I've been doing my base miles for a month and a half now, and I'm seeing good results. I've already lost 12 pounds (I had that much to give and more), my resting HR has been lowered a little from 67 to 62, and my average speed has increased from 14 mph to 16 mph as my fitness has improved. Plus, I'm staying out longer. Initially I was riding about twenty miles in 1.5 hours. If the weather holds through next week, I'm going to shoot for some forty mile rides toward the end of the week. I've only cut two rides short: one because I felt weak and the other because of traffic fleeing a Kentucky basketball game (I almost got belted twice).

While I'm in no hurry to move out of the base period, especially since I'm seeing needed results, I'm wondering how long I should continue riding base miles. When is the right time to move to the preparation period?

From what I hear on the forums, now would be a good time

gcasillo: It depends. Have you prepared a schedule of events/rides/races that you plan to do this year? If not, I would recommend you do that. Find one that you would consider your "A" event and then plan your schedule backwards from that event. Don't forget to include taper time in your schedule.

you can keep doing base miles forever if you want. since it sounds like you're still not ready to give it up and since winter is still here, i would just ride if i were you. you're doing a lot better than most people this winter, i can tell you that. most things i've read say 500-1000 miles makes a good base, then you can start increasing the distance, doing some speed work, and adding intervals slowly as well.

I'm planning on racing a couple times around late June through August. Mostly to get my feet wet with racing, and I want to be as well prepared for that experience as I can. So I'm in no rush. I'm doing a century in late May and intend to do some weekend touring throughout the summer and early Fall.

The focus this year is to get into shape, maintain that shape once I get it, and get some racing experience. I'm hoping to make 2006 a strong year and race as much as possible then.

I think another 4-6 weeks of base miles should put me on target for a peak somewhere in July. Cool. Just hope the snow and ice keeps away until Spring can get here. :)

I would recommend you do base period training until you are at or below 10% body fat. Get it measured by a competent sports physiologist.

I would recommend you do base period training until you are at or below 10% body fat. Get it measured by a competent sports physiologist.

any reason you give that particular metric? i'm just curious; i havn't heard of body fat as a guideline for when training periods begin and end.

don d,

Hell, if I'd waited till I had 10% body fat, I'd have never have done my four marathons or my centuries. I'm only 54 years old, but this little round Choctaw body will never see 10% body fat until my death bed!

I suggest that if you feel good, get goin'.

Tyson

don d,

Hell, if I'd waited till I had 10% body fat, I'd have never have done my four marathons or my centuries. I'm only 54 years old, but this little round Choctaw body will never see 10% body fat until my death bed!

I suggest that if you feel good, get goin'.

Tyson

:)Centuries and Marathons are somewhat different than competitive bike races. They are primarily fitness events or fun events. I suspect most people who compete in these don't do alot of "periods" in their training. They just run or ride as much as they can and as often as they can. I'm not saying anyone should refrain from participating in fitness events based on body fat content, within reason.

If you want to be competitive though, if you want to finish first in the marathon or bike race, you must lose the body fat, and the base period is when you must do it. The long slow/steady rides at 60-75% MHR are what take the weight off and build the aerobic base at the same time.

At the lower levels of competition, you may be able to finish a flat criterium bike race near the front while you're heavy, but you will not be able to on a hilly course or as you move up in category.

As long as your body fat is high, I think you should focus training on bringing weight down with smaller emphasis on intervals and tempo. For competition, focus on events that will help you bring the body fat down, like centuries or randonnees.

By the way, 10% is not that low. I think the avg. american male is ~12%. I think you can be pretty competitive around 8%, but if you want to fly, you'll have to get down to 4-6%.

I've read this too, but it doesn't work for me don d.

As I increase the miles at slow pace my weight drops slightly, but when I rev up the pace in early spring the pounds come off much more quickly.

Thanks for the input. I'm much more concerned _this year_ with general fitness and weight loss. The races are there as a carrot to continue training right. I want to prepare this year like one should prepare for a good racing season.

I'm 219 right now, and ultimately I'm shooting for 175. Any lower regardless of body fat, and I'm getting to a weight that I haven't touched since high school; problem with this is that my weight fluctuated between 170 down to 150 because of serious illnesses. I honestly don't know what my ideal weight and body fat is until, well, I reach it. In H.S., my body fat was between 5-8%, so I believe something around 7-10% would be about right now.

The weight is melting off so far. Started at 231 and now 219. Just riding base miles and cooking regularly, so the diet and portions have been right (damn good actually). At this pace, I could break 200 lbs around mid April. I believe I'll be capable of a decent ride in a few races come late June and July.

I have no delusions of grandeur. I know I'm going OTB in these races. I just want to get a feel for them and use them as a carrot to continue training right. The century in late May is very important to me, as I'd like to carry some good distances as the year progresses, in the neighborhood of 80-100 miles. Long, slow rides would appear to be good for me considering my progress thus far with the base miles.

If you're a newer rider who is looking to lose weight, don't worry about "Base" or anything else right now. Getting used to your bike, logging longer miles on it and dropping weight are more than enough for your 1st season riding. If you can work a race in come July, think of it as a bonus.
If you really have 40+ pounds to lose, don't worry about speed and ride easy enough that you can do it day after day.

Base may mean something different to each person so you'll be getting answers all over the board.

If you want my answer to "base period" here it is.
Base for me starts in November. I take it easy and back way off my miles (hours in my case as I don't track miles in my training calendar) in November. Think of it as time for the body to relax. I cut back to no more than 8 hours a week on the bike and a lot of that will just be unstructured MTBing.
December & January are more hours but the intensity is also structured.
Lots of lower Z2 (127-140bpm) with some easy intervals and leg speed drills mixed in. Hours are increased from 8 to 10-12 weekly but I'll still mix in an active recovery week every 4th week with lower total hours.
February is similar with hours increasing to 14-16 weekly and at least 2 rides of 4+ hours weekly. February also has an active recovery week.
March hours are equal or less than February but with more intensity mixed in. The intervals are harder and longer. The recovery rides are slower.

All of this is building to racing which starts in early April. I should really hit my form around the end of May and should be able to hold it through the month of June. Between April and the end of July I'll do somewhere between 35 and 40 races so structured workouts will be few and far between. I'll count on racing 2-3 times a week to keep me in shape.

:)Centuries and Marathons are somewhat different than competitive bike races. They are primarily fitness events or fun events. I suspect most people who compete in these don't do alot of "periods" in their training. They just run or ride as much as they can and as often as they can. I'm not saying anyone should refrain from participating in fitness events based on body fat content, within reason.

If you want to be competitive though, if you want to finish first in the marathon or bike race, you must lose the body fat, and the base period is when you must do it. The long slow/steady rides at 60-75% MHR are what take the weight off and build the aerobic base at the same time.

At the lower levels of competition, you may be able to finish a flat criterium bike race near the front while you're heavy, but you will not be able to on a hilly course or as you move up in category.

As long as your body fat is high, I think you should focus training on bringing weight down with smaller emphasis on intervals and tempo. For competition, focus on events that will help you bring the body fat down, like centuries or randonnees.

[QUOTE=don d.]:)By the way, 10% is not that low. I think the avg. american male is ~12%. I think you can be pretty competitive around 8%, but if you want to fly, you'll have to get down to 4-6%. Avg american male is about 12 %, where did you get that figure, I just don't think that is close at all. I'm 6 ft and 160 lbs and I don't think I am below 10%.

Started at 231 and now 219.
Outstanding!

Remember to have fun once in a while.

Reference Group Percent Body Fat
Bodybuilders 5
Cross-country skiers 7
Triathletes 7
Basketball players 9
Swimmers, soccer players 10
Distance runners, football defensive backs 11
Football linebackers 12
Ideal healthy male 15
Power lifters, shot putters, discus throwers 17
Average American male 23

Avg american male is about 12 %, where did you get that figure, I just don't think that is close at all.
My post should have said ideal healthy male. The chart you posted above shows the ideal healthy male is ~15%. I have always read this number to be 12 %. This is kind of like an ideal weight number on those charts in a doctors office. But still, 12% "isn't close at all" to 15%? OK. :rolleyes:



I'm 6 ft and 160 lbs and I don't think I am below 10%.
Let us know when you know. :rolleyes:

As I mentioned to Tyson, my 10% point of reference is for COMPETITIVE CYCLISTS and is only a point of reference. Are you a competitive cyclist, coldspark? Are you trying to finish on the podium in your age group at the district competitions? I've read your posts and a year ago you were just getting back into cycling and riding casually on dirt roads around your area, which in and of itself is great, but has little or nothing to do with the original poster's query about competition base periods. How is the body fat content of a recreational/sport cyclist in any way analagous to a competitive cyclist? It always helps to read a post before you decide you need to critique it.

If you're a newer rider who is looking to lose weight, don't worry about "Base" or anything else right now. Getting used to your bike, logging longer miles on it and dropping weight are more than enough for your 1st season riding. If you can work a race in come July, think of it as a bonus.
If you really have 40+ pounds to lose, don't worry about speed and ride easy enough that you can do it day after day.

This is good advice and should be the primary focus of your training. As I posted, focus on events that will allow you to get time on the bike and bring your weight down.

My post should have said ideal healthy male. The chart you posted above shows the ideal healthy male is ~15%. I have always read this number to be 12 %. This is kind of like an ideal weight number on those charts in a doctors office. But still, 12% "isn't close at all" to 15%? OK. :rolleyes:




Let us know when you know. :rolleyes:

As I mentioned to Tyson, my 10% point of reference is for COMPETITIVE CYCLISTS and is only a point of reference. Are you a competitive cyclist, coldspark? Are you trying to finish on the podium in your age group at the district competitions? I've read your posts and a year ago you were just getting back into cycling and riding casually on dirt roads around your area, which in and of itself is great, but has little or nothing to do with the original poster's query about competition base periods. It always helps to read a post before you decide you need to critique it. Wow-touchy,you printed avg. American male instead of ideal healthy male so 23 in not that close to 12, I went off of what you wrote not what you ment to write (sorry next time I will read your mind). The origional post is from some one who is just starting out in racing so I guess I am not that for off from his fitness level. I did race at one time but it was not in the tdf so is probably not good enough for you. I was pointing out the avg. male fat % in a nice way I thought. My turn to roll eyes. ;) :D PS- I did read your post that is why I caught the mistake.

Without knowing what your season looks like, what your measurements are for things like lactate threshold and VO2 max, and knowing how your weights are going, it's difficult to say how long your base period should be. I think if you're really willing to compete, you'll at least get a performance test so you can determine just how much more work you'll need on your base.

In the meantime, if you feel like you're ready, you can move on to endurance training. Endurance training is still relatively lower heart rates (at least in the beginning when you first flip into endurance training), so if you find out from your tests that your base is not sufficient, then you can always move right back into base training without having destroyed your previous results with base training.

You can train base forever, but you have to move on at a certain point, or you'll compromise the rest of your season. You have to think about developing your endurance, your strength, and your aerobic capacity. Sometimes, you're not going to be able to train to perfection. You have to do what you can and move on in the time frame you've allotted for your race season.

Weight will come off. We're always heaviest in the winter when we're forced inside, but when spring comes and the mileage picks up, and the intensity increases, you'll see that your weight will come down a bit more. I am sitting here about 8 or 9% bodyfat heavier than the warm seasons. I'm not worried, because my riding will go up about twice what it is in the spring. Then I know I'll be pleasantly surprised when all the fat melts off and my bodyfat comes down.

Here's your progression for your training season: base=>endurance=>strength=>intervals=>power=>I'M RACING!!!

By the time you get to power, you should be entering your first racing season or already early in your racing season. So use this information to kind of estimate out how much time you will be able to afford to spend on base training. You'll have to know when your races are so you can figure out exactly where you need to be in your training schedule.

Good luck.

Koffee

Gawd, who can lose weight riding base? Not me, that's for sure.

The old school formula for serious racers was 1000 miles of base (about 1 month), which begins following 2 or 3 months virtually off the bike. People don't take months off the bike any more. It's probably almost as important to spend time in base to minimize risk of burn-out, like, mid-summer. But, IMO, after 6 weeks, you're probably going to plateau and not gain much from additional base work.

I'll probably get slammed for this (what the hey, bring it on. Discussion is good), but it may be a better time of year to work on strength, and do the endurance work later*, when days are longer and temps warmer. It's awfully hard to work on endurance this time of year, unless you live in the deep south or don't have a daytime job.

*Both strength and endurance work will slow down your racing speed. But, if you're going to be doing any srength work with weights, lifting heavy, you definitely want to have that phase well behind you before trying to be competitive. You need time to translate gym strength to bike strength, and re-develop speed. Endurance work will just slow you down 'til you recover. And all this assumes you're in pretty good shape to begin with.

You'll get slammed. ;)

That's the nature of the beast: base, endurance, strength, intervals, power. It has to do with PROGRESSION of intensity too. Going straight from base to strength is like destroying the base you just built. It's a lot more sensible and easier on the cardiovascular to move into endurance after base, gradually building up the heart rate and intensity until you move into strength training, where you may end up taking the heart rate into higher heart rates.

The old school stuff is outdated. Sure, you could go into strength training first, but then why bother spending time base training? It doesn't make sense.

Also, just because you move into strength, doesn't mean the endurance training ends either. It's just good that the weather gets warmer, so that you can continue to work on lengthening your rides and still do your strength work too.

Koffee

Oh, and P.S.: You can lose weight during base training. You'll just have to do really long rides, that's all. If you were doing base rides of like 30 minutes (or something along those lines), then there's no weight loss. But consider a 1.5 hour base ride would be like the equivalent of a 45 minute, high intensity ride. The difference between each ride is where your energy is coming from: mainly fat breakdown or mainly carbohydrate breakdown.

Koffee

roadbuzz's point about the difficulty of getting endurance work in during shorter winter days is well taken. That's why I shelled out a lot of $ for a HID with a 4-6 run time. I ride very early in the morning (4-6am) or shortly after I get home from work and have dinner (6-10pm). The only daytime rides I get in are on weekends, but I haven't let that deter me yet.

As for losing weight during base training, I shed weight easily if I'm active and eating well. No fast food & nothing but what I've cooked myself the last 3 1/2 months. Hence, the 2 lbs/week loss. Compare that to the last two winters where I ate almost nothing but fast food and got zero exercise. I gained 25 pounds that stuck to me until recently. I promised myself that I would be active and eat right this winter. So far so good.

I've never been an endurance/distance type of athlete, always a sprinter. Strength and speed come easier to me. Proof: I've never jogged longer than 2 miles at once. So I'm committed to building a solid base before I move on to strength.

I do fear plateauing though. I've experienced that once before and it sucked. Hopefully this time around, I'll recognize it and find a way out of it.

gcasilla,

How old are you? It makes a heck of a difference in some fundamental ways regarding my advice. It also affects the results you should expect. Getting in "race shape" at 27 is a different goal than getting in "race shape" at 57 starting from the same weight, etc.

Tyson

32.

roadbuzz's point about the difficulty of getting endurance work in during shorter winter days is well taken. That's why I shelled out a lot of $ for a HID with a 4-6 run time. I ride very early in the morning (4-6am) or shortly after I get home from work and have dinner (6-10pm). The only daytime rides I get in are on weekends, but I haven't let that deter me yet.

As for losing weight during base training, I shed weight easily if I'm active and eating well. No fast food & nothing but what I've cooked myself the last 3 1/2 months. Hence, the 2 lbs/week loss. Compare that to the last two winters where I ate almost nothing but fast food and got zero exercise. I gained 25 pounds that stuck to me until recently. I promised myself that I would be active and eat right this winter. So far so good.

I've never been an endurance/distance type of athlete, always a sprinter. Strength and speed come easier to me. Proof: I've never jogged longer than 2 miles at once. So I'm committed to building a solid base before I move on to strength.

I do fear plateauing though. I've experienced that once before and it sucked. Hopefully this time around, I'll recognize it and find a way out of it.

And this is a great explanation for why people need to understand that they need a coach. Anyone who is serious about their training, whether for weight loss or racing or whatever their goal, a coach will identify strengths and weaknesses, then set up your training schedule around it so that you can achieve your goal.

Koffee

The best info ive read on this is to continue your base miles until it doesnt improve your time trial anymore. This can be a long time as gains are made somewhat slowly this way. I started my winter training with a 3 mile time trial. About once a month Ill repeat the TT while base training. When my times stop improving Ill know I can move on to intervals if I like.

You'll get slammed. ;)

And that's OK, but hear me out.

I said, 'this assumes you're in pretty good shape.' What I meant was, you put in 5-7K miles last year. You're still in purdy dern good shape, but doing base because your aerobic development has been neglected since early summer. That's good. If you're racing every week-end, maybe your endurance is kaput. But I'll bet most of the riders get in a good bit of endurance work in the form of recreational rides throughout the season, 'cause they don't race every week-end.

And strength development doesn't mean hitting the weights with 5 sets of 6 reps to failure from day one. It's more like 6 weeks, 2 or 3 times a week of a couple of sets of 30 reps for each exercise, then 6 weeks of like 2 or 3 times a week, 2 or 3 sets, 15 reps. *Then* 4 to 6 weeks true strength work, lifting heavy, maybe 6 reps to failure kind of stuff. So, I'm talking about 4-4.5 months. Maybe you can combine the endurance work with the lighter, high rep weight work, and keep from pushing the strength work out too far in the spring.

But it goes back to my basic premise. Most people who are even asking the question are already in pretty good shape. So, maybe it's not ideal, but it can work.

The best info ive read on this is to continue your base miles until it doesnt improve your time trial anymore. This can be a long time as gains are made somewhat slowly this way. I started my winter training with a 3 mile time trial. About once a month Ill repeat the TT while base training. When my times stop improving Ill know I can move on to intervals if I like.
This is an excellent approach, but after 4 to 6 weeks of any kind of specific training, you tend to plateau (with me, it's usually around 6 weeks). When that happens, your body has outsmarted your program, and it's more efficient to change things up and start developing some other aspect of your conditioning.

And that's OK, but hear me out.

I said, 'this assumes you're in pretty good shape.' What I meant was, you put in 5-7K miles last year. You're still in purdy dern good shape, but doing base because your aerobic development has been neglected since early summer. That's good. If you're racing every week-end, maybe your endurance is kaput. But I'll bet most of the riders get in a good bit of endurance work in the form of recreational rides throughout the season, 'cause they don't race every week-end.

And strength development doesn't mean hitting the weights with 5 sets of 6 reps to failure from day one. It's more like 6 weeks, 2 or 3 times a week of a couple of sets of 30 reps for each exercise, then 6 weeks of like 2 or 3 times a week, 2 or 3 sets, 15 reps. *Then* 4 to 6 weeks true strength work, lifting heavy, maybe 6 reps to failure kind of stuff. So, I'm talking about 4-4.5 months. Maybe you can combine the endurance work with the lighter, high rep weight work, and keep from pushing the strength work out too far in the spring.

But it goes back to my basic premise. Most people who are even asking the question are already in pretty good shape. So, maybe it's not ideal, but it can work.

What you're saying is that because riders don't race every weekend, they don't need as much endurance? Still not buying it. When you're riding all spring, summer, and into the fall, you need the break. There's not a lot of people on this forum that I don't think ride A LOT once the weather gets warmer. You need the break, then you start training base. That's the nature of the beast. Not only that, there's no one on these forums that has the type of base that doesn't need working on. The only people who probably don't need a long base period are the elite athletes. Otherwise, building a base isn't something that's done because you lose it, it's because you need it. It's because you need to rebuild muscle cells that are broken down from the riding season. It's for allowing the body to grow more capillaries around the muscles, which is important for providing nutrients and oxygen to the muscles at work. It's for getting the mitochondria in the body to grow bigger and for getting the mitochondria to multiply in the muscles so your body can do more aerobic respiration to produce more ATP so that your muscles can do more work. It's for giving your body a physical and mental break so that you can get all the great benefits I told you about. It's for increasing the heart's stroke volume- the maximum amount of oxygenated blood that can be pumped out of the heart per beat. That's important, because as the heart grows, it's able to take in more blood and pump out more blood to the body per beat. And THIS is important because you need all the blood you can get during high intensity efforts. That means you have more blood going to the muscles, more oxygen going to the muscles, more ATP produced by the muscles to produce energy to continue working during the exercise, and longer efforts. There's a lot more positive stuff that happens in base training, but that's a lot of the good stuff in that paragraph.

As you reach the end of your base training, you're going to find yourself increasing the time on your bike, and as you do that, the intensity of the training will increase. This will be your endurance training, and it will continue until you hit the higher intensity stuff- hill work (strength), intervals (speedwork), and power. This happens over time, of course, and the amount of time you spend in each will depend on what you're training for, what your weaknesses are, and how long you have in your training program.

It's never easy to figure out on your own. I think you've got some of the concepts down, but it's kind of off a bit. Here are some books you should read up on so you can get a better idea of how to structure your training program and get a better idea of how a well structured training program works. It will also help you put your training into perspective: Ed Burke "Serious Cycling", Joel Friel "The Cyclists Training Bible", Sally Edwards "Heart Rate Monitor Book", Sally Edwards/Sally Reed "Heart Rate Monitor Book for Outdoor and Indoor Cyclists", Phil Maffetone "The Maffetone Method: The Holistic, Low-Stress, No-Pain Way to Exceptional Fitness".

Those would be some good books to start out with. All of them have great, solid training programs and explanations so you can get a better grasp on training and stuff.

Koffee

What you're saying is that because riders don't race every weekend, they don't need as much endurance?
No! :eek: What I meant was on off week-ends, most ('round here, anyway) are off doing 70, 80, or 100 miles with friends at a good endurance pace.


Still not buying it. When you're riding all spring, summer, and into the fall, you need the break. There's not a lot of people on this forum that I don't think ride A LOT once the weather gets warmer. You need the break, then you start training base.
No argument. Nowhere did I intend to give the impression that base should be neglected. I agree with all that you said.

Oh, and P.S.: You can lose weight during base training. You'll just have to do really long rides, that's all. If you were doing base rides of like 30 minutes (or something along those lines), then there's no weight loss. But consider a 1.5 hour base ride would be like the equivalent of a 45 minute, high intensity ride. The difference between each ride is where your energy is coming from: mainly fat breakdown or mainly carbohydrate breakdown.

Koffee

Koffee is so smart. Why can't I be like her?
As one who has no clue what the hell he's doing, I highly recommend some of this "base stuff". I only say "base stuff" because it's mysteriously intriguing me. :rolleyes: I started up with a 2 hour ride last Friday and killed myself trying to chug along at 13-15mph-- bonked a little and my legs didn't want to hold me up anymore 'cause they were mad at me.

The next day I went out with 3 guys from my school's racing team, and that's when I learned that I should have been kept back in the 3rd grade. I started spinning faster and easier, and we averaged 17-20 mph for 2 hours. I felt great... well, my butt seems to need to remember how to feel. I found out the hard way how not to go about easing myself back into the new year. Right way? Supah Loooooooong and easy!

This is just for the newer people like the original poster and me... because I'm at work and have nothing else to do.

Those would be some good books to start out with. All of them have great, solid training programs and explanations so you can get a better grasp on training and stuff.
Smack!!! ;)

No smack, man. I recommend these books for everyone. If you are doing exercise, you should know what you're doing. That way, you can improve.

If you look at some of my older posts, it's the very same books I recommend for everyone. ;)

Koffee

...building a base isn't something that's done because you lose it, it's because you need it. It's because you need to rebuild muscle cells that are broken down from the riding season. It's for allowing the body to grow more capillaries around the muscles, which is important for providing nutrients and oxygen to the muscles at work. It's for getting the mitochondria in the body to grow bigger and for getting the mitochondria to multiply in the muscles so your body can do more aerobic respiration to produce more ATP so that your muscles can do more work. It's for giving your body a physical and mental break so that you can get all the great benefits I told you about. It's for increasing the heart's stroke volume- the maximum amount of oxygenated blood that can be pumped out of the heart per beat...There's a lot more positive stuff that happens in base training, but that's a lot of the good stuff in that paragraph.

The benefits listed above are often quoted for base training, but I'm highly skeptical of some of them. It seems to me that base training concepts have been accepted without much discussion. I have not been able to find any science to support many of the claims, and some of them simply disagree with the science. For example:

1. Muscle capillarization: not much of that going on in base training. The most effective training zone to build capillaries is zone 5 (above lactate threshold). Some lesser building occurs in zones 4 and 3, but almost none in zone 2.

2. Mitochondrial enzyme growth: most effective in zone 4. Less in zone 3, even less in zone 2.

3. Increased stroke volume: best done with zone 5 training. Zone 4 training is fair, zone 3 is poor, zone 2 is useless.

(Source: Coggan, "Training and racing using a power meter: an introduction")

Given that these improvements happen outside of base-level training zones, I suspect that the benefits of base training are other than the three ones I mention above. Perhaps a different form of base training would be more efffective, one where training volume is reduced but training intensity isn't.

The benefits listed above are often quoted for base training, but I'm highly skeptical of some of them. It seems to me that base training concepts have been accepted without much discussion. I have not been able to find any science to support many of the claims, and some of them simply disagree with the science. For example:

1. Muscle capillarization: not much of that going on in base training. The most effective training zone to build capillaries is zone 5 (above lactate threshold). Some lesser building occurs in zones 4 and 3, but almost none in zone 2.

2. Mitochondrial enzyme growth: most effective in zone 4. Less in zone 3, even less in zone 2.

3. Increased stroke volume: best done with zone 5 training. Zone 4 training is fair, zone 3 is poor, zone 2 is useless.

(Source: Coggan, "Training and racing using a power meter: an introduction")

Given that these improvements happen outside of base-level training zones, I suspect that the benefits of base training are other than the three ones I mention above. Perhaps a different form of base training would be more efffective, one where training volume is reduced but training intensity isn't.

So you're recommending that riders who want to be competitive cyclists focus on intensity, training in the upper limits of heart rate, in the area that would produce lactic acid buildup, say above 85% of MHR, from day 1? If that is what you're saying, I would strongly urge anyone considering following this advice to consult a doctor or competent exercise physiologist before doing this.

(Source: Coggan, "Training and racing using a power meter: an introduction")
Interesting. I did a little googling around to see if I could learn more, and came up with an page w/a table from the above .

http://www.fascatcoaching.com/intervaltypes.html

(Easy there, folks, the page *does* say aerobic work is important.)
Terry, can the Coggan article be accessed online anywhere?

Base training is important for a variety of reasons. In Joe Friel's "Triathlon Training Bible" he uses the analogy of a house when describing the different types of training. Base training is like the foundation of a house. Everything is built upon it. If your foundation is solid then you'll have a sturdy house. If it isn't then you won't. This makes perfect sense to me.

I'll say this for base training as it has related to me over the last two months. I needed to lose weight. I have done so to the tune of 2 lbs./week since the beginning of December. It has been effortless. Rides of 1.5 to 2 hours five days a week at a HR between 130-145bpm. At this rate or even a bit slower, I'm going to begin upping the intesity at a considerably lower weight. In short, I'll be fresh when that time comes. My resting HR has fallen too, a good sign.

Now all of this probably could have been accomplished with more intensity but between December and February? Jeez, I'd be wasted well before June and July when I'm looking to peak. Maybe in the future, but I'm not interested in racing and results in the heart of Winter. The weather won't allow it, and I know I'll be better off with a break at this time of the year.

Considering that Winter is always a time when I gain weight and lose conditioning (especially the last two), I'm practially having an out of body experience with the weight I've lost and conditioning I've gained. I won't soon discard the important of a good base.

Terry, can the Coggan article be accessed online anywhere?

Not Terry but here you go

http://www.midweekclub.ca/articles/coggan.pdf

The benefits listed above are often quoted for base training, but I'm highly skeptical of some of them. It seems to me that base training concepts have been accepted without much discussion. I have not been able to find any science to support many of the claims, and some of them simply disagree with the science. For example:

1. Muscle capillarization: not much of that going on in base training. The most effective training zone to build capillaries is zone 5 (above lactate threshold). Some lesser building occurs in zones 4 and 3, but almost none in zone 2.

2. Mitochondrial enzyme growth: most effective in zone 4. Less in zone 3, even less in zone 2.

3. Increased stroke volume: best done with zone 5 training. Zone 4 training is fair, zone 3 is poor, zone 2 is useless.

(Source: Coggan, "Training and racing using a power meter: an introduction")

Given that these improvements happen outside of base-level training zones, I suspect that the benefits of base training are other than the three ones I mention above. Perhaps a different form of base training would be more efffective, one where training volume is reduced but training intensity isn't.


Terry, the stuff you've quoted is contrary to every training book, seminar and lecture I've ever attended. It's not even used in any of the materials from any of the aerobics and fitness conventions.

The stuff I talked about is used in the USA Cycling manual for our license. They draw their information for our education from Ed Burke, Joel Friel, and Tudor O. Bompa. When it comes to periodization training, they EXCLUSIVELY endorse Bompa as the authority on the subject, and they strongly suggest we follow through with reading, lectures, etc. on Bompa to gain further education on training.

A lot of what you're saying makes little or no sense in that training at the higher heart rates results in increased lactate in the bloodstream, as well as the release of free radicals into the blood and muscles from training at the higher heart rates. This gunk roaming through the body and muscles facilitates breakdown of the muscles, blood cells, and general immune system, which is why it is always recommended to take a break at the end of your season, and which is why base training exists. It allows the body to rebuild (and you should know that muscle breakdown results in muscle thickening, and thickening occurs during RECOVERY AND REST, not from active workout), rejuvinate, and regrow. During that time, if you do it correctly, you will grow even stronger the next year. This is one of the basis for periodization training (besides peaking and cycling) that every professional athlete uses to excel at their sport. This is one big reason why professionals are better than the recreational athletes. They have a schedule, they do it right, they train smart (not hard, as recreational athletes think they must do in order to improve). They are also gifted too, but you can be gifted and not excel too.

The East Germans were the first to use this type of training for the benefits I mentioned, and when they did this (back in the 1930s), they were on top of the world. But gradually, as the benefits of periodization became more known, the rest of the athletic world also picked up on these training concepts, and that was lucky, because if they continued to train like you (Terry) suggested, the East Germans would still be winning at everything, and there'd no chance for the rest of the world... well, except those lucky gifted ones!

It sounds like you may need to pick up some of the books I always like to mention:

"The Cyclists Training Bible", by Joel Friel
"The Heart Rate Monitor Book for Outdoor and Indoor Cyclists", by Sally Reed, Sally Edwards
"Serious Cycling", by Ed Burke
"Periodization: Theory and Methodology of Training", by Tudor O. Bompa


And some extras for you:
"Human Anatomy and Physiology", by Elaine N. Marieb (really, she is wonderful, strongly recommended book!)
"The Maffetone Method: The Holistic, Low-Stress, No-Pain Way to Exceptional Fitness", by Phil Maffetone (also a wonderful author, and I so highly regard him)
"Bicycling Magazine's Complete Book of Road Cycling Skills : Your Guide to Riding Faster, Stronger, Longer, and Safer", by Ed Pavelka

If you ever decide to go for a coaching license through USA Cycling, you'd benefit from reading that book for coaches. It breaks down physiology and periodization training really well.

One thing that strikes me with all the books I've read and lectures, seminars, classes, etc. that I've attended is that they're all saying the same thing. At least, they all go on the same principles. Where people tend to differ is in how to apply the principles to their training programs, and that's where the debates come in.

These are some good books for you to start with. If you read those books, you'll understand why I said the things I said in my earlier post.

Koffee

So you're recommending that riders who want to be competitive cyclists focus on intensity, training in the upper limits of heart rate, in the area that would produce lactic acid buildup, say above 85% of MHR, from day 1? If that is what you're saying, I would strongly urge anyone considering following this advice to consult a doctor or competent exercise physiologist before doing this.

I'm not recommending anything at this point, being unqualified to give advice. I would like to see some better justification of the benefits of base training than what I've been able to find.

Koffee,

Thanks for the reading recommendations. I've read some of those, but they appear skimpy on the science end. I've found Andy Coggan, on the other hand, to be quite reliable. If he makes a statement, he has the science to back it up, so I'm prone to believe his adaptation chart until something reliable comes along to discredit it.

Burke(Serious Cycling) claims several adaptations from base training, without support. In brackets following each one I have listed the training zone that Coggan says maximizes that adaptation, where applicable:

- increased glycogen stores [zone 3]
- improved respiratory system [N/A]
- increased heart efficiency (stroke volume, presumably) [zone 5]
- increased thermoregulation [N/A]
- increased neuromuscular efficiency [N/A]
- increased fat metabolism [N/A]
- increased mitochondrial density [zone 4]

No doubt the above adaptions also occur during base training, but Coggan claims they occur faster at higher levels. And I for one believe him.

I've found Andy Coggan, on the other hand, to be quite reliable. If he makes a statement, he has the science to back it up, so I'm prone to believe his adaptation chart until something reliable comes along to discredit it.

I guess this leads to the question: What would Coggan recommend to a rider who wants to become a competitive cyclist who is somewhat overweight by competitive standards who wants to know where to start and how long he should stay there? Is his Zone 2/Aerobic capacity the zone he would recommend for what is being called here base training? Having read his stuff, do you know if that is what he would recommend to the OP and for how long? Or would Coggan recommend going straight into Zone 4/5?

I guess this leads to the question: What would Coggan recommend to a rider who wants to become a competitive cyclist who is somewhat overweight by competitive standards who wants to know where to start and how long he should stay there? Is his Zone 2/Aerobic capacity the zone he would recommend for what is being called here base training? Having read his stuff, do you know if that is what he would recommend to the OP and for how long? Or would Coggan recommend going straight into Zone 4/5?

Well, finding Andy's opinions on training might be tricky. He's a scientist, not a coach. But here's a excerpt of his from the Topica Wattage forum (http://lists.topica.com/lists/wattage/read) :

"Defining various training 'levels' is obviously only the first step in developing a training plan, as what really matters is the distribution of training time or effort devoted to each of the various levels. Discussion of such matters, however, is probably best left to the future, so all I will say at this point is this: 1) I believe that training should be highly individualized, to account for each athlete's unique abilities, goals, and state of development (e.g., age, training background), and 2) compared to some, I tend to place more value in training at levels 2, 3, and 4 - indeed, what many consider to be 'junk training'. In that regard, my philosophy apparently parallels that of Peter Keen, or at least how his ideas are seemingly reflected in the BCF guidelines..."

What exactley is base miles, is it miles that you do everyday?

What exactley is base miles, is it miles that you do everyday?
I'll give it a shot...
Base miles are aerobic riding. Harder than recovery, and typically, slightly harder than "junk/everyday" miles. I don't recall the %Max HR or %AT HR numbers, but I bet someone else does!

I have always considered base miles to be the miles that you ride below the effort level the body starts to metabolize glycogen for energy. I have always learned this to be below 65-70% MHR. My understanding is below the 65-70% level the body utilizes fats as the primary energy source. Once you go over this level, the body starts to tap into it's glycogen stores. So for weight loss and aerobic conditioning, riding below the 65-70% level is the target zone. I have never seen any info to contradict this, but am most certainly open to references.

Perhaps the conditioned athlete, like an pro or even an amateur getting in shape after a short winter layoff, could go directly to what Coggan calls the Zone 2/aerobic conditioning.

But for riders like the OP, I am still of the opinion that base training consists of what I would call Long Slow Distance and what others now call Long Steady Distance, at least until they reach a certain level of fitness and conditioning, which would include things such as a reasonable body fat content.

Cheers.

I have always considered base miles to be the miles that you ride below the effort level the body starts to metabolize glycogen for energy. I have always learned this to be below 65-70% MHR. My understanding is below the 65-70% level the body utilizes fats as the primary energy source. Once you go over this level, the body starts to tap into it's glycogen stores. So for weight loss and aerobic conditioning, riding below the 65-70% level is the target zone. I have never seen any info to contradict this, but am most certainly open to references.

Perhaps the conditioned athlete, like an pro or even an amateur getting in shape after a short winter layoff, could go directly to what Coggan calls the Zone 2/aerobic conditioning.

But for riders like the OP, I am still of the opinion that base training consists of what I would call Long Slow Distance and what others now call Long Steady Distance, at least until they reach a certain level of fitness and conditioning, which would include things such as a reasonable body fat content.

Cheers.

And that's exactly it, Don. I glanced over the Coggan thing- it's definitely going to be different for someone of the elite level, where they have a higher conditioning and a much higher aerobic base. If you looked at the rides the elites do for base training, it's not the average recreational athlete. Nor do elite athletes need to spend much time at base. The stuff I read from Coggan looked more like something an elite athlete would be doing, not the average recreational one. And really, that study had more to do with power training, and not what we're talking about. So there's no research to back up Coggan's claims on what happens during what he defines zones to be. He just throws in what he thinks happens during different phases of his defined zones (and gives no parameters on how he came to these zones really). The real meat of the paper he wrote has to do with power training, and not what we're talking about.

Terry, the reason why books like "Serious Cycling", et. al. don't give a lot of the research up is because they're not research books. They are tailored to suit the reading skills of the general public and to allow the general public to understand what comes from the research that's out there. Burke, for instance, spent 10 years analyzing pedal stroke. But if he took all that research and compacted it into one book, it wouldn't be readable. Instead, he summarized the gist of what he learned from the research, and we all understand what we need to do for our training. But far from making grandiose statements about what he thinks we should do for exercise, he does give a quick reference to many studies. He does it liberally throughout his books, and if people need to investigate it further, they can look it up for themselves. Books like the ones Burke writes are deliberately not bogged down with research studies. My eyes blurred over from getting through Coggen's stuff- but getting the material and educational info from Burke is pretty easy and straightforward. I could not imagine what I would do if every single book out there by the authorities in the subject had all the research they'd read contained in the book. Probably, I'd not coach... I'd just find a new field to get into!

Coggen's stuff is definitely interesting, but he doesn't give any research behind why he puts those check marks under the different zones he's designated that does stuff like increased mitochondria, increased muscle growth, etc. It's difficult to take one study as fact too, as most other learned authorities that are internationally known are interpreting studies from laboratories, universities, and elite cyclists they've worked with and written their books in a straightforward manner so that we can understand how to train for maximum performance.

Koffee

I have always considered base miles to be the miles that you ride below the effort level the body starts to metabolize glycogen for energy. I have always learned this to be below 65-70% MHR. My understanding is below the 65-70% level the body utilizes fats as the primary energy source. Once you go over this level, the body starts to tap into it's glycogen stores. So for weight loss and aerobic conditioning, riding below the 65-70% level is the target zone. I have never seen any info to contradict this, but am most certainly open to references.


According to the Heart Rate Monitor Book for Cyclists, you burn the greatest percentage of fat in zone 2. But you burn *more* fat in zone 3 or 4 (as long as you're underneath your personal aerobic threshold). So it's still better to be higher to burn more fat. But then they talk briefly about how you train your body to burn fat easily by riding in zone 2, so you should do that anyway. Then they talk about coming up with your own personal variety for every week, and to top it off talk about the 12-month plan.

But I'm still confused on the question of, if you're riding for fitness, how much riding in zone 2 is really needed to train the body for efficiency? I can keep up at the top of zone 3 for hours already (only been riding seriously for 3 months). Will I really get more fit if I spend a week riding in zone 2? Can I do knitting or read a book while doing that?

As someone who lives in an area where the average high in January is 45, I seem to have found plenty of time this January to ride, so I don't have any great need to ride a lot less in January. Since I'm just riding for fitness, I'm just trying to do a variety of levels each week, which I'm trying to force to include an hour a week in zone 2/low zone 3.

(not that this has anything to do with the original question of training for racing)

Bruce