Why Data Matters for Training
Cycling is one of the few sports where you can measure the actual work you did, in watts, to a decimal point, in real time. That's not a small thing. A runner training by feel is guessing at intensity. A cyclist with a power meter or even just a heart rate strap knows, objectively, whether yesterday's "easy" ride was actually easy.
That objectivity is the entire case for cycling tech. Not the gadgets themselves — the fact that they let you stop guessing. Anthony has said this on the podcast more times than he can count: the single biggest training error amateurs make is riding their easy days too hard and their hard days not hard enough, and almost nobody can feel that drift happening in real time. A number on a screen catches it. Perceived effort usually doesn't, because moderate-hard feels productive even when it's quietly stalling your progress.
None of this means the data replaces judgment. It means the data gives your judgment something to check itself against. A rider who trains entirely on feel for twenty years develops decent instincts. A rider who trains with data for two years develops the same instincts faster, because every session is a labelled data point instead of a vague memory.
The trap is treating the tech itself as the training. Buying a $700 head unit doesn't make you fitter, and neither does a power meter sitting unused because you never learned what the numbers mean. The gear is only worth what you do with it. That's what this guide is for — cutting through what's marketing and what's actually useful, so the money and the time you spend on tech goes toward training decisions that matter.
Bike Computer vs GPS Watch
This is the question Anthony gets asked constantly, usually from someone who already owns a decent GPS watch from running and wonders if they really need a separate cycling computer too.
The honest answer is: it depends on how seriously you ride. A bike computer earns its keep once you're training with power, riding more than a few times a week, or doing anything structured enough that you need to see live numbers — target power, time remaining in an interval, a clean data field layout — without craning your wrist mid-effort. Head units also pair more reliably with power meters, di2/AXS electronic shifting, and radar like Garmin Varia, and they handle route navigation on the bars far better than a watch screen the size of a coin.
A GPS watch is the right call if you're a casual rider, or if you're already using the watch for running and don't want to manage two ecosystems. Modern multisport watches record rides perfectly well, estimate power reasonably (though not as precisely as a real power meter), and keep your whole training history — running and riding — in one place. For the rider who does one structured ride a week and three easy spins, a watch is plenty. The full breakdown of when a watch does the job and when it doesn't covers this in more depth if you're already deciding between ecosystems.
The two big brands solve the head-unit question differently. Garmin's Edge range (540, 840, 1050) leads on mapping and ecosystem breadth — if you own a Garmin watch too, everything talks to everything. Wahoo's ELEMNT range leads on simplicity: cleaner screens during intervals, faster setup, less clutter. Neither is wrong. The full Wahoo vs Garmin comparison breaks down which fits which kind of rider, and Best Cycling Computers 2026 adds Hammerhead's Karoo 3 into the mix for anyone shopping fresh.
The practical rule: if you train with power or ride structured sessions three-plus times a week, get a head unit. If you're casual, or you're already deep in a watch ecosystem from running, don't feel pressured to buy a second device just because the cycling internet says you need one.
Key Metrics to Track
Most riders drown in numbers their platform shows them and never learn which three actually matter. Here's the honest shortlist.
Power (or heart rate, if you don't have a meter). This is the anchor metric. It tells you the actual intensity of what you did, independent of how you felt that day. If you have a power meter, everything else — zones, intervals, pacing — is built on this number. If you don't, heart rate is the next best proxy, though it lags behind effort and drifts with heat, fatigue and caffeine.
Cadence. Your pedalling rate in revolutions per minute. Most riders naturally settle somewhere between 80-95 RPM on the flat and lower on climbs. Cadence matters less as a number to hit and more as a variable worth being aware of — grinding at 50 RPM overloads the legs, spinning at 110 loads the cardiovascular system instead. Low-cadence torque work is a specific, useful training tool, not something to chase by default.
Time in zone. Not your average power for a ride, but how much of the ride you actually spent at the intensity the session called for. This is where most amateurs get caught out — a ride can average a sensible number while actually containing 20 minutes of unplanned grey-zone effort dragging the average down from what was really two very different rides mashed together. Checking time in zone tells you whether you executed the session you meant to, not just whether the average looked fine afterward.
Past those three, you get into secondary metrics that matter more to a coach managing your season than to you checking a single ride: Normalised Power (NP), Intensity Factor (IF), Training Stress Score (TSS), and the load trio of CTL, ATL and TSB. These are properly useful for planning a season and spotting when you're overreaching, but they're weekly-review numbers, not things to obsess over after every ride. Cycling Metrics Explained walks through what each one means in plain English and which ones deserve a daily glance versus a weekly one.
Power Meters, Briefly
A power meter measures the force you apply to the pedals or crank, in watts, in real time. It's the most direct way to know exactly how hard you're working, independent of heat, fatigue, caffeine or how you happen to feel that morning — all of which distort heart rate.
You don't need one to get fit. Cyclists trained hard and got fast for decades before power meters existed, and heart rate plus RPE (rate of perceived exertion) still builds real fitness today. But once you're following a structured plan — set FTP zones, specific interval targets, a coach tracking your load — a power meter removes a layer of guesswork that heart rate can't. It's the difference between "that felt about right" and "I held exactly 260 watts for the full ten minutes."
Types worth knowing: crank-based and spider-based meters (the most common, generally accurate, fitted to one bike), pedal-based systems like Garmin Rally (easy to swap between bikes), and single-sided options that estimate total power from one leg (cheaper, less precise, fine for a first meter). The full power meter buying guide and power meter vs smart trainer comparison go deeper if you're actually shopping.
Whatever you buy, calibrate the reading against a fixed reference occasionally, and use the FTP Zone Calculator to turn the raw wattage into training zones that actually mean something for your sessions.
What You Actually Need vs What's Marketing
This is where the cycling internet earns its reputation for parting riders from their money. A rundown of what's worth it and what isn't.
Worth it: a mid-range GPS-enabled bike computer or watch that reliably records rides and shows live data. A single-sided or crank power meter once you're following structured training. A heart rate strap — chest straps remain more accurate than optical wrist sensors for cycling specifically, since wrist-based HR struggles with the vibration and grip changes of riding.
Marketing, mostly: the newest flagship head unit's full-colour mapping, if you mostly ride the same local roads. Multi-band GPS, unless you're riding under tree cover or in deep valleys regularly. Advanced recovery scores and "body battery" metrics baked into watches — interesting, rarely actionable, and no substitute for just tracking your own sleep and how sessions actually feel.
Depends on you: a smart trainer with power. Properly useful if you train indoors through winter and want ERG-mode workouts executed precisely. A total waste if you never ride indoors.
The test Anthony uses with athletes he coaches: will this piece of tech change a training decision you make this month? If the answer is yes — you'll finally know your real FTP, you'll finally see if your easy days are actually easy — buy it. If the answer is "it would be nice to have," save the money and put it toward a season of proper coaching instead, because the gap between a rider with great gear and no structure and a rider with modest gear and a real plan is not close.
Where to Go From Here
Start with whichever question is actually costing you progress right now:
- GPS Watches for Cyclists Who Run — choosing between a watch and a head unit
- Wahoo vs Garmin Cycling Computers — the honest brand breakdown
- Best Cycling Computers 2026 — Garmin, Wahoo and Hammerhead compared
- Cycling Power Meter Guide — which type to buy and how to use it
- Power Meter Training: How to Use It — turning wattage into structured sessions
- Power Meter vs Smart Trainer — which to buy first
- Cycling Metrics Explained — TSS, NP, CTL, ATL and TSB in plain English
- Reading Your Training Data — the deeper TrainingPeaks field guide
Set your zones with the FTP Zone Calculator or the HR Zone Calculator, and check your power-to-weight with the W/kg Calculator once you've got real numbers to work from.
The tech is a tool, not a training plan. If you want the numbers turned into an actual season — periodised, coached, adjusted week to week — that's what Not Done Yet is built for.