To get a heated debate on here (and address something that kind of irks me), why do people, esp. on this forum, feel the need to always include speed (MPH) when talking about biking. I know not everyone can afford a powermeter (watts are way more useful info than speed), but doesn’t everyone know this is a completely arbitrary stat based on location?
I have definitely come to this opinion since moving to Colorado, where I do almost everything on time. You could ride an hour here and go 9 MPH, depending where you go. Computers just aren’t that useful.
I say just get a HR, and get in the zone you want. Map your ride on the computer later if you are curious. Put in the time, and ditch the computer!
Most races I do have a set distance. I have a goal time of when I want to finish the race. In order to accomplish a goal time in a given distance I must average a certain distance per time (mph).
In a training ride I will try and hold a certain mph so I know what it feels like and if its possible to hold for varying distances.
If I am doing a very hilly ride, I know there isn’t much comparing apples to apples, but I live in Ohio so its all pretty flat.
Its a cheap way to quasi track fitness and stay motivated.
Cycling (like swimming and running and triathlon) is about covering a set distance as quickly as possible. Speed is the measure of how quickly you are covering distance. Runners and swimmers use time over a given distance to quote speed. Cyclists can use speedometers so they do.
HR, Watts, a given performance on 5 x100 in the pool, etc are just tools to use to train to attain higher speeds. Speed is what its all about, hence references to it. If you don’t get that, you should take up bridge.
To get a heated debate on here (and address something that kind of irks me), why do people, esp. on this forum, feel the need to always include speed (MPH) when talking about biking. I know not everyone can afford a powermeter (watts are way more useful info than speed), but doesn’t everyone know this is a completely arbitrary stat based on location?
I have definitely come to this opinion since moving to Colorado, where I do almost everything on time. You could ride an hour here and go 9 MPH, depending where you go. Computers just aren’t that useful.
I say just get a HR, and get in the zone you want. Map your ride on the computer later if you are curious. Put in the time, and ditch the computer!
Well, its tradition, and the computers are cheap.
When Power meters or GPS are $12, most people will use them.
HR alone isnt enough for me. I like to know, with a given HR how fast was I going? OBVIOUSLY, is there was a huge headwind, or tail, I would factor that into the equation. I use a Forerunner 305 for this but also like to have a speedometer on my bike as well.
ps. when are people always talking about speed related to biking?
Cycling is about covering a distance as quickly as possible, however, usually the fastest way to do that is with other cyclists. Note: you said cycling, not time-trialing.
Perhaps that is a bigger difference since I was (and still am) training for pack riding, where speeds vastly vary. You work accelerations, you don’t worry that the group is only rolling along at 24 MPH, because if you go off the front yourself they will easily catch you. And together you can all go 28 MPH (if there is no wind or hills, or a large tractor to pass).
I just think it is a silly way to tell someone about your ride. “Today I went 24.5 mph for 10 miles”. Cool I can go 40 mph for 10 miles given the right circumstances.
I’ve trained under different coaches and with many of the top pros in the US, and I would venture to say, most pros, or almost all, don’t really worry about their average speed.
to the Ohio poster, I understand your plight, I spend 18 long years there myself (you are exempt from this arguement).
Cycling is about covering a distance as quickly as possible, however, usually the fastest way to do that is with other cyclists. Note: you said cycling, not time-trialing.
I think you’re joking, but it worked in the olden days, and that’s how I do most of my solo rides “Hey I’m climbing this hill in one tougher cog, I must be going okay”.
I think you’re joking, but it worked in the olden days, and that’s how I do most of my solo rides “Hey I’m climbing this hill in one tougher cog, I must be going okay”.
well im joking AND serious. I don’t have a computer on my bikes. but I know about how fast im going based on gear and cadence =)
Search “mph”, and not even counting this thread you will get about 10-15 different ones just from today.
One was in relation to the helmet post: There are undeniably some situations where it will be beneficial. I don’t know if my next crash is going to be getting hit head on by a truck going 45 mph and I’d be dead no matter what was on my head or if I am going to slide out in a corner and go down faster than my old man reflexes can get my arm out to adequately break my fall.
Another is in relation to aerodynamics:
Went from some Vittoria Open Corsa CX with latex last year to Mich PR3 with butyl this year. That switch looks to be worth ~15 watts at 28 mph.
Another was about helmet face masks:
It also makes sense for riding a motorcycle because I don’t know too many cyclists that go 80 mph on the express way.
Another about pack riding:
If you do pull through keep similar speed or 1mph faster, it is bad to come through way faster than the last puller.
I could continue…
…but I dont think you could use power or Heart rate for any of those posts.
I’ve trained under different coaches and with many of the top pros in the US, and I would venture to say, most pros, or almost all, don’t really worry about their average speed.
Pros do care if they are winning or not and in sports like running, swimming and time trialing on a bike (which is what triathlon cycling is) he who goes fastest wins. Speed over a given distance is all that matters. They may not get quoted saying they went X mph in a marathon or maintianed a certain average mph on the bike leg of a tri but the only thing they really care about is how fast they can go so to say they don’t “worry about their average speed” is just stupid.
To get a heated debate on here (and address something that kind of irks me), why do people, esp. on this forum, feel the need to always include speed (MPH) when talking about biking. I know not everyone can afford a powermeter (watts are way more useful info than speed), but doesn’t everyone know this is a completely arbitrary stat based on location?
I have definitely come to this opinion since moving to Colorado, where I do almost everything on time. You could ride an hour here and go 9 MPH, depending where you go. Computers just aren’t that useful.
I say just get a HR, and get in the zone you want. Map your ride on the computer later if you are curious. Put in the time, and ditch the computer!
Because MPH (or KPH) is what counts when it comes to racing. Power is an OK indicator of effort but it says nothing about how fast you will go if your aerodynamics suck or if they are particularly good. MPH is the one indicator that puts power, aerodymanics, and effort all into one number and it is the only number the race judges care about.
i’ve never trained to go a certain speed in a tt (or triathlon when i was doing them); i’ve only trained to go as fast as possible. speed is a red herring as a training tool.
I would say that the majority of pros have either a HRM or Power meter on their bike over a speedometer. And I am talking about cycling not running, so the marathon doesn’t really apply.
What’s stupid is to think that Craig Alexander or Andy goes out and trains to ride 27.4 mph. They go out to train to ride at a HR of 155 or 315 watts for a race. I think they understand that if the wind is blowing at Kona, they might not go 27.4 mph. But if they are holding their 155 or 315, they are doing what they need to.
Time-trialing on a bike is only triathlon cycling to North America.