Power vs Heart Rate: How Modern Athletes Train

[@whatstrue1481]

I think the advantage of training with heart rate is that it DOES take into account your level of tiredness, stress, recovery etc. So you train accordingly. If you only train with power it does not take into account these things on a day to day basis. So if you plan is to do X wattage in a training session but your body is just not up to it (because of a lack of recovery, tiredness, stress or whatever) you run the risk of "over training" or not allowing sufficient recovery and actually getting a negative result.

[@willhilsman1572]

HR being impacted by a ton of different things and being variable is exactly why it's valuable, not why it's not valuable

[@theworkethic]

💯

[@DanEvo21]

That’s exactly what I was left thinking

[@csantos2]

So I find that HR is useful in training and racing, but only based on knowing when I am working anaerobically. I know how long I can sustain with a diminishing oxygen uptake, and I know my recovery time once I am at a sub-anaerobic HR. So in training it helps me with my FTP test to make sure I don't blow up before I get to the half-way point and then I can ramp up gradually so that I dump everything out by the end of the effort. And for my intervals I use it to make sure that I can target certain benefits of different intervals. Some efforts require me to be reaching a state of oxygen depletion. Power is far more important during intervals, but HR allows me to refine the effort to gain the most benefit. In races I use HR for longer attacks so I can dance on the line of oxygen depletion without going over it. I know where my limits are during an attack and on a rotation so I know how long of pulls I can take and whether or not I need to skip a pull. My power will be my power, high or low, but if my heart cannot effectively deliver oxygen throughout my system anymore then I will gas out. If the power is low in that moment then there will be opportunities later that might benefit different efforts. But if I gas out because I deprived my muscles of enough oxygen to too long then I lose more opportunities. I also use it when coming up on the 3k to finish where I determine if I can put out a 2-minute neuromuscular effort. If not, then by the 500m to go point, depending on where my HR is at, I know if I will have to surf wheels to time my sprint because it will be short-lived or if I can still put out a 20-second max effort without going hypoxic. I know where my HR absolutely cannot be in order to make longer efforts work if I am going to be going deep into the red. I know that once I hit 200 bpm I have about 15 seconds before I reach my maximum HR of 209 when putting out 130-200% of my FTP, and at 209 bpm I have about 3 seconds before I lose most of my vision and muscular control meaning I have about 5-7 rotations before I have to stop spinning or I will crash. I know that I can sustain 20 seconds >1000 watts (or whatever power my absolute maximal effort produces) if and only if I am below 194 bpm. And I know that as long as I am below 200 bpm I can still burst for 10 seconds at maximal effort. But I also absolutely agree that HR can easily psych people out, affect confidence, limit the quality of training, etc. for most. I have put a lot of work in making it a valuable metric to me and I have suffered a lot to do that. I would not recommend it as it provides the most marginal of gains in almost any situation. These are probably things you can teach your body to understand instinctually without requiring all this mental effort which I feel would be more beneficial in a race so you can react faster.

[@gregdoucette]

csantos2 awesome post

[@maxhansen513]

Love this casual format for this topic

[@DennisNowland]

I'll stick with my heart rate 70 years of age, I find that a good indicator of how I actually am at the moment.

[@BioStuff415]

Heart rate... it is the object that determines most of the output of the cyclist. It is the true measure of where the limit is in the person. Power is a function of nerves, muscle, brain, blood and intracellular conditions. Heart rate with power is an indicator of how efficient the body is at that point... but each morning we take the heart rate, and decide if we need more recovery or if we are ready for more.

[@sevenrats]

As a recreational cyclist I find HR much more useful. Power output will vary depending on fitness level at any perceived effort. You can't look at two riders and say "this guy is doing 400 watts and the other guy is doing 200 watts" and know who's working harder. Taking weight out of it, all we know is who is making more power and is therefore faster. The 400 watt guy could be a pro and cruising along at temp and a HR of 130, while the 200 watt guy could be a rec. rider and killing themselves with his HR at 190. Sure it's good to know what to expect of yourself at any given HR but the fact is that whenever you reach VO2 Max, that's it for you. So when I ride I pay more attention to my HR and know that if I get up over 160, I'm getting close to my limits. Of course if you've been training and KNOW what you can do power wise then you can simply track that while racing. I think that no matter what, if you estimate anyones maximum HR, you can predict where they will reach threshold, no matter what their fitness level but you won't know the actual work they can do without measuring it. That's where power comes in. An unfit persons HR will max out at a lower workload than a fit person. So both are useful but in different ways.

[@johnbrown7156]

Heart rate measurements and the use of them in training are _not_ "subjective" in any important sense. "Subjective" just doesn't mean what you guys are using it to mean here. The difference between measuring power and measuring heart-rate is that in both instances you are actually interested in the same thing (power) but that you only measure it _directly_ in the case of power. We measure heart-rate as it's a by-product of power produced, and can thus be an indirect measurement of power (notwithstanding all the confounding factors for which it is also a by-product). The direct/indirect distinction is better than the objective/subjective one (which is just plain wrong).

[@christopherthomas9997]

The concept of subjectivity here is valid, though it is unintentional on the part of the observer. A person who looks at heart rate as a measure of effort rarely understands (in the moment) all of the variables that are affecting heart rate (e.g. temperature, hydration, stressors, exertion, etc.) and therefore has a subjective understanding of the effort they are expending. So, it's not just that heart rate is an indirect measurement, but that it is influenced by many factors in a given moment only one of which is the variable you are interested in. That is why the direct measurement of a power meter is better, because it is measuring exactly what you are interested in without other confounding variables.

[@AnitCsah]

Exactly. A subjective measure of power would be a person thinking "I feel like I am working hard." Heart rate is an objective measure of how hard your cardiovascular system is working. As you mention, it can only indirectly measure your effort in terms of power and has many confounding variables that influence its readings.

[@ianhogg1547]

Christopher Thomas aa

[@michaelvrbanac6923]

I train and race with both. I watch HR response during intervals and during recovery between intervals. HR builds during longer intervals and is usually higher for each successive interval. I also build power during intervals. High temperatures will shoot up HR.

[@raymonddowns6064]

I have to disagree with the idea of relying solely on power when doing intervals. Your argument is that heart rate would elevate as your moving further into the workout and backing off would cause your power to decrease therefore you should push on through using the power number and ignore heart rate. The problem I see with this mentality is that the later part of the interval workout could likely push your heart rate beyond 90 percent of your max heat rate in which now you are training at a heart rate that likely produces little or no additional anaerobic benefits while adding potentially harmful stress which increases your chance of injury and over training.

[@MrPeperoni79]

For HR to be useful in all situations, the maxHR has to be the ceiling for an endurance athletes. However, for many endurance athletes, the HR is not a limiting factor. When I am unfit after injury or something and I do the first hard exercise, my HR would go to 195. When I am fit I can never reach 195, maybe 185, but not more because as you become fitter other things become the performance bottleneck.

[@mikecoglione1308]

The problem with power workouts is they are extremely difficult at best to pull off riding out there not on an indoor trainer. From personal experience not meeting your intervals only brings about good things due to overtraining. HR is a much better indicator because if kept under 130 the nervous system doesn't seem to ever mind you can ride almost as much as you want. If you want to try riding fast or doing HIT it should only be done 1-2x a week anyway otherwise fatigue creeps in. This is obviously pertinent to people who exercise a lot like 15-20h a week or more but generally intervals are hard, unpleasant and serve no purpose other than to tire you out. Zone 2 and easy training is where its at. If you want intervals or something hard buy a mountain bike and hit trails for your HIT you're at 150-160bpm almost the entire ride. But due to the many changes in road pitch, wind, load of the bike (commuting), training outside with power is a fool's errand. I have found myself more in the wrong gear or almost crashing trying to train with power its almost like I don't know how to ride a bike I am chasing my bike computer to the exclusion of everything else. I don't race.

[@markwilliams7113]

Much more importantly, and glossed over by the drivel spouted in this "chat" is that HR is a physiological response to cost of work done. In other words, an "input" cost. Power is an output measurement only. Going on their logic an athlete must ignore all of the physiological variables making up his performance and only train according to the power levels deemed by the "power gods" to be appropriate. So fatigue, illness, dehydration etc are to be ignored in search of the power numbers. Which is why pretty much all athletes training with power end up in a chronic fatigue cycle sooner or later. HR can pre-indicate fatigue and illness and the more sophisticated HR methodologies - like heart rate variability - are untouchable in terms of achieving meaningful, long-term performance gains.

[@GH-if5xw]

Quadruple Bypass Surgery affects heart rate. Go ask a Cardiologist, he ain’t interested in Power, he gives you HR targets to excise in. That’s why we have Stress Tests, I ain’t got to win a race, just keep my Cardio Numbers healthy for my Cardiologist, 30 minutes a day make a huge difference.

[@stuartdryer1352]

One thing to add. Heart rate will always increase for a given power output when ambient temperature is higher. That higher HR per watts reflects the physiological cost of your training on that day. I am not sure this is accurately reflected in any sort of training stress score. I use a PM and a HRM. HR is definitely something you should not ignore during training.

[@TrainerRoad]

Heart rate is a great tool to use for recovery and monitoring your body on and off the bike but when used for training zones, it can be misleading due to being so variable. Lots of great resources on this: blog.trainerroad.com/how-to-measure-recovery-with-resting-heart-rate/ soundcloud.com/trainerroad/yearly-planning-power-vs-heart-rate-indoor-training-gear-more-ask-a-cycling-coach-134#t=56:10 forum.trainerroad.com/t/do-i-need-a-heart-rate-monitor/2585

[@duartecid3978]

I think the increasing emphasis on power over HR is a mistake as it is convincing people that power is absolute, somehow separate and more significant than HR, and therefore diminishing the importance of the latter. This may well sell more power meters, but unless the message gets changed to both are important and are best used together, I fear that we are going to see a lot more people over stressing themselves and not even realising it because they’re dismissing things like unusually slow or fast HR as some kind of inconsistency or too much coffee. This may well lead to some unfortunate or even fatal consequences as power meters become more affordable and widely used.

[@tymbrimi0]

Nate’s upper body is looking healthier - kudos on you guys putting some effort towards becoming “better athletes” (Chad’s words) to complement being a “faster cyclist”!

[@ClockCutter]

"Heart rate is subjective". What? That's crazy talk. What a person's heart rate is can be measured by anyone. It's as an objective a fact as any. I think you're trying to say something else and using the wrong term.

[@TheyForcedMyHandLE]

They're just saying the heart rate can be influenced by a number of factors outside of just the current work being done. I guess being "subject" to (dependent on) external factors, whereas measuring power is more independent of those factors (i.e. "objective" using their terminology). Their examples were that their heart rate can fluctuate day-to-day due to sleep, stress, coffee, etc., all while their power can remain consistent. They're probably stretching the terminology, but I think we get what they're saying.

[@indonesiaamerica7050]

@@TheyForcedMyHandLE That's not what subjective means. What is "subjective" is how, specifically, HR data correlates with performance. IOW, there are a number of theories that all that apparently conflict in the minds of certain "watts" centric Brain Trusts (idiots). HR is a trailing factor. And it is "subjective" (subject to POV and which "objective" analytical paradigms are favored) how to use that when training athletes how to plan their efforts and respond in real time to surprises. This is mainly because it is the athletes that are regarded by the academics as hopelessly incapable of understanding "the science" that the idiot savants think that they own (based mainly on the laws of thermodynamics). The reason that HR data is so useful is that it's a trailing factor that can help predict collapse before it happens and therefore is a very important pacing tool for longer efforts (anything longer than 5 to 10 minutes). Many athletes are simply conditioned to follow the coach consciously and respond within a "perceived exertion" window when they fade and sometimes learn to catch the fade and recover all within a "hard phase" where the coaches don't care about fluctuations and waves but instead look at dumb algorithms like "Effective Power" or something like that. And it is harder to use with HR curves because you need to have lots of diligently recorded HR data to make the most of it. You also need very high quality "power" data that tracks peaks in torque and has very good pedal velocity data.

[@indonesiaamerica7050]

@AMPITUP ITTY If you have to choose one, choose HR. The fact is that power can be estimated after the fact but HR can't. Once you miss the opportunity to record the data it's lost forever. The main thing about power metrics is that it's more precise for comparing efforts over different courses. So if you're training for a mountainous event but want to do lots of varied terrain it's easier to translate those efforts. If you're training for a track event you can still use ordinary road gear but still should use something close to your event gear for certain intervals. OTOH, it's arguably more important to hit your HR exertion goals than power goals except for sprinting and fine-tuning form before serious events begin. Power got popular because people wanted to try to match cross training efforts and running HR is different from other sports because it can vary by muscle groups and pacing strategies. It's actually a lot more complicated than anyone wants to represent. Basically, the "sports doctors" in the various sports don't work much together. All of the best research is protected/proprietary.

[@MoyMacGill]

Thanks. I'm starting to get a understanding with the help these shows give

[@nickpilgrim1966]

The big difference is age related. Older riders need more time to warm up I.e. get HR up before either ftp effort or punchy efforts. Going red too quickly is hard to recover without that wind up.

[@ankurjhaveri7380]

Although I agree HR is not “subjective”, there is value to this discussion. It would be interesting to see a controlled study across a normalized sample where HR vs power zone training was compared. At the end of the day, which results in better outcomes? I absolutely value the abundance of anecdotal evidence, but it would be nice to have some real data.

[@94mikyyy]

Heart rate dictates blood lactates not power output. If I am at 180bpm at 300w and 5 days ago at same output I was at 170bmp obviously I can't sustain the wattage for the same time. It's okay to say for 3 hour ride power output is constant and not subjective. But in every other sport it is very subjective to all those elements like heart rate. Track and field, weightlifters etc. they all experience lower power output due to stress, motivation...In strength training there is competing weight and training weight. Weightlifters determine that by measuring heart rate, if it increases too much before the lift it is causing big emotional stress and that is the training limit, whereas footballers dont use that because he doesn't have to lift weights on his game. So I don't understand how can you now say that it is completely irrelevant. If I am at 180bpm at 300w and 5 days ago at same output I was at 170bmp obviously I can't sustain the wattage for the same time.

[@martinmacmahon4542]

I have signed up for Liege Bastogne Liege. 273km +5k climbing. Don't have time to complete all. I have 9 years experience of sportive so relatively fit. I was advised by your great staff to stick to the plan. You mentioned it is possible to jump early into build phase and skip some base phase. I am desperate to do well in this event(personal goal). I am impressed so far, really impressed with the software and plans. Now I JUST need a little tiny light of guidance on this subject of to skip or not to skip the second part of the base phase. Intention will be to finish the first. Regards, a Dubliner living in Germany as a Hamburger 😎

[@carlmons]

The more fit you are the faster your heart rate responds to your work level- long lag indicates poor aerobic condition, especially if the rate increases after exertion. The more you ride with a heart rate monitor the more you understand what the variances mean, and the more you can nail down how long you can hold a given heart rate. A power meter alone will not tell you how your body is responding to varying conditions (heat, cold, illness, fatigue, position, cadence, etc.)- for example, when riding in cold air I struggle to get my rate over 135, I know I'm warmed up if it can hit 165, I can hold 155 all day, 165 for an hour, 175 for 10 minutes, and 185 for about 2 minutes. But, a HRM alone will not give you any feedback about performance progress. I believe it's best to train with both, but watch the HRM more to get to know your body's feedback and limits to the point you don't need either during races, except maybe for pacing the beginning of a TT or a solo breakaway, where I use HRM only. Training with both will give immediate feedback to power at given heart rates with changes in cadence, position, etc. It's not an either/or question- it's both and when, and the objective should be to get to know your body so well you don't need either.

[@MichaelCruzCPP]

You guys rock happy new year

[@TrainerRoad]

Thanks, Michael! Happy training in 2018!

[@darklol701]

clear explanation! great job

[@colinjones9515]

Just use them both as recording devices for training. don't bother using them in competition. Use the force :0

[@velocity4761]

maybe im wrong but to me hr is an indication of your condition when u r training/riding. training with power doesnt take into account your condition so sometimes u r working alot harder to hit your target wattage for your intervals.

[@TrainerRoad]

While this is true to a certain extent, the main issue is that HR has many other factors affecting it that skew your data. For example, let's say you decide that you will not exceed 170 bpm for a certain interval. However, you drank coffee before your ride, which raised your Heart Rate artificially. Therefore you reach 170bmp at a much lower power than usual. Does that mean that you shouldn't work as hard for the interval? Of course not! The reality is that heart rate can be high for a variety of reasons that are completely separate from your body's response to training stimulus. That's where power is exceptional because 250 watts is 250 watts whether you are sleepy, excited, caffeinated or drowsy. Your ability to express FTP may vary from day to day due to fatigue or other facctors, and on those days you can use your HR and your judgement to determine if you should adjust your power targets up or down.

[@famzini4424]

the only reason why heart rate or better said cardiogram patterns are not used is because people don't have the knowledge to intrerpret it... and oh my god, how much insight can you get, you have no idea!

[@jared7586]

That was a great talk. Cemented what I already know. Thanks so much !! Gonna do first tri this year just power keep HR Aside look at after race. Thx.

[@ytpadyt]

Why HR increases during the steady wattage pace? What causes the decreasing efficiency in the body? Energy (sugar/fat)/chemicals (Na/K/Mg/C...)/blood volume? Thanx

[@TrainerRoad]

Hey Patrick! This is a pretty complex question for us to answer here in the comments section. I'd recommend submitting this question to our Ask a Cycling Coach Podcast! You can submit your question for a chance to get it answered here. You could also try asking the TrainerRoad community at the TrainerRoad forum. There are a lot of well-read guys in that forum who may be able to direct you to some resources that answer your question :) You can access the forum at trainerroad.com/forum. Cheers!

[@cybersomu]

Once your heart rate goes up (with or without meter) doesn't your body actually want to back out? I guess my question is how do we get over the hump of heart rate? You are trying hard to breathe with higher heart rate.

[@oilguy54able]

Great Show! Two questions... For an Ironman event, would it be better to keep an eye on average power with a target over running number, or both? And, does TrainerRoad have longer ride plans for a Triatlete? Thank you.

[@napearson99]

It's a little bit of both with a dash of RPE. If you're running behind on your normalized power number you want to know that early so you can adjust. If you notice that 3 hours in it would be very hard to raise your average power without going too hard and burning yourself out for the run. So personally, I'd show 5 second power and normalized power on my head unit. And yes, TrainerRoad has sprint, Olympic, half and full distance triathlon plans.

[@Wealthishealth89]

These guys have a solid build. Although Cycling is the sport here. Good to see that.

[@allthingsTechrelated]

good stuff. Happy New Year. is there a danger to train over your maximum heart rate? if so, how can we ignore the heart rate monitor during training or during races?

[@TrainerRoad]

All endurance athletes should see their doctor first to make sure you're fit to train and race. That being said your max heart rate is by definition the max heart rate you can achieve, so you can never go above your max heart rate, you just get a new max heart rate. The 220-age formula is a rule of thumb that doesn't hold up very well and should be ignored in TrainerRoad's opinion. That puts my max HR at 185, which I can hold for around an hour if I'm not tired. If I always trained based on a max HR of 220-age I'd never have any intensity in my training.

[@allthingsTechrelated]

TrainerRoad thanks for the insightful explanation.

[@Rawsan]

Which power meter is good value for money?

[@RaMewYT]

I bought the Favero Assioma pedal power meter a quarter ago and are very much satisfied and can only recommend it

[@ronykuba]

Quarq DZero aluminium

[@TrainerRoad]

There are TONS of good ones. We recommend visiting dcrainmaker.com and reading his power meter reviews; they are the best in the business. A few good value ones: - Quarq - Garmin - Stages - 4iiii - Powertap They are all at different price points and have different pluses and minuses and there are much more than that are on that list. Here's DC Rainmakers 2017 Power Meter Guide: www.dcrainmaker.com/2017/11/power-meters-annual-buyers-guide-2017-edition.html

[@michwoz]

I would choose between Power2max Ng Eco, Quarq Dzero (alu) and Favero Assioma.

[@Rawsan]

TrainerRoad great, that is really good information. Thanks.

[@whiskyo]

Damn it. So did I just waste my money ordering a heart rate strap when I should have gotten I wattage device for my pedal?

[@AftershockPS3]

Is good cyclist have a low heart rate at high power And Bad cyclist have a high heart rate at high power ? It is true? I saw national cyclist strava they training on speed av 30 but his hr av very low 80~100 If compare with other rider on speed 30 av his hr av maybe. 150+

[@blingn007]

Not necessarily. Some people get up to 202 bpm during a race while others get to 180. Their peak heart rate has nothing to do with ftp.

[@superinquisitor]

Way too many ads on this shit, my guy

[@kay19833]

the sky is blue folks.

[@chriscampbell6883]

My goodness. Nate you look sick! You usually look great, healthy tan etc. Your eyes are dark, puffy and you have a gray completion. You need a holiday, in the sun.....no work. Delegate more! Happy New year! 2018 will be great for me, can't wait for the season to start properly! Thanks guys.

[@TrainerRoad]

That was filmed after a few nights of bad sleep. I was exhausted that day (and I look it). My wife and Mom keep telling me I look tired too...I think I'll go take a nap right now! -Nate