Michael Ross Book

Just wondering if anyone has talked about the Michael Ross book, Maximum Performance for Cyclists. I just finished the first reading of it and I find it rather interesting, but I don't recall any discussion about it here. Seems like his approach would be popular here, as he is of the all/most of your work should be HIT, and don't bother much (at all) with the endurance stuff. Makes a lot of other interesting claims.

Has anyone read this? Followed this plan? Have any comments?

Interestingly enough I've tended towards his version of HIT over the past few weeks naturally. It seems a natural progression for me, having started out on the Morris-style blocks of training. It's also interesting that (IIRC) Acoggan has mentioned he used to be able to compete in 5 hour races while not training much/any more than 1-2 hours a session. What also strikes me is that someone on this plan probably would not pile up a ton of CTL since you never ride more than 4 days a week, and maybe 2 hours at most with some sessions only 1 hour.

I wonder how this would translate to longer events, such as 12 and 24 hour events.

Any thoughts appreciated.

I always tended to block HIT training and when I learned of this book, I purchased a copy. Honestly, I found it a bit disappointing for several reasons: 1) I am in the Ric Stern/Dr. Coggan school regarding weight training, so when I see a good part of Dr. Ross' book dedicated to weight lifting, I am going to be turned-off; 2) The workouts could be better explained; 3) Like Friel and others, he invents his own terminology and in some instances is pseudoscientific. 4) Tends to violates the KISS principle.

I read his book and was very dissapointed. He makes a lot of statements that aren't backed up in any way and you're just supposed to accept them and go with it. For instance his thoughts on high fat diet as a way to encourage your body to burn more fats or low carbs during rest days to encourage better glycogen storage when you start training again. Where does this come from? He puts them out there as unsubstantiated fact and expects folks to change their eating habits because he says so? I also agree with the previous poster on his strength training emphasis his plug for creatine and a number of other things I found hard to swallow like his starvation based Lipolysis workout where he cautions you to be on the lookout for ketoacidosis while riding on an empty stomach. About the only thing I agree with in this book is his approach to block training and there are better sources of info on that subject.

To be honest I gave up about 150 pages into the book since I realized I just wasn't on board and needed a lot more convincing before I was going to make the sort of changes he suggests. I'm just not convinced he's based his programs on anything more than his own opinions and they don't seem very well grounded in science.

This book reminds me of a lot of quack diet books out there. Full of opinionated and unsupported nonsense but since the author has those two precious letters tied to his name folks will read it and try it.

That is interesting because I was intrigued by the book, because all his workouts, eating plans, etc. where cited with one or more peer reviewed studies that have proven to work, although in the controlled enviroments that they were implemented.

I was looking for something different because the Friel school of thought was not working for me. I am currently at the start of my second season with the plan. First year, followed at about 50 to 60%, the results were great, no overtraining (which I suffered previously) and greatly reduced training time. This year I am following the plan at about 70 to 80%, and power numbers and fitness seem to be improving.

I am interested in finding out if anyone has done a the plan at full capacity to see if they reached their goals.

Yes, most workouts in Ross's book are based on some published HIT test. However, he doesn't answer or prove or refer weather it's the same to do that kind of tapering for a couple of weeks and see improvments than do the same stuff for the whole year.

__________________
These are layman's opinions, expressed in language no self-respecting scientist woul be using.

The problem with his kind of "science" based trainig is, that it sounds convincing but does not take ino account that the training types, the athletes history and performance level may have high impact on the outcome of the study. So basically somehing that works for newbies does nt have to work for elite level athletes. Furthermore the way performance improvement is analyzed is important. If only 2 min MP is tested and you compete in century rides, so what?

Taken together one will always find some study backing ones claims, so just citing one paper is not convincing at all. This is what I see day in and out at work.

I think Dr. Ross' citations are one of the book's strong points. Regarding individualization, he does offer variations of the HIT theme depending upon fitness level and goals. Clearly though, this book is not targeted at newbies. Those simply training for a century ride? Despite the myths, the most effective endurance training really is a tops-down approach. Increase FTP, the century ride will be completed faster. HIT plus one endurance workout per week is all most require to maximize endurance. I like the approach, I just don't like the way it is presented.

1. has anyone done a steady dose of Ross lyposis training or Ed Burke bonk training, and seen results in their level of endurance. My endurance has improved but at the same time I have done a better job of nutrition and electrolyte replacement. 2. Weights bulk me up to much, old college football player so I have not performed more than a months worth at a time. 3. One thing that has worked for sure is Ross prescription for super carbo load in just one day. I have used this many times with good success.

I followed Ross' program this Winter since it wasn't too different than my usual Morris program. Several things appealed to me:

1. The apparent scientific rigor.
2. You can do the long rides during the Priming phase in December when it's still nice outside. I hated doing the Morris Endurance phase in February (our worst month).
3. The "individualization" of the HIT workouts.
4. The relatively short times for "long" intervals. I find Morris' 8-12 min intervals painful and difficult to recover from.

The weight program went really well (32% gain on the front squat, 16% on the leg press). Daily Undulating Progression works in the gym!

I did one or two Lip/Mito/starvation rides weekly during the lifting phase when I couldn't get outside. I did no more than zone 3 to low zone 4 for an hour and never bonked. They were good for weight control, but I'm convinced a 3+ hour endurance ride is better for building endurance. Definitely not a silver bullet, but maybe the best way to spend an hour on the trainer in the base phases?

I found the Ross HIT program too stressful. So much so, I was never able to do the sets of eight intervals at prescribed power on the second and third days and after two weeks had lost power in the Conconi test. I'm going back to the Morris SMSP program.

I'm also concerned with the lack of transition between the lifting and interval phases. I now truly understand how the Morris-style endurance phase helps you transfer the strength gains made during lifting to the bike. I had a great lifting phase, but I don't feel it on the bike this year like I did last year when following Morris' program.

Also, see my question about Ross' relatively short times for "long" intervals: http://www.cyclingforums.com/t389539.html

__________________
DCMTB Mountain Bike Team

The question I wanted to raise in my pevious post was if the citations really back Ross` claims exactly or just superficially, which would be even worse than not following science but rather experience.

I would be shocked if you did not. Such gains are typical for early stages of weight training and is primarily due to enhanced neuomuscular coordination. Since these gains are highly specific to the type of exercise, it is highly debatable the gains would transfer to cycling.

This is one part of the book I found particularly disturbing. While I am a big fan of L3/L4 workouts anf they constitute most of my training, the benefit of "stavation riding" is dubious. I don't eat a lot in the AM prior to training, but during my workouts I always ingest maybe 200 kcal of gel, not so much to get me through the workout, but to help rapidly replenish glycogn stores for the next day.
Maybe you jumped in too quickly; however, I did find his intervals hard with too little recovery.

I interpret HIT as primarily 2X20s and 4-5 minute VO2 max intervals. Many find 2X20s the single most effective workout. Some also extpand the 2X20s by doing a 5 minute interval after the second 20 minute interval at FTP + 105%. These can be done for many consecutive days.

Wow, good comments on this. Thanks for the feedback. Some thoughts:

I too found it disappointing. In addition to your #1, I would add the flexibility chapter. When it comes down to it there were very few "meat" chapters in the book, maybe 2? But then, at this point if I can get 1 chapter in any book which sheds some new light on these subjects I consider it a good thing.

From Dave...

This bothers me too. For me, a lot of the things he says borders on insanity in terms of "everyday living". If you told me I would increase my FTP 35% by sitting in a tub of hot fat every night, well this just isn't going to happen because it's too absurd for me to actually incorporate into my life. That's what a lot of the nutritional yo-yo approaches seem to me. Carb reduce, carb load, 3 days on, don't eat before you exercise, and so on. But the HIT workouts need to eat before, but not the SPAM workouts. I have to also admit that I wondered if this was some sort of practical joke, doing SPAM workouts.

Yes, too many references to smelling ammonia for my liking. I guess it stands to be asked, who is this book for? Are people really doing this to themselves to win the local race? His block training approach does seem to diifer from that of Morris though.

The longer endurance stuff is what I wonder about. Ok so maybe this works for 2/3 or even 4 hour races. But what about 6 hour marathons? 12? 24? Seems like you leave youself short if you don't have the 3 hour L3 sessions in there. For me there's a disconnect between these block training sessions in terms of 90-120 efforts versus 3/4 hour efforts, meaning that I seem to do great with the 2 hour sessions but I don't miraculously have the ability to bang it out for 4 hours like Ross suggests. If nothing else how in the world are you going to learn how to pace yourself if all you ever do is 1 hour blow-it-out sessions?

I agree totally with this. It's something that nagged me the whole time while reading it. To cross-check this would be a lot of work because he does reference a lot of material. And I'm sure if you got your hands on all of it, it would be mind-numbing to sort through.

In the end, however, I still find the book intriguiing on some levels. Still, I'm not going to throw away my L3 and L4 work because of it.

Morris prescribes decreasing the interval length (and increasing power if possible) as the block progresses to make the consecutive days more bearable. I underestimated how important this is. Morris also suggests you do no more than three day blocks and to mix it up with one and two day blocks. Three days of HIT was enough to overtrain me (although, in all fairness, I probably overestimated my CP); four days week after week would probably kill me.

__________________
DCMTB Mountain Bike Team

I just got done with 4 weeks of blocks of varying lengths, and the last week I did a 4 day set knowing that I had a rest week coming up. Anything more than that would be pretty tough. Maybe as a lead-in to a peak it would work for 2 or maybe 3 weeks. But that's got "blow your load" written all over it, no?

I did the four day blocks all last year and starting this year and I find it to work quite well. I do saturday thru tuesday and find that I am ready to go for the next weekend block or well rested for a weekend race. The key is total rest those three days, I find myself itching to get back on the bike after the rest. If on the fourth day I am feeling a little tired I will just do half of the intervals or do some of the shorter HIT intervals he has. The key like stated earlier is to get your CP correct, start at very low watts somewhere in the 100 to 150 watts and once you get to your CP it will be humbly low. Then your whole plan with HIT and SPAM will be doable. I also try not to miss a recovery drink after my workouts. This plan might not work for many, but it has kept me competiting in cycling, after I would have quit trying to put in all those extra hours on the bike.