Cycling Dynamics
 

Anyone have any experiences with this new stuff they'd like to share? Do you use it? Do you look at it? If so, what to do you with it?

I have a pretty consistent 52/48 L/R split, which seems normal and not really something to worry about.

Peak power on left leg is maybe 69-128, where right is 63-121. So the durations usually aren't hugely different, but the left usually starts and ends a little later. Seems pretty consistent, even when they both move around a bit in the cycle as power goes up or down, my left is always later.

Overall power is relatively similar, both start about 358 to 0 (couple degrees before TDC to actual TDC) and end between 194 and 202 (left leg stays on 6 or 7 degrees longer).

Is any of this useful? Should I be changing my pedal stroke somehow to try and correct imbalances or differences? What's even the ideal?

A few years ago I dove deep into that stuff and surmised that unless things are drastically off, its not that important. It helps me because sometimes my hips got so bad I was at 60-40 L/R (but that's rare).

IMO, the only one that's really beneficial is 'stand up time' but even then software doesn't support it (that I know of). For example, differentiating the power curve standing vs. sitting and optimize your sprint.

That would be interesting to filter other stuff by standing vs sitting. But yeah, nobody does that. Not even Garmin (I can't even pick, say, my torque effectiveness for the best seated 5 minute power from a ride).

Right now it's just a chart that says "standing" or "sitting" which is fine, but I don't really see a ton of value.

I have a bunch of charts that my Garmin 820 generates when I use my Garmin Vector 2 power pedals. I have to find a post that I did for a guy in training and nutrition. However, my observations are inconclusive. What is ideal and how do I change something to improve?

Here is the post from training and nutrition.

As promised, here is data from last night's track workout at Velo Sports Center in Carson, CA on the 250 meter indoor wooden track. I used my Garmin Vector 2 power pedals and my Garmin 820 head unit with 1 second recording mounted on my track bike - fixed gear no brakes. When I set up the pedals on my track bike the Garmin asked to set angles, set crank length and calibrate which I did. I clicked on power sensor details and turned on smoothing.

The session included a 60 lap warmup with the last 20 laps a motor burnout and then 2x20 minute motor paced efforts in a 15 rider pace line with each rider taking 2 laps on the motor before pulling up and going to the end. However, in set one, when a rider got to the end of the line, we were supposed to launch an attack from the back and gain 1/2 lap on the motor before swinging up. We each did that twice. Speed was approximately 25 mph. The next set was the same without the attacks but the speed was 26.5 mph.

HR is blue, cadence is light blue and power is brown on the first two graphs.

Overview of the workout from Cycling Analytics

https://i.imgur.com/jNgZnDd.jpg
I added the second interval to show how variant power is on the track.

https://i.imgur.com/GXoQJxd.jpg

Left right balance

https://i.imgur.com/FxNXEmK.jpg

Torque Effectiveness.

https://i.imgur.com/JVSbs1K.jpg

Pedal Smoothness

https://i.imgur.com/iplpc8S.jpg

Platform Centre Offset

https://i.imgur.com/8VoonjX.jpg

Power Phase

https://i.imgur.com/ku3p81G.jpg

Peak Power Phase

https://i.imgur.com/gOSd7dI.jpg

The data may be misleading. This is the 250 track where we are constantly adjusting pedal force on the banking and to react to surges in the pace line. Also, Garmin accelerometers are slow - at least by my observation so fast transient changes in force may be lost. So the imbalance may be worse or better.

Here is an expanded graph of my first acceleration that was intended to be a breakaway. The goal was to accelerate hard so as not to allow other racers to jump on my wheel. Inspecting the L/R balance, it is 49/51 at 550 watts and 112 rpm at 92.6 gear inches. BTW, the speed on the graph is wrong. It is more like 30 mph. If you look at the other new metrics, I blew the doors off of torque effectiveness and etc.

https://i.imgur.com/9iHWxoX.jpg

So high power seems okay but I still am suspicious of the data. I do not have a left right power issue.

Let's say I did. Right before our session, the para olympic guys were on the track. Did you ever see a one leg olympian cycle? He was very fast. All the O2 in his blood is available to his remaining leg. And we know that it does not take a lot of strength to make a lot of power. Of course steady state and accelerations are two different matters.

This is a very low-data response.......but where I would care about it, it gets much more efficient anyway.........when you're putting out more power.

All those metrics aren't as "efficient" when you're at anything below a decent tempo. There and above it improves.

I've also noticed the little metrics improve as overall power has gone up. As in, more efficient at XXX+XXw now versus XXXw a few years back.

For some reason it seems that if I use ERG mode for those 3min and 8min intervals that the body tries to find the most efficient range of motion so you can survive the sets.