The Beginners Guide To Numbers
When I first started cycling all I cared about was my average speed. I would look at my rides and think "Wow, I averaged 28kph today that's fantastic!!" I knew that this wasn't the best metric to go by, but it was all I had. Since then I've gotten a lot stronger and learned a lot more about what numbers I should (and shouldn't) look at, and what kind of factors affect said numbers.
Before I get too far, I would like to stress that looking at numbers isn't necessary in order to enjoy cycling, and it's definitely possible to improve riding purely by feel. The numbers are for people who want to squeeze every bit of performance out of their bodies, or just a little bit of performance, or just people who like numbers. The point is, if you want numbers to look at, great, if not, riding a bike is still amazing and you should definitely do it. I fall into the group who like the numbers though, so lets take a deeper look.
Speed
This is the easiest metric to capture when you start cycling. All it takes is a smartphone stuck in a jersey pocket with Strava running and boom, speed data. Living in Winnipeg it's incredibly flat, and although it can be equally windy, my go-to interval location is well sheltered from the wind, so speed is a relatively accurate metric.
If you want to judge your effort by speed, try to find somewhere with a lot of trees and turns so wind plays a smaller part in your speed. Alternatively, find a hill so steep that wind has little to no affect on speed. I'm assuming this works, I don't really know what hills are though, so I may be wrong.
Sounds pretty good right? Not really. Speed can be affected by too many factors to be an accurate measure. The aforementioned wind can play a HUGE role in speed, drafting riders or vehicles makes it easier to go faster, and any change in gradient will change the effort for a given speed.
Heart Rate
Heart rate is (in my opinion) the best number to look at for a beginner who is looking for a bit more performance. For around $100 you can buy a high-quality, comfortable heart rate monitor that will hook up to a cell phone (because you already have one, not that I"d recommend putting it on your bars) or a cycling computer (Around a $250-$300 investment, but I'd rather have it on my bars than a phone).
Heart rate is well suited for pacing longer efforts. Wether you want to ensure you aren't digging too deep when you're off the front in a road race, or just don't want to get popped off the back when you pull off on a club ride, heart rate will tell you how hard your body is working.
Again, there are some downsides to using heart rate. Thinks like how well you slept, temperature, fatigue, and caffeine consumption can affect your resting and peak heart rate. It's still a better guage of effort than speed, but there are still some flaws.
Cadence
This one is less about how hard you're working. Once you're training with heart rate, cadence will help you become more efficient. A cadence sensor will probably cost you around $40, so by cycling standards, it's a relatively inexpensive piece of equipment.
Your cadence (how fast you're spinning your legs) will change how effeciently you're putting down power. Current science is showing that 85-100 (95-110?) rpm is the most efficient. I forget exactly what the number was, I just know I tend to sit above it. The argument for higher cadence is that you're working your heart more than your legs, so you'll be fresher when you need to put more power down.
Personally I tend to train to power and heart rate, but the occasional session focussed on low and high cadence can be incredibly valuable, both for sprints (high cadence) and hills (low cadence, sometimes).
Power
Seemingly the gold standard of training data, your power shows you quantifyably how hard you're working. Power doesn't care that you had a long day yesterday, or that you're going into a 60kph headwind, or that you're riding up a 15% grade (I've done at least two of those). Power is measured my multiplying how hard you're pushing on the pedals by how long the cranks are by how fast you're turning the pedals, or something like that, none of my physics classes covered powermeters, and those classes were years ago.
The point is, it's accurate, and is affected a lot less by circumstanes. It's still affected by temperature to some degree, though much less than heart rate. The biggest downside to training with power is that a good power meter costs as much as (or more than) most people's first bike, but if you want to train as efficiently as possible, it's the best option on the market.
I tried to be as concise as possible with this one. I plan on writing dedicated posts about all these at some point in the future.
Stay Cool Internet :)
Before I get too far, I would like to stress that looking at numbers isn't necessary in order to enjoy cycling, and it's definitely possible to improve riding purely by feel. The numbers are for people who want to squeeze every bit of performance out of their bodies, or just a little bit of performance, or just people who like numbers. The point is, if you want numbers to look at, great, if not, riding a bike is still amazing and you should definitely do it. I fall into the group who like the numbers though, so lets take a deeper look.
Speed
This is the easiest metric to capture when you start cycling. All it takes is a smartphone stuck in a jersey pocket with Strava running and boom, speed data. Living in Winnipeg it's incredibly flat, and although it can be equally windy, my go-to interval location is well sheltered from the wind, so speed is a relatively accurate metric.
If you want to judge your effort by speed, try to find somewhere with a lot of trees and turns so wind plays a smaller part in your speed. Alternatively, find a hill so steep that wind has little to no affect on speed. I'm assuming this works, I don't really know what hills are though, so I may be wrong.
Sounds pretty good right? Not really. Speed can be affected by too many factors to be an accurate measure. The aforementioned wind can play a HUGE role in speed, drafting riders or vehicles makes it easier to go faster, and any change in gradient will change the effort for a given speed.
Heart Rate
Heart rate is (in my opinion) the best number to look at for a beginner who is looking for a bit more performance. For around $100 you can buy a high-quality, comfortable heart rate monitor that will hook up to a cell phone (because you already have one, not that I"d recommend putting it on your bars) or a cycling computer (Around a $250-$300 investment, but I'd rather have it on my bars than a phone).
Heart rate is well suited for pacing longer efforts. Wether you want to ensure you aren't digging too deep when you're off the front in a road race, or just don't want to get popped off the back when you pull off on a club ride, heart rate will tell you how hard your body is working.
Again, there are some downsides to using heart rate. Thinks like how well you slept, temperature, fatigue, and caffeine consumption can affect your resting and peak heart rate. It's still a better guage of effort than speed, but there are still some flaws.
Cadence
This one is less about how hard you're working. Once you're training with heart rate, cadence will help you become more efficient. A cadence sensor will probably cost you around $40, so by cycling standards, it's a relatively inexpensive piece of equipment.
Your cadence (how fast you're spinning your legs) will change how effeciently you're putting down power. Current science is showing that 85-100 (95-110?) rpm is the most efficient. I forget exactly what the number was, I just know I tend to sit above it. The argument for higher cadence is that you're working your heart more than your legs, so you'll be fresher when you need to put more power down.
 |
| Cadence in the picture is actually zero, but it's the most relevant picture I had |
Personally I tend to train to power and heart rate, but the occasional session focussed on low and high cadence can be incredibly valuable, both for sprints (high cadence) and hills (low cadence, sometimes).
Power
Seemingly the gold standard of training data, your power shows you quantifyably how hard you're working. Power doesn't care that you had a long day yesterday, or that you're going into a 60kph headwind, or that you're riding up a 15% grade (I've done at least two of those). Power is measured my multiplying how hard you're pushing on the pedals by how long the cranks are by how fast you're turning the pedals, or something like that, none of my physics classes covered powermeters, and those classes were years ago.
The point is, it's accurate, and is affected a lot less by circumstanes. It's still affected by temperature to some degree, though much less than heart rate. The biggest downside to training with power is that a good power meter costs as much as (or more than) most people's first bike, but if you want to train as efficiently as possible, it's the best option on the market.
I tried to be as concise as possible with this one. I plan on writing dedicated posts about all these at some point in the future.
Stay Cool Internet :)
Comments
Post a Comment