Page 3 - Level 2 revisited

20-01.-2007, 04:16 AM

#31

RipVanCommittee

Registered User

Join Date: Nov 2005

Posts: 110

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by acoggan

That was the one I had in mind. Dated or not, I would assume that any training recommendations that it contains reflect Lemond's thinking, or at least his thinking at the time.

I'm pretty amazed that you haven't already read it!

The funny thing is, he makes the same statement in his book (which I'd quote, but I lost the book long ago...) regarding long rides. He says something to the effect that the only reason to do 6 hour rides was to get to/from/between the big passes, and that the climbs themselves where the only part that mattered.

I think you'll find the training section of the book really interesting. Reading that book, btw, is what convinced me to buy a bike!

20-01.-2007, 04:19 AM

#32

TiMan

Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2003

Location: Recovery is the Golden Fleece and almost nobody gets it right

Posts: 484

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiredued

What book are you talking about? The book I read "Greg Lemond's Complete Book of Bicycling" 1990 seemed a bit outdated.

..... but only because it has no power based training. It's still the best single book on the market for training in general. It has a lot of detail that you will not find any training book, except for Hunter/Coggan's. ie" Friel's Bible is WAY too vague IMHO.
If you get this book, David Morris's book on block training and the Hunter Coggan book then you'll have all the info you will ever need to reach Cat 1.
....but Lemond has learned much more since then and especially in regards to training by power.

Wiredued, there really is "nothing new under the Sun" in training except for the power meter. We may know the "WHY's" better nowadays but as far as new methodology...nope. They were even doing classic block training 40 years ago.

The only thing "new" is O2 carrying(building) drugs and thats why riders are better now than "back then".

Last edited by TiMan : 20-01.-2007 at 04:26 AM.

20-01.-2007, 04:26 AM

#33

wiredued

Registered User

Join Date: Aug 2004

Posts: 1,159

Re: Level 2 revisited

We must have our books mixed up as I recall Greg advocated alot of endurance hours per week and a very traditional approach....I have to find that book now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TiMan

..... but only because it has no power based training. It's still the best single book on the market for training. It has a lot of detail that you will not find any training book, except for Hunter/Coggan's. ie" Friel's Bible is WAY too vague IMHO.
....but Lemond has learned much more since then and especially in regards to training by power.

Wiredued, there really is "nothing new under the Sun" in training except for the power meter. We may know the "WHY's" better nowadays but as far as new methodology...nope. They were even doing classic block training 40 years ago.

The only thing "new" is O2 carrying(building) drugs and thats why riders are better now than "back then".

__________________
Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. http://www.earnharts.com/html/reala...ecific.asp?id=3

20-01.-2007, 04:32 AM

#34

TiMan

Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2003

Location: Recovery is the Golden Fleece and almost nobody gets it right

Posts: 484

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiredued

We must have our books mixed up as I recall Greg advocated alot of endurance hours per week and a very traditional approach....I have to find that book now.

Yes, in the book there is a lot of "hours"...but notice that he recommends threshold training and sprint training year round...and even going above threshold at times in the winter.
The hours are relatively low in the winter...add them up from his own personal training...... and then build to a high amount before the first races..... and 20-25 hours per week for the "in season" for a top amateur rider and 22-26 for a pro.

Lemond did mention this in his seminar and said that he has since learned that you don't need to do that many hours to reach a very high level.

This is NOT what is currently "the rage" in modern cycling. The current rage is old fashioned Russian style(pre 1980) periodization, which died relatively quickly with runners and nordic skiiers. This old style of periodization was taught by Matveyev in Russia. It was quickly replaced by Zatsiorsky who included all factors of training (Peter Coe, Seb Coe's dad, called it multi tier training) but most Western CYCLING coaches adopted the old format of training.

Lemond, Hinualt, Fignon and their coahes Guimard, Paul koechli never bought into this old style Matveyev, Carmichael/Friel approach.

Guys like Carmichael who recommends NO threshold work this time of year and even promotes what he calls "foundation miles" for months on end in the Fall and winter. These foundation miles are very low level L2. Friel is very similar in his approach and guys follow his advice to the T.
Carmichael approach is very popular because it is easy and because he said Lance used it. He is really "pushing" CTS now for the big $$$.

Last edited by TiMan : 20-01.-2007 at 05:04 AM.

20-01.-2007, 04:36 AM

#35

acoggan

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 2,592

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by TiMan

Lemond has learned much more since then and especially in regards to training by power.

Especially after Monday.

20-01.-2007, 04:38 AM

#36

acoggan

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 2,592

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by RipVanCommittee

I'm pretty amazed that you haven't already read it!

I never read any of the popular books on training until just a couple of years ago. I then bought 5 or 6, read them in a weekend, and sold them all except one: Better Training for Distance Runners, by Martin and Coe.

20-01.-2007, 04:42 AM

#37

TiMan

Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2003

Location: Recovery is the Golden Fleece and almost nobody gets it right

Posts: 484

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by acoggan

Especially after Monday.

he he.....I hope you invited him to join the forum....if any top ex pro would it would be him....he loves to talk....and to teach.
God would that be a blast.
Then this forum would out put the "Carmichael Training Centers" out of business.

20-01.-2007, 04:46 AM

#38

TiMan

Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2003

Location: Recovery is the Golden Fleece and almost nobody gets it right

Posts: 484

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by acoggan

HA!.....like me too! Too weird! I threw them all away including Friels, except for Lemonds book, "Better training for Distance runners", and now the Hunter/Coggan book.
There is one other really good book out there Andy...get it....it called
"Road Racing for Serious Runners"
http://www.humankinetics.com/produc...isbn=0880118180

20-01.-2007, 04:49 AM

#39

acoggan

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 2,592

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by TiMan

That does look like a good one - thanks for the suggestion.

FWIW, if I ever got around to writing a book on training (vs. powermeter use), it would probably be rather similar to these two running books. (I even have a tentative working title: The Physiology and Biomechanics of Cycling.)

20-01.-2007, 05:06 AM

#40

jstock

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2006

Location: Northern Europe

Posts: 69

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by TiMan

"Better training for Distance runners", and now the Hunter/Coggan book.

Me too. Does this mean I will become as fast as you guys are/were?

Thank you for all the interesting reading on the forum as well!
/J

20-01.-2007, 05:08 AM

#41

TiMan

Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2003

Location: Recovery is the Golden Fleece and almost nobody gets it right

Posts: 484

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by jstock

Me too. Does this mean I will become as fast as you guys are/were?

Thank you for all the interesting reading on the forum as well!
/J

I'll be a CTS(Carmichael) coach and say YES he he he

....but the most important factor is genetics BY FAR.

Keep training tough and you'll get good enough!

20-01.-2007, 05:13 AM

#42

Bruce Diesel

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2004

Location: Johannesburg

Posts: 189

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by TiMan

Lemond quotes on training.

Referring to Cramichael's training approach for top riders Lemond says this....

"He (Chris Carmichael) would say, "I am doing a lot of quantity and quality". But you can't do both without drugs. You can't be doing 30 hours a week and still ride hard." I can tell you that I rarely did 30 hours a week, and this is what they are doing regularly." Mountain Bike Action

Here are a few quotes I recorded from a seminar I attended. Dug up my tape.

"You should train for 2-3 days of quality training in a row and then take 1-2 days off for rest and recovery, and some may need more time off"

"I almost always took one day off the bike, usually Monday, and one day at a very easy spin per week, usually Fridays, as a pro, so most of you with a real job and other life stressors should take at least this much. Many of you will need more recovery time each week."

"If a guy is taking only one day off a week he is not training properly, and he will eventually over train unless he takes drugs. You need at least one day off the bike and one day of very easy spinning per week year round".

"There are so many myths and traditions in cycling and so many riders, and even coaches, are misinformed. Great cycling fitness and performance is a byproduct of an incredible VO2 max, big stroke volume, and well honed lactate threshold. To increase these you need quality training."..... Now he raised his voice a bit and said......"This cannot be done with low level endurance riding! You need to do a lot of lactate threshold training, some tempo, and then latter on, and a few weeks before your early races, start doing VO2 max intervals as well."

"Most riders don't have a clue when it comes to structure in their training. I would sooner have a guy say that he trains only three days a week because he trains so hard that he needs the other days to recover rather then I ride six days a week."

Then after the seminar he hung around for like an hour while guys bombarded him with questions.

Cool eh

Ti

Speaking of Lemond quotes. There is a small book from Bicycling Magazine, 1000 tips for cyclists or some such title.

There is a quote attributed to Lemond in there saying that 12 hours a week of (quality) training was enough time to reach 95% of your potential as a cyclist (I think the word quality should prefix training).

20-01.-2007, 05:21 AM

#43

Spunout

Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2005

Posts: 637

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by acoggan

No, I'm not. Clearly, however, you don't have to do 5+ h training rides to race 5+ h as Spunout asserted.

More specifically, it's a mistake to try to directly link race duration to how much/how long one should train...

It wasn't meant as a DIRECT link sir. There are other things learned in a 5 hr ride: How to eat, drink, prepare your ass for the saddle, your core strength, etc.

On the TSS question: I think an athlete should have experience performing the work needed for the race. If it is 3,000KJ, then train for that output. Some may be able to do it in 3 hours, others may need 5 hours.

20-01.-2007, 05:30 AM

#44

Spunout

Registered User

Join Date: Sep 2005

Posts: 637

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by acoggan

That was the one I had in mind. Dated or not, I would assume that any training recommendations that it contains reflect Lemond's thinking, or at least his thinking at the time.

Agree. Read around the lines, and meld the ideas and understanding with today's tools. It is so very very current.

I'm going to go read it again too

20-01.-2007, 05:34 AM

#45

peterpen

Registered User

Join Date: Jul 2003

Posts: 343

Re: Level 2 revisited

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spunout

I agree with this completely. One important benefit is training how to optimally recover from such target outputs, which is obviously more important for those of us who may race consecutive days.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode