Yes it does and its called HRRc. Intervals.icu tracks quite a few power & HR combo metrics:
HRRc measures how quickly you recover after a hard effort. It is the largest drop in HR over 60 seconds starting from a HR of at least Z5 (threshold)
Power / HR: Also known as output / input ratio, a measure of how much output (watts) you produce for a given input (heart rate measured in beats/minute). As you get fitter this number should go up
Aerobic decoupling % compares your power / HR ratio for the first half of your ride to the second. Usually your power for a given HR will be higher for the 1st half of a ride than the 2nd and the percentage positive. Base training will improve (reduce) your aerobic decoupling
Power/HR Z2: This is your average watts / average heart rate for the parts of your ride done in HR zone 2 (aerobic or endurance). The ride is split up into 1 minute sections adjusted for HR lag. Only minutes in HR Z2 with cadence within 92% and 115% of the median for the Z2 points are kept. The power/HR Z2 ratio is the average of these minutes and an indicator of aerobic fitness
There are lots of related charts and you can build your own using these metrics.
I just use power and usually donāt bother wearing my HR monitorā¦except for V02 workouts when I always try to wear my HR monitor to help ensure that Iām working hard enough to get HR upto/above 90% max to help ensure Iām getting a good v02 response.
This is an old post which I started and its quite impressive how my cycling journey developed over the years.
Initially I was all about power, now its more and more about heart rate. I know both my power and heart rate profiles and have use cases for both.
On long Z2 rides, I mostly look at HR in order not to overpace, I also know that HR is drifting towards the end and I accept that, however I make sure not to exaggerate. Especially if I am pretty fatigued and keeping the Z2 power would push me into Z3/4 HR.
Same principle on long alpine climbs. I have the power, but HR is the check, for example on GrandFondos to keep the pace controlled especially on the first climbs.
Finally, I look at training load by power, but Zone distribution by HR. I find that more useful, as micro-burst in power donāt change the picture.
Well, thatās were I am now. Slowly, I could imagine working mostly with HR as I got the feel for the power and know how I react to it better and better.
For me itās a must with MTB endurance rides. I donāt know how youād use power successfully for them. At least not here in the rocky rooty northeast. Itās funny because it use to be the standard. Now itās power but plenty of people trained and got super fit with it.
Sameā¦donāt have power on my mtb, and use HR for all the rides. In addition to helping with z2, with the extreme heat + humidity here, I use it as a cowitness with RPE to know when Iām getting in trouble and, more importantly when Iāve recovered during/from higher intensity climbs and segments.
I generally have power for all except commuting. I use HR in conjunction with power most often racing or events trying not to go too deep (if I can help it - sometimes itās just go as long as you can).
While I do have power on my gravel bike, I do wonder sometimes if thatās a case where effort is better measured with HR. While downhills arenāt as much effort as MTB, itās still more taxing than the zero watts showing?
I stopped wearing Hr for races but probably should go back. When it comes to racing it kind of is what it is for me. If Iām worried about staying somewhere Iām probably going to get dropped. Unless we are talking long races
More in the context of trying make a break and/ or managing effort off the front. When Iām hanging on, itās just hang at all costs, until I canāt!
I have always had a sensitive stomach and since my last vacation I have had really bad bloating issues. Sometimes it takes a couple of weeks until they subside. When I am bloated on the bike my heart rate would indicate that my FTP dropped like 30%. If the bloating goes away mid ride, my heart rate goes back to expected levels.
So now suppose I am doing a 1.5 hr z2 ride. If I use heart rate I would need to pace it at roughly 160 watts (ftp of 280ish, need to test again soon). If I use power, I would probably stay around 200 - 210 watts. My heart rate at 210 will be sweet spot levels.
Now here lies my question: Suppose my FTP is truly 280. If my heart heart is at z2 levels around 160 watts when I am bloated, will my body adapt as if I am pedaling at 210 when I am not bloated?
Edit:
Asked differently; is my body adapting to the power I am putting out or the heart rate I am pedaling at?
Iām probably guilty of riding too much on RPE and not pacing enough of my power meter but I do find it useful compare both RPE and power to % Max HR sometimes. For instance when Iām starting to find something hard (RPE) its reassuring to glance down and see a %max HR that indicates thereās plenty left in the tank and I can push through it. Similarly, glancing down and seeing a power figure below threshold has the same affect. HR is also useful to me, particularly on TTs where I know if I keep things below say 92% I can keep it going the duration, if I keep it below 95% I can only keep it going for minutes and over 95% I can only keep it going for seconds.
I would ask what is your true FTP when bloated? What about a bloated FTP test Just kiddingā¦
There are different approaches out there, however I pace Z2 always based on heart rate, because its the physiological parameter. This means if I am tired and its hot I go a little slower and if I am well rested and its a little colder I go a little higher power.
Also, I think Z2 ist also more about going longer then going harder. If you go harder you are more āat riskā to be out of that zone.
Another good parameter is also ventilation points.
This is where I am confused though (emphasis mine):
Suppose I am sensitive to caffeine. If I were to drink coffee before and during rides to arbitrarily elevate my heart rate, could I make the same progress at 50% of FTP on coffee compared to e.g. 70% of FTP off coffee? Or, do the legs need the stimulus of 70% of FTP regardless of heart rate?
Why would I want to do this? In theory, I would be more rested for subsequent high intensity rides. Or, am I completely off base and my legs would be just as tired after 3 hrs at 50% FTP with HR of 120 as the would at 70% of FTP with HR of 120?
I donāt know if you know the answer, but this is what lies at the heart of my original question.
Would love to hear @not_coggan (or any physiologist/sport scientist) opinion on this.
Well, its true that heart rate varies with caffeine consumption, heat, hydration, fatigue and other things, but its it also true that your FTP varies as well.
First of all I think the body is not that sensitive to training stimulus and you can use ventilation points and after some experience āfeelā to know if you are too fast or too slow. Besides, riding a little longer but slower or a little faster but less, probably similar outcome. Whats important is the purpose of the ride.
Personally, I know my end of Z2 HR is about 154 and my watts are around 200 at this point. I start with around that wattage and see how HR develops, if it starts to go over 154 or if I feel really tired, I slow down to be somewhat in the 145 to 154 range. I also err more on the side of āgoing to slowā then āgoing to fastā for these kind of rides. Again purpose, because I am rather too fresh for the next workout then fatigued.
Funny observation from my races this weekend. I had more than one of the older guys in my races talk to me afterwards and tell me how they hit their āmax heart ratesā and had to shut down. None of them use power regularly and most train very loosely.
As a person whoās burned more money on training and power meters (than a sane person might), they were all shocked to learn that I just use a ādumbā race screen with simple speed, distance and cadence metrics for my races. I only pay attention to power in TT efforts and even then only at the start as a throttle limiter.
Otherwise for all mass start events, itās just a matter of RPE and whether I can hold the wheel or not. It was just interesting to hear so many (5 or so) touch on using HR for actual limit control in race scenarios. Most were even in our XC MTB race, where I just ride until I pop or hit that nasty feeling and dial it backā¦ but on my body not any numbers on the head unit.
I personally record HR every ride and ask my athletes to do the same. To me the whole story is told by power, RPE/subjective feedback, and HR. Without information on one of those, I am just getting part of it.
I use EF extensively for trend analysis in base periods, and also during VO2max blocks. I do look at decoupling on long rides or long interval efforts but not quite as intently as I used to.
I watch HR in threshold sets to see response there as well. Not necessarily a raw number, but again a trend over a 20min interval or two can be informative.
Finally, HR depression has been a leading and somewhat reliable indicator of fatigue for me in a number of my athletes.
Probably depends on the kind of races. In crits I only look at laps and NP (too see when I will break apart), but for the long Grand Fondos in the Swiss Alps, its all about keeping HR in check, especially at the beginningā¦
Yeah, I record it all for review. It usually falls into the āThatās interestingā¦ā category with some generalizations on my part at best.
But I got dropped in some races one year by living too much in the numbers (HR in particular) when I would have been right where I belonged if I had ignored that stuff and held to the group. I know itās different for everyone, but I train by numbers (power) and race by feel in nearly all cases.
Just kiddingā¦