Maelochs

Cool ... I can always use more practice at acting human.

dirtydozen

and you'll finish 5 times second of the TdF

Doge

For this thread - there was one goal. Finish 100 miles. The plan was it would take 7~8 hours. The OP did fine, but did not execute to the plan on post 1. The OP was unable to hold the goal speed, or distance and had muscle fatigue (waste product, most likely). I would guess if the OP had continued in pain finishing speed would be 2-3 mph lower than plan and > 8 hours. Many of us have been there where we finish 3-4 mph slower and bonk. There are lots of factors, but eating would be one.

I already posted this, but it seems to get lost in all the science.
Caffeine (and other), carbs get you pumped up / ready to go, energy up. You really don't want that in your 1st of 8 hours. "Effort" for any 8 hour even needs to be much lower no matter who you are and OP did start faster than goal. Don't chase the cool kids on the race bikes, don't start on drugs. "De-tuning" early in the ride will help later.

I assume all giving advice here have done / tried centuries using carbs.
How many who opposed my diet tried it carb-less (no carbs, coffee in the AM) to start and introduced carbs later in the ride?
I said it would likely be slower, but it would be less likely to cause fatigue.
Anyone tried it?

Doge

There is this belief that a person needs to train/adapt to this. Maybe so. I was a distance cyclist, but during the week I ate / drank carbs, and then would go low-carb in the morning before a long ride and do fine. When I did them, I had no car or could not afford gas. My goals were get there. GUs etc were too expensive and it was easier to just go carb free and grab a cheap bagel in Julian. Not bonking was serious enough if I didn't get there - id be sleeping under a rock.

This was my weekly commute to the beach on Friday, Sat and back on Sunday for a couple years. https://ridewithgps.com/routes/21607478. I had a cross country trip with a string of 200mile days this time where I'd eat a dozen eggs for breakfast and a half gallon of ice cream at night for my >20mph ave 200 mile rides (mostly I-40/route 66 to US-50 to DC.).

Maelochs

For this thread there was one person's goal ... and a lot of people bringing in unrelated stuff, like triathletes running out of carbs.

This guy had one goal ... to finish ... and another goal---to do a certain speed---and another goal, to feel alright afterwards (else he wouldn't have stopped.)

Very little of what some folks posted had to do with the OP achieving His goals with His level of fitness.

Lots of interesting information about a lot of other situations, though.

TMonk

cliff bars, snickers bars, PB & honey sandos, bananas, stuff like that.

i'll eat gels and weird "space food" like that if it's given to me for free, like it was in college and still is sometimes due to racing team sponsors. I'm not into drink mixes that have complex carbs, fat or protein - just weirds me out. I stick to water unless it's extraordinarily long or hot - then maybe some gatorade.

RichardR1015

These are all true and yet they got lost in the thread. I don't expect to be riding the Tour de France in the future, just self satisfaction was the goal. Even though 100 didn't get done, was a very good learning experience and I now know A) I'm not ready for a 100 and I need to dial in my eating when on my ride so overall still good.

Carbonfiberboy 

Chapple wrote a whole book about this back in '06, Base Building for Cyclists. He lays out a case for the essential task of base building being fat adaptation through training, and that this type of fat adaptation adds to power output throughout the power range. Worked for you, worked for Heathpack, worked for Froome, worked for me. This is regardless of being fed or not.

Since you (and the rest of us) are so interested in this and you have the subjects and equipment, perhaps you could do an experiment. What if you broke your cyclists into 2 groups, one fed with carbs 2 hours before the test, one not fed or fed with only fat. Then have them execute a ~45' climb at say 90% FTP or so and at the finish measure lactate levels. Is there an obvious statistical difference? Were both groups able to hold their power? IOW, does being fed alter the mix of energy pathways as I think you are alleging? I ask this question because yesterday I did the final pass climb of a 65 mile/5000' ride at a steady 96% LTHR, well fed with carbs, and experienced no burn, though the last 10 minutes required a little teeth-gritting as I got tired. Took me 42', which might be a PR.

Unfortunately, I don't know enough about athletic metabolism to say for sure whether any alteration in energy pathways might be trumped by differing abilities in lactate burning as developed by over/under intervals as Heathpack pointed out earlier. But perhaps that might wash out if one had enough subjects with similar training.

f4rrest

I've done the Mt Wilson ride 3 times in the last 2 weeks. The main continuous ascent is 4759ft in 22.6 miles.

First ride: start fasted with coffee, then maltodexrin/Gatorade halfway up. Then a gel and pancake at top. I started easy and pushed the end. The main ascent was 2:09. Felt pretty good rest of the ride (60 mi).

Second ride 2 days later: had oatmeal and coffee, started maltodexrin/Gatorade earlier. Didn't push the end. Main ascent 2:13, and felt awesome the rest of the ride (65 mi).

Third ride 4 days later: same breakfast and feed as 2nd ride. But this time took the aluminum bike with larger wheels (add 10 lb) and flexy SPD shoes. This ride was noticeably harder. Main climb took 2:30.

Result: while I never skipped coffee, having breakfast didn't seem to matter. Riding the heavy bike with flexy shoes was a pain.

rgconner

You would want some other groups in there, maybe 25/75,50/50,75/25 mixed in there.

Consuming all of one or the other does not sound like a good idea, there should be an ideal blend of fat/carb/protein that is probably pretty good for 80% of the population, with some people doing better on specific blends.

Carbonfiberboy 

That's cool. You're pretty well trained! I am surprised at how much time the heavy bike and flexy shoes added.

Carbonfiberboy 

Most scientific experiments give clearer results if the number of variables is strictly controlled.

rgconner

Maybe so, but you would have a hard time constructing a null hypothesis with just those two options and have it stand up to scrutiny.

For example, if your NH was "100% Carbohydrates is the best source of energy for cycling" and then all you tested was 100% fat as an alternative, I would question the validity of your results.

Then again, I am discussing the scientific method on a bike forum... so what do I know?

People would probably think it is a valid test, just as you do.

Doge

I think I mentioned - I do these experiments, but along performance times <2 hours, not 8 hour fondos. Picture is one segment we play with for fuel, equipment, effort etc. We have several different segments for different stuff.
Palomar.JPG

This is not that.

Edit - I just reread - you are suggesting a 45' effort to figure out the best diet for an 8 hour ride and do that based on lactate measure?

If that has been your thinking, it is obvious why you are suggesting carbs. At 90% ftp - I'd have a similar suggestion. As I posted, I have no experience at competition at that 8 hour time - other than RAAM. So I don't know what FTP to go with but I'd guess it is around 50%. I think I ran about 50%ftp on my 8 hour rides, and my goal was not speed, or time. It was getting there.

Anyway the experiment for this thread would be hard. Find 20 riders for each group for a 100 mile fondo who say max ride they've done is <50 miles and expect to average 8 hours. Both groups with electrolytes and water.

Group A - no carbs or stimulants before ride. At mid-time introduce small carbs. At last 20% introduce caffeine GUs...
Group B - Start with 150-200mg caffeine, run on carbs and GUs - minimal fat / protein.

See highest rate of finishers.
I would do no coaching to keep them on pace, or give any other advice.

Doge

The other thing I'd change is not tell them what FTP to go at. Just say - "go 90% of what you think you can hold for an hour".

I would expect the non-drugged fat eaters to be a lower % of FTP then the caffeinated carb eaters.
I would expect the waste product in the fat eaters to be lower.
I would expect the carbo eaters to be faster.

As this is 45 min - I would expect all to finish.

Do this at 8 hours and I think the results will be different. The goal being what was in post 1 on this thread. To finish.

Doge

@Carbonfiberboy and @Heathpack,
I thought of a better way to put this in your terms.

Do you think FTP is higher on mostly carbs, or mostly fat?

Do you think waste product is higher on higher FTP (esp. for someone doing double their max time)?

I was suggesting a diet that would encourage riding a lower % of FTP, therefore producing less waste and increasing the chances of finishing.

Carbonfiberboy 

1) Depends on the mix. With adequate carbs, no difference. Fat consumption will not increase FTP, but too low carb consumption (not on the test day, but over time) will decrease FTP.

2) No or hard to tell. Both lactate production and burn rate have to do with FTP. My guess is that production is less with higher FTP - but it could also be burn rate, or both. I don't know of a way to test the difference, though there probably is one.

3) My opinion is that diet has very little to do with it as long as macros and micros are all present in proper amounts. I think training is the key to producing less lactate at any given effort, and also the key to burning more of it. It's not just a question of finishing. Any diet will allow one to finish. It's about reducing time to the finish for TTs, or in races, it's frequently how well one can surge.

Years ago, I was frustrated by not being able to go clear on competitive group rides until a buddy of mine told me the secret: get better at surging than those whom you are attacking and just keep surging and letting them catch you until they can't. That's about lactate production and clearing at high effort levels, and it works.

After I got too old for that, I became enamored of randonneuring, though I never rode over 400k because I didn't and don't recover well. There's nothing like a 250 mile time trial in the mountains to teach one how to finish fast. I never met one randonneur who ate more than the usual fat macro, but they all eat copious amounts of carbs with some protein. A guy I rode with when I was stronger won the 508 and did well in solo RAAM. He ate carbs. IIRC, on the 508 his crew chief said: 19 bottles of Ensure plus some Perpetuem and sports drinks. Good balanced diet and about what my wife uses when we ride tandem.

Edit: about finishing 8 hour rides. OK. Back in 2004, so at 59, I rode a 154 mile fondo, 9000'+, in 8:40 saddle time, riding the first 117 miles, where all the climbing was, at 16.4 average and the last 36 at a 23 mph average. I put together a 4 person rolling paceline for that last bit, me and 3 racer boys. We picked up about 30 riders behind us, but after 20 miles or so it was only the 4 of us. That was my best performance on that ride. I was using my malto/protein mix with a little Hammer Gel. IIRC, I ate nothing else. That's also what I had for breakfast, 3 hours before the start (then I went back to sleep). My notes say I took 3 caffeine pills during that ride, 200mg each, the last one before the final 36 miles.

Edit 2: I'm not suggesting that the untrained go out and average 86% of LTHR like I did for 154 miles. That took 10 years of training to achieve. But the principles are the same. Eat food that keeps you moving and prevents bonking. Go hard where you need to and back off where you don't.

Carbonfiberboy 

No, that would only show if one were better than the other as a sole fuel, nothing more. But that was not what I was suggesting. It wouldn't even be an interesting result because to become efficient in the use of either fuel requires quite a bit of time and effort. That's what's wrong with so many athlete studies: they don't allow for training effect.

Zurichman2

Richard this thread has become way off track. Looking at some of the posts it is starting to looking like a bragging thread. Looking at what you posted I think you can make a 100 mile ride and are almost ready. From what you posted you pretty much know that you didn't eat enough. So no I probably am not buying into that your legs went out on you. I would suggest that you bonked a little bit. A little fine tuning practicing eating on your training rides and finding out what works for you will help you on your Century ride. I have been able to eat some of the support food at supported rides and think a quick pit stop at the rest stops are worth it as long as you don't stay in there too long or eat too much. If nothing else getting off the bike and stretching your legs some has to help break up the ride some. Don't get me wrong on my training rides I do 100 milers unsupported and stop for some food at the 50 mile turn around but I have done a few. The other thing is you can increase you long distance rides around 10% every week and just go out and get some saddle time in and don't worry about how fast you are riding them. If you are thinking that you want to do a 100 miler in 7-8 hrs. get use to 5-6 hrs. in the saddle Maybe eve ride a couple 50 milers back to back on a weekend to get your legs use to the stress. If you then can ride say a 70 - 75 mile training ride 2 weeks before your next Century ride you got it as the excitement of the ride will get you past the last 25 miles. It wouldn't hurt to seek out a smart rider that has done some Century rides and ask them to help you to get thru your first Century. Finally to kind of steal a line from Yogi Berra Cycling is 85% physical and the other 65% is mental. I think you at least have the 75% physical and if you can pick up just a little bit more physical and mental you have this. When it gets tough don't think you still have 30 miles to go just say to yourself I just need to make it to the next 5 miles and do 5 mile segments in your head or whatever works for you. We can give you all kind of suggestions but what it finally comes down to you have to find out what works for you. This is why I luv long distance cyling.

I hope this helps.

Good luck
You got this
Zman

Maelochs

This is interesting.

I was helping lead a beginner group ride a couple decades ago and did some research because at the time I was not a beginner ( a status I have sadly reclaimed since.)

The advice I got was to stop every 45 minutes to an hour twenty minutes or whatever, to give everyone just enough time to stretch and eat a tiny snack (not ice cream, not a cheeseburger---a banana or something) and after five or seven minutes (which is 15, if you have ever tried to get a group moving) get everyone back riding---just enough time to stretch and not enough time to cool down/stiffen up.

This way, i was told, you can get novices to do a bunch of 12-15 mile rides back to back, where a 25-mile ride might max them all and leave them ready to quit.

I have found that for myself, stopping to change two flats when I was really tired left me feeling fresh and ready to finish a long ride ... and on another occasion I had to run into a store to buy a battery for my light two-thirds of the way through a ride, and when I got back on the bike I felt fresh again.

I have since read posts suggesting Never Stopping .... but my experience and my research indicate that a short (five-seven minutes) break can make the whole difference.

so .... next time bring some tacks, and when you get tired, throw them in the road ahead of you.

Scarbo

Ya think? A lot of pompous palaver in here, for sure. Yours is the most sensible posting on this thread and contains the most useful information.

Zurichman2

This is why organized rides has rest stops every 15-25 miles during their rides. Truth be told most riders don't eat enough food/calories while on their bikes and this helps some. In my experience though once you get behind in calories on a ride it's pretty much too late or really tough to get caught back up. On all the rides I have been on rest stops have been stocked with numerous stuff. The best stocked rest stops are the ones that are done by riders that actually know what riders want/need to eat. The worse are run by non cyclists that are only trying to make money off the ride. One actually have Hershey kisses and doughnuts at the rest stops. On this post I wouldn't recommend throwing the tacks down just stop at every rest stop and get in and out. I saw a post one time that if you wanted to learn to change out a flat go out in a pouring down rain, flatten a perfectly good tire in your driveway and you will learn how to change out a flat. I never tried that and still am not the expert here but I normally can get it done. Thank goodness I don't flat very often.

Zman

OldTryGuy

i really enjoy all of the bantering and information. Thanks to all contributors!!!

redlude97

This is the part that I don't really believe is true. At 50% ftp that you are suggesting there is no need to eat fat. Better off just doing it fasted as your body will easily release fatty acids at that intensity to keep you fueled. Unless you can provide evidence, working at 50% ftp with or without sugars will not produce any significant difference in lactate.

Doge

I think you misunderstood what I said (or I miss-typed). I'm thread-weary so not going to read it all now.
So it is the other way/I agree with you. Fasted would work, but that is not what the OP said they were doing and in 8 hours - there is no issue using food.
At 50% FTP you don't need carbs, at least for the start. I posted 50% as a guess after a suggestion a 90%FTP 45min hill climb would show use something about an eight hour event. Which I do not agree with.
I suggested carbs - last half. And caffeine last quarter. Not to go faster, to finish.
I was also saying that staying off of stimulants and carbs would create a slower start, and enable the rider to stay on plan. Some argue stimulates and carbs product the same output as fat. I think you run faster on carbs and stimulants - which is why folks use them.

Most/many of the responses were not considering the time of this event. 6-7 hours on the bike and stops (in the OP).
AND the OP asked what to eat, not how to ride.
So the TT and hill climbing and 90% FTP and encouragement on riding etc., were mostly not inline with the facts as stated in post 1, that is, unless you see all eating the same, regardless of event.

IMO had the OP started stimulant-and-carb free he/she would have most likely gone 1-2 mph slower than was done by mile 70 and would not have had, or had much less muscle fatigue.