Originally Posted by
Zephyr11
Okay, so I'm not super knowledgeable as far as cycling nutrition, but I guess I related it to how running works. I'm a pretty serious runner, and I've done a ton of research as far as nutrition for that and assumed it was the same, but if it's not, feel free to correct me. A 27 mile ride is about equal to a 9 mile run (give or take...there's no TRUE conversion but this is the general cross-training conversion factor). Since he's saying he was famished afterward, I'm going to assume that meant he was pushing himself (since exertion level will have a large effect on how much muscle was broken down during the ride). For the sake of this topic, I'll assume it to be a medium, steady-state effort. For me, a 9 mile steady-state run is starting to get into the territory where if I don't refuel afterward, my workout the next day will suffer. That indicates to me that my body needs recovery food in order to replace its glycogen stores and start to rebuild whatever muscles I broke down. Every one of my coaches as well as every piece of literature I've ever read has always told me that you should eat some type of recovery food after working out, even if it's not a balls-to-the-wall sufferfest. Heck, I make sure I eat a bowl of oatmeal after running my super-easy effort 4 mile double in the morning. So I disagree with your statement that recovery foods aren't needed, ESPECIALLY if that's the OP's long ride of the week (it's all relative anyway...an ultramarathoner thinks my 16 mile long run is short, but it's long enough for me that I need recovery food afterward). The size of the recovery meal might be out of proportion, which is what I'm assuming you probably are trying to say, but to say that recovery food isn't needed for that ride isn't true.
Well, first ... a 27 mile ride does not equate with a 9 mile run. For me, a 27 mile ride is something I'd do in the evening after work and then continue on to do a full evening of housework and other stuff. For me, a 9 mile run is currently impossible, and even if I were to do a combination run-walk, I'd be dead for the rest of the evening. (This, however, may be a different story for a triathlete) I have heard people who have done both compare the cycling double century with the marathon in terms of effort, etc.. If that is the case, then that's a 200 mile to 26 mile ratio, which would mean that a 27 mile ride compares to a 3.5 mile run.
This particular 27 mile ride was done at 13.5 mph (22.5 km/h) which is a casual-moderate pace ... fairly slow. It's actually about the pace I ride when I'm not exerting myself very much, and I'm known as a slow rider.
It's sort of common knowledge among cyclists that if the ride is 2 hours or less, no additional eating is required before, after, or during the ride ..... unless the ride is a hammer-fest, or straight up the side of a mountain, or something where a great deal of exertion took place. This is because the body has enough calories in storage to be able to handle 2 hours of riding just fine ... unless the person has not eaten for many hours prior to the ride and has already depleted his/her stores.
However, if the OP is starving after the ride, that would indicate that the OP likely didn't eat anything prior to the ride, or very little. Something as simple as a bagal prior to the ride would solve the problem. And personally I'd also recommend bringing one bottle of a sports drink with a few calories in it during the ride as well.
When rides get over the 2-hour point, that's when it becomes more important to eat before, during, and after rides, because the body starts to use up what it has in storage and needs something more to work with.