- Jun 21, 2004
daveryanwyoming said:Righhhhhht, like "immediate feedback" for the intensity of a sprint or the first five minutes of a time trial when your HR is still playing catchup to your efforts.
Been there, done that for nearly 2 decades, no thanks....
That's simply not true and there's lot's of data to demonstrate the ways that HR can be a very misleading measure of exertion.
They are still the most reliable training tool. If you are getting misleading data it is probably because you are using them in one-off situations or on athletes where there is no prior imformation.
If you've got all that experience you don't need me to tell you the over a period of time the power metre gives useful feedback - like the first 5 minutes of a TT. But if you want accurate, momentary data the power meter is useless - hence for climbing, where standing and sitting occur for seconds for most riders, the HRM gives a measure of exertion while the PM provides no meaningful data.
I'll put my 20 years of training, racing and coaching cyclists and triathletes against yours but anyone can make claims on these forums.
For every bit of data about misleading HRM feedback I'll give you 50 success stories from their use. As a poster states above - there is a role for both in cycling training, as long as you realise the limitations of them both.
But getting back to my original claim. A heart rate monitor will give you an almost immediate measure of exertion that a power meter cannot. A HRM would provide useful data on whether standing or sitting is more efficient on a climb. A power meter is simply the wrong tool for that job.