Strategy for pacing the bike on hills; overdoing it on the uphills! (Page 3)

Fastyellow - 2010-11-12 2:48 PM



You very rarely see this in a tri....they are out there, but very rare.

Fastyellow - 2010-11-12 11:48 AM

You very rarely see this in a tri....they are out there, but very rare.

tjfry - 2010-11-12 12:00 PM


Agree. Do they still ride up the beast in St. Croix? I remember watching that race as a kid and only about half the pro men could ride the entire way up and maybe 1 female. Watching pros walk their bikes up a hill was kinda cool. Sorry for the hijack

tjfry - 2010-11-12 1:31 PM

I am certainly curious as to why. HR is a measure of stress on the body. Power, like pace or speed, is just an output. Granted, it's more precise and detailed, it's still just an output. I think the two go hand in hand. Measure the stress on your body (whether you use HR or RPE) against a particular output. Would like to hear your thoughts.

AndrewMT - 2010-11-12 4:04 PM

Sorry to disappear for a bit.  Once and a while I actually have to do my job!

Anyway, the way I see it is that at best, the two data sources are redundant.  At worst, you get conflicting information. 

In perfect conditions my power and HR zones may be aligned, but what do I do when my HR is a bit skewed due to the dozens of things that can impact HR?  Which one do you follow?  It may be a hot day or I may be a little dehydrated, which would make my HR a little higher on average.  In that situation, I would want to still stick to my targeted power goals, but my HR would be telling me that I'm pushing too hard.  Or I'm getting sick and I decide to stick to my HR zones and I don't hit any of my power targets.  In either case, what's the benefit of having both?

I like to look at my HR data after a ride, but during, I could care less. 

Now, can you pleeeeeaaase teach me to swim?

tjfry - 2010-11-12 7:33 PM

We look at things at opposite sides of the mirror I guess. When I see my pace and HR not lining up as they should I immediately look to causes. It's not unlike training at altitude. Sometimes you let the hr go, but realize why it's doing what it does. other times, hr rules the world. If you scrap your hr on race day b/c its too high, then you are doing exactly what you suggested to everyone not to do, and that's going too hard when you shouldn't. That's why I think they are great together. One is a measure of what your body is dealing with (effort, heat, sickness, dehydration, whatever) and the other is what your body is producing in absolute terms (power, pace, etc.) the two together tell you gobs about your ability that day.
my 2 cents anyway

happy to fix your swim anytime!!

sand101 - 2010-11-12 1:46 PM

Couldn't there be another reason for this?  You look like a thin, light guy. Speed on the uphills is controlled by W/kg (light guys rule) and that speed in the straights and downhills is controlled by W/frontal area (which doesn't vary as much).   It could have been that the guy was bigger and output more raw power but you had him on W/kg.  Does that sound right?

Oldteen - 2010-11-15 1:38 PM

A bit OT, but here's another take on HR vs Power training question (with a few references)-

http://www.bicyclepaper.com/articles/2009/05/training__heart_rate_vs_power

Even in the era of PM's, PE still matters a lot.  As Merckx said about improving climbing performance & technology- don't ride upgrades, ride up grades.  Regardless of technology it is up to the individual endurance athlete to gain the experience/training to know how much they can (or cannot) push the steeper hills for best performance on a given day.  It's all fine to discuss Vi ~1, but that goal is tough on a tough hilly course.  Most of us do not have the discipline to throttle back to 5mph (or less) on a 12% grade (~220W assuming 150#cyclist w/19# bike).

crmorton - 2010-11-12 7:40 AM

Oh wow. I am that guy.
The guy who goes uphill passing people and then wonders why everyone catches up to me on the flats and downhills.

In Muskoka 70.3, I even started chatting with a group of guys around me (who were all going steady power), I shouted to one of them "Am I doing something wrong here?" as I passed by him on another uphill. We passed back and forth for about 40km, then I never saw him again (in this case we hit a stretch of brutal rollers, and I pulled away since he didn't have extra time to catch up).

Turns out, I must have been in good shape because I had the best run of my life (in a half iron).

Regardless it did indicate that I may not be using my energy efficiently while riding, and I should try and control my exertions on the uphills in the future.

tjfry - 2010-11-12 8:33 PM
We look at things at opposite sides of the mirror I guess. When I see my pace and HR not lining up as they should I immediately look to causes. It's not unlike training at altitude. Sometimes you let the hr go, but realize why it's doing what it does. other times, hr rules the world. If you scrap your hr on race day b/c its too high, then you are doing exactly what you suggested to everyone not to do, and that's going too hard when you shouldn't. That's why I think they are great together. One is a measure of what your body is dealing with (effort, heat, sickness, dehydration, whatever) and the other is what your body is producing in absolute terms (power, pace, etc.) the two together tell you gobs about your ability that day.
my 2 cents anyway

GoFaster - 2010-11-15 5:36 PM

I think this is right on the money - and I know a lot of people disagree.  I remember reading one of JeepFleeb's IM race reports, using both power and HR.  He started the ride hitting the targeted power numbers, but the HR was much higher then expected.  He had a choice to make - stick with the power number or listen to HR.  He was concerned but stuck with power and fell apart for the run.

I found a similar situation last year in a Sprint.  I had no power in the legs, but my HR was as high as it goes for a race.  I couldn't understand why I wasn't able to hit the planned watts, but the HR told me I was at my limit.  Whatever it was, I had no legs on the day.  HR told me something was wrong - I already knew that from not generating the watts, but the HR validated that it wasn't because my exertion level was too low.

As TJ said, they are great tools to be used in parallel with one another.