LOL no, I’m not a robot. Long day, about 6900kJ over 12.75 hours and 201 miles. Temps ranged from 50F at the start, to 104F in the afternoon, and average 80F. Versus a fixed HR my power dropped throughout the day.
Hoping someone with lactate data stops by and contributes. I’ve done some INSCYD testing and generally have very good Power:HR data, but I don’t know my LT1. Just estimates.
My initial thought was compare decoupling before and after. And my second thought was field testing.
Decoupling is simiar…so you would suggest another FTP test to confirm new fitness level?
Yes I think testing would give you some good info as long as you test the same way etc…
we are talking LT1. You can do something like this:
You can also do the weekly endurance ride by power. When I mentioned increasing from 150W to 200W at my HR-eLT1, that was at a pretty narrow FTP range (260-275).
Im always amused by the notion that hr can be variable by all those reasons listed but then insist that target power should remain static despite all those variables which might be perturbing hr response.
Hr lag can make guiding a workout by hr challenging, but rpe plus hr boundaries can be a useful way to understand your own capabilities and power duration curve and to keep a logical limiter on those days where things might be off.
I think you are responding a claim that nobody made.
Your power zones, e. g. lactate threshold, do not depend on as many parameters as heart rate and do not vary as much day-by-day as well as during a workout. E. g. my lactate threshold does not change from the first to the third 4-minute VO2max interval I did today. My average heart rate certainly did. If I had paced by heart rate, I think my last interval would have been threshold.
Heart rate can be used for very steady, long intervals and endurance. (I pace outdoor endurance rides almost exclusively by heart rate.) Or as additional data points in addition to power.
Yes, agreed, heart rate data can be an auxiliary data point that augments power. I haven’t argued otherwise. I use that pretty much every workout. I can gauge my fitness by looking at my heart rate elasticity (how quickly it relaxes after an interval) or in absolute terms at a given power level.
Still, power is the primary way by which you should structure your training, heart rate is useful, but ultimately secondary to power.
I was responding specifically about this statement since this is how you lead your post.
Those days where hr is altered by fatigue, sleep, illness, heat or elevation are specifically what I’m talking about. Those are times you should listen to your body and not just blindly follow a power target. All of those effect your performance, so no… the target is not what it was originally intended unless you purposefully toned it down.
???
I still think you are reading things into my post I have never written. Yes, of course, you should listen to your body when you train and pull the plug when necessary. That in no way contradicts that you should base your training off of power zones, heart rate metrics are secondary to that.
Heart rate can be a data point to inform your decision to (not!) pull the plug, and I wrote that in my post that you initially replied to. I literally use it every time I train with TR. Perhaps I feel shitty during the first two intervals, but my heart rate recovers well within 90 seconds (that’s my personal experience), then I know I should push on. If, on the other hand, my heart rate spikes during the second interval and I feel badly, I know I should consider pulling the plug quickly and either call it a day or do an easy endurance ride instead.
I’m not really sure how you’re claiming to not say what i quoted your post which specifically says that. You specifically said to not use it because it is affected by so many factors, most of which you listed also affect performance.
That’s all. Power is great for the ease and consistency of its measurement, but hr gives us good insight as to where we are at a given point in time. And in the context of the thread, @lt1, is a great metric for guiding capabilities for an endurance ride or a fitness change.
For the original question 10 bpm lower at a specific power range should mean you are free to do more work in the endurance rides to drive more adaptations. Or do the same work on those rides and add in some more work on your hard days.
Are you sure you have read my post in its entirety? Let me just quote two bullet points from that post (emphasis added):
I’m not sure how you can read that as me claiming HR data is useless and should not be used, quite the contrary. I’m just saying that if power data is available, then you should use power as your primary metric, but heart rate still gives additional, supplemental information.