Originally Posted by
DaveWC
It's incorrect logic to make any statement whatsoever regarding nutrition on two rides where nutrition was held constant. Obviously nutrition had no impact on the 2nd ride. No one here has ever said that it did. I asked you earlier to give me a quote where anyone claimed that nutrition impacted the 2nd ride. You couldn't. The issue is that your conclusion cannot address nutrition.
Now tell me why I'm not on solid ground saying that nutrition definitely had an impact on my two rides. Everything else was constant except for nutrition and my performance increased by a margin that you have defined as huge.
You can make a strong NEGATIVE conclusion about nutrition on my ride. I'm going to say it clearly for you AGAIN:
Nutrition (on-ride nutrition, specifically), because it was held constant (same in each ride) , played NO role in my gains from ride #1 to #2.
ALL of my gains in ride #2 were due to the training effect, and nutrition played ZERO role in the training effect.
It is true that I can't now conclude that nutrition plays no role in cycling gains - that's clearly false, but that's exactly what you're putting in my mouth despite me not saying that.
And again, the reason me posting this thread is that come spring (or whenever weather improves), tons of people, having being off their bike for 1-2 months, are going to do exactly what I did, but add a gel or two to ride #2, and then post "WOW - Honey Stingers or whatever gels that I took on ride #2 are awesome - they made me go faster and caused my legs to feel great post-ride!" This thread alone won't completely disprove that notion, but it does show that at least for me (and likely other riders), you can get some real gains if coming from out of shape even without the nutrition, and beware of placebo effect.
Haven't changed my mind one bit - that's the reality of my two rides.
This is fun though - thanks for keeping the thread alive!