CP V2 Power Profile

That question came up on the Wattage list and here's an explanation Andy gave for why AP was selected:

Quoted post said:

Given that power profiling isn't something you really need to do all
that often, then a simple paper-and-pencil (or Excel-based) approach is
(IMO) adequate, and give the flexibility to use whatever means you wish
to define the value for the last column, i.e., functional threshold
power. Implementing it in the software (as now has been done) does make
life easier, though, and may encourage/allow some to gain better
understanding than they had before. This approach, though, requires that
you either 1) settle on a single way of defining the last column (e.g.,
based on 60 min average power), or 2) introduce additional complexity
into the code to provide the flexibility that the paper-and-pencil
approach provides. Given the numerous other programming needs that had
to be met, it was decided that #1 was a better option than #2. Maybe
some day in the distant future there will be additional software
"switches" that can be set to give the user more flexibility, but I
think most everyone would agree that others things (e.g., quadrant
analysis) come first.

lists.topica.commessage.htmlOpen ↗

frenchyge said:

That question came up on the Wattage list and here's an explanation Andy gave for why AP was selected:

lists.topica.commessage.htmlOpen ↗

To which I would add:

1) regardless of how the software operates, the last column should be viewed as simply "functional threshold power" (i.e., regardless of how you choose to estimate it).

2) the reason that the 5 min column is based on average and not normalized power is that 5 min is too short for the normalized power algorithm to be completely trustworthy (even out at 60 min it seems to be good to "only" about +/-5%).

acoggan said:

2) the reason that the 5 min column is based on average and not normalized power is that 5 min is too short for the normalized power algorithm to be completely trustworthy (even out at 60 min it seems to be good to "only" about +/-5%).

Is that something that's slated for improvement in the next version?? 😄