Both but looking back post race the NP us the number I am most interested in especially on a course with a lot of variability.

---

-Of course it's 'effing hard, it's IRONMAN!
Team ZOOT
ZOOT, QR, Garmin, HED Wheels, Zealios, FormSwim, Precision Hydration, Rudy Project

Good point, thank you. Any others?

NP for me on an auto lapping every 5 miles is my main number watched during a long race. I do check 3 or 10 second Ave Watts to keep check of small quick spikes, but NP is my guiding number.

do you average 0's or not?

at placid that was an issue i had.. going down from keene my average plummetted because i wasnt pedalling at all. so NP was a more accurate representaiton for my "work" that i put in...

just a thought

next time ill have the head unit ignore 0's for the average

I have AP and NP side-by-side on my Garmin, lap average for each and auto-lapping every 10 km.

As someone on here summarised it nicely for me, AP is the number that's pushing you down the road (i.e. how fast you're going to go) and NP is what it's costing you physiologically.

I tend to ride to AP but keep a close eye on NP and try to keep it as low as possible. Logically it might make more sense to pace to NP, but in my head at least, I found that mindset "rewarded" surging to try to hit a target NP number, whereas pacing to AP seems to encourage me to keep it steady. Give it a try yourself on some training rides.

Why not use Lap Power (AP or NP) and just lap it after the descent?

Ignoring 0's is a very misleading road to go down with power data.

never thought of that.. but i only display NP during a race..

NP is an output AP is the input
or
AP is what you do and NP is the physiological cost of how you're doing what you're doing

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Hill course, NP is more valuable. Flat course, they should be very close, so doesn’t matter as much.

I’ve only done two races so far this year and both were hilly courses (Quassy and Placid), so NP was more representative of the day.

---

Blog: http://262toboylstonstreet.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/NateThomasTri
Coaching: https://bybtricoaching.com/ - accepting athletes for 2023

AVG. The best predictor of performance is previous performance. I'm a small guy with a big anaerobic engine and I race a lot of crits. I routinely see NP numbers in races that I can never reach in a solid state effort for the same duration. So while looking at NP makes me feel good, for me those numbers end up being purely theoritical and of no use in setting training zones, pacing breakaways, or TTs. There's a really good reason the Power Duration Curve in WKO uses AVG and not NP. As far as hilly courses, good course recon with a good idea of how to gauge each effort I find helps the best, especially if you're feel great or horrible.

if you're racing crits you should not be looking at your power data AT ALL (and actually if you're looking at your garmin we need to have a chat). for IM short/long races you need pacing information, for crits its purely tactical. you follow wheels or you don't, and its not your strength that dictates pacing, its what the group is willing to allow. even if you're getting into the break, speed is a better indicator of what you need to be doing, not power. Crits by their very nature are likely to have a big VI, 1.2 is not uncommon, and when reviewing data post race the most important # for me is 0w time. My goal is to have maximum time at 0w (coasting) and a win/podium. Crits are far more about energy conservation and using it when required than it is proving that you can throw down power all race long.

WUT?! I'm just the opposite. I try to keep a low variability (until racing situation dictates). If you're averaging crit speeds around 28-30MPH and you have a lot of time at 0W that's a bad sign about what you're doing the rest of time. There's no free lunch. Getting into the bad cycle of jumping like hell out of turns then coasting. If I find myself doing a lot of coasting it's usually a signal for me to move up so I can get a smoother application of power.


My metric is to spend as little time as possible over 60CP/FTP. When I go over that, I want it to be because I'm doing something on my terms, like attacking the field.

Interesting approach. I'll have to give that a try. Personally I've always looked at 10 second average power and just checked in every 30 seconds or so.

That's the best characterization I've ever seen of the two.

i have a similar rule, try to only use power when it makes others use equal or greater power. that said, i don't know what level you are racing or how big your fields are, but in P1/2 you always have to be fighting to stay in position. the fields are so fast and so large that if you're not moving up you are moving backwards. it takes effort to surf, but far less than being stuck in the accordion further back and having to deal with the loss of momentum.

I keep np and avg power on the screen but I really go by np and of course keep rpe in mind

Not if you want to count calories

This is why I use NP in long events. Plus of course, the higher figure massages my ego.

---

29 years and counting

I struggled with this my first few years racing trying to figure this out. I honestly now target different power for different parts of the race and dont look as much at the entire race power numbers till I am done. Ex: flat sections I will hold 220, I will hit lap when I hit a hill and go up the hill at 260-280, coast the downhill then hit lap again on next flat section. Hilly races I tuck and dont pedal once going over 35 mph so that kills the avg power leading to a high VI but for me its smarter racing I think. As Nate said a flat race numbers are pretty much the same maybe separated by 2-5w.

Dont chase a power number in a race, race smart. Upload data at end and see what all the numbers are. Guess my answer to your question is look at both and learn your numbers.

---

2024: Bevoman, Galveston, Alcatraz, Marble Falls, Santa Cruz

Lots of good responses. Thank you all !

-OP