What is the evidence that training with power is superior to . . .

Steve_B

What's not obvious? We have already explained to you the sources of error of other methods/instruments (so no need for you to ask that question again). How else are you going to get an accurate assessment of training progress?

Fday

Ugh, I know the tradition. However, it is up to the journal as to what their rules are regarding this and it is up to the editors of the journal to enforce their rules, whatever they may be, in this regards.

The abstracts of every PowerCranks study I know of are available on our web page along with links to the actual studies (such as they exist, some remain unpublished). You may examine them and reach your own conclusion regarding there validity, strengths and/or weakensses.

Back on topic. When you hear of any studies that look at the efficacy a power meter as a training device, whether some small "ethical" lapse occurred on the part of the author, or not, please let us all know.

Fday

I can think of many ways. Race results? Frequent training time trial efforts? Occasional testing? Assessing improvement is easy. Obtaining improvement is what is hard. I think that is what the original question was about.

fergie

That power meters do what they intend to do, measure power accurately? Here you go...

Development and evaluation of a new bicycle instrument for measurements of pedal forces and power output in cycling.
Int J Sports Med. 2007 Apr;28(4):326-32. Epub 2006 Oct 6.

Accuracy of SRM and power tap power monitoring systems for bicycling.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Jul;36(7):1252-8.

Validity and reliability of the Polar S710 mobile cycling powermeter.
Int J Sports Med. 2003 Apr;24(3):156-61.

Validity and reliability of the PowerTap mobile cycling powermeter when compared with the SRM Device.
Int J Sports Med. 2005 Dec;26(10):868-73.

Agreement between polar and SRM mobile ergometer systems during laboratory-based high-intensity, intermittent cycling activity.
J Sports Sci. 2006 Aug;24(8):863-8.

__________________
Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
http://hamishferguson.blogspot.com/

fergie

Nope, race results can be obtained independent of a good performance. Simon Jones was happier with the British Teams Pursuit's silver medal at Worlds behind Australia than 4 weeks earlier when they rolled the Aussies at Commonwealth Games.


Yes if you can hold all external factors constant. Good luck with that. Though judging by your products infomercial (doesn't any product that needs one of these ring warning bells) we can expect divine intervention for any users.

Hah, and what criteria will you test?

Glad you mention that. Whole lotta research about specificity of training. Train as you intend to race. Similar courses, similar conditions, similar weather, similar equipment. See where i'm headed with this?

__________________
Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
http://hamishferguson.blogspot.com/

fergie

Hey Frank, did a Pubmed search for your product and didn't find anything. Does this mean all this research has not been published in any reputable journals?

Also found these studies...

Leg muscle recruitment during cycling is less developed in triathletes than cyclists despite matched cycling training loads. [Exp Brain Res. 2007]

"Our findings imply that control of muscle recruitment is less developed in triathletes than in cyclists matched for cycling training loads, which suggests that multidiscipline training may interfere with adaptation of the neuromuscular system to cycling training in triathletes."

Effective force and economy of triathletes and cyclists.
Sports Biomech. 2007 Jan;6(1):31-43.

Patterns of leg muscle recruitment vary between novice and highly trained cyclists. [J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2007]

Do differences in muscle recruitment between novice and elite cyclists reflect different movement patterns or less skilled muscle recruitment? [J Sci Med Sport. 2007]

Triathletes show less efficiency than cyclists with same cycle training load due to interference from other modes of training. Elite cyclists are better at pedalling because they (not exactly rocket science) have more experience. Not quite sure where your product fits in as it changes the pedalling parameters and like a Triathlete running and swimming detracts from time that could be well spent becoming better at pedalling. Unless people intend to race with your product. Do see a lot of people race with SRM or Powertap.

__________________
Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
http://hamishferguson.blogspot.com/

Steve_B

But again, power meters don't impose any particular way or method to obtain improvement. So what is it exactly you plan to study? We've already told you why the precision is necessary so please don't repeat that same answer.

Squint

So it looks like this whole thread was a waste of time since it didn't result in the sale of a single PowerCrank.

Of course, if anyone actually is considering Powercranks, there are Smartcranks, the non-spamming alternative:

http://www.smartcranks.com/main_e.htm

swampy1970

This thread probably only resulted in the sale of beer and porn.... and probably got some wondering if they could get a refund from their ISP.

swampy1970

OK, this is one thing in this thread that did confuse me....

If someone lends or gives a facility some product for testing this is "unethical?"

How the heck is someone supposed to get product tested? Just wait until someone ponies up enough of their own money (or even worse grants that come from the tax payers hard earned...) to buy 10 pairs of powercranks so they can distribute them to willing riders just because they think it'll make a worthwhile research project.... and then have to listen to everyone on cyclingforums.com say that it's not a valid test because only 10 riders were involved.

Fday

Well, I guess one would study the method of using them to see if one method of use might result in more benefit over another method or comparing one of these uses to another, more traditional, way of training. For instance, some here have specified that certain uses are better than others (one here has even written a book on the subject).

RChung

Well, here's one that studied Smartcranks using a randomized controlled experimental design. Its conclusion was:

"We observed no significant statistical difference for peak power [...] and PO at IAT [...] for SmartCrank and control conditions, respectively (P > 0.05). However, we did observe that work distribution in the downward phase was significantly reduced in the SmartCranks training group at peak PO [...]. Although the possible implications of the change in the work distribution of sectors are not known, for the success in cycling performance-indicated by the PO-training with the SmartCranks was not more advantageous than training with conventional bicycle cranks."

RChung

No. What would be considered unethical is if the authors of the study don't reveal that they got support from the manufacturer of the product being tested. Even with disclosure there are still ethical traps that need to be avoided, but dislosure is the first step.

[Edit:] For example, the study referred to just above acknowledged that the equipment was provided by Smartcranks.

fergie

Hmmm, no surprises there.

__________________
Hamish Ferguson: Cycling Coach
http://hamishferguson.blogspot.com/