Local 10K Indoor Time Trial. Course was rolling and generally up hill with the last .4 miles downhill. I didn’t have good legs and my results were pretty underwhelming. I finished 20th, certainly nothing to brag about.
What struck me was that:
How is that possible???
you might want to check your heart. I think you might be dead, or dying. 28 average bpm over an hour?
LOL… I train with Power, not HR, so I threw out my HR monitor a while ago. I promise you though… that last 90 seconds I my HR was well into the 190’s. 
not sure how you could end up with np lower than avg. in a well-paced tt mine will be within a watt or two of each other (np higher).
that 755 watt spike for 5 second? lose that for sure.
also, if you don’t train with a hr monitor and pm then how do you track training adaptations? you really need both to see changes in fitness…
not sure how you could end up with np lower than avg. in a well-paced tt mine will be within a watt or two of each other (np higher).
usually mine is too… hence the Q. just wondering if that, plus the lower than 1 variability index is indiciative of something in WKO
so, if you don’t train with a hr monitor and pm then how do you track training adaptations? you really need both to see changes in fitness…
Monthly FTP testing for the bike and 5 or 10K race times on the run (ie. going faster). HR training was a disaster for me. Power/Pace works much better in my case.
Oh… and the spike was accelerating off the line and not a good measure of effort. Point taken though…
also, if you don’t train with a hr monitor and pm then how do you track training adaptations? you really need both to see changes in fitness…
You can track that rather simple and without a HR. HR shows cradiovascular strain while what we really are concern about what’s going on in our working muscles, hence it is easy to track that with a power meter - i.e. power improvements over time at 5min, 60 min, 120 min, etc.
Edit: in my quest to be a smart-ass I made an incorrect statement. I withdraw my hypothesis.
During short efforts, normalized power can be ever-so-slightly lower than average power (such that VI is slightly less than 1.00) due to the fact that the 30 s rolling average doesn’t “kick in” until, well, the 30 s mark. IOW, it is neither an artifact nor the result of anything that you did, but just a function of the way normalized power is calculated.
if you don’t train with a hr monitor and pm then how do you track training adaptations? you really need both to see changes in fitness…
No, you don’t.
Edit: in my quest to be a smart-ass I made an incorrect statement. I withdraw my hypothesis.
It was appreciated none the less…
obviously power improvements over time demonstrate changes in fitness, but in between your power tests, how do you determine when you’re starting to over-reach? when you need an extra day or two of rest?
don’t get me wrong, i train and race with power and think it’s the most valuable tool. but i also want to see what my hr is doing and use as a comparison in the bigger overall training picture. if i’m riding at 250 watts at 150 hr, and then see 250 at 145 for a few workouts, i know it’s time to adjust zones.
and if you want to know what’s going on with your ‘working muscles’ over time, wouldn’t kjs be a better indicator of overall work done? i’ve had some long rides with great np numbers but low kjs, vs. lower np and higher kjs. pretty easy to tell which one required more work.
i used to spike off the line and at the turn as well until talking to a teammate with a masters nat tt championships (and crit, rr, + track for good measure) explained that he tried to not go over lt for the start, which seems pretty difficult to me but obviously it works for him. i followed his advice to dial it back (was ~100 watts over avg for whole ride) and had my best effort yet.
obviously power improvements over time demonstrate changes in fitness, but in between your power tests, how do you determine when you’re starting to over-reach? when you need an extra day or two of rest?
That’s easy: perceived exertion (which, unlike heart rate, accounts for much more than just cardiovascular strain).
Of course, there’s also that old saw about “training is testing, testing is training”…
don’t get me wrong, i train and race with power and think it’s the most valuable tool. but i also want to see what my hr is doing and use as a comparison in the bigger overall training picture. if i’m riding at 250 watts at 150 hr, and then see 250 at 145 for a few workouts, i know it’s time to adjust zones.
Do you? That is, how do you know that your heart rate is lower because you are more fit, vs. just having acutely overreached?
and if you want to know what’s going on with your ‘working muscles’ over time, wouldn’t kjs be a better indicator of overall work done? i’ve had some long rides with great np numbers but low kjs, vs. lower np and higher kjs. pretty easy to tell which one required more work.
Again, that’s easy: the ride with the higher total work is the one in which you did more work. However, from a training/adaptation perspective the relevant measure isn’t work, but physiological strain, which is dependent upon not only how much work you do, but also the rate at which you do said work.
also, if you don’t train with a hr monitor and pm then how do you track training adaptations? you really need both to see changes in fitness…
? that’s easy–your power increases!
obviously power improvements over time demonstrate changes in fitness, but in between your power tests, how do you determine when you’re starting to over-reach? when you need an extra day or two of rest?
don’t get me wrong, i train and race with power and think it’s the most valuable tool. but i also want to see what my hr is doing and use as a comparison in the bigger overall training picture. if i’m riding at 250 watts at 150 hr, and then see 250 at 145 for a few workouts, i know it’s time to adjust zones.
and if you want to know what’s going on with your ‘working muscles’ over time, wouldn’t kjs be a better indicator of overall work done? i’ve had some long rides with great np numbers but low kjs, vs. lower np and higher kjs. pretty easy to tell which one required more work.
To add to what AC said above, you can use TSS to track total cycling load in addition to RPE. If you have training peaks you can use the performance manager chart to track accute and chronic fatigue. Also you can use race day (alternative to trainingpeaks) in which you can track your load using BikeScore as well and you can use the features to plan taper and predict peaks. Either chart plus RPE can give you a pretty good idea of how much is too much, no need to use a HR.
During short efforts, normalized power can be ever-so-slightly lower than average power (such that VI is slightly less than 1.00) due to the fact that the 30 s rolling average doesn’t “kick in” until, well, the 30 s mark. IOW, it is neither an artifact nor the result of anything that you did, but just a function of the way normalized power is calculated.
makes sense. thanks.
That’s easy: perceived exertion (which, unlike heart rate, accounts for much more than just cardiovascular strain).
so, it seems that you favor a more qualitative approach?? glad your way of thinking has finally come around!
obviously power improvements over time demonstrate changes in fitness, but in between your power tests, how do you determine when you’re starting to over-reach? when you need an extra day or two of rest?
What’s a rest day?
Actually, I track my ATl/CTL/TSB and if I am feeling over cooked or have a particularly steep CTL ramp rate I dial it back to allow myself to recover. I’ve been pretty consistant at +7CTL/wk since November and have not had any issues with getting sick or overtraining (as I did last year) while adding 20 watts to FTP.
That’s easy: perceived exertion (which, unlike heart rate, accounts for much more than just cardiovascular strain).
good point, pe is another indicator. but is it not subjective based on feel? personally, i don’t trust myself to be able to judge how i feel to that degree of accuracy. for example, the first minute or two of a tt feels fine when you’re doing 50 watts over what you can sustain, but we all know what happens for the last 5k of that effort. again, i’d take watts, hr and pe all into account.
Do you? That is, how do you know that your heart rate is lower because you are more fit, vs. just having acutely overreached?
not for one or two training sessions but over a few more (and again, accounting for watts, hr and pe), i’d judge that my fitness is changing. but if you’re working from watts + pe, how would that be a more accurate indicator?
don’t mean to be dense and appreciate your sharing of knowledge.
but here’s my challenge with tss: i can tolerate high volume & moderate-hard work level much better than lower volume + really high intensity. so banging out 75+ hours, 3000+ tss and 50k+kj training months (like january) is much more doable for my body type than a month like february, which had a stage race and another 2-race weekend, from which i needed more rest than i did during jan’s big training block (could be i’m just old too).
more to the point, a 30 min tt is does less damage than a really nasty, highly variable 30 min crit, if that makes sense.
so while tss might numerically represent cycling load, its not representative of how my body might be reacting to different scenarios.