IBOHUNT

Same here.
Wife and kids notice it when I don't get out

Dudelsack 

Odd. Most contemporary American statists are making that exact argument. We have a moral obligation to keep our weight down, ban large sugary drinks and outlaw McDonalds, stop the blight of cigarettes, etc. etc. because to do otherwise puts an undue financial burden on the taxpayers of this country.

I don't disagree with that viewpoint necessarily. The point is that it is not, as you contend, a Strawman.

chasm54

The contention was that FrenchFit was erecting a strawman in the context of this thread - nobody but him had put up the argument that he was knocking down.

I you'd like a debate on whether we have a moral obligation to maintain ourselves in the best possible health, I'd be happy to oblige, but I have a horrible feeling we'd quickly get the thread moved to P&R, which would be a pity...

NOS88

I'm currious if the OP had stated, "I find incorporating rest and moderation actually incurease my fitness." would this discussion have taken a different track?

One thing that troubles me is the notion that there is a universal "good for you." While, planners, demographers, researchers, and others may have identified some elements of what is good for people, on an individual level it varies widely. As an example, my younger brother is constantly pushing himself physically, often to the point of injury. Yet, he views that as a good way to live his life. For him, if it doesn't hurt or wear you out, you're not getting your full measure of living. While I don't agree with him, I know what I think doesn't really matter to him. He's pretty much of the mind that it's better to be a bright candle that burns out quickly than one the flickers away for a long time.

In any event, I get the feeling that there is a lot of defending positions in this thread that are the result of lack of clarification and some assumptions being made.

chasm54

it would. To some extent it has made its way to the same destination, though, with the discussion about balance in training, and the fact that even the pros train mostly at moderate intensities.

Some of these analogies (the earlier reference to treating a sedan like a racing car is another) seem to me to be false. People aren't candles or machines. Biological systems renew themselves, they don't simply wear out from overuse. It's arguable that "burning brightly" is more a recipe for long life than is just "flickering away".

I agree.

NOS88

Analogies always run the risk of being false. But their intent is to illustrate or clarify not to correspond directly to the thing being described. I would offer that biological systems only renew themselves to a point. Consider those who need knee, hip, or other joint replacements. My brother knows he has a genetic condition that will likely create serious problems with his knees. He knows the onset of this will come quicker as he puts stress on them. Yet he won’t even consider a reduction in playing basketball in an intenesly competitive league and then having to ice his knees and limp the next two days after each game. It is very much an attitudinal thing for him. Why baby his knees when he can use them doing what he likes until they give out? He also knows that with knee replacements his basketball playing days will likely end. I’m confident he’ll find something else that pushes his body to the point of damage. Self-destructive or living life to its fullest? I’m pretty sure that in reality they may not be mutually exclusive

Garfield Cat

Does that qualify for using the race card?

phillybill

fitness... 5 hours a week.... do not care about the speed or mileage....

FrenchFit 

Hey, I'm just going to agree with everyone, and I did go outside the thrust of the OPer and comment about the thrust of this "fitness" dialogue through-out the BF. But, seems funny, I just got an email ad from 24hr Fitness Gyms, every sentence has one of the magic fitness words, e.g. "goals", "willpower", "motivation", "success", "commitment", ...please, we're talking about sweating and breathing hard, not about winning an Olympic gold medal.

chasm54

No indeed. Though I'm inclined to the view that most self-destructive behaviours (alcoholism and other drug addictions, self-harm, defeatism of various kinds) are a product of the opposite of "living life to the fullest". Pressing on with his basketball may be destructive to his knees, but maybe not to his self, in the wider sense?

And when the basketball is no longer an option, turn him on to cycling. Very kind to the knees, and we'll race him.

NOS88

Knowing his abilities he'll probably kick my arse!

billydonn

All well and good. Just don't say that's all anyone else "should" do and declare that doing more is pointless for people over 50. If you do that you might get an argument.

WC89

You know, I'm not ashamed to admit that while I ride for personal fitness and fun, a portion of my riding is performance-mined, in that I push myself to actually beat some of the guys I ride with sometimes, especially in the hills. Guess what, some guys beat me too. It's all in the fun of riding. I can take my licks. I also like hearing compliments on how strong I've become or how well I rode a particular tough hill. I make a point to reciprocate with the compliments since it' all about having good clean fun while getting/staying fit. We try not to get overly serious with it all.

Dudelsack 

Don't know about that. I might even agree with you, Heaven forbid.

chasm54

LOL. While we're on the subject of strawmen and other logical fallacies, let's not forget arguing ad hominem. ​Very important to remember that even the habitually wrong can be right.

sreten

Hi,

As the OP I don't mind being disagreed with, it's fully expected.

I don't agree with the "no pain, no gain" brigade, but do agree
within a training regimen pushing as hard as possible will get
you to as good as your going to get within that regimen, as
long as pushing hard doesn't cause you any problems.

I'm not interested in being as good as I'm going to get anymore.
My contention is as long as you over extend your body compared
to what its used to, you will get fitter, and that doesn't mean to me
remotely exploring the pain barrier, it means to me going a little faster.

I started riding again at Christmas, and have settled to about 100 miles
a week. I'm still getting better and faster without trying too hard, and
I don't really care if where I get to by this coming Christmas I could
of got to some months earlier by torturing myself on each ride.

My conjecture, as I'm no expert, but have done a lot of running, is
that "pain does not equal gain". My conjecture is you can only get
fitter relatively slowly in old age, and all that needs is for you go
a little faster each time, i.e. always pushing a little more overall,
over a week, not each ride, some are bimbles, some I try harder.

My conjecture is if you plan to do something for a long time for
your general fitness, not for competition, you can bumble along
at say 90% of where you'd be trying a lot harder for a given weekly
mileage, and it will make very little difference over the long term.

I'd also say someone riding a bike for say 10 hours a week
with moderate pushing will be better off long term than
someone pushing hard for 5 hours a week.

rgds, sreten.

FrenchFit 

Or sohpmoric, pretentious, affected.

chasm54

My personal experience is that this conjecture is mistaken. It may well be more difficult to build muscle as one gets older, but that is a different matter. I find I respond to training just as fast as ever I did. The difference is in recovery - I need more rest between hard efforts than I used to. But if I ramp up the intensity of my training, the improvements in performance happen remarkably fast.

Here, I tend to agree, though much depends on what "moderate" and "hard" means. And the issue is the balance between the two. Even if one is training for racing, out of (say) twelve hours per week on the bike, no more than two or three of those would typically be spent going "hard".

Gallo

You keep repeating it is counter productive

I don't think any of us can push our hardest every pedal stroke. One of the things about cycling is the ability to coast and most of us do. So you point about 10 moderate vs Hard is moot. Further more why is not 10 hours moderate and 10 hours hard? What about 5 hours moderate 3 hours slow and two hours full tilt vs 10 hours moderate?

I just turned 50 and have had gains in climbing times and overall speed steadily since Christmas. I believe it is because I am pushing harder. Not huge but improving. I feel less beat up after long rides because of my form. How is the at counter productive?

you seem to elude that it is bad for your body and have no study to back up the claim.

you need to define counter productive and what it means within the context of your statement

you need to define hard and what it means within the context of your statement

You have found a formula that works for you great. I am sure it will work for others as well.

I enjoy pushing hard and improving, When I cant improve I will enjoy declining slowly or quickly and tracking it.

Cycling seems to be one of the sports that if you keep at you will lose speed but not as much as other sports

There are guys older than me that drop me like a rock off a cliff

I think blanket statements of what is right for everybody are difficult to substantiate and will always be controversial.

gregf83 

Pushing as hard as possible is difficult, uncomfortable, sometimes painful but ultimately satisfying for some people. Those with type A personalities are competitive and like to push themselves. There is pleny of suffering in cycling. Others are happy to just ride and smell the roses. There isn't a right or wrong way to ride as long as you are enjoying yourself

DnvrFox

Curious

What's your working definition of "old age?"

Years - and if so, what year(s)?

Functional - and if so, what functions or loss of function would define old age?

Something else - i.e., someone older than you are?

Dudelsack 

You mean: even a blind pig finds an acorn ever now and then.

chasm54

No, I don't. That's not much of a saying, actually. Pigs have a superb sense of smell, they'd have no difficulty finding acorns with their eyes shut. They're better than truffle hounds at finding truffles - the only reason people use dogs for the prupose is that it's tough to stop a pig from eating the truffles.

wphamilton

That's because if a little is good, more is better!

There's a lot of room between what most of us consider pushing to the max and what it would take to damage ourselves by cycling too hard too much. If someone likes doing it, I can't think of any physiological reason why not.

sreten

Hi,

My personal experience of 25 years of running, off and on, was that that it
got initially harder and took longer to get to where I could get to, each time
I started again, and over over the years, where I could get to inevitably
declined. YMMV but I could go from whatever to pretty decent in 1
month in my twenties, it took about two months in my forties.

rgds, sreten.