How to train for first 100k Ride?

Discussion in 'UK and Europe' started by Clogicrogerc, Feb 2, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Clogicrogerc

    Clogicrogerc Guest

    Hi

    Better introduce myself as
    injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.

    Call me Roger for short :)

    Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness up to
    readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax on flattish course within the permitted time limit).

    With running marathons the key sessions were a long-slow-slog, a race-pace-steady-session and
    occasional fast-intervals-with-recoveries. Plus of course easy leisurely recovery runs.

    Is it the same when trying to train for a bike event?

    RC
     
    Tags:


  2. Just Zis Guy

    Just Zis Guy Guest

    On 02 Feb 2003 11:43:40 GMT, [email protected] (CLogicRogerC) wrote:

    >Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness
    >up to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax on flattish course within the permitted
    >time limit).

    At the risk of being trite,

    1. Get on bike
    2. Ride
    3. Repeat

    The critical thing is to make sure your bike is in good fettle and well adjusted - bad fit or
    mechanical breakdown is more likely to terminate your endeavour than lack of fitness, being as what
    as you is a runner anyway.

    A 100k Audax is really not an immense distance, especially for someone who is tolerably fit anyway.
    The time challenge is not punishing either. I ride 15 miles a day round trip to work, and that keeps
    me fit enough to do a century (100 miles) at will with no special training. Any of the club's Sunday
    runs (which can be 80 miles or more) is well within my capabilities, again with no preparation.

    But if you're really keen to measure how well you could do, I recommend that you find the local CTC
    District Association (<http://www.ctc.org.uk>) and ride along on some of their shorter Sunday runs
    to test the water - you will probably be surrounded by people who will be able to help if you have
    issues with knee discomfort or anything. You don't need to be a member to ride along, and you'll
    have a chance to assess some local teashops :)

    I reckon that you'll be doing the 80 mile Brisk ride within a few weeks, and will be shooting for
    Paris-Brest-Paris and that custom Roberts within a month. Hang on, I'll get me bike....

    Guy
    ===
    ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
    dynamic DNS permitting)
    NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
    work. Apologies.
     
  3. Clogicrogerc

    Clogicrogerc Guest

    <<I ride 15 miles a day round trip to work, and that keeps me fit enough to do a century (100 miles)
    at will with no special training. Any of the club's Sunday runs (which can be 80 miles or more) is
    well within my capabilities, again with no preparation.>>

    Wow, thats v different to running, where you really need "time on your feet" in training to complete
    a long event....that was the reason for my question really.

    In changing from running to cycling I didn't want to set unrealistic goals and then not train
    appropriately.

    I'll carry on doing my short (3 miles each way) commute 3 times a week and chuck in one "long slow
    ramble" and one faster 1-hour ride and see how it goes.

    RC
     
  4. Peter B

    Peter B Guest

    "CLogicRogerC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Hi
    >
    > Better introduce myself as
    > injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.
    >
    > Call me Roger for short :)
    >
    > Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness up
    > to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax
    on
    > flattish course within the permitted time limit).
    >
    > With running marathons the key sessions were a long-slow-slog, a race-pace-steady-session and
    > occasional fast-intervals-with-recoveries.
    Plus of
    > course easy leisurely recovery runs.
    >
    > Is it the same when trying to train for a bike event?

    It might be similar if training for a race, which you aren't.

    You already have the general fitness to complete 60 miles, what you my not have is specific muscle
    training which as already suggested you'll develop by riding your bike. Also your knees may have to
    adjust, again building up gradually will ease them along. While trying to avoid the Grandmother/egg
    scenario don't forget to allow recovery periods between rides (you probably know more about this
    than me being a marathon runner).

    The other thing that may hamper you on a longish ride is discomfort. Again just riding your bike for
    longer distances will accustom your body and discomfort will at the least ease, but it is important
    to have the bike set up correctly and have a saddle that suits you. Saddles are personal, what suits
    one may not suit another but I think one general rule is to not be swayed into thinking a soft one
    equates to comfort. Usually the extra padding feels nice for a start but in fact your bum squirms
    around on it rather than sitting on it leading to discomfort.

    Pete
     
  5. Just Zis Guy

    Just Zis Guy Guest

    On 02 Feb 2003 13:02:02 GMT, [email protected] (CLogicRogerC) wrote:

    ><<I ride 15 miles a day round trip to work, and that keeps me fit enough to do a century (100
    >miles) at will with no special training.

    >Wow, thats v different to running, where you really need "time on your feet" in training to
    >complete a long event

    Yes, very different. I'm not sure what the physiological reason is, but I suspect it's mostly about
    the fact that the bike supports your weight, and the gears allow you to turn the effort down to
    whatever feels right. A bike is the most efficient form of transport known to humanity, of course.

    >In changing from running to cycling I didn't want to set unrealistic goals and then not train
    >appropriately.

    I know it seems odd, but most of the audax riders I know don't train in any formal sense. They just
    ride their bikes for fun, and sometimes clock up a brevet along the way.

    >I'll carry on doing my short (3 miles each way) commute 3 times a week and chuck in one "long slow
    >ramble" and one faster 1-hour ride and see how it goes.

    That will probably do it :) But the more the merrier - try taking the long way home sometimes.

    Guy
    ===
    ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
    dynamic DNS permitting)
    NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
    work. Apologies.
     
  6. Tony W

    Tony W Guest

    "CLogicRogerC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Hi
    >
    > Better introduce myself as
    > injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.
    >
    > Call me Roger for short :)
    >
    > Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness up
    > to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax
    on
    > flattish course within the permitted time limit).
    >
    > With running marathons the key sessions were a long-slow-slog, a race-pace-steady-session and
    > occasional fast-intervals-with-recoveries.
    Plus of
    > course easy leisurely recovery runs.
    >
    > Is it the same when trying to train for a bike event?

    Given that you are reasonably fit the alternative approach is to wait till the day, get on the bike,
    ride the 100k, get off but maybe don't sit down for a week :( Possible but none too enjoyable

    100k is no great distance for someone who is reasonably fit. The time requirements of and Audax are
    normally OK though not generous -- remembering that all stops have to be included in your average.

    Get a few miles in your legs. Start gently, increase until you are comfortable doing say
    40k/25miles. From there 60k/40m is a breeze -- though it is putting you into the region where some
    top up food will be needed.

    Take food (energy bars are good, nuts & raisins are a favourite of mine). Eat regularly through your
    ride. Drink plenty of water.

    Your enjoyment will be improved by making sure the bike fits and is comfortable, the saddle is
    comfortable and at the right height and the tyres are suited to the road and pumped up HARD.

    Have fun

    T
     
  7. Pete Biggs

    Pete Biggs Guest

    Just do plenty of brisk 15 to 35 mile rides. That's what I do and it keeps me fit enough for the
    very occasional ~100km ride - without special training or preparation at all.

    ~PB
     
  8. Gonzalez

    Gonzalez Guest

    The Lonely Planet recommends the following to get to cycle fitness:

    Mon Tues Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun Week1 10km rest 10km rest 10km rest 10km Week2 rest 15km rest
    15km rest 20km rest Week3 20km rest 20km 25km rest 25km 20km Week4 rest 30km rest 35km 30km
    30km rest Week5 30km rest 40km rest 35km rest 40km Week6 30km rest 40km rest rest 60km 40km
    Week7 30km rest 40km rest 30km 70km 30km Week8 rest 60km 30km rest 40km rest 90km

    If you already cycle regularly you should be able to cut out the first 4 weeks of the above training
    programme.
    --
    remove remove to reply
     
  9. Clogicrogerc

    Clogicrogerc Guest

    <<Get a few miles in your legs. Start gently, increase until you are comfortable doing say
    40k/25miles.>>

    Cheers - thats a useful benchmark to have. In the past Ive just jumped on the bike after years of no
    cycling and after 35 miles in one go Ive been v sore and with trashed muscles - aim of my question
    was to get an idea of how to pace things to avoid that this time around.

    Cheers,

    RC
     
  10. Nick Kew

    Nick Kew Guest

    In article <[email protected]>, one of infinite monkeys
    at the keyboard of [email protected] (CLogicRogerC) wrote:

    100k on a bike is a short ride, unless you're on "challenging" terrain.

    Many years ago, we did a quick 100K in preparation for my first 'proper' cycling holiday[1]. After
    nothing more than the Girton-Cambridge journey (about 4Km, flat), 100K was enough to get some
    sunburn, but none of the tiredness/stiffness/soreness you might expect after unaccustomed serious
    exercise. And that was after four years of debauchery, aka the student life..

    If you're past a certain age, that might be different. Or maybe not, considering the number of
    people doing serious rides in their eighties and even nineties[2].

    [1] Cambridge to Oxford via Edinburgh and many other great places ...
    [2] Now there's something to hope for ...

    --
    Wear your paunch with pride!
     
  11. Graham Glen

    Graham Glen Guest

    In message <[email protected]>, CLogicRogerC <[email protected]> writes
    >Hi
    >
    >Better introduce myself as
    >injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.
    >
    >Call me Roger for short :)
    >
    >Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness
    >up to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax on flattish course within the permitted
    >time limit).
    >

    I find commuting 15-20 miles every day gives a sufficient level of fitness so that I can go out and
    do 50-60 miles without too many problems. Anything further than that and I would want to put in some
    rides of 40-50 miles to get in better shape.

    Graham
    --
    Graham Glen
     
  12. Jim

    Jim Guest

    This summer I did a charity ride from Chesterfield to Worcester, some 100 or so miles. 6 weeks prior
    I upped my usual weekend sortie by 45 minutes or 1 hour each time and found this to be suitable. I
    usually ride about 3 - 4 hours a week.

    One thing that struck me was that it was only ever a 100 mile ride once, once the first mile was
    covered it then became a 99 mile ride... and so on.

    I reckon your own synopsis below is spot on.

    Good luck !

    "CLogicRogerC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Hi
    >
    > Better introduce myself as
    > injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.
    >
    > Call me Roger for short :)
    >
    > Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness up
    > to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax
    on
    > flattish course within the permitted time limit).
    >
    > With running marathons the key sessions were a long-slow-slog, a race-pace-steady-session and
    > occasional fast-intervals-with-recoveries.
    Plus of
    > course easy leisurely recovery runs.
    >
    > Is it the same when trying to train for a bike event?
    >
    > RC
     
  13. On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 06:43:40 -0500, CLogicRogerC wrote:

    > Hi
    >
    > Better introduce myself as
    > injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.
    >
    > Call me Roger for short :)
    >
    > Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness
    > up to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax on flattish course within the permitted
    > time limit).
    >
    > With running marathons the key sessions were a long-slow-slog, a race-pace-steady-session and
    > occasional fast-intervals-with-recoveries. Plus of course easy leisurely recovery runs.
    >
    > Is it the same when trying to train for a bike event?

    You've gotten a whole lot of advice to the contrary. However, you're describing pretty much the sort
    of training regimen bicycle magazines print every year as guidance for getting ready for centuries,
    and it's generally a good idea.

    It is true that a 100K ride isn't especially long -- especially if you're
    comparing against brevets. In fact, the randonneur group in my bike club
    never puts on a 100K brevet -- 200K is the shortest. A very few clubs in
    North America put on 100K brevets, but to compensate for the very short
    distance, they seek out the most difficult, challenging terrain available.
    A "flattish" 100K -- good luck, maybe things are different in Europe.

    I would advise you to ignore the advice that says "just get on the bike and ride," and equally
    ignore the advice to just do some short commutes. If you aren't a cyclist, you probably should start
    in the 20 mile range and work your way up, increasing the distance by no more than 10-15% each time,
    giving yourself time between rides to recover.

    Once you get up to the 50 mile distance you might just go for it; but many people find the jump from
    50 to 62, 64, in some cases 70 miles (some groups have a funny idea of how long 100K actually is) to
    be taxing. Another thing is there are additional factors in Audax that aren't present in any old
    ordinary ride. If you really wanted to do well, you might want to be sure you can do the distance by
    having done it already before; this will leave you at ease to deal with the other factors without
    the stress of not being sure you can do it, or not knowing from experience how to pace yourself for
    a longer ride.

    Besides - cycling is fun. The more of it you do, the more you enjoy it.
     
  14. M Series

    M Series Guest

    The other replies say it all really. I have no idea what the time limit for a 100Km Audax actually
    is, 6 hours for 100miles is respectable and very doable by a leisure rider with some training. You
    need to adjust your body for several hours in the saddle and I mean your backside, arms back and
    neck, lots of 30 milers will give you the fitness but in my experience sitting in the same position
    for longer than usual gets uncomfortable. This will come with increasing your distance each week. I
    would recommend you do at least one ride of the duration you expect on the day just so you know what
    you'll feel like. When I was just starting serious cycling I averaged about 12mph comfortably, thats
    5 minutes a mile so at that pace non stop your 100km would have taken me 5 hours. Audax time limits
    include your stops don't forget.

    "CLogicRogerC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Hi
    >
    > Better introduce myself as
    > injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.
    >
    > Call me Roger for short :)
    >
    > Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness up
    > to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax
    on
    > flattish course within the permitted time limit).
    >
    > With running marathons the key sessions were a long-slow-slog, a race-pace-steady-session and
    > occasional fast-intervals-with-recoveries.
    Plus of
    > course easy leisurely recovery runs.
    >
    > Is it the same when trying to train for a bike event?
    >
    > RC
     
  15. Chris French

    Chris French Guest

    In message <[email protected]>, CLogicRogerC <[email protected]> writes
    ><<I ride 15 miles a day round trip to work, and that keeps me fit enough to do a century (100
    >miles) at will with no special training. Any of the club's Sunday runs (which can be 80 miles or
    >more) is well within my capabilities, again with no preparation.>>
    >
    >Wow, thats v different to running, where you really need "time on your feet" in training to
    >complete a long event....that was the reason for my question really.
    >
    <snip>

    >I'll carry on doing my short (3 miles each way) commute 3 times a week and chuck in one "long slow
    >ramble" and one faster 1-hour ride and see how it goes.

    Things is, while it may sound like it to you at the moment, 100K on a bike isn't actually a 'long'
    event - it's the sort of distance that someone out for a day ride might do without thinking about it
    (for me it depends on the teashop frequency....). If your are talking about 200k or 400k then some
    more serious preparation might be in order.

    If as you suggest you can get in a couple of longer rides in a week that should probably do
    the trick.
    --
    Chris French, Leeds
     
  16. Frank

    Frank Guest

    "CLogicRogerC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Hi
    >
    > Better introduce myself as
    > injured-runner-using-old-bike-to-maintain-fitness-until-injury-cleared-up.
    >
    > Call me Roger for short :)
    >
    > Any suggestions on the training required to get an "infrequent" cyclist of reasonable fitness up
    > to readiness for a 100k ride (to complete an Audax
    on
    > flattish course within the permitted time limit).
    >
    > With running marathons the key sessions were a long-slow-slog, a race-pace-steady-session and
    > occasional fast-intervals-with-recoveries.
    Plus of
    > course easy leisurely recovery runs.
    >
    > Is it the same when trying to train for a bike event?
    >

    Harden up your bum, this is the only really limiting factor for a fit person. A slow 100km is no
    effort at all.

    I went on the London to Southend last year with a friend the most amusing thing for me was that down
    a shallow incline my bike would accelerate past a pedalling mountain biker even if I wasn't
    pedalling myself. So get yourself a proper bike ;-)
     
  17. Just Zis Guy

    Just Zis Guy Guest

    On 02 Feb 2003 16:22:59 GMT, [email protected] (CLogicRogerC) wrote:

    >In the past Ive just jumped on the bike after years of no cycling and after 35 miles in one go Ive
    >been v sore and with trashed muscles

    Usually the result of mashing the gears or poor fit. I urge you to buy a cheap computer with
    cadence, and keep your cadence above 90rpm. My average cadence is about 95-100 on an upright and
    105+ on a confortable bike[1].

    [1] Give in to your backside, young Jedi! The Dark Side is stronger - wind resistance is futile!

    Guy
    ===
    ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
    dynamic DNS permitting)
    NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
    work. Apologies.
     
  18. Just Zis Guy

    Just Zis Guy Guest

    On Sun, 2 Feb 2003 22:33:14 +0000, chris French <[email protected]> wrote:

    >Things is, while it may sound like it to you at the moment, 100K on a bike isn't actually a 'long'
    >event - it's the sort of distance that someone out for a day ride might do without thinking about
    >it (for me it depends on the teashop frequency....). If your are talking about 200k or 400k then
    >some more serious preparation might be in order.

    Good point. 100k is just round the corner, really. 100 miles is not *that* far. 200k? You'll need
    the Thermos and a second water bottle. Definitely.

    Guy
    ===
    ** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
    dynamic DNS permitting)
    NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
    work. Apologies.
     
  19. Mossimus

    Mossimus Guest

    Help cure cancer. http://members.ud.com/services/teams/team.htm?id=CF728396-DDAA-4B0A-84E6-221
    154760180 "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On 02 Feb 2003 13:02:02 GMT, [email protected] (CLogicRogerC) wrote:
    >
    > ><<I ride 15 miles a day round trip to work, and that keeps me fit enough to do a century (100
    > >miles) at will with no special training.
    >
    > >Wow, thats v different to running, where you really need "time on your
    feet" in
    > >training to complete a long event
    >
    > Yes, very different. I'm not sure what the physiological reason is, but I suspect it's mostly
    > about the fact that the bike supports your weight, and the gears allow you to turn the effort
    > down to whatever feels right. A bike is the most efficient form of transport known to humanity,
    > of course.

    Thought a canoe is more efficient?

    Simon
     
  20. Steve Palincsar wrote:
    > On Sun, 02 Feb 2003 06:43:40 -0500, CLogicRogerC wrote:
    >
    ..
    >
    > I would advise you to ignore the advice that says "just get on the bike and ride," and equally
    > ignore the advice to just do some short commutes. If you aren't a cyclist, you probably should
    > start in the 20 mile range and work your way up, increasing the distance by no more than 10-15%
    > each time, giving yourself time between rides to recover.
    >

    I am sure that for most of the people on this ng, especially those of us who commute over 20 miles a
    day every day, riding 100k is just a matter of doing it. It just requires a bit more time in the
    saddle but no particular effort. I don't know what kind of time you would be expected to do it in at
    an Audax event, but it seems a usual minimum average is 15kph and 100k at 15kph on the road and
    assuming it's not all uphill, should be doable by anyone who wants to, with no more preparation than
    daily commuting. Higher averages might indeed require some sort of training regime.

    Rich
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...