160 average or normalized? Depending on terrain 160 avg might not be anything to worry about. Could still be a good z2 workout.
1 Like
David Millar used to race without data but then again he maybe raced with something else. He talks about it on his reflections on his club TT 10.5mins into this video https://youtu.be/R60iAwh6e6I?si=60GDwu2RGniNCOXF
So I just happened to find myself solo off the front, for the first time ever, from the chase group (3 riders still up ahead) about 33 miles (2:00-ish hours remaining) from the finish of a 100 mile gravel race this past weekend. I always just look at the Maps page displaying the map, time and distance remaining.
While alone, no one in sight, during a torrential downpour, no brakes and my drivetrain crunching away, I considered switching to my power page. I know I can hold low Tempo for that duration and thought it possibly wise to lay down a consistent steady pace to the finish line for 4th place overall.
However, I decided to do the opposite and go just off RPE. I didn’t really even look at my bike computer except for directions. It felt so liberating letting the effort come to me and go off of feel. It’s definitely what I needed considering the circumstances. Riding without metrics CAN be beneficial for sure!
5 Likes
it was avg
i think it’s just a touch low for where I wanna be. I want my lowest Z2 ride to be ~175 avg and high end ~225-230 as my peak and wind up ~ 210 average.
160 is almost noodling around for me.
like on that day I was talking about I could have done much more and I thought I was doing in the 190-210 range but I was doing 160.
I guess that may be a completely different topic…my main point is my RPE meter is not gauged correctly with what I’m actually doing at this point in my riding hobby.
1 Like
ty i’ll watch that with my coffee tmw morning.
1 Like