Topic: Does training with Power teach us to ignore Heart Rate...to our detriment?

[Clean39T]

I know there have been a couple discussions around the “Haywire Heart” book by Zinn et. Al. already, but I wanted to start a thread that goes in a bit different direction.

Topic: Does training with Power teach us to ignore Heart Rate to our detriment, leading us to push harder than we should by viewing our bodies too mechanistically? I’m leaning toward yes. If you agree, what have you adjusted in your training as a result? If you think I’m crazy, tell me why…

I started doing structured training using TrainerRoad and a PM/SmartTrainer back in late October. Since then I’ve religiously completed Sweet Spot Base Mid-Volume I and High-Volume II, and am now on Sustained Build High Volume. I’ve done the requisite testing all along the way and have logged every ride. I’ve generally hit every interval as prescribed, with life getting in the way of a day or two here and there, and a couple shortened weekend rides because dear god 3 hrs on a trainer is a long time.

Along the way I’ve noticed a couple things.

First, it’s much easier to follow a training plan based on power than RPE or HR. My PM has a number that I can keep striving to back off or increase intensity to hit, and it reproduces the same day-after-day. I can see when I’m losing focus. I can see when it’s time to ramp the next interval. And I can ratchet intensity little by little as the plan goes along. I’m training more consistently than I ever have (at least over winter).

Second, in striving to hit power targets and complete intervals, I override and dissociate with my what’s going on internally. Shut up legs, shut up brain, shut up lungs, shut up heart – hit the target! Hold it! And rest…go again! I’ve learned to treat my body like a machine. If I’m tired, I have to dig deeper and push harder and see a higher percent of MaxHR to complete an interval. Hot? Not recovered? Who cares. 300W for 30 sec. Go.

Third, there’s a part of me that feels like this is a foolish way to train. And that’s the part that’s writing this…

PMs are praised for being a “real”, “objective” measure of workload and capability, vs. heart-rate, which the experts say can vary day by day, especially if you’re tired, over-heated, over-trained, jet-lagged, had too much coffee, too much sugar, not enough sugar, not enough water…essentially, heart-rate responds to the physical conditions of your body at the time you are measuring it and/or working through some activity. They say this is a bad thing, that you need to ignore your “artificially low” heart-rate (that’s there because you just flew across the country only to wake up at 6a to race the next day) and concentrate on your power numbers, because power doesn’t lie.

I’m not so sure.

Could it be that heart-rate should be the primary measurement and governor of what we do as cyclists, especially as aging cyclists? Should we work out by HR zone and respond primarily to that with power being used (if at all) as a secondary metric? And by “we”, I mean the people who aren’t collecting a paycheck based on how fast we go; those who want to live well into their 50s, 60s, and 70s without a pacemaker or fear of a cardiac event coming on due to any number of endurance-sports induced self-sabotage?

Of course, it’s probably not an either/or decision – I imagine there are those who train with power, but set their limits with heart-rate – or have figured out how to set limits on how often they chase that next FTP test PR, KOM, etc.

But there-in lies my question. With all of the industry emphasis on power, sweet-spot intervals, smart-trainers, Zwift’ing, etc., are we riding down a road we don’t belong on as 30+, 40+, 50+ yr old “athletes”?

How do YOU manage your exertion and does your knowledge of the potential dangers of going beyond your limits, over-riding your protection systems, etc. play into that? Do you meet the man-with-the-hammer on a regular basis? Or do you train more conservatively and save beast-mode for the occasional race?

For those who’ve read “Haywire Heart”, did you find the wrap-up on it entirely too short? I certainly did. And so here I am asking these questions…

[nate2351]

I've always done longer rides based of HR while checking the watts after the fact to see how much I decoupled. For <20 minutes I find it best to use the PM. I don't think base rides off of power are a good idea, you usually find you're going far too hard by the end, again due to the decoupling.

I think power only leads to ignoring heart rate if you ignore the heart rate. Understanding how the two relate can lead to much better training in my opinion.

[r_mutt]

i think there are some new power meter adoptees don't understand how to proper train with a power meter and perhaps ignore HR.

one's HR should give an idea of how hard one's body is working to maintain that wattage. if your HR jumps up much higher than it should be for a given power zone, then something is wrong.

this is why you are given both HR and power numbers when you take an LT test.

[makoti]

Second, in striving to hit power targets and complete intervals, I override and dissociate with my what’s going on internally. Shut up legs, shut up brain, shut up lungs, shut up heart – hit the target! Hold it! And rest…go again!

What training ISN'T like that? The entire idea of training is to push yourself past comfortable limits. The trick is to not do that all the time.

[Clean39T]

i think there are some new power meter adoptees don't understand how to proper train with a power meter and perhaps ignore HR.



Sounds like I'm that guy...and maybe I do actually need a coach, not just a book or an app...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shovelhd]

It's a triumvirate. Power, HR, RPE. You can't train HR but you can train by it. You can both train and train by power. RPE is the hardest to develop, but if you're racing, it's the most important, and most often overlooked.

[earlfoss]

It doesn't teach you to ignore HR. You integrate power, HR, and other metrics to get a more accurate look at the big picture.

[Clean39T]

I've always done longer rides based of HR while checking the watts after the fact to see how much I decoupled. For <20 minutes I find it best to use the PM. I don't think base rides off of power are a good idea, you usually find you're going far too hard by the end, again due to the decoupling.



I think power only leads to ignoring heart rate if you ignore the heart rate. Understanding how the two relate can lead to much better training in my opinion.


So, for intervals, or even for an FTP test, do you set a HR ceiling?

My LTHR is reportedly ~171, but I frequently max out at 186 on intervals (long or short) by the end. 186 or 187 is the highest recorded HR I've seen in ten plus years of using a strap. It doesn't seem right/good to be bouncing off the redline like that, but I'm still completing the power-based interval target based on the FTP test, so...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mtechnica]

Does it matter what your heart rate is though? That what I'm not sure about. Seems like heart rate is indirectly related to power, if you are fatigued and your heart rate is higher then you can't maintain the same power. I've never heard anyone say you can injure yourself by exercising too hard, your body is supposed to shut itself down first right?

[Clean39T]

What training ISN'T like that? The entire idea of training is to push yourself past comfortable limits. The trick is to not do that all the time.


I've always trained that way, running or riding, I guess the difference is that I'm going deeper into the pain cave now because I'm focusing on the power. Is that a good thing? I honestly don't know. I'm getting stronger/faster - but is going too deep too often a fools game at 37?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[shovelhd]

Does it matter what your heart rate is though? That what I'm not sure about. Seems like heart rate is indirectly related to power, if you are fatigued and your heart rate is higher then you can't maintain the same power. I've never heard anyone say you can injure yourself by exercising too hard, your body is supposed to shut itself down first right?

Not really. You should read Training and Racing with a Power Meter. It's a good beginner's guide to training.

Heart rate varies according to many factors like fatigue, hydration, health, temperature, etc. However if you are rested and focused, it can be very repeatable. If you are fatigued, your heart rate pegs at a level well below max. You can keep pushing and pushing but your HR won't go up. That's your body telling you to back off.

You can absolutely hurt yourself by exercising too hard. Not necessarily drop dead, but you can set your training back weeks if you don't rest enough and dig yourself a deep hole. You can feel great while digging, too.

[nate2351]

So, for intervals, or even for an FTP test, do you set a HR ceiling?

My LTHR is reportedly ~171, but I frequently max out at 186 on intervals (long or short) by the end. 186 or 187 is the highest recorded HR I've seen in ten plus years of using a strap. It doesn't seem right/good to be bouncing off the redline like that, but I'm still completing the power-based interval target based on the FTP test, so...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For a test I don't limit myself to a certain HR, but I also don't expect high numbers in the winter. I don't freak out when my 20 min test is 50-75 watts lower in the winter.

If the HR and Watts aren't lining up I either lower the watts to match the HR or cut the intervals. If you're HR is through the roof to match the watts either you're tired or the watts are too high. There's no shame in cutting your losses and living to fight another day. The last thing you want is to burnout in March.

Are you training for races or sportives?

[John H.]

Lots of good info here.
Listen to Shovel and Earfloss.

If you are you a workout to target your LTH level (171) and you ar seeing 187- you are going way too hard.
Time for you to learn a bit about integrating heartrate and power.

So, for intervals, or even for an FTP test, do you set a HR ceiling?

My LTHR is reportedly ~171, but I frequently max out at 186 on intervals (long or short) by the end. 186 or 187 is the highest recorded HR I've seen in ten plus years of using a strap. It doesn't seem right/good to be bouncing off the redline like that, but I'm still completing the power-based interval target based on the FTP test, so...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[11.4]

A few points:

1. HR and Power can in fact correlate linearly if your body is rested, nourished, and in a growth mode. That's what you're trying for. If you can plot a straight line for power versus heart rate, you're doing what you're supposed to. However, if the line drops so you aren't improving power against heart rate, you are overtrained or otherwise lacking productive training potential. That's where you should back off. I actually like to see Productive Training Potential as a slope of that line that tells you how you're doing. It's the first differential of your rate of improvement, so it can actually tell you a lot about your optimal training rate. Why is this important? You can train gently for improvement or train hard for more improvement, and you need to know what your body tolerates. It's a way to calculate how fast you can train and when you need to back off.

2. As pointed out, heart rate is a measure of how your body is exerting, while power meter wattage is a measure of how you translate that exertion to a proxy for speed. However, do note that you can actually train your heart rate in a number of ways. This is what power training always forgets: you can use your training to improve your heart performance in terms of HR at a particular output, blood volume per beat, etc. It's what aerobic training is about and that used to be so important to training. So don't feel you can't improve HR.

3. Don't forget that RPE is also trainable. We call it mental toughness or whatever, but there are many ways it can improve and often it can be the most trainable parameter of the three.

Thus there's at least a triumvirate of three measures that are all trainable: HR, Power, and RPE. RPE. And of course there's the efficiency measure that basically incorporates pedaling action, effective fit, positioning, overall health, and so on. Then everybody's happy and the real nerds among us can start calculating personal trinomials to optimize among all three variables. But to the OP's original question, this is how you can calculate just how hard you can train and just when you have to ease off. You don't necessarily have to do all the math, but if you're deeply into a power meter already, you have the comfort level to calculate how well you're improving and see whether you can improve on a third parameter or need to lay off. It's a lot more intuitively obvious once you try it (said, laughing).

[joosttx]

Training with power should be coupled with HR. Simply put how can you tell when you get fatigued if you are only looking power. Its a sure fire way to over train.

[Andrevich4]

I use all three.

I like heart rate because it tells me when I'm about to get sick. Usually 24-48 hours pre-sick my HR won't go up where it needs to. So I stop, I rest, and generally I don't get sick.

RPE serves as a qualitative assessment. So I note where are my thoughts when I'm riding, what's my self-talk, how much of a jerk am I off the bike, etc. All of that gets captured so I can see trends.

For long rides and racing I use data collection passively. Good for after the fact but not how I like to gauge ride or effort.


To the larger point... I think it's a good question. If it takes someone 3 cups of coffee to be awake enough to hit the TrainerRoad efforts early in the morning that caffeine influx has to be more stressful on the body than simply the wattage the rider is putting out. Likewise when coaching sleep-deprived, stressed-out collegiate cyclists I think it's almost better to have them focused on HR over power, even if it is less efficient. Seems that the HR is telling more about what's happening in the athlete than power ever could.

[shovelhd]

When I said that HR isn't trainable, I meant to the same degree as power and RPE. HR numbers are mainly genetic. Mine are genetically high. Someone else may not be genetically high. They may be much stronger than me, while their maxHR is 20 points lower than mine. There is nothing they can do to make up that 20 points, it's impossible. Comparing power numbers amongst riders is silly enough, but comparing HR is even sillier.

[unterhausen]

I worry that if my heart rate ever gets to 160, the world is going to come to an end or something. Pretty sure the highest I have ever seen on my trainer is 159. I wish I had been monitoring it when I was younger. The standard calculation says my max is 165. I feel like I might hit that when I'm out climbing on my mountain bike, but I have never taken the heart strap with me for that. Thinking about it though.

I think HR is really interesting. When I am riding my trainer in erg mode, I can see my hr go up and down with my cadence. Seems like higher cadence makes my HR go up.

[shovelhd]

Yes, higher cadence tends to raise HR at that moment. However if you slow down pedal speed and grunt, your HR may not drop right away.

My max HR is 193, and I'm 59 years old. Do the math. See why formulas and comparing numbers are silly?

[Clean39T]

It doesn't teach you to ignore HR. You integrate power, HR, and other metrics to get a more accurate look at the big picture.

This seems to sum it up pretty well.

So, the caution should be: don't get a power meter or smart trainer and just start wailing on yourself without taking the time to understand how to integrate Power, HR, and RPE into a sustainable, healthy, and effective training regimen.

I read "Training and Racing with a PM" - but obviously not carefully enough. And I guess I got sucked in to just picking a TrainerRoad plan without really thinking about how to integrate it or use it well.

The anxiety about doing long term structural damage though is still there after reading that book. I'm trying to temper it with an understanding that on a risk-metric basis, it's still unlikely I'll have an issue - and goddamit do I love riding my bike and riding it hard..

[Clean39T]

Just to give a for instance, here's my last 20-min Test and a 95-99% FTP muscular endurance intervals (Darwin). I'm at 187bpm at the end of the 20-min Test and upper 170s during the threshold intervals. I'm using a Quarq with a Kurt Rock n Roll.

[unterhausen]

Just to give a for instance, here's my last 20-min Test and a 95-99% FTP muscular endurance intervals (Darwin). I'm at 187bpm at the end of the 20-min Test and upper 170s during the threshold intervals. I'm using a Quarq with a Kurt Rock n Roll.that's pretty interesting. I thought I rode Darwin, but I didn't. Closest I can find right off the bat is Lamark, which is 4x10 minute 100% ftp intervals. We have virtually the same FTP, mine is set at 242 right now. My heart rate may have broken 140, but mostly it was just below.

I guess that's why a lot of people consider HR to be useless. But of course, it's not, you just can't compare between people.

It's amusing that Clean39T is worried his heart rate is too high while I occasionally worry mine is too low. Probably pays to worry a little.

[Clean39T]

that's pretty interesting. I thought I rode Darwin, but I didn't. Closest I can find right off the bat is Lamark, which is 4x10 minute 100% ftp intervals. We have virtually the same FTP, mine is set at 242 right now. My heart rate may have broken 140, but mostly it was just below.

I guess that's why a lot of people consider HR to be useless. But of course, it's not, you just can't compare between people.

What's your MaxHR though? If you were at 140 and your max is 150, we'd be in the same ballpark.

I do also notice that my HR for higher cadence at the same power is higher - I always wonder if that is inefficient pedaling mechanics, or the fact that I'm 6'4" and 170lbs, but have big leg bones and giant feet, so moving all that mass fast takes some doing :\

[Clean39T]

It's amusing that Clean39T is worried his heart rate is too high while I occasionally worry mine is too low. Probably pays to worry a little.

My worry isn't that it's too high as far as an absolute value goes - I know that varies person to person - it's that I'm spending too much time in the highest zone because that's what it's taking to complete the workout - and that spending too much time that high could be detrimental from both a short/mid-term overtraining standpoint and a long-term structural standpoint.

That's in addition to worrying I'm not training efficiently...effectively...whatever.

[Tandem Rider]

Do you monitor your resting HR in the morning? I know it's old school, but I find for me, it's the canary in the coal mine. It somewhat tracks my training load, but it won't drop back down after a recovery day if I'm stressed, getting sick, or over training. Extra recovery is way better than letting any of those issues set you back.

During intervals I pretty much ignore it while on the bike, but look at it some afterwards. I especially ignore it while doing shorter intervals, I presume they are supposed to hit max. Base rides and tempo rides I look at it quite a bit during the effort.

[jimcav]

My worry isn't that it's too high as far as an absolute value goes - I know that varies person to person - it's that I'm spending too much time in the highest zone because that's what it's taking to complete the workout - and that spending too much time that high could be detrimental from both a short/mid-term overtraining standpoint and a long-term structural standpoint.

That's in addition to worrying I'm not training efficiently...effectively...whatever.

You have lots of decent advice here, but if you don't have some basic tenets to follow for a training program, it is pretty useless to worry about RPE, HR, or watts. You will most likely push for some goal that is too hard or too often or both. It is in fact unhealthy to train too hard, too often. What that is, just like Vo2 max, is going to vary between folks. HR is useful in trending, but remember HR is a factor in how you keep cool, so if you shoot for some arbitrary number (whether power or HR) and don't adjust for heat/humidity changes, then you will be overdoing it to hit that number. I tend to push myself, and also commuted by bike. I almost always tried to catch anyone I saw, and conversely tried to drop anyone who jumped on my wheel, when i was commuting, without asking--ended up being in great shape and then added racing and marathon training and insidiously became badly overtrained--and low testosterone and compression fractures followed.
I personally like power training as I came from a running background using HR and found on a bike that power was more effective for me to train to improve cycling performance--but i didn't properly shut it down on my other rides. I felt pretty good riding at a "junk" hard tempo, so i did it all the time--and paid the price. my advice is to follow a plan and ideally your baseline for the plan is an accurate measure

[shovelhd]

Do you monitor your resting HR in the morning? I know it's old school, but I find for me, it's the canary in the coal mine. It somewhat tracks my training load, but it won't drop back down after a recovery day if I'm stressed, getting sick, or over training. Extra recovery is way better than letting any of those issues set you back.

During intervals I pretty much ignore it while on the bike, but look at it some afterwards. I especially ignore it while doing shorter intervals, I presume they are supposed to hit max. Base rides and tempo rides I look at it quite a bit during the effort.

Good point. There's your HR when you wake up, taken at roughly the same time every day, as a baseline. It will vary a lot. Then there's your base HR when you put your HR strap on before your workout. That is another important data point. Finally, there's your recovery HR after an interval set, during the rest interval, and how fast it comes down and how low it gets. The number can be compared to your easy spin warmup HR before you started the workout. That tells you even more info.

Like jimcav says one post up, you can work on numbers and pour through numbers all day every day but without goals it's just an exercise (pun intended). OP, what are your goals? Don't say I want to get stronger and faster than last year, because everyone wants to get stronger and faster, and the goal is so nebulous that you could succeed or fail depending on how you interpret the numbers. If you gained 10 watts, but your season is toast halfway through it, what did you gain?

I give Splash a lot of grief because he asks a ton of questions without any context, but I give the guy credit. He had solid goals, and his questions were directly related to them, although it took a while to get that out.

Set meaningful goals. Develop a training plan. Stick to it. Build and refine your RPE so that you can flex your plan to avoid burnout. Have fun, enjoy the ride, and don't get all hung up on the numbers. I can't tell you how many riders I beat that were significantly stronger than me. Winning is in your head more than your legs.

[joosttx]

The anxiety about doing long term structural damage though is still there after reading that book. I'm trying to temper it with an understanding that on a risk-metric basis, it's still unlikely I'll have an issue ..

I would work on the anxiety issue too if you want to prevent long term structual damage.

[Clean39T]

I would work on the anxiety issue too if you want to prevent long term structual damage.

Lolz. So true. That book should come with a warning..

[Clean39T]

So much good stuff in this thread and a ton for me to think about...thank you all for the contributions and for taking this thread in a good direction despite the rambling entry.

To answer a question from above...

My goals have been pretty nebulous to this point: lose weight (done - down just shy of 50lbs since 11/2015), get comfortable on the bike again (done), get fast enough to join moderate group rides (done), and get strong enough to ride all the hills in my area so 50-70mi rides are doable any day of the week (done).

From here it sounds like I need to clarify what matters to me if I actually want to improve and not just train for training sake without clear direction.

I'm signed up for a couple early season road races to try racing for the first time in a decade - if I have fun, I'll probably double down in that direction and need to get serious about learning the lessons described in this thread, plus hire a coach or really put the time in to learning how to build a plan and commit to the monitoring, assessment, and adjustments needed to improve.

If I don't really enjoy it that much, then I'll still want to put that time in, but it's going to be more directed at doing some of the sportive and gravel series around here in addition to getting in on weekly group rides.

In any event, I have a lot to learn.

[echappist]

i once averaged 177bpm for the last 45 min of a race in a 2-man break that stayed away. My HR usually tops out at 177 at the end of really hard efforts. Threshold at the time was ~315, power for this duration was 265.

Of course, this was during a race, and the heat index during the ride averaged in the mid 90s. Both factors inflate HR; however, the effect of heat is certainly not something to ignore. One guy from the pack suffered a heat stroke after the race.

As Shovel pointed out, getting a good sense of RPE is also important as there was no way I was going to stay below 165 bpm even when sitting in the pack (averaged 165 bpm for 185W for the first 80 minutes of the race). All I knew during that 45 minutes was that I wasn't at the end of my reserves, and my HR was high. Having some sense of what your body could handle is what is needed to push at a reasonable level. Eventually, I figured that I should be okay as long as I don't venture north of 180.

In other situations, I've found that having a good sense of RPE is quite helpful in doing ITTs as one doesn't get to look at the screen that often.

This seems to sum it up pretty well.

So, the caution should be: don't get a power meter or smart trainer and just start wailing on yourself without taking the time to understand how to integrate Power, HR, and RPE into a sustainable, healthy, and effective training regimen.

I read "Training and Racing with a PM" - but obviously not carefully enough. And I guess I got sucked in to just picking a TrainerRoad plan without really thinking about how to integrate it or use it well.

The anxiety about doing long term structural damage though is still there after reading that book. I'm trying to temper it with an understanding that on a risk-metric basis, it's still unlikely I'll have an issue - and goddamit do I love riding my bike and riding it hard..

even a thorough reading of that book may not yield much. It's a primer on a tool, not a primer on how to structure training. It has some tips on how to structure training, but these are very rough guidelines that don't lead to a training plan. Some people respond wonderfully to self-training (usually the extremely talented ones), others would benefit from having a coach.

[Joachim]

I coach my riders using all 3. Some use in addition to those 3, heart rate variability (HRV) which I like as an additional data point. For novice riders (and those than have been off the bike for a long time), I emphasize to get in tune with their RPE. Just like its mentioned above by Shovel, its often overlooked when riders are training with power. Just because it has a lot of variability in terms of outside influences, it still pretty accurate to use as a gauge. I even include in my riders schedules, days where they just go and ride. Garmin in the back pocket (I still want the data), but they ride on feel. Each variable (HR, power, HRV and RPE) has its pros and cons, there is not one perfect answer. Depending on your personal circumstances, one variable might take priority over others, but they should not be ignored. If you want chat about this you are more than welcome to contact me via PM. Always happy to help!

[Clean39T]

I coach my riders using all 3. Some use in addition to those 3, heart rate variability (HRV) which I like as an additional data point. For novice riders (and those than have been off the bike for a long time), I emphasize to get in tune with their RPE. Just like its mentioned above by Shovel, its often overlooked when riders are training with power. Just because it has a lot of variability in terms of outside influences, it still pretty accurate to use as a gauge. I even include in my riders schedules, days where they just go and ride. Garmin in the back pocket (I still want the data), but they ride on feel. Each variable (HR, power, HRV and RPE) has its pros and cons, there is not one perfect answer. Depending on your personal circumstances, one variable might take priority over others, but they should not be ignored. If you want chat about this you are more than welcome to contact me via PM. Always happy to help!



Thanks! And I do, just trying to carve out some focused time to connect..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[makoti]

I've always trained that way, running or riding, I guess the difference is that I'm going deeper into the pain cave now because I'm focusing on the power. Is that a good thing? I honestly don't know. I'm getting stronger/faster - but is going too deep too often a fools game at 37?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have 21 years on ya, so I know what you're saying.
I think I work harder/better with a PM than just doing it seat of pants or by HR. Because of that, I think I can take more rest time. At my age, I *need* more rest than I used to. You can overtrain with any method. I think power is the way to go, regardless of age.

[misterha]

So much good stuff in this thread and a ton for me to think about...thank you all for the contributions and for taking this thread in a good direction despite the rambling entry.

To answer a question from above...

My goals have been pretty nebulous to this point: lose weight (done - down just shy of 50lbs since 11/2015), get comfortable on the bike again (done), get fast enough to join moderate group rides (done), and get strong enough to ride all the hills in my area so 50-70mi rides are doable any day of the week (done).

From here it sounds like I need to clarify what matters to me if I actually want to improve and not just train for training sake without clear direction.

I'm signed up for a couple early season road races to try racing for the first time in a decade - if I have fun, I'll probably double down in that direction and need to get serious about learning the lessons described in this thread, plus hire a coach or really put the time in to learning how to build a plan and commit to the monitoring, assessment, and adjustments needed to improve.

If I don't really enjoy it that much, then I'll still want to put that time in, but it's going to be more directed at doing some of the sportive and gravel series around here in addition to getting in on weekly group rides.

In any event, I have a lot to learn.

After training with power for the past 3 years I gave one good year of hard racing and got decent results ie not getting dropped and finishing top 10. I don't race as much but I don't think I'll ever not ride with power. It's hard to explain why but I like to have it as a metric. My rides are still fun, I enjoy scenic routes and riding with my friends. At the same time structure somehow makes riding more enjoyable.