Re: Training Q

Mark Hickey said:

App said:

Rider 1 rides 25 miles/day, every day with a focus on upping his
average. Doing the simple math, he gets 175 miles per week.

Rider 2 rides four to five times per week, putting in about the same
distance. Rider 2 gets three ~30 mile rides, and then one or two
longer ones.

If all variables were held constant (route, effort, vertical, weekly
distance) except for the frequency, who would end up in better
condition?

Your question doesn't make sense... if rider 2 is doing three 30 mile
rides, then "one or two longer ones" he or she is getting in as many
or more miles than rider 1.

175 - (3*30) = 85

It's called aritemetic, use it!

whew there's a lot of info on starting, developing training
but once into it, aware of the possibilties and potentials-only
specific results can show you the way.
bottom line here was if you train recreational 50 miles once a week
with 15 miles each day-cycle excercises-stretches-nutrition-sprints
then your gonna go 50 miles easy but 100 easy no.
to go 100 then you have to...

Bill Sornson said:

Jim Smith said:

Mark Hickey said:

"App" <[email hidden]> wrote:

> Rider 1 rides 25 miles/day, every day with a focus on upping his
> average. Doing the simple math, he gets 175 miles per week.
>
> Rider 2 rides four to five times per week, putting in about the same
> distance. Rider 2 gets three ~30 mile rides, and then one or two
> longer ones.
>
> If all variables were held constant (route, effort, vertical, weekly
> distance) except for the frequency, who would end up in better
> condition?

Your question doesn't make sense... if rider 2 is doing three 30 mile
rides, then "one or two longer ones" he or she is getting in as many
or more miles than rider 1.

175 - (3*30) = 85

It's called aritemetic, use it!

It's called reading comprehension. Try it!

I actually wrote a response that started out with precisely the same
words (glad I "read ahead"...). ;-)

I didn't read the "weekly distance" proviso to mean that both riders
rode the same weekly distance, but that the rides they each did were
consistent week to week. After all, how can rides of very different
length have the same "route" unless they're doing all their riding on
a five mile loop? Yuck.

In the end, the two riders aren't doing a lot differently, and will
likely end up with fairly similar results. Of course, if rider two
can do his or her "longer ride" at the same "effort" rider 1 is doing
his or her 25 mile rides, he or she is obviously in better shape.

So the question really does need to be explained a bit better... I
think Carl probably nailed down the OP's intent in his missive.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Quoted message said:

A more practical approach would be that someone who never
goes more than 30 miles in training is not likely to do well
if asked to pace himself for an 85-mile ride nearly three
times his normal distance or any ride that takes more than
two hours.

I've found that intensity is a reasonable substitute for distance. I
once did a very windy out-and-back century at a time when I hadn't
done any rides over about 25 miles for months, but a lot of those
rides were at a very high pace. I felt great the whole time, dropped
almost everyone I was riding with and finished with a group of three
others in 4:20 something. Then I went for a ride of about 20 more
miles, and still felt fine. YMMV.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame