"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - Is there anyway to train for hills w/o doing hills?

Right now I live in DC and I can't find any hills to simulate the hill climb I will be doing this summer as part of an important stage race on my calendar. That hill (in Washington State) is about 8 miles long at approx. 4% (max 10%). Is there any way to train for this here where it is really pretty flat?

I am posting a separate thread in the DC area forum to see if there are any climbs like that near here. I don't have a car and everywhere I have ridden in the last 6 months seems to be pretty flat. So let's assume for a moment that there really are no hills. What then?

Thanks!

I do all my hill work indoors.

Good climbers just have high power-to-weight ratios, work on that. :)

I live in Florida, and have this stupid proclivity to take on climbing challenges.

My take on climbing for Flatlanders. http://everestchallengex2.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html

And living in DC, you can find some nice climbs with a 2 hour drive to the eastern panhandle of WV.

Big gear intervals. Get used to producing power at a cadence lower than you'd normally ride at back home.

There's nothing magical about climbing, at least below 4-5,000ft. It boils down to w/kg, and how you manage your energy expenditures before and during the climb(s).

After that, it's a matter of altitude acclimatization, which has nothing to do with the actual act of climbing. Plenty of flat lands at high altitude without a mountain in sight (Tibetan Plateau, etc.).

My take on climbing for Flatlanders. http://everestchallengex2.blogspot.c...1_archive.html

Thanks for the good read. I found it very useful. I just recently got a heart rate monitor and found out my lactic threshold so I can actually do this. There are climbs of around 1% near here that I can probably get up to LT over 6 or 7 miles. That is only 1 mile shy of the hill climb. So that seems like it might work to increase power (I have already lost a good deal of weight over last year).

I live in Florida, and have this stupid proclivity to take on climbing challenges.

My take on climbing for Flatlanders. http://everestchallengex2.blogspot.com/2008_07_01_archive.html

And living in DC, you can find some nice climbs with a 2 hour drive to the eastern panhandle of WV.

You missed the part about him not having a car.

There aren't any serious hills in Atlanta either other than Kennesaw Mtn. Lots of rollers < 75-100 meters. I would probably just work hard on FTP with 20x2 intervals, ride flats out of the saddle in your largest gear for long stretches and watch the weight.

One option to consider would be to ride to the end of the W&OD in Purcellville. From there you have many options, perhaps the simplest of which would be to make your way to 601 (mount weather). Though it's not a sustained climb it may as well be as there's no time to recover if you ride it properly. If you ride it from the rt.7 side it's around 8 miles to route 50... at which point you can turn around and do it in reverse. The return leg climbs a bit more gradually but is no less challenging. That first mile or so from the rt. 7 side is like a swift kick between the legs.

Riding from DC, your total mileage for the day would be over 120. It'd be an *epic* day of riding but since 90 miles would be on flat MUPs with easy access to food/drink/places to rest, it's very doable and actually a pretty nice ride.

And yes, I've done this ride and that's why I'm recommending it.

you could also ride about 40 miles out to sugar loaf and do the 6-8 minute climb there.

you could also ride about 40 miles out to sugar loaf and do the 6-8 minute climb there.

+1

Big gear intervals. Get used to producing power at a cadence lower than you'd normally ride at back home.
There's nothing magical about climbing, at least below 4-5,000ft. It boils down to w/kg, and how you manage your energy expenditures before and during the climb(s).

After that, it's a matter of altitude acclimatization, which has nothing to do with the actual act of climbing. Plenty of flat lands at high altitude without a mountain in sight (Tibetan Plateau, etc.).

+1

unless you are extremely strong and light, or have a very small gearing, you are going to be grinding it out on the 10% grades. if you aren't prepared to crunch out watts in low cadence, it will not be pretty. riding at 60-75 rpm is nothing like 90-105 rpm for me.

as far as the techincal aspects of riding, you should really be okay so long as you can ride a bike to begin with. the lower speed doesn't take that much adjustment. the only technical thing that i would consider preparing for is the sound. i remember getting freaked out when i was on my first group ride, and the sound changed from wind to other riders breathing hard. it made me think that i was working harder than i was. maybe that was just me, though. good luck.

+1

unless you are extremely strong and light, or have a very small gearing, you are going to be grinding it out on the 10% grades.

This is a good point. I had not thought of that. There are some pretty long gravel paths around here. Perhaps, on my commuter bike with big tires it seems like this would create some extra resistance and I could really get the HR up for a sustained period while turning a pretty big gear. The C&O canal trail for instance is packed gravel forever at a nearly uniform grade (0% to be precise, excepting the occasional lock) Would that be useful?

This is a good point. I had not thought of that. There are some pretty long gravel paths around here. Perhaps, on my commuter bike with big tires it seems like this would create some extra resistance and I could really get the HR up for a sustained period while turning a pretty big gear. The C&O canal trail for instance is packed gravel forever at a nearly uniform grade (0% to be precise, excepting the occasional lock) Would that be useful?

no.

find a relentlessly long stretch of road, hopefully one where the prevailing winds usually involve a headwind.

shift into your 53x15/16 and churn the gear, into it.

that's what i did to prepare for the pordoi/giau/gavia/stelvio/mortirollo/etc.

find a relentlessly long stretch of road, hopefully one where the prevailing winds usually involve a headwind.

shift into your 53x15/16 and churn the gear, into it.

I might be missing something. This is exactly what I was planning on doing but on the C&O trail where there would be no stop lights or traffic and the grade is super even. The packed gravel would just be adding resistance much like a headwind (only more reliable). The speed might not be quite as high, but the same wattage would be achievable, no?

I think it would be fine as long as the fit is the same on both bikes.

Low cadence/headwind work will help, but there is only one good way to train for climbing without actually climbing imo:

Get a climbing block (to prop your front wheel up high) for your trainer.

The thing that is different about climbing is that it recruits different muscles in different proportions than does riding on flat land.
This has to do with the angle that your body and legs make with the gravity vector (straight down).


Get a trainer and a climbing block

I'm another FL flatlander and I just got back from a couple of weeks in Spain. I did a bunch of climbing including several long (10-15km) Cat 1 rated mountain passes. The low cadence hurts, and my lower back hurts after a day of climbing. Otherwise, it's just a long FTP-style effort, not much different than getting on the TT bike and doing a hard hour.

The thing that is different about climbing is that it recruits different muscles in different proportions than does riding on flat land.
This has to do with the angle that your body and legs make with the gravity vector (straight down).


Get a trainer and a climbing block

I have heard several smart people (present company included I am sure :)) say this bit about the angle of gravity but something about it challenges me. After all 5% is less than 3 degrees. The distance between the contact patches of my tires is approximately 40 inches. That means that in order to train for a 5% average climb, I need to raise my front wheel a whopping 2 inches. I am skeptical that my muscle recruitment will be significantly different due to such a subtle change in angle. I am open to the idea (in fact that is the whole point of this post) but does anyone have some concrete experience with this angle business? Successes? Failures?

The main thing you need to emulate is the resistance at lower speeds so you can train in the same gearing at which you will climb. The angle of the bike is not nearly as important.

The effect of gearing is something most people don't recognize as a contributing factor, but it is the only significant difference between 400 watts at 10mph in a 39-23 up a 10% grade and 400 watts in a 53-14 at 30mph. Smarter bears amongst us will point out that with the preceding gearing and speeds the cadence is different and they get a gold star... So why do you tend to hammer in a pace line at 100rpm and climb sustained long climbs at 70-80rpm?: Inertial crank load (peak resistance to swinging through the stroke) due to gearing.

No matter how smooth you think your pedal stroke is, you have a system of contracting muscles and articulating joints connected to those cranks and the reality is that your power delivery is pulsating through the stroke. Think about how that works with high effective gearing vs low effective gearing, and how it "feels" to your legs. Very few well trained cyclists would choose to ride up a sustained climb in a 39-29 at 100rpm, or to ride on flats in a 53-11 at 70rpm and this is not due to some arbitrary peloton protocol, or due to position on the bike in either case.

Training into a headwind or just doing intervals to improve your general fitness will be better than no preparation for climbing events, but to truely train for the demands of climbing, you need to train in the same gears that you will be climbing with. Nowadays that means you can use a computrainer to ride at threshold wattage at slow speeds (assuming you aren't a big power rider) and even simulate the grade with lifting the front of your bike; or you can get caveman with it and drag heavy itesm like old tires around on the road with your bike; the Russians used to train that way, seriously :thumb:

http://www.bicyclebuys.com/productimages/0100187-AST.jpg


+


http://www.toywonders.com/images/cinderblock.jpg

The main thing you need to emulate is the resistance at lower speeds so you can train in the same gearing at which you will climb. The angle of the bike is not nearly as important.



I understand what you're saying, but not certain that I agree. Yes, people do tend to slow down their cadences on hills, but it is not a universal truth and furthermore not necessarily a positive. I feel is largely a reflection of your muscle composition and aerobic fitness level. When I'm cranking up a hill, I keep my cadence high. It only slows down when I run out of gas. Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn't. Having your front tire elevated makes a significant difference on muscle recruitment, though, that I know.

I understand what you're saying...

Based on your response; you probably don't understand. Many physiologists don't understand, and besides I suck at explaining it so don't take that the wrong way. I am not talking about using a different cadence, I am talking about gearing as a function of climbing requirements and the resultant change in muscular effects/demands.

If you can't grasp how swinging through the power pulse phase of the crank stroke is different with lower gearing vs. higher gearing, no biggie... just ride what feels right. But don't look at shorter power climbs which have totally different demands in an attempt to understand what I am saying... we are talking about sustained threshold vs sustained threshold. Long sustained climb vs. flat TT pace. If you feel it doesn't apply just go with what feels right. But what I wrote isn't really debatable (you can debate contribution)... it is basic applied mechanics taking into account the physiological system it is connected to. :thumb:

You will be much better prepared for long brutal climbs by dragging a concrete block around at 10mph than you will be riding threshold intervals into the wind at the same wattage in bigger gearing that you won't be using when you are ascending that mountain... assuming you can bring yourself to train that way ;)

Based on your response; you probably don't understand.

Based on your response, you're not trying to explain.

I'm an engineer. I understand gearing. I understand that the power portions of our pedal strokes provide impulse loads that drive the bike forward. I understand that these power pulses accelerate the bike and due to the V^2 quality of kinetic energy, the bike will accelerate (in terms of change in speed) more in a low gear than in a high gear. Accepting this, there will be a difference in rotational acceleration of the cranks in a low gear vs. a higher gear while you apply force to the pedals. In low gears, people tend to 'mash' a bit more because the bike has more of a change in speed (proportionally) than in higher gears. If you're saying this is the case, then to some extent, I'll agree.

How, specifically, does that difference in pedal stroke change price of poker? I am interested in what you have to say, but to this point, you really haven't even attempted to explain. You've just made an unsupported claim and used a couple scientific sounding terms with nothing to back it up. Take some time and explain it or don't mention it in the first place.

The main thing you need to emulate is the resistance at lower speeds so you can train in the same gearing at which you will climb. The angle of the bike is not nearly as important.

The effect of gearing is something most people don't recognize as a contributing factor, but it is the only significant difference between 400 watts at 10mph in a 39-23 up a 10% grade and 400 watts in a 53-14 at 30mph. Smarter bears amongst us will point out that with the preceding gearing and speeds the cadence is different and they get a gold star... So why do you tend to hammer in a pace line at 100rpm and climb sustained long climbs at 70-80rpm?: Inertial crank load (peak resistance to swinging through the stroke) due to gearing.

No matter how smooth you think your pedal stroke is, you have a system of contracting muscles and articulating joints connected to those cranks and the reality is that your power delivery is pulsating through the stroke. Think about how that works with high effective gearing vs low effective gearing, and how it "feels" to your legs. Very few well trained cyclists would choose to ride up a sustained climb in a 39-29 at 100rpm, or to ride on flats in a 53-11 at 70rpm and this is not due to some arbitrary peloton protocol, or due to position on the bike in either case.

Training into a headwind or just doing intervals to improve your general fitness will be better than no preparation for climbing events, but to truely train for the demands of climbing, you need to train in the same gears that you will be climbing with. Nowadays that means you can use a computrainer to ride at threshold wattage at slow speeds (assuming you aren't a big power rider) and even simulate the grade with lifting the front of your bike; or you can get caveman with it and drag heavy itesm like old tires around on the road with your bike; the Russians used to train that way, seriously :thumb:

The problem with your entire argument is the assumption that you can't do the flat steady state work, and the climbing at the same rpm, which is incorrect.

Take an average size rider, capable of 300 watts FTP. The steady state intervals are going to produce 26mph on the flat. This can very easily be done at 80rpms, with conventional gearing.

Same rider on an 8% grade can will do about 9mph, which can be done at 80 rpms with a 39/27.

If you want to train to climb hills in a big gear at 40rpm, perhaps it would make sense to drag cinderblocks. However, if you climb with a reasonably high cadence, then steady states on the flats work quite nicely.

the length to which people go to overcomplicate things never ceases to amaze me

the best way to train for climbing is to climb

that doesnt sound like an option for you so go out and train as though you normally would for racing, but focus on the interval length that you think it will take you to complete an uphill 8 mi. TT (probably 40 minutes +/-)

you're in DC area, you could race 2x every weekend between now and september, in the absence of racing, you could do the 7 a.m., 8:30 a.m., or 10:00 a.m. group rides out of rock creek park that will give you lots of training intensity

surely you can find a ride out to WVa (raw talent ranch aka jay's lost river barn) or out to the shenandoah/skyline or frederick/thurmont/hagerstown, MD to get in some actual climbing on things that are significantly steeper than your uphill TT

I can simulate hard climbing on the e-motion rollers by just riding in my biggest gear with resistance, keeping a slow cadence. Nothing comes close to the real thing once you have to deal with 10% plus though.

here's some good climbing footage. Note the body positions and weight movements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8p-wDm5Wbc

ot: merlin, that avatar pic is amazing. where did you go? surely that isn't jacksonville.

Based on your response, you're not trying to explain. I'm trying, just not succeeding. :o I am certainly no teacher, at least in a pedantic sense...


In low gears, people tend to 'mash' a bit more because the bike has more of a change in speed (proportionally) than in higher gears. If you're saying this is the case, then to some extent, I'll agree.

Yes, however keep thinking your assumption though... are you sure cyclists alter cadence as gearing changes to level out surging, or could there be more to it?

Stiff frames are no more efficient than a flexy one in terms of energy conservation right? How many times have you seen the "stiff frames matter" argument torn to shreds with proofs that show all energy transferred to bending the BB is given back on the return stroke(minus an infinitesimal amount of heat), yet somehow a stiff frame still feels faster, especially for us big guys??? Muscles need resistance for optimal performance, and you can make more power with a stiff frame under hard efforts, it is not placebo effect... my only point is that you have to account for the whole system, not just mechanics of the bike and rider as a simple engine.

It isn't just the bike that is accelerating faster, but also the leg... actually all together hopefully, but you have the rotational acceleration the leg is dealing with in addition to the bike/rider system. Cyclists tend to self select lower cadences in large part so their legs have sufficient resistance for optimum performance. Nothing too earth shattering there... understanding gearing and its effect on the whole system is the complicated part, and you understand that.

The rub comes from the fact that even though you may self select a lower cadence, if you don't have any training pushing your threshold wattage at 70rpm in a little gear, it is going to fatigue you more than when you pushed the same wattage at 100rpm in a big gear. And you can't train for cadence in a much larger gear either because it will fatigue you that much more.




How, specifically, does that difference in pedal stroke change price of poker? I am interested in what you have to say, but to this point, you really haven't even attempted to explain. You've just made an unsupported claim and used a couple scientific sounding terms with nothing to back it up. Take some time and explain it or don't mention it in the first place.
For a recreational cyclist, it doesn't really matter... but if you are are well trained cyclist and preparing to spend a significant amount of time climbing yet unable to spend any amount of time actually climbing; the most effective training method is to simulate the power requirements and the gearing together Thus why I brought up the Russian method of dragging heavy items to stimulate sustained climbing (pretty flat in Moscow)... obviously a computrainer is better (if you are powerful you will can burn up the motor at high loads and low speed though).

I saw a bunch of posts about riding into the wind, simulating the grade for position, but no mention of the most important aspect that will be experienced while climbing that was heretofore not mentioned; low gearing while you are throwing it down... that was my only intent

Disclaimer:
I have no interest in trying to alter anyone's belief system. I don't have Wikipedia links to back up any statements I made so feel free to dismiss them as ramblings from a Bozo.

The problem with your entire argument is the assumption that you can't do the flat steady state work, and the climbing at the same rpm, which is incorrect.

Why couldn't you do the same rpm given gearing options? I implied some of the training doesn't translate directly; you inferred that I assumed something I didn't.

No, to the contrary you shouldn't want to do it at the same rpm. You will still be better off doing flat steady state work at 100 rpm and then climbing at 80rpm than to try to spin up the mountain at 100 rpm! Lance's whole "spinning" up the mountain was PR crap... besides spinning in that sense is still 85rpm instead of 110rpm.

I can simulate hard climbing on the e-motion rollers by just riding in my biggest gear with resistance, keeping a slow cadence. Nothing comes close to the real thing once you have to deal with 10% plus though.

Ha ha... I have the Inside Ride Rollers too. I am going to sound like a complete quack now, but you are right... throw some tire liners on, jack up the magnet to full load and ride at the 53-13 at 70rpm and it isn't too bad, and much better alternative to riding a trainer... but that is because with the light flywheel that whole inertial pedal load thing as a function of gearing is not really applicable.;)

I'm trying, just not succeeding.

OK, now you tried. Previously, you didn't succeed because you didn't even attempt. Good enough.
Without any evidence (Wikipedia doesn't count for evidence, does it? I'm thinking peer reviewed research) , I'm going to have a tough time taking what you say as fact, but at least you stated your case.

I'll say, 'maybe' to your notion of gearing effect. Having said that, big gears into a stiff breeze can get a lot of work done. Big gears and slower than normal cadences up moderate inclines can also go a long way to building climbing strength.

I like merlin's thoughts on this. Race intensity coupled with proper gearing should go the farthest to benefitting you in the actual race. Meaning, if the hill is 40 minutes long then do 2x20s in a somewhat lower cadence then normal. Then do your best to have a gear in the race that gets you that same cadence. Its not optimal but, unless you're a pro, probably nothing else about you (or I) is anyway. ;)

If you happen to have a compact crank and a 28 on the back, you'll be spinning like 5mph in the low gear. That's hardly race effort on a 4% grade.

I concur with MDCatV - Are you on a local club?

Lotsa club folks around here in DC take long trips to Mt. Weather, nearby Blue Mountain (which I think is a better climb), and Skyline Drive. And nearly every club takes a weekend trip or two to the RTR (http://www.lostriverbarn.com) every year...

You could always just find a cycling buddy with a car and offer to fill up his tank and buy him lunch.

Where's Blue Mountain?

Blue Mountain is about 14 miles Southwest of Mt. Weather. Search for Blue Mountain Road. It's unpaved for the top half of the climb and took me just over 21 minutes when I was there in March.

Unfortunately from google maps the roads looks horribly complicated near Blue Mountain but as far as I know, there's only one way up and one way down (the rest on google maps must be gravel driveways and stuff). Obviously taking the gravel/dirt UP the mountain is the way to go.

A few times a year, we do a 70 miler starting from Marshal, VA that flies over slight rollers about 20 miles to Mt. Weather, heading up and over that ridge and then descends for a bit, to start following a stream to the base of Blue Mountain. When you descend from Blue Mountain you're only about 12 miles from Marshal. I don't have the cue sheet myself but I'm sure you can google tons of routes out there.

After Mt. Weather's descent, it's mostly flat valleys between the actual mountains (duh) so you can get some great pacelining going, with a few exceptions. And there's a great burger/sandwich place in Marshal with beer and milkshakes for lunch afterwards.

Our last ride there was 69.6 miles in 3:41, averaging 18.9 mph. Tough.

http://www.ncvc.net/rides/Wiki%20Pages/Marshall%20Ride.aspx

There's the info for the Marshal route.

Hey BC,

Good post! I think you are getting some great advice here:

- push a bigger gear at lower rpm's - definitely something you should get used to, you need to train your brain for riding at lower RPM's.

- While training for Mt. Washington last year, the nearest good hill was .5 miles long at 8%. To get a feel for the cadence and push I would need at + 12% sections, I would warm up in a cadence around 80rpm's, then push a gear and try to repeat that hill at 60 -65 rpms. Do not underestimate the need to get comfortable with lower rpm's needing more power. You might simply run out of gearing and need more power at lower cadence to resolve certain sections.

- Deep breathing - if you don't know how to relax on tough grades, work on relaxing the upper body and breathing deep and exhaling fully.

- save the standing for stretching or the most difficult grades.

- While researching for that ride, I found some great advice. Find a flat road, throw it into your hardest gear that you can sustain for an hour and suffer. Maybe that is too extreme for the 4% to 10% grades you will be dealing with. You may want to drop that down to 30 minutes and spin a slightly easier gear. Focus on your glutes - sitting back in the saddle a bit and driving all your energy to the bottom bracket.

- I agree with Pursuit 4000 to some extent - "Good climbers just have high power-to-weight ratios, work on that." However, in my experience it's more than that. Power to weight is great, but once on a big hill, I think some balance and focus on position, form and getting those hip flexors ready for adjusting grades can be time well spent.

With your race being between 4 - 10 % - I'm assuming it's not all straight up? Do you have a profile of the course? PM if you don't want to share the race info with all.

dave

ot: merlin, that avatar pic is amazing. where did you go? surely that isn't jacksonville.

Col de Galibier.

Right now I live in DC and I can't find any hills to simulate the hill climb I will be doing this summer as part of an important stage race on my calendar. That hill (in Washington State) is about 8 miles long at approx. 4% (max 10%). Is there any way to train for this here where it is really pretty flat?

I am posting a separate thread in the DC area forum to see if there are any climbs like that near here. I don't have a car and everywhere I have ridden in the last 6 months seems to be pretty flat. So let's assume for a moment that there really are no hills. What then?

Thanks!

As others have said, it's all about W/kg when it comes to climbing. So you have a few options:

a) Watch the weight, as the Duke suggested,
b) Do a good amount of high gear riding, or
c) High resistance intervals.

Good luck!

Question: how to simulate climbing without hills/etc..

Answer: use a high gear, low cadence, at FTP for the duration of the climbs that will be in the actual race.


True or False

I understand what you're saying, but not certain that I agree. Yes, people do tend to slow down their cadences on hills, but it is not a universal truth and furthermore not necessarily a positive. I feel is largely a reflection of your muscle composition and aerobic fitness level. When I'm cranking up a hill, I keep my cadence high. It only slows down when I run out of gas. Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn't. Having your front tire elevated makes a significant difference on muscle recruitment, though, that I know.

On another note, this reminded me of something that helped me immensely in training for climbs. Doing Hindu squats every other night has proven very effective for me when I was weaker on the climbs. Now, I'm not an all-star climber, but I am significantly better than I used to be and can recover a lot faster.

I'm getting ready for a Colorado trip by training at a Midwestern altitude of 900 feet.

I'm training with a steady diet of flat headwinds and a lot of Cheetos and Mountain Dew.

I can't wait for that first day at 5000-8500 feet.

a) Watch the weight, as the Duke suggested,
b) Do a good amount of high gear riding, or
c) High resistance intervals.


I can't believe this hasn't been said yet:
"Ride lots"

My climbing has improved substantially over the last nine months- and strangely, while riding less and moving away from living in the mountains at 5K feet. (base elevation) For me I think the recipe has been a combination of training less but in a more targeted fashion, and going down 10lbs has not hurt me any.

Something that may or may not be meaningful:
I started and got serious about running 10-12 miles several times a week. I am recovering much more quickly over long, sustained efforts... maybe tied to practicing long efforts at a steady pace more frequently?

Over the course of typing this post I'm thinking about it, and my riding has naturally turned into most of the points on the list above.
a) The difference between weighing 153 and 142 has been very noticeable.
b) Training for fast 40K TT times (most of my training so far has been Merckx style without aero gear)
c) Living at the top of some ramps that rival mount doom (yes, really) and attacking big hills repeatedly during 75% of my rides.

Steady-state work with running and swimming may or may not have anything to do with it, but one thing I do know: the difference between weighing 153 and 142 has been very noticeable.

Weight may or may not be something you can change, but I'd definitely work on HARD efforts over the period of time you anticipate the uphill lasting.

Col de Galibier.

thanks. that background is epic.

One relatively minor thing. Do some training with a raised front wheel. You will be using slightly different muscles in the legs and in the core. Should help you maintain comfort and therefore power.

Newb questions:
--what in the world is FTP with relation to training? (Google yields file transfer protocol :p)
--This thread is super relevant to me as most of my training is within flats and I have most interest in hills, but do people actually drag cinder blocks or big bricks, or was that some sort of metaphor? Are there actual weights that can be strategically attached to a bike for training?

Cheers!
-Nico

Newb questions:
--what in the world is FTP with relation to training? (Google yields file transfer protocol :p)
--This thread is super relevant to me as most of my training is within flats and I have most interest in hills, but do people actually drag cinder blocks or big bricks, or was that some sort of metaphor? Are there actual weights that can be strategically attached to a bike for training?

Cheers!
-Nico

no. yes. why?

I'd go do laps at Rock Creek Park. I always got dropped on that stupid hill. Pretend the rest of the lap is a false flat.

Newb questions:
--what in the world is FTP with relation to training? (Google yields file transfer protocol :p)



Functional Threshold Power. Essentially the power output you can maintain for an hour.

Newb questions:
--what in the world is FTP with relation to training? (Google yields file transfer protocol :p)
-Nico

Functional Threshold Power - the power output you can sustain for an hour or so.