Cyclists with a "Running" Problem

[Vetplant]

Some Pichas to share about the Running Power Estimator App:

 

I tried to stay to some sort of constant power level that felt comfortable. Just wanted to see whether a constant Power reading felt like a constant Effort. And for the most part it did.

 

As I said previously, the only area where it didn't feel "right" was just as you crested an incline or when starting an incline. But playing with the 3 main settings in the app will make this more "real time", the cost will obviously be more noise in the data:

-duration of which pace is calculated: currently 20s

-distance over which gradient is calculated: currently 75m

-bias between the mean gradient and the instant gradient: 80%

 

In the pictures, you can see the HeartRate tracked relatively evenly all the way, while the Pace went up and down. My Cadence stayed withing a 5rpm band. From this it seems that the App is doing what I want, it evens out my effort.

 

In the results, it gives you an Ave Power for every Lap you registered as well as a Max Power for that Lap.

 

While running, you just get a single data field to display, Running Power. And because it is a Connect IQ App, you can only have 2 instances of datafields in an activity. So at most you will be able to show running power on two pages. This isn't a showstopper, but might be a bit irritating for some.

 

Interestingly, it writes the Estimated Power to the Fit File every second along with the Gradient. But this data isn't pushed to Strava or Training Peaks as far as I can see. So we will either need to do our own analytics on the FIT files to create a CP curve or will have to wait for these developers to start pulling that data into their platforms. At least the data is there to be used.

 

Overall, I think this can be a very useful App.

 

 

[shaper]

Ah - thanks Shaper, excellent info and advice - let me do some more reading and learning 

Unless you use software to generate your power distribution curve, same as you do in cycling, so that you know exactly what power you can generate and for how long.  The simplest which will give you a ball park idea is to reverse "engineer" your power numbers.

 

For the first 6-8 weeks, you should totally ignore the power numbers when you run as they mean nothing to you as you have no reference points yet.  For these 6-8 weeks, just run and record the power data.  Post run, look at the numbers and start writing down and recording the information.  For a certain power you will run at a certain pace, and the opposite is true.

 

So create 2 columns, one for pace and one for power.  Your pace column will be from say 7min/km up to 4 mins/km (or whatever the fastest sprint you can do).  Then go run, do 30s sprints, do 1 min sprints, 4-5min VO2max intervals, 20 min threshold runs, 30 min time trials, long runs, recovery runs. After you run, record your average pace and slot it in between your 7 and 4 min/km, see what your average power was for that run and write it down next to the pace.  Zoom in on your VO2max intervals or sprints, write down the average pace and corresponding average power.

 

In this way you start to build the 2 columns with Average Pace v Average power for many iterations of pace between your upper and lower extremes.  Some runs you will have the same average power, you can then use this as a check to see if this runs power is similar to previous runs.  If so then you know the data is becoming reliable.  If it's a run with an average pace you have not done before, then you slot it in.  i.e you had done runs at 5:15 and 5:25 mins/km and recorded the power, this run is at 5:21 mins/km, so you can slot the pace and power numbers between the 2.  Eventually you will have a whole column of different paces between 4 and 7 mins/km and a corresponding column of different power numbers.

 

Finally go do a lactate threshold test, will give you your lactate pace as well as your critical power.

 

Now with all this data you will be able to set your zones for creating your workouts and plans https://www.velopress.com/jim-vances-running-power-zones/

 

You can also start testing your data.  Do a race, go for a run, decide before what your goal pace will be.  Look at your table of pace v power you have built up and see what the corresponding power will be for the pace you want to run at.  Then go run at that power, ignoring pace and see how you do and whether the numbers work.  They should do if you have been methodical.

 

Same with races, you want to target a 1:50hr 21km, your pace will be 5:42min/km, look up in your table what the power for that pace is.  Then run the 21km at that power, run on power and see how close to your target time is. 

 

Periodic do lactate test, recalculate your Critical Power (same as you do for cycling FTP), redo your zones.  Rinse and repeat, to get faster, but running to power rather than to pace.

Edited June 26, 2020 by shaper

[shaper]

 

Interestingly, it writes the Estimated Power to the Fit File every second along with the Gradient. But this data isn't pushed to Strava or Training Peaks as far as I can see. So we will either need to do our own analytics on the FIT files to create a CP curve or will have to wait for these developers to start pulling that data into their platforms. At least the data is there to be used.

 

Overall, I think this can be a very useful App.

For TrainingPeaks, you have to buy WKO5 if you want the power curve, it will record the info but only for pulling through to WKO5 which is their analysis software.

 

Strava does not record running power, however, there are rumours that they are about to at some point soon.  If they do, then with the help of David at Intervals.icu, we might be able to get a running power distribution curve.

 

Currently if you want that power curve, then you either going to have to generate it via a spreadsheet and graphs or use Golden Cheetah

Edited June 26, 2020 by shaper

[Vetplant]

For TrainingPeaks, you have to buy WKO5 if you want the power curve, it will record the info but only for pulling through to WKO5 which is their analysis software.

 

Strava does not record running power, however, there are rumours that they are about to at some point soon.  If they do, then with the help of David at Intervals.icu, we might be able to get a running power distribution curve.

 

Currently if you want that power curve, then you either going to have to generate it via a spreadsheet or use Golden Cheetah

Good point, haven't run GC in a long while. Intervals.icu has been my go-to recently.

 

I'm wondering if the Estimated Running Power is written in the "correct slot" in the fit file for all these platforms to recognise this. I saw in the App Reviews someone gave the developer the secret number he needed to be able to do that. So we might be lucky.

 

I'll report back on GC in the meantime. 

[shaper]

Good point, haven't run GC in a long while. Intervals.icu has been my go-to recently.

 

I'm wondering if the Estimated Running Power is written in the "correct slot" in the fit file for all these platforms to recognise this. I saw in the App Reviews someone gave the developer the secret number he needed to be able to do that. So we might be lucky.

 

I'll report back on GC in the meantime. 

When using Golden Cheetah, there will be a chart for power curve for cycling, Just download another chart power curve for cycling, then on this chart use the filter function and change it to running only and rename it.  

 

Now with power being used for both cycling and running, you will have to add a filter to the original cycling chart for cycling only.  Then you will have 2 independent Power Distribution charts and each with calculate your Critical Power

[Jehosefat]

Go look at my CPT power chart in an earlier post. Power is pretty constant whether course is flat or hilly, only thing that changes is pace with hill.

 

To give you a simple example

 

If totally flat your run at 200w which is equivalent to 1hr for 10km. Your average for the run is 6min/km.  We have built a spreadsheet during training, so know what power equates to what pace.

 

If you run a course which is one hill 5kms up and 5kms back down, you run up at 200w being at a pace of say 6:30min/km (as you have to run slower to stay at 200w as working against the slope and gravity).  Coming back down with the use of gravity and slope it easy running downhill so you have to run faster at now 5:30min/km to maintain the 200w.  Net result 6:30min/km on way up, 5:30min/km on way down, Average pace for the run 6mins/km finish in 1 hour on a 10km hilly course. 

 

You still raced both courses at 200w power output and had the same finish time even though one was a hill and not flat.  

 

I get what you are saying but what I am saying is that however you are measuring power, it is being measured incorrectly.

 

If the same power output would get you the same speed regardless of the course then why are all the marathon world records set on flat courses and none are set on hilly courses? Surely the athletes are capable of outputting the same power on different courses?

 

It sounds like your "power" measure is actually measuring something more like gradient adjusted pace than actual power output.

[Christie]

Imo running power is a bit less usefull than cycling power - there are no gears involved. On the bike, I found power was most usefull for interval training. For running you can use pace for interval training - it should correlate directly to power. On the bike I could use heartrate for effort comtrol on longer intervals and TTs - I would think heartrate would work very well for managingrunning effort

[Geared]

For TrainingPeaks, you have to buy WKO5 if you want the power curve, it will record the info but only for pulling through to WKO5 which is their analysis software.

 

Strava does not record running power, however, there are rumours that they are about to at some point soon.  If they do, then with the help of David at Intervals.icu, we might be able to get a running power distribution curve.

 

Currently if you want that power curve, then you either going to have to generate it via a spreadsheet and graphs or use Golden Cheetah

 

 

is this a separate software over and above a premium account ? 

 

great convo guys, I am learning a lot from both sides, and the dcrainmaker article was great, I follow all his stuff, but missed that one, seems promising overall. 

[travisza]

Imo running power is a bit less usefull than cycling power - there are no gears involved. On the bike, I found power was most usefull for interval training. For running you can use pace for interval training - it should correlate directly to power. On the bike I could use heartrate for effort comtrol on longer intervals and TTs - I would think heartrate would work very well for managingrunning effort

I'm afraid not.

 

"For running you can use pace for interval training - it should correlate directly to power." - think about running the same pace for an interval (1) up a hill (2) on a flat (3) downhill. Same pace, 3 very different effort (and power) levels

 

"Heartrate would work very well for managing running effort" - if used only by itself then no. Exactly the same theory as why you would use power numbers in cycling. A number of external factors can influence your HR including fatigue, sleep the night before, stress, cardiac drift over the course of a workout etc. All make HR relatively ineffective (when used solely by itself).

 

If you combine HR, pace and RPE you can manage your interval efforts pretty well especially if you are an experienced runner

[shaper]

I get what you are saying but what I am saying is that however you are measuring power, it is being measured incorrectly.

 

If the same power output would get you the same speed regardless of the course then why are all the marathon world records set on flat courses and none are set on hilly courses? Surely the athletes are capable of outputting the same power on different courses?

 

It sounds like your "power" measure is actually measuring something more like gradient adjusted pace than actual power output.

I have tried to explain it as best I can, you can disagree, but having run with power for over 2 years, I can tell you it works, Andy will also say the same.  We do not run to pace but power, pace varies.  Constant power is basically trying to flatten the course.  You can agree to disagree.  

 

Why do you think RD Murray (triathlete) is now running to power and smashing 5km records?  Go look at his IG and Strava and you will see his runs have power recorded.  IIRC the recent 5km PB, his power was over 400w

[Vetplant]

When using Golden Cheetah, there will be a chart for power curve for cycling, Just download another chart power curve for cycling, then on this chart use the filter function and change it to running only and rename it.  

 

Now with power being used for both cycling and running, you will have to add a filter to the original cycling chart for cycling only.  Then you will have 2 independent Power Distribution charts and each with calculate your Critical Power

Some Feedback on GC, I installed 3.6.

 

On the activity "EDIT", you get a "Developer" tab where the Estimated Power is listed. Just copy from there into the Power column on the Standard tab and Bob's your uncle.

 

Golden Cheetah plots the CP for the activity.

 

Now to build the CP over time.

 

Thanks for the tips Shaper

[b-rad]

Go look at my CPT power chart in an earlier post. Power is pretty constant whether course is flat or hilly, only thing that changes is pace with hill.

 

To give you a simple example

 

If totally flat your run at 200w which is equivalent to 1hr for 10km. Your average for the run is 6min/km.  We have built a spreadsheet during training, so know what power equates to what pace.

 

If you run a course which is one hill 5kms up and 5kms back down, you run up at 200w being at a pace of say 6:30min/km (as you have to run slower to stay at 200w as working against the slope and gravity).  Coming back down with the use of gravity and slope it easy running downhill so you have to run faster at now 5:30min/km to maintain the 200w.  Net result 6:30min/km on way up, 5:30min/km on way down, Average pace for the run 6mins/km finish in 1 hour on a 10km hilly course. 

 

You still raced both courses at 200w power output and had the same finish time even though one was a hill and not flat.

 

I see where you are going in the explanation. But what happens for a route with more climbing than descending as your example assumes equal uphill to downhill?

Relative to an equal effort flat route a net uphill course run at the same power as the flat route will no doubt take longer? If pace has to reduce somewhat on the uphill sections to maintain the same power then the route will take longer.

Or is an adjustment to required power made if it's a hilly course but a similar PB is intended as on the flat course?

[Mats]

Thanks for the info Shaper.

Always nice to see things differently and learn something new.

 

I have a Polar Vantage V that has running power but never even looked at it.

[Vetplant]

One drawback with almost all of these running power solutions is that it doesn't measure actual power.

 

This isn't an issue in most cases, but there are a few exceptions to remember:

-Tailwind/Headwind: Only the newest Stryd measures wind, so be careful when it is exceptionally windy.

-Pushing a running Pram: It has no idea you are moving an additional 25kg while running.

(I might try to adjust the Mass setting in the App before doing the next Pram run and see if it makes this more useful)

-Underfoot conditions: Wet/Dry Tarmac, gravel, Sand, grass. Take note that these will create big discrepancies

 

I'm sure there are plenty more examples, these were just off the top of my head.

[shaper]

I see where you are going in the explanation. But what happens for a route with more climbing than descending as your example assumes equal uphill to downhill?

Relative to an equal effort flat route a net uphill course run at the same power as the flat route will no doubt take longer? If pace has to reduce somewhat on the uphill sections to maintain the same power then the route will take longer.

Or is an adjustment to required power made if it's a hilly course but a similar PB is intended as on the flat course?

Most runs/races are out/around and back from A to A, so generally cancel each other out with ups and downs, I have done Pirates (over Northcliff) and Irene (flat) picking a similar training power with target finish time in mind and have finished both races in similar times.

 

Where the route is from A to B and all up hill, then adjustment will have to be made with regard to pacing being your power.  As I use the stryd app it tells me for race calculation and seems to work. But have to agree it has me thinking too.  I guess there will always be outlier exceptions.

 

Here how stryd calculates https://blog.stryd.com/2020/01/10/how-to-calculate-your-race-time-from-your-target-power/

[Pieter-za]

A slight sidetrack from the very insightful RP discussion, new regs allow for 'organised groups of 4' for exercising:

 

https://businesstech.co.za/news/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Cogta.pdf

 

e) exercise between the hours of 06h00 to 18h00: Provided that the exercise is not done in organised groups of more than four people and adheres to health protocols and social distancing measures;

Edited June 26, 2020 by Pieter-za