Use a power Tap or disk wheel

[Woofer]

? so far I haven't heard any real solid proof yet that they are better, although I want to believe as I have a PM.

No one is going to be able to produce a double blind study of the kind ("real solid proof that power meters are good for time trials?" ) you are asking for so that is a totally pointless request. Either it's useful for an individual or it's not. Whether or not lots of pros use it is a pretty naive criteria - if you paid any attention, Greg Lemond had to drag the peloton kicking and screaming into the modern era, and no one except a millionaire can afford some of the training luxuries pros use, and it can be argued, no one except a pro should use some of the pharmaceuticals quite a few of them are admitting to using.

 

[RapDaddyo]

I'm not intending on touching a nerve there Rapdadio, rather I'm stating an observation. Again if the PM"s made that big of difference the pro's would be using them no questions. Maybe you just think you need a PM, maybe you would be better served if you trained and learned how your body should feel when your pacing, maybe by using RPE? so far I haven't heard any real solid proof yet that they are better, although I want to believe as I have a PM.

You didn't touch a nerve. I'm simply saying that I think the answer to whether a PM will result in better pacing is different for each cyclist and that what the pros use reflects what they think works best for them. If LA thinks he can pace himself better without a PM, what good does that do me? And, BTW, I have tried pacing myself without my PM and I don't do very well.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

While there aren't any studies looking directly at pacing and use (or non-use) of a power meter, there are lots of studies looking at pacing and 'all-out' trials in time trials in a variety of sports, and a variety of durations. Iirc Carl Foster is the main researcher into this sphere of sports science, and the research shows that better pacing is better for the athlete in durations of > 60-secs.

As to whether pro use power meters or not, many pros are still stuck in the dark ages and don't know or understand the benefits of such tools. This also applies to some DS. Additionally, there are also sponsorship considerations (with sometimes only the very best riders allowed to do as they please in terms of non-use of sponsored equipment).

Finally, there is data to show that even a current world champion (he could be current olympic champion -- it's too early for me to recall) paces about as well as demented yapping dog without the use of a power meter -- no differently to the vast majority of people. That is, we start to hard, suffer, feel ill, fade, hurt more, and then manage to up the pace as we approach the finish line.

Ric

No one is going to be able to produce a double blind study of the kind ("real solid proof that power meters are good for time trials?" ) you are asking for so that is a totally pointless request. Either it's useful for an individual or it's not. Whether or not lots of pros use it is a pretty naive criteria - if you paid any attention, Greg Lemond had to drag the peloton kicking and screaming into the modern era, and no one except a millionaire can afford some of the training luxuries pros use, and it can be argued, no one except a pro should use some of the pharmaceuticals quite a few of them are admitting to using.

 

[Robert West]

So then it would be your belief that I would render a better time if I pace myself at 250 watts throughout a 40km TT as opposed to pacing myself solely on HR. It is almost hard to believe that this will work as the last TT I did I did solely on HR. I know that I was likely producing well over my threshold watts for the 1st 5km. That said, if I were to have raced myself. I would have initially passed myself only to be caught later in the TT. Is that a fair statement? Kinda amazing this PM stuff. If the above is true I will give it a shot in a race that really means something to me as my goal is to beat 58 minutes, weather permittting. If I feel the weather is comperable to the last TT where I did the 58 minutes and I fail, I will think differently about the usefulness of a PM and the people who promote them.

 

[RapDaddyo]

So then it would be your belief that I would render a better time if I pace myself at 250 watts throughout a 40km TT as opposed to pacing myself solely on HR.

It appears that you believe that a constant power is the optimal pacing strategy for a TT. This is true only for a course that is board flat and with no wind. There are no such courses other than indoor track events.

 

[RapDaddyo]

So then it would be your belief that I would render a better time if I pace myself at 250 watts throughout a 40km TT as opposed to pacing myself solely on HR. It is almost hard to believe that this will work as the last TT I did I did solely on HR. I know that I was likely producing well over my threshold watts for the 1st 5km. That said, if I were to have raced myself. I would have initially passed myself only to be caught later in the TT. Is that a fair statement? Kinda amazing this PM stuff. If the above is true I will give it a shot in a race that really means something to me as my goal is to beat 58 minutes, weather permittting. If I feel the weather is comperable to the last TT where I did the 58 minutes and I fail, I will think differently about the usefulness of a PM and the people who promote them.

After further reflection on your post, I think you are mixing two entirely different issues. One issue is the NP you are able to generate on a given day. The second issue is how effectively you deploy that NP on the course under the conditions. For example, I just rode a 17.5 mile hillclimb race that I had ridden on three practice rides. My race time was my best time, but not because I did the best job of pacing. In fact, my pacing was abysmal. My NP hour splits were 253/212. That's horrible, especially in light of the fact that the 2nd half of the course had the most slow sections (grade). The only reason I recorded my fastest time was because my NP was greater than my three previous rides. The only way to compare two pacing strategies is to compare two rides of the same course under the same environmental conditions at the same NP. If the NPs are different, the pacing strategies are non-comparable and you're wasting your time doing it (IMO).

 

[Robert West]

First you'll have to tell me what NP stands for.

And second like I said, I have done a 40km practice TT, pacing myself with only a heartrate monitor. I held nothing back and I was in shear survival mode for at least the last 10km. This coming weekend I will do the same race only this time it counts. I'm planning on taking Ric's advice and to pace myself with my PM. Provided that the weather conditions are comparable the evidence will show the true result. This will not be something you have read about that takes place in a Lab, rather a true to life PM vs HRM challenge. We all read about the latest and greatest wheels or aerobars that give you seconds and we eat it up and spend our cash to gain some speed. In this case what we read in the above posting is forget about a disk wheel in favor of a PM. I think that is saying a mouth full, as we all know that a disk wheel is very advantageous when racing a TT. So we will see, as I'm a skeptic. Skeptics make the best believers.

 

[RapDaddyo]

First you'll have to tell me what NP stands for.

NP means Normalized Power. NP was developed by Andy Coggan to represent the equivalent intensity (power) of a variable intensity (power) ride. The computation takes into account the ski-slope physiological relationship between blood lactate and power, whereby intensities above one's FT (functional threshold) are weighted more heavily than intensities below one's FT. An explanation can be found here http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/defined.html. NP is the only way I know of to compare two different rides of varying intensities. You get it for free with the Cycling Peaks software, which in itself justifies the purchase IMO.

And second like I said, I have done a 40km practice TT, pacing myself with only a heartrate monitor. I held nothing back and I was in shear survival mode for at least the last 10km. This coming weekend I will do the same race only this time it counts. I'm planning on taking Ric's advice and to pace myself with my PM. Provided that the weather conditions are comparable the evidence will show the true result. This will not be something you have read about that takes place in a Lab, rather a true to life PM vs HRM challenge. We all read about the latest and greatest wheels or aerobars that give you seconds and we eat it up and spend our cash to gain some speed. So we will see, as I'm a skeptic. Skeptics make the best believers.

The results of your two rides may tell you something, but I doubt that the results, regardless of which strategy results in the fastest time, will tell me anything. I have done my testing and I know two things: (1) I pace myself better with a PM than I do without a PM; and (2) a constant power pacing strategy on a variable terrain course is a sub-optimal pacing strategy.

In this case what we read in the above posting is forget about a disk wheel in favor of a PM. I think that is saying a mouth full, as we all know that a disk wheel is very advantageous when racing a TT.

I don't know what you're talking about. I don't think anybody here but you knows how well you pace yourself with your HRM vs. your PM. I have said repeatedly that it depends on the individual but that most of us do a better job of pacing ourselve with a PM. I'm not trying to convince you to pace yourself with a PM. I am simply sharing my knowledge and the results of my personal testing and experimentation. I don't think I am going to change your mind any more than I think I am going to change Stormer's mind, and I'm not going to try.

Most importantly, however you pace yourself, good luck in your TT.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

So then it would be your belief that I would render a better time if I pace myself at 250 watts throughout a 40km TT as opposed to pacing myself solely on HR.

Robert, i *think* you're replying to me (i could be wrong). If you are, this is *not* what i said.

I did not, anywhere, state about riding at a constant power (whether at 250 W or some other value).

Ric

 

[ric_stern/RST]

And second like I said, I have done a 40km practice TT, pacing myself with only a heartrate monitor. I held nothing back and I was in shear survival mode for at least the last 10km. This coming weekend I will do the same race only this time it counts. I'm planning on taking Ric's advice and to pace myself with my PM. Provided that the weather conditions are comparable the evidence will show the true result. This will not be something you have read about that takes place in a Lab, rather a true to life PM vs HRM challenge. We all read about the latest and greatest wheels or aerobars that give you seconds and we eat it up and spend our cash to gain some speed. In this case what we read in the above posting is forget about a disk wheel in favor of a PM. I think that is saying a mouth full, as we all know that a disk wheel is very advantageous when racing a TT. So we will see, as I'm a skeptic. Skeptics make the best believers.

Nowhere did i mention about forgoing a disc for a power meter. I'm not sure if you thought my 1st message in this thread had a 'hidden' subtext, or not. i was responding to some specific questions that Woofer (i think) asked.

That is, i talked about paced and unpaced TTs (paced TT's needn't be at a constant pace/power, just a predetermined effort). I then talked about about why pros may not use PMs.

I then mentioned that i have data from an Olympic Champion, that shows he poorly controlled his power output. It was very up and down, when a more constant or less changeable pattern would have been best. That is nothing to do with RD's ideas (on variable pacing), simply that the rider started *waaaay* too hard and then he faded badly.

Ric

 

[Robert West]

A part from the who said what, I'm not impressed, no disrespect intended. Anyway, if I were to purchase a disk wheel I would undoubtedly know that I would be reaping the rewards of a better time during a TT. That said I would have guessed that you would have sided heavily on the use of a PM as opposed to a disk wheel as it would render better time. So like I said in one of the above posts, you may be better off learning how your body feels (RPE) and being aided with a heart rate monitor during a TT, than ever using a PM during a TT. I'm thinking that the benefit to using a PM during a TT, is that one could base interval intensities but while doing the TT you may want to put tape over the watts readout.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

That said I would have guessed that you would have sided heavily on the use of a PM as opposed to a disk wheel as it would render better time.

If you're replying to me then you have misinterpreted what i wrote. I have not suggested one way or the other what my preference is for power meter use/non-use in a TT.

Ric

 

[RapDaddyo]

I think you should use a disc, if for no other reason than that you will believe that will give you the fastest time. I think that one's psychological frame of mind is very important to athletic performance and at this point there is no data or study that would persuade you of the merits of pacing with a PM. And, BTW, there probably never will be because no sample of cyclists is going to pace themselves with and without a PM exactly as you would. I have offered up the benefits of my personal experience and thinking about pacing with a PM but, as you said, you're not impressed. Good luck in your TT. I hope you have your personal best time.

 

[Robert West]

Well, thanks for your good will and good luck in your endeavors as well.

 

[frenchyge]

A part from the who said what, I'm not impressed, no disrespect intended. Anyway, if I were to purchase a disk wheel I would undoubtedly know that I would be reaping the rewards of a better time during a TT. That said I would have guessed that you would have sided heavily on the use of a PM as opposed to a disk wheel as it would render better time.

Robert, if you asked us "How much time will a disk wheel save me?" We would have had to answer "It depends (on the length of the TT, the speed you ride, and the equipment that you're currently using) but the disk will probably help you." Instead, you've asked us "Which will help me more, a disk or a PM?" and we've answered "It depends, but both will be probably help." You've got to understand that we're not trying to impress or persuade you, but rather to give you an answer that you (and any lurkers who are reading this) can use and apply in your own situation.

What I've heard said is that:
1) The ability to pace oneself is highly individual, but riders typically do a poor job of pacing based on HR or RPE. The slow feedback loop provided by HR or RPE typically results in a large overshoot of effort at the beginning of the ride, and a sagging effort in the middle. If you are a typical rider in that regard, a PM will help with this and save you time - probably lots of time.
2) Experience does not necessarily improve one's ability to pace, as even very high level athletes make the same mistakes as newbies in terms of pacing. Expecting that you can train yourself to pace as effectively based on HR or RPE as you could with a PM may not be reasonable.
3) A PM gives additional benefit by allowing someone to apply a variable power strategy which matches and is optimized for the specific conditions of the course. This will save time over even a properly ridden constant paced effort, and will save even more time over an improperly paced effort.
4) The benefits of pacing with a PM are real, and significant for typical riders. They are difficult to *quantify* on an online forum, however, because of they vary based on the individual and TT conditions.

So like I said in one of the above posts, you may be better off learning how your body feels (RPE) and being aided with a heart rate monitor during a TT, than ever using a PM during a TT. I'm thinking that the benefit to using a PM during a TT, is that one could base interval intensities but while doing the TT you may want to put tape over the watts readout.

You said that? What's the rationale for that statement? I can't think of *any* disadvantage that having a power readout would create, so why would you tape over the display?

 

[frenchyge]

So then it would be your belief that I would render a better time if I pace myself at 250 watts throughout a 40km TT as opposed to pacing myself solely on HR. It is almost hard to believe that this will work as the last TT I did I did solely on HR. I know that I was likely producing well over my threshold watts for the 1st 5km. That said, if I were to have raced myself. I would have initially passed myself only to be caught later in the TT. Is that a fair statement?

Yes, you would have caught *and passed* yourself later in the TT. There is a fixed quantity of power you can apply to the pedals over the course of a given TT and if you use too much at the beginning then you'll have less to give at the end. The problem is that on a bike, power output is proportional to the speed raised to the third power! Because of that, you get much less benefit from a high power start than you would hope, and the optimal use of your limited resource is at a steady level (for a flat, windless course).

On a variable course, a variable power output can give you an even better time for the same total output, compared to a constant power pace.

 

[Robert West]

Now thats an answer without asking another question. Hard to come by on this forum and I guess for good reason but kind of frustrating. Thank you for your patience. I hope this thread continues as I would like to see other peoples take on this?

 

[Roadie_scum]

Now thats an answer without asking another question. Hard to come by on this forum and I guess for good reason but kind of frustrating. Thank you for your patience. I hope this thread continues as I would like to see other peoples take on this?

If you want to see a little bit more while you wait for some replies, there is a thread that addresses very similar issues here and includes some other info:

http://cyclingforums.com/t-272895-15-1.html

 

[Robert West]

Thx, it seems we have the same notions about pacing vs aerodynamics. Are you satisfied with what you learned?

 

[Roadie_scum]

Thx, it seems we have the same notions about pacing vs aerodynamics. Are you satisfied with what you learned?

I think the answers from others were very helpful. The ideal situation is probably SRM + Disc but since I most likely can't get my hands on that setup I will experiment. I suspect I will end up pacing off power but it remains to be seen.