Time Crunch Intervals Question (HR/Watts)

Ands

For peeps doing the TCTP, with regard to the intensities, do your watts and HR for your designated zones match up when you train? If they don't, what do you follow - watts or HR?

The reason I ask is because doing a SS interval session, my wattage range is 197-206, HR range 154-157. I did my intervals comfortably, and found a good rythmn turning about 202 watts at 88rpm, but my HR was sitting around 161 each time. So to drop my HR, I'd either have to drop my watts or cadence. Should I follow the watts or the HR (today I followed the watts)?

Also, when you are fatigued or ill, what happens to your HR? Sometimes people say they can't get their HR up, others say it is elevated . Can anyone explain!

MatthewBulmer

If you've set up your training zones using power, then gauge your intensity using power and not HR. Power will be a more accurate way of ensuring your session is performed at the correct intensity.

TBH I've not found suppressed/elevated HR, either during exercise or at rest, to be a good indicator of overtraining or illness. In fact, I've stopped monitoring for that purpose any more.

Ands

Thanks Matthew. The zones are defined from both a HR & a power reading - the resultant table of data states what HR you should be working at for a particular wattage (not sure if you are familiar with this particular program - sorry if I am telling you what you already know). I knew as soon as I worked out my zones on paper that my HR & pwr wouldn't correlate - i.e. I knew that I couldn't do 200 watts at 154-157bpm, just based on what I knew from my existing training. So it's no surprise that my HR is higher for 200 watts. I'm just not sure which reading to follow next time. Surely I'm not the only one whose ranges don't match up....or am I?

If I churn out more power, I'll get stronger, right??? In which case I'll stick to following the wattage. (Probably a daft question but I've got my training so wrong in the past and this time I just want to try and get something right!)

MatthewBulmer

Personally, I'd just stick to the power-based training zones and not pay too much attention to the HR stuff. I'd imagine that from most people there wouldn't be an exact correlation between the equivilent HR/Power zones (there isn't for me.)

Anonymous

Ands.

If you have power measurement, do your testing using power and set your zones just using power. Then train using power. Ignore HR!

twotyred

I don't have a power tap or SRM but I've started using the power measurement on the Keiser bikes at the gym I go to. OK not as accurate as a power tap but much better than nothing.

Since doing this I've come to the conclusion that HR is a very blunt instrument. For instance its a lagging indicator e.g when doing 2 x 20 min intervals at constant power my HR can take 10 mins to stabilise making it IMHO useless for measuring effort on shorter interval sessions. Also from the start of the first interval to the end of the second interval my HR range is 20 bpm and my average HR for the second interval can be 10 bpm higher than the first. If I were doing the intervals on HR alone I'd probably be starting off too hard to get my HR in the correct zone and then be unable to complete the interval.

Finally my HR is affected by ambient temp. It can vary by 10 bpm depending whether I'm on one of the bikes under the air con unit or not.

I've done a Carmichael performance test and my HR for the second 8 mins was well above that of the first 8 min interval although power was way down. If I'd used HR instead of power to set my zones they would be completely wrong.

In summary if you have access to power measurement then use that and don't bother with HR. I'm now wondering how its possible to train effectively using HR alone and trying to figure out some way of affording a power tap

Ands

Yep, OK, thanks everyone I was going to stick with power. I only have power on the turbo tho, not on the road - but at least I will get to know what kind of HR correlates to what wattage when I'm out (indoor/outdoor variances aside...).

Yesterday was the first set of intervals I had done since re-doing my zones properly (was ill last week so didn't ride for 4 days) but since I did them on the road I had no choice but to use HR (and I'm pretty sure I wasn't doing 200 watts, given that today was harder on the turbo.)

A Powertap is on my shopping list too Twotyred.....I would love to be able to see exactly what I'm doing, and get all my data. (Just got to wait for my daughter to start school and then I can go back to work and earn some ££. (oh, but then I'd have no time to train...)) .

rossere

I agree with everyone above – if you can measure your efforts using power then use that.

I am following the TCTP using HR and, like others, I am find it hard to measure how hard I am going due to the lag in HR and cardiovascular drift.

When I start an interval I have to put in a big effort/surge to get my HR up to the required level (and this takes one minute) and then have to drop off a bit to keep my HR in the SS zone. The trouble with this is that I produce lactate right from the start which my body then has to process throughout the whole of the interval and I end up panting half way through. In short I feel like I am going off too hard – or is this how I should train using HR ?

The second problem I have is that on the final interval my HR drifts out the top of the SS zone so I have to drop my effort to keep my HR at SS.
Again is this the right thing to do when measuring effort/intensity with HR ?

Given that I am doing all my intervals on the trainer my only solution to this problem is one that has been discussed many times on the forum.
That is to use the same speed, cadence and gear combination that I know from previous efforts produces an effort that puts my HR in the SS zone.
Thus from the start of the interval I would ignore HR and just use the speed/gear/cadence for the length of the interval.

Sorry if this has hijacked your thread Ands

Ands

rossere wrote:

Sorry if this has hijacked your thread Ands

Not at all - I want to (and need to) hear other people's experiences (and besides, it was completely on-topic!)

I had been wondering how long others take to get up to the right intensity. I have been taking about 40 secs to get up to the right wattage, just working up through the gears/resistance rather than switching straight into the target gear. This is the one time I ignore my HR.

amaferanga

Which turbo are you using for your power measurements?

Ands

amaferanga wrote:

Which turbo are you using for your power measurements?

If that Q is for me, it's a Tacx Flow.

MatthewBulmer

rossere wrote:

IWhen I start an interval I have to put in a big effort/surge to get my HR up to the required level (and this takes one minute) and then have to drop off a bit to keep my HR in the SS zone. The trouble with this is that I produce lactate right from the start which my body then has to process throughout the whole of the interval and I end up panting half way through. In short I feel like I am going off too hard – or is this how I should train using HR ?

Given that these are ‘steady state’ intervals, I would suggest that’s it’s not the correct approach to try and raise your heart rate into the required training zone as quickly as possible. This will lead to a very high initial power output which you would be unable to sustain for the whole of the interval i.e. your power output would not be ‘steady state’ at all during the interval.

I would agree that without some means of accurately measuring power, then finding the right level for these intervals takes a bit of practice, and trial and error. Prior to getting a powermeter, I used the following methods to measure intensity (most particularly on the turbo): HR, RPE and rear wheel speed. If you try and maintain the same variables for each turbo session (temperature, hydration, warm-up proctocol, tyre pressure, turbo roller pressure on tyre) then I think that over the space of a few sessions you can build a pretty accurate picture of the sort of effort you can consistently maintain across all of the intervals/sets in a particular session. If you record your outputs from the session then you have a reasonable baseline upon which you can gauge your future sessions. Since I’ve had a powermeter, I’ve been able to verify that the intensity at which I’d previously been conducting my turbo sessions was at basically the right level – so this approach can work.

The other thing that is harder to do without a powermeter is to measure changes in fitness levels through field tests (eg FTP Test). There are just too many variables on a turbo for the results to provide accurate data on improvements in fitness. Instead, I’ve been monitoring my fitness by riding up a long hill (20mins) each month to see if my time reduces. Obviously, there are still variables involved, but I feel that as long as you pick a day that isn’t unduly windy, then this can act as a good field test.

rossere

Thanks Matthew,

I was starting to realise the way I was going about doing the intervals was wrong on Tuesday when, on the last interval, It felt like I was pedalling through thick cement.
However, it is good to get the reassurance/confirmation.

I have a session tomorrow (3 x 8min SS) so I will use speed/cadence/gear to judge my effort by.

A power meter is now rapidly moving up my wish list.

lochindaal

Ands
I see the same as you but I just focus on the Power Zones when using a Tacx excel.

What i have noticed is my recovery between intervals my HR drops down a lot better. I am in a repeat of week 5 at the moment as work got in the way of training.