If you do not use your power meter in a race, at least to record the data, how the hell do you expect to use it effectively in training?

Not perfect, but I'm not sure it's any less perfect than power if you gain a good sense of feel. The problem with chasing a number is that you might have more or less than it on race day. Or it's hot, windy, altitude, climbing vs flat, stage 3 of a race, etc--all factors that make power a considerable variable. For a TT it can help keep a lid on the first couple minutes when +25 feels fine but after that I'd go by rpe. The very fastest I went in a 10-mile and 40k TTs was without a pm.

If you find you go faster without a power meter, do not look at the power, just collect data. Then use that data to refine your training.

Why would I use race effort data to refine training?

Why would you time your race?

Because the first one across the line wins. How else do you suggest gauging a race, by height?

There is a middle ground (or many middle grounds) between robotic adherence to a power pacing plan, and not even looking at it at all.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Gauge your race effort on the supply side of the equation (fitness) by the power you put out rather than result:

Example:
Race 1 you do 350 watts for your 40k TT and finish 2nd behind Fabian Cancellara

Race 2 you do 325 watts for your 40k TT finishing 1st place ahead of Jack Mott

Race 3 you do 325 watts and set a PB in the 40k TT due to favorable winds/roads but finish 3rd

When looking over your history of training and your approach to it, which race do you look at as an example of where you showed up in the best shape and did the best performance?

If you don't at least record the data from your races you miss out on knowing when you performed your best physically, which makes it less clear what approaches to training/nutrition/recovery work best for you. Also, you have to estimate your tss that day! the horror. (this is obviously much less important)

Of course there are various caveats to the examples above. For instance you need to be aware of hot temperature/altitude and other factors affect your power output. Using a power meter in your races even if you don't look at it will help you learn those things too.

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

I don't read into any one race or training effort that represents an outlier. They're nice for a brag-a-thon but IMO what you can consistently repeat is far more relevant. If you gauge power based on one number then you potentially over- or under-sell the effort. That works both ways with training or race data.

Frankly, I don't really subscribe to the examples you presented. I never think about beating or being beaten by anyone, only getting 100% of myself on that day. What someone else does is only relevant to the race result, not your effort. In other words, someone else will go slower or faster but you have no control over it, so might as well focus on what you do.

Some examples back:
-My best 10-mile TT power was slowest TT ever at that distance because course had a 1-mile climb and technical descent. I was +15 watts over repeated PCSD numbers (I probably did 6x that year), which is flat and hot. If I'd paced based on that consistent #, I'd have way undersold the effort.

-First 40k was at 5k feet and very dry. I intended to pace off an estimated power number but my PM mis-calibrated and I went way deep in the whole for first 5k, then suffered mightily for the next 35. The next year I ignored PM and went :16 faster. Maybe that's a fluky example but the environmental differences (power loss at altitude, dehydration at altitude, etc) changed everything

These are two scenarios where training and race data doesn't tell you a whole lot. Sure, I know my best 10-mile TT # but if I tried to take that to PCSD or training and repeat it wouldn't have gone well.

Don't get me wrong, the numbers are interesting and can show useful insights. I do find power especially useful during base when you want to focus on the right amount of effort for a workout or block of time, especially for long efforts and rides. But once you get to really dropping the hammer in race season, I view what you get as what you have.

I agree. People also stress out if the thing works too. I know someone who has a habit of getting himself psyched out by what his bike computer tells him. He will get worried if the power numbers are considerably higher than his threshold or his heart rate is really high even if he feels in control. I think this is a matter of personal disposition though. One person looks at the numbers and says "hellyah, I'm killin' it" and another person says "ohmygod imagonna die". People in the latter disposition should use a power meter to regulate recovery days and just tape over the display when it comes time to deliver hard efforts.

For my part, I train with a CT during the winter and then during the summer I train & race by feel. I know what each power band feels like reliably. If these devices get a bit cheaper I may spring for one but I spend 25% of the year staring at the watts and that is working pretty well.

If you know yourself, then power is at best redundant at worst it is misleading.

Nonsense.

I'm slowly weening myself off of power for racing. I still use it, but I don't go "all in" with it. I think it's good for making sure you don't have spikes, but I've found that paying more attention to RPE and HR gives me the best results for that given day.