I see these values on my files in WKO+ but I haven’t read anywhere how these are used in any analysis. I think the Pw:HR has something to do with HR coupling with power, but I am not sure exactly what the number means. I have no idea what the Pa:HR is.
For example, I’m looking at two files:
On December 10 my Pw:HR is at +2.06% and Pa:HR is at 6.96% for an easy 1 hour ride on the trainer.
Last night, my Pw:HR was -5.42% and my Pa:HR was -0.1%
On another note, I am just finishing a four week block of base/endurance riding. I know I need to retest FTP, my trainer rides are getting much easier at selected power. I’ll be doing that this coming Monday. Could that be something to do with it? Just speculating.
Ok, so I guess ‘ST’ stands for ‘smartass triathletes’ now huh?
I’ve read that. Well I should say reread that. I have Joe Friel’s Cyclists’ Training Bible and Dr. Coggan’s Training and Racing with a Power Meter. Admittedly, I haven’t made it through all of both books yet, thesis research is sapping my time.
What I don’t understand is this:
In the two rides I indicated above, the first was one hour at 150W, the second was two hours at 160W and a lower HR. Yet, the Pw:HR was decoupled by more than 5% for the second one (assuming the negative percentage is equivalent to the positive one, I’ve not seen an example with a negative value).
I read on here all the time about how useless HR is as an indicator of fitness. How does Pw:HR fit into this? According to Friel, the better ‘coupling’ indicates better aerobic fitness. But I’m just confused since my HR was lower, steady, and my power was higher, yet the ratio is out of whack.
From my understanding, Pw:Hr is most useful in the longer aerobic sessions… think HIM/IM bike training. You can gauge your fitness by observing if your HR has to increase or decrease realtive to a steady workload over a longish period of time. If you HR increases for the same work load during a ride, then your body is “fatiguing” and having to work harder and indicates a lack of muscular endurance and fatigue resistance. Im not really sure what a decreasing HR relative to workload would mean… maybe dehydration?
It is basically a single use tool, gauging aerobic fitness. I don’t pay it much attention.
I read on here all the time about how useless HR is as an indicator of fitness. How does Pw:HR fit into this? According to Friel, the better ‘coupling’ indicates better aerobic fitness. But I’m just confused since my HR was lower, steady, and my power was higher, yet the ratio is out of whack.
Pw:HR makes power as useless as HR. Think about it mathematically:
I read on here all the time about how useless HR is as an indicator of fitness. How does Pw:HR fit into this? According to Friel, the better ‘coupling’ indicates better aerobic fitness. But I’m just confused since my HR was lower, steady, and my power was higher, yet the ratio is out of whack.
Pw:HR makes power as useless as HR. Think about it mathematically:
Basically, it adds back all uncertainty and problems of HR, ruining the superior measurement that is power.
Basically what I’m thinking. Although I’ll continue to wear my HR strap just to have the data, I’ll stop obsessing over a change in HR from one ride to the next.
I’m new to training with a power meter, and I’m loving it. I’m just a nerd and want to be sure that I’m quantifying any changes in my fitness via all means available. I love it.
Well, you have to draw the line somewhere. A rectal temperature probe would provide additional potentially useful data but I don’t think it would be worth the discomfort.
Well, you have to draw the line somewhere. A rectal temperature probe would provide additional potentially useful data but I don’t think it would be worth the discomfort.
