Originally Posted by
KenCarlson
If you ask me, if your goal is to ride a century, then forget what your average speed is and about the only relevant statistic I see is that you can ride 20-40 miles. I would say keep riding farther distances and work up to a century.
For example, I start out each riding season doing 30-40 mile rides in the spring, working up to 50-60 mile rides in early summer, and then 70-80 mile rides when I consider myself "in shape" for the season. If I can comfortably do an 80 mile ride, then go for 90-100, I typically don't do so well. I can go for 70-80 miles and not stop once (except for stop signs, red lights, and to refill water bottles), but if I go for 90-100 I sometimes need to go so far as pull over and lie down, and I've been known to even have a short nap. (Warning: other cyclists have a tendency to stop and check on you to see if you're OK when you do this.) And my average speed might drop 1-2 mph between and 80 mile ride and a 100 mile ride.
When I started riding more seriously, I thought that working up to longer distances made me a better overall cyclist. One summer when I worked from home, I did a little workout ride in the mornings to get out and get some fresh air before sitting in the house all day. Those rides were 10-13 miles on a particular route. Since I wasn't going very far, I found myself putting in more effort to ride faster. That summer I topped out at doing a 7 mile section of my route at and average 21.6 mph. I consider myself a 17-18 mph rider, so for me that was quite an achievement. I've never gotten back to that average speed since I don't regularly do speed training.
To summarize, speed and distance are two different things. If you're going to ride a century, then concentrate on distance. 40 miles is a long way from 100 miles.
-Ken
Ken,
Thanks for you input. The terrain ridden yesterday is/was fairly flat. I'll have to go to the data on my home computer to look at the elevation gains but for the most part, the trail is mostly rolling hills and long straight aways. You are right, speed and distance are two different things. My friends (they don't ride) tell me not to worry how long the century will take me, to just finish. On the other hand, I do want to finish with a respectable time and one that I can use as a baseline to beat in future centuries that I would like to participate in.
I also have caught the cycling bug and look to get out as much as I can during the week and on weekends. I often try and guage myself against other riders that you can tell have experience. I find that I can catch up but cannot sustain the their speeds for long. That is what triggered the idea to upgrade the wheels (obviously, the engine needs continued work but why not work in parallel?) I am not really interested in doing club rides or races as I really cannot afford to get caught up in someone elses wheels and take another fall right now. I know there is an inherent risk in falling with all rides but if I can minimize my chances, I will. Maybe next year when I can say I am 100% I'll go there. So, competing against data it is.
I am hopeful that I can train (long rides and TTs) and bring up the speed to maybe 19 mph on average and increase my top speed where applicable, that would be good and would give me a better shot at completing the century in a little more than 6+ hours with the planned stops.
Sounds like that 200 mile ride is epic and I am sure picturesque. Wish I could do that!