I see these new metrics, but I can’t find anything to define them. What do they mean?
Did the ATC ride today, aka the local World Championships and my values were:
Pw:HR 7.37%
Pa:HR 19.63%
What does that mean?
http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/decoupling.asp
2-4hr steady AeT riding - hr/watts during second half should be within 5% of first half. If Paulo was still here, his head would explode.
http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/decoupling.asp
2-4hr steady AeT riding - hr/watts during second half should be within 5% of first half. If Paulo was still here, his head would explode.
no kidding although it would be fun listening to his toughts about it 
I almost get it, except what the difference between Pa and Pw?
I’ve loaded the new version but haven’t gotten a chance to get into it too much but I’m pretty sure Pa is pace and Pw is power. Since they support running data now as well, you have both covered.
What does that mean?
Nothing, and the article supposedly explaining it only makes matters worse, unfortunately.
Besides somehow trying to marry power (a useful, objective measurement) to “aerobic threshold” (a nonexistent, invented…something), we have the added problem of looking at cardiac drift as though it is a good indicator of fitness.
You might find this link more useful.
Thanks. I get it.
So it seems those numbers are really high and indicate a lack of aerobic endurance. But I wonder… Isn’t it just a lack of aerobic endurance relative to the pace that you are riding. Regardless of fitness anybody can produce high decoupling if they ride too hard early, right?
Seems like the nature of the ride though. It’s a full on race for the first 40 miles. The “intention” is that you are supposed to be smoked by the middle of the ride and then crawl back home.
This is definitely not a long, steady, nor flat ride as you may be able to see below. I rode home via Lost Creek which I think explains when the pace:HR is so decoupled. It’s much hillier on the way home.
Entire workout (189 watts):
Duration: 3:43:45
Work: 2532 kJ
TSS: 302.1 (intensity factor 0.9)
Norm Power: 243
VI: 1.29
Pw:HR: 7.37%
Pa:HR: 19.63%
Distance: 66.851 mi
Elevation Gain: 4921 ft
Elevation Loss: 4892 ft
Grade: 0.0 % (30 ft)
Min Max Avg
Power: 0 816 189 watts
Heart Rate: 81 187 147 bpm
Cadence: 29 128 89 rpm
Speed: 0 44.7 17.9 mph
Pace 1:20 0:00 3:21 min/mi
Altitude: 427 1083 798 ft
Crank Torque: 0 866 180 lb-in
Peak 5s (816 watts):
Duration: 0:05
Work: 4 kJ
TSS: n/a
Norm Power: n/a
VI: n/a
Pw:HR: 63.92%
Pa:HR: 16.54%
Distance: 200 ft
Elevation Gain: 0 ft
Elevation Loss: 0 ft
Grade: -3.3 % (-7 ft)
Min Max Avg
Power: 816 816 816 watts
Heart Rate: 152 152 152 bpm
Cadence: 121 121 121 rpm
Speed: 27.2 27.2 27.2 mph
Pace 2:12 2:12 2:12 min/mi
Altitude: 663 663 663 ft
Crank Torque: 570 570 570 lb-in
Or not. Thanks Philbert.
Just forget you ever heard the terms “aerobic threshold” or “decoupled” and everything will be fine .
Note that you could look at power:hr or pace:hr under strictly controlled conditions (i.e. a laboratory with constant temperature, good cooling, constant fluid replacement, ad nauseum) and try to make some observations. However, most indoor training and practically any outdoor training will not fit the bill. In the context of this article the idea is rendered meaningless and/or a feature in search of a use / marketing.
You know, for a second I was going to add that there is a useful situation for looking at watts:HR, specifically, for an indication when power declines for the same HR. I think Chris (lakerfan) has spent some time looking at this metric in power files in the past.
But as I thought about it more, I realized that you’re not really getting any more information by looking at the watts:HR metric. If you’re the athlete, you can probably look at the file and see the objective measure of power declining, and you’ll likely already know that it wasn’t because you eased up on the throttle (RPE would tell you that much). At most this gives you confirmation of what you already know in the form of a visual graph (or, now with WKO+ 2.2, with the corresponding metric).
cramer
yup, besides the misinformation provided, I just think it complicates something which is ather simple to determine if training with power/pace-GPS. Plus with all the factors affecting HR it might lead to more confusion than anything. I hardly train with HRM anymore so those #s remain in zeros on my wko+
You might find this link more useful.
Now that was just mean.
But funny.
Wasn’t meant to be mean, honestly. Just a reality check.