thebulls

Yes, for the most part that's right. But it was an interesting enough comment to get me to check it ...

Summarizing what's below: Average completion time on solo 200km's ridden hard in preparation for a grand randonnee: 10.9 hours with 66 feet of climbing per mile (cpm). Average completion time on 600's in the year I rode a GR, 37.7 hrs with 60'cpm. Average completion time on the GR's is not meaningful (differing lengths). On the 200's, my moving average speed was 14.4mph and on the GR's that drops to 12.3mph. Overall average speed on GR's is 8.7mph and not counting sleep, that rises to 9.6mph. Average cpm on the four GR's below is 49'cpm.

In 2006, before BMB, I only had one 200km that I rode hard; 79 feet of climbing per mile (cpm) and completion time of 11h18m -- but then we went on and made it a double century. Most of my training for BMB was centuries. My 600km took 38h23m and had 57' cpm. BMB took me 88h4m and had 51'cpm.

In 2007, before PBP, I rode my series hard and did a lot of 200km's. Avg completion time on 200km's was 10.7 hours with 64'cpm. The 600 took me 37h48m and had 58'cpm. I had a cold before leaving for Paris and it turned to pneumonia during PBP so I "only" made 720 miles, back to Dreux, in 86.6 hours. If I'd have kept going at the same pace for the final 50 miles in to Paris it would have put me at 92.4 hours (which is why I bailed in Dreux). By my measure, PBP has 55'cpm.

In 2010, training for SIR's Border-to-Border 1000km, I only rode two 200km's, 10.3 hours average and 55'cpm. That year's 600km took 38h43m but at least an hour of that was because I was helping a new rider who was struggling, 63'cpm. Completion time on the 1000km was 66h35m and it had 28'cpm.

In 2011, training again for PBP, I only rode three hard solo 200km's, 11.9 hours average but they were tough ones with 79'cpm. That year's 600km took 36h44m and had 58'cpm. PBP took me 87h37m or so.

FWIW.

Nick

thebulls

That's similar to my own experience. I slept a total of a bit over 10hours on the last PBP. About 8 hours of that was in four "long" sleeps of longer than an hour and the rest was catnaps. My rule for myself was that anywhere I felt snoozy I wasn't going to fight it, I'd pull over and take a fifteen minute nap (or whatever I felt I needed). The only time I violated that rule was on the third night, riding with tandem-riding friends, I was feeling desperately snoozy but since we were riding together at night for safety, I tried to push through it. When I fell asleep in the middle of talking with the captain I decided it was time for a 15 minute snooze. At the control, they were still eating when I got through the line.

But "YMMV" is the rule here. During the first 350 miles I rode much of it with a friend, and we slept at the same spots -- 75 mins at mile 285 and 30 mins at mile 342. Somewhere around mile 350 he had to stop for another snooze and I kept going. But five miles later I had to stop for 10 minutes and another five miles later for 30 minutes. Waking up from that stop, we bumped into each other again and rode together for about five miles when he announced he had to sleep again. I said "See you in Brest" and then didn't see him again for three days. Turns out he made Brest within the limit but then slept so long he was over the limit at Carhaix. He says he had a blast riding slowly back for a couple of days and then taking the train the rest of the way.

Meanwhile, after Brest I didn't sleep again until the fifteen minute snooze before Tinteniac, so a total of just under three hours of sleep for the first 540 miles to Tinteniac, at which point I stopped and slept for 3 hours on cardboard sheets that had been taped to the cafeteria floor. For the rest, 10 minutes, 130 minutes at mile 680, on a cot at Mortagne, 10 minutes roadside, and 100 minutes at mile 727, Dreux, on a bristly floor mat that was better than the hard floor. Slightly.

Nick

Carbonfiberboy 

Good to keep track of everything, isn't it? Me too. I find it a great help both in planning and executing.

I mentioned that we had 96 finishers for our first spring 200k. We had 54 finishers for the following 300k. It did rain a bit, so times were about 2 hours slower than usual, probably riders taking a break somewhere dry. Rain does slow one down a bit on the road, but not that much. I expect even better turnouts in '15.

lhbernhardt

If I had started with the 80-hour (or even 90-hour group), my time would NOT have been the same; it would have been reduced by at least five hours because I would have adopted a more aggressive strategy.

The 84-hour group at PBP leaves early on Monday morning. This suggests that the best strategy (for those wishing to enjoy the ride) would be to maximize riding during daylight hours, and to stop and sleep at night. Really, who wants to ride in a beautiful country such as France during darkness and not be able to see anything? For this you need to be pretty fast, yes, but MORE IMPORTANT: you need to absolutely minimize your time at the controles! I think this is where most people lose time. Consider that every two minutes spent at a control is worth 1 kmh (every three minutes if you are slower, but then dropping from a 20 kmh average to 19 kmh is much more significant than dropping from 30 kmh to 29). You want to get in and get out right away. You DO NOT want to be farting around trying to decide what to do next! I think this is where people with slower times lose most of their time. I don't often like riding with others because at the controles, the ride partner is either already gone (actually a good thing, because it tells you that you need to be more efficient at the controle) or he needs to do "just one more thing" so you're kind of obligated to wait and lose equal time.

The 80- and 90-hour groups leave in the late afternoon/early evening on Sunday. This encourages riding all night while you're still fresh, and then making as much use of Monday's daylight hours before sleeping on Monday night. So, assuming you leave at 6 pm, you should be in Brest by 7 or 8 pm the next evening (25/26 hours), which lets you target the second controle on the way back (Loudeac) for sleeping, leaving you with about 450 km to ride on Tuesday, and you're done in under 60 hours!

If I do PBP in 2015, I'll probably adopt the second strategy since I've already seen that part of France, I know how the controles are arranged, and because I want to see how fast I can do this on a fixed gear. And to keep this on the training issue: yes, for this I would expect to have to train, with both intense efforts to increase cruising speed, hill repeats to reduce climbing time, and a couple of 600 to 1,000 km rides (not too many) to get used to time in the saddle and to develop greater mental toughness for when the whole body is telling you that it's tired and is grasping at excuses why I should stay another couple of minutes at the controle...

For the first strategy above, no, I did not have to train beyond anything I was already doing (riding brevets, getting 3.5 hour rides on weekends, doing the daily commute, about 20 kmh each way, but usually taking a longer way home). Plus riding the track, which was my only speed work.

Luis

thebulls

This can't be emphasized enough and is even harder to do on PBP than on other events because there is so much congestion at the controls and many of the control services are scattered helter skelter so you can't get everything done without a fair amount of wandering around, trying to find things. My total on-bike time was 60 hours. Not counting any sleep time, total stoppage time in controls was just over 11 hours and between controls was 5-1/2 hours.

Even just the first stop at mile 87 took 17 minutes, and as my notes say: "As usual, the one thing that every rider needs -- water -- was not immediately obvious. Only after finding a "Translator" was I able to get the attention of the barman, who grudgingly filled my bottle." And at Villaines, mile 137, where I was stopped for 26 minutes, my notes say: "At Villaines, I found that the bike "racks" couldn't handle my 650Bx38 tires, so had to squeeze in to find something to lean the bike on. Then I couldn't find the place to get my card stamped, so wasted some time wandering around trying to find it. At least I found water while I was wandering--it was outdoors, sort of a "water manifold" supplied by a rubber hose. When I got back to my bike, I realized that it'd be smart to clean up a bunch of gel that had leaked out all over the inside of my Carradice, so I took all the gooey plastic bags out and schlepped them back up to the manifold and cleaned it all up. At least the gel washed off easily! Despite all of this wandering, I was only a couple of minutes longer than planned at the control, so set out only a few minutes late, just before 5:00 am."

For the first two hundred miles I was relying on a liquid diet of gel and sustained energy to minimize stoppage time, but by Fougeres I needed to eat something solid, and that meant a fifteen minute wait in line in the cafeteria. From then on, I tried to only eat in every other control. Stopping at places between controls is no more efficient than stopping in controls, in my experience. Service is not fast either way. And the selection is better in the controls.

Bathroom breaks are another significant cause of stoppage time--I tried to stop about five miles before any control and duck off to the bushes, because that is much faster than locating the bathroom, walking there (often five minutes), waiting in line, etc.

I guess none of this relates to training, oh, well. Except in respect as part of training is learning how to control fast so you can finish a brevet in time.

Nick

Weatherby

Nick, I wonder if you could expand on these thoughts.

Are you saying that the typical training regimens are not sufficient or not suited towards very long distance riding? Is riding Brevets the best way to gain say your level of fitness, which obviously is impressive considering the 99 month string. Do you have any suggestions on training the neck, back, and arms? Just miles? I never used to have any issues with these muscles but stopped riding for many years and got fat, which seems like lead weight pulling on the back and neck. The legs seem not too bad, they just need to transport another several stone. Maybe I need to find a gym or just ride more and be patient and keep losing weight. I ditched the old bike with the racer position and now sit more upright and that helps.

I kinda sorta disagree. Learning how to eat, navigate, what gear to bring, and other logistics are very significant aspects of training. One of the few things I am good at is getting in and out of controls.

thebulls

Hi, Weatherby,

By "been there done that" I just meant that despite doing all the training, I ride as fast as I ride. If I didn't do any training then I would definitely be slower. At the moment, the main thing that would help me on brevets is to get my weight back down where it was before PBP, or even lower. You can do all the work you want on the numerator of the strength to weight ratio, but if the denominator is out of control then the work on the numerator can only go so far. For PBP in 2011, I did a pretty good job on getting my weight down. The big motivation was that my post-ride analysis of PBP in 2007 said that even with the pneumonia that I got during PBP, I could have finished in time if I had been ten pounds lighter. So in 2011, I got most of the way there, and it definitely helped. Then I blew it after PBP and regained the weight I had lost.

The "training" that I've done is probably not as systematic as it could be. I commute five days a week, 20 miles round-trip, and about 1000 feet of climbing a day. So it's about 50 feet per mile, which is in the ballpark of PBP. For PBP training, I tried to add five to ten miles to my commute, either two of the days or three depending on what I had done the weekend. And during the extended commute I would either ride hill intervals or intervals on the flat at Haines Point, sometimes doing maximum effort shorter intervals, sometimes doing longer intervals at just below or just above lactate threshold. Then on the weekend I was riding populaires, but riding them as hard as I could all day. This year I've been trying to do some more core strength stuff. But I got the flu in mid-February and that really put me down for a month and I'm still struggling to get back to where I was. I can only do half as many sit-ups and push-ups. Must ... work ... harder. It's definitely slowed me down on the last two 200's.

I've never done any training for the neck, back and arms. Daily commuting plus a monthly 200km or longer ride does a pretty good job of keeping me where I need to be. My handlebars are set almost precisely at saddle height for brevets, but my commute bike is probably 1/2" lower to force a little more work.

Since you list your location as "Mid-Atlantic" who do you ride brevets with?

Nick

lonesomesteve

I think this is key for a lot of randonneurs. Going faster on the bike is all about power/weight ratio. If you're racing, then you've probably already got your weight low enough and it makes sense to focus on increasing the numerator (power). But in my experience, most randonneurs can benefit far more from focusing on the denominator (weight). It's just far easier to lose weight than it is to increase power (not to say that losing weight is easy).

I'm not one to Train per se. Between my daily commute and a weekend ride I average about 120 - 150 miles per week, but it's mostly "just riding." I'm pretty consistent about that year round, so my power output doesn't change much. But I notice significant improvements in my climbing ability from just 5 - 10 lbs of weight loss, and that translates to being much faster overall on a brevet. Obviously this doesn't apply if you already have a BMI of 20.

Weatherby

Ciming back to cycling after many years and being much heavier, the effect of extra weight is profound.

I cannot locate the article but it showed graphically the effect of power to weight ratio on speed as a function of climb slope but the way it showed the data was very interesting. It showed the effective extra distance in miles that a 1000 foot climb adds to a ride. For very, very fit riders the effect was around 2-3 miles per 1000 feet of climbing depending on a variety of factors. So, a 10,000 foot climb ride would add 20-30 miles effectively to the "Vendettes" ride.....maybe an hour or so. A less fit, heavier rider could effectively see an extra 5-7 miles per 1000 foot elevation gain or 50-70 miles on the same hypothetical ride with 10,000 feet of climbing and if we assume a steady state speed of14-15 mph on the flats, that 10,000 feet of climbing would add around 4 hours for a heavier, less fit "Touriste". Of course, these are extreme examples from memory.........memory, I completely forgot why I was writing this.

lhbernhardt

The added climbing numbers make a lot of sense. My rule of thumb for estimating how long it will take me to finish a given ride is to assume a 25 kmh average (15 mph), and adding an hour for every 5,000 feet (1500 meters) of climbing. This seems to work out. The recent 200 km brevet I did in NW Washington, containing minimal climbing, took me about 7.5 hours. The following 300 km brevet between Seattle & Arlington, with 10,000 feet of climbing, took me about 13.5 hours (not completely sure, as the results haven't yet been posted and I didn't pay much attention at the end, and my computer just tells me the actual moving time, which is a lot less). I spent absolutely minimal time at each controle, and I did much of the riding with groups that maintained a higher tempo than I would have on my own, which is why I finished ahead of my estimate in both cases.

And speaking of body weight, I find that the biggest difference between racers and randonneurs is that racers are much thinner. I think that long distance cyclists fall into this trap where they think riding such long distances gives them license to eat whatever they want. Like the Lon Haldeman "See food diet," if I see it, I eat it.

What they forget is that 1) the more they ride, the more efficient the body gets, so it requires less food to ride the same distance at the same speed, and 2) the older they get, the less food they need because the body is no longer "growing," it's just maintaining.

So racers can keep eating lots because 1) they're usually a lot younger, and 2) they don't just go the same distances at the same speed, they go longer distances a lot faster because as their bodies become more efficient, they climb to the "next level." This usually doesn't happen with recreational cyclists.

I'm 63, I'm 6'1" and 175 pounds, and I've maintained this for most of my life. I've been cycling so long that I don't think I could bonk if I wanted to. That 200 I rode, I had a full breakfast, then I had maybe a banana, some cookies, and a small tin of pineapple juice during the ride. My water bottle was empty at the start because I was gong to fill it at a controle, but I forgot... But it was a cool day. For the 300, I had a Starbuck's breakfast sandwich at the start, I forgot to bring a water bottle completely, but a kind randonneur let me borrow his unused bottle (I was just going to stop and get a bottle of Gatorade, but he insisted). I had a Vietnamese sandwich and some cookies and a can of juice, and most of a package of Power Bar gummy things. And less than a bottle of water, and that was it. I almost didn't finish the hamburger and fries I had at the end of the ride. But it was a fairly rainy ride. But I am just amazed by how many bottles some guys go thru during a ride! Yes, everybody's different, but I think a lot of riders train themselves to have to consume too much. But then I probably err on the side of not drinking enough.

Luis

Weatherby

Luis, you are very fit maybe remarkable so for your age. It is not just the 7 hour 200k. Your climbing estimate and that you do not need to drink much says a lot to me. I drank 5 large bottles on a 200k recently and needed every single drop of it. Why? I am not fit and my body is not efficient. Inefficiency combined with a nice layer of insulating fat requires a lot more cooling to deal with the heat. I am 6'3'' and used to weigh 165-170 and did not need much water then either. I started the year at 245ish and am down to about 208. I can see more speed already on the 1km hill leading up into my little town.

To be honest, I see the Brevets this year as a driving force/goal to restore my health. So, I do see them as training. If paced properly and you don't overeat, you can lose weight on long rides. I intentionally lost 20 pounds on a 4 week bike tour once but that was riding a fully loaded touring bike 100+ miles per day in mountains and hills. I suspect most Randonneurs are out purely for enjoyment AND what is better than a long ride in the country on great roads especially with similar riders. I am also sure that there are many who want to do a time. Both would benefit from easier climbing. I do know that wobbling up a steep grade at 3.27 mph is no fun.

softreset

As someone who let their fitness lapse and is interested in getting into Randonneuring, I'll second this.

I have nothing to contribute to the discussion at hand, other than "thank you." I've appreciated all the insights.

thebulls

Except compared to the alternative ... sitting on your couch. And each steep grade you wobble up at 3.27 mph is one fewer steep grade between you and the finish.

thebulls

While I agree that this can often be a problem, it isn't the cause of randonneurs being overweight. I think the primary cause of overweight randonneurs is that they are overweight people who have chosen to be randonneurs (often in an attempt to lose the overweight). Statisticians call this "selectivity bias" -- what you observe is there because people have selected into it. It isn't that thin-bodied racers decide to become randonneurs and then turn into overweight people.

For myself, I have observed that when I get into better shape and lower weight, e.g. for PBP in 2011, then I don't need to eat as much while riding, and overall it is much easier to stay fueled up and avoid bonking. Partly that may be my body becoming more efficient. But significantly, it's because I am doing less work because there is less mass to move.

If you want to test the hypothesis that your abilities are all because of trained efficiency, there is an easy way to do that: Buy a 25 pound bag of cat food (or maybe some 25 pound bar-bell weights), pack your bike otherwise normally, and then add in the 25 pound weight to your Carradice, and ride your brevet. On a 200, I'm guessing your residual fitness might let you overcome the extra mass without _too_ much extra suffering. So try this on a 400 :-) You may think I'm joking, but it would be really interesting to hear your experiences with this experiment.

(Even with this experiment, there is still somewhat of a difference between being 25 pounds overweight and carrying 25 extra pounds--you don't have to pump blood through the barbell weights. In regressions that I have run, there is a statistically significant difference between running the regression against total weight and running the regression against bodyweight + luggage separately. It's a little extra work to carry 25 pounds of overweight versus 25 pound of barbells.)

Nick

lhbernhardt

Good things to think about. Also, funny you should mention riding with extra weight. A lot of my riding during the week is just an extension of my commute to work. I'll usually ride 20 km to work, and then on the afternoons where I'm not going to be at the velodrome that evening, I'll usually go for a longer ride, sometimes up to 3 1/2 hours in the longer days of summer. On these rides, I almost always have my commuter backpack, which weighs maybe 15 pounds (similar to the weight of a biathlon rifle, from my cross-country ski racing days). It contains a spare t-shirt, personal items in case I need to spend the night in a motel somewhere, and a Kryptonite New York lock, which is kinda heavy for a u-lock. I find this to be good training, having to carry the extra weight. When I am unencumbered on the weekend rides or brevets, I feel like I'm just floating along until I get warmed up and used to not having to carry the extra weight.

The biggest downside I find to carrying the pack is that it causes some lower back pain after an hour so two on the road...

Luis

Weatherby

i guess I need to train with my ANSCHÜTZ strapped over the shoulder...

halfbiked

As usual, your mileage may vary. For me, I (like you) commute 30 miles round trip. I've been getting 70 to 120 miles a week this year (I do partial rides in inclement weather). I just signed up for a populaire on this Saturday, 100k, which I expect to be no trouble. I'm looking at a flat 200k in 3 weeks, which I think will be a stretch if I do 5 days of commuting that week. Then I have a gravel century in mid-late may, with 7000 ft of climbing. I did that one last year on 3x/week commutes (i.e. 90 miles), plus 3x/week of strength training (i.e. weights). So, for me, the 200k doesn't seem that out of my ability. It would probably be smart to go light on riding the week before attempting the 200k distance the first time. I'll likely do such a taper the week before the gravel century, like last year.

ronocnikral

I've got a commute similar in distance, and have been putting in similar miles. I haven't busted out a 100k, but I'm doing a 200k this weekend. I'm hoping experience trumps my lack preparedness. I'll finish, it won't be pretty, it won't be sub 8. It will most likely be around 10-ish hours, but I plan to use it as training. I'll do another 200k at the end of the month which I hope to finish in much better fashion.

antimonysarah

This. You can't be overweight and race, unless you really enjoy losing. Brevets aren't races, though, and an overweight randonneur can be perfectly successful without losing weight. And randos, in my experience, are very welcoming to overweight riders, unlike some other cycling groups. They'll still cheerfully drop me while I'm wobbling uphill at the aforementioned 3.27 mph, but they won't insult me as they do so.

unterhausen

Weight management for older riders can definitely be a significant part of training. As a racer in my teens and twenties, I could eat whatever I wanted and maintain my weight. I hate the fact that this isn't the case with randonneuring, although if I rode as much now as I did then it would probably be close. The issue I have found is that I have to force myself to eat on the bike to avoid bonking, but then when I get off the bike I have to go back on my diet. I used to have a junk food snack after a ride, I've given up on that for the most part. My biggest weight gains happen over the summer after I've completed my SR series and in the fall when riding becomes more of a chore due to low light

When I started riding again 5-6 years ago, I had just lost 50 pounds by swimming. Had to swim to get my leg muscles built up to the point I could ride. So I'm really good at gaining weight.

jlafitte 

I read with interest this quote from RUSA's PBP FAQ:

"Most successful PBP finishers have at least 5,000 miles of training during the spring and summer leading up to PBP."

Anyone like to comment?

Also, Anyone tried the recovery/endurance/taper brevet training outlined in Hughes and Kehlenbach's book Distance Cycling? Would this be scalable to a 1000/1200? I haven't done any systematic training, but I'm hoping to successfully finish my first series and next month's 600 has me motivated to do some preparation.

The Octopus 

I've done PBP twice (and 4 other 1200s) and that's the benchmark I shoot for. It's worked well for me. The one 1200K I DNF'd (Uzbekistan) -- the only ride I have ever DNF'd -- had nothing to do with training or volume, and everything to do with having totally unsuitable equipment.

Re: "training" in general, I think it's difficult to answer any question about training without first identifying with some specificity exactly what a rider is trying to accomplish (and from where one is starting). FWIW, I never rode more than 100 miles except when I was doing an event; each successive long event was the "training" for the next one.