The importance of crank length to the cyclist.

[FrankDay]

T… but each of other data points all contribute a little (or a lot) towards the performance puzzle.

Well, I would agree it is a puzzle but I would suggest that you don't have the answers. In fact, there is zero evidence that anyone has the answers or that any of those metrics you listed as collecting are useful to effect an outcome superior to someone who doesn't use them (despite your assertion to the contrary). If you have the proof that collecting a single one of those metrics makes a difference in coaching or racing outcome please present them here.

 

[CoachFergie]

Well, I would agree it is a puzzle but I would suggest that you don't have the answers. In fact, there is zero evidence that anyone has the answers or that any of those metrics you listed as collecting are useful to effect an outcome superior to someone who doesn't use them (despite your assertion to the contrary). If you have the proof that collecting a single one of those metrics makes a difference in coaching or racing outcome please present them here.

A Medical and Engineering Degree and you still confuse measuring performance and enhancing performance.

 

[FrankDay]

A Medical and Engineering Degree and you still confuse measuring performance and enhancing performance.

Sorry, it was always my impression that athletes hired COACHES to ENHANCE their performance, not simply MEASURE it. Now, if you want to tell us that you see your job as simply measuring the performance of your athletes and not helping them to get better I will accept your assertion that the data you are collecting does just that. But, coach, if, instead, you want to tell us that you see your job as coach as helping your athletes to improve beyond what they can do without you then please give us some evidence that any or all of that data you collect is demonstrably useful in that regard.

 

[CoachFergie]

Unleash the fury of the caps lock!

The simplified process of coaching is to have a measurable goal and the have an athlete that you test in relation to that goal.

With this data I have a specific picture of their strengths and weaknesses.

With this data from specific events we can determine if the rider is improving in relation to these events.

With the power data we can measure if they are making real improvements so we don't have to BS them by telling them their times are getting better, their speed is improving or their HR is changing as anyone with a background in physiology or biomechanics will know these "improvements" are sometimes just smoke and mirrors perpetuated by people selling gimmicks without any real supporting data.

 

[Martin318is]

I saw a lot on that list that seemed pretty useless. We are talking racing aren't we? Nobody here cares where the athlete actually finishes? To each his own I suppose.

Oh courageous approach Frank....

of COURSE people care where a rider finishes, however as a metric of personal performance over a season an individual race placing is pretty irrelevant.

of course, that is unless you are also going to get all the performance metrics of all the other riders in the field and compare them.


"Your training isn't working at the moment because 2 weeks ago you won in a solo breakaway and this week you only came 5th in the bunch sprint", yeah right

 

[FrankDay]

Unleash the fury of the caps lock!

The simplified process of coaching is to have a measurable goal and the have an athlete that you test in relation to that goal.

With this data I have a specific picture of their strengths and weaknesses.

With this data from specific events we can determine if the rider is improving in relation to these events.

With the power data we can measure if they are making real improvements so we don't have to BS them by telling them their times are getting better, their speed is improving or their HR is changing as anyone with a background in physiology or biomechanics will know these "improvements" are sometimes just smoke and mirrors perpetuated by people selling gimmicks without any real supporting data.

you failed to answer the question

But, coach, if, instead, you want to tell us that you see your job as coach as helping your athletes to improve beyond what they can do without you then please give us some evidence that any or all of that data you collect is demonstrably useful in that regard.

How does any of that data help you to do a better job enhancing race performance compared to a coach who doesn't bother gathering all that data? (and, where is the evidence that supports your assertion?)

 

[Martin318is]

On the day it is the only metric I'm interested in.

As part of a process it's utility is probably even less than HR or cadence.

Precisely - a race placing is an end result, not a particularly useful training guide (without the full stats on everyone else in the field). A description of the rider's actions in the race and why is a LOT more useful as it can be used for improving tactical awareness

 

[Martin318is]

you failed to answer the questionHow does any of that data help you to do a better job enhancing race performance compared to a coach who doesn't bother gathering all that data? (and, where is the evidence that supports your assertion?)

sorry, I'm confused.... YOU are demanding empirical evidence from someone to prove their own assertion?

 

[CoachFergie]

How does any of that data help you to do a better job enhancing race performance compared to a coach who doesn't bother gathering all that data? (and, where is the evidence that supports your assertion?)

For the same reasons that we measure anything. To show that performance has improved.

So when I say race this way or train that way we can look at the data and see if we got it right.

How does the coach who doesn't collect any data show the rider that the training is working?

 

[FrankDay]

sorry, I'm confused.... YOU are demanding empirical evidence from someone to prove their own assertion?

If he asserts that the data he is collecting is useful in helping him to improve race performance in his athletes I am asking him to provide some evidence to prove that such data collection allows him do a better job than say a coach who doesn't gather such data. If he doesn't assert that I wonder why he bothers to collect it.

He seems to think that my inability to provide scientific proof of my musings proves they cannot be true. (the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence) And, then he throws out all this data he collects as somehow proof he knows what he is talking about. All I am asking is for some scientific evidence he is not wasting his time (and the time of his athletes).

 

[FrankDay]

How does the coach who doesn't collect any data show the rider that the training is working?

Race results?

 

[Martin318is]

Race results?

In anything other than Cat 1 that is still a vague subjective value and in Cat 1 it is still not all that useful a "guide" - unless you start winning every single week of course...

It will still allow for variables such as (to keep it brief) who else in the field is sandbagging or peaking for that race. Doesn't give a clear indicator of improvement of the individual rider and certainly doesn't demonstrate any particular aspect of training was responsble for it.

 

[FrankDay]

In anything other than Cat 1 that is still a vague subjective value and in Cat 1 it is still not all that useful a "guide" - unless you start winning every single week of course...

It will still allow for variables such as (to keep it brief) who else in the field is sandbagging or peaking for that race. Doesn't give a clear indicator of improvement of the individual rider and certainly doesn't demonstrate any particular aspect of training was responsble for it.

There are plenty of elite coaches who eschew the use of power meters and collecting all of that data. The PM and collecting all that data has been around for many years but these luddite coaches have not gone the way of the dodo bird and their athletes continue to win world championships. Most of us believe what we do to be best. We might even be correct. A problem only arises when we are asked to prove our belief.

 

[CoachFergie]

If he asserts that the data he is collecting is useful in helping him to improve race performance in his athletes I am asking him to provide some evidence to prove that such data collection allows him do a better job than say a coach who doesn't gather such data. If he doesn't assert that I wonder why he bothers to collect it.

He seems to think that my inability to provide scientific proof of my musings proves they cannot be true. (the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence) And, then he throws out all this data he collects as somehow proof he knows what he is talking about. All I am asking is for some scientific evidence he is not wasting his time (and the time of his athletes).

Again you confuse measuring performance with enhancing it.

Training, diet, recovery, sport psyc, technique, equipment selection, knowing the rules, staying injury and illness free, management and tactics enhance performance.

The power meter is the best way to measure if the above manipulations (experiments even) are having any significant effect.

 

[CoachFergie]

Race results?

Tell you nothing beyond who placed where on the day.

Riders can sit in, cheat, be on drugs and you have no way of judging how they performed.

 

[CoachFergie]

There are plenty of elite coaches who eschew the use of power meters and collecting all of that data. The PM and collecting all that data has been around for many years but these luddite coaches have not gone the way of the dodo bird and their athletes continue to win world championships. Most of us believe what we do to be best. We might even be correct. A problem only arises when we are asked to prove our belief.

Some eschew PMs because they know they would get found out as BS artists.

Just as riders can't hide from the power meter neither can I as a coach!

 

[FrankDay]

Some eschew PMs because they know they would get found out as BS artists.

Just as riders can't hide from the power meter neither can I as a coach!

Exactly how would someone who has coached an athlete to a world championship without a PM be exposed as a BS artist if they had all that data but simply refused to look at or use it?

As I stated, the only problem arises when someone is asked to prove what they believe. Riders also cannot hide from the stopwatch or the competition. And, obfuscating is not proof.

 

[FrankDay]

Tell you nothing beyond who placed where on the day.

Riders can sit in, cheat, be on drugs and you have no way of judging how they performed.

Well, it may tell you nothing but the question was how such a coach might tell. I threw that out as a possibility. Seemed like a reasonable possibility to me.

Anyhow, there are plenty of coaches who don't use PM's whose athletes do very well. We can presume they have figured out a way of evaluating what they are doing without that device. Just because you don't know how they might do it doesn't mean there is no way or not even an excellent way.

 

[CoachFergie]

Exactly how would someone who has coached an athlete to a world championship without a PM be exposed as a BS artist if they had all that data but simply refused to look at or use it?

I have coached cyclists to six UCI World Titles, I even have one of the nice Santini Rainbow Jerseys but at no point do I consider that a major reason of why I appear to be effective as a coach. Correlation does not imply causation.

What I can show potential clients is initial testing of other clients, what I suggested they do to improve and the increases in performance they saw.

I lose potential clients when they realise that I don't wave a magic wand and they start winning races and that there is no alternative to a lot of hard work.

As I stated, the only problem arises when someone is asked to prove what they believe. Riders also cannot hide from the stopwatch or the competition. And, obfuscating is not proof.

In the goal race it's all about the clock or the finish judge but that is the last 1% of a process. The rider has every right to demand evidence of what I suggest. Sorry to hear you don't set the same standard.

 

[CoachFergie]

Well, it may tell you nothing but the question was how such a coach might tell. I threw that out as a possibility. Seemed like a reasonable possibility to me.

Well if you can't tell the difference between measuring performance and enhancing performance I can see we have different definitions of reasonable

Anyhow, there are plenty of coaches who don't use PM's whose athletes do very well. We can presume they have figured out a way of evaluating what they are doing without that device. Just because you don't know how they might do it doesn't mean there is no way or not even an excellent way.

Or they just BS their riders.

I started coaching before HR monitors were popular and had NZ champions and riders on the start line at 1996 Olympics before I knew what a watt was and with the advent of training and racing with a power meter enjoy having the PM keeping me accountable.

 

[FrankDay]

The rider has every right to demand evidence of what I suggest.

Don't we have the right to demand the same when you come here and make assertions that you are correct and others are wrong? Where is the proof that what you assert (the superiority of your approach) is true?

 

[CoachFergie]

Don't we have the right to demand the same when you come here and make assertions that you are correct and others are wrong? Where is the proof that what you assert (the superiority of your approach) is true?

What have I been saying Frank?

The power meter keeps me accountable. If I didn't measure performance I could feed them any BS I wanted to. Within reason you can't argue with the numbers from racing.

I do coach some riders who do win everything in A grade. If they get to the end of the season and are still winning how do they tell if they have actually improved?

 

[FrankDay]

What have I been saying Frank?

The power meter keeps me accountable. If I didn't measure performance I could feed them any BS I wanted to. Within reason you can't argue with the numbers from racing.

I do coach some riders who do win everything in A grade. If they get to the end of the season and are still winning how do they tell if they have actually improved?

Those numbers don't keep you accountable. Speaking of feeding BS, asserting that is complete BS as there is zero evidence that having or using those numbers make any difference regarding outcome. You are simply using those numbers for marketing purposes. Here, let me show you how good I am. That is the problem.

How do we know whether Chrissie Wellington (an athlete who doesn't use a power meter and is, I believe, now self-coached) is better this year than last year or a couple of years ago. She has never lost an IM race and since no other woman has recently come within 20 minutes of her times it might be hard to know. But, maybe the fact she broke her own world record, set last year, might be a clue? You might ask, if coaches are so important and valuable, why is she apparently doing better without a coach than when she had one? If you had all her power data of every training ride would you be any more confident as to how good she is?

 

[CoachFergie]

Those numbers don't keep you accountable.

Then what does?

Speaking of feeding BS, asserting that is complete BS as there is zero evidence that having or using those numbers make any difference regarding outcome.

Still haven't figured out the difference between measuring outcomes and enhancing outcomes have you Frank

You are simply using those numbers for marketing purposes. Here, let me show you how good I am. That is the problem.

Yup I can see how people demanding evidence for what people assert would offend you Frank. If I wandered over to the Gimmickcranks site I bet I would see a lot of numbers being tossed around. I don't deal in beliefs and I don't expect others to as well.

Like any experiment (and that is what any training programme is) I like to measure before and after to see if my wonderful ideas have any merit.

How do we know whether Chrissie Wellington (an athlete who doesn't use a power meter and is, I believe, now self-coached) is better this year than last year or a couple of years ago. She has never lost an IM race and since no other woman has recently come within 20 minutes of her times it might be hard to know. But, maybe the fact she broke her own world record, set last year, might be a clue? You might ask, if coaches are so important and valuable, why is she apparently doing better without a coach than when she had one? If you had all her power data of every training ride would you be any more confident as to how good she is?

This is the very reason I collect so much data from as many people as possible so I don't lowering myself to inductive reasoning. I practice "evidence based coaching" not "Chrissie Wellington does it so it should work for everyone else as well coaching".

For her cycling at least, yes I would be.

 

[FrankDay]

Those numbers don't keep you accountable.

Then what does?

Nothing. You collect, analyze, and report those numbers. There is no independent entity reporting coaching results and making you (or anyone else) accountable for your results. If your bosses decide to let you go I suspect it will be because your race results are unacceptable and you won't be able to save your job by showing them some numbers.

Like any experiment (and that is what any training programme is) I like to measure before and after to see if my wonderful ideas have any merit.

So you are telling us you have no scientific basis for doing what you are doing, it is all one big experiment? Thanks for coming clean, finally!

This is the very reason I collect so much data from as many people as possible so I don't lowering myself to inductive reasoning. I practice "evidence based coaching" not "Chrissie Wellington does it so it should work for everyone else as well coaching".

Well, all those numbers are evidence. Only question is how good is that evidence as regards helping the athlete reach their goal? Got any numbers to answer that question?

If you had all her power data of every training ride would you be any more confident as to how good she is?

For her cycling at least, yes I would be.

Really? Suppose her power numbers weren't very good, didn't explain her cycling dominance (yes, she dominates on the bike), how would this affect your assessment as to how good she really is? Isn't it possible she has achieved at least the bicycle portion of her dominance by sacrificing power to achieve better aerodynamics? The only reasonable way to determine how good an athlete is, compared to other athletes, is to observe them in competition, not by looking at some power numbers.