BikeTechReview.com

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Forum
Welcome, Guest
Username Password: Remember me

HR question
(1 viewing) (1) Guest
  • Page:
  • 1

TOPIC: HR question

HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25340

  • aroo
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
Ok Ya'll,

I've been using a PM for the last year. I haven't been using the HR portion of it until this last week. I have an event coming up where I do not plan touse the PT as I don't feel like going to the effort of putting on the wheel covers so I will use my old zipp disk instead. Based upon the last week of HR data from a few intervals and a guestimate of my new position FTP, I came up with a target HR for the 17 mile TT. As I haven't used HR as a measure of effort in over 10 years I wanted to be sur eI wasn't too far off.

Stats....new position 3 min power is 435(old 410) or 6% higher than previous position. First can I extrapolate that to FTP being 6% higher as well? I was at 330 FTP and 350(22 minutes) If I use the ^% and guestimate 350 as new position FTP, the HR I observed for that power after 5-6 minutes was 176-178. 3 minute HR was 187 right near the end of the 3 minutes. If the HR for the FTP guess is good, that is the same as it was 15 years ago(max HR 194 '92)

The 3 minutes interval was just a distanc ethat fits in nicely with the roads I have at my disposal and I tried to target 120% of what I thought was my FTP for that distance, with rare occasion getting all 5 intervals to meet the power goal.

Am I totally off base, and if so, where?

Thanks for the input.

Jeff

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25341

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
How are you going to approach the first 5 minutes of your TT effort?
-kraig

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25342

  • Ron Ruff
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 894
  • Karma: 0
If you normally use the PM for pacing, then I wouldn't take it off for the race.

My experience with HR is that it varied widely at <FTP intensities (ie didn't correlate to power with any accuracy) and as I approached FTP it seemed pretty consistent... but then I was only 10bpm away from max. In other words, a wide range of power outputs comprised a small range of HR. Add in the extreme lag factor, and it didn't seem very useful.

What is useful to me is paying attention to what is going on in my body and knowing the sensations that go along with various intensities over time... and I've been pacing really well without looking at anything.

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25343

  • aroo
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
Kraig......... >

Initial pacing will be"easy" but not too easy. I have only had the PM for 1 yr and prior to that did everything PE. Have since learned that PE at start is way off from where I thought it was even trying to go easy at start.

Ron,

Thanks, I can see the issue with small HR range being large power range. Hadn't thought about it enough to clue myself into that one. My pacing with power has been problematic this year. It has been fairly good at weekly 10 mi TTs, bit varied on actual paid events. I am also on my third torque tube, second head unit, so I have had issues with the actual data being supplied to me from the meter.

I have found that the meter is a good tool to show me when I am not going hard enough, but I already know that from PE, as my PE clues me into checking the power data, then it is ussually, yep, pick it up. Also, as Kraig noted good for the start, where my supercomputer is not quite clued in yet as to what is the appropriate effort level.

Since it will just be a "fun" event for me, a 17 mile TT in the morning and a 49 mi RR in the afternoon, I am finding the effort to put the covers on is not there. I suppose I could just run the FP60 wheel without covers, but I have missed the sound of the disk wheel this year

The TT is listed as very flat, whereas the RR is pretty hilly. I'd rather have the PM for the RR for my bridging efforts after the climbs

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25344

  • bikedude
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 142
  • Karma: 0
This is a good subject for me as I’m finding that I’m using HR over power more as I can have a wider range of power for a usable HR.
I seem to have a hard time producing power going in to the wind and I’ll be up close to 100% of my usable HR at a lower than normal power output.
So I have gone more to watching my HR and keeping it in a workable range then watching my power. and this seems to be working, much to my confusion of how I thought it worked?
On the flat or small rolling course I can use power but if the course has hills or a good head wind I have to watch my HR it has me quite confused.
Dan…

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25345

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
aroo wrote:
Kraig......... >

Initial pacing will be"easy" but not too easy. I have only had the PM for 1 yr and prior to that did everything PE.


Sounds like you've got some good things to roll with and consider, then.

In general, I wouldn't try to make it as complicated as it appears that you are trying to make it. If you are dead-set on using HR, then I'd maybe rely on the avg HR you achieve during the last 10 minutes of a 20 minute au bloc effort as a reference point for your effort while also factoring in your RPE...once signficantly into the effort...or, just roll the super.
-kraig

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25346

  • aroo
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
and hope the system doesn't crash!!

I probably was making it too complicated.

So, any thoughts on the translation on the 6% power increase across other durations other than 3 min.?

I'll just have to hope our decent weather continues and that the extra work hours don't stop me from getting in a longer session.

Thanks,

Jeff

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25347

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
aroo wrote:

So, any thoughts on the translation on the 6% power increase across other durations other than 3 min.?


Well, I guess my initial thoughts are that it seems complicated, and kind of a second order deal when it comes to TT performance, and that I'm not a fan of using a single 3 minute sample (IIRC what you are postulating) to do much of anything when it comes to TT stuff...And, I think for a 17 mile effort, 20MP is a much more relevant thing to discuss and consider.

...and, if the race is just for fun, why not give your thinking a shot? What's the worst that can happen? You just might discover something along the way!

I guess my thoughts are also (and this relates to bikedude a bit too) - that I pretty consistently record HR and it seems to track efforts quite well, as does the raw power meter data.
-kraig

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25348

  • Ron Ruff
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 894
  • Karma: 0
aroo wrote:
So, any thoughts on the translation on the 6% power increase across other durations other than 3 min.?


I wouldn't make any assumptions about a 17min effort based on a 3min performance.

And if you don't use a PM in the race you'll never know if your pacing was good. It was a major revelation for me to discover that what felt "normal"... bust out of the gate and ride the first 5 minutes like the race is only 6 minutes long, then recover and struggle the rest of the way... was actually slow and stupid. A HRM completely misses this.

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25349

  • aroo
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
Ron,

Yeah, been there, seen that!!

I did a full 40k pacing off the PM, all went according to plan until the last 8k when my legs wanted to cramp instead of spin to keep up power. ended up 5w lower than target

I have a bunch of 20 min and 3 min data points from my old position and they correlate pretty well with each other over the course of the season. I also based my target 40k off the 20 min, but hadn't done that long an effort before the 40k point, so I wasn't ready and I believe that was the cause of my falling off target for that event.

I also discovered that the HR won't work without the power(hub needs to be spinning) unless one continually turns it on. So it would be old school, ie 2008, for me or use the PM. I just had Saris redo the hub bearings, but they are already grinding again.

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25350

  • Lindy
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 45
  • Karma: 0
aroo wrote:
I also discovered that the HR won't work without the power(hub needs to be spinning) unless one continually turns it on. So it would be old school, ie 2008, for me or use the PM. I just had Saris redo the hub bearings, but they are already grinding again.

There is a mode switch to turn the Saris head unit into a speedometer so the hub is not needed, but a magnet on the rear wheel is probably still required to keep activity going. It may also be set the auto turnoff high enough to get by.

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25351

  • aroo
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
Thanks, hadn't thought about setting the auto turn-off higher.

Thanks, again.

Don't have a speed sensor.

I plan to jump to quarq next year to eliminate some of my issues.

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25355

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
Ron Ruff wrote:
<snipo> bust out of the gate and ride the first 5 minutes like the race is only 6 minutes long, then recover and struggle the rest of the way... was actually slow and stupid. A HRM completely misses this.



what does the ground speed profile on a flat, windless course during an effort like you describe look like?
-kraig

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25356

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
So, I went back and checked out some pretty good efforts I've done over the last 5 years (where I have HR and power data) over durations varying from 4 minutes to 40+ minutes - these efforts employ different pacing, too, it seems.

Some pretty interesting things dropped out, when incorporatin HR and the super, despite the pleadings of the anti-HR acolytes out there.

Seems as, though, if I hit a 5-ish bpm window for a 20-ish MP effort after 2-4 minutes, I'm in the good (final power wise). Outside that window, it seems as if I give up time (i.e - go too hard and it costs me, go to easy, and it costs me).

What's your HR/power/time data say when doing a similar analysis?
-kraig

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25357

  • Ron Ruff
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 894
  • Karma: 0
kraig wrote:
what does the ground speed profile on a flat, windless course during an effort like you describe look like?


Don't know... no flat windless roads, and I also didn't have a device that would record my data.

About the HR response though... as I recall it would take ~5 minutes for it to reach my "target" of ~170bpm (for a 60 minute effort) and then it would overshoot a bit. And then I'd keep it around 170. I didn't know at the time, but I now realize that I was *way* over 60MP in the first 5 minutes... probably 20% over... and even though my power was deteriorating after that, my HR stayed up there.

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25358

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
Ron Ruff wrote:
<snip> didn't have a device that would record my data.


Trainers/rollers are good for exploring "constant/controlled" deals, IME. Did you own a trainer?

I can remember when I first got into the bike thing...probably in the late 80's/early 90's - Kirk had a recordable HR monitor - probably from Polar - can't remember the name of the model (vantage XL??) - can anyone help me on that?

I bought my first downloadable HR monitor in probably 1995 or so - it was the Polar Xtrainer or some sort - I was in grad school at the time and it probably cost me a months rent! It really openend my eyes on lots of training topics.

Power meters did a similar thing - though, I was a bit more "aware" of things at the time of my power meter purchase.

I agree with you, though, if you go as hard as you can in the first 5 minutes until you hit your "target" HR for a 20 minute+ effort, well, then, you get what you deserve! )

I think approaching pacing from an HR based perspective is an interesting concept to explore. Lots of good things can come out of it, I reckon - super-wise, that is.

-k
-kraig

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25359

  • aroo
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
Kraig,

Speaking for myself, I discovered a couple of things yesterday.

First off, my 6% was actually 4%, as the super recollected incorrectly. Second was that my visit to the ER this week for a esopgigeal stricture resulted in my acquiring a cold, so says the yellow phlegm. Third, is that combining the 2 above and applying them to a 10 mile TT effort results in a very bad result. I abandonned my effort after 8 miles. Power estimate too high. Data shows pretty straightline decline after the initial 2 minutes. Avg after 8 miles wasn't even close to where it ussually would be, snot level high.

HR monitor on. I saw an initial dip in HR at the start, went from 101 to 170 in 60 seconds, by 2 minutes was about 174. The majority of the ride was between 177-178 which was reached at the 3.5 minute mark. Peaked at 181, 9 miuntes in. I have no idea what my max HR currently is, but it was supposedly 194 back in 1993 when I had a university Vo2 test done(54 ml/kg/min) It appears to me, that *gasp* I went too hard. Now I get to enjoy this phlegm for a couple of weeks, all the up to event day.

Re: HR question 8 years, 3 months ago #25360

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
aroo - sorry to hear about your snot issues. that's never a good deal.

you'll get 'em next time!
-kraig

Re: HR question 8 years, 2 months ago #25371

  • triguy42
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 357
  • Karma: 0
I've also found similar results to Ron wrt small HR variations meaning substantial changes in power. Part of this depends on the day, there were TT days when I couldn't get my HR above 165 no matter how hard I pushed...and most other days I could comfortably ride at 172-175 without killing myself. These are outliers, however, and my TT efforts seem to be fairly consistent in the 168-172 range. Part of this definitely has to do with hydration level, as I've found a direct correlation on longer rides between power dropping, HR rising (a lot, like 10bpm) and going past my apparent 2.5% weight loss threshold. One thing that I know for certain, however, is that I have never ridden at TT speeds and been consistently above 175. I know from experience that going at 180-182 is about my peak for short duration efforts (1-4min) and riding at 176-180 means I'll be dead meat in less than 10 minutes. If you know some of these more "set" thresholds then you can at least judge if you are dramatically above FTP.

Re: HR question 8 years, 2 months ago #25373

  • kraig
  • OFFLINE
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 3285
  • Karma: 4
FWIW, I just quickly checked out my training file database - i have about 400 files that have both avg power and avg hr data.

It's interesting to notice that for a given avg power, I can predict avg HR within a +/- 5% band or so.

What does everyone else's avg power and HR database information say?
-kraig

Follow up 8 years, 2 months ago #25427

  • aroo
  • OFFLINE
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
Well, I opted to go with the super(no HR,W, or MPH). By the turnaound I had decided the super was not pushing me hard enough, so Itried to push harder all the way back in. I measured the course as 17.9 miles per Mazda afterwards. Had no idea how my ride went, but it seems it went ok for me, being late Sept. I finished 2nd overall at 37:42, 0:52 back, third was another 0:51 back. The real challange was the 49 mile RR in the afternoon. My HR hit 187 on the climb 1st lap of 3 with a 5 min avg of 400w and a 3 min of 425.(my best fresh 3min interval is 435) Being 5kg heab=vier than I should be made it a rough day, plus I didn't drink for a whole lap as I was in a chase group of 3 trying to bridge to the 8 up the road and was too focused on the pursuit. You'd think that after 17 years of this, I'd have figured that one out. I caught on 2/3 of the way up the hill on lap 2, the other two with me were not so fortunate. I ended up 5th in the RR, tried to limit my losses to less than the 51 seconds I had on 2 overall, but could see them slipping away with 3.5 to go. I think I managed to keep 3rd place overall at bay. I haven't had 67 hard miles of riding in one day in years!! That hurt, but was fun in a demented sort of way.

I had a real power drop near the end, pushing as much as I had, managing 200w. I also had some strage hr readings after the second trip up with long data segments in excess of 210bpm. At the finish I felt dead and the hr was holding at 220. I am used to seeing a random anomoly, but this was for a couple of minutes. I guess coded data doesn't eliminate interference.
  • Page:
  • 1
Time to create page: 1.45 seconds

Poll

Which type of tire is more aerodynamic?