gyming to improve power
- Thread starter franco1
- Start date
Actually, I average a cadence of 90 on my rides, hills and all. Generally my, maximum falls in the 110-115 rpm range. My minimum, on extremely steep hills is usually around 55-60 rpm. Realize my smallest gear is a 39-25. For the vast majority of the time though (>90%) I'm between 87-95 rpm.n crowley said:
To the extent that it matters, my normal rides have anywhere from 1500 - 2000 ft. in ascent.
mac_220 said:
still not very much force. at your peak power of 1058 W, you can already generate more force and power than that which is required accelerating or attacking. in fact most matched control would have little difficulty being able to apply the same forces and power as (e.g.) TdF riders coming out of a corner (etc).
The difficulty arises in the recovery phase from these accelerations (etc) and maintaining moderate power outputs for long periods of time.
Using Mark as an example (i hope this is okay Mark, as you've already posted your stats in the other thread?) he can already generate more power (and force) than some elite TdF cyclists (and of course lesser ability cyclists). Thus, while it's true that weights will increase peak power (Mark's 1058 W) this isn't really a limiting factor -- it's Mark's MAP and LT that need to be increased. These are achieved by on the bike training (although in low fitness subjects the cycling specific metrics will be increased by other exercise modalities). Of course, on the bike training will also increase Mark's peak power should he want to concentrate on that aspect. Additionally, if Mark decided to go the track 200-m (etc) racing route then weights would be required because of the very high forces and powers required (>2000 W).
ric
Mansmind said:
You temporarily tapped into Anquetil's power generating technique, of
course that's only about 25 % of the power stroke. That increased power
can (with correct equipment and ankle technique) be applied right through
the dead spot area down to 5 o'clock.
i require some 8/9000 calories during long ride days, 3/4000 of those calories are at the expense of cycling, i get those calories by whatever means possible, if i was to eat carbs alone then i wouldn't stop, 12-15% of those calories comes from protein, 25% comes from fats 60% of my calories comes from carbs, i eat alot of fat and maltodextrin and carb drinks. since it is an easy way of upping my calorie intake.ric_stern/RST said:
My diet works, i obtain the calories i require, i recover within 2 days completly.
just cause my diet isn't steamed this, boiled that, fresh this organic the other or green leafy, just cause it isn't the same as yours doesn't make it a poor diet. a poor diet would in my terms be 1000kcal short or to much, doesn't make no difference to me weather food is fryed grilled steamed boiled, organic or not, to me aslong as the calories are there in the quantities i require i don't care. my diet is fine, i just preapare the foods in different ways than you with oil fat, i don't care.
But you probably think fat is a bad thing, but i like my diet when i have very long rides i need extra 2/3000kcal or so, so thats 2 giant fruit and nut 1kg choclate bars complete with 1 litre of irnbru with an apple banna etc and what ever else i can get my hands on to eat. i love my diet and i bet there are hundreds of people out there that would love it also, if it mean't they could reatin a perfect weight.
65miles @ 23mph avg can't be that bad a diet and remain 11.5st, ohhh and i have tryed the higher carbs thing, but recovery periods are slower than extra protein, since i don't have a deskjob, but a job that requires 8hrs strenuous work walking carrying and lifting, i need recovery periods to be as quick as possible to be in condition to do my job and to beablee to pedal the miles to and from work.
diet change left me run down with a cold, so the missus agreed that my diet works for me.
closesupport said:
if you're a pro cyclist riding the TdF!
a good healthy diet referred to how it was in terms of good health and how you food is prepared, not the energy expenditure and input required.
maybe if and when you get coronary vascular disease etc you might think differently.
no, fat is essential in our diets.
ric
you should try to have a week off every 4 weeks 5th week off to prevent plataeu, this gives you time for overal recovery.Pauly Wauly said:
increase your protein intake will increase the rate at which you recover.
65miles yesterday average speed of 23mph max speed 43.5mph 3 hrs of riding alot of which was head wind, this ride alone equates to 3.985kcal,ric_stern/RST said:
plus the 4200kcal's for my basic metab and my daily activities...
calories aren't only used on the bike you know!
i load wagons alday, boxes from 5kg upto 28kg in a warehouse for 7hrs a day, plus lots and lots of walking? maybe around 15000kg of weight moved each day on somedays, by me my friend
39g of fat is essential as a minimum in our diets...... endurance, comes from a mixture of fats and carbs, carbs alone just won't cut it.
closesupport said:
having a week off every 4 weeks would be a waste of time and a sure sign that your training isn't correct. It may not even be necessary to have a recovery week every 4th week.
although protein is important, recovery is more rapid with restoration of muscle and liver glycogen
ric
not necessary, well i wonder why chris carmicheal enforces a very similar regimn for lance armstrong. Guess he is wrong to state that this is the best method to avoid plateu in training?ric_stern/RST said:
closesupport said:
assuming that you mean 3985 kcal for your 3 hr ride (where did the number come from?), then over your 3 hr ride you averaged 369 W, which is highly unlikely, as it would mean you're an elite pro capable of doing rather well in e.g., the TdF!
ric
closesupport said:
i think maybe you need to reread what was written. he doesn't have a week off. he may have an easy week (and i doubt that on such a regular basis) but he doesn't have a week off.
ric
how can you say i generate 369 watts, you don't know my cadenance or my gear the weather conditions, my body surface area nor do you know what type of surface it was on! you can only presume,like the fact that i could do well as a pro cyclist over a number of days. 53x17-53x12 asphault road surface 11.5 stone, with head winds on occassions, plus crosswinds and i ain't an elite pro, i ride for pleasure, i mash out the gears for fun, and train for the chemical buzz.ric_stern/RST said:
I don't race, i don't compete i do however overtake many other cyclist on the road, i do get annoyed with cars that won't exceeed 25mph whilst trying to maintain 40 on certain roads on sundays, i hate traffic lights, but i do love riding around on the velodrome.
this for me replaces marathon training, i have to ride harder to achieve my high, i do think there is no better feeling than pure exhaustion during a bonk, I don't drink alcohol i depplete stores and feel somewhat exhausted, thats more fun.
but the calories used came from.......... http://www.caloriesperhour.com/index_burn.html saves me doing the maths and completing the formulas from time to time i check them out? 185-195max bpm my time zone is set 175-195bpm.
closesupport said:
power = energy expended / time
as you expended (supposedly) 3985 kcal (!) then as a trained cyclists your efficiency is 20 - 25%. 3985 kcal x 4.18 = 16657 kj x ~0.24 (as at ~ 370 W you're very elite) = 3985 kj.
you rode for 3 hrs = 10800 secs
power = 3985 kj / 10800 = 0.369 x 1000 = ~ 369 W
Thus, if your energy expenditure is correct (which it highly unlikely isn't) i don't need to know anything other than EE and duration of bike ride to estimate power output.
thanks. now i know not to visit this site.
ric
easy rides are used to relax the muscles, time off is to aid in recovery.ric_stern/RST said:
srength training the carmichael way, lift lower weights at high repetitions, in the range of 15-20 reps to increase muscular endurance.
but since chris carmicheal coaches lance throughout his training regimn and lance has won the tdf 1999,2000,2001,2002,2003, now 2004 . So i guess you know better than he.
and in the training guide wrote by chris carmicheal that i have here infront of me states this, down times, fitness diet etc, you would like to correct him on some of his many mistakes, since you know best.....
closesupport said:
Actually, i believe it's Ferrari, but that's a different issue.
Anyway, LA (or any pro) would not take a week *off* every 4 or 5 weeks or whatever it was you rambled about. Are you sure you're reading the passage correctly -- having a recovery week every 4th or 5th week is more believeable, but not having a week off?
ric
thats pretty much very similar to what i do after accellerating, i'll sit back and pull up on the bars using my arms to generate more force on the pedals, then when i obtain my desired speed i get to drop the gear and mash out the 12 then when i begin to tire i'll drop to 14 and spin it off to try and maintain it, then agin when i achieve optimal speed returning to the 12,Mansmind said:
then when i require a rest i'll relax one leg pushing down and pulling up for a few minutes alternating between the pair then return to a double stroke to spin to a max speed.
I had a friend way back who took every 4th week off his training. He wasn't a cyclist but I remember many of us were dumbfounded by this idea.
The thing is, though, that when this guy trained he really trained so, by the end of 3 weeks, he was ready for rest.
Personally I still think too many athletes overtrain so the idea of taking a week off is probably a good idea. Plus the knees get a rest.
I don't know who was in charge of Paula Ratcliffe's training but to me it seemed like she was overtrained and hardly to blame for what happened to her in the Olympics. Apparently she still had a virus in her system and was on antibiotics when they shoved her into a major race in far from ideal condition.
If you read Roger Bannister's account of his 4 minute mile, he only trained 4 hours a week while at Oxford and beat a major contender who was training 4 hours a day.
I think there has always been an idea that more is better but so many athletes fall fowl of this temptation (including myself)
The thing is, though, that when this guy trained he really trained so, by the end of 3 weeks, he was ready for rest.
Personally I still think too many athletes overtrain so the idea of taking a week off is probably a good idea. Plus the knees get a rest.
I don't know who was in charge of Paula Ratcliffe's training but to me it seemed like she was overtrained and hardly to blame for what happened to her in the Olympics. Apparently she still had a virus in her system and was on antibiotics when they shoved her into a major race in far from ideal condition.
If you read Roger Bannister's account of his 4 minute mile, he only trained 4 hours a week while at Oxford and beat a major contender who was training 4 hours a day.
I think there has always been an idea that more is better but so many athletes fall fowl of this temptation (including myself)
ric_stern/RST said:
Carrera said:
in an elite or even non-elite athlete, if you took a week off, especially on a regular basis you would detrain. having a week off is different to having a recovery week.
do you mean Paula Radcliffe... or is Paula Ratcliffe a friend of Paula Catcliffe
unfortunately, the Olympics weren't able to wait until she was better
ric
Similar threads
