HR v Power

[Robh]

Exactly Kieran...So don't throw away your HR monitors just yet...

Some more info from Juerg's response to Toks about HR, have fun reading:-

Part 1

I like to keep the info going on this topic. Not to discourage people in using wattage or HR only , but rather show as objectively as possible benefits and disadvantage on both of them.

Here a question I got least night.
“There are days, where I try to maintain a wattage level close to my Lactate threshold, but still slightly below. Now some days, I can't hold the wattage very long and I also can't get my heart rate up as well so both of the ideas don't work at all ( wattage as well as heart rate ) why ?

Hmm this is a situation I think any runner or cyclist has had in the years of training. Days where the body just flies and days where you just crawl along.
Well the beauty of this experience teaches us one thing for sure. We are not a motor but a physiological system.

There are some possibilities who can lead to the above situation and possibly some explanations we don't know yet.

I will in the evening try to shed light on one very interesting situation, and we very often don't think at that direction.

Here’s a hint.
You had a few busy days at work, no time to workout, you whole "plan" went belly up and you are frustrated. So finally you have been able to squeeze a 2 hour time slot and you like to pick up all your missed units and you go out after work. As usual very little food and very keen to get going.
You have one advantage:
your mind is ready, your legs are recovered and fresh, your bike is keen and your wattage meter works well, as does the polar monitor.
You even see a very high HRV at rest and you are sure it will go nicely.
Your plan: 2 hour ride just below LBP if you take HR so 145.
Or you plan to go with wattage just below LBP or a zone for that length of workout 260 wattage.
I take again a real example tested and checked just lately.
LBP by 145 / wattage at that HR 260.
Here a hint.
Your liver is half empty after a 12 hour work so app. 60 - 70 gr of glycogen left.
Your leg muscles are at a same situation so let's say 140 gr of muscle glycogen left.
So total glycogen at the start situation 200 - 210 gr.
Now start working out.
Here one more info to consider.
The VO2 ( total O2 used in this intensity 145 /260 wattage is 38 ml/kg /min
The kcal/h at that intensity is 845.
Now train by 260 wattage
or train by 145 HR .
Play through your physiological system and see what or when we may get some reactions in these 2 versions of training

[Robh]

Part 2 :-

Okay let's see.
Training plan tells us:
a) 260 wattage for 2 hours based on a "Wattage test like perhaps a 3 min step test to all out situation. Take 4 mmol as anaerobic threshold or any other idea.
Main plan is that 260 wattage is considered still a part of an endurance zone you should be able to maintain for 11/2 - 2 hours. You may take some nutrition in during the training
No to make it first easy we just look at the numbers a) 260 for 2 hours
versus 145 for 2 hours.
In both cases the idea is that you like to train your body in a specific training zone.
In the wattage idea , you will reach your goal by maintaining 260 wattage for 2 hours ( and not worrying where the HR goes, as it does not matter for your 260 Zone ) and you consider that workout as a workout , where your body was always in the same training zone.
b) With the target of 145 you try to maintain 145 HR and don't worry about the changes in actual wattage performance. Your training goal is achieved, if you can maintain 145 for the 2 hours and if you use these ideas you consider this workout as a workout, where you maintained physiologically ( cardio ) the same intensity over the full 2 hours.

Okay : actual situation at the start:
200 - 210 gr of glycogen in the tank which gives you app. 800 - 850 kcal / h energy .
Your intensity is in a zone , where the glucose part will be the main fuel to maintain the wattage 260 ) which was during the test ( 3 min steps ) by a heart rate of 145.
You know based on the test results . that you will use 845 kcal /h.
True , you not burn glucose only ( always some FFA and some oxygen independent action is going on. )

Well VO2 testing equipment with RQ may tell you on the printouts a different story but we can discuss this at another time )

So let's start the workout.
Let's make it very simple:
wattage plan : After app. 1 h you start or are running out of fuel, because the intensity , resp. the energy you need to maintain 260 has used up all your fuel sources.
Now what is going on now after 1 hour?
Can you maintain the wattage?? If you try what will happen, if you can't what is going on with the wattage and the heart rate.

Now can you maintain 145 over the 2 hours?
If yes why and what happened.
. Last question I would ask myself as an athlete :
Was the 145 intensity always in the same zone ( physiologically ) and I can count that workout as a 2 hour training in the 145 zone ?
Was the 260 workout always in the same zone physiologically , even till the moment where I "bonked" and what happened after the "bonk" what intensity zone was that and how do I know what kind of a reaction I will get out of the 2 versions : 145 " zoning "

260 1/2 workout.
We did , and our athletes may remember this "camp" tested with Glycogen depleted situations and glycogen loaded situation, as a part of our basic "research' to see , whether the FaCT testing and LBP is influenced by pre test energy storage or not, as this is a possible major stumbling block in the "classical" lactate testing idea on absolute numbers as well as interpretations on the way the lactate curve will move.
I actually think , Herb has a test printout somewhere on the Website which shows this info.

We did as well ( 7 years ago ) some additional testing with ammonia trends , as we are together with the University of Calgary the only place where we can do point to point ammonia testing like we do with lactate. This info with our athletes gave us a very interesting inside view in individual behaviour in cases like the above one and recovery timing.

I am still very thank full on Geoff / Ryder/ Martina on the countless poking and blood testing I was allowed to do. ( very often with no results but sometimes with interesting informations where we could learn and tried to understand , that there is only one way of coaching , that is one person at a time.

I hope with this example to get some more open thinking going on in the discussion wattage versus heart rate.


P.S If you find the grammar it's because Juerg's first languge is not English he's from Switzerland.

[Robh]

Adam,

I posted your question and Juerg responded not as simple as I though. No surprise really after spending 3 months playing with some of their ideas. Nothing is black & white.

http://www.fact-canada.com/discus/messa ... 1209656290

Juerg has asked me a question about your post :-

Rob I am back with another question to your "case" . On the day he biked 90 min ( 60 min uncomfortable and than getting better)
What was his "wattage" and did he used wattage from the recovery zone or did he used just body feeling. What was his HR and when he felt fast and strong what was the definition of fast and strong ?