That’s a good point. I think you’re right that normalized power would be higher if variance is higher. That is more in line with how I feel trying to maintain the same average power outdoors and the opposite of what OP describes.
Higher NP lower AP does not mean a higher stimulus. In fact - a more variable ride with higher NP can be a lower stimulus with just more fatigue. The best stimulus generally is going to come from structured consistent time in zone - i.e. stick to your intervals best you can even if you’re outdoors.
So to clarify in your scenario we are assuming everything thing is the same at the described values… Heart rate, cadence, RPE, breathing rate, etc. The only difference is power output indoor v. outdoor? The next question is there an actual measurable difference in physiological stress? For this you would need to test blood lactate and cortisol levels. But let’s also assume this is the same in this scenario.
If this is true… there is no difference. To your body stress is stress, it doesn’t matter what the watts. Training is about the “dose of stress” delivered to your systems. If you hit the same HR and RPE targets, you are getting the same cardiovascular and metabolic workout.
For example, athletes who train in heat have reduced power output and performance, but it doesn’t mean they are not getting the benefit of training. In fact when they compete in a cooler climate will more than likely outperform what they had statistically done in the more extreme environment.
If you have a big discrepancy you can scsle workouts accordingly, but you aren’t leaving gains on the table by doing the workout indoors.
No.
No, you wouldn’t - try not to worry about it.
Consistency is the most important thing, whether indoors or outdoors. Whatever suits you best, stick with that unless you’re really struggling to maintain even power.
Why would 330w provide the same stimulus as 300?
Assuming everything is equal (HR, breathing rate, RPE, etc) the body doesn’t know watts, only stress. If stress levels are the same the stimulus is the same.
I think the differences here are probably impossible to quantify and control.
I do believe that doing more work is a better stimulus, so if you can produce more power and do exactly the same workout outside, then that is the better option.
The problem is that it’s really hard to be as efficient with structured training outside. For most of us, those small gains from doing more work may be lost through other inefficiencies.
This is sort of like using high-carb or bicarb. It allows you to do more work, which stacks up over time. More work = better training, even if it’s the same type of stimulus.
Someone mentioned heat training, and while heat brings on its own set of unique adaptations, it’s not the same type of training stimulus as riding at the same HR while producing a ton more power. In that case, heat is something that has its own purposes, so it’s not apples to apples, but it helps to see how different conditions can have massively different effects.
If there is a 30w difference in output why would you think that the input is the same?
Personally I don’t (something else is obviously going on)… but was playing along with the “everything is the same” scenario posed by the OP.