First, I've made the distinction between `indoor' training and `outdoor' training.
Indoor training. Some people just pedal and read a book. Others actually `train' and pay close attention to the numbers. My comments refer to the latter.
For 16 years I made dedicated good use of the CompuTrainer. I sold it last year when we moved from Chicago to the mountains of Arizona. I replaced the CompuTrainer with a LeMond Revolution.
The LeMond Revolution is different from the CT in that:
- it measures nothing, i.e., it has no devices for cadence, power, time, heart rate, power,
- it is a wind trainer that has no electrical parts,
- it is noisier than a CT (i.e., air displacement is noisy),
- the complete LR unit comes in at $500 v. the CT at $1,500 t0 $2,000 (assuming computer and monitor interface),
- it is bulletproof strong with no wires, digital displays, or parts that can come loose or break,
- it eliminates rear wheel / tire problems (flat tires, rubber residue accumulation, needing to clean the tire with alcohol or a solvent to assure good grip, etc),
- there are (and probably never will be) `upgrades' in equipment or software,
- because of all of the above it is, for me, far simpler to set up and use (just get on the bike and start pedaling).
Perhaps surprising to many, I never really used the CT for power meter training. I used it almost exclusively for the novelty of programming known courses (Assault on Mt. Mitchell, RAAM stages, etc) and experiencing the entertainment factor of doing so. As well, since I could adjust the resistance to the rear wheel I'd program long hours of `x' resistance in my training. I made good use of the CT. And it offered me more (power metering) than I used it for.
Now something about the mountainous and hilly terrain in which I now live.
At this writing I've ridden 6,450 miles and climbed 496,000 feet since January 1, 2012. These are all `outdoor' miles and feet climbed. I guess I could have use the CT to simulate these indoors but it would never have been the same. Bike handling skills. Dealing with dramatically different roads and road conditions. Dealing with wind, cold, rain, snow and ice. None of that happens on an indoor trainer.
But there are drawbacks to training exclusively on long/short ascents and descents. The first and most frustrating for me is that, on the long descents (as many as 17 miles of continuous descending), I'm doing nothing but steering. That is, my heart rate drops to the 60's and I'm putting out NO power. Less frustrating but equally limiting is that, on the long ascents, I'm just grinding away at a low rpm and `manageable' heart rate in the 115 - 130 bpm range.
Alternating LONG periods of no watts with LONG periods of pushing 200 - 350 watts (my estimate) leaves a big hole in my physical conditioning for handling the real-world demand for constant application of watts for hour after hour. In otherwords, in my local terrain it is too much of a mix of `long rest' and `hard but short pressure.'
I recently completed a long time trial on a flat course. I'm in great shape and did well over the course (except for the 4 flat tires and the time it took to change tubes and tires). However, I didn't do as well as I had expected. After about 100 miles I noticed that my legs began to hurt, i.e., the uninterrupted application of watts became a limiting factor. I was used to `resting' on the many downhills in my local terrain.
So I now recognize the need to `fill in' the hole in my training. That is, I need to train without the benefit of the `rest' that the downhills offer me.
On my next blog entry I'll describe the problems associated with trying to measure / train with a power meter in my terrain.
No comments:
Post a Comment