A few thoughts...
Knowledge of a person's actual power output while cycling is immensely valuable, because:
1) mechanical power is what moves the bike down the road, and
2) cycling economy/efficiency does not vary dramatically between individuals, such that power provides a reasonable proxy for actual metabolic demand.
With that in mind, consider a running power estimator, i.e., one that relies on GPS, acceleromters, etc., to calculate power:
1) since power is being determined indirectly, the reported values provide no further insight into someone's actual performance than does knowledge of their pace and changes in elevation (although if accurate, estimated power does have the benefit of pinning a single number on things), and
2) running economy varies much more between individuals than does cycling economy/efficiency, such that the calculated power may not provide a valid/reliable indication of actual metabolic demand.
Combining the above with the fact that runners don't generally have to be able to rapidly change pace the way cyclists do, that they aren't as influenced by environmental conditions (e.g., wind), that they tend to utilize flat surfaces (tracks) for structured training, etc., and I can't see a running power meter having a significant impact on how people actually train and perform.
Knowledge of a person's actual power output while cycling is immensely valuable, because:
1) mechanical power is what moves the bike down the road, and
2) cycling economy/efficiency does not vary dramatically between individuals, such that power provides a reasonable proxy for actual metabolic demand.
With that in mind, consider a running power estimator, i.e., one that relies on GPS, acceleromters, etc., to calculate power:
1) since power is being determined indirectly, the reported values provide no further insight into someone's actual performance than does knowledge of their pace and changes in elevation (although if accurate, estimated power does have the benefit of pinning a single number on things), and
2) running economy varies much more between individuals than does cycling economy/efficiency, such that the calculated power may not provide a valid/reliable indication of actual metabolic demand.
Combining the above with the fact that runners don't generally have to be able to rapidly change pace the way cyclists do, that they aren't as influenced by environmental conditions (e.g., wind), that they tend to utilize flat surfaces (tracks) for structured training, etc., and I can't see a running power meter having a significant impact on how people actually train and perform.
Last edited by:
Andrew Coggan: Feb 2, 15 10:24