Begginers Bike?

Hi All

I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to try cycling to help me.
However I need some advice.

I guess I will mostly be cycling roads and foot paths to start with so which is the best bike for my
£300 budget?

Also - Im a big guy (6'3" and around 21 stone!!) so I want some thing that I can feel safe on and
that won't fall apart under the strain.

Any / All advice would be appreciated/

Steve

"Steve Patrick" <sp014a7590@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:eGwWb.90$MQ1.17@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Hi All
>
> I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to try cycling to help me.
> However I need some advice.
>
> I guess I will mostly be cycling roads and foot paths to start with so
which
> is the best bike for my £300 budget?
>
> Also - Im a big guy (6'3" and around 21 stone!!) so I want some thing that
I
> can feel safe on and that won't fall apart under the strain.
>
> Any / All advice would be appreciated/

The standard response to this question applies:

Get thee to several local bike shops. Test ride several bikes in your price range *and* size.
Consider all types. Comfort, hybrid, MTB. At this price point, stay away from full susp offerings,
*especially* department store offerings. Go back to the shops you like the best. Evaluate not only
the bikes, but the shops and personnel as well

Bring home the one you like the best, from the shop you like the best.

Be aware that your butt *will * feel poorly for a while. The seat doesn't break in, your butt does.
Contrary to the obvious, avoid wide, higly padded seats. You end up sitting on your pedalling
muscles, instead of using them.

Pete

"Steve Patrick" <sp014a7590@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:eGwWb.90$MQ1.17@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Hi All
>
> I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to try cycling to help me.
> However I need some advice.
>
> I guess I will mostly be cycling roads and foot paths to start with

*ahem* I take it you mean bridleways, footpaths are off-limits to cyclists and will stir up a lot
of trouble.

> so which is the best bike for my £300 budget?

Anything from a bike shop which fits properly and doesn't have rear suspension or discs - at this
price they will be an attention grabbing ornament.

> Also - Im a big guy (6'3" and around 21 stone!!) so I want some thing that
I
> can feel safe on and that won't fall apart under the strain.

You should be pretty safe, at this price point manufacturers aren't making silly light bikes. Look
for a full cro-moly frame instead of hi-ten steel BTW, and if a bike has a cro-moly sticker on the
seat-tube it doesn't mean the whole bike is cro-moly - ask. On the other hand if it has a Reynolds
853 sticker it won't rust. Allegedly.

> Any / All advice would be appreciated/ Steve

No worries steve, Steve.

Steve says:

>Anything from a bike shop which fits properly and doesn't have rear suspension or discs - at this
>price they will be an attention grabbing ornament.

Steve's right, Steve

Steve ;-)

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:56:42 +0000, Steve Patrick wrote:

> Also - Im a big guy (6'3" and around 21 stone!!) so I want some thing that I can feel safe on and
> that won't fall apart under the strain.

I take it the bike will only be used on road and light tracks. If you actually start mountain biking
with a 300 quid bike and your weight, it will disintegrate.

--
a.m-b FAQ: http://www.j-harris.net/bike/ambfaq.htm

b.bmx FAQ: http://www.t-online.de/~jharris/bmx_faq.htm

"Steve Patrick" <sp014a7590@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:eGwWb.90$MQ1.17@news-binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> Hi All
>
> I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to try cycling to help me.
> However I need some advice.
>
> I guess I will mostly be cycling roads and foot paths to start with so
which
> is the best bike for my £300 budget?
>
> Also - Im a big guy (6'3" and around 21 stone!!) so I want some thing that
I
> can feel safe on and that won't fall apart under the strain.
>
> Any / All advice would be appreciated/
>
> Steve

I don't know what 300 pounds is in Dollars, but I'll assume its less than $1000. If you have a heavy
upper torso, you won't want a road bike---too much weight on your palms and wrists, and if you have
a really big gut, your gut will hit your knees, interfering with breathing when the bike has a
"normal" set up. Not to mention, I think road cycling by itself, promotes core strength weaknesses
which you need to deal with on your road back to fitness.

Hybrids are no good on the road, and no good off road. They are easy to sell for lazy bike shop
employees looking to sell a "magic carpet ride" to some clueless bastard that needs help. Kind of
sad really.

Mountain bikes will have you in a much better orientation on the bike for your mass. You can use a
hard tail if you want to ride with slicks on the road, but if you do off-road trails with much in
the way of bumps, don't listen to the little guys who think a hard tail is an acceptable ride for
you. If you weigh 140 or 150 pounds, when the rear wheel goes over a bump, it will try to push your
butt up and forward into the handle bars--but since you weigh so little, the inertial mass is easily
overcome, and the rider does not tire themself out much with this type of compensating.

Its a strength to weight ratio kind of issue, like hill climbing. Take a 225 pound velodrome
sprinter, with 7 percent body fat----have him climb a hill against a 140 pound road racer.... Even
though the 225 pound sprinter is far stronger, and far more muscular, his "strength to weight" ratio
is not as good as the 140 pound road racer's. The 225 pound guy will be "smoked", bad. Put them both
on a flat road, and if the sprinter is also a good time trialler, which is very possible, the 140
pound hill climber can be smoked.

The same issue exists in mountain biking, when you deal with the forces throwing you around on a
hard tail, versus a plush full suspension bike. The heavy rider needs to avoid having to counteract
the much larger inertial forces his increased mass will be subject to, if riding a hard tail on a
bumpy or heavily rooted trail. The oxygen you will blow, from using all your upper body muscles to
try to compensate for the bike pitching you around, will cut into your speed and ability to ride
the trail, severely. I believe the better solution for you would be one of the less expensive dual
sus mtn bikes like Diamond Back makes--they have several under $1000, and they will prevent you
from being pitched around so much. I would not want to race one--but that is unrelated to the issue---
you need to get to a comfort level for training, and I think this is the kind of bike that can take
you there. Once you get down to low body fat, if you are still over 200 pounds, you will still need
a dual suspension bike, but if you are lean and getting faster, you might want a more expensive
full sus bike -- then....

Regards, Dan V

Dan Volker retorted :
> "Steve Patrick" <sp014a7590@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:eGwWb.90$MQ1.17@news-
> binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
>> Hi All
>>
>> I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to try cycling to help me.
>> However I need some advice.
>>
>> I guess I will mostly be cycling roads and foot paths to start with so which is the best bike for
>> my £300 budget?
>>
>> Also - Im a big guy (6'3" and around 21 stone!!) so I want some thing that I can feel safe on and
>> that won't fall apart under the strain.
>>
>> Any / All advice would be appreciated/
>>
>> Steve
>
> I don't know what 300 pounds is in Dollars, but I'll assume its less than $1000.

http://www.xe.com/ucc/

> >
> > I don't know what 300 pounds is in Dollars, but I'll assume its less than $1000.
>
> http://www.xe.com/ucc/
>

Thanks Penny :-)

So If he was planning on spending $567 , then he could look for last year's Diamond Back XSL comp (
this year it sells for $680, but shops will sell last years in his price range). I rode one of these
from 2002, and it felt like a good bike, for a big heavy guy, trying to get back in shape.

Regards, Dan V

"Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:MzPWb.50329$qK3.11567@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>
>
> > >
> > > I don't know what 300 pounds is in Dollars, but I'll assume its less than $1000.
> >
> > http://www.xe.com/ucc/
> >
>
> Thanks Penny :-)
>
> So If he was planning on spending $567 , then he could look for last
year's
> Diamond Back XSL comp ( this year it sells for $680, but shops will sell last years in his price
> range). I rode one of these from 2002, and it felt like a good bike, for a big
heavy
> guy, trying to get back in shape.
>
> Regards, Dan V

A link to the bike I am talking about ----
http://www.diamondback.com/items.asp...temid=105&va=0

"Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<2bNWb.39405$8a5.560@bignews1.bellsouth.net>...
> "Steve Patrick" <sp014a7590@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:eGwWb.90$MQ1.17@news-
> binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > Hi All
> >
> > I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to try cycling to help me.
> > However I need some advice.

<snip>

> I think road cycling by itself, promotes core strength weaknesses which you need to deal with on
> your road back to fitness.

As compared to what?

<snip>

> Mountain bikes will have you in a much better orientation on the bike for your mass. You can use
> a hard tail if you want to ride with slicks on the road, but if you do off-road trails with much
> in the way of bumps, don't listen to the little guys who think a hard tail is an acceptable ride
> for you.

Here's a hint ... try not to listen to guys who interchange "mass" and "weight" at random.

> If you weigh 140 or 150 pounds, when the rear wheel goes over a bump, it will try to push your
> butt up and forward into the handle bars--but since you weigh so little, the inertial mass is
> easily overcome, and the rider does not tire themself out much with this type of compensating.
>
> Its a strength to weight ratio kind of issue, like hill climbing. Take a 225 pound velodrome
> sprinter, with 7 percent body fat----have him climb a hill against a 140 pound road racer.... Even
> though the 225 pound sprinter is far stronger,

Define strength. Mean or peak power output? Watt/kilogram? Functional aerobic capacity (measured in
METS)? Or the fall back VO2 max ml/kg/min (maximal oxygen uptake in mililiters per kilogram of body
weight per minute).

> and far more muscular,

Lean muscle/kg? or Type I to type II muscle fiber count?

> his "strength to weight" ratio is not as good as the 140 pound road racer's. The 225 pound guy
> will be "smoked", bad. Put them both on a flat road, and if the sprinter is also a good time
> trialler, which is very possible, the 140 pound hill climber can be smoked.

Yikes! Please tell me that you don't have a background in coaching or athletic
performance/physiology. If the 225 lbs. rider has the anaerobic capacity of a "sprinter" and has the
aerobic capacity to time trial, why would he lose in a hill climb?

<snip>

> Regards, Dan V

Free advice is, generally, worth just what you pay for it.

Go see a doctor before you start your new exercise program.

Test ride as many different bikes in your price range as you can, and go with the one that feels the
best to you.

R

"Reco Diver" <reco_diver@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:db285975.0402141246.48570e55@posting.google.com...
> "Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:<2bNWb.39405$8a5.560@bignews1.bellsouth.net>...
> > "Steve Patrick" <sp014a7590@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:eGwWb.90$MQ1.17@news-
> > binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > > Hi All
> > >
> > > I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to
try
> > > cycling to help me. However I need some advice.
>
> <snip>
>
> > I think road cycling by itself, promotes core strength weaknesses which you need to deal with on
> > your road back to fitness.
>
> As compared to what?

As compared to Karate, or speed skating, or mountain biking....

>
> <snip>
>
> > Mountain bikes will have you in a much better orientation on the bike
for
> > your mass. You can use a hard tail if you want to ride with slicks on
the
> > road, but if you do off-road trails with much in the way of bumps, don't listen to the little
> > guys who think a hard tail is an acceptable ride
for
> > you.
>
> Here's a hint ... try not to listen to guys who interchange "mass" and "weight" at random.

Here's a hint for you...I was just trying to help, while you are trying to "sound" like a
coach...:-)

>
> > If you weigh 140 or 150 pounds, when the rear wheel goes over a bump,
it
> > will try to push your butt up and forward into the handle bars--but
since
> > you weigh so little, the inertial mass is easily overcome, and the rider does not tire themself
> > out much with this type of compensating.
> >
> > Its a strength to weight ratio kind of issue, like hill climbing. Take a
225
> > pound velodrome sprinter, with 7 percent body fat----have him climb a
hill
> > against a 140 pound road racer.... Even though the 225 pound sprinter is
far
> > stronger,
>
> Define strength. Mean or peak power output? Watt/kilogram? Functional aerobic capacity (measured
> in METS)? Or the fall back VO2 max ml/kg/min (maximal oxygen uptake in mililiters per kilogram of
> body weight per minute).

Strength, meaning the workload in watts, that the bike rider is able to generate. In simpler terms,
at 215 pounds, I will squat a great deal more in the gym, than most if not all, 140 pound riders could---
that's strength. I was not referring to VO2 max, since I doubt the original poster would know or
care much about VO2 max at this point. But since you are trying so hard to sound schooled in
physiology, it would be hard to understand why you are not aware of the effect of body weight in a
VO2 max calculation. For those who have not read up on this, the calculation of your oxygen
processing ability is divided by your body weight--meaning the heavier you are, the smaller the VO2
max number---and in fact, the harder it is to compete in an activity where a big premium is placed
on raw aerobic power--such as hill climbing. There are very few cyclists that can weigh 225 pounds
and still have a competitive VO2 max (competitive in cycling at a cat 1 level would be between 65
ml/KG and 80ml/kg --just an approximation).

And there are big, muscular cyclists that can sprint at a national level in the Velodrome, and
still do a flat 40K time trail in 54 minutes--or less. But these same guys will never do well in a
hill climb.

>
>
> > and far more muscular,
>
> Lean muscle/kg? or Type I to type II muscle fiber count?

You need to be riding more and pontificating less ;-)

>
> > his "strength to weight" ratio is not as good as the 140 pound road racer's. The 225 pound guy
> > will be "smoked",
bad.
> > Put them both on a flat road, and if the sprinter is also a good time trialler, which is very
> > possible, the 140 pound hill climber can be
smoked.
>
> Yikes! Please tell me that you don't have a background in coaching or athletic
> performance/physiology. If the 225 lbs. rider has the anaerobic capacity of a "sprinter" and has
> the aerobic capacity to time trial, why would he lose in a hill climb?

It sounds like you want desperately to be taken seriously as some kind of authority -- maybe if you
get out on a bike with enough real racers, you'll gain some of the insights you appear to be
looking for :-)

>
> <snip>
>
>
> > Regards, Dan V
>
> Free advice is, generally, worth just what you pay for it.
>
> Go see a doctor before you start your new exercise program.
>
> Test ride as many different bikes in your price range as you can, and go with the one that feels
> the best to you.
>
> R

And this was good advice!!!!

Dan V

"Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<nDwXb.22022$Bv3.2414@bignews3.bellsouth.net>...
> "Reco Diver" <reco_diver@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:db285975.0402141246.48570e55@posting.google.com...
> > "Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:<2bNWb.39405$8a5.560@bignews1.bellsouth.net>...
> > > "Steve Patrick" <sp014a7590@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message news:eGwWb.90$MQ1.17@news-
> > > binary.blueyonder.co.uk...
> > > > Hi All
> > > >
> > > > I am a 35 year old guy that needs to loose weight and have decided to
> try
> > > > cycling to help me. However I need some advice.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I think road cycling by itself, promotes core strength weaknesses which you need to deal with
> > > on your road back to fitness.
> >
> > As compared to what?
>
> As compared to Karate, or speed skating, or mountain biking....

Go tell that to Glen Winkle ... More to the point, how is it that road cycling "promotes core
strength weaknesses"?
>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > Mountain bikes will have you in a much better orientation on the bike
> for
> > > your mass. You can use a hard tail if you want to ride with slicks on
> the
> > > road, but if you do off-road trails with much in the way of bumps, don't listen to the little
> > > guys who think a hard tail is an acceptable ride
> for
> > > you.
> >
> > Here's a hint ... try not to listen to guys who interchange "mass" and "weight" at random.
>
> Here's a hint for you...I was just trying to help,

"Try is the first step to failure." H.S.

> while you are trying to "sound" like a coach...:-)

What do you mean "sound"? I am a licensed coach in California and Arizona, and coached (while
completeing my grad work) at NAU, one of the better NCCA mountain teams of the mid 1990's.

>
> >
> > > If you weigh 140 or 150 pounds, when the rear wheel goes over a bump,
> it
> > > will try to push your butt up and forward into the handle bars--but
> since
> > > you weigh so little, the inertial mass is easily overcome, and the rider does not tire
> > > themself out much with this type of compensating.
> > >
> > > Its a strength to weight ratio kind of issue, like hill climbing. Take a
> 225
> > > pound velodrome sprinter, with 7 percent body fat----have him climb a
> hill
> > > against a 140 pound road racer.... Even though the 225 pound sprinter is
> far
> > > stronger,
> >
> > Define strength. Mean or peak power output? Watt/kilogram? Functional aerobic capacity (measured
> > in METS)? Or the fall back VO2 max ml/kg/min (maximal oxygen uptake in mililiters per kilogram
> > of body weight per minute).
>
> Strength, meaning the workload in watts, that the bike rider is able to generate.

You haven't given a "T".

> In simpler terms, at 215 pounds, I will squat a great deal more in the gym, than most if not all,
> 140 pound riders could---that's strength.

That is peak output.

> I was not referring to VO2 max, since I doubt the original poster would know or care much about
> VO2 max at this point. But since you are trying so hard to sound schooled in physiology, it would
> be hard to understand why you are not aware of the effect of body weight in a VO2 max calculation.

Who said I was not aware of the effect of body weight. Why do you thik I spelled it out for you just
in case you were slow.

> For those who have not read up on this, the calculation of your oxygen processing ability is
> divided by your body weight--meaning the heavier you are, the smaller the VO2 max number---and in
> fact, the harder it is to compete in an activity where a big premium is placed on raw aerobic power--
> such as hill climbing.

Or time trialing.

> There are very few cyclists that can weigh 225 pounds and still have a competitive VO2 max
> (competitive in cycling at a cat 1 level would be between 65 ml/KG and 80ml/kg --just an
> approximation).

But it happens ... (Name drop) Charles Bean, California State Omnium champion, tipped the scales at
close to two and a quarter when he won the championship (and still was a healthy ~200 when I was his
assistant coach for two seasons).

So why not use METS? is it becuase you are comparing athletes trained for aerobic capacity with
athletes trained for anaerobic capacity. To put it simply, you are comparing Roger Dunkley to John
Carlos or Glen Winkle to Marty Nothstein.

>
> And there are big, muscular cyclists that can sprint at a national level in the Velodrome, and
> still do a flat 40K time trail in 54 minutes--or less. But these same guys will never do well in a
> hill climb.

Name names ... If you have an athlete who can go sub 1 hour, but can't climb a hill, then the
problem is psychological not physiological.

BTW for every big guy who can TT there is a small guy who can Kilo.

>
> >
> >
> > > and far more muscular,
> >
> > Lean muscle/kg? or Type I to type II muscle fiber count?
>
> You need to be riding more and pontificating less ;-)

You are talking with great arm waving gestures, yet you say so little. You use abiguous terms like
"more muscular" and "strength to weight ratio" and even when you define strength in terms of watts
you don't give a T, leaving your definition open to interpretation (peak watts? toatl watts?).

>
> >
> > > his "strength to weight" ratio is not as good as the 140 pound road racer's. The 225 pound guy
> > > will be "smoked",
> bad.
> > > Put them both on a flat road, and if the sprinter is also a good time trialler, which is very
> > > possible, the 140 pound hill climber can be
> smoked.
> >
> > Yikes! Please tell me that you don't have a background in coaching or athletic
> > performance/physiology. If the 225 lbs. rider has the anaerobic capacity of a "sprinter" and has
> > the aerobic capacity to time trial, why would he lose in a hill climb?
>
> It sounds like you want desperately to be taken seriously as some kind of authority --

Nope ... I'm not trying to be taken seriously. I was just taking another Usenet A hole to task for
spreading ambiguous half truths.

> maybe if you get out on a bike with enough real racers, you'll

Spoken like a true cat 4.

I started road racing in 1977. Started racing at Hellyer in 1979. By 1980, I was a junior 2. In 1988
I was racing as an E/E and coaching in California. I was with AVCT (see: Hearts of Lions)
Bridgestone until 1991 when I retired from fulltime racing and went in for a little government time.
Picked coaching back up in 1994 and have been doing it ever since (along side some government work).

> gain some of the insights you appear to be looking for :-)

I wasn't looking for insights, and since you so obviously have none to offer ... :-)~

>
>
>
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >
> > > Regards, Dan V
> >
> > Free advice is, generally, worth just what you pay for it.
> >
> > Go see a doctor before you start your new exercise program.
> >
> > Test ride as many different bikes in your price range as you can, and go with the one that feels
> > the best to you.
> >
> > R
>
> And this was good advice!!!!
>
> Dan V

Oh come on now don't start agreeing now ... this leaves me no place to insert my "feelings" about
12-lead, vital capacity, and MBC testing.

Really, I get ppl talking about starting up riding to lose weight, or to get back into racing and
they want to know what they "should do for cross training?", or "what's a good helmet?" "what's a
good bike?"

The first thing a new rider should do, if they are looking to race or improve their fitness level,
is go talk to a doctor. Get a 12-lead if it is available. Do a VC and a MBC if they can. There is
plenty of time to worry about single pivot vs Four-bar or who makes the best Chamois Fat.

R

"Reco Diver" <reco_diver@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:db285975.0402142210.674f8a90@posting.google.com...
> "Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:<nDwXb.22022$Bv3.2414@bignews3.bellsouth.net>...

> > > > I think road cycling by itself, promotes core strength weaknesses which you need to deal
> > > > with on your road back to fitness.
> > >
> > > As compared to what?
> >
> > As compared to Karate, or speed skating, or mountain biking....
>
> Go tell that to Glen Winkle ... More to the point, how is it that road cycling "promotes core
> strength weaknesses"?

Look at the postural components of fitness, and the postural issues evident on a huge number of road
cyclists. If they all did a huge stretch routine daily, or Pilates, or karate also, they would not
have these issues to impair their absolute fitness, but the reality is, most cyclists don't spend
the time with the stretching they should...And remember, this discussion is more about the average
person who wants to get back into shape--it is not specifically about members of the US Olympic team
who have mandatory daily stretching, daily massage, etc.

To get a bit more critical, look at what cycling alone does to most cat 3's and 2's who ONLY do
cycling as a sport---you see a body type which looks like they are de-evolving toward "Tyranosaurus
Rex", with a tiny upper body and vestigial arms & shoulders---their whole body is in their legs. I
see this type of "training" most cat 3's and 2's do as overdeveloping one area, and underdeveloping
many others. Mountain biking forces you to contract muscles all over your upper body constantly, as
the trail pitches them around on the bike---in contrast, road cyclists go for an almost zen-like
quiet of upper body muscles, so that they don't waste oxygen or blood sugar on muscles which are not
adding speed to the bike--I believe good time trialers can actually "shunt" blood more directly to
the large primary muscles of cycling, and away from muscles useless to them, such as lats, pecs,
shoulders, etc. To whatever extent this actually happens, this will clearly NOT help in developing
these muscles.

And back to the bigger issue of core strength weaknesses, again, the discussion is not about Cat
1's, or pros, but about the "average joe" who already has severe core strength weaknesses ( part of
having a big gut :-)
. In this scenario, I see road cycling and its attendant postural and muscle specificity, to be a
good way to make their existing imbalances worse....If they were to ADD Pilates, or karate, or a
good Gym workout that included core strength exercises, then I'd say the road cycling was great--
but most will NOT.

> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > Mountain bikes will have you in a much better orientation on the
bike
> > for
> > > > your mass. You can use a hard tail if you want to ride with slicks
on
> > the
> > > > road, but if you do off-road trails with much in the way of bumps,
don't
> > > > listen to the little guys who think a hard tail is an acceptable
ride
> > for
> > > > you.
> > >
> > > Here's a hint ... try not to listen to guys who interchange "mass" and "weight" at random.
> >
> > Here's a hint for you...I was just trying to help,
>
> "Try is the first step to failure." H.S.

If only I had known a "god of the sports physiology universe" had been monitoring this list, I would
not have posted--I'd have known you would have helped this person. Usenet does not typically benefit
from this form of daily assistance from above, and as hard as this may be for you to accept, quite a
bit of benefit DOES come from usenet related discussions. I could give you examples of where it has
actually saved lives :-)

>
> > For those who have not read up on this, the calculation of your oxygen processing ability is
> > divided by your body weight--meaning the heavier
you
> > are, the smaller the VO2 max number---and in fact, the harder it is to compete in an activity
> > where a big premium is placed on raw aerobic power--such as hill climbing.
>
> Or time trialing.

As I'm sure you know, it is far more involved than this. The vast majority of cat 2 or cat 1, 140
and 150 pound riders will have a significantly higher VO2 max than the 220 lb time trialler( in same
cat) . However, many other factors will come into play in a flat 40K event----the air resistance of
the rider is a huge portion of this, as the rider is averaging close to 30 mph. As the surface area
increases as a square function, and the rider's volume as a cube function, the higher wattage the
big rider can generate has "relatively less" wind resistance to overcome, per pound of bodyweight.

Also, the big velodrome type rider can have far more anerobic capacity( which will help in an
anerobic threshold ride, and can shave some time off the final half mile as they increase effort to
100% HR) , they will have a much larger buffer potential for lactic acid, and they may "tolerate"
high levels of lactate far better than a smal rider ( I'm saying "may"--its just one more issue that
"can" come into play).

You could probably add several other supporting factors to this list, if you cared to :-)

>
> > There are very few cyclists that can weigh 225 pounds and still have a competitive VO2 max
> > (competitive in cycling at a cat 1 level would be between 65 ml/KG and 80ml/kg --just an
> > approximation).
>
> But it happens ... (Name drop) Charles Bean, California State Omnium champion, tipped the scales
> at close to two and a quarter when he won the championship (and still was a healthy ~200 when I
> was his assistant coach for two seasons).
>
> So why not use METS? is it becuase you are comparing athletes trained for aerobic capacity with
> athletes trained for anaerobic capacity. To put it simply, you are comparing Roger Dunkley to John
> Carlos or Glen Winkle to Marty Nothstein.

Pretty much, and I like your examples :-) But I'd defend this because when we are talking about the
huge variety of body types and athletic backgrounds which this usenet group is composed of, the
easier comparitive tool is VO2 max. I'd also add that while I liked using VO2 max as a measure of my
own fitness when I was bike racing, kickboxing, or doing a Technical Dive at 300 feet( where we used
custom WKPP tables for decompression, individualized to each of us by VO2 max--thanks to George
Irvine, Dr. Bill Hamilton, and Bill Mee) , I understand that most people on the NG will not have an
interest or even significant benefit from measuring VO2 max, Mets, or any other high end testing---
beyond body fat testing :-)

> .
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > and far more muscular,
> > >
> > > Lean muscle/kg? or Type I to type II muscle fiber count?
> >
> > You need to be riding more and pontificating less ;-)
>
> You are talking with great arm waving gestures, yet you say so little. You use abiguous terms like
> "more muscular" and "strength to weight ratio" and even when you define strength in terms of watts
> you don't give a T, leaving your definition open to interpretation (peak watts? toatl watts?).

As if most readers here in this NG will care. More importantly, you "knew" what I was saying, but
pedantically decided to chide me for the way I said it. I think you could have a great deal to offer
me, and many other people on this NG, but I'd request you worry more about the final package of
knowledge you are leaving people with----and that you consider people will have more interest if you
speal/write in terms they understand, and with examples they can apply to themselves. Most people
care about issues which relate to them...If a person really wanted a discussion of the relative
benefits of Mets calculations and interpretation , over VO2 max, do you really think this is where
they would be looking for it?
> >
> > >
> > > > his "strength to weight" ratio is not as good as the 140 pound road racer's. The 225 pound
> > > > guy will be
"smoked",
> > bad.
> > > > Put them both on a flat road, and if the sprinter is also a good
time
> > > > trialler, which is very possible, the 140 pound hill climber can be
> > smoked.
> > >
> > > Yikes! Please tell me that you don't have a background in coaching or athletic
> > > performance/physiology. If the 225 lbs. rider has the anaerobic capacity of a "sprinter" and
> > > has the aerobic capacity to time trial, why would he lose in a hill climb?

I do lots of sports, and "sit on the shoulders of many giants" :-) ( I have some long term friends
who are at the tops of many fields, and my desire to compete more enjoyably, has led me to a
reasonably good understanding of many issues in sports ( and diving) related physiology. I try not
to sound like an authority--I am not one, but there are plenty of instances where what I call common
sense, is all that a person needs for advice. If someone here posts for very specific training
advice, I would point them to someone trained and gifted in this type of assistance. If they have a
very general question, as the OP did, it is clear they don't want to pay $100 or $500 an hour to get
an answer :-)

And I really am sick of hearing little guys who weigh 140 pounds tell big riders, that all they
need is a hard tail, even for riding heavily rooted trails. I see this in the bike shops here is
S Florida all the time. That is what my response to the OP was really about. How about wading
into that one
:-)

> >
> > It sounds like you want desperately to be taken seriously as some kind
of
> > authority --
>
> Nope ... I'm not trying to be taken seriously. I was just taking another Usenet A hole to task for
> spreading ambiguous half truths.
>

Careful, lie down with the dogs and you'll get fleas....and something tells me you're already
scratching :-)

>
> > maybe if you get out on a bike with enough real racers, you'll
>
> Spoken like a true cat 4.

Evil, vicious and totally uncalled for ;-)

>
> I started road racing in 1977. Started racing at Hellyer in 1979. By 1980, I was a junior 2. In
> 1988 I was racing as an E/E and coaching in California. I was with AVCT (see: Hearts of Lions)
> Bridgestone until 1991 when I retired from fulltime racing and went in for a little government
> time. Picked coaching back up in 1994 and have been doing it ever since (along side some
> government work).

Nice background. If you were'nt using the hotmail address, I might have given you the benefit of the
doubt on your first post, but as you should know, there is an awful lot of masquerading going on
under the anonymity of hotmail faking.

> > > >
> > > Go see a doctor before you start your new exercise program.
> > >
> > > Test ride as many different bikes in your price range as you can, and go with the one that
> > > feels the best to you.
> > >

> >
>
> The first thing a new rider should do, if they are looking to race or improve their fitness level,
> is go talk to a doctor. Get a 12-lead if it is available. Do a VC and a MBC if they can. There is
> plenty of time to worry about single pivot vs Four-bar or who makes the best Chamois Fat.
>
> R

Well...this NG "is" really more about arguing the merits of single pivot versus 4 bar---but its also
about arguing anything, so if you don't get too over-technical, you can probably create plenty of
arguments here :-)

Dan V

"Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message news:<2wLXb.48346$Ch.35658@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
> "Reco Diver" <reco_diver@hotmail.com> wrote in message

<snip>

> I'd also add that while I liked using VO2 max as a measure of my own fitness when I was bike
> racing, kickboxing, or doing a Technical Dive at 300 feet( where we used custom WKPP tables for
> decompression, individualized to each of us by VO2 max--thanks to George Irvine, Dr. Bill
> Hamilton, and Bill Mee) , I understand that most people on the NG will not have an interest or
> even significant benefit from measuring VO2 max, Mets, or any other high end testing--- beyond
> body fat testing :-)

I'll be damned it is DIR Dan Volker.

You and I know many of the same people .... You through WKPP and me through SCRU. Go figure, those
pushing the envelope tend to be so far inland.

<snip>

>> > >
> > > You need to be riding more and pontificating less ;-)
> >
> > You are talking with great arm waving gestures, yet you say so little. You use abiguous terms
> > like "more muscular" and "strength to weight ratio" and even when you define strength in terms
> > of watts you don't give a T, leaving your definition open to interpretation (peak watts? toatl
> > watts?).
>
>
> As if most readers here in this NG will care. More importantly, you "knew" what I was saying, but
> pedantically decided to chide me for the way I said it.

Absolutely.

> I think you could have a great deal to offer me, and many other people on this NG, but I'd request
> you worry more about the final package of knowledge you are leaving people with----and that you
> consider people will have more interest if you speal/write in terms they understand, and with
> examples they can apply to themselves. Most people care about issues which relate to them...If a
> person really wanted a discussion of the relative benefits of Mets calculations and interpretation
> , over VO2 max, do you really think this is where they would be looking for it?

You'd be amazed who reads this group.

> > Spoken like a true cat 4.
>
> Evil, vicious and totally uncalled for ;-)
>
> >
> > I started road racing in 1977. Started racing at Hellyer in 1979. By 1980, I was a junior 2. In
> > 1988 I was racing as an E/E and coaching in California. I was with AVCT (see: Hearts of Lions)
> > Bridgestone until 1991 when I retired from fulltime racing and went in for a little government
> > time. Picked coaching back up in 1994 and have been doing it ever since (along side some
> > government work).
>
> Nice background. If you were'nt using the hotmail address, I might have given you the benefit of
> the doubt on your first post, but as you should know, there is an awful lot of masquerading going
> on under the anonymity of hotmail faking.

At one time I used my "normal" account ... then I was accused of "advertising." So now I use a genero-
hotmail account. Usenet is nameless and faceless. So now I am just another jerk with a bad nick.
>
> > > > >
> > > > Go see a doctor before you start your new exercise program.
> > > >
> > > > Test ride as many different bikes in your price range as you can, and go with the one that
> > > > feels the best to you.
> > > >
>
> > >
> >
> > The first thing a new rider should do, if they are looking to race or improve their fitness
> > level, is go talk to a doctor. Get a 12-lead if it is available. Do a VC and a MBC if they
> > can. There is plenty of time to worry about single pivot vs Four-bar or who makes the best
> > Chamois Fat.
> >
> > R
>
> Well...this NG "is" really more about arguing the merits of single pivot versus 4 bar---but its
> also about arguing anything, so if you don't get too over-technical, you can probably create
> plenty of arguments here :-)
>
> Dan V

Over Technical ???? Me ???? Never ....

But I do have some opinions on the merits (?) of the Mark 12, Bail Out bottles, and pure O2
stops ....

R

"Reco Diver" <reco_diver@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:db285975.0402151528.17a5a103@posting.google.com...
> "Dan Volker" <dvolker@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:<2wLXb.48346$Ch.35658@bignews6.bellsouth.net>...
> > "Reco Diver" <reco_diver@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> <snip>
>
> > I'd also add that while I liked using VO2 max as a measure of my own
fitness
> > when I was bike racing, kickboxing, or doing a Technical Dive at 300
feet(
> > where we used custom WKPP tables for decompression, individualized to
each
> > of us by VO2 max--thanks to George Irvine, Dr. Bill Hamilton, and Bill
Mee)
> > , I understand that most people on the NG will not have an interest or
even
> > significant benefit from measuring VO2 max, Mets, or any other high end testing--- beyond body
> > fat testing :-)
>
> I'll be damned it is DIR Dan Volker.
>
> You and I know many of the same people .... You through WKPP and me through SCRU. Go figure, those
> pushing the envelope tend to be so far inland.
>

I am definitely a long way from "good" mountain biking. For the tech dives, George, Bill and I used
to dive off Jupiter and Pompano, on some incredible sites--these being local to us. Wakulla and the
other caves were a huge inland journey, to be sure. And now I am hearing there is some decent
mountain biking near Wakulla! Hmmmm.

> <snip>
> > >
> > Well...this NG "is" really more about arguing the merits of single pivot versus 4 bar---but its
> > also about arguing anything, so if you don't get
too
> > over-technical, you can probably create plenty of arguments here :-)
> >
> > Dan V
>
> Over Technical ???? Me ???? Never ....
>
> But I do have some opinions on the merits (?) of the Mark 12, Bail Out bottles, and pure O2
> stops ....
>
> R

I got pretty tired arguing for DIR on rec.scuba, and I'd be shocked if even one other mountain biker
shared an interest in tech or deep cave diving......But :-) ...... I would need to have a really
good reason to use any rebreather---even including the Halcyon--there is just too much of a "pre-
flight checkout" .....kind of like turning a pseudo recreational dive into flying a 747. My area has
always been deep ocean, and doubles and stages have just been so much easier and safer. I'm sure you
know the bailout issue for deep cave penetrations, and if you look at the new Halcyon rebreather, it
looks more like a stage bottle itself
:-)
I can't guess your issue with bailout bottles, unless its that you don't like to have the hassle of
a big bunch of them needing to be spread around a big penetration. The pure O2 stop at 20 feet is
pretty much optional---I don't generally want it or need it--maybe if I had done a 270 for 24, run a
30 minute deco, a short surface interval, and then done another dive to 270, but this is more of a
special circumstance scenario. Because O2 is a vasoconstrictor, on a normal dive to 270 for 23
minutes, I'll switch to 50/50 at 70 feet, and stay on this to the surface. Alot of the guys who feel
they "need" O2 at 20, actually get some bubbling the moment they hit the O2 at 20--due to the vasoconstriction---
and after 15 minutes of this, these and most other bubbles have begun resolving, but it basically
just adds time to the deco I don't care to add. And when I've been spearfishing, the deco weenies
want me out of the water with my fish as soon as possible :-)

Regards, Dan V