![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#31 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Northumberland. UK
Posts: 127
|
Rob
Quote:
![]() Cheers. PB
__________________
What do you mean your legs are hurting? Give it some welly man! Visit My Training Weblog |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#32 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 138
|
Quote:
__________________
These are layman's opinions, expressed in language no self-respecting scientist woul be using. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,286
|
Quote:
This probably isn't the whole answer... but I'll give it a shot. Maybe Ric, Andy or Alex can chime in and correct me or add to my thoughts. 1. In addition to the physiological things listed, there is a neuromuscular component to fatigue at all levels... not just sprinting. Neuromuscular improvements are seen only when training at specific joint angles and velocities. Thus the crossover between cycling and running is limited. 2. Running requires muscles adapt to very high eccentric forces (esp running downhill) and hence fatigue muscles more and reduce the specificity of the exercise. 3. Even when attempting steady state efforts, cycling is fairly stochastic in terms of energy demands (you go hard up little hills, etc). This may not be the case running (I don't really know), but would also influence the specificity and the level of crossover. I actually like my neuromuscular theory... a lot of good middle distance runners I've seen crossover take a while to adapt to cycling (3-12 months), but then are very fit and fast. Or they are fit (they climb) but they are too sketchy in bunches to be bike racers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,588
|
Quote:
1. Training specificity is related to the mode of exercise, not the intensity. 2. Who cares about running/runners? ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 215
|
Back to the original topic. Both my FTP and VO2 max peaks are produced when my base consisted of a large volume of L3 training in the winter. Since I don't have multiple hours to train during the week, that rules out longer L2 rides. OTOH, when in the past I added in too much L4 training, my FTP peaked early and did not rise much thereafter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#36 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 929
|
Quote:
wrt. to the bolded comment, would you mind describing a typical week that worked well for you and one that did not (too much L4?). I'm interested in the volume of L4 in relation to total weekly volume and the intensity and format of the L4 workouts themselves. If you use PMC, an idea of CTL at various phase is also of interest or a chart of course.
__________________
rmur |
|
|
|
|