Normalised Power measures the overall effect of high intense effort on the whole ride.
It is kind of like a weighted average (but not really) . It gives you an approximation for how much power you could have held if your effort would have been a steads effort.
Well, did it feel like you just rode for 75 minutes at 172 watts? Or did it feel harder?
Felt harder I’d say!
AVG Power with zero - AVG Power without zero - NP
If you guys are going for an endurance outdoor ride (example: >100km >1500climbmeters >3,5h) - whitch kind of power you using for orientation from these 3 above #training
I always use NP.
If going for AVG, you should include the zero, otherwise your average will be inflated from leaving out all the times you’re coasting.
I have an additional question RE: NP vs. Average Power…
When I “zoom in” on an interval from an outdoor workout, I sometimes see a NP that is lower than my average power for that interval. Happened once after a sweet spot workout, and I thought it was a fluke. I’ve seen it two or three more times since then, and I can’t get my head around how that would be possible… any ideas?
I use avg power including 0’s. I pretty much ignore NP.
I think both have value. A ride with an NP of 250 and AP of 200 will feel harder than a ride with NP 210 and AP 200. The first ride is probably more ‘punchy’ in that there are probably more hard efforts, but also more coasting or recovery. One area to use caution with NP is with short efforts, like <10min. For these you should use AP, because the way it is calculated, it isn’t really a valid number without multiple minutes of data.
@SRLECEY If you zoom in, i found this article, why NP in a short interval can be lower than your AP:
@Jeff_Soderman makes sence for me. thank you. About the short effort the article explain the same, why NP doesn‘t work well.