It's also a good movie with Ben Effleck.

---

<The Dew Abides>

Happens to me all the time. If you're in erg mode on the Kickr, and you come to a complete stop, it will let you spin up before insisting on 200 watts. But woe unto you if you drop your remote or stop pedaling for 5 seconds to adjust a shoe. If your cadence drops by half, the pressure on the pedals needs to double. Drop cadence by 75% and pedal force needs to quadruple to generate the same wattage.

---

<The Dew Abides>

Understand what you are saying, but I think you are on a slight tangent from my original intent. If I can't make the interval, if it doesn't feel right, if it just seems to hard (or easy for that matter), then you can adjust. There is no argument to that.

But they gave you that zone as a target for that workout and the goal is to achieve that target. If you need to adjust, you just move the target and still look to achieve that new adjusted target. Erg mode allows you to set the target, and adjust it. You still have to spin the pedals and make the decision on where that target is compared to what was listed originally (95%, 100%, 105%, etc.).

And I don't even see erg as something that just "does it for me". I am looking to workout between 90-95 RPM. If I venture out of that range to say 75 RPM and erg mode adjusts resistance accordingly to allow me to hit the target watts, I don't see that as successful. What erg does for me is I usually feel that difference in resistance when I drop to low, or go to high on RPM and settle back into where I want to be (whether where I want to be was what the coach said, or what I adjusted to after getting a feel for my legs that day). It's just making my workouts a lot more on point not having to fiddle with resistance and or gears as the trainer warms up.

You are arguing that I shouldn't have to hit a certain target due to the daily changes in my ability due to fatigue, etc.. I'm merely asking if that once I get that factored in and have a goal set, does erg mode lead rto some sort of inefficiency in your cycling.?

Irritating, but I guess it is what it is. Basically, I guess you have to do all of your intervals at a high cadence.

Not really. It's just takes more pressure to produce the same wattage at 75 rpm than it does at 95, same as on the road. It's when the cadence drops really low -- maybe 20 or 30 rpm? -- that massive resistance becomes a problem.

Now that I think about it, it's not much different from a spin bike -- let the flywheel stop spinning when you've got a healthy resistance on it, and you'll never get it started again without reducing the resistance.

---

<The Dew Abides>

Also, depending on the trainer you have, it's a control system that is going to take a second to land on the right resistance. It's likely going to overshoot and jack the resistance up too much, then reduce, and oscillate around that target number until it gets it correct. So the immediate resistance change is going to be the worst.

Pedal at a smooth 200 watts, and 90 RPM, then ramp up to 110 for a second, then back down to 90RPM. Going to be almost not resistance because it's trying to figure out the right combo to get you 200 watts at 110RPM, which is much less resistance at the wheel. You just have to be patient. I actually prefer easing into cadence changes as I find it helps it figure it out faster. If I stop to adjust a shoe, I slowly build back up. Two quick RPM changes makes it take even longer to settle in.

I use ERG for all structured workouts on the weekdays and I do my long rides on the weekends on the roads (benefit of living in California).

Question: Do you notice your power output varies between tri bike and road bike training? I have noticed that I have an easier time cranking out a higher normalized power output when riding on my road bike than I am able to on my tri bike. This may be for a variety of factors (e.g. not spinning down trainer after switching bikes). I'm wondering if this is normal or if there is a larger problem (e.g. tri bike fit).

Any thoughts?

""""Is there any reason to believe that an exact and perfectly consistent figure is actually beneficial in training? """"

None

""""" I'm more concerned about drift"""""""

You are allowed to recalibrate the trainer and yourself between intervals, or at least my athletes are. ymmv

"""""""""""""""""""does erg mode lead rto some sort of inefficiency in your cycling.? """""""""""""""""""""

Erg mode is less like real riding than Standard mode (IIRC that's what it's called)


If you're always 5-7w lower than prescribed and struggling to make the intervals, is the wattage number or range prescribed correct for your fitness level? If your workout goal is 260-270 and you're coming in at 252-256 all the time something is off.

A different way to examine your dilemma is this: It's unrealistic.

By that I mean the prescribed range is unrealistic if you can not hit it the overwhelming majority of the time and/or the rider has unrealistic expectations of what they should & can be able to consistently do.

Everyone should fail at a workout now and then, but consistent failing needs a re-examination.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

There have been some really good answers here thus far but I'll chip in my $0.02 anyways: I think the primary drawback of erg mode is that your pacing can suffer if you become reliant on it. If you check out the timetriallingforum.co.uk you'll notice most of the people over there either use "dumb" trainers or they put their smart trainer into slope mode for the majority of their training.

Pacing is definitely a skill that you need to practice, both inside and outside.

With that said, if you're doing a lot of base work over the winter, logging tons of hours in Z2 while watching movies etc, erg mode is a useful tool IMO. Sometimes you just need to roll out of bed and push the pedals. Erg mode is great for that.

Personally, as I get closer to race season and I start to add more intensity to my training I'll become less dependent on erg mode. I'll ride outside twice a week on the weekends which gives me practice pacing and I'll do all of my 2x20s in slope mode. IMO, learning to pace yourself for an extended period of time near threshold is very important. Assuming you've set your zones correctly, there's a huge difference between riding for an hour at 95% vs 98/99/100%. Those few percentage points of exertion can mean the difference between being able to run at your target pace and not even being able to run the entire run course.

The other thing that popped into my head this afternoon:

It's about the training stimulus much more than it is about the wattage number

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

I think it also depends on the trainer. I rarely use erg mode because it feels more “jerky” especially on hard intervals, when my watts may not be super consistent. I exclusively use the resistance option, and ramp up the “+ %” depending on the workout.

I have the bushido. I’m sure with a better trainers would use erg more regularly.

I don't know that there's any evidence that this following has much merit in this particular case, it's more of a general rule of mine. - Variety is good.
It sounds like you really, really want to pedal at an exact wattage number and an exact rpm for each session. You don't want pedal a bit faster or slower unless it's prescribed, you don't want your power to modulate. You want homogeneity. In general, when it comes to being resilient and adaptable (not specifically in athletic training), I consider that a bad approach.
When I ride without erg mode and notice I'm sagging a few watts below target, I have to have a little interrogation with my legs to see if they're suffering or if I just lost concentration and then push up a little and settle at a higher workload. These constant conscious corrections and the minor accelerations to raise (and lower) my effort to stay around my target for a session is not, to me, an inconvenience. It's part of the training. It adds to, not detracts from, the benefits.

I'm really not trying to be super anal about hitting exact numbers, im just argumentative a little when I can't see the other side clearly. Not even in a way that I'm trying to be ignorant, just that I don't quite see it yet with whatever the reasoning is and I'm trying to see it. Not trying to even say I don't agree with other people, just that it's not the aspect of the argument I'm looking at and not understanding. So don't read into this that I sit on my trainer at XXX watts and have a panic attack when I go 1 minute over on my warm up or something. So dont take my statements as me having to do this. Just pointing out what erg mode does for me and I don't see any drawback of hitting your target numbers (if your legs are up to it that day).

I think you mentioning the concentration to keep a wattage is where I saw the original person who told me this coming from, and me not seeing a huge deal initially. Other points brought up seem a bit off tangent to that. The ability to keep consistent wattage on varying terrain is an outdoor learned skill to me just like bike handling. The ability to adjust based on fresh or tired legs isn't the issue to me (I had to bump up 5% last night when it was just too easy).

I think the difference is the concentration, and is that really a thing you all train for? I'm mentioning that in erg mode, I now concentrate on RPM without dealing with wattage changes that come with Cadence change (I have spin up workouts, high RPM, Lower mid 80 stiff). I'm just noting that it's not like I completely cut out on what my legs are doing. I still have to pay attention.

I just had issues with my last trainer finding good gear/resistance ratios that would stick in an appropriate wattage. Like on the magnitude of 20 watt swings in a 10 minute interval in the first half hour. It wasn't my legs tiring, it was me paying attention and shifting gears to catch up. Is there really a learned skill or physical adaptation there other than quit drifting off into your TV show, haha? I've just not thought of that difference having a tangible affect on riding. Not saying it doesn't, just will have to see. Again, I've only had this for 3-4 weeks now and about 10-12 rides.

Yeah that all sounds reasonable to me (not an expert!) with one exception:
The one thing I would see slightly differently is where you say ability to maintain wattage on varying terrain is an outdoor learned skill. I don't think it needs to be. You are specifically eliminating the component that would somewhat simulate this by your preference for using ERG mode to eliminate the interaction of gear ratios and power in determining your cadence. Out on the road, you have to choose a combination of gear, power level and cadence to accomodate the prevailing terrain and conditions. Any 2 will determine the 3rd. If you don't use ERG mode, wheel speed and resistance are linked and thus the trainer provides much of the same challenge, i.e. you may not be able to ride at your exact preferred cadence for a given power due to gear ratios. You're optimising your indoor experience to provide ideal cadence for any given power, you can't do that outside. Is it an advantage to do it indoors if your objective is developing outdoor performance? I'm not sure. I would think you should at least mix it up so that you spend at least some of the time NOT riding your ideal cadence. On the road you may have to choose between 82rpm or 93rpm. If you're used to being able to always spin 88rpm, will this cause you any difficulty (either physical or mental). If you do sufficient outdoor riding I doubt this will be an issue, but for those who ride indoors for virtually all their training I would think this could be an actual issue.

This