Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   "The 33"-Road Bike Racing (http://www.bikeforums.net/33-road-bike-racing/)
-   -   Best Bang ... (http://www.bikeforums.net/33-road-bike-racing/936617-best-bang.html)

AzTallRider 03-04-14 12:02 PM

Always fun to see another Arizona racer on the forum. Getting to proper racing weight opens up your wheel choices significantly, so unless you need to replace something broken, you might consider taking the weight off before investing in wheels. I'm 6'6". I went from 230 to my current 188 when I started 'training to race' and 'eating to train'. Stopped worrying about choosing the "Clyde" version of the wheels.

Gratz on doing that well in VOS - you clearly have power. For motivation, think about applying that power to less weight, and what that would mean on the VOS climb. It's hard to overstate the benefits of weighing less when racing a bike.

Oh, and a locals tip. Spend a lot of time on either Usury or 9-mile. Or both :)

needmoreair 03-04-14 05:41 PM

I'm partial to a powermeter being the best bang for the buck. After that, a very well fitting race kit. After that, race tires and latex tubes. After that, race wheels. All assuming a functional bike that won't break when you stand up to accelerate.

For a tt, I'd say skinsuit first (150-200), aero helmet that fits riding style second (80-200), disk wheel cover (100 bucks) third. That's assuming you have a good position on a functional bike with aero bars.

Ygduf 03-04-14 05:54 PM

I neglected to mention, the bang-for-buck ratio on going to bed early is out of this world.

Put that at the top of the list.

And when can we start making bang-for-buck massage parlor jokes? Now?

misterwaterfall 03-04-14 05:57 PM

Now is a good time. There are probably 25-30 "$25 massage" type places in my city. I'm waiting until kwaki is in town to give them a test run, I'm scared.

Ygduf 03-04-14 06:36 PM

My wife was called to sit on a jury where a guy was being charged with sexual assault for demanding that type of thing. I guess you gotta know the secret word.

gruveb 03-05-14 08:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AzTallRider (Post 16547609)
Always fun to see another Arizona racer on the forum. Getting to proper racing weight opens up your wheel choices significantly, so unless you need to replace something broken, you might consider taking the weight off before investing in wheels. I'm 6'6". I went from 230 to my current 188 when I started 'training to race' and 'eating to train'. Stopped worrying about choosing the "Clyde" version of the wheels.

Gratz on doing that well in VOS - you clearly have power. For motivation, think about applying that power to less weight, and what that would mean on the VOS climb. It's hard to overstate the benefits of weighing less when racing a bike.

Oh, and a locals tip. Spend a lot of time on either Usury or 9-mile. Or both :)

I live in extreme southern Arizona...like northern Mexico, practically. I've done 9 mile hill once in a gran fondo last fall. I think I can get down to around 185, so that's my goal.

gruveb 03-05-14 08:16 AM

Thanks for all of the responses. I have learned a lot. I'm thinking a power meter may be the next step for me. I'm not looking for a piece of equipment that will compensate for performance being lowered by my weight, just trying to plan for future upgrades when the time comes.

mike868y 03-05-14 08:36 AM

"This stuff can come later, but right now, don't worry about coaching, $300 fits, powermeters, or aero equip. Just ride & learn to turn."

MDcatV 03-05-14 08:37 AM

^my coach is from somewhere in southern AZ, he now lives in WV though. I've plunked $$ down on coaching, power meters, light weight stuff, aero stuff, wheels, etc., etc., etc. in my experience, my growth as a cyclist has been served best by expenditures on coaching, which is why i'm going that route again this year after a few years of self coaching.

mike868y 03-05-14 08:48 AM

^sure, but you are in a considerably different point in your development than the OP.

gsteinb 03-05-14 08:49 AM

you would argue that a set of wheels would lead to better results for a newbie than a coach?

kindablue 03-05-14 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gruveb (Post 16549915)
I think I can get down to around 185, so that's my goal.

Slightly off topic, but Racing Weight by Matt Fitzgerald really helped me conceptualize my weight and weight goals. It really hones in on the concept of an endurance athlete's body composition and where it should be from off season to race peak.
Each to their own, but hope that helps OP.

p.s. sounds like you did well at VOS, congrats!

mike868y 03-05-14 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsteinb (Post 16550036)
you would argue that a set of wheels would lead to better results for a newbie than a coach?

no i would argue that pedaling a lot would lead to better results for a newbie than a coach. the op is probably at a point where anything he does is going to make huge differences. there's so much info available in books/online that imo he's not in a position where he needs a coach.

gruveb 03-05-14 09:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kindablue (Post 16550097)
Slightly off topic, but Racing Weight by Matt Fitzgerald really helped me conceptualize my weight and weight goals. It really hones in on the concept of an endurance athlete's body composition and where it should be from off season to race peak.
Each to their own, but hope that helps OP.

p.s. sounds like you did well at VOS, congrats!


I have that book, bought it when it first came out...but have forgotten about it. I should re-read it.

I do remember how it discussed fluctuating weight throughout the year. So with a little calculation, knowing that I'm 215 with 18% body fat, if I can trim to 10% while without losing muscle, I'd still be 198. :(

MDcatV 03-05-14 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike868y (Post 16550115)
no i would argue that pedaling a lot would lead to better results for a newbie than a coach. the op is probably at a point where anything he does is going to make huge differences. there's so much info available in books/online that imo he's not in a position where he needs a coach.

so you think that you would gain more from your college classes by having the text books and doing labs than by having a professor?

gsteinb 03-05-14 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike868y (Post 16550115)
no i would argue that pedaling a lot would lead to better results for a newbie than a coach. the op is probably at a point where anything he does is going to make huge differences. there's so much info available in books/online that imo he's not in a position where he needs a coach.


I'll use myself as an example. Now I realize some of you guys think I'm hella fast, but I'm still old. When I was your age I had some bad ideas in my head, and as a result I ended up burying myself and given the introduction of some life stress I took it as an opportunity to quit. Had I had the kind of guidance I have now I would have been a pretty incredible cyclist. I doubt good enough to race on the highest levels, but really pretty good.

Yes you can and will make gains no matter what you do. But certain mistakes can be quite debilitating. And the question is more like 'I have money to spend…how should I spend it," than anything else.

mike868y 03-05-14 09:31 AM

i'm not saying a coach would be bad, i just think there's a time and a place for a formal coach and a structured plan and a time and a place for trying to ride an race as much as possible, talk to more experienced members of your club/the fast guys on the group rides, etc.

that being said, both g and mdcatv are far better bike racers than me sooo...

Ygduf 03-05-14 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gsteinb (Post 16550036)
you would argue that a set of wheels would lead to better results for a newbie than a coach?


good coach or bad coach?





I will argue anything!

ljrichar 03-05-14 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gruveb (Post 16550132)
I do remember how it discussed fluctuating weight throughout the year. So with a little calculation, knowing that I'm 215 with 18% body fat, if I can trim to 10% while without losing muscle, I'd still be 198. :(

Pretty sure your calculations are way off.

waterrockets 03-05-14 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ljrichar (Post 16550408)
Pretty sure your calculations are way off.

Yeah, I'm seeing 194 @ 10%

revchuck 03-05-14 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike868y (Post 16550196)
i'm not saying a coach would be bad, i just think there's a time and a place for a formal coach and a structured plan and a time and a place for trying to ride an race as much as possible, talk to more experienced members of your club/the fast guys on the group rides, etc.

that being said, both g and mdcatv are far better bike racers than me sooo...

You seem to be saying that flailing about enthusiastically is a good way to go for a new racer. :)

I think you've set up a false dichotomy above. One can have a coach and a formal training plan AND race a lot and benefit from the advice of local experienced racers. I know that I'd be farther behind the power curve if I didn't have a coach providing direction, experience and accountability. I also feel that the less one is gifted, the more one benefits from having a coach.

Ygduf 03-05-14 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waterrockets (Post 16550473)
Yeah, I'm seeing 194 @ 10%


Losing 8% bodyfat would subtract more than 8% body mass. There's a lot of water and vessels and blood volume and structure to go along with the increased weight.

gsteinb 03-05-14 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mike868y (Post 16550196)
i'm not saying a coach would be bad, i just think there's a time and a place for a formal coach and a structured plan and a time and a place for trying to ride an race as much as possible, talk to more experienced members of your club/the fast guys on the group rides, etc.

that being said, both g and mdcatv are far better bike racers than me sooo...


I'm not at all saying it's necessary, but I don't think there's much of a question that it would be a better use of money than many cycling related items, save a powermeter.

waterrockets 03-05-14 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ygduf (Post 16550547)
Losing 8% bodyfat would subtract more than 8% body mass. There's a lot of water and vessels and blood volume and structure to go along with the increased weight.

Fair enough, but what % of body fat accounts for this other mass? Isn't this structure measured when using calipers, or is it factored out in the computations that follow?

Ygduf 03-05-14 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waterrockets (Post 16550645)
Fair enough, but what % of body fat accounts for this other mass? Isn't this structure measured when using calipers, or is it factored out in the computations that follow?

quoting from another forum where I talked about going from 13% to 9%. Where the 15lbs represents about 8-9% of bodymass.

Quote:

13% down to 9% makes sense to me based on 15 pounds of total weight lost.


This is obviously mega rough but: you were at 24 pounds of total fat before, down to ~15 now.


20% of total weight loss being lean tissue is expected/predictable, so that's 3 pounds there. With total lost fat at 9 pounds with, say, an additional 3 pound drop in the capacity to carry body water in a comfortably hydrated state*, there's your 15 pounds matching up to the percentage shift, which may not be accurate but still makes sense as internally consistent.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:45 PM.