For those that don't have a power meter

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
User avatar
Tinea Pedis
Posts: 8615
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
Contact:

by Tinea Pedis

Citizenfox wrote:No PM doesn't mean your not serious, and going out and hammering until you're eyes bleed doesn't mean you're not having fun.

With all due respect, you again seem to have missed this crucial point

Have a look at serious training sans powermeter.

It is effective, no one, and certainly not me, are claiming otherwise. The sessions, the micro/macro cycles don't really change whether you have a PM or not.


It's a sliding scale, and if you really were as serious as you could be about training you'd have one.

As much as I hate appeals to authority or N=1 surveys, I will say that I've been 100% serious about my training for years. Last year I had to go 3 months without a power meter. I was heading to Europe to race, so could not have been more driven to make sure I was in terrific shape. Only the sessions were just not as finely tuned without a power meter as they were with one. I know how to hurt and I'm good enough at TTs to know how to gauge my RPE, still could not get the quality I needed.

I was serious. I'm sure you know guys who are serious. But like it or not, they provide a performance management aspect that is the step above anything else on offer. Without it, you're selling yourself short and 'not (as) serious' as you could otherwise be.


Cal - your post lost me mate :lol:
Last edited by Tinea Pedis on Tue Apr 21, 2015 2:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

That's ok Tinea... I totally get how valuable a pm can be for serious training but Tapeworms post kind of implied, no it explicitly states that because I'm not seriously "training" I must "own the choice that I'm settling for a lesser path". And that I take exception to. I like the path I've taken. I'm not aspiring to win any races. Is that wrong? That's rhetorical by the way :).
By the way, still not home yet. Glad I brought my lights.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
Tinea Pedis
Posts: 8615
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 6:08 am
Contact:

by Tinea Pedis

And I agreed with him. I think you've missed the context of it all.

You also ranted about how someone who was 'serious' (like you are) is somehow "insufferable" because of his training. Yet you're the same but not insufferable and a terrific guy to ride with. That's the part that totally lost me. And it may all be true, it just didn't bear any relevance to the debate.

User avatar
53x12
Posts: 3708
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2006 6:02 am
Location: On the bike

by 53x12

Tapeworm wrote:^ another fallacy, that because the training is serious that you can't enjoy the riding.



Well said. They aren't mutually exclusive. So often these kind of discussions the dissenting opinion wants to pigeon hole the discussion into the corner (as with other discussions on this forum). There is no reason why you can't use a pm, train well, enjoy training, race, enjoy racing and all that is involved. To be honest, since my first power meter several years back, I think I have enjoyed training and riding more because I can actually see the improvement in an objective manner. No need to guess. I see it on the screen.


Also, an insufferable rider is an insufferable rider. Regardless if they use a PM or not. Regardless if they ride a boutique brand bike. Regardless if they were Rapha. A person is "insufferable" because that is who they are. Not because of the equipment they use.
"Marginal gains are the only gains when all that's left to gain is in the margins."

Citizenfox
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 1:22 pm

by Citizenfox

Even if they wear Rapha? Say it ain't so....

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Ok ok. I stand down. I did not mean to imply anyone who is over the top with training is insufferable. In fact, I don't believe anyone gets really really good at something without being somewhat obsessive about it. I'm obsessive about bike stuff for sure. WW provides an outlet for that.
The original question in the first post was simply someone asking "For those that don't train with a powermeter, may I ask why".
Some train with them. Some don't. Some believe in them. Some don't. Some use them religiously. Some use them for information and fun. For some cost is an issue. For others they wouldn't have on if they were free. I guess the answers are all over the board.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

Citizenfox
Posts: 197
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 1:22 pm

by Citizenfox

I'm not even sure that it's "some believe in them and some don't." There's no question the data is valuable. Seems to come down to if you don't want "all the data all the time" are you serious about you're training. Some say yes, others say no.

User avatar
Calnago
In Memoriam
Posts: 8612
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Yes @Citizenfox, saying some "believe" in them and others don't was another poor choice of words on my part. Thanks for clarifying...
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

aussietim
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:59 am

by aussietim

I recently got a power meter, Older powertap SL+. My session yesterday was 2 x 20min Sweet Spot, aiming for 90% FTP (for me 238w, FTP 265 @ 70kg). I had read online doing this workout without power using HR to aim for 95% of FTHR (159 bpm).

I had the power reading setting on my garmin at 3 sec average, which I have read is the preferred setting by many people. However, my power numbers still jumped around quite a bit and I found it quite hard to gauge my effort based on watts. I actually found it much easier to pace my effort based on HR and looking at the data 160bpm correlated extremely well with 90% FTP.

I am not knocking training with power at all, and I still have a lot to learn and I am sure there are some settings I can play with to make the power reading a bit more consistent. But from my experience today I would say that someone with only HRM (provided they have correcly tested their LTHR) could go out and do that same session with the same efficiency.

User avatar
Tapeworm
Posts: 2585
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am

by Tapeworm

aussietim wrote:...But from my experience today I would say that someone with only HRM (provided they have correcly tested their LTHR) could go out and do that same session with the same efficiency.


The prescription of training doesn't change because of a power meter. Nor the effectiveness.

A power meter allows the the measurement and recording of what is ultimately the "end product" of all this training stuff.

Is there something about this that people don't get?
"Physiology is all just propaganda and lies... all waiting to be disproven by the next study."
"I'm not a real doctor; But I am a real worm; I am an actual worm." - TMBG

DanW
Posts: 1243
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

by DanW

Quite. Also, it isn't the PM's fault that the "power numbers" jump around- it is just measuring what is going on on the bike!

aussietim
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:59 am

by aussietim

Agreed, but isn't it also a tool to provide feedback during training sessions to ensure you are hitting the targets of your session. These sweet spot intervals for example, fall in quite a specific range (depending who you read, 90-95%). 5% over and you are at or above FTP which is not the intent of the session you have gone out to ride. 5% under and you drop into lower zone 3 which is regarded as some as the "happy hard effort" which is not an effective level to train at.

As I mentioned this is my first foray into the whole world of power so just my experience with limited knowledge. And although all the data at the end is great for analysis, its the day to day sessions and the feedback on the road which is the reason I decided to get into it ie make sure I am riding my hard sessions hard enough and easy sessions easy enough, Pacing my TT's correctly ect.

DanW
Posts: 1243
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

by DanW

So did your HR stay constant from second 1 of the 20 minute interval right to the end? Was the HR then identical all throughout the second interval too? If it was then the power would have dropped throughout the interval and between intervals unless you are superhuman :) Just using HR isn't the end of the world but Power lets you see the actual end product as TW says.

Don't get caught up with thinking only x Watts generates y improvements and 5% off and the entire ride is a waste of time necessarily- it is more of a sliding scale rather than absolute values. Sweetspot is just a way of describing an efficient ratio of training effect with physiological strain. "Sweetspot" kind of straddles upper Z3, lower Z4 as far as I can make out from the various models proposed. You can get the same training effect in Z3 (again as far as I can make out) as in Z4, you just need to do more of it but since the physiological strain isn't linear but increases with intensity you can recover better from a longer Z3/ Sweetspot session than a slightly shorter, higher intensity session with the same training effect. A power meter just gives a bit of a better idea of what was done on the bike to judge this kind of balance in your example session.

aussietim
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:59 am

by aussietim

My HR wasn't constant through the whole 20mins due to slowing for traffic ect (unfortunately there is one traffic light on that loop). However when I had a sustained effort targeting that HR lead to the power numbers I was targeting. I haven't loaded the ride in golden cheetah yet but can post when I do.

I should say I am not super hung up on the numbers and realize that there is likely 5% error/variation in the readings themselves. I guess the end result is to take it all with a grain of salt and make adjustments to your training as needed based on the analysis of the results.

by Weenie


Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com



User avatar
Tapeworm
Posts: 2585
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 10:39 am

by Tapeworm

I am a big advocate of taping up the watts display and performing on feel. Al la:- Image

This is a great way to ensure RPE is aligned with actual effort. But without the power meter you don't *know*. It can be estimated, approximated without one, of course.

Why "guess" when you can "know"?

To sidetrack a tad, but on topic, one the most important things I am using the powermeter for more and more of late is testing of position and equipment choices.

Thanks to rchung's work, tools like Aerolab are a real boon. Amazing how much difference can be yielded from subtle changes.

I am pretty sure I'm not allowed to be going as fast as I am currently on such meagre watts ;)
"Physiology is all just propaganda and lies... all waiting to be disproven by the next study."
"I'm not a real doctor; But I am a real worm; I am an actual worm." - TMBG

Post Reply