Cycling Training link.

[Lonnie]

So AltaChic's workout thread went all to hell, so I figured I repost this here. This link is cycling specific, but it is one of the BEST free resources on power and HR zone training.

Training and racing using a power meter: an introduction Andrew R. Coggan, Ph.D.

See Table 1 on page 15-16. Money.

[upallnight]

for those interested in power...

the new Quarq device holds some promise. could be as accurate as the SRMs, but less expensive. seems like the powertap, iBike, et al, all have more issues than the SRM (save the price tag).

a few cool things:
- wireless (ANT+Sport)
- you can use your own head unit
- you can use your own HRM (all the above should mean cheaper and better devices; more choice for the end user)
- light (120g)
- crank-based measurement of power is the best thing going; all other methods require more calculation/extrapolation.

downside:
- unproven (to be released in december)
- requires a detachable spider, so only certain cranks are supported. (on the other hand, SRM requires new bb + crankset, which drives up that cost.)
- probably not cheap

i have one of the supported cranksets, so if the price is right, i may give this a go. still could be bloody expensive.

[BushwackerinPA]

So AltaChic's workout thread went all to hell, so I figured I repost this here. This link is cycling specific, but it is one of the BEST free resources on power and HR zone training.

Training and racing using a power meter: an introduction Andrew R. Coggan, Ph.D.

See Table 1 on page 15-16. Money.

maybe you should just Mountain Bike with me more .

[tromano]

Its an interesting link. All I can say is that I just try to stay at around 80% of HR or whatever. If its an easy climb I just go faster. If I am about to anaerobic I really slow down to granny or stop for a minute or two. I have found that it is much easier to ride day after day if I keep the leg burn down as much as possible. Its was happening a lot as I have gotten used to the elevation and longer climbs in Utah. There is lot more aerobic challenge component in most rides around here than in the MidAtlantic.

[Shredgar]

Great link, thanks Lonnie.

[Lonnie]

maybe you should just Mountain Bike with me more .

I'd say that's working. I didn't go granny ring all day today.

Whenever I ride with you, I just pretty much count on the fact it's going to be a level 4/5 day.

[upallnight]

Its an interesting link. All I can say is that I just try to stay at around 80% of HR or whatever.

i guess it depends on what you're after. are you looking to maintain what you've got? looking to build strength? endurance?

from what i've learned, HR is good, but there are many factors that can influence it, like hydration, the amount you slept the night before, etc. so, one day's 80% may not equal the next day's 80% in terms of the actual exertion of the workout.

HR works really well for running, but it works less well on a bike. i guess power (though difficult to measure on a bike without high cost) has a 1:1 (or closer to it) correlation with effort, so it's a better indicator or improvement. HR is still good and always will have value (and it's easy/cheap to measure), but power can tell those who are interested in such things whether they are pushing too hard and susceptible to over-training.

with HR, i could be "recovered" from yesterday's workout, but that could be masked by a poor night's sleep.

[Lonnie]

I use a combo of HR and perceived exertion.

Here's another fun link (for back calculating power...)

http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/espeed.htm

[upallnight]

Power's pretty easy to calculate in controlled environments, but if you look at all the parameters in that calculator it is easy to see how complex and impractial it is to do estimates out in the real world. for instance, how often do you face a constant wind during your entire ride, or hold a constant position (for the same level of drag)?

check out the iBike. it attempts to use some of these calculations (like wind speed) to compute power. however, it requires extensive calibration and doesn't always work right (let's say you're drafting).

the devices that calculate power most accurately in real-world environments are the crank-based devices. even calculating power at the rear hub has inherent flaws, namely that you are using what's happening at the hub to guess what is happening at the cranks.

interesting stuff. i just hope the crank-based systems get cheaper. Quarq pricing will be announced at Interbike. i'm very curious.