I’m new to using a power meter but I’m already starting to think about my race pacing next season. At the moment I’ve doing my thinking in terms of watts, but am wondering if I should instead think of pacing in w/kg. I’d like to keep FTP changes and calculations to a minimum and use one standard all of the time on my Joule so I can get used to it.
The amount of watts or w/kg you can push will change all the time. As long as you are basing the figures on what you can actually do, it doesn’t matter which one you make a plan off. Obviously while you are riding you will see watts. If you want to compare your effort to someone else, you have to use w/kg
Why not use both? w/kg can reflect an increase just bc you’ve lost 2kg. You’ve gotten the ratio up by reducing the wt side of the equation.
Ultimately you can never have too many watts, having a watt target that reflects what you’re doing in training for the race is a good idea.
If you stick both #'s on your joule, which I know you can on the Joule GPS which is what I use, then you can track both. After a bit you’ll know that 185w is x.xx p/wt ratio.
Focus on watts. w/kg is more of a metric to look at after training while analyzing the data.
Are you concerned about your w/kg because you are heavier rider?
If you stick both #'s on your joule, which I know you can on the Joule GPS which is what I use, then you can track both. After a bit you’ll know that 185w is x.xx p/wt ratio.
Thank you, I’ll try that. At moment I had been using: cadence, HR, power, and mph which was my junk metric that I’d ‘highlight’ with the grey box you can barely see through, lol.
Are you concerned about your w/kg because you are heavier rider?
Nope, I’m thin. I literally thought there might be a mathematical reason to chose one over the other (e.g. w/kg changes less month to month).
Nope, I’m thin. I literally thought there might be a mathematical reason to chose one over the other (e.g. w/kg changes less month to month).
For the sake of clarity I’m going to comment on FTP and FTP/kg (instead of just W and W/kg).
Unless you are gaining or declining, your FTP should remain fairly consistent.
When you factor in W/kg, you have the above factor plus the additional factor of weight. So assuming your weight is consistent AND FTP is consistent then FTP/kg is consistent. If either of those are fluctuating then either value can cause your FTP/kg to change.
For training and racing, simply monitor your FTP. Train hard to raise it. Know what it is. Test it on the trainer and outdoors, as it will very likely differ. Then build your race plan off of your FTP. There are charts that show you recommended percentage of FTP to ride at for each distance race. It’s incredibly simple once your FTP is nailed down.
Lastly, if you want to know how you compare to other riders, go look up the FTP/kg chart. That is the only time I look at FTP/kg is knowing that if I can get up to a 4.0 then I’m moving up to the top end of the guys I’ll be racing against.
Focus on watts, always. w/kg really only takes into account you’re climbing a hill and even then you’ll want to know how many watts you need to hold climbing that hill rather than w/kg. At the end of the day if you’re on a flat segment and you’re pushing 300 watts at 5 w/kg but your teammate is pushing 350 watts at 4.5 w/kg then your teammate is going to be faster than you because they’re pushing more watts. This is assuming all other things are equal (CdA, etc).
w/kg as a metric is good to track your progress when analyzing your data over a long period of time, or when you want to compare yourself to your teammates.
Nope, I’m thin. I literally thought there might be a mathematical reason to chose one over the other (e.g. w/kg changes less month to month).
For the sake of clarity I’m going to comment on FTP and FTP/kg (instead of just W and W/kg).
Unless you are gaining or declining, your FTP should remain fairly consistent.
When you factor in W/kg, you have the above factor plus the additional factor of weight. So assuming your weight is consistent AND FTP is consistent then FTP/kg is consistent. If either of those are fluctuating then either value can cause your FTP/kg to change.
For training and racing, simply monitor your FTP. Train hard to raise it. Know what it is. Test it on the trainer and outdoors, as it will very likely differ. Then build your race plan off of your FTP. There are charts that show you recommended percentage of FTP to ride at for each distance race. It’s incredibly simple once your FTP is nailed down.
Lastly, if you want to know how you compare to other riders, go look up the FTP/kg chart. That is the only time I look at FTP/kg is knowing that if I can get up to a 4.0 then I’m moving up to the top end of the guys I’ll be racing against.
Good tips. Would love to see a publication build a similar chart with pro triathletes w/kg numbers. Although the short duration numbers would be basically worthless for non-drafting races I think.
Oops, I see the previous poster posted a better version of this chart with FTP values. Super cool.
I would find out watts/heart rate at lactate threshold for both bike and run then for extended endurance efforts settle in to a certain heart rate % for the given distance then just ride consistent watts that keep you near target heart rate. I might not totally understand your question you want to know how to pace a race or watts or watts/kg? I mean it doesn’t really matter which one you use if that’s what you’re asking watts/wpk
Nope, I’m thin. I literally thought there might be a mathematical reason to chose one over the other (e.g. w/kg changes less month to month).
If you have lost all the weight you can, then w/kg is rather pointless to monitor. You certainly are not going to improve it through weight loss, so in that case, all you have to focus on is your watts and how best to improve those numbers.
I would find out watts/heart rate at lactate threshold for both bike and run then for extended endurance efforts settle in to a certain heart rate % for the given distance then just ride consistent watts that keep you near target heart rate
Even though you’re training / racing with power, this is good advice. Know what your HR should look like at various power outputs. You may come to a point in a race where your HR is higher than expected at your target power and you’re going to have to choose to either hold your power or hold your HR. It happened to me at IMFL last year (warm / crazy humid day). I stuck with power as my HR crawled up and I’m fairly certain it wound up hurting my run. By the time I started the run it was impossible to get my HR down.
But I still had a killer bike time. 
Oops, I see the previous poster posted a better version of this chart
I can top that.
http://i64.tinypic.com/293gbjc.jpg
ETA: This is the most recent version (8) as used by WKO4. Really, though, the tables/the notion of power profiling has been made obsolete by the introduction of power-duration profiling.
I would find out watts/heart rate at lactate threshold for both bike and run then for extended endurance efforts settle in to a certain heart rate % for the given distance then just ride consistent watts that keep you near target heart rate
Even though you’re training / racing with power, this is good advice. Know what your HR should look like at various power outputs. You may come to a point in a race where your HR is higher than expected at your target power and you’re going to have to choose to either hold your power or hold your HR.
Good points.
In previous years I’ve found my calf cramping at above 163bpm or so. That said, I’m doing a ton more cycling in the off season this year and will be training smart during the season, so I’m hoping muscular bike fitness will no longer be an issue this year.
Edit: that LT stuff sounds complicated. Not sure if I’m quite there yet. : )
Oops, I see the previous poster posted a better version of this chart
I can top that.
Personally I like your other chart better. To see myself classified as Novice 1 or Novice 2 has no real sting to it. Taking my first FTP test and seeing myself classified as Untrained was just the fire I needed lit under my saddle.
FWIW I have 2 screens I use.
The first when I train has 5 things displayed on it.
Ride Time
watts
avg watts
mph
w/kg
then the subscreen under those has
distance and kJ
When I race I’ve got it set up w/6 things displayed on it
ride time + miles
mph + avg mph
watts + avg watts
the little sub screen repeats miles but also has kJ
You may prefer something different but I find that gives me everything when racing that I need to know and care to know.
I would find out watts/heart rate at lactate threshold for both bike and run then for extended endurance efforts settle in to a certain heart rate % for the given distance then just ride consistent watts that keep you near target heart rate
Even though you’re training / racing with power, this is good advice. Know what your HR should look like at various power outputs. You may come to a point in a race where your HR is higher than expected at your target power and you’re going to have to choose to either hold your power or hold your HR.
Good points.
In previous years I’ve found my calf cramping at above 163bpm or so. That said, I’m doing a ton more cycling in the off season this year and will be training smart during the season, so I’m hoping muscular bike fitness will no longer be an issue this year.
Edit: that LT stuff sounds complicated. Not sure if I’m quite there yet. : )
Power in training/racing is only useful if you are using heart rate for non interval sessions but you must know your values at lactate threshold for both power and heart rate for running and cycling to train effectively with technology imo. for long distance it really doesn’t matter what your FTP is if your body isn’t doing that on a certain day. If you don’t wanna get LT tested all the time or get bsx then just do 20min test and record hr as well both bike and run (the values will be different) then use coggan zones. Watts or watts/kg does not matter you could use either one it doesn’t change the amount you’re stepping on the pedals
Once your absolute watts are high, then look at w/kg.
If racing Tri’s, and therefor TTs primarily then one could argue for watts per CDA, right?
Assuming you knew your CdA from a trip to the tunnel, using your TT position.
That figure would basically tell you (baring execution failure) who wins a flat TT.
I’d agree with that and reword.
Focus on absolute watts, then focus on w/kg and/or w/cda depending on your race focus