Using left crank power meter and now adding Garmin Rally pedal PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,646 Times
in
6,054 Posts
#27
Klaatu..Verata..Necktie?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 17,945
Bikes: Litespeed Ultimate, Ultegra; Canyon Endurace, 105; Battaglin MAX, Chorus; Bianchi 928 Veloce; Ritchey Road Logic, Dura Ace; Cannondale R500 RX100; Schwinn Circuit, Sante; Lotus Supreme, Dura Ace
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10416 Post(s)
Liked 11,876 Times
in
6,083 Posts
There are lots of things you can do with power meter data. Training is certainly one of them, but there are others. It turns out that training (especially training FTP) is one of the least demanding things you can do with power data (that's why riders have been able to train effectively with just a wristwatch and a regular training route since there have been wristwatches). There are things you can do with power data that you can't do with a Timex wristwatch. That you don't do any of these things and instead only do the simplest possible thing with power data is probably why you think that consistency is all one needs.
And, I don't look at that right hand panel and think "oh, that shows that one is consistently off by a certain percent." I think that's what the left hand panel shows.
And, I don't look at that right hand panel and think "oh, that shows that one is consistently off by a certain percent." I think that's what the left hand panel shows.
It's like having two watches, that not only don't always give the same time, but don't show a consistent difference - without other instrumentation, you have no idea whether either is accurate.
__________________
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
"Don't take life so serious-it ain't nohow permanent."
"Everybody's gotta be somewhere." - Eccles
#28
Senior Member
That's a good and important question.
There are two ways to get faster: more power or less drag. I'm now at a stage of my life where my power is way down from my peak -- but I'm only a tiny bit down from my peak speeds. All this crazy stuff I do with power data? I have to do it or else I'd be even slower than I am.
There are two ways to get faster: more power or less drag. I'm now at a stage of my life where my power is way down from my peak -- but I'm only a tiny bit down from my peak speeds. All this crazy stuff I do with power data? I have to do it or else I'd be even slower than I am.
Like you, i'm at a stage where I'm not as concerned with power numbers, doesn't mean I'm totally disinterested in them. But I feel like for the weekenders, there has to be a balanced perspective on the pursuit of their training goals (but this is only my personal value judgement).
I often wonder about this. Toward the end of many of my 10min or 20min intervals, I will find myself pedaling in squares, or shifting my butt as I try to finish the intervals. This is when the force going into the pedal change (based on my square pedaling). This probably affect muscle recruitment. This is one scenario that I wish to have good measurements and insight into how my pedaling techniques as I fatigue may or may not affect muscle recruitment.
Last edited by aclinjury; 10-21-21 at 01:50 PM.
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,399
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4393 Post(s)
Liked 4,836 Times
in
2,990 Posts
The real question is, can a more accurate PM on the market make a weekend athlete any better than a less accurate PM. I'm referring to weekend athletes, the people in this discussion. I doubt it. To this end, the discussion and dissection of PM... probably doesn't mean much for weekenders than say a pro pursuit cyclists. They should really stop pushing weekenders into buying PMs and into thinking that PMs will somehow enable them to do something that requires genetic blessing. No PM is gonna overcome a genetic deficit.
#30
Senior Member
For me it's quite important that my bike PM correlates well with my indoor trainer PM. Fortunately they are always within a couple of percent and both are consistent. They could both be reading power in units of chicken-power for all I care. I find both PMs massively useful for both training and events and you would probably class me as a "weekender". The only bike I don't have a PM on is my mtb, as I don't really think it would be a lot of use for the casual trail riding I do on it. But on my road bike a PM really helps me to pace long Sportives and mountain climbs etc. I'm not sure anyone thinks a PM will enable them to do something that requires "genetic blessing" as you put it!
So now, I'm thinking, maybe after a certain point of training gains that your genetics have allowed, then the continual rigorous trainng and use of a PM... is probably a just like to give the same result as a loser training routine, and even without a power meter. That's why I asked the question earlier, "would a more accurate PM allow a weekender to train better than a less accurate PM". In my personal anecdote, I'd say... probably not likely.
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 23,208
Mentioned: 89 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18883 Post(s)
Liked 10,646 Times
in
6,054 Posts
Will I get bigger gains lifting at the gym where there's numbers on the side of each plate saying what it weighs, or picking up rocks in nature? DCRainman reviewed one that he said was fine up until about 600 w and then had no idea what's going on above that. That would be useless for sprint training for me. But most of the ones that are being sold are pretty good. 🙂
#32
Perceptual Dullard
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,414
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 915 Post(s)
Liked 1,139 Times
in
489 Posts
For me it's quite important that my bike PM correlates well with my indoor trainer PM. Fortunately they are always within a couple of percent and both are consistent. They could both be reading power in units of chicken-power for all I care. I find both PMs massively useful for both training and events and you would probably class me as a "weekender". The only bike I don't have a PM on is my mtb, as I don't really think it would be a lot of use for the casual trail riding I do on it. But on my road bike a PM really helps me to pace long Sportives and mountain climbs etc. I'm not sure anyone thinks a PM will enable them to do something that requires "genetic blessing" as you put it!
Pacing can actually be important (but it's more about the distribution of work than raw power). One of the earliest things I learned from using power is that my previous pacing using RPE was way off. Having accurate power data (not just consistent) helped me to learn when to trust my RPE and when not to, so I learned how to "re-calibrate" RPE. That's especially important near threshold, so having accuracy near threshold was important to me.
I see your points, all valid. I consider myself a weekender. I used to train a lot 18 hrs/wk, and was holding 4.5-4.6 w/kg on an hour mtb climb (peaks over 7000 ft elevation). This would make me a solid cat 3 climber. But for me to maintain this w/kg, it requires a lot of training. Fast forward 4-5 years later, I've lost a bit of interest in all the structure training and power stuff. I hit the gym, packed on 5 pounds of muscles, and cut back my cycling hours to ~10 hrs/wk. And incidently this morning, I decided what the heck let's do a 20min interval, didn't really have a wattage goal for the interval at all, just went by leg feeling, and to my pleasant surprise, I keep the exact same power I did 4-5 years ago, granted i did gain 5 pounds, but I also felt like with the weight gain my "perceived effort" was a tad easier too. So, I guess what I'm sayin here is that, for my case, I didn't seem to lose much fitness after plateauing 4-5 years ago.
So now, I'm thinking, maybe after a certain point of training gains that your genetics have allowed, then the continual rigorous trainng and use of a PM... is probably a just like to give the same result as a loser training routine, and even without a power meter. That's why I asked the question earlier, "would a more accurate PM allow a weekender to train better than a less accurate PM". In my personal anecdote, I'd say... probably not likely.
So now, I'm thinking, maybe after a certain point of training gains that your genetics have allowed, then the continual rigorous trainng and use of a PM... is probably a just like to give the same result as a loser training routine, and even without a power meter. That's why I asked the question earlier, "would a more accurate PM allow a weekender to train better than a less accurate PM". In my personal anecdote, I'd say... probably not likely.
As an anecdote, I've never done 18 hrs/week of riding. The most I've ever done for an extended period was maybe 12 hrs/wk, and I was at my fittest. Then I changed jobs, and got married, and soon after we were expecting a child, so my riding time got cut a lot. That's when I bought a power meter. I was using the power meter not to get faster, but to learn how to cut out "inefficiency" in training time. I was able to stay very close to my former speeds and times on half as much riding -- but I couldn't keep it up for hours and hours as I had before. So I never actually got faster with power -- I stayed almost the same on half the riding. Now, of course, I'm much slower, and the kid is going to graduate from college next spring. So I'm old, fat, and slow; but if I do all these crazy things, there are times when I'm just old and fat.
Likes For RChung:
#33
Senior Member
I care about whether they read in chicken-power because in order to test their accuracy, I measure the difference in reported power when adding a known mass, or climbing a known height, at different known speeds. It's a lot easier to do that in watts than in chicken-power.
Pacing can actually be important (but it's more about the distribution of work than raw power). One of the earliest things I learned from using power is that my previous pacing using RPE was way off. Having accurate power data (not just consistent) helped me to learn when to trust my RPE and when not to, so I learned how to "re-calibrate" RPE. That's especially important near threshold, so having accuracy near threshold was important to me.
I mostly agree, which is why I say that one of the least demanding uses for power data is training. That's why I keep saying that you can train pretty effectively with just a wristwatch and a regular training route, and why I think a single-sided power meter is fine for many riders. However, I think the real value of power data comes from doing things you can't do with a wristwatch, like drag reduction (but there are others, depending on what kind of weekend warrioring you do).
As an anecdote, I've never done 18 hrs/week of riding. The most I've ever done for an extended period was maybe 12 hrs/wk, and I was at my fittest. Then I changed jobs, and got married, and soon after we were expecting a child, so my riding time got cut a lot. That's when I bought a power meter. I was using the power meter not to get faster, but to learn how to cut out "inefficiency" in training time. I was able to stay very close to my former speeds and times on half as much riding -- but I couldn't keep it up for hours and hours as I had before. So I never actually got faster with power -- I stayed almost the same on half the riding. Now, of course, I'm much slower, and the kid is going to graduate from college next spring. So I'm old, fat, and slow; but if I do all these crazy things, there are times when I'm just old and fat.
Pacing can actually be important (but it's more about the distribution of work than raw power). One of the earliest things I learned from using power is that my previous pacing using RPE was way off. Having accurate power data (not just consistent) helped me to learn when to trust my RPE and when not to, so I learned how to "re-calibrate" RPE. That's especially important near threshold, so having accuracy near threshold was important to me.
I mostly agree, which is why I say that one of the least demanding uses for power data is training. That's why I keep saying that you can train pretty effectively with just a wristwatch and a regular training route, and why I think a single-sided power meter is fine for many riders. However, I think the real value of power data comes from doing things you can't do with a wristwatch, like drag reduction (but there are others, depending on what kind of weekend warrioring you do).
As an anecdote, I've never done 18 hrs/week of riding. The most I've ever done for an extended period was maybe 12 hrs/wk, and I was at my fittest. Then I changed jobs, and got married, and soon after we were expecting a child, so my riding time got cut a lot. That's when I bought a power meter. I was using the power meter not to get faster, but to learn how to cut out "inefficiency" in training time. I was able to stay very close to my former speeds and times on half as much riding -- but I couldn't keep it up for hours and hours as I had before. So I never actually got faster with power -- I stayed almost the same on half the riding. Now, of course, I'm much slower, and the kid is going to graduate from college next spring. So I'm old, fat, and slow; but if I do all these crazy things, there are times when I'm just old and fat.
1. your routine doesn't have to be "efficient" because you will gain fitness based on sheer volume. Of course, as a race or event approaches, you need to cut down the zone1/2 hours and start to focus on specificity (the greater the volume you had put in, the shorter amount of time you need to spend on specificity before entering peak fitness).
2. with a great volume base, you're considered well trained, then the rule "FTP = 95% of 20min max effort" applies. If not well trained, then this rule doesn't apply. And it seems from personal experience that it requires about 18-20 hrs/wk to be considered "well trained". Anything less then this, then you could still train to get a good threshold but you won't be able to do many above-threshold forays and still have something left at the finishline.
But I will say this. There are many research on exercise physiology already. All the training and response are pretty well researched (yes, you still need to understand your body because of specific individual response, but this can only be known after some experience, and maybe a good coach). However, the one area that is still not well document is diet. There isn't much research that say "if you eat this diet, you can expect to get this training response". If there is something I wish to know better, it's this aspect of training performance.
Likes For aclinjury:
#34
Senior Member
Will I get bigger gains lifting at the gym where there's numbers on the side of each plate saying what it weighs, or picking up rocks in nature? DCRainman reviewed one that he said was fine up until about 600 w and then had no idea what's going on above that. That would be useless for sprint training for me. But most of the ones that are being sold are pretty good. 🙂
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,399
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4393 Post(s)
Liked 4,836 Times
in
2,990 Posts
I care about whether they read in chicken-power because in order to test their accuracy, I measure the difference in reported power when adding a known mass, or climbing a known height, at different known speeds. It's a lot easier to do that in watts than in chicken-power.
Pacing can actually be important (but it's more about the distribution of work than raw power). One of the earliest things I learned from using power is that my previous pacing using RPE was way off. Having accurate power data (not just consistent) helped me to learn when to trust my RPE and when not to, so I learned how to "re-calibrate" RPE. That's especially important near threshold, so having accuracy near threshold was important to me.
Pacing can actually be important (but it's more about the distribution of work than raw power). One of the earliest things I learned from using power is that my previous pacing using RPE was way off. Having accurate power data (not just consistent) helped me to learn when to trust my RPE and when not to, so I learned how to "re-calibrate" RPE. That's especially important near threshold, so having accuracy near threshold was important to me.
Likes For PeteHski:
#36
Perceptual Dullard
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2,414
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 915 Post(s)
Liked 1,139 Times
in
489 Posts
My threshold power is defined using the same "chicken-power units" as I ride with. So in that sense it doesn't really matter. But as it happens I don't think my PMs are far off measuring in actual Watts. So it's all good for my simple usage and pretty effective. I found the same with RPE. I tended to ride too hard when I was fresh and full of adrenaline. Now I pace long climbs much better and usually better than my friends who ride without power. I'm now pretty good at guessing what power I'm riding with too. I just have a single-sided Specialized/4iiii crank sensor on my road bike and an Elite OTS on my trainer. I've been impressed with both their consistency and agreement. The Elite consistently reads about 3-4% lower at my threshold, which is to be expected with drivetrain losses. I have compared them at steady power levels from 100W through to 350W and they are within that same 3-4% window, perhaps a little higher at very low wattage, but that doesn't bother me. I'm about to move onto a Kickr Bike for my indoor training this winter, so will be interesting to see how that compares on power measurement, but I'm not expecting to see a big difference.
Last edited by RChung; 10-23-21 at 12:01 AM.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,399
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4393 Post(s)
Liked 4,836 Times
in
2,990 Posts
Coincidentally, that plot in post #18 showed readings from two PMs which, on average, differed by 3-4%. This is why I've been saying that knowing that two devices are close on average isn't that important: average closeness is a pretty low bar. What's important is knowing when they're different, by how much, and what effect that has on what you're trying to do. Training doesn't make a lot of demands on data fidelity but training isn't the only thing one can do with power data.