Power meter vs perceived exertion

[HillRPete]

HillRPete,
just to be the devils advocate here, so whilst doing a prescibred Wattage on short interval, even if you feel great, you wouldn't up the power?

In that case I would add another repetition at the end, but that's just how I'm structuring my training. An interval workout block always goes over a month. Start with n repetitions, then do one more every week. Next month, change type of intervals, depending on the progression I want. (A bit influenced by medium distance running)

[Cuki]

It was very common in my running career to train with HRM's, but never to race with them. You simply didn't want to know. I would imagine elite and pro cyclists are no different.
HRM's and PM's are amazing training tools, I'm not so sure they are great racing tools.

[highdraw]

I would beg to differ Cuki. Racing to power is very common and can be quite helpful. Knowing that you will blow up over a particular power threshold say in a climb or a long fast effort will shape how fast you go out.

[eric]

For normal (2-4 hour) road races I set my computer display to only show time and distance. I don't want to see power or HR numbers in a normal race. I have to do what I have to do.

For training and for extra long climbing races (6+ hours) I use a display which shows power and HR.

[Rick]

I would beg to differ Cuki. Racing to power is very common and can be quite helpful. Knowing that you will blow up over a particular power threshold say in a climb or a long fast effort will shape how fast you go out.

But I think the argument would be that an experienced rider also knows when he is nearing blow up just from the PE.
PE having the advantage that it is a measure of how close you are to blow up TODAY...not when you established the number you think you need to stay under.

I am not arguing too vigorously in favor of PE over Power; I don't really know what would be the best. But I can see the logic to PE and I do "believe" in it.

[highdraw]

Audio in this video is a bit annoying but some good comments about how to race with power:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2jamVKAu40

[Cuki]

Highdraw, I could imagine certain disciplines of road cycling, yes, TT's etc, some might find it useful to be on the numbers? You guys will probably know best. Strategic races like Grand Tours and running events like Marathons, well, I totally understand why elite runners and cyclists may wish not to use PM's or HRM's. Eric makes the most valid point, you simply do what you have to do at those particular moments in a race.
And as Rick mentions, you don't need a HRM or a PM to tell elite athletes when they about to blow up. If you spend as much time on your bike as I did in my running shoes, you will know nearly everything you need to know.
PM's and HRM's are great tools to understand personal performance, as is the very personal PE.

[Tinea Pedis]

but it is certainly real that some Pros are ignoring there Power numbers in races.

Without doubt. What is also real is that the majority of the Pro peloton now run a power meter and don't have the screen taped up.

I think you're taking some of higher profile exceptions and looking to find a rule.


As a counter point, I know Cadel religiously trains to power. Lives close to me, so is even wary of others riding with him and somehow getting a gauge of what power he's pushing off their power and speed also, Sky showed in 2012 exactly what you can do to a stage race by using a power meter up major climbs.

I don't really look at power in a race. Only once or twice (road races, not TTs) I've wished I could not see it - as, like others have said, you have to push what you have to push. However I had three months this year training off PE and HR and I genuinely cannot say my training quality was as good as when I had a PM. For any interval length.


If PE works for you, terrific. Lord knows there are hundreds of incredible cyclists around the world who have never owned a power meter. But I would argue for most, the best quality training, race analysis and race pacing strategies come from running one.

[PDXWheels]

arguably the best Grand Tour Rider of the Modern Era seems to disagree. This is why I ask.

I think they are simply playing a little mind trick on themselves. So they don't look down and see a number and think "this is really hard, I can't do much more".

Nothing too scientific, just shifting their focus.

[tinozee]

In many cases you want to stay below a certain watts. You might work on intervals at 160% ftp and not higher, etc. On the road, racing, in a group, etc. though it's very distracting with a draft, momentum,rolling hills, etc. the number is always morphing and not as useful real time.

[Butcher]

Training and racing are two different things. It is amazing what a race can pull out of you. Much more than training by yourself.

[topflightpro]

I tape over my computer when I race. My power numbers, HR... are irrelevant during a crit or RR.

Also, if everything is covered, I can't see a number and think, "Oh, I can't go that hard."

I can see how someone would want to target a power number in a TT, or in some cases monitor his or her power during a major climb. But I only look at my on-screen numbers during training. It's great for intervals.

[Tapeworm]

There is definitive answer, all that matters is that whatever practice is employed enables improvement/performance.

FWIW, I like occasionally taping up power readings and then correlating RPE to the power recorded. This is sometime to hone in on what I am *feeling* and attempt to realign perception of "hard". The other reason being is that sometimes device fail, often at their most critical, and hence being able to survive without data can be a useful racecraft.

That being said, wherever possible, *the data is always recorded*. This is the important part. Analysis, post race/training, is what helps in the long term.

Try both. Record data. Report back.

If in training data readings distract or motivate you is largely irrelevant, as long as you get better.

[Tapeworm]

Oh, and HR is next to useless. Don't bother.

[kulivontot]

RPE is only valid for a single time point. There's no way to integrate that data over a period of time and determine your training load. Also says nothing for making improvements. Not even remotely comparable for training purposes.