Quoted message said:I don't understand this....isn't the point of training improved fitness? So why not improve
fitness and undergo a slight calorie restriction to lose weight at the same time?
It depends on your training. A lot of low intensity (some higher intensity) training is fine, but
your regime sounded rather strenuous and caloric restiction doesn't work well with high volumes of
intense training. Whether this was why you got sick can't be said, but it may have contributed
And I always thought that you should do longer
Quoted message said:interval training earlier in the season and progress to shorter anaerobic efforts closer to racing
season (I usually start these in April). Am I wrong in this? Don't forget, I ride all year, so to
do long, easy rides
(ie: the weird "base training" thing) seems counterproductive to me. It's not as if I ever *stop*
riding, I just go a little easier in November/December. I typically range between 8000-10000
miles per year. I did do some days where the intervals were shorter, but I don't see the
point of doing a lot of base miles (junk miles?) when I never stopped riding all year.
It is a common misconception that somehow the body can't handle short intervals. I fell for this one
for numerous years and its bullsh#t. I actually find some of the stuff I read online humorous
because its so far fetched. In fact, I would argue the other way around, but that's just because I
have my own views on training. I would say that you should always focus on short then long and move
away from revolving your training around threshold (another misconcetion). There is no magic
intensity, and actually, threshold training is more strenuous than 1 minute intervals.
Another misconception is that base miles are "junk" miles. Glen Swan loved to talked about how you
only training yourself slow, but not everyone can come out in April and ride hard. The fact is, base
miles help you build on the high intensity training and vice versa. To go fast you need to go REALLY
FAST for less time.
Quoted message said:That's a bummer for me....sounds as if you started back all over
again.
Well not exactly. I should point out that I was not laid up for a month. I actually lost about 2
weeks solid, like you. And, as Booth showed in 1977, two weeks of detraining sets you back almost to
zero, at least from an enzyme standpoint, and cardiac function, as well as blood volume. However,
you do have those capillaries and the neural pathways are intact. The point is, if you tested
yourself, you're at near zero, but it comes back quick, so stay focused and reasonable and you'll
move abck up fast.
Quoted message said:Darn. What HR zone do you envision for this base training period? Also, I eat very, very well.
Lots of lean protein, high fiber carbs, fruits and veggies, which is sort of a natural South Beach
diet for me (Phase 2 and on). All I do when I want to get superlean is limit my calories a
reasonable amount so that I have a slight caloric deficit every day. I do factor in for aerobic
activity, but not for weight training.
Assuming your LT zone is correct, anything up to 160-165. Blocks of tempo work are good and break
the monotony. They also are quite effective at raising LT without being as stessful.
Quoted message said:Would cold medicines have the same effect? (I want to avoid an artificial increase in HR).
Not really. Cold meds use pseudoephedrine which is super weak. You won't get much buzz at all.
Quoted message said:Thank you so much for your time in writing a great, informative response, even though you made me
a bit bummed about the loss of fitness :<
Don't be. I actually look at it as a new challenge and a chance to try a new approach. Now that I
care less about race results I'm not afraid to try just about anything in training. If it works,
I'll try it with a client, if not, I toss it. Look at this as a new challenge and you'll be more
focused; its just one more hurdle. :~)=>..
Best wishes, Chris
