It's killing me but..........

RapDaddyo

Wow, that's great! I like your approach of bumping up the 2nd interval first (or even the 2nd half of the 2nd interval), then bumping up the whole set.

That doesn't matter in the slightest. Most of us with higher FTs should be getting on our hands and knees every day, thanking our parents and higher powers for the genetic potential we were blessed with. At the end of the day, you may be more highly trained than any of us in terms of realizing your genetic potential. The really good news is that you don't seem to be flattening out. Your rate of increase is still very high.

Gee, I don't know. I don't want to put any artificial limits on you (not that you'd pay any attention). I do predict you're going to be waiting for your young friend at the top of the hills by May 15th. I'd say just ride this train and see where it ends up.

Sillyoldtwit

Have just read the Bonking thread. Very interesting! However I'm more confused than ever. I'm doing hard (for me) 20 minute intervals in the gym Tue/Wed/Thu
(burning more than 500 calories each time)
I am also trying to lose weight, which the replys in the bonking thread seem to say is very difficult. I thought after a hard session you need protein to repair the body but at the same time you need carbohydrates for the next days hard session. How do you guys balance these needs. And more to the point, how the hell do you lose weight if you eat like a pig after a hard session and put the calories straight back on again.

One theory I have is. Take a few days off from cycling, fast to lose 2 or 3 kilos, thereby lowering the baseline from which to work. Any ideas?

RapDaddyo

It's hard to lose weight through high-intensity work - not enough time in the saddle. If you want to lose weight, switch to longer L2-L3 rides for a week or so. You won't gain power, but you will gain endurance. The intensity almost doesn't matter - just lots of time in the saddle. Don't pig out after your rides - the weight will come off.

Sillyoldtwit

As you know I have that mountainous 160km ride on the 4th of June. As to which is it better to do, increase my power or endurance I'm not quite sure.
The endurance element is provide by my weekend rides which I've just upped to 75km for April and will increase to over 100km in May. I have no worries about being able to do 160km, but at what pace is another matter.

Another thing is, I'm really into these higher and higher Wattage intervals.
I think if I stopped them I would get withdrawal symptoms. June the 4th is secondary to whizzing past my cycling partner on the hills. After all that's why I'm in these forums.

Maybe I'll have to grit my teeth and take your advice for 2 weeks.
When you say longer L2 -L3 rides BTW, what are we talking about time-wise?

RapDaddyo

Don't worry about pace. I'll be able to give you a pace as you approach the event. It is all about pace, based on your power at that time.

There is a distinct tradeoff between increasing power (shorter rides with high-intensity efforts) and losing weight (longer rides at lower intensity).

2-3 hours per ride, whatever you can handle before you go bonkers. I once watched an entire 3-hour golf event coverage on my trainer, taking a 5min break once per hour.

Sillyoldtwit

Just one quick question RD. If I do longer rides at L2-L3 for 2 weeks will my power drop much? I hate to think after all this effort that I'll have to work my way back up again.

RapDaddyo

No, you won't lose power. You just won't increase power with these L2-L3 workouts. It's sort of an either/or proposition.

netscriber

Hey Tyson,
I have been following your thread rather religiously. Good going. Keep it up. I wish I could be as consistent as you. I have always wondered about your body mass when you talk your power numbers. May I ask, what you weigh and how tall you are? Also, have you crossed your 200W?

Regards

Sillyoldtwit

Well, besides RD my guide and mentor, that's one more person following the thread. Seriously though NS, I hope this thread has given some encouragement to the older rider, especially the newbie older rider. With the help of RD and others, I'm now riding like I couldn't even imagine a few short weeks ago.
In answer to your question; I'm 5' 11 and from 84Kilos 4 months ago I now hover around 75K. Some times I get down to 74k but then my body starts to crave chocolate, cakes, etc. So it looks like I'm stuck with 75k, unless the regime as iterated by RD works. At the moment I'm mixing 180s with 200s.
So far my jumps have been 20 watts a time, however, I don't think I can continue at that rate. My power is still very low, and although RD says don't set targets, I do hope to be generating 240Watts before my ride in June. We'll see.

RD, I had a thought. I don't know if this is feasible, but what about after finishing my 2x20s, having a 5 minute spin at 30watts say, then do 1 hour at something like 120watts to lose weight? A sort of compromise!

(I've become a power junky - help!) TYSON

netscriber

It was interesting and encouraging to me that some of my theories were correct. But, I wont get into that. Try profiling yourself as per AC's profiling chart here...
http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/profile.html

Regards, and keep up the good work.

kmavm

Having started the bonking thread, I might "weigh in" (ha!) to say that, yes, intense training (or more accurately, recovery from intense training) is somewhat hindered by a hypocaloric diet. It's not entirely either/or, though. It's possible to strike a balance where you run a modest caloric deficit, accepting that it will take a little longer before you're ready to really nail a hard training session. The problem is simply glycogen depletion. When running a caloric deficit, it will take your muscles a little longer to top off their reserves of high-quality fuel, but they'll get around to it eventually. At most, we're talking about 1 less day of intervals per week, while losing 1 pound a week.

There's no reason to at all to lose fitness as a result; in the worst case, your pace of fitness improvements might be somewhat lower than it would otherwise be. Studies examining taper protocols find that most athletes can reduce training volume by 2/3rds (!) and, as long as intensity is maintained, experience no drop in performance for at least a couple months. Habitually hard-training athletes find this hard to believe, but it's a pretty robust result.

I also note that you've been given the standard "piles o' miles" weight loss advice. You should know that that doesn't work for everyone. For two years, I did 200-300 miles per week, and gained three pounds. In the last year, I've done 150-200 miles per week, and lost about twenty pounds. The problem is twofold:

1. We're constantly surrounded by energy-rich food, such that any conceivable exercise-induced caloric deficit can be replaced in just an hour or two of thoughtless eating, and
2. Our bodies have evolved an extremely exquisite mechanism for staying in a neutral-to-slightly-positive energy balance.

These two points mean that, for most, diet, not exercise, is the key to systaining a medium-term energy deficit (and hence, long-term weight loss). Also, I think the "piles o' miles" weight loss program exacerbates the chronic glycogen depletion problem, making hard training truly impossible. Paradoxically, for me at least, the key to losing weight has been training less, and eating a lot less.

There is simply no way to lose 2 or 3 kilos of fat in "a few days." It should take you at least 1-2 months to lose that kind of weight in a way that will maintain health and fitness. Whatever you do, don't literally "fast" for days on end. Snapping in and out of true starvation is an extreme stress; your body will be too busy recovering from trying to digest your muscles to fuel your brain to bother making capillaries, increasing mitochondrial density, or any the other energy-intensive adaptations you're asking your body to make when you train hard.

A final thought: you've discovered one of cycling's "dirty little secrets" that we like to hide from new riders for a while. Many lose a few pounds when starting cycling, especially coming from a sedentary lifestyle, but pretty soon there's a trade-off between optimizing power production, and optimizing body composition. Like all riders, you must try to make a choice about how to live your life to find a sweet spot in that continuum.

I claim that, all else being equal, it is better to be powerful than light.

1. There's no such thing as "too powerful," while there's such a thing as "too light" (i.e., too light for health, or vigorous athletic performance).

2. Event selection can mitigate the importance of low body weight. While we often pretend W/Kg is the only measure that matters, in flatter events it is more likely to be W/Kg^(2/3).

3. Getting powerful is, in a sick way, kind of fun. Sure, intervals are hard, but if we didn't enjoy hard training at some level, we'd all be doing some other activity than performance-oriented cycling. Getting light, on the other hand, is miserably hard work, and can lead to real psychological and physical problems for some; google "anorexia athletica" some time.

4. Subjectively, I think it's easier to take a powerful rider, and lose some weight while maintaining fitness, than it is to take a lean rider, and improve fitness while maintaining body composition. YMMV on this point, admittedly.

Since you're still making huge, relatively easy gains in the power department, I would just keep investing your limited reserves of time and energy there. Only when you start having real difficulty improving your power output would I worry about body composition. That could take years.

whoawhoa

BTW, heres a good chart with expected benefits broken down by zone. http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/levels.html

RapDaddyo

Yes, you are becoming a power junkie. There are lots of worse things to be addicted to. Yes, you could do something like you describe. I see you don't want to give up your L4s, so don't. You just need to recognize that there is a tradeoff between high-intensity (= power increase) and longer duration (= weight loss). But, this a tradeoff you'll need to live with forever. If you want to lose weight without starving yourself, you need to log lots of time in the saddle. If you want to ride with more power and flatten the hills, you need to log lots of high-intensity minutes. You can do both (as I do with 3+ hour rides with ~75-90 mins of L4-L6 time), but not everybody can handle the volume and intensity combined.

Sillyoldtwit

Wow! We have 5 readers of this thread now!

Thanks for your replies guys, I will come back to you after digesting (pun) it all.
Have to get on with some work now. I have some 150 pages of technical documents from Toyota to proofread. So if you ever buy a Toyota and don't understand the English in the literature - blame me!