Power Meter Advice
Comments
-
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Not necessarily, indeed it can be quite useful. I'd say imprecise data is more troublesome but even that depends on the nature of the imprecision.BigFatBloke wrote:Inaccurate data is worse than useless.
I can see that you might be able to make some use of inaccurate data.
In scientific terms what is the difference between inaccurate and imprecise?
My earlier comment about snake oil salesmen was not directed at you and best I don't name the person / persons on here.
For the record, I find your posts and your blog excellent and informative.0 -
I guess if the data is consistently inaccurate, then it can still be used as a proxy. 'Imprecise' might imply that the data is too variable to be of any use.0
-
BigFatBloke wrote:Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Not necessarily, indeed it can be quite useful. I'd say imprecise data is more troublesome but even that depends on the nature of the imprecision.BigFatBloke wrote:Inaccurate data is worse than useless.
I can see that you might be able to make some use of inaccurate data.
In scientific terms what is the difference between inaccurate and imprecise?
My earlier comment about snake oil salesmen was not directed at you and best I don't name the person / persons on here.
For the record, I find your posts and your blog excellent and informative.
I'm not taking anything personally. I expect anything I write to be fairly challenged, if it deserves it.
As for precision and accuracy, probably the easiest way to think of it is with the target example:
http://www.mathsisfun.com/accuracy-precision.html
but a little more info here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_and_precision0 -
Another thought has sprung to mind, how robust are power meters? Will they last through the winter months without any problems when riding down the wet and sometimes muddy country roads? I assume they would be fine as there made for MTB's but I just wanted to see if anyone has run into any problems or not.0
-
BigFatBloke wrote:Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Not necessarily, indeed it can be quite useful. I'd say imprecise data is more troublesome but even that depends on the nature of the imprecision.BigFatBloke wrote:Inaccurate data is worse than useless.
I can see that you might be able to make some use of inaccurate data.
In scientific terms what is the difference between inaccurate and imprecise?
My earlier comment about snake oil salesmen was not directed at you and best I don't name the person / persons on here.
For the record, I find your posts and your blog excellent and informative.
Well that clears this thread and all others about power meters to an end then... snake oil = waste of money .. or have I misconstrued your seemingly robust standpoint to which there is no counter argument?
We all know Strava data is pants and most of us are not stupid to incorporate any of it into our training analysis.
We all know that the cost and upkeep of power meters far outweighs for the amateur any possible or probably gains over following a structured and appropriate training plan religiously, but the individual can make a choice on how they wish to spend their money.
Yes, I would buy one like I would buy a Cannondale Evo if I was able to, but I'm happy not to be troubled by the lack of either.
I am just enjoying my racing and staying fit, lean and healthy and for this season to be half way competitive - on the back of some 'preposterously' misleading data and work over the preceding months.0 -
JGSI wrote:BigFatBloke wrote:Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
Not necessarily, indeed it can be quite useful. I'd say imprecise data is more troublesome but even that depends on the nature of the imprecision.BigFatBloke wrote:Inaccurate data is worse than useless.
I can see that you might be able to make some use of inaccurate data.
In scientific terms what is the difference between inaccurate and imprecise?
My earlier comment about snake oil salesmen was not directed at you and best I don't name the person / persons on here.
For the record, I find your posts and your blog excellent and informative.
Well that clears this thread and all others about power meters to an end then... snake oil = waste of money .. or have I misconstrued your seemingly robust standpoint to which there is no counter argument?
We all know Strava data is pants and most of us are not stupid to incorporate any of it into our training analysis.
We all know that the cost and upkeep of power meters far outweighs for the amateur any possible or probably gains over following a structured and appropriate training plan religiously, but the individual can make a choice on how they wish to spend their money.
Yes, I would buy one like I would buy a Cannondale Evo if I was able to, but I'm happy not to be troubled by the lack of either.
I am just enjoying my racing and staying fit, lean and healthy and for this season to be half way competitive - on the back of some 'preposterously' misleading data and work over the preceding months.
Power meters are a good tool. Some of them are inaccurate, some of them are far from reliable and some of them are not robust. They are an expensive precision scientific instrument and should be treated as such. I have not personally used SRM but I have used most others and tested a few which never came to market.
I do not have a problem with power meters other than their cost and lack of robustness and with some the fact you can't self calibrate.
I do have a problem with the way some people tell others to use them and dress them up as the answer to everything. They do not suit everyone and some people with certain personalities might be better off avoiding them.
There is far more to training than power meter data and I don't like the way some try to disparage anyone who does not use a power meter and try to convince everyone that the power meter has all the answers and is the only way to train.
All that said I agree with most of what Alex Simmons says on here and in his blog.0 -
I'm not aware of anyone ever saying power meters are THE answer or that everyone needs one.
You sound just like Trev Rev....More problems but still living....0 -
amaferanga wrote:I'm not aware of anyone ever saying power meters are THE answer or that everyone needs one.
You sound just like Trev Rev....
ding dong .. now you have said that ...
0 -
The 2 biggest benefits of using a power meter for me are: 1 - measurable improvement; and 2 - ensuring you get the most from the time you dedicate to training. Like many on here I only have a handful of hours a week I can spend on the bike, therefore being able to get maximum training benefit for that time makes a massive difference. If you do a typical 2*20 min FTP interval and use RPE or heart rate data, you'll likely spend significantly less time in the right training zone compared to using a power meter, so for the same amount of time on the bike you'll be getting less benefit. With shorter VO2 or high intensity efforts the effect is even more pronounced.FCN3: Titanium Qoroz.0
-
Wrath Rob wrote:The 2 biggest benefits of using a power meter for me are: 1 - measurable improvement; and 2 - ensuring you get the most from the time you dedicate to training. Like many on here I only have a handful of hours a week I can spend on the bike, therefore being able to get maximum training benefit for that time makes a massive difference. If you do a typical 2*20 min FTP interval and use RPE or heart rate data, you'll likely spend significantly less time in the right training zone compared to using a power meter, so for the same amount of time on the bike you'll be getting less benefit. With shorter VO2 or high intensity efforts the effect is even more pronounced.
Simply untrue.
the difference between RPE/HR v power are marginal.
riding to power does not neccessarily mean you can measure improvement, the body responds very randomly, a gain shown by power may not be true just that day your body was feeling good and the gain may not have come from training and thus you would continue on your merry training method and undertrain. There are days when we feel great in a race and days when we don't.
Beleive it or not when training to power your heart is actually working too. You can not just keep adding extra watts, why because like us all humans we have a HR ceiling and that is that, if you have been properly "training" for a couple of years you will already be there. Whatever your one hour power is, try adding 20watts, not a chance, you might make that in 6months say but after that your ceiling will hold you back. Just the same training at HR.
If you want to measure your training it's just as well to see a trend in your average speed over the same training circuit, if you aren't completing your training in faster times then you are not training or improving, simple fact, makes no difference what your power readings are saying.
Any length of training over about five minutes then you can train just the same at HR as it will have plataued to a steady output and you can just keep it there,as it gets tired you push harder to keep it there, this is where training effect takes place contrary to what people beleive, you maintain physical effort/exhersion. Training to power unless you have it bang on say FTP then you will be undertraining, looking at HR as well would be wise.
Using power is so clinical too it may well be a very de-motivating tool to use.
Have you ever trained at HR properly ?Team4Luke supports Cardiac Risk in the Young0 -
Team4Luke
I have my turbo set up with both a power meter and heart rate monitor. On a 2x20 session there is definitely a benefit of having the pm as at the start it takes the heart rate some time to catch-up with the level of effort and particularly on the second 20 there is a noticeable element of cardiac drift which would make the session tracked by HR monitor alone less meaningful.
Having said that, a well structured training programme with a HR monitor can be a useful and effective tool and a lot cheaper !0 -
Team4Luke wrote:Wrath Rob wrote:The 2 biggest benefits of using a power meter for me are: 1 - measurable improvement; and 2 - ensuring you get the most from the time you dedicate to training. Like many on here I only have a handful of hours a week I can spend on the bike, therefore being able to get maximum training benefit for that time makes a massive difference. If you do a typical 2*20 min FTP interval and use RPE or heart rate data, you'll likely spend significantly less time in the right training zone compared to using a power meter, so for the same amount of time on the bike you'll be getting less benefit. With shorter VO2 or high intensity efforts the effect is even more pronounced.
Simply untrue.
the difference between RPE/HR v power are marginal.
riding to power does not neccessarily mean you can measure improvement, the body responds very randomly, a gain shown by power may not be true just that day your body was feeling good and the gain may not have come from training and thus you would continue on your merry training method and undertrain. There are days when we feel great in a race and days when we don't.
Beleive it or not when training to power your heart is actually working too. You can not just keep adding extra watts, why because like us all humans we have a HR ceiling and that is that, if you have been properly "training" for a couple of years you will already be there. Whatever your one hour power is, try adding 20watts, not a chance, you might make that in 6months say but after that your ceiling will hold you back. Just the same training at HR.
If you want to measure your training it's just as well to see a trend in your average speed over the same training circuit, if you aren't completing your training in faster times then you are not training or improving, simple fact, makes no difference what your power readings are saying.
Any length of training over about five minutes then you can train just the same at HR as it will have plataued to a steady output and you can just keep it there,as it gets tired you push harder to keep it there, this is where training effect takes place contrary to what people beleive, you maintain physical effort/exhersion. Training to power unless you have it bang on say FTP then you will be undertraining, looking at HR as well would be wise.
Using power is so clinical too it may well be a very de-motivating tool to use.
Have you ever trained at HR properly ?
Hi Team4Luke,
I don't wish to come across patronising but as someone with a lot of power training experience I must point out that there is a lot of misinformation in what you have written and I feel that you need to be corrected so that people do not learn false information.
Firstly a trend in avg speed is rarely a good way to judge progress. Even a small amount of wind will foul attempts to find out if you are going forwards of backwards. Temperature will affect this as well, so will time of year for instance in winter you will likely be going slower than in summer given the same power output. Sensible use of an accurate power reading from a reputable PM brand will take the mystery and guesswork out of training and tell you quite frankly what is going on with no hiding place.
Secondly you state that "Training to power unless you have it bang on say FTP then you will be undertraining, looking at HR as well would be wise." This is absolutely incorrect and I don't know how you could possibly come to this conclusion. Training bang on FTP is very stressful and takes a great deal of effort to hold for extended periods. By definition the maximum length of time you can ride at FTP is 60mins and to suggest that riding at a lower power level than FTP is undertraining is complete nonsense. Again I don't know why you would think this unless you are mistaken as to what FTP is.
If the power readings are rising for the durations that you are targeting then things are on the up regardless of speed, heartrate, breath rate, blink rate or frequently you have to wipe your nose per minute.
HR can actually vary from day to day at a given power output more than many realise, this is one more reason why HR training should be used with caution. Some days my HR would be high and my power is low and other days the reverse is true. Cardiac drift is well documented and easily spotted looking at power files. Obviously heart rate does not take into account stroke volume either and that all heart beats are not the same...
Anyway I hope you don't take my post badly but like I said there was a great deal of misinformation in your post.
Cheers
Tony0 -
I actually feel sorry for Team4Luke.CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!0
-
Herbsman wrote:I actually feel sorry for Team4Luke.
Me too. He's been pulled up on this a few times, but he keeps on trotting it out...0 -
the difference between RPE/HR v power are marginal.
Its and interesting question. What is the difference?
The difference is RPE is how your head perceive your effort.
HR is how hard your heart is working.
Power is how hard your legs are working.
The question is. What do you want to know?
Another point i find interesting is that its people without powermeters dont want other people to buy them (execept me: Dont buy them, then I have a better chance of beating you to the finish line )we have a HR ceiling and that is that
Sure, we have a max HR, but most of us is far from the ceiling of how effective our heart and the rest of our vascular system is. That is why we train!
There are so many cool things your can do with a powermeter, both short and long term, that you cannot do with RPE or HR monitor, that people write books about it. I have been riding with a Power2Max for more then 2 years. To go back and track progress in test, intervals and races is fantastic.Whatever your one hour power is, try adding 20watts, not a chance
Actually, during my first year with a powermeter I added 24 watt to my FTP. Its so cool to have such a factual number to look at, and can say: I did that! My training is paying off.0 -
Thanks all for stepping in. Away from BR for a few days and its interesting to see what's posted!
Tony's right, both HR and average speed are poorer indicators of fitness than power as they're impacted by too many variables and in the case of HR, can take too long to respond to be effective.
Here's an example. Its the classic 2*20 FTP ride. My LTHR is 166bpm and by FTP was 310w (ignore the FTP listed, it was due a re-test). Look at the first interval and you can see that I spent almost the entire interval with my HR below LTHR, but my power at, or very close to FTP. If I'd been training on HR alone I would have been over FTP to start and then slowly decreased power to keep my HR constant until the end of the interval. As I'd been working too hard I probably then would have struggled to complete the 2nd interval, cut my training short, been demotivated and not trained sufficiently.
Conversely in the 2nd interval sees my power again at or close to FTP for the 20 mins but my HR rise until its above LTHR, which I hold through to the end of the workout. If I'd have been training on HR I would have quickly reached my LTHR and again decreased power output and dropped out the the desired zone.
Don't get me started on RPE, if I'd have used RPE then I'd probably have got off the bike 1/2 way through the 2nd interval as I was suffering big time!
What can you learn from this? Training using power enables you to focus your training to exact targets and so to get the most out of your time on the bike and remains the gold standard. Don't get me wrong, training with HR produced multiple champions and is a good method, just not as good as using power.FCN3: Titanium Qoroz.0 -
Good posts darkblue and Rob. Exactly my experience of using power0
-
Mine is being fitted Friday, hope it will be worthwhile.0
-
Herbsman wrote:I actually feel sorry for Team4Luke.
Undermining the person does not undermine their argument. If you think he is wrong, say so, then explain why you think he is wrong. Team4Luke makes some valid points. Here are a few more observations.
To be fair, there are some problems with power meters. Some are not as accurate as you might think. Many people are using a power meter which is not calibrated correctly.
The power meter measures power at the point of measurement. It does not measure effort, it does not measure how hard you are working.
300 watts in hot humid conditions, at say 85F is far harder work than 300 watts at 65F.
300 watts after a 3 hour ride is far harder than 300 watts after a 10 minute warm up.
300 watts fresh & healthy is far easier than 300 watts with a virus.
300 watts on a road bike up hill might be far easier than 300 watts in your most aero TT position.
FTP might be accurate, but it might not. See Alex Simmons blog. Many riders are using an FTP figure which is inaccurate.
TSS and training zones are useless if based on the wrong FTP. Power meter data does not take into consideration how the body is responding until it is too late and you see your power is down when it should not be. TSS does not take so many important things into account it is at best misleading.
Power meter data does not tell you how hard you are trying, it only tells you or your coach what power you are putting out now or have done in the past. The power numbers need context.
You do not need power meters, and the way many people use them, they probably do more harm than good.0 -
You just can't help yourself Trev eh?More problems but still living....0
-
That is classic!BigFatBloke wrote:300 watts in hot humid conditions, at say 85F is far harder work than 300 watts at 65F.
300 watts after a 3 hour ride is far harder than 300 watts after a 10 minute warm up.
300 watts fresh & healthy is far easier than 300 watts with a virus.
300 watts on a road bike up hill might be far easier than 300 watts in your most aero TT position.
Work = Force x Distance and is measured in Joules
Power = Work / Time and is measured in Watts
None of these relate to temperature, biological issues, fatigue or physiological positioning on the bike. What your post really states is the benefit of a power meter, i.e. that power is power no matter what the conditions, the rest of it is your perceived effort due to other factors. And it is exactly this information that will enable you to train better by more effectively targetting your time on the bike. Can't make 300w due to illness? Stop training and get some rest. Feel a bit tired? Don't slack off, push harder to get the most out of training (or spot overtraining potential my monitoring CTL, ATL etc). Can't make 300W on your TT bike? Tweak your position. etc. etc etc.FCN3: Titanium Qoroz.0 -
I can't make 300w because my legs aren't big enough...
English Cycles V3 | Cervelo P5 | Cervelo T4 | Trek Domane Koppenberg0 -
Wrath Rob wrote:
That is classic!BigFatBloke wrote:300 watts in hot humid conditions, at say 85F is far harder work than 300 watts at 65F.
300 watts after a 3 hour ride is far harder than 300 watts after a 10 minute warm up.
300 watts fresh & healthy is far easier than 300 watts with a virus.
300 watts on a road bike up hill might be far easier than 300 watts in your most aero TT position.
Work = Force x Distance and is measured in Joules
Power = Work / Time and is measured in Watts
None of these relate to temperature, biological issues, fatigue or physiological positioning on the bike. What your post really states is the benefit of a power meter, i.e. that power is power no matter what the conditions, the rest of it is your perceived effort due to other factors. And it is exactly this information that will enable you to train better by more effectively targetting your time on the bike. Can't make 300w due to illness? Stop training and get some rest. Feel a bit tired? Don't slack off, push harder to get the most out of training (or spot overtraining potential my monitoring CTL, ATL etc). Can't make 300W on your TT bike? Tweak your position. etc. etc etc.
You have just outlined some examples of why you need to look at power in context. The number alone is meaningless. Your post illustrates this very well.
Does 300 watts for an hour at 65f outdoors give you the same TSS score as 300 watts at 85f on a turbo with no fan?0 -
You just don't get it do you, Trev.BigFatBloke wrote:You have just outlined some examples of why you need to look at power in context. The number alone is meaningless. Your post illustrates this very well.
Does 300 watts for an hour at 65f outdoors give you the same TSS score as 300 watts at 85f on a turbo with no fan?
Arguing against power meters is equivalent to arguing against having numbers on the weights in the gym.
If this was 'StrengthRadar' and someone started a thread saying the maximum weight they could deadlift is 200kg and they were aiming to increase it to 220kg you'd be arguing that they should just lift on feel and that the actual weight alone didn't matter because you need to look at it in context, and besides some of the 30kg weights on the bar might only be 29.87kg or in fact 30.32kg.
You're full of shit...CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!0 -
Herbsman wrote:
You just don't get it do you, Trev.BigFatBloke wrote:You have just outlined some examples of why you need to look at power in context. The number alone is meaningless. Your post illustrates this very well.
Does 300 watts for an hour at 65f outdoors give you the same TSS score as 300 watts at 85f on a turbo with no fan?
Arguing against power meters is equivalent to arguing against having numbers on the weights in the gym.
If this was 'StrengthRadar' and someone started a thread saying the maximum weight they could deadlift is 200kg and they were aiming to increase it to 220kg you'd be arguing that they should just lift on feel and that the actual weight alone didn't matter because you need to look at it in context, and besides some of the 30kg weights on the bar might only be 29.87kg or in fact 30.32kg.
You're full of shoot...
I am not arguing against using power meters, but I am questioning the way many people use them and I argue you do not need a power meter to train effectively. I also argue some makes are next to useless, unreliable, inaccurate and not worth the money or trouble.
I also argue that TSS is flawed.
To say I am full of shoot is not an argument.
And again I ask does 300 watts at 85f on a turbo with no fan give you the same TSS score as 300 watts outdoors at 65f?0 -
Is being able to deadlift 200kg at 85f in a gym with no fan the same as being able to lift 200kg outdoors at 65f?
If not, what - other than the mass of the cast iron discs attached to the bar that I am deadlifting - do you suggest I measure as an indicator of my strength?CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!0 -
Herbsman wrote:Is being able to deadlift 200kg at 85f in a gym with no fan the same as being able to lift 200kg outdoors at 65f?
You can't really compare one lift to 5, 10, 20, 60 minutes riding a bike.
If you read my original post you will see i said, "to be fair, there are some problems with power meters." One problem is TSS which does not take into account anything but watts out. People then analyse and plan their training and rest around output numbers alone without taking into account all the other factors which affect fitness.
I have no objection to accurately measuring performance, I object to the way some people end up riding about training like idiots chasing numbers and doing the wrong training at the wrong time, not resting enough, or not training hard enough because they are guided only by past performance which was probably measured wrong in the first place.
TSS is an algorithm in wonderland, particularly if it based on an FTP number which is inaccurate.0 -
BigFatBloke wrote:I object to the way some people end up riding about training like idiots chasing numbers and doing the wrong training at the wrong time, not resting enough, or not training hard enough because they are guided only by past performance which was probably measured wrong in the first place.
Have you considered writing to your local MP?0 -
Imposter wrote:BigFatBloke wrote:I object to the way some people end up riding about training like idiots chasing numbers and doing the wrong training at the wrong time, not resting enough, or not training hard enough because they are guided only by past performance which was probably measured wrong in the first place.
Have you considered writing to your local MP?
No, but a few people have written to their MP about me.0 -
You're thinking about this the wrong way. Ambient temperature will impact other physiological systems, e.g. your body's ability to cool yourself effectively. TSS measures the amount of cycling work you've done in relation to the intensity (vs. your FTP) and duration. To take your example, if you manage 300w for 5 mins then stop as its too hot you may only post a TSS of 5 but that's all the work that you've done. You don't magically get additional training effort relating to cycling just because the temperature is 20f higher, you'll just get a tiny, tiny bit better at cycling in higher temperatures, and probably loose some cycling fitness as you failed to complete your 1 hour (or whatever) workout.BigFatBloke wrote:And again I ask does 300 watts at 85f on a turbo with no fan give you the same TSS score as 300 watts outdoors at 65f?
So to answer your question, the TSS will be the same as TSS relates to the cycling work, not the additional cooling work. And if you're trying to measure how much cycling work you do, it works as a metric.FCN3: Titanium Qoroz.0
