the local climbing challenge, etc. etc. ... outside cycling stuff.

If, for example, you were able to tell me that doing what you suggest for 6 weeks would put me in a good place to be able to cycle to the top of Mt Wellington, a challenging climb, then I might be interested. But if you can't come up with a reason to do what you suggest, why would we bother?
Doing what I suggest will put you in a good place to be able to cycle to the top of Mt Wellington.
fstrnu is offline  
Old 02-15-19, 04:43 AM
  #50  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 51,388

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 127 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2848 Post(s)
Liked 41 Times in 30 Posts
Originally Posted by fstrnu View Post
Doing what I suggest will put you in a good place to be able to cycle to the top of Mt Wellington.
19.5 km with 1273 metres of climbing.


OK, now how do you know? Have you done the training you suggest, and have then done a climbing challenge outside?
Machka is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.