Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS?
Quote | Reply
I've been hammering at my new computrainer toy for about a week and have a couple questions now that i've used each of the basic softwares that come with my system. But I'm training for IM-distance triathlons and need some input on what pace my training.

1. Which software is best for training purposes? I like the computrainer 3D software for its courses and such, but find that it might not be best for training b/c my watts vary depending on the course. I do like the Computrainer 1.5 for the spinscan though.



And Most importantly:

2. What is the key metric to train off of for cycling: Watts or Spinscan? I can maintaing 80+ SS but find that my power decreases to abtou 20-30 below my normal power if i just pace off watt power (my aerobic wattage is around 160). If I try to push watts, my spinscan turns to shit at <70. Which number is more important for triathlon training?

** note- is it me or do I find that being seated up generates more comfort and power than being aero? I'm losing between 10-25 watts going aero.



Any tips, suggestions, experiences would help
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [jerryST] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Watts PERIOD.
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [jerryST] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I just finished (a month ago) training with Watts using one of Hunter Kemper's plans for the CT and REALLY enjoyed it. Watts are the way to go in my opinion. I use to try and pay attention to the spinscan, however, now I just use it as something to look at while racing the computer. ;)
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [jerryST] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Train by watts, but keep an eye on your SS numbers as well.

I use the Coaching Software for a lot of my training, either it's full screen SpinScan mode, or Manual Ergo mode (great for intervals).
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [jerryST] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
watts. I also like the coaching software. I can program in workouts based on watts/time. Ex. 10 Minutes at xx watts, 2 minutes at yy watts, etc.
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Train by watts, but keep an eye on your SS numbers as well.

I use the Coaching Software for a lot of my training, either it's full screen SpinScan mode, or Manual Ergo mode (great for intervals).


Spinscan means absolutely nothing. Even if there was some merit in having a more even pedal stroke (which there is no evidence to support), Spinscan diesn't even measure this. It is pure smoke and mirrors.

Scott
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [smartin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Got to disagree, SS has helped me...watts should by far be the focus when using a CT, but SS as I understand it, (shaky grasp) is a measure of pedaling efficency...spreading the watts that you are producing over more muscle groups, and applying that effort more efficiently...it has helped me to use both, but then my pedal stroke was worse prior to getting a CT.

SS can also help you in combination with watts and varying terrain courses to find your 'best' cadence.

I usually run it in split screen mode, watching power at the bottom and my spinscan numbers as well.

As for aero versus road bike, I dont find any difference, if fit is good you should be seeing similar watt and SS numbers. Though i did find as i spent more time on the tri bike on the CT that it improved....train what your going to race....eh?
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [Dumper] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
my S/S numbers are typically 55-60's and I couldn't care less as long as the watts are there. So far so good :)

It has some entertainment value though.
Last edited by: rmur: Mar 31, 06 15:30
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [rmur] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's interesting about ppl putting in similar Watts in Aero and Upright position. Do you others have similar experiences? From my thoughts, anything at Half-IM and below i'd do in a road setup and above that I'm relying on IM (assuming course isn't too hilly).

Do your watts look the same aero and un-aero?
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [jerryST] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
i think it's very much a personal thing but my best 30-60MP's have actually been set in the aero position. I suspect L5 power or 5MP would be compromised in my current aero position (my PB being on a L5 hill repeat) but anything longish -- 15/20 minutes and higher --- I'm okay on the aerobars.

But if you're dropped like Bjorn ... I'm not sure ...

These are all outdoor experiences BTW. On the CT, staring at a screen all bets are off. I use an old road bike - ride on the drops as much as possible and practice my aero position by draping the forearms over the tops. Safe enough indoors :)
Quote Reply
Re: Computrainer Q - Training based on Watts or SS? [Dumper] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
but SS as I understand it, (shaky grasp) is a measure of pedaling efficency


It is marketed as such, but is not.

Quote:


spreading the watts that you are producing over more muscle groups, and applying that effort more efficiently


It does not tell you either of these things.

Quote:


but then my pedal stroke was worse prior to getting a CT


The problem is in defining what is a better pedal stroke. If you can do it, you are the first. You may indeed have a better SS since getting a CT, but that is by no means a measure of the efficiency or quality of your pedal stroke.

Quote:


SS can also help you in combination with watts and varying terrain courses to find your 'best' cadence.


Your 'best' cadence is that which allows you to maintain the highest watts for a given duration, period.

Quote:


Though i did find as i spent more time on the tri bike on the CT that it improved....train what your going to race....eh?


Now that I completely agree with =).



Scott
Quote Reply