Originally Posted by
Hermes
IMO, a 50+ cyclist can climb as much as he/she wants to and it is not age dependent. It depends on genetics, preparation and opportunity. Generally, lighter riders are better climbers but not always.
IMO, the accumulated climbing recorded by Garmin and other devices is interesting but may be misleading. For example, recently I was at a training camp in Tucson and climbed Mount Lemmon. The ride starts at 3,300 feet and the top is 9,100. We climbed to 8,500 with a climbing distance of 21.5 miles @5% average grade and 5,200 feet of elevation.
The first 7 miles was brutally hot 100 degrees. The next 7 miles was cooler with some shade and I felt better. The final 7 miles was much cooler but the oxygen was less and power production less. I really suffered the last couple miles.
If I ride rolling terrain with climbs and descents that total 5,200 feet of climbing at lower altitude with moderate temperature, it is much easier.
I moved to SoCal from NorCal last year. At my new location, I do not have the amount of climbing with longer climbs available so my opportunity for more climbing is limited.
IMO, an interesting discussion is why climbing is different from flat to rolling. I have found that I have to practice climbing to be better at climbing and practice flat terrain to be better at flat terrain.
This article discusses the difference riding on flat terrain and climbing and why some cyclists are better at one or the other.
https://cyclingtips.com/2013/09/clim...-are-affected/
The simplest way to think about this whole situation is that your muscles need to contract quicker in a high kinetic energy situation (i.e. time trial) than in a low kinetic energy situation (i.e. climbing). Time-trialling recruits more fast-twitch muscle fibres even though you may be at the exact same cadence and same power as when you’re climbing. Depending on your physiological make-up, you will likely be better at one than the other.
The discussion in your link is all correct until it gets down to the fast twitch vs. slow twitch, when it goes off the rails. Muscle fiber has nothing to do with it. It's all about that previous paragraph:
In short, your motor patterns are significantly different between time trialing and climbing.
This is explained more scientifically through crank inertial load:
http://www.fredericgrappe.com/wp-con...%20cycling.pdf
Change in crank inertial load is the technical difference between cycling on the flat and climbing. This term is also the reason that we pedal at a lower rpm when climbing than we do on the flat:
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...during_cycling
The change in crank inertial load does require a somewhat different neuromuscular adaptation to achieve endurance, which is the reason that the best climbing training is climbing.
The gradient which produces the fastest rate of ascent on long climbs will be the gradient which allows the climber to use their most efficient climbing cadence at their most favorable power, which will depend on their available gear ratios. That said, lower gears and steeper gradients will produce less wind resistance and thus faster ascents.