The Doctor

Peter The reason I placed the post was to clear up the misconception that we at SSISA are somehow against power meters. As you can see, it is actually quite the opposite. The study that we undertook was not "set out to prove" anything. We saw a gap in the research that has been done and decided to investigate. We have no vested interest in the outcome and the trial was conducted under strict ethical conditions as are all research trials conducted through the University of Cape Town. I appreciate that you will naturally have some bias and therefore adopt a fairly aggressive stance. Instead of trying to find fault with the resaerch, why not show some evidence to counter our findings (there is none!) In response to your questions: 1) Yes 2) 20 3) Yes 4) No. The heart rate group was encouraged to reach the target heart rate in all intervals. The average values validate this. 5) Normalised power is a term used by Cyclingpeaks and is not a scientifically validated term. A similar term would be training impulse or TRIMPS. The answer then is yes. Although the average power and heart rate values were identical, the TRIMP values for the heart rate group were higher. As many coaches prescribe power based intervals and ask the athlete to sustain a fixed power throughout the interval, our findings validate the advice that fixing power output may result in a lower training stimulus than fixing heart rate. 6) The training and testing conditions were strictly controlled. Each athlete performed the performance tests at the same time of day, under stable climactic conditions in a temperature, pressure and humidity controlled laboratory. Other factors were also controlled 7) There is no method to account for genetic variability but both groups were randomly assigned and matched for performance data prior to participation. 8) Answered in my previous post Please do not post any similar questions. You can have a copy of the journal when its published and then you can have a go at the study. However, I anticipate your approach will be somewhat biased.

I would like to clear up a few misconceptions regarding power meters and heart rate monitors as there have been a few posts in the past 6 months related to this issue. There is no argument about the benefit of training with a power meter. Power meters provide the athlete and coach with significantly more data than a heart rate monitor alone. Monitoring performance changes over time and identifying fatigue is significantly easier with both power and heart rate measurement together. If you want to maximise your training then a power meter is always going to benefit you more than a heart rate monitor, PROVIDED that you use it correctly. The question that arises is whether it is more beneficial to train at a particular power output value or heart rate zone. Until recently there have been no peer-reviewed scientific studies comparing heart rate to power based training. NONE! We recently completed a study which investigated a high intensity training protocol using either heart rate or power. Although each group of subjects trained at identical averge power outputs and heart rates throughout the study, the heart rate group improved their VO2max and peak power output to a greater extent. Although the power values during each interval did not differ, it seems that the particular power curve during heart rate based intervals provided a greater training stimulus (The heart rate intervals started at higher power and finished at lower power than the very constant power ouput of the power based intervals) This study is in review in an iternational peer reviewed scientific journal and will be publsihed in due course. The above study is only applicable to the particular session that we used - 8 x 4min at 80% PPO with 1.5min rest or 8 x 4min at 91% max HR with 1.5min rest (80PPO = 91% max heart rate for this group of athletes) Whether or not the same applies to other training sessions (longer or shorter intervals or lower and higher intensities) remains to be seen but the science has not been done yet. There are some training sessions that by their nature will necessitate the use of a power meter. T-max intervals (which have been proven to provide the greatest training stiumulus in very highly trained athletes) can only be performed using a power meter or ergometer. Similarly, Blowout sessions also require a power meter. In conclusion: If you want to have the best training tool, then purchase a power meter. However, using it incorrectly MAY provide you with a lower training stimulus than a heart rate monitor. If in doubt, perform your intervals by either adhering to a heart rate zone or alternatively by aiming for an average power output during each interval (instead of rigidly sticking to a prescribed power value). Then use the power data to monitor your training load, adaptation and fatigue (get a good coach or use cyclingpeaks software).

Ryan was an individual that all young cyclists should aspire to emulate. Not only in his achievements but also in the humility and good nature he brought to the sport. My deepest sympathy and condolences to his family, friends, fianc? and teammates. He will be sorely missed by everyone who had the pleasure of knowing him.

I knew there was a valid reason!

The reality is that the average haematocrit of Italian junior riders has risen from approximately 43% to just under 50% over the last decade. I will let you draw your own conclusions from that.