Sent you a message with one.
First: great tool indeed. easy to compare YoY numbers (vs feelings). @david Is it possible to use w/kg instead of simple Power?
thanks
Gabor
Tx. For which chart in particular?
Hrmax% vs Power
Ok I will have a look at that.
1 Like
It is possible to look at increasing fitness over years by Efficiency factor (EF). Thats normalized power/HR. But dont look at to short period. It gives you wrong numbers. For example, you cant compare base miles period on flat terrain (for example January) vs July with a lot of races or a holiday in the mountains. When your NP and avg power or higher, the EF will automatic also higher.
I have in golden cheetah a chart for the last 3 years. It gives me nice insight about my aerobic fitness. You can see that the lowest and highest points increased…so it is possible to compare every single month with the other years, in order to prevent comparing appels and orange.
You can plot this on the /fitness page using a custom chart. It doesn’t have the trend line however.
You could also look at Power/HR which gets ride of the NP skew from hard rides. There is also “Power/HR Z2” which is only from zone 2 data and has lots of cleanup done (HR lag adjusted, minutes with coasting thrown out etc.).
1 Like
Ah I was looking on the /fitness page and not the compare page.
FYI This chart doesn’t seem to be working at present - 5/11/21. I also checked it on another I follow and same empty chart. Thanks.
Yes, I’m seeing an empty chart too.
Same here. Currently empty.
I have fixed this for deployment Thurs AM (GMT+2). Tx for the reports.
3 Likes
Hi David,
I consider the idea behind this graph very powerful: Looking at the HR-Power relationship as an indicator for progress !
I am wondering however why you choose to plot the maximum HR for a specific power-bin. (Rather than average HR, median HR, 90% percentile HR,…)
I would think that the maximum is highly likely to be an outlier (for example if it turns out to be the minute after a very hard short effort or at the end of an exhausting ride, … )
Curious to get your ideas on this.
It doesn’t use the max HR but the average HR for each bucket.
Each ride has a power vs HR curve created by breaking the ride up into 1 minute segments, adjusting for HR lag and calculating average power and HR for each segments. These are the data points used for the decoupling related charts on the activity power page. Only segments with 100% moving time are kept.
The traces for the comparison chart are created by bucketing the power-HR segments for all matching activities into power buckets and averaging the HR.
Hope that makes sense!
2 Likes
I’m totally fine with the current axes, but I’d like an option to compare HR at given power.
So in pop-up I could see two datapoints with the same power (x) value but different heartrate (y) values.
2 Likes
I’m back looking at data after a long break, and really like this chart, and many of the other changes that have been made.
I’m seeing some weird data in mine, and from looking at the activity that seems to be causing it I don’t see anything obviously wrong with the data. I found the ‘bad’ ride by changing the date range until I found a change that would have or not have the drop at 260 watts.
How can I go about confirming that the workout in question (Feb 19th) is really the problem, and what could be wrong with the data?
edit - Also another question regarding how multiple rides from a time period are agragated - is this the average for all rides? (ie something like all 1 min buckets of 160 watts averaged for time adjusted HR) When I increase the time period to 1 year as above what does that mean?
That activity has a lot of broken HR data towards the end. If you Actions → Settings you can tick the ignore HR box and it will be left out of the compare data set (I just did that now).
Intervals.icu computes power vs HR data by breaking the activity into 1 minute buckets with average power, HR (adjusted for lag) and cadence for each. Buckets with stopped time and other dodgyness are discarded. This is stored in 5w increments. So for 200-204w your avg HR (for all 1 min buckets with this power) might by 142 and there were 32 minutes (buckets) in that range.
The compare page calculates a weighted average of each power bucket for all the activities.
Your power vs HR lines are not nearly as straight and linear as mine. Not sure why that should be?
1 Like
Thanks David, I appreciate you help with this and the continued development of the site.
I am curious about this as well! Have not been following a plan for a quite a while, and have been doing lots of aerobic work in the 150-170ish watts range, so that may explain some of the flatness in that area, as this range is likely highly over-represented compared to the other ranges. Some rides are literally 2 hours at a single wattage in that range.
I guess another thing that could affect this is doing mostly TR workouts, in ERG mode. I could see that artificially ‘quantizing’ the powers that I ride significant time at, which could leave some ranges with very little data, and therefore more variability.
I am very interesting in the power/HR relationship around LT1, as that relates to the efforts in the longer rides that I do. I will be playing around with this more going forward.
If I wanted to design a ‘test ride’ for this graph, would it be better to have slowly and continuously increasing power, or have steps? For the range of power I’m most interested in, I would likely do something like 140-190 over 1 or 2 hours. Since you take the 1 minute buckets, I’m thinking a ‘slow’ continuous increase would be the way to go, as that would keep all the buckets consistent with each other. Given the 5 watt quantization, maybe something 2-3 watts/minute or less would be considered ‘slow’???