Heart Rate Or Power

sub7bikes.co.uk said:

Hi Guys,
Could anyone share their experiences with training to heart rate zones or power levels, I myself have always used my own heart rate zones & based my training around this, but am I missing out?

Lots of people are going to tell you that you are missing out. However, there is no scientific evidence that there is any difference between the two regarding outcome.

[censored] (good) training is [censored] (good) training no matter what you use to gauge your effort.

However, used intelligently, a power meter will provide significantly greater insights into your training, physiology and other key performance factors than using a HRM could ever do.

Fday said:

Lots of people are going to tell you that you are missing out. However, there is no scientific evidence that there is any difference between the two regarding outcome.

Wanted to quote this to have for the next PC debate re: scientific evidence.

To the OP: There isn't anything wrong with HR, but power provides better feedback.

-Power is equivalent to split times on the track or in the pool. A measure of work / time, not the body's response to work.

-Power provides a concrete, objective way to measure progress (or lack thereof) via repeated testing.

-As a triathlete, power was a valuable way to measure effort, progress, and provide a guide for pacing.

As a roadie, power is even more valuable in helping to ensure that the hard parts of training are hard enough, that the easy parts are easy enough, and to make sure that I know when I have done enough hard efforts.

Now that I have been using a power meter for a short period (little more than a year) if I had to give up using a power meter I would not use a HRM and would use RPE the best that I could.

When I use a spin bike at the gym I use RPE. Even though my HR monitor and strap are in my gym bag the batteries have been dead for a couple of years now. 🙂

That of course is just my individual choice and opinion.

The reality is YOU need try it for yourself but like most power newbs it will most likely be a distraction whilst using it for the first few weeks/months and if you don't finally figure out how it can be used to your advantange than you'll need a coach with p/m expertise or eventually you'll sell it and be one of the anti pm crowd,
however even if you don't like looking at the display all the time you can cover the display and still track your training load (this one of the biggest pluses over looked by the anti pm crowd) by analising the ride files after your outings and make adjustments like.... gee l really backed of the effort half way up that second hill looks like l'd be better off using a bigger/smaller gear next time etc etc.

l use a pm and a cad sensor l tried a hr device but drove me nutts and l can tell and controll my hr by my leg sensations (Percieved effort) and my breathing rate l do this by monitoring my cadence and the effort l exert by pushing down on the pedals.
My training is now NOTHING like it was before owning a pm l used to be one of those... need to spin more characters because thats what l read on the internet was the best way to train but nothing could be further from the truth IMHO.
At the very least a pm is great at measuring calorie requirements as 2 rides on the same route done in different conditions can be a real eye opener when you go back over previuos outings and see that when you think you had a bad day and sucked sometimes it's obvious you had a normal day or it was indeed as hard as felt by comparing to days that "felt good".
Only you can decide if a pm will improve or hinder your training.

This question is the equivalent of trolling on a training forum.

Fday said:

Lots of people are going to tell you that you are missing out. However, there is no scientific evidence that there is any difference between the two regarding outcome.

Nice troll Frank.

fergie said:

Nice troll Frank.

Huh? Just stating my impressions. If there were any scientific evidence I am sure you or someone else would have provided it by now.

Ha ha ignorance is bliss Frank.

Fday said:

... If there were any scientific evidence I am sure you or someone else would have provided it by now.

Still spewing that same strawman Frank?

Power Meters, Heart Rate Monitors, Bike Speedometers, they're all just measurement instruments. None of them are training philosophies nor training plans and none of them claim to be. The progress a rider does or doesn't make depends on how they train and these instruments don't force any particular way of training.

But as measurement instruments the Power Meter measures things far more objectively and in ways that are very useful to well structured training plans. If your sustainable power goes up (or down) over time as a result of a particular training routine it tells you something that HR or pure speed without regard to terrain and environment can't tell you and that's only the tip of the iceberg in terms of comparing measurements between the instruments.

But in the end as Alex and others have pointed out, the better measurement instrument will not in and of itself ensure better training nor does it claim to, just better more relevant and more accurate measurements.

You don't need a scientific study to demonstrate the improved accuracy of a particular piece of measurement equipment, just externally verifiable product specifications which the better PMs have.

-Dave

Ok, think of it this way: I have a $150 custom kitchen knife (true story, i do have this knife). You talk about super sharp and a beauty.

Now imagine using it not to slice meat or chop vegetables (you know, what it is best for and what separates it from the $9 walmart knife), but for............spreading butter on toast.

Same thing with a poorly used power device. A poorly used one is not going to help much, but used the way it is supposed to, it is a hella good tool. Way way better than HR - but only if you know what you are doing or take time to learn.

The best tools/gadgets in the world wont be any good if you fail to use them properly or use them in some ill-advised way.

Fday said:

Huh? Just stating my impressions. If there were any scientific evidence I am sure you or someone else would have provided it by now.

Huh? The OP wasn't asking for any scientific evidence, they were asking for peoples experiances, understandy?

A pm, hrm, stopwatch, gps, speedo, cad sensor etc are just used as tools,
why would someone need scientific evidence to know that a pm measures power output?
Bit like asking to see scientific evidence to prove that a clock tells time 🙄
What the op does in training with his tools is up to him... but the training itself is what will or won't prove effective. Aint rocket science man.

I think a person can learn something even if they are not using the PM in the appropriate manner and I am one of those as I feel that my training is slowly evolving and being refined.

A HRM, RPE or any other source is not teaching me little subtleties that I have been observing while using a PM.

For instance, though I am one of the organizers of the group rides on the weekends, I am riding less with the group. On Saturday I started in a group of about 20 cyclists and I was 3rd guy back at the start. My goal for Saturday was to have around a 0.75 IF for the ride, but in the draft at 20 mph I was at 88 watts. So I took off and went ahead taking my watts up to the level I wanted. Later the group caught me and as they came around I was mixed in again. They slowed down to my pace and once again my watts dropped below 100 in the draft even though we were doing around 26 mph. The group was really confused what I was doing because I kept getting out of the pace line (leaving a gap to the riders behind me) to be in the wind or to get my watts back up.

Anyway the PM is showing me things about cycling in groups, on climbs, how if I were to race to reserve energy and a number of other things. These are things I could not perceive and I do not think a HRM would teach me either. So even if I am not using a PM in the absolute most refined training manner it is still a very useful tool to me as I learn and grow as a cyclist. As I learn by observing the PM my training is becoming more efficient.

By the way of the 20 people in the group I am probably the weakest of the bunch as a cyclist so even though they do not use PM's or even understand the concept they are still very strong cyclists. I am just enjoying learning and growing by observation and I have something that just gives me a little feedback that keeps me honest in my training load. If the OP is one who likes to keep a training log to reflect back on the PM with WKO+ is a great setup IMO.

bubsy said:

Huh? The OP wasn't asking for any scientific evidence, they were asking for peoples experiances, understandy?

A pm, hrm, stopwatch, gps, speedo, cad sensor etc are just used as tools,
why would someone need scientific evidence to know that a pm measures power output?
Bit like asking to see scientific evidence to prove that a clock tells time 🙄
What the op does in training with his tools is up to him... but the training itself is what will or won't prove effective. Aint rocket science man.

Here is what the OP asked: "but am I missing out?"

I was simply forewarning him that lots of people would be telling him yes but that there was zero evidence to support that these opinions were actually true. While these opinions may actually be true it is a fact that I don't know and neither do any of those spouting them as to whether there is a real benefit or not to using one. (Although the fact that many current world champions train and race without a PM is suggestive that if there is a benefit it must be small.) So, don't take the fact that no one has actually studied this question, or the fact that I point this out, personally.

More trolling Frank, and appeal to authority. Honestly how would you know what World Cycling Champions are doing? You hear that BCF are using Gimmickcranks but they are not and that is from one of their top coaches. A mate of friend had a cobber whose buddy thought that he overheard a story in a crowded noisy bar that Lance may have ridden a Gimmickcrank and you think you have your finger on the pulse of what the top riders are doing. Keep digging that hole Frank.

The science is there, we have supplied it numerous times but obviously keeping your head in the sand is the only strategy you have to rely on.

Fday said:

Here is what the OP asked: "but am I missing out?"

I was simply forewarning him that lots of people would be telling him yes but that there was zero evidence to support that these opinions were actually true. While these opinions may actually be true it is a fact that I don't know and neither do any of those spouting them as to whether there is a real benefit or not to using one. (Although the fact that many current world champions train and race without a PM is suggestive that if there is a benefit it must be small.) So, don't take the fact that no one has actually studied this question, or the fact that I point this out, personally.

You still don't get it do you?... NO study is needed.
It's a "TOOL"... If a worldclass panel beater spends a life time aquiring skills and "tools" and someone takes away one tool that they use for every panel job then they will improvise and realise how much it does or doesn't disrupt their work but the work will still be done as that's what a world class panel beater knows has to be done,
weather or not the work is the same quality will still depend entirely on the athlet er...... panel beater to finish what they started and decide if that tool is worth it's weight in gold as far as time taken to get the work done and the quality of the end product,
hence the reason I said in my first post to the op "you need to try it for your self"
A tool can have more than one use and can be appled in many different ways each unique to the user and may not be of any benifit to another user if applied in the same way, no "sane" person would even bring up a comment like "there is no scientific evidenvce blah blah blah that this TOOL works" it's just not relevant.

Back to the the original question Sub7bikes if your hrm was taken away along with any other tools or gadgets you use often
even down to no computer no pens or paper to make notes or record time, dist, speed etc could your training/racing continue at pretty much the same level and my guess is yes,
then do you think if those tools were given back to you after X amount of time that you would still find them useful to your program and my guess is again yes,
then a pm may be a tool/gadget you would find useful but try one and give it time as it may alter your thinking, training and motivation it ways you could never have imagined, or you may find over time it's not for you,
but don't just wack it on your bike and assume it will do amazing things by just being on there, read read and read some more and when yer done reading by the book "racing and training with power" read it then read it again to understand how to apply all the data from ALL your tools to better help you manage and refine your current type of training.
If I were allowed 1 tool and only 1 tool I would choose a pm as it would trump all my other tools/gadgets and believe me l have many.

fergie said:

More trolling Frank, and appeal to authority. Honestly how would you know what World Cycling Champions are doing? You hear that BCF are using Gimmickcranks but they are not and that is from one of their top coaches. A mate of friend had a cobber whose buddy thought that he overheard a story in a crowded noisy bar that Lance may have ridden a Gimmickcrank and you think you have your finger on the pulse of what the top riders are doing. Keep digging that hole Frank.

The science is there, we have supplied it numerous times but obviously keeping your head in the sand is the only strategy you have to rely on.

One doesn't have to be a cycling world champion to be a world champion who cycles. I know of at least three world champions who cycle (triathletes) who eschew PM's in both training and racing. At least one of them used to use one and stopped so it is not as if he is not aware of the possibilities.

A. This is a cycling forum. Plenty of athletes in other sports cycle. But I don't make decisions on cycling from what other athletes in other sports do.

B. So we base our decision to use a piece of equipment on one athlete. Pretty much shows how warped your thinking is.

C. Keep slamming power meters because it's the key performance measure that you have NEVER been able to show Gimmickcranks can improve.

Yup, just keep digging that hole.

fergie said:

A. This is a cycling forum. Plenty of athletes in other sports cycle. But I don't make decisions on cycling from what other athletes in other sports do.

B. So we base our decision to use a piece of equipment on one athlete. Pretty much shows how warped your thinking is.

C. Keep slamming power meters because it's the key performance measure that you have NEVER been able to show Gimmickcranks can improve.

Yup, just keep digging that hole.

Fergie, It isn't clear what you make you decisions on. Several current and former world CYCLING champions happen to incorporate gimmickcranks into their training. That fact certainly hasn't influenced your opinion of them. I simply don't know whether these individuals do or do not use PM's also.

And, I am not slamming PM's. The OP originally asked the question as to whether he was "missing anything" from not using one. I think the answer to that question is, he is missing knowing what his power number is. Other than that, it is not clear he is missing anything in his training that might affect his performance. Clearly an argument can be made for using a PM. It is just that there is no scientific evidence to back up or disprove that argument.