I have gc 3.0, but I don't see where it estimates my vo2max?

Enjoy the ride -- don't kill yourself and you can enjoy the awesome scenery out there. Certainly better than the cornfields! You'll be up the mountain and enjoying the descent before you know it. Do rides here of at least the length (time, not miles) you will be riding, and you should be more than OK.

it's p[art of the long term metric page i believe. it's probably decent, but i doubt it's too precise.

This statement "Interval just means any time frame spent at a specific wattage" is incorrect.

Tempo and threshold are synonymous. They mean the same thing: medium to long duration workouts done at the point where lactate production meets production uptake that improve your lactate tolerance. These workouts are NOT done as intervals (i.e. short duration, medium intensity, multiple times). If you are doing multiple repeats of a certain distance at threshold pace, then you are simply doing them wrong.

Intervals are what you called "vo2max" intervals. These are shorter and done at an intensity greater than your threshold to improve vo2max. If you are unread on running/cycling/endurance training, I suggest picking up:

http://www.amazon.com/Cyclists-Train...=cycling+bible
http://www.amazon.com/Daniels-Runnin.../dp/0736054928
http://www.amazon.com/Lore-Running-4.../dp/0873229592

Also, did you read what I typed to OP originally? If you did, you would have read that I suggested threshold work as well as intervals. Just doing threshold work will limit his improvement.

To stray from the main topic: resorting to personal attacks actually lowers your own ethos. It shows a lack of confidence and understanding of sports physiology. I am simply arguing my case that there is a misconception about what an interval work out is. Nothing else. I am happy to debate with you in a civil manner whenever you want.

I don't see anything called "long term metric" either.

I think there is confusion here as to the definition of a VO2 max interval. As in one of you is talking about intervals designed to increase power at the VO2 max heart rate zone and the other is thinking about training to actually increase one's VO2 max. 4 weeks is not enough time to get any appreciable increase in VO2 max, nor is task being attempted that difficult that we need to get all super science about this. The OP isn't training to break the Alpe d'Huez TT record, just trying to survive a decent sized climb.

The best advice given here was ride into the wind at low cadence at a approximately a threshold pace (read: the fastest you could hold for 30 minutes pace, technically an hour, but if you aren't experienced with these things or using power meter you'll go too easy thinking about your fastest hour pace). Do this for 20 minutes, take about 5 minutes easy fast spinning to recover and do it again. do this every other day up until the week before your climb, then ride but take it easy the week of your climb.

+1

Wingates are the most efficient avenue to increased fitness in a short time period. They are also the most unpleasant avenue.

[QUOTE=RoadMike;15661247] 4 weeks is not enough time to get any appreciable increase in VO2 max[/QUOTE]

Incorrect.

"Resting blood samples were also collected at the beginning of each pre and posttesting period, before and after the 4-week training program. The EXP group showed significant improvements in VO(2)max (+5.4%), peak oxygen pulse (+7.7%) and T(max) (+32.2%) compared with pretesting."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/21849912/

Just put an 11-28 or something like that on that back of your triple if you don't have it already. If you are going to be going 7-10mph, might as well go 80-100 rpm instead of 60-70, you'll last longer that way.

Also start off a lot slower than you think you need to go on the bottom and ramp up the power throughout the climb. I find I go faster that way. I see a lot of people (and I used to do this too) go gung-ho at the bottom of a long climb and blow up halfway only to creep up the last part very slowly.

3000 feet in 12 miles is 250 feet per mile. That's a reasonable average grade, not an extreme, steep climb. You'll be fine with your triple. Enjoy the ride!

If it was over 400 feet per mile, then the whole climb is steep, and some sections of it would be very steep.

EDIT--those feet per mile numbers are for one-way climbs, not up and back down rides.

My heart rate monitor helps me on long climbs. I have a target heart rate that I know I can sustain for hours, and I mostly try to keep at that pace. Like the other posters said, do your own ride, don't try to match a fast climber.

My "training" for long climbs is to ride a fairly flat route for a couple of hours right at my target heart rate, and avoid coasting as much as possible. I just want practice in long, steady efforts. Other than that, I'll do fast (for me) group rides to get some high intensity riding.

it's funny the very books you listed back up my argument, and contradict yours... (well at least the opne that actually involves cycling)

This.

When you start, the pace should be outright easy -- almost boring. Beware of getting excited because it's easy to get an adrenaline high that allows you to feel great while you're hammering an excellent but totally unsustainable pace. Once you blow your spinning muscles, you are screwed.

Once you get to the halfway mark, you should still feel great. At that point, it's safer to play with your pace and notch it up. Don't worry. No matter how good you feel, you'll have plenty of opportunity to use up your stuff. By far the biggest mistake I see newer riders make is starting too hard.

I do agree with Banerjek, that the OP should be fine on this ride, and proper pacing will definitely help. My responses were aimed at how you use your training time to make it easier, or faster.

I have no dog in this fight, but if you think tempo and threshold are the same, you need to keep reading.

Oh yeah? What if there's no wind? Higher and lower wind speeds? It doesn't sound like a plan as much a semi random approach to training. Especially given the short time frame and his desire to train, he's definitely better off following a regimen that's controllable and will certainly produce results rather than leaving it to chance.

It is, however, long enough to lose 10lbs or so, if there's fat there to lose, with proper diet and a bunch of threshold work.

Indeed. And I'd rather have either of those than VO2 max for a sustained climb.

then do the same thing without wind? You don't need wind to pedal at low cadence at threshold effort, if it's available though, might as well use it. 2x20's for 3 weeks is far from random...tough crowd in here today. Once again, it's a 12 mile 3000 foot climb. It's NOT that big of a deal.

I was wrong about the VO2 max thing...got scienced pretty hard there.

I don't have the books handy at work, but here's a reference:


"Also known as an anaerobic threshold (AT) run or lactate-threshold run, the tempo run was popularized by Jack Daniels, Ph.D., about a decade ago. Here’s his definition, taken from Daniels’ Running Formula (Human Kinetics): "A tempo run is nothing more than 20 minutes of steady running at threshold pace." (He goes on to say that 20 minutes is ideal, but may be varied to suit the needs of a particular course.) Without getting too technical, threshold pace is the effort level just below which the body’s ability to clear lactate, a by-product of carbohydrate metabolism, can no longer keep up with lactate production"

http://www.runnersworld.com/workouts...ctly-tempo-run

I can cite the specific lines from Jack Daniels when I get home tonight, if you'd like. However, the point would be the same, tempo means the same as threshold. This applies for both running and cycling. Just a workout at or barely below lactate threshold.

I wanted to substantiate my claim earlier with another source:

Maximal Steady-State Training
"Steady-state training at the lactate threshold is often referred to as “maximal steady-state” exercise or “tempo runs.” Research has shown that the lactate threshold occurs at 80-90% of heart rate reserve (HRR) in trained individuals and at 50-60% HRR in untrained individuals (Weltman 1995). Without access to an exercise physiology laboratory to get actual lactate threshold measurements for your clients, the RPE scale will be the most accurate way to determine training intensity for maximal steady-state exercise sessions. Research has shown that RPE is strongly related to the blood lactate response to exercise regardless of gender, training status, type of exercise being performed, or the intensity of training (Weltman 1995). Findings from studies have indicated that the lactate threshold occurs between 13 and 15 on the RPE scale, which corresponds to feelings of ‘somewhat hard’ and ‘hard’ (Weltman 1995).

http://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article...threshold.html

It's a pedant-o-rama.

There is no One True Definition of "Tempo" and "Threshold". It depends on whose model you are referencing. Some use the terms to describe different zones, some don't.

^^ part of the problem here is linguistics. You're using a vocabularly from running, not cycling, and from a time when people trained with heart rate and thought lactate was the enemy.

Most of use posting on this thread use the vocabularly currently used by cycling coaches training with power, and we focus on FTP, and power zones, and don't worry much about thing s like heart rate, and lactic acid.

In current common cyclist training usage, particualry training with power, there is definitely a difference between tempo work and threshold work.

"Threshold" has always meant 60-minute power/ pace, and "tempo" has always meant 2-hour power/ pace, in my experience. Threshold is threshold, tempo is a little below it. Of course, that's just my experience, but it's not something to try to argue and get any traction.

Agreed. and I kinda typed the same thing while you were posting.


The substantive debate, however, regardless of the terms, is whether longer intervals, at or around FTP, or shorter intervals targeted at V02 max, are better suited for training for sustained climbing.

With one noticeable vote for vo2max intervals, the rest of us voting for longer intervals (i.e. 2x20).

All intervals will make you faster, it's just that 2x20's and the like are specifically aimed at FTP, which is the key to sustained climbing given that is determined by W(at FTP) /kg

Even now in running, threshold is usually approximated to 10k pace and tempo is approximated to half-marathon pace. Again, that may just be my experience.