It's killing me but.......... - Page 2

I think I would have really liked that guy. If he had also varied the pace to encompass L4-L7 on every workout, we'd be in complete synch.

I'm worried that we're losing our original poster. Buried in RDs thoughtful analysis is the suggestion that he should be simply accumulating time at around 118 watts (.91x130watts). Since he is a relative beginner at this, I personally wouldn't be doing lots of L4 (which for him is around 118-120 watts) every single day. My approach would be to take whatever total time he will ride on each day, and try to make maybe one-third to one-half of that time around the L4 watts. And if he feels tired on a day, stay at lower power. Undertraining with enthusiasm will be better than overtraining and feeling tired all the time. As RD points out, the improved power will come over time.

I don't know that I'm qualified to give the OP a precise prescription, but I think we agree that he is now riding at higher power than necessary and that he will likely make more progress and have more enjoyment if he drops it down a bit. It would be nice if he got a benchmark. I'm sort of guessing at his FT. And, even though I sort of look with disdain at HR data, it doesn't help that he says it was 150 for all of his workouts irrespective of power. But, to the OP: take none of this as criticism of what you are doing. I encourage what you are doing. I just want you to be successful. IIRC, there is a young fella you'd like to beat to the top of a hill, right? My sentiments exactly.

Let me first say, this forum is unbelievable in the amount of help you guys give to relative newcomers like me. Thanks again for that - much appreciated!

I haven't got my head completely around all this level business, but I'm working on it by reading through the forum and various links. One thing I don't understand is how cadence comes into the formula.

In my workouts I listed, I try to maintain a leg speed of 90 per minute. I've found that I can regulate this speed through my HR. When my HR drops - sure enough the leg speed has dropped off. (obvious some will say!)

Anyway, today I took RDO's advice and attempted to find out my FT. Lo and behold it was as close to 130 W as damn it. Again I did the hour at 130 with a leg speed of 90. And actually, RDO I think I mislead you by stating my HR is always 150. What I was doing last week was, when I lowered the W I sped up to increase my HR to 150. (maybe not a dood thing eh?) Today my average HR for the hour fluctuated between 135 and 142 (good spots and bad spots).

I was getting tired at 56 mins but managed to keep going.

One funny footnote; I was crouched low over the aerobike and the sweat was pouring off me in buckets. Suddenly the display started to fade and was barely visible at the end. The sweat had seeped into the electrics. I think they are still trying to dry it out.

And to the guy who asked if that was my usual week's training, the answer is no. I only started the programme last week. And as for Sunday rides, my cycling partner and I usually do a mountainous course which averages out at around 2 hours 40 minutes. Last weekend was close to 0C so I went to the gym instead. I cant do 2 hours on the bikes in the gym because of sheer unadalterated boredom (even with my iPod Shuffle blasting out fast 60's hits)

I need a name. I don't feel comfortable with sillyoldtwit or any of the 3 parts and the acronym (sot) doesn't do it for me. How about Sly? I'll go with Sly until I have something better.

First of all, Sly, you have no idea how helpful these details are to those of us trying to help you. I guess newbies will never know what sort of details to include when asking for help, but this really brings some things into focus for me and I'm sure for others. Second, with a full hour at max power (MP), you definitely have earned a day off or recovery day and would be well advised to do one or the other today. FYI, there are three schools of thought on recovery days. Some, like me, just take the day off and don't exercise at all. A second group ride but at an easy intensity. The rule of thumb is that you could have a relaxed conversation the entire time. Andy Coggan says it's equivalent to taking your bike for a walk. In power, we're talking about a max of 55% of your FT -- that's right, 72! And a third group do an alternate exercise such as an upper body weight workout in the gym. Trust me, we don't want to touch that third rail! You'll learn over time when you want to take a day off, but an hour at max power is on the edge if not over the edge. Third, getting your FT with a full hour at MP is awesome! That is the gold standard for setting your workout intensities (along with MAP, a different sort of test that is equally a "gold standard"). You'll want to re-do this test about once a month to track your progress. And, isn't it an awesome workout? Of course, you'll need to find a new health club after they boot you for shorting out their equipment.

Now, about this cadence bogie. If you don't change gears (or resistance on a trainer), cadence corresponds to power and HR varies directly with cadence and hence power. This is to be expected and is why HR can be useful to manage intensity. But, if you hold power constant and change gears you will have a different cadence with each gear. Under this scenario, HR will be highest at the highest cadence, yet power is constant. This is the reason HR is not so useful to manage intensity. There is no "right" cadence. You should find the cadence at which you can ride at a given power (e.g., 130w) with the least perceived effort and ignore HR. HR is only one physiological response to increased intensity of effort and does not even fully measure the cardio response because it doesn't measure stroke volume.

Now that you know your FT, you can fully apply Andy Coggan's training levels (see the table in the link I posted in your first thread). Again, I think you would make great progress working exclusively in level 4 (91%-105% of FT). You can do interval durations anywhere from 10 to 30 mins, but 20-30 mins is better. The rest or recovery between intervals is really up to you, but you shouldn't need more than a few mins (e.g., 5), more for mental preparation for the next interval than any physiological reason. I'll be very interested to hear what your FT is at this time next month. Keep up the good work, Sly.

A couple of laughs in there RD. You feel uncomfortable with my username!?!? Shouldn't it be me who feels uncomfortable? OK I will now be known as Sillyoldtwit alias Tyson. (not Mike) And thanks for giving me the day off tomorrow. I was already psyched up for another hard day, but I'll take your advice and take it easy.

Incidentally, I didn't mention that before I ever get on the bike in the gym, I do an hours upper body work. (never touch the legs - I leave that to the bike)
I know this is not a bodybuilding forum, but I train like a lot of bodybuilders these days, that is, in one session I train one large muscle group and 1 small.
Tomorrow for example, I shall do all back work and finish off with working on the triceps.

Just one more thing - with regard to recovery, I base my recovery duration on the things I learned in my running days. So after 10 minutes at L4 say, I start the next 10 minutes when my pulse has returned to 120 (one and a half mins approx)
We also used to do anaerobic intervals on a Thursday night which consisted of a 70 yard sprint building up in intensity til you crossed the line (when you were flat out) then a 6 second recovery and off again x 12. This training made our team one of the top teams in England over a 10 mile course.
However, I digress; back on the bike.

Yeah. You're not silly. Who am I to call you old? And, where I come from twit is not a flattering term. I still like Sly, but I'll go with Tyson.

That's good for getting the chicks.

For L4 intervals it really doesn't matter, since it's mainly of psychological value. You already know you can ride for an hour at FT pace, so why should you need much of a rest after, say, 20 minutes? The important thing is how many minutes at L4 pace, not the duration or power of the recovery segment.

Using the information you've just mentioned one can also see that at a higher HR the cardiovascular stress is probably higher and sometimes that is a desired part of the intended training. For example, one can rest the legs a bit by using some higher cadences that will continue to stress some aspects of the CV system. Particularly useful for days after hard training, when approaching a peak, or doing a taper.

Actually, at a given workload the increase in HR is probably very much related to changes or limits in stroke volume assuming you're not getting hotter, dehydrated, etc. Depends also on intensity and duration. The cadence to aim at during an interval may need to be highly dependent on how such an effort could be used during a race. Especially for a beginner, a self-selected cadence may not be the best way for them to prepare for their objectives.

I think it's best to look at HR, power, PE together and maybe lean towards one or the other depending on your objectives, and there are some useful ways to incorporate cadence choices within this equation.

This week I've really got into 2 x 20 mins at 120 W as you suggested RD,and they felt awesome as you would say. Between intervals I rested for 5 mins with my HR dropping down to 110 from 140ish. I don't thing I need that much rest, but I took it anyway. I confess to blasting out the last 2 mins of each 20 at 150W with an accelerating cadence to somewhere near 120 at the end.

My question is this - Palewin suggested increasing the workload over a 3 week period with the 4th week's training done at a more leisurely pace. I was considering stepping up to 125/130 W next week. As someone close to my age RD, do you think that step up is about right or would you suggest I stick at the 120 W for a time?

PS I've just read through the 30 second interval thread; this type of interval seems to fit in with the running training I mentioned earlier on in this thread.
Should I be doing something like that occasionally?

Awesome!

You'll know when to increase power because they will begin to feel "too easy." So, increase by 5-10w to try and retain the same feeling you had originally -- breathing, perspiration, heart rate. And, if your schedule permits, begin to do 3x20s one day a week, especially if the next day is an off day.

I didn't weigh in on that thread but I consider 30s intervals to be in sort of "no man's land." They're too long for neuromuscular focus and they're too short for optimal VO2MAX focus. You choose an interval duration for a specific targeted adaptation (lactate threshold, VO2MAX or neuromuscular). I'd suggest you stick with your LT (or L4) intervals for the time being. I think that in about a month you will look back at your power for your 20min intervals and will be astonished that you ever rode them at only 120w. And, in 3 months, remember to go easy on the young fellas, especially on the hills!

I saw my name, so its time to chime back in. Your question combines two separate aspects of workload: total time and power level. My "three weeks up, one week down" pattern is very unoriginal; I first saw it mentioned in Friel's "Training Bible", and more relevant to me, its what my CTS coach follows in the schedules he prepares for me. But what changes within a particular cycle is not the power range (i.e. my current L4 is 214-248 watts that stays constant) but the amount of time I spend in the range increases weekly. So in week 1 of the cycle I may total 1 hr 45 min of L4 intervals, in week 2, 2 hr of L4, and in week 3, 2 hr 15 min of L4 intervals. After the easy week, the 1st week of the next cycle might start at 2 hrs of L4 and build from there. I will probably retest my FT power every two months (during the easy week, so that I'm rested), and it's the retest that (hopefully!) results in my raising the entire set of power ranges for the successive cycles. Now to keep this complete, but not turn into a chapter on training (which I'm not qualified to write, anyway) what we change with each cycle is the type of interval. For example, my previous cycle concentrated on what CTS calls "Muscle Tension" intervals, big ring climbing repeats in the mid-L4 power range. The cycle I'm now in (I'm in the 2nd week) concentrates on CTS Tempo intervals, longer big ring low-end-L4 intervals on flat-to-rolling terrain. As we get closer to my real racing season, I know from experience we will have cycles concentrating on shorter L5/L6 intervals. But in each cycle, the power range will stay constant, the total accumulation of time in the range will build from week to week. I think most coaches agree on this basic overall picture. Where they differ is in the types of intervals they prescribe and the total workload. This is one of the ways in which individuality enters the picture.

Thanks once more guys for taking the time out to help a silly old twit.

Oops! Sorry I forgot you don't like that name RD.

Palewin, I'm going to have to read that a couple more times to take it in, but will come back to you.

RD wrote:

Now I know you are trying to kill me RD!

TYSON (as in Mike)

Yep, that's my secret strategy, kill off everybody in my age group. Seriously, you'll know when it's time to add a 3rd 20 when you begin to finish 2x20s and feel like, "Gee, that was nice while it lasted, but too short." Anyway, I want to be sure you get to the top of the hills before that 35yo Sunday riding partner in, say, May. I look forward to your post in a few months when you say, "What a whiner ... all I heard today from my riding partner was, 'Hey, Sly, hold it back a bit, you're killing me.'"

Well, then, add some 2x30 would do the trick. At end of the work out, you would tell yourself "my......I thought I would never be able to sustain THAT long...." Time to go home. Work done for the day.

Now I'm really getting into this, I have something that's being puzzling me.
The point of the whole exercise if you remember is to keep up with my young
cycling buddy on the hills. I think it was Palewin (sorry if it wasn't) who said climbing hills is all about body weight and power. Now, on the flat he can't match my speed and struggles badly. I assume this is because I have more power. So on the hills, assuming he doesn't have my power, he is beating me by being smaller in stature and quite a bit lighter. Although he does have a bit of a paunch I have to say (don't know his body fat %).
Taking this to its logical conclusion, it seems by the above formula that his weight difference is greater than my power advantage. Have I got this right?
I can't help feeling that apart from a psycological reason there's something missing in the formula. When I hit a hill, it is as if a tap is turned on and all my energy just drains away. As I mentioned before, not so long ago I did a 7 hour solo ride with only 1 stop to fill my bottles, so it's not a stamina thing.(mostly flat)
Maybe my reasoning is flawed.