Yet Another Cycling Forum
General Category => The Knowledge => Further and Faster => Topic started by: rob on 26 October, 2015, 03:04:20 pm
-
I've been training for the last 2 years using HR and achieved some reasonable gains. The power brigade on the TT forum, basically say that training by HR is a complete waste and only using power will bring about the correct results. I'm a bit of a technophobe and pretty tight. Given that a crank based power meter for my TT bike plus all the extra gubbins would cost me just shy of a grand I chose to give it a miss. What I have done is to purchase a Garmin 500 with cadence/speed and HRM to give me some metrics to work with.
Given that the TT bike is fixed my plan was to use the same gear and the same tension settings on the turbo and gauge power using cadence and speed, downloading the data and looking at HR later on. As a test I did an hour at my top-end tempo HR and watched what my cadence did. I knew that power would drop off over the hour, but I was pretty amazed that my cadence went from 95rpm to just over 60rpm over an hour, maintaining an HR within 2-3 beats of target. The average cadence at the end of the session was 72rpm. The data may be a bit skewed as I've had 8 weeks of just commuting since PBP and my last turbo session was in July. I had also just had a cold.
I'm going to try an hour of tempo again tonight, but I'm not sure whether to use HR or try to pace the session at, say , 75rpm and see how HR moves.
I think once I find the target cadences I can start to work my sessions around slowly increasing cadence (read power) and duration over the next 6 months.
Is this a valid approach or flawed ?
-
How about hooking up your turbo and gubbins to something like TrainerRoad? I've seen comparison graphs elsewhere that show a perfectly acceptable comparison between a power meter and virtual power.
https://www.trainerroad.com/virtual-power
-
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=2177886
-
With many turbos, their resistance varies according to how warm they are. It can take a while for them to warm up properly.
HR drifts too, and is not consistent from workout to workout either.
I'm using TrainerRoad with a Kickr. BTW, Rob, if you want to try out TrainerRoad, I can give you a free month to try it out (I don't know what T&Cs apply to the trial). Be warned that it's considered a gateway drug on the slow twitch forum.
You can see the cardiac drift effect clearly in this workout I did:
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/rides/2420443-Jay-Peak
Each of the 203W intervals has a HR about 10bpm higher than the previous.
-
When I did the training thing, losing enough body heat was a real problem. I could maintain a constant high power output over long durations only if I could lose enough heat and that is pretty difficult on a turbo. Not many turbos are set up for a 40+km wind flow and low-ish humidity.
-
the real power meter is much more precise to measure your output/intensity and can be a very useful tool in the actual tt race when you need to pace yourself and not burn out at the start or on the inclines. i've used both hrm and pm alongside and hr is nowhere near as useful due to the lag and other factors affecting it (but definitely better than nothing).
-
I thought some research had found that HR produced better results than power.
Here you go:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19204572
Big problems with these kinds of studies: they’re just too small.
-
Thanks for pointers to traineroad. I had looked at it but we only have one lap-top in the house and it isn't mine. I'm actually not too bothered about getting accurate power data as I race on HR and RPE, anyway. What I was looking for was a metric that allowed me to pace my sessions better.
I re-ran my 1hr tempo test last night and managed to get the effort a bit smoother. There was still a drop off in cadence as I started at circa 90rpm and was doing 70rpm by the end. My average cadence was 74rpm, so I will try the same session next week and ride the whole hour at 75rpm and see how HR/RPE responds.
I'll do something similar with my threshold efforts, with a view to steadily increasing the cadence - in truth 70rpm is a bit slow for me, so I'm hoping to put some improvements in to get this into the 80s fairly quickly. I have a couple of bigger chainrings that I can swap over as fitness builds.
-
How about hooking up your turbo and gubbins to something like TrainerRoad? I've seen comparison graphs elsewhere that show a perfectly acceptable comparison between a power meter and virtual power.
https://www.trainerroad.com/virtual-power
I notice they are using a Kurt Kinetic Road Machine, which has a repeatable power curve. Better than most. KK freely publish the curve in MS Excel, and a 4th order Polynomial trendline will give you the coefficients to plot power for any speed.
You can either perform 60 minute FTPs or CT20 tests with a bike computer on the driven wheel.
A useful addition to the KK road machine is the Pro Flywheel which goes most of the way to simulate the Standing start of a TT.
If you already have a turbo, the 'test' part of the FTP protocol will be the only part that will be variable. The 'warm up' part will always be the same for consistency's sake. The 'preconditioning' cycle of a motor vehicle emissions test ( as Volkswagen know too well ) is consistent. The 'preconditioning' cycle of a cyclist's FTP test should also be consistent.
-
2 * 20 @ 101% threshold HR last night. At the end of the second interval I was going slower than at the end of a tempo session. I think all this info discovery is depressing me and whilst last years training seemed to make a huge difference I was still doing it wrong.
I think as I use a warm-up to get my HR up towards target I think I'm pushing too hard and compromising the interval and the rest of the session. I'm going to pace some sessions by cadence/speed next week and see how HR responds rather than the other way round. It's 6 months until I race again so plenty of time to experiment.
-
My understanding of sweet spot training is that you should be doing it at 90-95% of THR. I certainly couldn't do 2*20 at anything above my THR. To improve your threshold you could do 2*20 at 90-95% and if you manage that OK add another 20 interval and see if you can complete 3*20 at that HR range. As you continue to do these then either your THR increases or you get faster for the same HR, or both.
I have just started using TrainerRoad which will complement my commute based training this winter. I will train with virtual power on the turbo but HR on the road, the relationship between the two is very interesting.
What I found last winter was that it was very difficult to ride at the same HR into the wind than with it, usually a 10bpm difference at least. Possibly psychological but more likely due to lower cadence.
-
By last Summer I was able to do 2hrs at Sweet Spot - which I paced by using a Heart rate right at the top of my measured zone 3 (162-163bpm). 163bpm is almost exactly 95% of my threshold HR of 172bpm. The last 30 mins were a but gnarly but I could complete the session. You do need a good dvd to keep you distracted and not clock watching.
I could also do 2*20 mins at 101% of threshold HR (175bpm) which is the session I did last night. If your threshold/FTP is the max you can produce for an hour then 2*20mins should be do-able with the right level of focus.
Where I'm getting to know is that I warmed up so entered the interval/session at the target HR and what this seems to mean is that I worked too hard in the warm-up and in the first few minutes of the session and this compromised output at the end. I need to start pacing intervals so that I enter then at a lower HR but can maintain the effort until the end. From there I can start to steadily increase the effort/duration and see how HR reacts (hopefully falls) as there are fitness gains.
-
THR and FTP are not the same thing though. FTP is the maximum average power you can sustain for one hour but THR is most commonly defined as OBLA (onset of blood lactate accumulation). My understanding of OBLA is just under and an hour is possible but just over and after 5 minutes or so it becomes quite a struggle to keep up a constant output. I know that in my case as long as HR remains 158 or below I can carry on for hours, 160 and above and I know I can't keep it up for more than a few minutes without blowing. This figure matches very closely to an Conconi type test I did lat year to estimate my OBLA HR.
-
Keep the resistance of the turbo on the same curve, which is what the Kurt Kinetic Road Machine does. Fit a computer to the driven wheel and watch avg Speed through a 10 mile session. Don’t worry about speed or power or HR. Just make sure the ‘warm up’ is the same every session.
IF the time it takes to complete the 10 miles reduces and the avg speed increases, you’re getting better.
With the avg speed noted, refer to Kurt Kinetic’s curve to get an estimate of the Power.
For a CT20, ride for 20 minutes instead of 10 miles. Eventually, they should agree. :thumbsup:
-
I have done a couple of ramp tests in the past and have a good handle on my zones and where my lactate threshold (OBLA) sit. From these I have been able to design sessions that push threshold from below or pull from above. Adam Topham's TT book has been quite useful although I don't do the pyramid intervals which look horrific. Given I am training for longer TTs (50m and up) I do most work sub threshold/tempo/sweet spot and one session a week above threshold.
I tried to do one of my favourite sessions this morning which was 5min on/off under over threshold, but tried to use cadence rather than HR. Again I found it wasn't hard enough and ended up overcooking the early part and ruining the last 15 mins of the session. So I'm now concluding that a) I have been warming up too hard and b) My HR has a real lag. I need to stop worrying about not working hard enough early in a session in order to push hard to the end. Will try the same set of sessions next week and review.
-
Going back to your original question I would say focus on a constant cadence not HR. If you look at myTrainerRoad FTP test trace (https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/rides/2421889-20-Minute-Test) you can see that although the oxygen deficit induced HR "lag" is pronounced for up to 2 minutes my HR doesn't really stabilise until the second 10 minutes. However in the 3rd and 4th quarters the average HR and average power are constant.
-
In my last 20 minute test my HR climbed throughout.
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/rides/2179426-20-Minute-Test
-
In my last 20 minute test my HR climbed throughout.
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/rides/2179426-20-Minute-Test
But so did your power after the first quarter. Also it would not be implausible to expect HR to increase with temperature so if there is inadequate cooling HR will increase even at a constant power output, this can be a marked effect on turbos, particularly if used indoors.
-
Going back to your original question I would say focus on a constant cadence not HR. If you look at myTrainerRoad FTP test trace (https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/rides/2421889-20-Minute-Test) you can see that although the oxygen deficit induced HR "lag" is pronounced for up to 2 minutes my HR doesn't really stabilise until the second 10 minutes. However in the 3rd and 4th quarters the average HR and average power are constant.
Thanks. I'm with you, but it takes a fair bit of will power not to push too early in a session as I have a limited amount of time to train so want to make every session count. Roughly I estimate my upper tempo cadence to be 75rpm and my threshold to be 80rpm. Using the Kurt Kinetic graph this roughly equates to 175w and 200w, respectively. This feels a bit low given the times I did last year, but 1) it's an estimate only and 2) I'm a bit out of shape. Extrapolating this tells me that 90rpm would be, again roughly, 250w so my target is to be able to do this for an hour within the next 6 months.
Going back to your points on HR there's a good article on riding a 12hr here :-
http://www.abcc.co.uk/how-to-ride-a-12-hour-time-trial/
This was written prior to power meters being too common but the HRs in the table actually work really well for me so my HR goes :-
10m - 180+
25m - 175+
50m - 170
100m - 160
12hr - 150
As you say with the 150bpm I can hold it for 12hrs, but the last 2-3 are a bit tough and I dropped a few beats at the end of the 12 I did last year. My measured threshold HR is 172 so being able to run a bit over for a 25 feels about right.
Rob
-
I was aware of that article by Malcolm (I was an ABCC coach myself in the 80s/early 90s) but the bit on HRs is not significant in my opinion. It did prompt me to look at all my old HR data I recorded for TTs in 89/90. Interestingly I see a very similar initial rise in HR and then very stable HR for the majority of the ride but with a slight uplift at the end or a slight decrease which I suspect was due to having a bit left in the last mile or the opposite! Most interesting is that of the two 25s I have data for the much better performance was 5bpm lower that slower one.
My conclusions from then and what I can see now is that using HR to guide race effort should be treated with caution as so many things can elevate or depress it. However as a training aid to keep you in the right zone I find it really useful.
As I said upthread I find it much harder to keep my HR high when riding into the wind, either training or racing. Having thought about that and considered what you have said Rob, I now suspect that it could be a cadence issue, I.e. I struggle to keep up my cadence into the wind and end up with a lower HR for the same? perceived effort.
Personally if I were you I would go with a lower gear and higher cadence on the turbo.
-
All useful points, thanks.
On racing by HR, I do find it quite variable. I did 3 25s last year and HR varied by 5-10bpm. On my PB ride (1:00:17) I was still lifting towards the end. Feeling I had a bit left I went harder at the start of the next 2 rides and then struggled later on. In retrospect I think I paced the first one right, but I do curse those 17 seconds.
Commonly accepted theory is that, for a fairly aero position 230-240 watts will get you under the hour. My position isn't the best but I estimate my FTP was around that number last year.
The weakness I noticed last year, racing on fixed, was pushing headwinds and riding up steady drags. I did some high intensity low cadence intervals last year and I hated them. By mid Summer I was really spinning in order to get to the effort I required on the turbo. In order to fix both issues I have upped the gear on the turbo from 49*19 to 48*17. All efforts will now be at a lower cadence, but I agree I may have overlooked it. I will give it a few weeks and see how it goes and if cadence increases as fitness starts to rebuild. The other issue is that I have 49 and 50 tooth chainrings but nothing smaller.
I will end up buying a power meter I'm sure but I am trying to put it off for a while. This project has already been pretty costly.
-
65 mins at Tempo effort last night. Went a bit too hard for the first 30-odd minutes and backed off slightly for the last half an hour. Ave RPM was very similar to previous workouts without the huge drop-off in output.
Heart Rate took 30mins to get into the range I would expect for an effort like this.
-
I've come to find I take a ridiculous amount of time to warm up properly. 30km or so at audax pace. It's slow enough that I'm concerned about finding a different warm up strategy when I start racing.
-
In my last 20 minute test my HR climbed throughout.
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/rides/2179426-20-Minute-Test
Please tell us there was a five minute nothingness between the warm-up and the test.
Five minutes to go to the lavvy and do some stretches.
-
In my last 20 minute test my HR climbed throughout.
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/rides/2179426-20-Minute-Test
Please tell us there was a five minute nothingness between the warm-up and the test.
Five minutes to go to the lavvy and do some stretches.
Sorry, can't help you there. It was 5 minutes at ~50% FTP.
-
I've come to find I take a ridiculous amount of time to warm up properly. 30km or so at audax pace. It's slow enough that I'm concerned about finding a different warm up strategy when I start racing.
I think I've worked out that I don't need to worry too much about this as I used to bury myself to get the HR up with a view to entering the interval at target HR.
When I race I do at least 30mins, slowly bringing the HR up and then doing a few sprints. For 10s and 25s, although I don't do very many, it's pretty important. For a 50 I do the same warm-up, for 100s and 12hrs I barely bother - there's plenty of time to get warmed up as you get going.
I do try to ride to/from local events, but silly early morning events in the SE can scupper that. Events in Lincolnshire seem to have much more civilised start times.
-
‘Warm-ups’ are NOT to elevate HR. HR will elevate itself if there is too much CO2 in the blood.
‘Warm-ups’ are to dilate both the vascular and pulmonary systems.
If you go barmy immediately, HR will rocket because the arteries are not getting enough blood to the not yet dilated alveoli. There will be an excess of CO2 in the blood, and not enough O2.
Doing this results in Piss Poor Performance.
Warm up so HR increases slowly and then reduces. When HR starts to ‘Cardiac Drift’, you’re warmed up. This could be nearly an hour or 20 miles steady riding on a TT bike.
Every racehorse knows they can run faster with an empty rectum.
Every TTer knows performance is better with an empty bladder.
-
When HR starts to ‘Cardiac Drift’, you’re warmed up too warm.
:thumbsup:
-
Last night I did a 15min warm up, 20 mins at 80rpm, 5 min break and then attempted another 20mins at 80rpm.
During the first 20 mins my HR rose in a straight line and hit my threshold HR right at the end. It dropped off for the 5mins but was up very quickly in the first 5mins of the second interval. At this point I throttled back a little to 75rpm but kept going for the full 20mins. Average output was 6% higher than doing the same session paced by HR last week.
I think I've found the right starting level for this workout, but now need to see how much longer I can push into the second interval at the intended output.
-
This week has gone a lot better, but I have been reading up on cardiac drift. It seems this may be the issue, but I have been surprised by the rate and size of the drift.
I have purchased a great big fan and will start to drink more during the sessions.
-
Power is the way to go. Have a gander at some of the books by Joe Friel.
-
Power is the way to go. Have a gander at some of the books by Joe Friel.
I have one, but I do find these manuals a bit of a chore to get through. I'm probably ideal coaching material, but I'm also too tight to pay for one - same reason I haven't bought a power meter (yet).
I'm getting on quite well using speed, cadence and HR, but it took a bit of experimentation. I'm gradually increasing output and volume week-on-week, concentrating on tempo and threshold. Base rides are done on the commute and I do a longer tempo ride on a Sunday morning. This is a gradual build through to May/June next year when the fun starts.
-
Well, I bought my first power meter this week, a Powertap GS hub for a bargain £300 including the dual ANT+/BLE Powercap.
I will build it up with a Swiss DT RR585 rim and aero spokes for winter training and then put a deep carbon rim on it next season for racing. Although at that price I am only just resisting buying a second one!
-
Just retested. Thought I'd dropped more. Down to 269 from 276 in May.
-
This Autumn's project is to purchase a power meter. I'm a bit limited as I'm still going to train and race fixed. I'm down to :-
- Power2Max crank based unit - would have been cheaper prior to brexit vote
- Powertap pedals - means changing from the speedplay zeroes that I really like.
-
I like the Powertap pedals mainly because I can move them between bikes. The balance thing is useful. They seem robust.
Two faults I have found:
- don't work below a certain cadence, so steep hills on fixed can be an issue (and Hardknott on gears)
- the cleats are not quite standard look. So they don't have the memory thing to keep the position when you replace cleats and I think the float options are more limited
I can't speak to their accuracy directly. Pedal based power is likely to the noisiest signal compared to as you move fruther down the drive train. It is the most direct measurement you could have short of having a power metering cleat or shoe.
-
Leaning towards the power2max track system which is EUR990 at the moment. The bike needs new cranks/bb anyway so it's a good time to change over. I'd really rather not change my pedal system for now, I think.
A couple of forums say they read a bit low, but I suppose that doesn't matter too much if you're just measuring your own progress.
-
I've just sold my Kettler Magnetic "Spin Bike". It will fund about 25 sessions at the LBS Wattbike course.
I'm a total convert to Wattbike/Power training. My heart rate lags so far behind power output that I'd say "perceived effort" is a better way to do shortish intervals.
Of course perceived effort usually results in a slow downward curve of actual power.
Maintaining real power at, or beyond, threshold is, as I have found out, way, way, waaaay beyond my perception of what "a really big effort" was.
2* 20 minute intervals at 110% & 130% of FTP is without a shadow of a doubt the toughest thing I have ever done whilst sat on a bike (It's one of the sessions on the FTP improvement course, the interval structure varies each session).
Also the group environment, with live performance figures displayed for all to see, adds the sort of peer-pressure motivation that I simply can't find in my lonely cold garage.
-
Using a power meter has been an eye-opener for me. Mostly because my perception of effort on flatter terrain is way off. Much more scope for going faster. Also I've found it very interesting to watch the interplay between power output, HR, speed and cadence. There are times when I can go faster just by changing to a lower gear, without an apparent increase in effort. Seems obvious, but seeing numbers really focuses the mind.
I haven't got around to doing an FTP test yet.
Largely because I know that when I do I'll have to do the sort of training sessions LEE is talking about ;D
-
It's the only way to train, for sure I can see why people can see it as a bit daunted and the cost. New PM, head unit, trainer etc. But the gains are potentially massive, not to mention the psychologically impact of keeping to a set power going up a hill and knowing that you can do this because you have done it in training.
I was using the wattbike down the gym, then went onto the recumbent bikes (had a power meter fitted, felt right) because I ride a bent, but found I could not get motivated and was still different then riding my own recumbent.
So bought a Muin Direct Drive trainer and a subscription to Traineroad and am now the proud owner of my own pain cave. ;D The trainer should pay of itself after four months given that the gym membership is now cancelled.
-
I just did a 20 minute Wattbike Retest, which estimates FTP.
It was an 8 session course, starting with a 20 minute test, then 6 varied sessions, and a final 20 minute threshold test.
My FTP went from 237W to 267W. It's currently the only "cycling" I do (apart from a weekly pub evening at social pace).
Since I've been using wattbikes (with an experienced coach I stress) I've had significant power improvements in "Max Minute Power" and "Functional Threshold Power".
I think that, if you really went for it, maybe 3-4 sessions a week, with recovery days, you could realise some huge gains.
Knowing what I know now I'd expect that sort of training to move me from low 200s to low 300s in FTP within the year.
Really quite amazing results.... and f***ing painful. It's so incredibly intense that at no stage am I ever sure whether I'll make it to the end of the session.
-
Good to see.
-
A lot of people on here talk about FTP and I can understand why as it's a measurable metric. I can see why, for a TT rider specializing in 10s and 25s, that this is a very important number.
The thing for me, though, is how much does FTP really matter for an audax rider (which I think most of us are) ? Just because you can get a huge amount of power out for an hour will it make you be able to get round a 600k or 1200k ? Surely a more important number is power in endurance and tempo zones leading to a flatter power curve ?
-
A lot of people on here talk about FTP and I can understand why as it's a measurable metric. I can see why, for a TT rider specializing in 10s and 25s, that this is a very important number.
The thing for me, though, is how much does FTP really matter for an audax rider (which I think most of us are) ? Just because you can get a huge amount of power out for an hour will it make you be able to get round a 600k or 1200k ? Surely a more important number is power in endurance and tempo zones leading to a flatter power curve ?
All athletes need a good aerobic base to get the best results. For longer rides, I would concur that more emphasis is needed on base. However, I have found that I got better results from following an FTP-based training plan than by riding lots of long miles at a steady pace. I think if your FTP is higher then the power you can output in the endurance zone while staying fat burning would tend to be higher. My highest lab-test FTP (~280W) coincided with my highest tested fat burning (~70%) rate in the endurance zone.
-
What Simonp said plus having an improved FTP surely makes the tough parts of Audax less stressful on the body.
Faster for less effort makes for a nice Audax ride.
I don't ride TTs or Race. I do however notice a huge improvement in my recovery time after a hard climb and I can push harder for longer on the hills.
One of the toughest things I have ever done on an Audax ride was a 100km leg of a 600km into a headwind through Lincolnshire last year.
That was as close to a solo 100km TT effort as I can imagine and came down to lots of power for a long time.
My recent FTP improvement came a year too late to help though.