|
27/03/2009 10:08:51 PM
|
Troy Collett
Posts 143
|
is it better to train by heart rate or by power?
im not sure if i should buy a HR monitor or a power meter
|
|
27/03/2009 10:32:13 PM
|
Corks
Posts 16
|
I would have thought that depends on where you are at as far as your current condition is concerned. It would be silly to train benchmarking against watts if your do not have a sufficient base under your belt, other wise you could quickly find yourself overtraining.
|
|
28/03/2009 3:45:28 PM
|
DanielS
Posts 21
|
The key to training with either is being able to REALLY understand the numbers OR have a coach who does. Otherwise they will just be an expensive toy.
I'd recommend reading up on methods for training via HR and via power, and then have a good think about what you would change once you started to have that information. The Friel book is good (Cyclists Training Bible), also Jeukendrop (High Performance Cycling), and from what I hear, Coggan & Allen for power based stuff (Training and Racing with a Power Meter).
If I had the funds, I'd be training with a power meter. The data is a better instantaneous indicator of effort, and is also an indicator of performance. HR is an indicator of effort, but not really performance. Other downsides of HR are that it has a time lag, and that it may vary from day-to-day depending on what you've eaten, level of rest, etc. But HR is still very good, provided you are conscious of these downsides. The big advantage of training with HR is the low cost 
But the key thing is to understand what is going on (or enlist the services of someone who does). Consistent and structured training with slightly inaccurate measurements is still better than haphazard training with a whole heap of data.
Oh, and there is also a 3rd option - train by perceived effort. It works for a lot of people, including many elite level cyclists.
edited by DanielS on 28/03/2009
|
|
5/04/2009 10:12:39 AM
|
Graham McArthur
Posts 15
|
Good post Daniel.
If you can afford it, power is the way to go, but as Daniels says, you must be able to understand the data and what it means and also be able to understand what you are training for and what is needed for you.
|
|
25/06/2009 12:43:50 AM
|
harley j
Posts 34
|
i slapped down some cash and got a cycleops powertap pro. it has all the data features of the more expensive models but just a couple of grams heavier.
ive only been using it for 2 months but already have set pb's on climbs ive been doing for 10 years. and my bamboo bike is heavier than my previous race bikes.
i did the homework, some say powertap is more accurate than srm and you can slap it on your girlfriends bike in 5 minutes and badger her with info she doesnt really care about..
that book 'high performance cycling' by asker, im a big fan too!!
i remember tagging on to rowan and jack up norton summit and thinking i was having a bad day, but i looked at my wattage and i was riding the highest i ever have just to keep em in sight. so now i can objectively say that i was getting my ass kicked, but also setting a pb at the same time..
heart rate shows how we are responding, power shows us what we are actually doing.
|
|
26/06/2009 8:04:01 AM
|
Michael Warner
Posts 116
|
So Harley, what sort of power can you sustain up Norton Summit? I borrowed a friend's PowerTap wheel once and tried it - I set out at 350W, but tapered to 307W by the finish line.
I tend to attack hills too hard :-)
|
|
26/06/2009 12:33:58 PM
|
andrew rowling
Posts 23
|
I heard that power taps are the most accurate as well. The SRM can vary as much as 7% with temperature.
Is 40kph about 340w ?
|
|
pages:
1 |
|---|