[digitallogic]

This is pretty cool! Your note about cycling power meters changing the way you perceive effort matches my experience as well. One other bit from my experience: I'm a runner and a cyclist, and I've always lusted after having cycling style data and prescribed workouts for my running. When Stryd launched I was all in, but... all it gave me was power numbers. It didn't have the tribal knowledge that came with my cycling power meter. Eg - lots of online content about zones, free and paid workouts / plans to target different goals (eg sprinting vs long endurance). It almost seems like any discussion of serious training on a bike comes back to watts.

But with the Stryd, all I got was power numbers, and the option to signup for a monthly paid subscription with some training plans that were pretty bare bones. It seems like running power meters just haven't been adopted widely enough for that critical mass of information to emerge. My realization from this is the data is useless without the tribal knowledge of how to use it. So my Stryd sits in a drawer somewhere, and I'm back to running by heart rate.

[leblancfg]

Author here: funny you should mention that! Same idea has been on my mind for years at this point.

To me, the holy grail of sports training is to have simple but powerful enough models to estimate power data from dozens of movements, and fit various power curves that match real-world training.

So much promise there.

---

As for Stryd: That's so interesting. I'd imagine a lot of the same parallels to cycling to apply? Once you have your running CP/FTP, I'd imagine you could follow the same cycling training plans (relative to your FTP) for the same intended stimulus.

I'm curious though, can you see the Watts/zone/W'bal/etc. values on a watch or something when you're running?

[digitallogic]

Very much on the same page as far as the holy grail! Would love if I had all that data (and it was actionable).

As for the Stryd... take this all with a grain of salt because I only have a consumer level understanding but: You can establish your FTP, but then the issue is setting zones from there. My understanding is that the big thing with establishing them is having an accurate estimation of LT1 and LT2 lactate thresholds. Most zone calculators are approximating that, but those calculators are based on a large body of data comparing lactate levels to cycling power in a controlled environment (a lab). That large body of data doesn’t exist for running power, and I recall reading that the little bit that does indicates that formulas for cycling power’s impact on L1/L2 thresholds don’t line up with running power. It’s also been maybe 4 or 5 years since I was engaged with this so the science may have improved!

Watch wise, when I used it, I have a Garmin Fenix, and it had options to show watts/zones/etc. You can even plug in zone based workouts just like you can with cycling power. I did find it a bit of a pain to monitor on a watch vs a bike computer, but not too big of a deal.

[andreareina]

The equivalent in running is pace, at least on flat ground. I don't know that power would really be useful in running, the biomechanics of running hills is sufficiently different that I question the ability to make an equivalence comparison the same way you do in cycling.