Wouldn't riding a bigger gear give you the same effect?
Nope.
netscriber said:
In other words isnt improvement being able to ride at a faster RPM on the hill with a given gear ratio?
Yes, that would be improvement. But if you're at a higher rpm in a given gear ratio, then you're moving faster and it doesn't take as long to get up the hill, as I said.
netscriber said:
I just cant imagine how one can outgrow a hill unless its a 10 second hill or a sprinters hill.
That would depend on where you typically ride and what constitutes a 'sprinter's hill'. Eastern Kansas is comprised of endlessly rolling terrain in every direction. The absolute longest hills around here are ~.5 miles, but they can be fairly steep (~6-8%). Also, keep in mind that by 'outgrow' I mean that that particular hill is no longer useful for the duration of interval that I want to train, and that I have to go find a longer hill, which may be many miles in another direction.
Sorry I do not understand this. Wouldnt a bigger gear make you work harder by increasing your speed or limiting your RPM? 😕
Maybe I misunderstood you, sorry. Yes you'll be working harder, but for a shorter length of time because you reach the top of the hill faster. But that's missing the real point.
The problem isn't that I can't work *hard* enough, it's that I can't work hard for *long* enough (because the hill is too short).
It's nothing new. Miguel Indurain climbed with a 10 pound weight hung round him on a regular basis when he was champ. There's no proof such a tactic works but maybe it's worth a go. But I always get to thinking you could equally just push a bigger gear rather than add 10 lbs.
Exactly. 😄 Increased sustainable power is the key. Not adding weights to the bike.
Edit: FWIW, Ric Stern has weighed in on this topic before (comes up often) and he states that there is no need to add weights to the bike. I don't know what A. Coggan would say but I'd bet dollars to donuts that it would be the same advice.
Maybe I misunderstood you, sorry. Yes you'll be working harder, but for a shorter length of time because you reach the top of the hill faster. But that's missing the real point.
The problem isn't that I can't work *hard* enough, it's that I can't work hard for *long* enough (because the hill is too short).
I know it doesnt always make sense but I used to "simulate" hills by sometimes riding a huge gear on false flats or riding into a headwind. I know it doesnt simulate a climbing position and the effects of elevation but somehow my simple mind says work is work. Simplicity aside, I agree given a shorter distance if one wants to increase workload the only way is to add weights.
Edit: FWIW, Ric Stern has weighed in on this topic before (comes up often) and he states that there is no need to add weights to the bike. I don't know what A. Coggan would say but I'd bet dollars to donuts that it would be the same advice.
In response to someone adding weight to make their climbs *harder*, yes, and I would agree. Note the difference between that, and what I'm saying now.
Exactly. 😄 Increased sustainable power is the key. Not adding weights to the bike.
Edit: FWIW, Ric Stern has weighed in on this topic before (comes up often) and he states that there is no need to add weights to the bike. I don't know what A. Coggan would say but I'd bet dollars to donuts that it would be the same advice.
I bet dollars to doughnuts that your dollars to doughnuts bet would win. I think this argument is a paralell to the SE debate that AC concluded by bringing his bazooka to the gunfight.
I bet dollars to doughnuts that your dollars to doughnuts bet would win. I think this argument is a paralell to the SE debate that AC concluded by bringing his bazooka to the gunfight.
The only benefit is physcological. Some people are limited mentally to going a faster speed, so by adding resistence at the same speed, they can train 'better'.
The faster I go, the more fun it is, so I wouldn't want to slow myself dow.
The only benefit is physcological. Some people are limited mentally to going a faster speed, so by adding resistence at the same speed, they can train 'better'.
The faster I go, the more fun it is, so I wouldn't want to slow myself dow.
I hears Jamie Staff does standing starts in a 100" gear with a 50lb weight vest...I can hear my knees popping now🙂 ...You should be doing your downhill work with an emergency chute anyhow🙂
No, the benefit of adding weight to the bike is that it *slows the bike down* at a given power. Who cares, you might ask? The answer is "people in a vertically challenged locale who want to train on hills." I've found, as my fitness has increased, that I've pretty much outgrown all the hills in the rolling terrain near me because I'm able to ride faster than I ever did before. Hills that used to make nice 5-minute intervals are now 2-3 minute intervals or less at a power level that's challenging to me. By adding weight to my bike, I could put out the same power at a slower speed, and thus my local hills are now 5+
Seems that your power-to-weight ratio has ~doubled; great achievment!
Yes, just add extra weight equal to your own weight to the bike and you'll have 5 minute intervals again. Or maybe you could just push some another cyclist up the road?
Honestly, I can't see a "substantial" benefit of wearing a weighted vest even if it is a mental barrier, but then again I have on occassion been passed by a racer mom or dad pulling one of those little baby carts up a hill and I thought to myself that they have to be working harder than me or I am really slacking (more than likely the former).
Seriously, one thing I would like to include to the conversation (for lurking newbies) if one insists on experimenting with some sort of weighted device is that it is stable, evenly distributed and has safety built in. Meaning that a shift in weight by a home made device or apparatus can obviously cause a crash or cause serious stress, back or joint injury.
Yes, just add extra weight equal to your own weight to the bike and you'll have 5 minute intervals again. Or maybe you could just push some another cyclist up the road?
If I do the MS150 this year, it'll be with my 10 yr old daughter on a borrowed tandem. She'll be good company and good ballast at the same time. 🙂
Seems that your power-to-weight ratio has ~doubled; great achievment!
You know? I tried to run a numbers scenario to illustrate the point I was making about slowing the bike down in order to use my limited geography to the best advantage. For any reasonable amount of added weight (say, < 20lbs) it really doesn't make much difference in the duration of the shortish climbs that I have around here -- maybe 15-30 seconds. Granted, that's a big difference up one climb in a race, but I was talking about doing timed intervals of a few minutes long, and in that context a few seconds probably isn't worth the effort of weighting the bike. You'd pretty much have to tow a trailer to make a significant difference in the duration of the hills around here.
I can still think of some instances where towing a child or weighted trailer may be helpful, so I won't bash the idea anymore, but it wouldn't help me here. 🙂
You know? I tried to run a numbers scenario to illustrate the point I was making about slowing the bike down in order to use my limited geography to the best advantage. For any reasonable amount of added weight (say, < 20lbs) it really doesn't make much difference in the duration of the shortish climbs that I have around here -- maybe 15-30 seconds. Granted, that's a big difference up one climb in a race, but I was talking about doing timed intervals of a few minutes long, and in that context a few seconds probably isn't worth the effort of weighting the bike. You'd pretty much have to tow a trailer to make a significant difference in the duration of the hills around here.
I can still think of some instances where towing a child or weighted trailer may be helpful, so I won't bash the idea anymore, but it wouldn't help me here. 🙂
Sounds like your searching for the benifit of short low cadence intervals. As I remember Acoggan said Se training was a waste of time but short intervals with hight tension low cadence was very usefull. [censored], I think I just put word in ACs mouth🙂
Sounds like your searching for the benifit of short low cadence intervals. As I remember Acoggan said Se training was a waste of time but short intervals with hight tension low cadence was very usefull. [censored], I think I just put word in ACs mouth🙂
...and mine. 🙂 No, what I'm talking about has nothing to do with cadence, or pedal force, leg strength, or SE. If you've ever tried to do intervals by power outside on rolling terrain, then you may have observed that while climbs almost *force* you to a high power, it's very difficult to hold a high power level on a downhill section. Those downhill sections really kill the average power of an interval, even though someone pacing by HR may barely notice them because of the time delays involved. I'm talking about using climbs or hill repeats to help with high-power intervals, but the problem in Kansas City (and many areas) is that there aren't really any hills *long* enough to do a 20, 10, or even 5 minute interval at ~300-400w. By slowing down the bike at high power, I thinking of effectively making the hill seem longer (timewise) to facilitate intervals of several minutes long. By adding resistance to the bike, a rider could use a *lower* gear / higher cadence to make the climb take longer, but still be putting out high power levels.
Your power output will not change by simply adding weight to your bike; all that will happen is that you go slower for the same power output you were putting out before.
As for anecdotal stories of racers training with a weight on their bike and subsequently being fast...well, that's all they are - anecdotal. Attributing performance to one training "trick" done over the winter is completely missing the point anyway.
Oops! I didn't see this when I made post #25. :o But yeah.
For the people who have gotten faster from training with a weighted bike (provided it is measurable and not "I feel faster"😉, it is most likely due to improved levels of fitness, which of course are obtained by working harder.
...and mine. 🙂 No, what I'm talking about has nothing to do with cadence, or pedal force, leg strength, or SE. If you've ever tried to do intervals by power outside on rolling terrain, then you may have observed that while climbs almost *force* you to a high power, it's very difficult to hold a high power level on a downhill section. Those downhill sections really kill the average power of an interval, even though someone pacing by HR may barely notice them because of the time delays involved. I'm talking about using climbs or hill repeats to help with high-power intervals, but the problem in Kansas City (and many areas) is that there aren't really any hills *long* enough to do a 20, 10, or even 5 minute interval at ~300-400w. By slowing down the bike at high power, I thinking of effectively making the hill seem longer (timewise) to facilitate intervals of several minutes long. By adding resistance to the bike, a rider could use a *lower* gear / higher cadence to make the climb take longer, but still be putting out high power levels.
My take on your question is that you are trying to mimic the demands of climbing....without climbing.? I am no pro, but when I ride miles on rolling terrain , my legs are happy around 90rpm, when I am climbing my cadence usually drops to 60+-.I usually climb seated and yes there is more power being made.Ok all anecdotal. I would think that to improve climbing ability without climbing you would have to duplicate cadence, pedal force, watts, and style(seated or standind) How bout a parachute?....No seriously🙂
