Can cycle computers slow you down?
New research suggest computers can hinder performance
Most of us probably ride with some cycle computer of sorts [rarely if ever - ed.], but did you know that it could be holding back, asks a recent study by the British Psychological Society.
Dr Dominic Micklewright of the University of Essex today published his findings following new research into whether cyclists’ perception of time, distance and exertion levels could be influenced by cycle computers.
Working with a group of 29 serious amateur cyclists in South Africa, the psychologists tested them over a series of 20km time trials under different conditions, with the riders split into three groups. One group received no feedback, one group received true speed and distance feedback, and the final group received speed and distance information that was 5% faster and further than their actual performance.
During a later blind 20km time trial cyclists from all of the groups were asked to rate their level of exertion at the moments when they believed they had cycled 4, 8, 12 and 16km. The cyclists who were conditioned without feedback had the most accurate perceptions of how far they had travelled. In contrast, the cyclists who were conditioned using either accurate or false feedback tended to under-estimate how far they had cycled.
“We have been very interested to see the results which imply that over reliance on cycle computers during training can impair cyclists’ natural judgements of distance,” says Dr Micklewright. “Potentially, this could cause cyclists to under-perform during a time trial because, even when using a cycle computer, their impaired ability to perceive distance might lead them to adopt an unnecessarily conservative pacing strategy.
“Of course, the cycle computer is an essential tool for the time trial cyclist but the information they provide will only be advantageous if it has a meaningful context. Perhaps even some of the great cyclists, such as Lance Armstrong and Cadel Evans, might benefit from fine-tuning their own perceptions of distance by occasionally training without a cycle computer”.
So should we all go and ditch our cycle computers then? How many of us already rely on computers currently? Let us know what you think…
Discuss this story
Personally I just have a GPS logger in my pocket, I tend to judge distance based on time if I'm not already familiar with the route I'm taking. This means I can analyse how I did after the ride, but just try to independently push myself during. Mind you, I think a cadence computer would be a nice addition. I don't personally care how far/fast I'm going so long as I'm spinning at a good rate and pushing my legs. Then again, I don't race, time trial or even sportive very much... Anyone know a dirt cheap cadence computer? 
Posted: 12/12/2008 14:44
I just set the computer to the time display and carry on cycling and look at the total time distance covered and average speed once ive finished the ride only to see how ive done and where I can improve on the next ride. Saying that, I mainly use my bike for commuting and the occasional audax or sportive and I get a buzz from pushing myself hard on short runs with a lot of hills thrown in for the masochist in me  .
Posted: 17/12/2008 22:03
I have never had much success with cycle computers in terms of performance enhancement. Much more effective IMO is to have an idea prior to an event of how fast you wish to get around and then have a look-see near the finish to work out if the desired outcome is feasible. If so, then it should be possible to push a bit harder for 10 minutes or so. Problem is, the difference between the feasible and impossible in cycling is so small that hoping for a big improvement just 'cos your 'pooter told you that you needed to go faster is only going to end in tears.
Posted: 17/12/2008 22:12
Quite true yer statement Richard about ending in tears cause ya thought ya did well and didnt. I did have a good result in May this year though in doing a 300k Audax for the first time. Most of the riders I went with that day said they finished the ride between 18 hours and 14 hours. So I thought id complete the ride in around 16 hours. I finished the ride the 14 hours 12 minutes and also had 2 punctures. The 2nd one left me on my own for 10 minutes or therabouts just outside of Lincoln so had a bit of catching up to do. Fortunately once I reached Licoln, the lads waited for me so was able to ride back with them. I was quite pleased with myself for smashing the time I thought id complete the ride in. I did use Go electrolyte though which I think had a bearing on the result.
Posted: 17/12/2008 22:35
Am very new to road cycling (well since I was a teen...) and did a long day and half ride without a computer. I see the advantage of having a computer (odometer and speed is useful) from the other riders. But I was happy to just pootle along at the pace set by one of the others - I wonder if it would have been as steady if they didn't have a computer. In training I'm happy to travel at my own pace and then use the time and gmap-pedometer website to find the distance (and hence work out the speed). Should I consider buying a computer and then, if so, would one with cadence be good?
Posted: 29/04/2009 13:44
Since my above post, I've put a computer on my bike. I couldn't immediately figure out how to set the wheel size, so I didn't bother. The bit I'm really interested in is the cadence and possibly the current time. I find it a far more useful measure of pace and effort, that's independent of the hill you currently happen to be on. I keep a regular 80 rpm then change gear if I deviate from that by more than a few rpm. It certainly worked last outing. Kept that pace, then when my partner wanted a rest went down to 60rpm until he was ready to go again. For what it's worth, the computer in question was 10-15 quid from Tesco. Wireless for the speed sensor and wired for the cadence.
Posted: 29/04/2009 13:50
Thanks for that - I've heard that Maplin have a good cheap one too. Not sure what to go for. I was originally thinking a relatively cheap one (no more than £60). But, have found out that through my work health insurance, I'm able to get a 30-50% discount on a Polar computer from a range of about 10 different computers - website is down now, so can't tell you exactly which ones - seem to remember CS300, CS400, CS600 RS800, S725x as some of the ones I thought would be good. Is it worth spending this kind of money? Thing is that I would then link up my profile to myhealth insurance, so I'll be able to get the money back on it (cash-back if evidence that you've done enough exercise!). If I did got down the Polar route, then I would want one that would be useable for running too. Any ideas or advice on this? I looked at some of the reviews of the earlier CS200/CS300 and they weren't all favourable. Thanks in advance.
Posted: 29/04/2009 14:36
Maplin & cheap don't go together. You can get computers with cadence sensors for <£40 on line, e.g. the Cateye Strada Cadence.
Posted: 29/04/2009 14:42
Depends on how much of a stats geek you are. I like the look of those units but if I'm honest to myself I know I just want to see fancy charts on my computer comparing the speed, incline and heart rate. It's not much to do with the cycling effeciency or my fitness progress. Though obviously 'logging' a ride is an incentive in itself to getting out and doing one. That said, in the right hands they certainly can prove useful to improving your general strength and fitness.
Posted: 29/04/2009 14:48
I stopped using a heart rate monitor after getting one of my best ever triathlon results with the thing trying to tell me I was in the red and should slow down for the whole four-hour race. Just one of those days when my heart decided it could beat harder and faster for longer than all the pseudo-scientific stuff in the HRM book and my cardiologist said it could. When the battery in my bike computer ran out I decided not to buy another polluting pill for it and took it off. The only computer we have now is on the touring tandem as an educational tool for Sean.
Posted: 29/04/2009 15:40
If having a computer on your bike adds to the enjoyment you get from riding then use one same with a HR monitor but as far as a HRM goes JohnG says it all in the previous post , you can be limiting yourself by using it during races as the extra adrenalin generated by the race etc means you can have a much higher HR during racing than training and being governed by a device on the bars is not going to improve you. As far as a computer telling you how well you rode via avg speed , that doesn't tell you anything as speed is controlled by weather conditions as much as by how you're riding.
Posted: 29/04/2009 16:04
I started a thread now that I've narrowed it down to 2 computers I like: Polar S725x or CS400?
Posted: 30/04/2009 21:59
|
|
