Fifty Plus (50+) - Building aerobic base

I would like to work on building my aerobic base by doing some long (40, 50, 60) endurance rides at a slower pace -- MY pace, not trying to keep up (or catch up) with our group. I'll call it my Endurance Aerobic Base-Building Ride, and I'll invite other group members to join me if they wish.

I ride primarily with our group because I enjoy the camaraderie and I don't enjoy long solo rides . However, many of them are stronger with a solid aerobic base and many more miles in the saddle. I'm still playing catch-up since I was off the bike all last year waiting for bi-lateral tennis elbow to heal. I've ridden 1000+ miles so far since late January and completed three (unorganized) 60+ miles and a half-century last weekend. I do OK but the second half of the ride is a struggle for me to keep up and my HR stays in the higher zones. After those rides, my slow resting HR doesn't recover until during the night, but I'm usually like new the next morning. After a tough climb, my HR drops quickly; recently I've seen it drop 30 beats in 20-30 seconds. My fitness is improving but I fear I'm taking things too quickly and putting the cart before the horse.

So, I want to do some long slow flat rides to work on my aerobic endurance, and increase the pace over the coming weeks. An article on aerobic base training at Active.com (http://www.active.com/fitness/Articles/Aerobic_base_training__Going_slower_to_get_faster.htm) mentions keeping the HR between 61-80% of max HR.

Does anyone have any suggestions, or anything to share from experience or the current thinking on the HR zones for aerobic base training, esp. in the 50+ group? I am aiming for two events later this year (72 flat miles, and a hilly metric) and want to do well and finish strong. I don't race but I like going fast and doing hills; keeping my pace down will be a challenge.:innocent:

Yes. I train with HR and most of my training is extensive, rather than intensive. I find I need high-volume, low-intensive work before I can handle the fast stuff.

But you'll need to increase the amount of time you spend on the bike. One thousand miles since late January really isn't very much, if you're to get the benefits of low-intensity training you need to do more than that. I'd suggest long rides at Z2 HR. in my case that means I'd be trying to ride for three or four hours with my HR between 105 and 129. I'd also do a shorter ride, maybe an hour or ninety minutes, at tempo - HR 130 to 145 for me, but you might want to save this until you have got some more miles in at the lower level.

Obviously your HR numbers will be different from mine. My max HR is about 186, but the more useful number is my lactate threshold HR, which is 156. There's a sticky in the training and nutrition forum that explains how to derive your LTHR.

You want to be in zones 2-3, and as Chasm has said, mostly z2 given where you are training wise. I've had my Lactate Threshold determined by metabolic testing, and for me those zones look like this:

z2: 95-101% of LT; 72-77% of MHR
z3: 102-107% of LT; 78-81% of MHR

The Max HR I use is the highest number I've ever recorded, which I haven't hit in quite some time. The zones I use are from the Australian Institute of Sport, which has done a lot of research in the area and is widely respected. Other zones (like Joe Friel's, which are widely used) differ.

Thank you. There are many resources out there but even the best of them conflict, and new studies can be even more conflicting; it's hard to know what's most accurate.

The highest HR I've seen in my monitor is 187; that was 1-1/2 years ago at the top of a difficult climb. My HR now at the top of the same climb is more than 10 beats lower, so I am improving. I don't know my aerobic threshold and would like to perform the test described in the sticky in the Training and Nutrition forum. Are the zones in that article a % of MHR? I would assume so since I can't estimate % of LTHR without performing the test for it.

I agree with most everything said so far- but assuming you don't have unlimited time for a lot of really long rides, try to do a lot of 2 to 3 hour rides, mostly in zone 2 as others have said. Add a longer ride every couple weeks, as best you can. This has worked for me to prepare for multi-day rides averaging 60+ miles/day.

I agree that really long slow rides alone can get pretty boring.

Thanks for that suggestion, it gives me an idea where I can use the gym AND study at the same time on days when we don't have a group ride or the temps are blazing hot. I can do 30-60 minutes on a stationery bike (I know, but it has its merits), followed by a 1-hour spin class, followed by 30-60 more minutes on a bike --- all done mostly in zone 2.

In calculating this year's mileage (since the end of January), I forgot to include numerous spin classes. :D

What AzT alluded to is that high z2/low z3 riding produces the biggest gains in aerobic fitness. Below that you're looking at more endurance adaptation. Above that and you start flirting with anaerobic capacity.

The problem with heart rate is there are a lot of factors, internal and external, that can throw off your actual watts:Hrate ratio. The best perceived exertion metric I've found is if you're in this zone, you should be able to just hold a conversation. Launch into a long monologue about your vacation or new bike and you should be shutting up fairly quickly.

You're on the right track doing this at your pace. It's difficult to find people who are both at your same level of fitness and who have the discipline to hold to a plan, and it can be counter productive at times to get sucked into other people's pace.

I agree that really long slow rides alone can get pretty boring.
Dude, that's the only way I can go.

I dunno, I've been using the HRM as much to gather information as for dictating the pace of my rides. The most useful thing I've found is that most of the time I'm not dogging it. When I get tuckered out it's because I've spend too much time in Z3-4. Unfortunately, all the interesting rides are out in da boonies, and hills there are just the way it is.

I'm guessing not to make it too scientific. As BD says, ride lots.

....snip...

In calculating this year's mileage (since the end of January), I forgot to include numerous spin classes. :D

Uh oh...Here we go! :popcorn:)

*I don't know my aerobic threshold and would like to perform the test described in the sticky in the Training and Nutrition forum. Are the zones in that article a % of MHR? I would assume so since I can't estimate % of LTHR without performing the test for it.

Yeah, you'll see that there is a reference to how to relate the LTHR to MHR in order to adjust the zones given in the quoted book to your particular circumstances, but there are plenty of recommendations these days basing zones exclusively on LTHR rather than MHR.

Personally I would not scorn the stationary bike. Unless you know it has been properly calibrated and maintained, I wouldn't trust the HR or power readings it provides, but at least they'll probably be consistent if you use the same bike, and allow you to track your progress. Certainly I made a lot of use of one a few years ago when I was working away on home several days per week. An hour in the morning in zone 3, three mornings a week, plus a long Z2 ride on the road at the weekend, worked reasonably well.

And again speaking personally, I don't find the long steady distance rides boring, I find it pleasant to ride alone. It's riding on trainers etc. that taxes my patience.

Thank you, chasm. I don't mind the spin class at times because I can take my study materials and study while I do my own ride. I can do a steady long hill, or intervals, or long slow ride, or whatever i want on the spin bike AND study at the same time. I don't have the same control if I ride with the group or alone on the road due to traffic and other factors. Of course, a group ride on the road is my preference!

I have a new question:
I read a statement somewhere that in zone 4 one cannot talk except with a few words; I think it actually said "you will not be talking!". However, when my HR was is in high zones I am able to speak more than a few words... more like a whole sentence before having to take a breath. Does this mean my HR may be artificially high in those circumstances, or I may be more fit than I realize?

I am improving in spite of not having a huge base (CPtips.com recommends only 500 miles). I just feel like I want a long slow ride at MY pace, not always having to keep up or chase the group. Even when I am with them at pace and on the hills, I am working to keep up. But then, perhaps all of them are too!

I read a statement somewhere that in zone 4 one cannot talk except with a few words; I think it actually said "you will not be talking!". However, when my HR was is in high zones I am able to speak more than a few words... more like a whole sentence before having to take a breath. Does this mean my HR may be artificially high in those circumstances, or I may be more fit than I realize?You're probably better to use the zone descriptions rather than rigid HR zones based on MaxHR. Fitness doesn't really change how you feel in the various zones just the power you put out. HR, as mentioned earlier, can change for many reasons including temperature, hydration levels etc.

Being able to talk comfortably is just a guideline. How fast you can go and still have a conversation is just an outcome of how fit you are. It also indicates how warmed up you are. Anytime you head off on a ride, you have to factor in some warmup time. In running, you warm up to the point where you've got your "second wind." It's not so dramatic in cycling. If you just start slow and let the speed come up by itself, you barely notice that you've crossed this threshold.

Also, the fitter or stronger you are as a cyclist, the longer it's going to take you to warm up. More muscle mass takes longer to warm up. I've known track sprinters that take about an hour to warm up. Back when I was racing, I'd do a 30-km warmup prior to a 15-km criterium!

Luis

I have a new question:
I read a statement somewhere that in zone 4 one cannot talk except with a few words; I think it actually said "you will not be talking!". However, when my HR was is in high zones I am able to speak more than a few words... more like a whole sentence before having to take a breath. Does this mean my HR may be artificially high in those circumstances, or I may be more fit than I realize?

It could be your LT is higher than you think, or it could be that, like many women, you have exemplary speaking skills. :innocent:

Being Also, the fitter or stronger you are as a cyclist, the longer it's going to take you to warm up. More muscle mass takes longer to warm up. I've known track sprinters that take about an hour to warm up. Back when I was racing, I'd do a 30-km warmup prior to a 15-km criterium!

Luis

And the shorter the race, the longer the warmup, because you will be cranking it right from the start.

People tend to think of training zones as hard numbers when in fact there is a lot of overlap. High zone 3 for example, also has some low zone 4 in it. In this digital age we often see things as stepped or absolute when they are actually analog and dynamic. There will always be some portion of your muscles working at different intensities. Also, hr is a lagging indicator. It trails effort and late in rides is often higher than it would be for the same effort earlier in the ride. Just a couple things to consider when heading out for a long ride.

Hello, Yen! I remember how distraught you were when your elbow injury occurred, and it's great to hear you're back in the saddle - black, or whatever color it is now!!

Have you read the notes, etc, by Matchka over on the Long Distance Forum? One piece of her wisdom is, it's "long, steady distance," not "long, slow, distance." I don't think you need all the latest ruminating by people who do some training and read all teh "latest." I think you'd be better served reading one or two sets of guidance written by really good, well-established and proven coaches and their colleagues. Examples include Joe Friel (with Dirk Friel) and Chris Carmichael.

I've been trying to keep my average HR between 120 and 125, backing off if I seem to be lingering at 140. I think that takes me from the middle of Zone 1 to the middle of Zone 3, but it really depends on the zonign system. I tend to use Joe Friel as default guidance, but I don't take any of it that seriously.

You're probably better to use the zone descriptions rather than rigid HR zones based on MaxHR. Fitness doesn't really change how you feel in the various zones just the power you put out. HR, as mentioned earlier, can change for many reasons including temperature, hydration levels etc.

Are you referring to the zones of perceived exertion?

Being able to talk comfortably is just a guideline. How fast you can go and still have a conversation is just an outcome of how fit you are. It also indicates how warmed up you are. Anytime you head off on a ride, you have to factor in some warmup time. In running, you warm up to the point where you've got your "second wind." It's not so dramatic in cycling. If you just start slow and let the speed come up by itself, you barely notice that you've crossed this threshold.

Also, the fitter or stronger you are as a cyclist, the longer it's going to take you to warm up. More muscle mass takes longer to warm up. I've known track sprinters that take about an hour to warm up. Back when I was racing, I'd do a 30-km warmup prior to a 15-km criterium!

Luis

When I ride alone, or ride to meet the group, I always warm up. That's difficult on the drive-and-ride events where we unload the bike and start riding soon after we arrive. I like to get there several minutes early to cruise around the parking lot but that's not always feasible (traffic, running late, etc.). It seems to take my legs 20-30 minutes to "come alive". It's been my assumption that's because I'm less fit than the others, which I probably am because they've been riding more often for much longer (i.e. they retired sooner!).

It could be your LT is higher than you think, or it could be that, like many women, you have exemplary speaking skills. :innocent:

Eh? :p

BikeWNC: Thanks for the tips.

Road Fan: Hi and thanks! It is good to be back. :thumb: We have Joe Friel's Cycling Past 50, and Carmichael's Food for Fitness: Eat Right to Train Right. I've skimmed both books but have yet to read them cover to cover. Does Carmichael have a training book you'd recommend for the average cyclist?

When I ride alone, or ride to meet the group, I always warm up. That's difficult on the drive-and-ride events where we unload the bike and start riding soon after we arrive. I like to get there several minutes early to cruise around the parking lot but that's not always feasible (traffic, running late, etc.). The rest of the group takes off like they're shot out of a cannon and don't seem to need a warm-up; it seems to take my legs 20-30 minutes to "come alive". It's been my assumption that's because I'm less fit than the others, which I probably am because they've been riding more often for much longer (i.e. they retired sooner!).

I takes me about 30 minutes to warmup which is typical for most independent of fitness. A couple of years ago, I attended a training camp. We all left the start together to ride to long climb where the real workout began. The start was really fast and I was immediately stressed. When we got to the climb, I was already fatigued. A couple of others commented to me they felt the same way. At dinner that evening, I asked a 30 something Cat 2 what he thought of the warmup. He thought it was an easy warmup. There you have it. It was an easy warmup. I just did not get the memo.:D

The rest of the group takes off like they're shot out of a cannon and don't seem to need a warm-up; it seems to take my legs 20-30 minutes to "come alive". It's been my assumption that's because I'm less fit than the others, which I probably am because they've been riding more often for much longer (i.e. they retired sooner!).

It may be that they are fitter than you, yes. But they'd still benefit from a warm-up. Speaking for myself, I need to warm up pretty hard: cruising around the parking lot wouldn't do it for me. It's counter-intuitive, because one feels one is using energy that might be needed later, but actually what it is doing is getting the vessels dilated so your muscles can get the oxygen etc. that they need right from the start. If I don't warm up properly for a race I am toast very early on.

I'll recommend it.

Yen,

I don't think riding long rides would help you to go faster. To be able to maintain a higher cruising speed, you need to push yourself some. You can do intervals or just pseudo intervals. If you don't push yourself on a regular basis, you are not going to get faster. But beware of getting fixated on "no pain no gain". Making exercise a painful ordeal is a good way to sabotage your exercise schedule. I believe that most people tend to avoid pain. Pushing yourself for either a short period on most sessions or being intense on one out of every three sessions is a good idea.

For building a base or improving, nothing works like more workouts in a week. For some strange reason, I do fine exercising every day out of the week. Now I do understand that most people can not. I would suggest that 4-5 days per week of aerobic exercise is a good idea. I don't think riding just on weekends works very well. If you can't ride during the week, some aerobic exercise that works the legs will help also like stair climbing, walking at a high speed up a sharp incline or better yet spinning. Spinning is pretty close to cycling especially if you do it on your own. Spin classes, to me tend to change up the pace to often to really feel like cycling.

Since your heart rate recovers fast after a climb, it seems to me that you are already in pretty good shape.

Now there is another thing to think about. Are you forgetting that you are a female? For some reason, many women think that they should be able to ride as fast as men. Yeah, it isn't fair. But then again, women live what is it 7 years longer than men on the average so maybe it balances out.

I figure that a woman who is my age is in as good a shape as I am if she can draft me and hang on. So if you are riding with men, take really short pulls.

I hope this helps, otherwise just ignore it.


Good luck


Pat

Yen,

I don't think riding long rides would help you to go faster. To be able to maintain a higher cruising speed, you need to push yourself some. You can do intervals or just pseudo intervals. If you don't push yourself on a regular basis, you are not going to get faster. But beware of getting fixated on "no pain no gain". Making exercise a painful ordeal is a good way to sabotage your exercise schedule. I believe that most people tend to avoid pain. Pushing yourself for either a short period on most sessions or being intense on one out of every three sessions is a good idea.

For building a base or improving, nothing works like more workouts in a week. For some strange reason, I do fine exercising every day out of the week. Now I do understand that most people can not. I would suggest that 4-5 days per week of aerobic exercise is a good idea. I don't think riding just on weekends works very well. If you can't ride during the week, some aerobic exercise that works the legs will help also like stair climbing, walking at a high speed up a sharp incline or better yet spinning. Spinning is pretty close to cycling especially if you do it on your own. Spin classes, to me tend to change up the pace to often to really feel like cycling.

Since your heart rate recovers fast after a climb, it seems to me that you are already in pretty good shape.

Now there is another thing to think about. Are you forgetting that you are a female? For some reason, many women think that they should be able to ride as fast as men. Yeah, it isn't fair. But then again, women live what is it 7 years longer than men on the average so maybe it balances out.

I figure that a woman who is my age is in as good a shape as I am if she can draft me and hang on. So if you are riding with men, take really short pulls.

I hope this helps, otherwise just ignore it.


Good luck


Pat

Riding fast helps develop the high end power and speed skills, but you need the underlying base to be able to do that for any extended duration, so I wouldn't try to dissuade Yen from adding more z2-3 base. The more base you have built up, the more you can focus on the higher intensity, but that is not where Yen is right now. And a long ride in z3 can certainly take it out of you. Frankly Pat, if you are riding 7 days a week, witout needing a rest day or two, then you aren't working as hard as you believe you are. And, as many have alluded to, hard for one person may not be hard for the next. I've never been on a group ride that didn't start out at a warmup pace for at least a few miles. Everyone 'gets' that they need a warmup. But some groups' warmup pace is a hard effort for a more casual rider. Hermes is really fast and strong guy, but even he related having to work hard when others were 'warming up'. My recovery pace would drop a lot of people, but I've been with others who were "keeping it easy" while pushing way beyond my target.

It's all relative, which is why most people do their base work solo. It's just too hard match up exactly with someone else, particularly a group. At some point the road tilts up, drafting becomes less of a factor, and everyone's base pace get's significantly different.

Pat, that helps - thanks. The thing is, I am pushing myself on almost every ride. The group's Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday rides push me to keep pace do all the hills. Therefore, I'm "being intense" on 3 rides/week. I usually do some other type of exercise on Tuesday/Thursday (at the gym -- the elliptical, moderate spin class at my own pace, treadmill, etc.) or I take a long walk w/hills. So, I am pushing myself on a regular basis, while avoiding the "no pain, no gain" mindset that leads to injury and burnout.

I want a long slow ride not to get faster, but to improve my aerobic endurance for the long haul as I begin training for some events later this year. I've done some metrics with the group, but at their pace with my HR near the top of zone 4 for most of the ride. I am improving and getting stronger, but I want some long slow/steady endurance rides at a more moderate pace the whole ride in zones 2/3.

Does that make sense?

Pat, that helps - thanks. The thing is, I am pushing myself on almost every ride. The group's Monday, Wednesday, and Saturday rides push me to keep pace do all the hills. Therefore, I'm "being intense" on 3 rides/week. I usually do some other type of exercise on Tuesday/Thursday (at the gym -- the elliptical, moderate spin class at my own pace, treadmill, etc.) or I take a long walk w/hills. So, I am pushing myself on a regular basis, while avoiding the "no pain, no gain" mindset that leads to injury and burnout.

I want a long slow ride not to get faster, but to improve my aerobic endurance for the long haul as I begin training for some events later this year. I've done some metrics with the group, but at their pace with my HR near the top of zone 4 for most of the ride. I am improving and getting stronger, but I want some long slow/steady endurance rides at a more moderate pace the whole ride in zones 2/3.

Does that make sense?

Yes it does.

"You need a larger aerobic engine to get faster, and riding at slow to moderate paces will develop your aerobic engine."

Thomas Chapple, Base Building for Cyclists p. 14

Chapple also points out that it takes a long time to develop the aerobic engine, which supports the anaerobic engine. The latter takes 6 to 9 weeks to bring to peak.

Yes it does.

"You need a larger aerobic engine to get faster, and riding at slow to moderate paces will develop your aerobic engine."

Thomas Chapple, Base Building for Cyclists p. 14

Chapple also points out that it takes a long time to develop the aerobic engine, which supports the anaerobic engine. The latter takes 6 to 9 weeks to bring to peak.

I ordered that book yesterday after seeing it recommended in the Long Distance forum.

I did an LSD (Long Steady Distance) ride today, on a trail with lunch at the end. We rode 47 miles before lunch, and reached 50+ at home. I set my Garmin to beep when my HR went into z3 (above 130 bpm). I wondered what pace would be required to keep my HR so low; usually, I was riding 14-16 mph.

I learned that my body has adapted to 40-50 mile rides with lunch in the middle -- our typical group ride! My legs aren't accustomed to riding almost 50 miles with only brief stops to use the potty or eat a food bar. I also learned that as soon as another rider joins us, I immediately try to keep pace; that's when my HR jumped to 145. I eased off and also noted my perceived exertion when my HR was 130 or below.

I have several questions that may be better asked in the Long Distance forum. I saw a few of Machka's comments there saying the S in LSD = Steady, not Slow. Well, my ride was steady... slow compared to all my long distance rides so far this year. The pace was refreshing and I look forward to more.

I ordered that book yesterday after seeing it recommended in the Long Distance forum.

Chapter 6... Fitness Elements is good stuff.

I did an LSD (Long Steady Distance) ride today, on a trail with lunch at the end. We rode 47 miles before lunch, and reached 50+ at home. I set my Garmin to beep when my HR went into z3 (above 130 bpm). I wondered what pace would be required to keep my HR so low; usually, I was riding 14-16 mph.

I learned that my body has adapted to 40-50 mile rides with lunch in the middle -- our typical group ride! My legs aren't accustomed to riding almost 50 miles with only brief stops to use the potty or eat a food bar. I also learned that as soon as another rider joins us, I immediately try to keep pace; that's when my HR jumped to 145. I eased off and also noted my perceived exertion when my HR was 130 or below.



Well done. Having the self-discipline to ride at the pace you need to ride at is key. I can't remember which of the famous coaches coined e phrase, but the mistake most people make is to make the hard rides too easy, and the easy rides too hard. Z2 rides like this will build a base that will, over time, allow you to benefit (and recover quickly) from more intense sessions.

Chapter 6... Fitness Elements is good stuff.

Thank you. The book should arrive on Monday... I look forward to devouring it. :)

Well done. Having the self-discipline to ride at the pace you need to ride at is key. I can't remember which of the famous coaches coined e phrase, but the mistake most people make is to make the hard rides too easy, and the easy rides too hard. Z2 rides like this will build a base that will, over time, allow you to benefit (and recover quickly) from more intense sessions.

Thank you. When we returned home after yesterday's ride, I felt like I could have gone another 5-10 miles yet was ready to quit (I'd met my goal). I felt slightly fatigued for a few hours, but after dinner I felt completely rested --- almost like it was a complete rest day! My HR did stay up for a while but was down to normal after dinner.

So, now I'm wondering how to proceed. I've already done several long (50-60 mile) and many short (20-mile) high-intensity rides with the group, plus some spin classes -- but at high intensity. I have seen improvement but I need some base training, yet it's late in the season.
* Should I only do solo rides for the next, say, 3-4 weeks and then re-join the group?
* If so, should every ride in the coming weeks be at Z2 regardless of duration: e.g. 1 weekly long ride (50-60 miles), a few 20-miles, a spin class or two?
* OR - should I resume the group rides but join the lower-intensity sub=group for a few weeks, and add 1-2 longer Z2 rides?

My goal with the long weekly ride is to slowly increase the pace in Z2, and when 50 miles is easy then add a few miles and more intensity; repeat when that distance is easy, and continue. My next event is a flat 72-mile organized metric on Sept. 29 (Lighthouse Century). Then I can do more hill training in preparation for a hilly metric in mid-November.

See my comments in the long distance forum.

What AzT alluded to is that high z2/low z3 riding produces the biggest gains in aerobic fitness. Below that you're looking at more endurance adaptation. Above that and you start flirting with anaerobic capacity.

The problem with heart rate is there are a lot of factors, internal and external, that can throw off your actual watts:Hrate ratio. The best perceived exertion metric I've found is if you're in this zone, you should be able to just hold a conversation. Launch into a long monologue about your vacation or new bike and you should be shutting up fairly quickly.

You're on the right track doing this at your pace. It's difficult to find people who are both at your same level of fitness and who have the discipline to hold to a plan, and it can be counter productive at times to get sucked into other people's pace.



I assume one would want to do a high Z2/low Z3 ride perhaps weekly and not very long, at least to start. Any sense for what this exercise would look like? Maybe, 20 minutes at this pace after perhaps a 15 minute warmup and followed by a similar cooldown? Repeat weekly?

Thank you. When we returned home after yesterday's ride, I felt like I could have gone another 5-10 miles yet was ready to quit (I'd met my goal). I felt slightly fatigued for a few hours, but after dinner I felt completely rested --- almost like it was a complete rest day! My HR did stay up for a while but was down to normal after dinner.

So, now I'm wondering how to proceed. I've already done several long (50-60 mile) and many short (20-mile) high-intensity rides with the group, plus some spin classes -- but at high intensity. I have seen improvement but I need some base training, yet it's late in the season.
* Should I only do solo rides for the next, say, 3-4 weeks and then re-join the group?
* If so, should every ride in the coming weeks be at Z2 regardless of duration: e.g. 1 weekly long ride (50-60 miles), a few 20-miles, a spin class or two?
* OR - should I resume the group rides but join the lower-intensity sub=group for a few weeks, and add 1-2 longer Z2 rides?

My goal with the long weekly ride is to slowly increase the pace in Z2, and when 50 miles is easy then add a few miles and more intensity; repeat when that distance is easy, and continue. My next event is a flat 72-mile organized metric on Sept. 29 (Lighthouse Century). Then I can do more hill training in preparation for a hilly metric in mid-November.

I would suggest putting together a weekly routine consisting of some a high-intensity (group ride?) day, a hills day, one or more LSD days increasing distance as time goes on, and budget-in recovery. The "Past 50" book by Joe Friel has a really good chapter on century preparation, with a really good guide for putting together weekly plans.

I can plan with the best of them, but keeping to the plan is another challenge. Yen, you already have a weekly routine.

In that chapter, Friel also has some guidance for how to start his plan "late" and fine-tune it to a particular target ride distance.

See my comments in the long distance forum.

Got it -- thank you!

I would suggest putting together a weekly routine consisting of some a high-intensity (group ride?) day, a hills day, one or more LSD days increasing distance as time goes on, and budget-in recovery. The "Past 50" book by Joe Friel has a really good chapter on century preparation, with a really good guide for putting together weekly plans.

I can plan with the best of them, but keeping to the plan is another challenge. Yen, you already have a weekly routine.

In that chapter, Friel also has some guidance for how to start his plan "late" and fine-tune it to a particular target ride distance.

Thanks RF, I'll look for that chapter. I was looking through Friel's book but in the wrong place. I have too many pots on the stove and all of them need stirring at once --- I need an uninterrupted day just to sit and read!

Thanks RF, I'll look for that chapter. I was looking through Friel's book but in the wrong place. I have too many pots on the stove and all of them need stirring at once --- I need an uninterrupted day just to sit and read!

Actually it's called "Testing your limits," chapter 5. The relevant tables are Tables 1 through 5 to cover both levels of century training. The text is very important to understanding the tables and using them correctly. It contains plans for a century, a fast century, and for multi-day tours.

An interesting point: the longest training ride he recommends in prep for a century is NOT a century, it's a 4.5 hour ride that simulates the conditions you would expect in the event. Assuming say, 15 mph average, your training distance maxes at 67.5 miles. For your 72 miler, it would max at (proportionally) 48.6 miles. Theoreticaly it can be said you're ready now.

But don't let the soup burn -- nobody will be happy!

When Mrs. Road Fan and I got prepared for our first metric two years ago, we used this concept (67.5% ready). It worked out quite well. The event ride is just one step in a longer training plan. For me, it's toward a 5-day 65/day tour in July, and an organized century in August.

Racing training is covered in a different chapter, so it wouldn't be fair to evaluate these training concepts from a road racer's point of view, beyond the basic concepts.

I'm not that familiar with more of Carmicheal's work. I became interested in him and in training reading "Fitness Cycling," co-authored with Ed Burke, and "The Ultimate Ride." Of the two, I like "Ultimate Ride" better.

...An interesting point: the longest training ride he recommends in prep for a century is NOT a century, it's a 4.5 hour ride that simulates the conditions you would expect in the event. ...

I saw that last night... very interesting and surprising!

I've been reading Thomas Chapple's book Base Training for Cyclists. I finally understand what it means to "train" your body to burn fat instead of carbs: by building a stronger aerobic engine through base training, the cyclist can ride harder at lower intensity where the body burns more fat, and the stronger the aerobic engine the harder one can ride in a lower (fat-burning) zone.

Much of the book is directed toward racers, but there's a lot of advice that pertains to cyclists at all skill levels who want to improve endurance, strength and efficiency.

He recommends finishing base training 9-12 weeks before the most important event. My first important event (the 72-mile metric) is 14 weeks away and I'm just starting these low/moderate base rides. So, my new plan is to continue base training for 4 more weeks, completing an abbreviated phase nine weeks before the event. I fear that if I take longer than 4 weeks then I'll lose too much of my current fitness.

My plan includes more rides, 2 days of recovery, and 1-2 long rides each week (1 to start, perhaps adding a second one later), and follow Friel's schedule to train for a century while incorporating Chapple's advanced training elements for endurance, strength and efficiency. I don't want to completely abandon the group rides so I'll pick the easiest one which has a couple of hills but the pace is slow/moderate. For easy/recovery rides, I'll do a spin class at MY pace, just to ride a bike without any hills

I'm surprised there isn't a Base Training sticky in the Training & Nutrition forum.

Seems to me that if your base training takes you up to ride durations about 70% of your event, you are good to go, as in, highly likely to complete it. The added work (and why should you quit????) will make it easier, or will at the same perceived effort get you more speed and climbing ability.

As far as combining Friel and Chapple, sure, sounds very reasonable.

There have been Base Training threads in T&N, haven't there?

Seems to me that if your base training takes you up to ride durations about 70% of your event, you are good to go, as in, highly likely to complete it. The added work (and why should you quit????) will make it easier, or will at the same perceived effort get you more speed and climbing ability.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I won't quit training after 4 more weeks; I'll begin more advanced training rather than most rides in z2.


There have been Base Training threads in T&N, haven't there?

I'm sure there must be but the Search didn't find any (????).
Oops, searched again with different parameters and found these:
http://www.bikeforums.net/search.php?searchid=5843929

Since your threads on training for base building and rides I started rereading "Friel's Riding Past 50" again. I am getting more out of it this time after several of the points brought up in these threads made me rethink my plans for training. I am getting more out of the book this time and feel I can apply it to my traiining better this time around. Thanks for stirring up the brain's pot for me, Yen.

Bill

:thumb: Bill! Same here; I'm getting more out of it now that I'm zeroing in on some training strategies.

I'm sure there must be but the Search didn't find any (????).

I searched again using different parameters and found lots of them:

http://www.bikeforums.net/search.php?searchid=5843929

People can really get way too hung up on these training programs, and become slaves to them. For professional/elite athletes, there may be some benefit to this kind of discipline. But for most of the rest of us, the difference is likely insignificant in terms of performance.
I found this statement in one of the above threads in the T&N forum and wonder how much of it is true. I like to follow a plan but keep it loose and simple without becoming a slave to the details. I'm not training for a race, just trying to improve so I can maintain a good steady pace in the events this fall. As already stated above, I'm already riding a good % of the distance in those rides; now I just need to improve my pace and skills by riding more often, including 1-2 long weekly rides at a steady pace (a pace I can comfortably maintain the whole ride but with a little challenge), and include some strength/efficiency drills . Oh, and recovery! Chapple says "fitness happens during rest". If I start getting too hung up on exact numbers and having to do every ride this way or that as if I'm a pro training for an important race, then riding won't be fun anymore :twitchy:

I found this statement in one of the above threads in the T&N forum and wonder how much of it is true. I like to follow a plan but keep it loose and simple without becoming a slave to the details. I'm not training for a race, just trying to improve so I can maintain a good steady pace in the events this fall. As already stated above, I'm already riding a good % of the distance in those rides; now I just need to improve my pace and skills by riding more often, including 1-2 long weekly rides at a steady pace (a pace I can comfortably maintain the whole ride but with a little challenge), and include some strength/efficiency drills . Oh, and recovery! Chapple says "fitness happens during rest". If I start getting too hung up on exact numbers and having to do every ride this way or that as if I'm a pro training for an important race, then riding won't be fun anymore

I think the last sentence of the statement you quoted is untrue. Being systematic about your training will produce greater benefits than just doing what comes naturally, and this is true of us all, not just the elite athletes. However, where I am with you is that you need to keep it fun, and there is no need to be a slave to the details. Indeed, it's important, IMO, to be relaxed enough about it to allow yourself to be spontaneous, listen to your body, and sometimes just do what feels right rather than what it says on the calendar.

Follow the broad principles, get some balance between building the base and doing some faster stuff, and don't sweat the details. If you're enjoying it, you'll keep doing it, and that's more important than worrying about whether you're doing everything precisely as the coaches recommend?

Thanks; I like a plan but not one that's too rigid. And I feel stronger already after just 1 week of more frequent riding which included 2 long z2 rides and 1 hilly ride.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I won't quit training after 4 more weeks; I'll begin more advanced training rather than most rides in z2.



I'm sure there must be but the Search didn't find any (????).
Oops, searched again with different parameters and found these:
http://www.bikeforums.net/search.php?searchid=5843929

My apology, I didn't mean to suggest that you would quit! I know better than that. Just that I wasn't suggesting you quit! Rather, according to Friel's plan, you don't need distance growth for that event, so you're presumably going for performance growth.