What is your watt/kg ratio?

[lukesdad]

And you don't think proper training (be that with a power meter or another means) would lead to a more marked improvement compared to a lighter bike or lighter and/or more aero wheels?

Can you provide some evidence for your claim that training with a power meter doesn't lead to improved performance as it seems there are a lot of very successful cyclists who are wasting there time using them....

Nothing wrong with "proper" training. But I know where I d rather spend my £800, and all these succesfull cyclists would still probably be succesfull without it and there are far more succesfull guys not using them than are at least around here anyways.

 

[Seamab]

No magic bullet here.

No magic bullet - you've still got to do the training!

FTP is just one sustainable power measurement - and I beg to differ; it changes a lot. What you are describing is Tempo pace, and you don't waht to be doing a lot of that as it will wipe you out. If you are talking about training LT it s 85-95% MHR not 85-95% of FTP. Threshold training as a % of FTP is 95-105%.

The levels described by Allen & Coggan are
Tempo: avg power 76-90% of FTP or approx 84-94% of avg HR
Lactate Threshold: 91-105% FTP or approx 95 - 105% of avg HR

Tempo level workouts are possible on consecutive days if duration is not excessive and dietary carb intake is adequate. LT workouts are performed when rider is sufficiently rested and not normally on consecutive days although possible.

FTP does not change a lot except for new riders who can make large jumps relatively quickly. The more trained you are the more difficult it is to improve or sustain FTP.

I don't see why we need experts to have a debate - what a strange suggestion. Take that to its conclusion and there would be no forum.

I very much respect the contribution Bill makes to this forum and appreciate his experience on many threads. It is evident that Bill doesn't need a power meter due to how well he understands his body after many years of successful training and racing.

I'm not sure i need one either but wouldn't mind giving it a try someday...

 

[Bill Gates]

The levels described by Allen & Coggan are
Tempo: avg power 76-90% of FTP or approx 84-94% of avg HR
Lactate Threshold: 91-105% FTP or approx 95 - 105% of avg HR

Tempo level workouts are possible on consecutive days if duration is not excessive and dietary carb intake is adequate. LT workouts are performed when rider is sufficiently rested and not normally on consecutive days although possible.

For a moment there I thought you were saying that you could get 105% of MHR.

For those of us using HR to train then my figures are more meaningful and measureable as a % of MHR.

Tempo 75-85% MHR, LT (or FTP) 85-95% MHR

I did a tempo workout on the turbo for 45 minutes yesterday

 

[Bill Gates]

I don't see why we need experts to have a debate - what a strange suggestion. Take that to its conclusion and there would be no forum.

So much for my last post. Heh Heh

Sports scientists and coaches are fond of using scientific surveys as a basis for their recommendations. For me this advice sometimes flies in the face of my own adecdotal experiences. The temptation is to dump your own experiences and opt for the scientific survey; after all it's scientific and can't be challenged.

I'm a bit of a maverick here as when I know something works for me then I not going to change it on the say so of someone else. And as an athlete, competing to the best of my ability is what I strive for so there is nothing dogmatic about this. If it works then I'm all for change.

Whenever I've crossed swords with a coach who posts on the forums they have resorted to character slurs and name calling. You can see their point. Their reputation is their livelihood and challenging their coaching mantras mean that they will use all means at their disposal to discredit you. Their best defence is "scientific surveys" and that you as a mere rider are merely exercising "belief" methods, and here's a good one - you don't understand basic physiology, which is a nice little insult bearing in mind their sports science degrees. Guaranteed to put you in your place that one.

Reading some scientific stuff recently on developing core strength, leg strength and high cadence advantages at high power levels have actually supported my andecdotal experiences. Just shows you that these guys can be wrong.

Sorry rant over.

 

[lukesdad]

Good rant agree with what you ve said. You don t need to prove anything to anybody accept yourself. I know what works for me . I race as a bi-product of my prime objective which is to get me back and forwards to work . Experts would not take this into account when making generalisations which is what alot are.

Every rider is different with different needs, and , it must be remembered that some of these experts have their own agenda usually financial (funding ,products books etc.)
So I d be wary of something I personally hadn t tried took me years to convince myself I needed an HRM.

 

[lukesdad]

Good rant agree with what you ve said. You don t need to prove anything to anybody accept yourself. I know what works for me . I race as a bi-product of my prime objective which is to get me back and forwards to work . Experts would not take this into account when making generalisations which is what alot are.

Every rider is different with different needs, and , it must be remembered that some of these experts have their own agenda usually financial (funding ,products books etc.)
So I d be wary of something I personally hadn t tried took me years to convince myself I needed an HRM.

An addition to the above post: it is not allways wise to ignore experts advice; maybe not relevant but, I didnt protect myself from the sun for years,untill skin cancer 2 years of hell and sickness and not a lot of bike riding. I think you need to select what advice you think is good sound advice then act accordingly.

 

[Will1985]

I don't see why we need experts to have a debate - what a strange suggestion.

Not at all - a healthy debate needs well informed arguments from both sides. There seems to be plenty on here for the traditional method with many years of experience, but the ones using power are still on the learning curve. Compare that to a thread on slowtwitch where there are brilliant exponents of both methods, making the thread a stimulating read.

Note that I am the only person to have replied to the OP...this isn't P&L you know.

 

[plank]

Thanks Will! Glad you don't like the W/Kg. As I said earlier mine comes out quite low on the chart for the tests I did, lower 4th cat, I was expecting it to be higher really. I have my first race in 2 weeks so will find out if its true or not(I hope not)

 

[Bill Gates]

Not at all - a healthy debate needs well informed arguments from both sides. There seems to be plenty on here for the traditional method with many years of experience, but the ones using power are still on the learning curve. Compare that to a thread on slowtwitch where there are brilliant exponents of both methods, making the thread a stimulating read.

Note that I am the only person to have replied to the OP...this isn't P&L you know.

Like this one you mean.

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/Heart_Rate_P2687799

 

[Seamab]

Note that I am the only person to have replied to the OP...this isn't P&L you know.

Indeed Will - apologies to the OP.

I have a turbo that measures power but i'm sure it's nowhere near the accuracy of a proper power meter. Based on Tacx watts my watts/kg ratio at FT would be approx 3.6.

According to the charts that would place me in the middle of 3rd Cat. I don't think i'm anywhere near that so its doubtless an inaccurate figure. I don't race nor intend to so i'll never find out anyway.

My reason for posting on this thread was that i thought it gave an imbalanced view against power meters if someone just happened along - not to offer any kind of expert opinion. As you say there seem to be few power meter users on here - either that or they are keeping quiet.

 

[plank]

ahh no problem you can talk about whatever you like.

I don't have time to do an FTP test at the gym with the watt bike. Did you have figures from the lower time ranges e.g. 5s or 1 min? Don't worry if you don't! I don't suppose it matters, I'm just going to find out soon when I race how I do. I'm going more towards the view that W/KG isn't going to make much difference and if its going to be a problem it will only be during climbing and accelerating, maybe if I was going to do a race up an alp it would be something to worry about.

 

[Bill Gates]

Not at all - a healthy debate needs well informed arguments from both sides. There seems to be plenty on here for the traditional method with many years of experience, but the ones using power are still on the learning curve. Compare that to a thread on slowtwitch where there are brilliant exponents of both methods, making the thread a stimulating read.

Note that I am the only person to have replied to the OP...this isn't P&L you know.

Like this one you mean.

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/Heart_Rate_P2687799

Will is there another thread on this subject on slowtwitch as I didn't find this one particularly stimulating and the exponents of both not that brilliant?

I didn't see you calling anyone there a luddite either.

 

[Bill Gates]

Looks as though David Lloyd and Splottboy speak the same language as me. Check this out guys: -

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=12684993&start=20

Look out for our old friend the inexperienced, never raced, all singing dancing power meter expert Amaferanga from this thread criticises Dave Lloyd over there.

 

[plank]

I know you dont care but I retested last night on a watt bike.

max 1782
1min average 700 (1km in 1.02)

actually I cant remember the last 2 numbers from the kilo test!

I also dropped 2kg down to 93. I'm finding all the testing and training quite interesting.

 

[jimboalee]

Something else to consider.

During an argument on another thread, I remembered Chris Boardman and Mike Burrows at MIRA doing aerodynamics testing on the Lotus bike for Chris' hour record.

The object of the exercise was to determine the bike's ( with Chris ) coefficient of drag.
Using this, Mike could calc how much power Chris would need for the speed to break the record.
Chris went away and trained on an ergometer ( and the Lotus bike ) until he could achieve the sustained power output to keep him at the required speed for the sixty minutes.

Chris also monitored his HR, but only for medical and observation reasons.

The hour record was broken more through physics and engineering rather than physiology, heartrate and Lactate threshold.

The power requirement was ascertained, and then Chris trained to achieve it.
Job was a goodun.

In roadracing, a rider's power to climb hills, sprint and keep a good speed are all researched by the team coach and known by the rider. The rider trains to BETTER these values.