hhnngg1

Again, that's because of inadequate planning on the rider's part.

Heck, I do fine on those 19+% grades and 6000+ft of climbing in 70 miles even with zero miles covered and zero elevation change - all because of adequate time on a trainer (where I'm going nowhere.)

It does take some knowledge of how long you expect to be out there, but there's no reason you cant prepare (or overprepare) for it.

Do agree though that most beginning riders, who usually don't know how long a climbing ride will take them, and don't train with HR or power to objectively gauge effort, will be surprised with how hard a hilly ride is vs a flat one mainly because they let the terrain dictate their effort more than vice-versa. For me, the flats are superior for training so long as they have few/no stops, because there's no descent to waste effort on the backside. (I still end up doing mostly climb rides since those are the lowest traffic routes but there's a no-traffic closed 8 mile stretch of flat that's the best for training on route.)

banerjek

Or they just don't want to know. I know I don't....

John_V 

Very interesting thread. I guess that after reading about some of the climbs you guys are doing, I'll have to quit complaining about climbing some of the steep bridges we have here in flatland Florida.

banerjek

You can keep complaining about mosquitoes since they're a nonissue once the elevation gets high enough and I believe you can't get away from them.

Though being eaten alive by deer flies while you're slowly grinding through elevations they're found at is certainly no fun...

Grambo

You're fine on 19% grades??? Put the bong down buddy! Mt Washington averages 12% and anybody who has ever ridden the race (I've done it 3 times) will tell you it is very difficult and is challenging for any rider ... pro or amateur. Anyone who thinks that you can train flat miles and do fine in a ride involving serious climbs is smoking something. Where do the top TDF riders train to get ready for Alpe d'Huez or Col du Tourmalet .... not the beach.

Mt. Washington write up from Northeastcycling.com

Mount Washington, NH

Mt. Washington is the biggest climb in the NE, and often dubbed the toughest hillclimb in North America or even the world. I would not challenge the notion it’s the toughest road climb in North America, and foul weather most of the time plays a big factor in this. It is the grand-daddy of hillclimbs in the northeastern part of the country, and careers have been launched with wins on this mountain. In 1997, Tyler Hamilton broke a 17 year old record, and then in 1999, broke his own record again. A new kid on the block came along in 2002, Tom Danielson, and took another minute off Tyler’s fastest time. See this autoroad link for a history of records on Mt Washington. The mostly paved auto road rises 4727 feet in 7.6 miles, nearly a 12% average grade. There is a 22% grade section at the top! This climb is truly monotonically rising, no flat or downhill sections to catch your breath on the way up. There is a lengthy section of well groomed gravel that has not been a problem for my 23mm tires at all, but can get soft in rain. Bicycles are allowed on this privately owned auto road up to four times a year currently. These are the July and August races and their respective practice climb days. Riders must take auto transportation down.

Weather at the top can be downright nasty, even mid-summer. One year when I did the climb in August it was in the 60’s at the base, but 39 and extremely windy at the top, and it snowed that night! There have been times when the race was cancelled. Mt Washington is also home to some of the worse weather on Earth. Until recently, the highest non-tornadic wind speed ever recorded on Earth was at the summit of Mt Washington at 231mph. Hurricane force winds are present 100 days a year on average. This in part makes Mt Washington one of the toughest bicycle climbs in the world.

Due to great demand for this bicycle hillclimb, two races are held each year. The traditional Mt Washington Auto Road Bicycle Hillclimb is held in August. Since 2006, a second race called Newton’s Revenge has been held in July. The races benefit different causes and are independent of each other. Both races are held on Saturday mornings, with Sunday available for backup. Both races also offer unsupported practice climbs approximately one month before the race. Both races also have catered awards banquets after the race. Registration opens for Newton's Revenge only after the August race fills. Here's more information on the Newton's Revenge and August MWARBH races.

eja_ bottecchia

Good advice. When climbing hills usually your head gives up before your body does. So it helps to know the lay of the land. Nothing worse than hammering up a portion of a climb, then turning a corner and realizing that you still have more climbing to do. Knowing your climb helps you to climb "smartly."

For training, you can do sprints, lots of them. Sprint intervals come close to replicating what you find on a typical climb. If you have a trainer, there are good climbing training videos out there.

Finally, your gear is important. I have a 53/39 in front and I normally ride a 11-25 (11 speed) cassette. When I climb I change to a 12-27 or even 12-29 cassette (except on my first climb up to Mt. Baldy where I stupidly forgot to change cassettes--OUCH). If you are new at this, you may wish to change to a more comfortable gear ratio.

Enjoy the ride and ride safely!

DaveSSS 

I'll just have to disagree with those who think you don't need hills or mountains to prepare for them. I would add one bit of advice, regarding pedaling cadence. I'm a spinner on the flats and usually maintain a cadence in the 90-100 rpm range and go higher for intervals. When climbing however, I pedal in the 75-85 rpm range and usually average around 87 rpm during an interval. I see many unsuccessful climbers, pedaling at 60 rpm or lower, either because they are under-geared, or they just don't know how to pick the right gear.

If you're going to train on flat ground, pick a gear that forces a lower cadence and higher torque for a given power output. If you're a masher who rides at 80-90 rpm most of the time, you might be right at home, when climbing.

Power to weight ratio is the important thing to monitor. A big guy might put out a lot of watts, but if his power to weight ratio is well under 4W/Kg, he won't climb very fast.

eja_ bottecchia

And none of those tricks are fun.

One thing that people have not mentioned here is the impact that thinner air can have on a rider at higher altitudes.

The first time that I rode a bike in Santa Fe, even on a fairly flat ride, I thought that I was riding with a giant belt tightly compressing my chest. It took a couple of days to get used to the altitude...had I known better, I would have brought a supply of EPO.

rangerdavid

Wanna get good at climbing mountains?



Climb mountains.

big john

This is what works for me. All the theory, preparation, and gearing doesn't mean squat when I am dog tired and there is another 3000 feet of gain ahead of me. After that climb I can relax and spin the flats until the end but the climbs kick ass on a 200 pound climber.

Sure, some of you can go from cruising the beach path to the Everest Challenge and not even get tired, but we are all different. Of course, I realize the training helps, hr and power monitors help, mental preparation helps, etc., but nothing equals climbing for me, for whatever reason.

As to altitude, it seems to bother me less than some people and I don't really notice until above about 9000 feet, usually.

coasting 

I used to ride every weekend on rolling hills and then I signed up to a pretty hilly organised century. I was used to doing a centruy a month on rolling hills and the routine rides were 60 miles. I thought I could handle a more climbing ride but because I had not done climbs where the climbing was followed by more climbing, I was totally unprepared mentally and physically.

Bob Dopolina 

OP,

Those telling you that you can use math to train on the flats and that that work will somehow translate to climbing have their skulls firmly wedge in an orifice of their fundement.

Climbing is a technique first and foremost. It also has a significant mental portion. The recruitment of muscles for seated climbing differs from riding the flats. The rhythms are different. Standing, shifting and a whole host of fundamental practices are different. Gravity sucks and is a game changer.

The elevation gains notched in previous posts wielded by some as badges of authority are modest at best. A few thousand 'feet' over the course of a century means it was pretty flat to rolling. Significant climbing is done in meters and is counted in thousands.

If you want to improve your climbing, then climb. There are no shortcuts despite what those who have read otherwise espouse.

Biscayne05

Comedy.

Bob Dopolina 

Tragedy.

Gallo

I would agree that climbing can only be understood by climbing. Massive miles on the flats at high heart rate will certainly be good if that is all you can do. I would ride a century flat just so you can get the feeling of the miles it takes to endure long rides.
For me hill climbing is a different beast. I am not a great hill climber and have worked to get better. I think many that claim hills are the same as flats are probably naturally good climbers. Not all of us are.

I have certain rules I enforce on myself. I do not stop unless I am really needy and that is rare but can happen. If I do stop I never walk my bike unless it is so steep I cannot climb it. I make sure I am well hydrated and have fluids with me. One bottle will have electrolytes or I also bring nutrition to stave off a bonk and eat when needed.


Mental
Climbs can get in your head and break the spirit. When I am suffering I will pick small goals as I climb and as I achieve them pick another goal. I convince myself the overall goal is somewhere ahead and I can get there one step at a time

Gearing
It does not come from a book it comes from your comfort. One of the biggest mistakes for me is to put in one gear only for a long climb. I have seen many who just spin away and I am jealous but I cannot. By my switching up the gears and getting out of the saddle and changing my cadence I "take a break" and then sit back down again and spin. I find this helps the monotony and I use different muscle groups easing the effort. Finding a comfort zone is not easy because when you climb you should never really be comfortable and are always pushing the envelope a little bit.

Preparing
Before a big ride with allot of climbing nothing can replace saddle time, get as much as you can. Preferably equal to the terrain that you will ride but if not possible just do it. Every extra mile or time on the trainer will be money in the bank.

Ride Day
Do not burn out early by chasing someone you cannot match. Ride your own pace

Looigi

I hear ya. That ride was the just warmup. The following week I did 450 miles with 40,000' of climbing riding over passes nearing 12,000', along with my wife. Then we spectated at a few stages the USAPCC. A good coupla weeks...

The main point however, is that though we live and ride at sea level, we had no difficulty with the altitude. We just were slower than we would have been at lower climes.

Looigi

Yes. I was composing a post saying the same thing but gave up in realizing the futility of it...

DataJunkie

Cool. I would spectate more of the USPCC but I am usually too busy.

Anyhow, folks here are making it more complicated than it is.

cashmonee

I mught be able to offer a different perspective for the OP. I am also a new rider (about 7 months), and also started out exclusively on flats. Now, I have yet to do any rides with ridiculous climbing, but I have recently been venturing into the Central Sierras. My rides went from 50-60 miles with only a few hundred feet of total elevation gain (flat) to rides that were 50ish miles and 3000-3500' of elevation gain.

Fitness was not the issue. I am onboard with what most have said about being fit enough. Mentally is where I can struggle. There are two things I struggle with the most mentally. One is knowing when the hill ends (and therefore where my effort should be), and two, the descent. I am terrible at descending, and frankly, sometimes afraid of the curves. Both of these are only fixed by riding in the terrain. After only a few rides in the foothills, I can gauge other rides. I know what a 5 mile 6% average grade should more or less be like. I become more comfortable with each descent. I cannot work either of these out on flatland. If I were you, I would make a least a few trips to the type of terrain you are talking about just to get comfortable with the mental aspect.

As far as total elevation, 9000' is a lot. Someone mentioned that your legs need to feel fresh after 4000' to do 9000'. You won't know that unless you have done it. Fitness-wise, I believe you can get there in the flats, but I don't think you will be fully prepared without at least one ride in the area.

hhnngg1

I'm not lying when I say I'm fine on 19% grades. You put that triple in granny gear, go at walking pace (4-5mph), and I'm barely even in the upper range of my all-day aerobic HR zone while climbing that hill. Not a big deal - most here could likely do it.

It's a totally different scenario to talk about RACING hills. I never said I'd be able to hammer Mt Washington, but then again, even the best riders here would be hard pressed to in the caliber of bike racing you refer to, hills or no hills.

Again, I stand firm that you do NOT need to ride hills to get good at hills. You just need to train at the appropriate intensity (power) + duration to adequately prepare you for the race distance. If your race is 30 miles with 4000 ft of climbing (def hilly course), you will need less training volume than if you're doing a 12,000 METER climb over 200-300 miles, sometimes in back to back days.

And again, I'm a pretty good example of how you don't need those hills to do ok on the climbs. Again, I do probably 70% of my training for most of the year outside of summer indoors on a trainer (it goes up to close to 100% from Nov-Feb.) If you absolutely needed to be climbing to survive on climbs, I should barely be able to climb any hills at all given that I've essentially done no hills and no real miles since I'm stationary on a trainer. Reality though is that I can pop into a hilly century and ride it at a respectable speed with no added outdoor training.

Another example - the local recreational bike clubs here in Norcal do a LOT of hilly riding all winter long. They have rides every day that some members do every day. But they're not racers, so they take their time. Even after climbing those hills every day, average mileage 50miles per ride, these guys and gals are not fast. THey're not bad, but without the intensity, they have no chance even against age-adjusted racers who don't climb anywhere near as much as they do. I'll take more wattage for longer time on flats against lower wattage for less time on hills any day.


I do agree with BDop that there are no shortcuts though. It's no easier to train on the flats than the hills if you're keeping the intensity up, and the fact that it's easier to let off makes it mentally even harder to stay in the hard effort zones with things are burning and aching.

hyhuu

As someone who is also new to cycling (less 2 years) I'll offer my personal experience: If one has never climbed long hill(s), it's difficult to really understand how to train (even with all of the readings) on flat for hills. But after one has climbed a long hill, it's easier to simulate on the flat. The key thing for me was recovery: on flat, that's easy to do; on steep terrain, if I got into the red I'm in big trouble and only real experience can teach me the pace that works for my body. In addtion, descending is also a separate skill that will take many many practices and I never could simulate that on flat terrain.

Elduderino2412

I would suggest "wasting" 4 hours one day to do some climbing. Wish i was only 2 hours away from some mountains, i would be happy to drive that.

gregf83 

Not really. The first and foremost deciding factor in how well you will climb is power/weight ratio period. Someone could do 95% of their training locally without big hills, pre-ride the course once or twice and be just fine.

If you've got 3 W/kg threshold power, you can ride the hills all you like and hone your pacing and 'technique' to perfection and you'll still finish in the back of the pack.

Your assertion that the only way to improve climbing is to climb is not at all helpful to someone who doesn't have access to hills.

svtmike

I think BDop is right -- and he has a ton of experience that backs it up -- you have to climb hills to get really good at it, because it is so much easier to go over your threshold and blow up than it is on the flats. It's tough to get started on a really steep incline, you need to shift where your balance is on the bike if it's really steep, etc. etc. And that's just ascending.

Sure, it's possible to train for increased power on the flats (check my location! that's what I have to do) and that will translate into increased power on the hills, but it won't help you with your pacing if you are racing or working on personal bests -- especially if you don't have a power meter to help you know for certain when you are outside your sustainable zone.

Jobiensis

You should always train on the hills, because they are a ton more fun than the flats.

Unless you can maintain 200 watts, weigh 120 lbs, have a triple or a monster cassette, you aren't spinning up a big hill.

6% incline, 150 watts, 170lb rider, 20 lb bike with a 34/28 is just less than 60rpm, which is slogging.

I don't think achieving the fine balance of slogging it out, standing, controlling breathing and heart rate, is something a new rider is going to learn on the flats.