Any thoughts? Are long, steady bike sessions better for fitness than super intense, short sprints uphill where heart rate soars?
These days I tend to mix it up a bit. I'll maybe do 2 hours steady riding on the flat and occasionally throw in some uphill sprints at the end.
I seem to be doing far more miles this year than in the past and find I can keep going for ages with minimal elevated heart rate. I wonder how much these long stints help my fitness and how much it might help my weight stabilise.
Cycling Training · Public discussion
L.S.D. is it any good?
Thread navigation
Jump through the discussion
Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.
Thread details
What we know about this thread
- Original section
- Cycling Training
- Published
- 7 June 2006
- Last activity
- 10 June 2006
- Original author
- Carrera
- Posts
- 6
- Discussion status
- Public discussion
- Total views
- 1,416
- Views / 30 days
- 0
The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.
-
-
Carrera said:
Any thoughts? Are long, steady bike sessions better for fitness than super intense, short sprints uphill where heart rate soars?... I wonder how much these long stints help my fitness and how much it might help my weight stabilise.
Your question is essentially wrong, since you limit yourself to LSD or short sprints. The basic goal of cycling training is to raise your FTP (functional threshold power, defined as roughly the power output you can maintain for one hour). All the studies show that the best way to raise FTP is "mid length" intervals, in the 10-to-20 minute range. These aren't sprints, they are sessions when you are training right around - slightly below to slightly above - FTP. To get beyond a simple posting, you need to look at any book on cycling training, Joe Friel or Chris Carmichael (among others) have books on training in general, Andy Coggan has an excellent book on training with power (while aimed at power meter users, it covers a lot of training philosophy). LSD essentially trains you to ride long distances relatively slowly; do enough LSD and you get training benefits (i.e. you gradually increase your speed) but you would get the same benefits with a lot less saddle time by interval training. And those short, intense sprints which I discount in your question do have a training benefit, but primarily for racers who need to be able to do short intense sprints.
-
I think Friel has the right perspective on it. It's an early-season phase, which one shouldn't overlook:
ultrafit.comjanuary06.htmlOpen ↗ -
But here's the question I'm wrestling with. Once you've already established a good base and are very fit on the bike, are miles that don't really hurt contributing in any way to improving TT times? Logically it seems to me that mileage done at moderate pace should be helpful as part of a varied training program (because you can't do all your mileage at max). On the other hand, when I am riding at moderate pace, intuitively it feels to me like, aside from weakening the bike = pain association, it's doing my ability to TT no good at all.
And if that's so, then if you adhere to hard-easy-hard training days, you might as well change that to hard-skip-hard-skip, etc. How would it hurt to just eliminate the easier miles? (Yes, I know, "recovery" - but recovery takes place while you're watching TV, too.)
-
Pendejo said:
But here's the question I'm wrestling with. Once you've already established a good base and are very fit on the bike, are miles that don't really hurt contributing in any way to improving TT times? Logically it seems to me that mileage done at moderate pace should be helpful as part of a varied training program (because you can't do all your mileage at max). On the other hand, when I am riding at moderate pace, intuitively it feels to me like, aside from weakening the bike = pain association, it's doing my ability to TT no good at all.
And if that's so, then if you adhere to hard-easy-hard training days, you might as well change that to hard-skip-hard-skip, etc. How would it hurt to just eliminate the easier miles? (Yes, I know, "recovery" - but recovery takes place while you're watching TV, too.)
I read somewhere that a lot of coaches are now telling their riders to do just that: Ride hard, then watch TV on recovery/rest days instead of doing LSD rides. By "hard" I mean something like a zone 2 or higher ride (I use a heart-rate monitor). Skip zone 1 rides completely.
I mostly follow this system, and I'm faster this year than last year. I ride zone 2 most of the time, add in sprints one day a week, and race or ride my TT-pace once a week. Was riding 200-300 miles/week, mostly easy, but now just 150-200 at a higher intensity. Simple, makes me faster, and saves me time. YMMV, and I'm sure I could improve on this system.
-
Recovery rides work better then just watching TV due to increase in blood flow to remove any unwanted chemicals from the muscle. This can be done by just riding slow for 20min at the end of a hard ride. There is no need to dedicate a whole days training to recovery if you allow enough cool down time after each ride. Then those recovery day can be spent in other area's of you life. Balance is the key to avoid staleness.
Active in the last 60 minutes
Active in this thread
0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total
No signed-in users are active right now.
No known search crawlers active right now.