Original episode & show notes | Raw transcript
In modern athletics, particularly in endurance sports, we are awash in data: power, heart rate, cadence, pace, and a dozen other metrics. While this quantitative data is invaluable, it only tells part of the story. The Empirical Cycling podcast transcript makes a compelling case that the most critical component of effective training—whether self-coached or guided—is the qualitative feedback loop.
This document deconstructs the key principles from the podcast, presenting them as a comprehensive guide for the intelligent athlete. The central thesis is that meaningful feedback transforms a static training plan into a dynamic, responsive, and individualized process. It is the bridge between objective data and subjective experience, and mastering it is fundamental to long-term progress.
A coach or athlete looking only at numbers is operating with a significant blind spot. The podcast highlights that a coach can only identify a problem from data alone “maybe 10% of the time,” and often only after a negative trend has already been established for several days.
Data lacks context: A power file doesn’t explain why performance was good or bad. Was a drop in power due to fatigue, a mechanical issue, or a stressful day at work? Was a high heart rate a sign of impending sickness or the first hot day of the year?
Trends appear in hindsight: Data often reveals a problem after the fact. An athlete’s comment—”my legs felt sluggish today”—is a real-time, leading indicator that allows for proactive adjustments, whereas a pattern of declining performance in data is a lagging indicator.
The act of writing down feedback, even for oneself, is a powerful psychological tool.
Tangibility: It moves a vague feeling (e.g., “I feel a bit off”) into the realm of concrete information (“For the last three workouts, I’ve had low motivation and my knee has been aching”). This forces acknowledgement and action.
Objectivity over time: In-the-moment emotions can cloud judgment. Looking back at notes from a week or a month prior provides a more objective perspective. An athlete can identify patterns they might otherwise dismiss, such as consistently poor performance following weeks with high work stress.
Building a Personal Knowledge Base: These notes become a historical record of how your body responds to different stimuli. This is an invaluable resource for future training decisions, allowing you to learn from past experiences.
The podcast repeatedly emphasizes that before scrutinizing the training plan itself, an athlete must account for four key external variables that profoundly impact performance. These are the first things to report when a workout goes poorly.
This is the most obvious performance inhibitor. The body diverts immense resources to fight illness, leaving little for muscle repair and adaptation.
Referred to as the “canary in the coal mine,” sleep quality and quantity are often the first indicators that something is amiss.
Physiological Impact: Sleep is when the majority of hormonal activity related to recovery (e.g., human growth hormone release) occurs. Poor sleep directly impairs glycogen replenishment, muscle repair, and central nervous system recovery.
The “Boiling Frog” Effect: A sudden, acute lack of sleep is noticeable. However, a gradual decline—losing 30-60 minutes per night over several weeks—can create a significant cumulative sleep debt that an athlete may not consciously recognize until performance collapses.
The body does not differentiate between physical stress from training and psychological stress from work, relationships, or other life events. The physiological response (e.g., cortisol release) is similar.
Resource Allocation: High stress places the body in a catabolic (“breakdown”) state, directly competing with the anabolic (“build-up”) state required for training adaptation. Your body will prioritize dealing with the perceived “threat” of stress over repairing muscle fibers.
The Silent Killer: As illustrated by the podcast anecdote of the client whose performance flatlined due to a high-stress year at work, this is often the most underestimated factor. Acknowledging that “work is stressful this week” is a critical piece of feedback.
Proper fueling underpins all physiological processes. The podcast makes a crucial distinction between fueling on and off the bike.
Off-the-Bike Fueling: This is what stocks your glycogen stores. You cannot make up for a day of poor nutrition with on-bike gels. If you start a workout with depleted glycogen, performance will inevitably be compromised, no matter how perfect your on-bike fueling strategy is.
On-the-Bike Fueling: This serves to spare existing glycogen stores and maintain blood glucose levels during exercise.
Feedback Point: Noting hunger levels (e.g., “I was hungry all night”) or daily nutrition habits provides essential context for performance.
Effective feedback combines objective metrics with subjective and qualitative insights.
Relying on one metric is insufficient. The combination of all three provides a holistic view.
Power: What you did (objective output).
Heart Rate (HR): How your body responded (internal cost).
Rate of Perceived Exertion (RPE): How it felt (subjective cost).
An incompatibility between these is not an error; it’s a data point. For example:
High HR + Low RPE + Normal Power: Could indicate heat, dehydration, or the start of an illness, even if you feel good.
Normal HR + High RPE + Low Power: A classic sign of muscular fatigue or low glycogen stores.
For RPE, the podcast advises reporting the overall RPE for the ride’s primary objective. If it was a 3x20-minute threshold workout within a longer ride, report the RPE of the intervals themselves, but feel free to add notes like, “The final 5 minutes of the last interval felt like a 9/10, while the rest was a 7/10.”
This is where the richest information lies. These are things that don’t have a number attached.
Motivation: “I wasn’t motivated to ride today,” or “I felt really excited for this workout.”
Physical Sensations: “Legs felt snappy and responsive,” or “Felt sluggish and heavy.”
Soreness: Differentiating between general fatigue and specific muscle soreness.
Mental State: Brain fog, irritability, or feelings of being overwhelmed.
The ultimate goal is to learn to anticipate the questions a coach would ask. When a workout goes wrong, run through the “Four Pillars” checklist yourself.
Instead of: “Hard workout, felt bad.”
Provide: “This workout felt much harder than expected (RPE 9/10). I think it might be because my sleep has been poor the last two nights due to a work deadline, and I skipped lunch yesterday.”
This demonstrates a high level of self-awareness and provides immediately actionable information.
A core philosophy of the podcast is that a training plan should not be written in stone. It is a hypothesis of what should work. Real-time feedback is the data used to validate or invalidate that hypothesis and make adjustments.
Flexibility is Key: Coaches who plan week-to-week do so to maximize this flexibility. Life happens—sickness, travel, stress—and the plan must adapt.
Adjusting vs. Failing: If a workout needs to be changed, it is not a failure on the athlete’s part. It is a correct and intelligent response to the body’s current state.
A primary goal of a good coaching relationship (or a good self-coaching practice) is to empower the athlete. The feedback process teaches you to listen to your body and gives you the confidence to make smart, in-the-moment decisions.
The Priority Ladder: If you are not feeling up for a prescribed hard workout, the podcast suggests a decision-making hierarchy:
Can you do an endurance ride instead?
If not, can you do a short recovery ride?
If not, take the day off.
You don’t need “permission” to make the right choice for your body. The key is to communicate that choice and the reasons behind it. This is the feedback that allows the rest of the week’s plan to be intelligently adjusted.
Effective workout feedback is a skill that requires practice. It involves moving beyond a simple report of watts and heart rate to a holistic account of one’s physiological and psychological state. By consistently providing detailed, contextual feedback—either to a coach or to oneself in a training log—an athlete closes the gap between action and analysis. This creates a powerful, adaptive loop that respects the complexities of the human body, acknowledges the realities of life, and ultimately paves the way for more sustainable and successful training.