30 Days Ago, Needed Oxygen, a Walker, and a Home Health Aid to Leave The House. Today...

[Catalyzt]

Second ride post catastrophe. Three miles this time (increased from 2.6), 282 feet of vertical (instead of 80 something), 73 watts (increased from 59) and 20 minutes (increased from 17.) Did not use turbo, about 55% motor off completely.

I can now walk three miles in a day (in three or four separate walks) and swim about a quarter mile. So measurable improvement over eight days. I've also gained back 10 of the 20 pounds I lost.

SO glad I got Nightmare! 36 pounds, but feels like 46 in my current condition! I can still barely get it out of the garage, but at least I didn't have to TAKE A NAP this week after doing that!

And 55nm of torque vs. 40nm is a huge difference, at least the way the Bosch is set up. A lot of work, yes, but did not feel like I was pushing past 70% of my current capacity. I have to really be careful because my wrists and arms are weak, too; I can still go over potholes or cracks in the pavement, I just have to make absolutely sure I am positioned correctly for them. I can't muscle my way out of a mistake the way I might have previously.

Good girl, Nightmare! (She's a little bored, but really glad to be getting out of the house again.)

 

[DaveMatthews]

Way to go mate! Keep it up. Slow but sure will get you back.
Job well done!

 

[stompandgo]

Tracking your progress is a great motivator. You are listening to your body as well. That's all good. Please take a moment, maybe on your next ride, to take a deep breath and give yourself an attaboy for all the hard work you have done so far.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

I have to really be careful because my wrists and arms are weak, too; I can still go over potholes or cracks in the pavement, I just have to make absolutely sure I am positioned correctly for them.

So many aspects of the act of riding that I never think about. Imagine programming a humanoid robot to deal with all that.

Glad you're making such good progress.

 

[Catalyzt]

I am at that point where I still -- just barely -- benefit from a hospital bed, but I'm also -- just barely -- able to ride.

I did kind of prank my wife. When she came home, as expected, she asked, "What is the bike doing there?"

My answer: "She was hungry, I'm feeding her."

At which point, my wife rolled her eyes and totally figured out I'd set her up for a one-liner. How do I know she is female? Well, because she's heterosexual, and I see how she reacts to male bikes.

I'm still using this thing mostly because we're doing noisy home repair projects upstairs and I REALLY need the extra 45 minutes of uninterrupted sleep, but also because the incline of the mattress is helpful-- I have to figure out some way to duplicate that in the bedroom.

Ride #3 Post Catastrophe -- not a big jump in average power, just up to 75 watts from 72, but significant increase in time, distance, and elevation. 29:30 minutes, 4.2 miles, 423 feet of vertical.

For these short little fitness rides, it is amazing how long the battery lasts. It held its charge for... 9 weeks, I think? Only lost a few percent from just sitting there. Then three rides, and I fed her when she was down to 15%.

It did not feel great while I was riding, but felt much better the next day, except for my hands.

 

[Catalyzt]

So guys, is "Average Watts" the best single metric for tracking the amount of effort I'm putting into each ride?

It seems like it probably is-- this factors in terrain, for example, how much assistance I'm using, but not how long I'm using it, is that right?

Ride #4 Post Catastrophe -- shorter at 3.7 mile and 23:30 minutes, but 82 watts. Inching forward.

Pre Catastrophe, I was more like 92, 98, or 100 watts.

This is really interesting, because I can't track other activities quite so precisely.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

So guys, is "Average Watts" the best single metric for tracking the amount of effort I'm putting into each ride?

It seems like it probably is-- this factors in terrain, for example, how much assistance I'm using, but not how long I'm using it, is that right?

Surprisingly complicated topic. Several different whole-ride averaging methods in common use. The best one for your situation depends partly on how you're riding these days.

If you're stopping or slowing a lot along the way, the weighted average often called "normalized power" would probably be the best way to track your effort day to day. Specialized calls it "adjusted rider power". This is the whole-ride power metric I generally follow.

A raw, unweighted time average might be too noisy in your case, but it's said to be better for short efforts (under 20 min). Specialized calls this "average rider power".

There's also a strong argument for comparing the same metric before and after your catastrophe.

See if you can find documentation for the rider power metrics available on your bike.

 

[stompandgo]

When racing, I used AP for the base total ride metric, and IP and 3 second power when on the bike. For your purposes, I would recommend AP.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

When racing, I used AP for the base total ride metric, and IP and 3 second power when on the bike. For your purposes, I would recommend AP.

If AP is average power over the whole ride, which average?

In a race where you never stop and have few low-intensity intervals, guessing the raw unweighted average would be the best reflection of your effort.

 

[Catalyzt]

I think Average Watts (Power) is about right given my circumstances.

If AP is average power over the whole ride, which average?

In a race where you never stop and have few low-intensity intervals, guessing the raw unweighted average would be the best reflection of your effort.

I'm using the metric that is called "Average Power" on the Bosch Flow app, and it's listed in watts. I'm not racing, but yes-- on my fitness rides, I usually never stop and have few low-intensity intervals. The longest are downhill coasts-- 50 seconds max, typically more like 10 or 20.

It is a little boring doing the same ride every time I go out, but the route is chosen for this reason-- to minimize coasting. Of course, just at this moment, being so deconditioned, even going downhill involves more exercise than, say, just walking around the house. I can feel the burn in my triceps from holding the bars through tight turns, and also some mild burn in my core from having my weight pitched more forward going downhill. We are talking maybe three minutes of coasting over a 23:30 minute ride. I figure that as about 20 minutes of exercise. When I was in shape, I'd do roughly 4.1 miles for 20 minutes of pedaling, whereas now I'm doing about 3.7. Which makes sense-- for that earlier ride, I was putting out 130 watts. So I think for a coarse metric, I'm liking Average Power.

Other short local rides are similar with a bit more coasting. Going to the Hollywood Reservoir, or to the Hollywood Sign, involves a LOT more downhill coasting. (I haven't tried those routes yet, maybe next week.) It might take me 35 minutes to grind up to the Hollywood Sign, but going back, I'm coasting for most of 20 minutes with only brief stretches of pedaling, so it's a very different ratio. I figure Flow is just measuring how hard I'm pedaling, and doesn't factor in the duration of the periods of coasting/downhill, but I don't know.

I could look at 'Calories' but I sense that would have to be a softer number. How can it estimate calories if it doesn't know my weight, etc.?

Thanks, folks, very helpful.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

It is a little boring doing the same ride every time I go out, but the route is chosen for this reason-- to minimize coasting.

As I recall, you don't have a nearby safe haven for listening to music on these repetitive rides. Too bad. It would definitely help with the boredom, even just as background. But safety first!

Boredom on neighborhood laps when I don't feel like facing traffic was the initial incentive for the synchronous pedaling to music playlist I've recently developed for my own cadence range. Safe enough with bone conduction earphones, and time just flies when you're actually pedalling to the music.

 

[stompandgo]

If AP is average power over the whole ride, which average?

In a race where you never stop and have few low-intensity intervals, guessing the raw unweighted average would be the best reflection of your effort.

When riding, as part of a training regimen, it's important on both sides. For Zone 2 recovery rides, the average to stay under is what is important. IP takes too many variables into account. On the high side, for longer efforts, like race winning intervals, the average is important.

When racing, AP is important to compare to FTP. Most of my races were a little under or more than one hour.

When racing, you never stop for a rest unless you need service. You do stop pedaling often.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

When riding, as part of a training regimen, it's important on both sides. For Zone 2 recovery rides, the average to stay under is what is important. IP takes too many variables into account. On the high side, for longer efforts, like race winning intervals, the average is important.

When racing, AP is important to compare to FTP. Most of my races were a little under or more than one hour.

When racing, you never stop for a rest unless you need service. You do stop pedaling often.

So you're using raw, unweighted average power, not normalized power, right?

 

[stompandgo]

Not anymore, because I haven't raced in 10 years. But back then, I did. Yes. Unweighted. I also used NP, but for different reasons, and peak, for different reasons.

 

[Catalyzt]

Up to 87 watts AP on 10/23, but then 92 today, but it's been a weird week-- I also gained a lot of weight, two or three pounds just this week. I have regained roughly 15 pounds, with about five more to go to be back to my previous weight.

One thing I did this time was to hit 'finish trip' a bit faster! I don't know if this is knowable, but does this impact Average Power in any way? Or does it only use the time you are moving as part of its calculation? (That would make more sense-- "Riding Time" stops when the bike stop.)

If all that is true, I really did jump 5 watts today. So my best AP is now close to my worse AP before the catastrophe.

 

[BlackHand]

Up to 87 watts AP on 10/23, but then 92 today, but it's been a weird week-- I also gained a lot of weight, two or three pounds just this week. I have regained roughly 15 pounds, with about five more to go to be back to my previous weight.

One thing I did this time was to hit 'finish trip' a bit faster! I don't know if this is knowable, but does this impact Average Power in any way? Or does it only use the time you are moving as part of its calculation? (That would make more sense-- "Riding Time" stops when the bike stop.)

If all that is true, I really did jump 5 watts today. So my best AP is now close to my worse AP before the catastrophe.

Yes, Bosch only calculates while moving and pedaling. I guess I don't 'know' for sure but as far as I can tell
it either doesn't count coasting at all or weighs it so insignificantly that it might as well not count it.

You can test this by walking your bike, you'll see your avg power stay the same while your distance increases and avg speed drops.

 

[Jeremy McCreary]

Yes, Bosch only calculates while moving and pedaling. I guess I don't 'know' for sure but as far as I can tell
it either doesn't count coasting at all or weighs it so insignificantly that it might as well not count it.

You can test this by walking your bike, you'll see your avg power stay the same while your distance increases and avg speed drops.

Interesting. Will try that test on Specialized's whole-ride power averages!

Normalized power (similar to Specialized's "adjusted rider power") automatically deweights very low and no power intervals. (It's based on a root mean square-type moving-window average but with 4th powers instead of squares.)

Doubt Specialized's raw unweighted "average power" does that by their own description, but Bosch's "average power" might not be so raw.