[Gear] - Deep Section Wheels

peter kern

whats the prize for the winner? i take on the coaching on a no win no fee basis. Its something i always wanted to do . if I win i get the money the other spend on their gear.
Since this is triathlon we are talking of course triathlon racing. for A to b since splits dont count.


On the other hand we could already do this show me one of the top guys that improved more than Paul Carol on the bike over the winter no new gear, no power, no vo2 testing so there is about 2.5 min improvement over 40k on the bike. of a guy thats 42 years of age . and what i like most he improved his swimming even more.
So there is the wheel already gone as no wheel can make 2.5 min over 40k and from what i have seen Mark Horan on power and coach has improved 2,5 min over 40 km so either coach or power is not worth the money there ;-) (and id wager its the power since the coach is good .

tunney

zico10 wrote: »

Just buying better wheels will make anyone go faster, whether overweight or not. The same cannot be said for just buying a power meter. You still need to learn how to train with it and use it correctly. And don't forget it's still possible to train hard and effectively without a power meter.

I spent €1,550 on two Zipp wheels back in the day. I never seriously looked into investing in a power meter, but I know they can go for similar prices. I don't think you're going to save a whole lot by buying one over the other. Admittedly I know next to nothing about training by power, but if it's a straight up choice between buying wheels or a power meter, the wheels would definitely be my recommendation.

So you are commenting on PM training without experience there of.

I remember the day I told my coach, back when I was coached (and training) that I had bought a disc wheel. His advice was to sell it and buy a power meter. (He has worked with four NGBs as a tri coach and been to a good few Commonwealth games and the olympics)

tunney

zico10 wrote: »

The two of you obviously have both fancy wheels and a PM, so I'll ask you, if it came down to it, on race day itself which would you go without?
Bear in mind you'd be going out on sh!t €150 wheels. I'm not trying to say training by power is a waste of time, but you both seem to be forgetting the benefit deep rim wheels provide.

I have more aero wheels than you could shake a stick at.
I also have a PM.

On a race day for anything other than sprint distance I would choose the PM. As sprint distance is just smashing it.

However the major benefits of PMs are not limited to race day. Its the training that counts. I know from the sub 10 thread last year you have an aversion to numbers, sciencey stuff and structure, that being said the touchy feeling vague approach works for you. However you are taking your N=1 results and insisting you are right when N tends to infinity. Likewise others are also taking their N=1 results but are applying them to others with mixed results to be honest.

tunney

zico10 wrote: »

Genuine questions, how much of your power output will be spent turning the non aero wheels? I think it's only Jackyback training for an IM, but if you were to put a time to it, how many minutes do you think the PM is going to give you over 180km?

I've no doubt a power meter is a wonderful training aid, and you both say the benefits of the PM are to be gained during training in the build up to your race. But it's hardly a case that it enables you to train for longer than the guy who doesn't have one.

Let's take the hypothetical situation of two athletes, of similar abilities, who have trained for an ironman. One has a PM, one has bling wheels. When it comes to race day they'll have both put in similar hours on the bike, one might have trained smarter, but the other guy's aero wheels are going to give him free speed, your PM will not. How much of a time benefit this free speed will amount to I don't know, but it definitely puts the guy without the aero wheels at a disadvantage.

How many times have we all sat watching people doing races, looking at the splits. half have said "wow wee, he is doing great". the other half have said "you'd know he is racing by feel". Low and behold blows his load and has a sh1t result because he went too hard. Money on the PM guy every time.

As I said in a previous reply - commenting on something with no experience of it.............

That being said PMs are not for everyone. I have a friend who is probably one of the better bikers in the sport in ireland, he has a PM but doesn't use it. Training by numbers doesn't suit him. Training by numbers doesn't suit some people. It does also mean that you won't really train in groups (usually because you realise how pointless the group rides are).

For some though they change everything.

El Director

I'm in too.

tunney

zico10 wrote: »

That's the thing, you both talk about coaches and a PM, not just a PM. Not trying to be a smart arse, but coaches are hardly free. The original question I responded to asked would a power meter be the best bang for buck an athlete could invest in. A coach is an added expense and for a decent coach over a year it's going to add hugely to your outlay on triathlon. And it shouldn't be unreasonable to expect a decent coach to come up with a decent training plan for an AG athlete who doesn't have a PM.

A power meter does not require a coach. I have a power meter. I do not have a coach. I use mine and get loads from it.

I can tell you from my weekend ride that I don't have the cardio vascular fitness to maintain abc watts (numbers removed for Mr GottaGateux sake) as the power heart rate decoupling was tending to 6% over the ride. I can tell you my optimal cadence is around 82rpm for sustained power generation. I can tell you that over shorter periods of time (30-40 minutes) I can maintain my 2009 IM power output with minimal decoupling which gives me hope for 2009 -20 watts on race day.

I can tell you that despite the distances being 40km shorter my ride required the almost the exact same work (3527KJ) as a 4:59 bike split on the IM Austria course.

I will also be able to gauge form going into Roth very well by comparing similar sessions from 2012 (when i do them) to 2011,2010,2009 data.

There will be no guesswork.

zico10 wrote: »

I'm sure my power was creeping up when I was training for an IM. I never trained with power, or HR for that matter, but just because I wasn't paying any attention to them doesn't mean improvements weren't being made.

But probably a hugely inefficient use of your time.

zico10 wrote: »

Maybe I'm only seeing what I want to see, but is there not evidence cropping up in the FTP thread, that warns against becoming a slave to power?
I originally posted recommending wheels over a PM, and I'll probably never know for sure until I train by power, but I'll still stand by that recommendation.

LOL

zico10 wrote: »

I have never followed Bambaata's training, but you're hardly lying when you say he will be a better cyclist this year, on account of his training with a PM. Surely with a similar volume of training he would have been cyclist regardless. One thing is certain though if he arrives at a race having forgot his race wheels he's going to clock a slower bike time.

If you educated yourself on what you are discussing you would know that the work Bambaata has done this year would not have been possible without a PM. Worth reading what he has done, some savage work.

tunney

I've not even got to the *real* reasons to choice a PM over aero wheels but I need a good hour to put that down

tunney

An analogy if you will.............

A group of women are discussing the pros and cons of sanitary pads versus tampons. A bloke overhears the discussion, joins them, and then proceeds to inform them of the superior choice based on his experiences with toilet roll.

zico10

First off Tunney thanks for taking the time to deal thoroughly with all my posts, I do genuinely appreciate it.

tunney wrote: »

So you are commenting on PM training without experience there of.

Yes and no, I didn't say anything specific about training by power, how could I? I acknowledged I never used a PM.
What I did say is that buying a PM alone is not going to give you free speed, aero wheels will. You don't need to have trained with a PM to know this.

tunney wrote: »

However the major benefits of PMs are not limited to race day. Its the training that counts. I know from the sub 10 thread last year you have an aversion to numbers, sciencey stuff and structure, that being said the touchy feeling vague approach works for you.

Believe it or not I already knew that about PMs.
I don't have an aversion to numbers or sciencey stuff, I just didn't pay much heed to them when I was training. I've always accepted I'd be a better trained athlete if I educated myself in such matters, but I think I'd lose sight of other stuff if these became my sole guide.
It's ridiculous to say I've an aversion to structure, if you care to have a look back at the sub 10 thread you'll see that my training was very, very structured. It wasn't the same approach you took to training, but that hardly makes it fair to say it was an unstructured 'touchy feeling vague approach'.

tunney wrote: »

However you are taking your N=1 results and insisting you are right when N tends to infinity. Likewise others are also taking their N=1 results but are applying them to others with mixed results to be honest.

I'm not insisting I'm right, that sounds more like your style, I'm merely giving my opinion.

tunney wrote: »

How many times have we all sat watching people doing races, looking at the splits. half have said "wow wee, he is doing great". the other half have said "you'd know he is racing by feel". Low and behold blows his load and has a sh1t result because he went too hard. Money on the PM guy every time.

Do you think you blew your load in the marathon when you went sub 10? Did you use a PM that day? Two rhetorical questions, to which I already know the answer.
I know you blame cups or poor hydration, but everybody else in Austria had to drink out of cups. You of all people surely knew how important hydration was, why didn't you just slow down and get fluids on board?
The way your run went that day seemed exactly like somebody's who had pushed too hard on the bike. When had you ever done a sub 5 hour 180km bike ride followed by a marathon before? Maybe, just maybe your numbers let you down that day and sticking to them in the heat or whatever else was the wrong thing to do.[/QUOTE]

tunney wrote: »

That being said PMs are not for everyone. I have a friend who is probably one of the better bikers in the sport in ireland, he has a PM but doesn't use it. Training by numbers doesn't suit him. Training by numbers doesn't suit some people. It does also mean that you won't really train in groups (usually because you realise how pointless the group rides are).

For some though they change everything.

+1

tunney wrote: »

A power meter does not require a coach. I have a power meter. I do not have a coach. I use mine and get loads from it.

I can tell you from my weekend ride that I don't have the cardio vascular fitness to maintain abc watts (numbers removed for Mr GottaGateux sake) as the power heart rate decoupling was tending to 6% over the ride. I can tell you my optimal cadence is around 82rpm for sustained power generation. I can tell you that over shorter periods of time (30-40 minutes) I can maintain my 2009 IM power output with minimal decoupling which gives me hope for 2009 -20 watts on race day.

I couldn't tell you any of that, but I knew what effort I was able to sustain for my IM and for my goal of going sub 10 it was sufficient on the day.

tunney wrote: »

I can tell you that despite the distances being 40km shorter my ride required the almost the exact same work (3527KJ) as a 4:59 bike split on the IM Austria course.

No such thing as a good bike split followed by a bad run.

tunney wrote: »

I will also be able to gauge form going into Roth very well by comparing similar sessions from 2012 (when i do them) to 2011,2010,2009 data.

There will be no guesswork.

Well I wish you well and I hope it works for you this time.

tunney wrote: »

But probably a hugely inefficient use of your time.

I don't think so, it got me to the marathon in Copenhagen with enough left in the tank to be actually able to run it. And I mean run it by most AG's standards.

tunney wrote: »

LOL

Indeed!

tunney wrote: »

If you educated yourself on what you are discussing you would know that the work Bambaata has done this year would not have been possible without a PM. Worth reading what he has done, some savage work.

I'll have a look at it so.

tunney wrote: »

I've not even got to the *real* reasons to choice a PM over aero wheels but I need a good hour to put that down

Well I honestly hope you do post that, like any post from you Tunney I'm sure it'll make interesting reading.

tunney

zico10 wrote: »

Yes and no, I didn't say anything specific about training by power, how could I? I acknowledged I never used a PM.
What I did say is that buying a PM alone is not going to give you free speed, aero wheels will. You don't need to have trained with a PM to know this.

I think the use of the word *free* here is the issue.

zico10 wrote: »

Believe it or not I already knew that about PMs.
I don't have an aversion to numbers or sciencey stuff, I just didn't pay much heed to them when I was training. I've always accepted I'd be a better trained athlete if I educated myself in such matters, but I think I'd lose sight of other stuff if these became my sole guide.
It's ridiculous to say I've an aversion to structure, if you care to have a look back at the sub 10 thread you'll see that my training was very, very structured. It wasn't the same approach you took to training, but that hardly makes it fair to say it was an unstructured 'touchy feeling vague approach'.

Agree to disagree

zico10 wrote: »

I'm not insisting I'm right, that sounds more like your style, I'm merely giving my opinion.

Forgive me I didn't mean to come on here and shout down the majority of posters. Oh no wait........

zico10 wrote: »

Do you think you blew your load in the marathon when you went sub 10? Did you use a PM that day? Two rhetorical questions, to which I already know the answer.
I know you blame cups or poor hydration, but everybody else in Austria had to drink out of cups. You of all people surely knew how important hydration was, why didn't you just slow down and get fluids on board?

I recovered and finished strong but yes I made a total mess of the run. I choose not to focus on it as otherwise I'll have to go back to Austria.

I made a fundamental error. I didn't not react to the situation as it unfolded in front of me. I should have changed my walking breaks to match the transitions rather than belligerently sticking to the plan and trying to drink on the go.

zico10 wrote: »

The way your run went that day seemed exactly like somebody's who had pushed too hard on the bike. When had you ever done a sub 5 hour 180km bike ride followed by a marathon before? Maybe, just maybe your numbers let you down that day and sticking to them in the heat or whatever else was the wrong thing to do.

I had trained at 240 watts for the months leading up and I changed my plan 20-30km into the race as I realised I was rolling faster than I needed to be (sub five was the target) so I backed off to 200 watts.

I came off the run feeling superb. A little too well and my early splits were too fast. Not a deal breaker but certainly too fast. Looking at the power file again from Austria it was perfect.

Yes I am annoyed that I failed on something as simple as not drinking for 20km in 37 degree heat. Yes I am annoyed that I didn't adapt. And no I still cannot drink from a cup.

peter kern

if power was the only way to get better as has been suggested in the case of one athlete...
How is it possible that hawii has been one 7 times without powermeter training and 3 times with power in the last 5 years.

for those people that say training with power is more important for ironman ......... the facts do not really support that. As if you look at the top Ironman level one could say while more males train on power than not
more femals dont train on power than with and we can say that in the last 5 years female Ironman has way further advacned than male Ironman.

So if one claims that improvement was made only because of a power meter I call BS.



peace

zico10

tunney wrote: »

I think the use of the word *free* here is the issue.

Free; in that you put on the wheels, you automatically go faster than without, no?

tunney wrote: »

Forgive me I didn't mean to come on here and shout down the majority of posters. Oh no wait........

Again I'm not shouting anyone down, I've posted my comments in what I think is a civilised manner and tried to engage people in polite debate. People might disagree, but that's what having opinions is all about.

tunney wrote: »

I recovered and finished strong

We'll agree to disagree. You certainly picked it up for the last 100m.

tunney wrote: »

I had trained at 240 watts for the months leading up and I changed my plan 20-30km into the race as I realised I was rolling faster than I needed to be (sub five was the target) so I backed off to 200 watts.

Not that I know much about it, but maybe other people here could learn something from it, but why 200? Was it just an arbitrary number you felt might be right? Was there any scientific reasoning behind it? Did it factor in the 37° heat which, being based in Ireland, you couldn't have possibly trained in?



Back in 2010 I asked about estimating an IM bike split and this is what you told me;

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=66478159

zico10 wrote: »

How should I estimate my time for bike leg of ironman race. Obviously it's not as simple as just multiplying a 40km split in an Olympic distance by 4.5. How can I use these though as a reliable guide to what sort of time I should be doing?
As regards half distance I've done Kenmare twice and the Sperrin half-ironman back in May. It's Challenge Copenhagen which I am doing, so with Kenmare being a good bit short of 90km and being so hilly, should I be using this to make a reliable estimate of time? The Sperrin race was a couple of k short as well.
Thanks

tunney wrote: »

Using the chung-on-a-stick method you can calculate your Crr and Cda.
Using gas analysis in a lab you can determine the point you cross the fat:cho threshold.

Now using the cda, the crr and your wattage you can factor in the terrain of the course and come up a number.

This should be close.

Previous non IM race times and practice 180km times are completely useless.

Best bet IMHO is to forget time goals and race by pe,hr and/or wattage. Chasing a bike time will leave you walk the run.

so genuine question where did you come up with your sub 5 target? And why would it have been wrong for me to estimate a time for my bike leg?

tunney wrote: »

Looking at the power file again from Austria it was perfect.

I certainly wish I was that certain about everything I did.

Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd.
Voltaire

peter kern

Free; in that you put on the wheels, you automatically go faster than without, no?

thats very expensive free speed ;-) for 90% of Irish triathletes training harder is what i call free speed ;-) and if a powermeter gets you to train harder than its more free speed than a wheel.

Ask the guy who bought a sub 9 disc that rubbed on his frame if that was free speed ;-)

tunney

peter kern wrote: »

Free; in that you put on the wheels, you automatically go faster than without, no?

thats very expensive free speed ;-) for 90% of Irish triathletes training harder is what i call free speed ;-) and if a powermeter gets you to train harder than its more free speed than a wheel.

Ask the guy who bought a sub 9 disc that rubbed on his frame if that was free speed ;-)

Wow. Peter and I agree. Just wow.

zico10

Free speed once the wheels are on your bike, just like a good bike set up/fit, whether you paid money or not.

tunney

Seeing as this thread is already wildly off topic:

It is from the always humorous Dr
Hutch column (by Michael Hutchinson) of Britain’s Cycling Weekly
magazine, March 29, 2012.

Dear Doctor. Well meaning but questionable advice from cycling’s own
agony uncle.
.............

A reader who requested anonymity writes: "Last season, my husband
became increasingly difficult to live with because, according to his
power meter, his fitness was going to the dogs. The little graph on
the PC was driving him into a depression.

I mentioned this to a cycling friend, who said I could alter the
calibration of the power meter in the software, which would produce a
bigger number, and make my husband much happier. I did so, and he
cheered up immediately.

I now use this tool for manipulating my husband’s mood. I reward him
with 20 watts when he is helpful around the house, and punish him
when, for example, he doesn’t take me anywhere on Valentine’s Day. Is
this wrong?"

Anon, email.
.............

[Dr Hutch responds:] "Nothing so brilliant could possibly be wrong.
I’m filling in your Nobel Prize nomination papers now."

El Director

tunney wrote: »

Seeing as this thread is already wildly off topic:

It is from the always humorous Dr
Hutch column (by Michael Hutchinson) of Britain’s Cycling Weekly
magazine, March 29, 2012.

Dear Doctor. Well meaning but questionable advice from cycling’s own
agony uncle.
.............

A reader who requested anonymity writes: "Last season, my husband
became increasingly difficult to live with because, according to his
power meter, his fitness was going to the dogs. The little graph on
the PC was driving him into a depression.

I mentioned this to a cycling friend, who said I could alter the
calibration of the power meter in the software, which would produce a
bigger number, and make my husband much happier. I did so, and he
cheered up immediately.

I now use this tool for manipulating my husband’s mood. I reward him
with 20 watts when he is helpful around the house, and punish him
when, for example, he doesn’t take me anywhere on Valentine’s Day. Is
this wrong?"

Anon, email.
.............

[Dr Hutch responds:] "Nothing so brilliant could possibly be wrong.
I’m filling in your Nobel Prize nomination papers now."

LMAO that sh!t is funny.

peter kern

we had also agreed the power meter is a tool not a solution ;-)
unless QFT is a sarcastic comment .


We both agree that powermeters can be a positive tool.
So there is not really much we disagree on .
the only difference you swear by them as the best tool out there, i use them as a tool in a tool box that has many pieces in that tool box . and say that often i have a better tool than a power meter in my box. ( or if not better than a powermeter at least cheaper )

often I am the completely wrong mechanic and like everybody i make mistakes too and i have had many athletes that should have been way faster, where I did not find the right tool to unblock the issue (most likely including your friend who I think i know)

peter kern

funny dave you actually brought the thread on track with that letter ;-)


ps what was the answer ;-)

Notwitch

Some more writings on some of the uses of a power meter on race day.


http://triathlete-europe.competitor.com/2012/04/13/power-pacing-for-a-winning-performance/