Originally Posted by hambertloot
(Post 15737676)
People just tend to train to hard too soon. Focus, like the first replier said, on riding ~6 days a week(i tend to enjoy one full day off per week of no riding, just helps mentally and physically to not ride). Do your rides at an easy intensity. One ride per week should be a long slow effort of 3+ hours. Keep the rest around 1-1.5 hours, and GRADUALLY increase the normal rides until you can do about 1.5-2 hours on 5 days a week and 4+ hours one day a week
It isn't until you have a strong aerobic base to be able to benefit from this anaerobic, high intensity training. And just remember, pro riders hit MHR at most once per month. No need to push extremely hard, but enough resistence to improve I say, do the least amount of training as possible to reap the most fitness This may sound boring to you to just ride and not do high intensity, but it is so worth it. One day a week I hit it hard with hills. One day a week I do a long, easy ride (16-17mph) of 100k+. One day is completely off the bike. One day is recovery of 30-60minutes. The rest are easy 1-2hr rides Hope the best for you!! |
Originally Posted by caloso
(Post 15738951)
Really? Are you sure? Read the descriptions. Unless you are going out for a steady diet of 3x3's and standing start sprints, those are not intervals that a rider would typically just find himself doing on a solo ride.
|
Originally Posted by ericm979
(Post 15736739)
You should read a book on training and physiology rather than asking a forum, where the answers will vary widely in quality and even the best will be too brief.
I suggest Thomas Chapple's Base Building book as it has the best explanation of the physiology. |
I guess walking or running can exactly give you what you get from aerobics,And also stretching ball is a good option.
Basically what i feel is running is even better if it doesn't suit you go for a walk that easy and very useful. rehab documentation software |
My experience is that a good way to get some aerobic base is to go for a 4-5 hour ride at whatever intensity it takes to have you staggering a little at the end. Then the next day do 3-4 hours at an intensity that has your legs comfortable the whole way, no effort, gear way down on hills. Then during the week, do whatever rides and intervals your recovery allows you. That's maybe more riding than your available time allows. If your time is short, it's best to do about like you've been doing, concentrate on the upper end. The upper end brings the lower end along better than vice versa. That's why the Time Crunched Cyclist has changed today's thinking away from doing easy rides when time is short. The pros and other dedicated racers do a lot of easy rides because they have almost unlimited time to put into it.
Perhaps the basic answer is that anaerobic training is not pure anaerobic. There's always an aerobic component. You may not have enough time for "pure aerobic training" to produce the results you're looking for. You might want to read Carmichael's Time Crunched Cyclist. |
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy
(Post 15756069)
Perhaps the basic answer is that anaerobic training is not pure anaerobic. There's always an aerobic component. You may not have enough time for "pure aerobic training" to produce the results you're looking for. You might want to read Carmichael's Time Crunched Cyclist.
I don't consistently have the time required for one 4-5 hour ride, plus other rides the remainder of the week. Also as much as I like to ride, 4-5 hours reaches a point where I just don't care to sit on a bike that long, unless I'm actually going somewhere. For the next three months it's getting too hot to ride fast anyway, so I'm going to test out doing a slow and steady 2-3 hour ride once a week every week for a few months and see what happens. Which may only prove what I know already without answering either question, that working on the weakest link is low hanging fruit when looking for improvement. |
Originally Posted by sprince
(Post 15757695)
I don't consistently have the time required for one 4-5 hour ride, plus other rides the remainder of the week. Also as much as I like to ride, 4-5 hours reaches a point where I just don't care to sit on a bike that long, unless I'm actually going somewhere. For the next three months it's getting too hot to ride fast anyway, so I'm going to test out doing a slow and steady 2-3 hour ride once a week every week for a few months and see what happens. Which may only prove what I know already without answering either question, that working on the weakest link is low hanging fruit when looking for improvement. |
It depends on the rider's goals- that little training volume would work for criterium or track racing.
If the goals are centuries or long road races, then it's not enough. Did the OP state his goals and I missed them? Any specific training advice made without knowing the rider's goals are no better than picking random workouts from the internet. Making a training plan should start with deciding on the goals. |
Originally Posted by ericm979
(Post 15758017)
Did the OP state his goals and I missed them?
|
Originally Posted by sprince
(Post 15761425)
No centuries, road races, or criteriums. Track would be sweet, but there are no velodromes and unfortunately no plans to ever build one in this area :( So if I have to pick a goal, it would be doing a couple 50 mile group rides a month without feeling abused afterwards.
Keep the pace manageable. Not too slow, you don't want to crawl along pointlessly ... keep it at a pace where you feel you've got a little bit in reserve. And of course, keep doing the faster stuff during the week. |
Originally Posted by sprince
(Post 15757695)
That's part of what I'm trying to flush out. The Coggan chart seems to indicate there is a definite cutoff at the top two zones where there would be very little or no aerobic benefit. That point also seems to be an area where you run into many differing opinions. From my own anecdotal experience I'd have to say I'm not getting much aerobic benefit from staying at the anaerobic side of the zones and I can't judge anaerobic cycling benefits because it's something that tends to come naturally to me anyway with a minimum of work. The other question that I've never found a decent explanation for is the difference between, for example, 3 hours of steady work with no break, and 3 hours with several short breaks to eat and rest. In other words is there something magical about a slow and steady, no break ride that you can't get from covering the same distance in the same amount of time with breaks?
I don't consistently have the time required for one 4-5 hour ride, plus other rides the remainder of the week. Also as much as I like to ride, 4-5 hours reaches a point where I just don't care to sit on a bike that long, unless I'm actually going somewhere. For the next three months it's getting too hot to ride fast anyway, so I'm going to test out doing a slow and steady 2-3 hour ride once a week every week for a few months and see what happens. Which may only prove what I know already without answering either question, that working on the weakest link is low hanging fruit when looking for improvement. |
Originally Posted by ericm979
(Post 15758017)
It depends on the rider's goals- that little training volume would work for criterium or track racing.
If the goals are centuries or long road races, then it's not enough. Did the OP state his goals and I missed them? Any specific training advice made without knowing the rider's goals are no better than picking random workouts from the internet. Making a training plan should start with deciding on the goals. |
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy
(Post 15763605)
Google "HIIT aerobic benefits" HIIT=high intensity interval training. I think the scholarly and other articles you will find there will answer your basic questions.
|
You have never experienced lactic acid build up in your legs?? This doesn't sound right. Here's what I think is happening:
What's happening is that you are training in at threshold (anaerobic threshold) when you're doing those 20 mph + rides... So it takes you about an hour or so and your fine. When you ease of and go longer, your not actually easing of by that, Your still burning a lot of carbohydrates at this intensity... enough maybe that in 1:40 h or so you'll bonk. I'd also hazard a guess that you're dieting? Training this is called lactic tolerance. It's actually a good way to improve aerobic fitness. More of this and you'll improve :-) Maybe divide the session into two intervals of 5 miles where you go 18-20mph, with the rest of the time slower (16-17). Going fast doesn't make you loose 'aerobic fitness'... quite the opposite. Train this at least 3x per week taking no more than 3 days away from the bike. Complete rest days are good. It comes down to selecting the right training zones. The 3h once a week is good... but do it longer than a month. The burning 'lactic acid' occurs above threshold. |
Originally Posted by Tomas Metcalfe
(Post 15780350)
You have never experienced lactic acid build up in your legs?? This doesn't sound right. Here's what I think is happening:
What's happening is that you are training in at threshold (anaerobic threshold) when you're doing those 20 mph + rides... So it takes you about an hour or so and your fine. When you ease of and go longer, your not actually easing of by that, Your still burning a lot of carbohydrates at this intensity... enough maybe that in 1:40 h or so you'll bonk. I'd also hazard a guess that you're dieting? Training this is called lactic tolerance. It's actually a good way to improve aerobic fitness. More of this and you'll improve :-) Maybe divide the session into two intervals of 5 miles where you go 18-20mph, with the rest of the time slower (16-17). Going fast doesn't make you loose 'aerobic fitness'... quite the opposite. Train this at least 3x per week taking no more than 3 days away from the bike. Complete rest days are good. It comes down to selecting the right training zones. The 3h once a week is good... but do it longer than a month. The burning 'lactic acid' occurs above threshold. I typically ride 6 days a week. I'm not dieting. I have always eaten a lot (minimum 4k calories per day lately). I do have problems trying to eat solid food on rides, party due to the oxygen deprivation and the fact that in warmer weather, solid food just kind of sits on my stomach until after the ride. Are you saying that I may be going too hard on the longer rides and not hard enough on the short rides, and possibly should eat more just before a long ride? |
It's 'running out of oxygen' (due to pushing harder than is sustainable) that causes lactic acid build up...
It sound like you're going too hard in both long and short rides. Reduce the hard efforts to specific intervals >12' at the pace you normally ride the 20m rides and intervals <12' as fast you can without the pace dropping of. |
Originally Posted by Machka
(Post 15733186)
I'm a lot older than you think ... and I've been cycling for 40 years. :)
What I'm saying is that if you want to take "training" seriously, get the tools to do so. Yeah sure, you can guestimate distances, speeds, etc. but if you really want to train, why not work with more concrete numbers? If you just want to ride, then don't worry about it. And incidentally, riding the same route all the time isn't a particularly effective training method. Mix it up! good time Machka about not riding the same route. i've been using this climb by my work place daily, since from what i read... the suggestion to getting better at a climb is to keep riding it. so now, there's another route at work that i use with climb.. but only 230-240ft of gradual climb vs. the 519ft of steep climb ride i use. so now i just use the gradual climb for recovery and the steep climb for training. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:55 AM. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.