The Powermeter Thread

[FrankDay]

Phooey.



For starters, I wouldn't design it so as to almost guarantee no difference compared to using heart rate.

EDIT: In the present context, Swart et al.'s concluding sentence is rather interesting:

"Coaches who are unable to monitor progress frequently should prescribe training based on heart rate, when intervals are performed under stable conditions..."

The thoughts that come to mind are:

1) When using a powermeter (but not a heart rate monitor), training is testing and testing is training; and

2) most people don't do their intervals on an ergometer in a climate-controlled laboratory.

I didn't ask you what you wouldn't do. What would you do? How would you design a study to show the advantages of the PM over other ways of skinning this effort feedback cat?

 

[acoggan]

I didn't ask you what you wouldn't do. What would you do? How would you design a study to show the advantages of the PM over other ways of skinning this effort feedback cat?

What was it about "science isn't always the best way of answering some questions" (http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1156563&postcount=66) that you didn't understand?

P.S. Even the phrasing of your question demonstrates that you don't "get it" - that is, you're asking about the same strawman argument that was the premise for Swart et al.'s paper.

 

[CoachFergie]

I didn't ask you what you wouldn't do. What would you do? How would you design a study to show the advantages of the PM over other ways of skinning this effort feedback cat?

Yes Andy, how would you design a Strawman study? Could you improve on Dr Swart

 

[FrankDay]

What was it about "science isn't always the best way of answering some questions" (http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1156563&postcount=66) that you didn't understand?

P.S. Even the phrasing of your question demonstrates that you don't "get it" - that is, you're asking about the same strawman argument that was the premise for Swart et al.'s paper.

Ugh, then what do you consider the best way to answer this question? The, "Trust me, I know what I am talking about and you don't." way of addressing these issues?

 

[CoachFergie]

Yes Andy how do you test if a product that isn't designed to improve performance actually improves performance

Answer the man!!!

 

[CoachFergie]

Do you guys know how to have a civilized discussion?

Rather hypocritical considering your volume of trolling!

 

[elapid]

OK, I give up. I had hoped for a meaningful discussion on PMs on this thread, but it has degenerated and gone the way of every other thread involving Frank and Fergie. Can't you two find somewhere else to bicker, like a Frank and Fergie thread, so the rest of us can havce a decent discussion on fitness-related topics and learn something?

 

[CoachFergie]

Yes apologies (edited, hiero2).

I have purchased a second hand SRM and have been comparing it with my Powertap.

There was a 10 watt difference between the two power meters which is to be expected comparing a hub based meter with a crank based meter. Obviously as the ride progresses the two meters get out of sync as I stopped and started a few times. But the spikes show it is consistently different.

I also checked the zero offset of the SRM frequently and noted it needed to be checked often going from inside to outside but settled down after a while.

Alex Simmons has posted two very good articles on this at his blog...

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.co.nz/2013/03/three-two-one-zero-offset.html

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.co.nz/2013/03/more-zo-zen_7.html

 

[FrankDay]

Yes Andy how do you test if a product that isn't designed to improve performance actually improves performance

Answer the man!!!

Dr. Coggan wrote a book called "Training and Racing with a power meter"

This is what is written in a review of that book (link here)

And while they may not have the gee-whiz factor equal to that of a set of carbon wheels or slick frame, it is arguably the biggest bang for the buck for improving your cycling next to getting a good coach.
But convincing you of the benefits of a power monitor is not what we’re talking about today. If you have a power monitor, you can use it as a gee-whiz toy on the bike, or you can actually use it properly and to its full potential for making yourself a better/faster cyclist. If that is your goal, then the best tool or instruction manual for how to use your power monitor is the 2nd edition of Hunter Allen and Dr. Andrew Coggan’s “Training and Racing with a Power Meter,” published by VeloPress.

Interestingly, this review also contains these words

… the book avoids over-burdening the reader with too much science

Hmmm. In view of what Fergie and Dr. Coggan have written here it seems some have misinterpreted Dr. Coggan's book that power meters might actually make a difference to the racing cyclist. And, that review implies that the authors took great pains to simplify the concepts for those unable to grasp the difficult science involved. Wonder how that could have happened?

But, another reviewer (link here), had another take on the book.

…This book, along with Allen's Power certification have done nothing but create an army of mindless coaches who know nothing of physiology and simply apply cookie cutter approaches to analysis. Further, nothing in the book has been validated by any peer reviewed research study; its all anecdotal. From such a premiere researcher as Coggan, this book is a let down and I don't expect the next edition to be much better...

Last, what does it say about the book if you go to Amazon to buy a copy?

In only a few short years, power meters have become an essential training tool for amateur and pro cyclists and triathletes. The first edition of Training and Racing with a Power Meter was largely responsible for popularizing what was once an arcane technology understood by only a few elite coaches and trainers. Now the updated and revised second edition provides significant updates on technology, software tools, training protocols, and workouts, making the benefits of power-based training available to everyone.

Describing this tool as "essential" and that there are "benefits" to using it certainly implies that Dr. Coggan believes, when he wrote that book, that there were "benefits" to using a power meter over not using one. Exactly what are those benefits he believes exist and how would he scientifically measure if the actually exist.

Or, is it better to ignore scientific validation if none is expected to exist?

 

[CoachFergie]

Dr. Coggan wrote a book called "Training and Racing with a power meter"

This is what is written in a review of that book (link here)Interestingly, this review also contains these words

The difference between marketing claims and scientifically tested hypotheses.

Hmmm. In view of what Fergie and Dr. Coggan have written here it seems some have misinterpreted Dr. Coggan's book that power meters might actually make a difference to the racing cyclist. And, that review implies that the authors took great pains to simplify the concepts for those unable to grasp the difficult science involved. Wonder how that could have happened?

People misunderstand all manner of things. I don't disagree that some people think a power meter will actually improve their performance rather than measure it as we are suggesting. Hence books like RATWAPM and this thread.

Describing this tool as "essential" and that there are "benefits" to using it certainly implies that Dr. Coggan believes, when he wrote that book, that there were "benefits" to using a power meter over not using one. Exactly what are those benefits he believes exist and how would he scientifically measure if the actually exist.

Again the difference between marketing claims and scientifically tested hypotheses.

 

[FrankDay]

People misunderstand all manner of things. I don't disagree that some people think a power meter will actually improve their performance rather than measure it as we are suggesting.

So, let me get this straight. You would like for your athletes to spend anywhere from $1-5,000 on a power meter for their bike (you just posted a picture of two of them on your bike) so you can measure their power and nothing else? Don't you think you could come up with another way of measuring their improvements without asking them to spend that outlay?

 

[CoachFergie]

So, let me get this straight. You would like for your athletes to spend anywhere from $1-5,000 on a power meter for their bike (you just posted a picture of two of them on your bike) so you can measure their power and nothing else? Don't you think you could come up with another way of measuring their improvements without asking them to spend that outlay?

That is correct.

Do let us know of a better method of measuring performance.

 

[FrankDay]

Do let us know of a better method of measuring performance.

Stopwatch? Race results?

 

[CoachFergie]

Well if we could hold all things equal from test to test or race to race that would be fine and dandy. But we can't. I can't keep the wind speed or direction constant for 5min in an outdoor track session or hold the temperature constant for an hour in a indoor track session.

Try again.

 

[FrankDay]

Well if we could hold all things equal from test to test or race to race that would be fine and dandy. But we can't. I can't keep the wind speed or direction constant for 5min in an outdoor track session or hold the temperature constant for an hour in a indoor track session.

Try again.

Ugh, power is not performance. Power is just one component of overall performance.

 

[CoachFergie]

Ugh, power is not performance. Power is just one component of overall performance.

That is correct Frank. Good boy. Great to see you are learning from this thread.

 

[42x16ss]

As someone who is new to the concept of training with power (it's been nearly 10 years since I raced at a level high enough to justify a PM) what is the best way to start out?

Is it a case of training as per normal with it for a while to determine your thresholds and building from there?

 

[CoachFergie]

As someone who is new to the concept of training with power (it's been nearly 10 years since I raced at a level high enough to justify a PM) what is the best way to start out?

Is it a case of simply riding around with it for a while and determining your thresholds and building from there?

Firstly learn how to use your power meter. Making sure, the battery in the power meter and head unit are charged or replacing a low battery, do a zero offset before each ride, learn how to download the power and if storage is an issue on the head unit then how to clear the data. Learn how to perform a calibration or know where to get a calibration performed and make sure you get the power meter serviced as recommended.

Then chose what software to download the data to. I use TrainingPeaks WKO+ as I can set it to display all the metrics I feel are important to monitor.

http://home.trainingpeaks.com/products-desktop/wko.aspx

Then start collecting data.

One aspect of WKO+ is the power profile which allows you to compare your power to weight with other riders. It does this for 5s, 60s, 5min and 60min (or 95% of 20min) power and gives you an indication of whether you are anywhere from Pro Tour power to ave joe (me). It's just an indication and can also be used to indicate if you are more suited to track sprinting (5sec), Kilo (60sec), pursuit or crit (5min) or Road (60min).

So doing a maximal effort for 5s, 60s, 5min and 20/60min would be a good start.

http://support.trainingpeaks.com/athlete-edition/charts/power-profiling-chart.aspx

Then you need to determine your functional threshold. The gold standard for this is your average power from a 40km TT. But of course not everyone is up for a 40km TT so there are a multitude of other measures...

Critical power test (ie 5min maximal test and 20min maximal test and plot the line to determine what your FTP is).

95% of a 20min effort. Important that this differs from a maximal 20min test as there can be an anaerobic contribution to a maximal 20min test. The recommendation is to perform a maximal 5min test and then do the 20min test.

Use the Normalized Power from a 60min maximal effort like a short road race or criterium.

There are others and Alex Simmons has written two excellent blog posts on the deadly sins (the sins were first outlined by Andy Coggan) so you avoid making errors.

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.co.nz/2008/05/the-seven-deadly-sins.html

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.co.nz/2009/07/sins-of-sins-testing-ftp-2.html

My thoughts are to use two or three methods to confirm that any one test is spot on.

The FTP can be used to determine your training ranges. So depending what you are riding for and where you are at during the season you can determine wattages to aim for. Needless to say starting out these power targets will probably rise rapidly so you would aim to test at least once a month to check your FTP hasn't risen.

Having a accurate FTP affects the determination of a Training Stress Score and the Training Stress Score is the basis of the Performance Manager which helps you to track the big picture. Essentially the Training Manager or PMC keeps a track of your fitness (Chronic Training Load or CTL), your fatigue (Acute Training Load or ATL) and based on a complex algorithm tells you what your current form (Training Stress Balance) is. Simplified; Fitness less Fatigue = Form.

http://support.trainingpeaks.com/athlete-edition/charts/performance-management-chart-(pmc).aspx

Again while none of this will improve your performance, that is what training, racing, recovery, diet, aerodynamics, bike position, equipment selection, skills, tactics and other things do measurement of power can be used to test your power in relation to your goal events (400watts on the track at 120rpm is not the same as 400 watts uphill at 75rpm), to set training targets and with the PMC (with regular recording with a well calibrated PM and an accurate FTP) ensure that you are making progress, not overtraining and plan your taper for major events.

A few disclaimers to the last post...

I have no professional affiliation with TrainingPeaks. I pay for their service which I use to deliver training programmes and as a means for riders to upload their training files.

Racing and Training with a Power Meter is not coaching. I had a meeting with a young lady today heading into a major stage race in NZ and watts or power didn't come up once. She trains with a Powertap. I have another young lady who trains and races with a Quarq and her plan for this race has nothing to do with power.

 

[Tapeworm]

Dr. Swart was the lead author of this strawman study:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19204572

Sorry, I still find it funny that a study championing HR training over power is validated by power outputs. Or is it just me?

 

[CoachFergie]

Sorry, I still find it funny that a study championing HR training over power is validated by power outputs. Or is it just me?

That among other things. I hope anything I get published eventually will have more substance but good to know that JSCR will publish any old nonsense.

 

[Tapeworm]

As someone who is new to the concept of training with power (it's been nearly 10 years since I raced at a level high enough to justify a PM) what is the best way to start out?

Is it a case of training as per normal with it for a while to determine your thresholds and building from there?

I would also add to Fergie's post above that, for the price (FREE), Golden Cheetah, is pretty good for analytical software.

 

[CoachFergie]

I would also add to Fergie's post above that, for the price (FREE), Golden Cheetah, is pretty good for analytical software.

http://goldencheetah.org/

I was using it this afternoon. WKO+ allows me to set up charts looking at what I see but I need GC to download two files into excel to publish that chart I used a few pages ago.

Instead of TSS, Golden Cheetah uses Bike Score. Dr Phil Skiba has done a nice write up about Bike Score...

http://www.physfarm.com/bikescore.pdf

 

[CoachFergie]

Also missed this excellent work from Charles Howe...

http://velodynamics2.webs.com/rcgtp1.pdf

and his excellent piece adapting the training methods of Arthur Lydiard (great KIWI coach) to racing and training with a power meter.

http://www.freewebs.com/velodynamics2/modelplan.pdf

and some more good links to training and racing with a power meter resources...

http://freewebs.com/velodynamics2/techarticles.htm

 

[CoachFergie]

Look at all these Pro's racing and not assessing their performance purely on the result or the stopwatch

Does the result sheet tell you if Vos won because she was the most powerful, or was it her position in the sprint, pacing of the sprint, timing of the sprint, which side of the road she chose to attack from, if she had the best lead out or if she followed another teams leadout?

Does the stopwatch tell you who was driving the team? Does the stopwatch tell you who was the weak link?

Now this last one is classic. Can the stopwatch tell you he was being pushed up the climb? Does the result sheet tell you he was pushed up the climb (apart from a fine from the Commissaire)? The SRM will tell you!

 

[sciguy]

http://goldencheetah.org/

I was using it this afternoon. WKO+ allows me to set up charts looking at what I see but I need GC to download two files into excel to publish that chart I used a few pages ago.

Instead of TSS, Golden Cheetah uses Bike Score. Dr Phil Skiba has done a nice write up about Bike Score...

http://www.physfarm.com/bikescore.pdf

Fergie,

The Golden Cheetah development build of Version 3, although still in beta form, does include all the Coggan metrics. If one likes they can display both Phil S's as well as Andy C's at the same time. I've been using this version for several months.

http://goldencheetah.stand2surf.net/?p=598


Golden Cheetah is especially nice for those running Macintosh computers.

Hugh