Training to be a better climber

[edd]

This probably been discussed to death, however trying to put a new spin on it. I just ride for fun, yeah and it's no fun when others ride past you, hills particularly, so everybody really wants to be a better climber. I work in a gym and teach spin classes … had a guy ask me what weight training he should do to help him climb better on his bike, I showed him some stuff and then fessed up that none of this is really going to make him a better climber. As it has been repeatedly stated here, fitness is very activity, action velocity specific. And then a light came on in my head. What most people don't get in the gym is the progressive nature training must incorporate to continue to induce improvement. Could this be the same for road cyclists ???

First theory for training hill repeats

Start with a biggish gear so you are out of your comfort zone and push a cadence of 50 to 60. if you don't quite make the top of the hill, is okay, if your knees scream at you it's not okay. depending on the hill I'd start with 5 repeats. Keep this up each week until you can make the top of the hill on all of the repeats.

Then lift the cadence to 60 - 70, same again, then lift to 70 - 80

once you get to over 80, up a gear go back to 50 to 60

I like to use a metronome, as well as a cadence computer.

( shoot me down if you think I'm wrong, that's why I'm here)

 

[daveryanwyoming]

....What most people don't get in the gym is the progressive nature training must incorporate to continue to induce improvement. Could this be the same for road cyclists ???...

Edd, I'll agree with this part, you do need to periodically increase your training load or you'll move from training to maintaining. As discussed in another thread you'll adapt to a given steady load(assuming the load is well chosen and within your ability to adapt to it) in 6 weeks or so. IOW you want to increase your load more often than that as long as you're actually adapting.

As for the other part, I think you're still stuck thinking in terms of strength as in the way a lifter thinks of strength instead of thinking in terms of sustainable power. I was just looking at some power vs. pedal torque data from recent rides. If I want to sustain 350 watts at my typical cadences(80-90 rpm) I'm putting a bit less than 50 pounds into each pedal stroke. Just about any healthy adult can do countless 50 pound single leg presses. But most can't do them 80 to 100 times a minute for hours or even minutes. The question is not about peak strength, it's about the ability to efficiently deliver energy to the working muscles.

The key to developing better climbing or time trialing or general riding fitness is about training those systems that deliver energy to the muscles for repeated quick contractions. As long as you focus on the strength component you'll miss the point for everything except standing starts and final sprints but even those won't matter much if you don't have your aerobic sytems working really well. So read up on the kreb cycle or aerobic and anaerobic glycolysis or just cut to the chase and read up on L3-L5 power training in Hunter and Coggan's book. That's the kind of stuff that will make someone a better climber and it doesn't rely on starting out at really low cadences and suffering in huge gears which can't be good for connective tissue or joint health.

If your hills force you to 50 rpm then you need lower gears, either a wider range rear cluster or a compact crank or both. Heck if it takes a triple to let you ride at more reasonable cadences, then get one. I do think it's good to expand your useable range of cadences from a narrow 80-90 rpm to something more versatile like 70-110 rpm or even higher. Extending the top end is particularly helpful for responding to sudden surges and attacks without always having to shift first. Specificity certainly comes into play, but if you're slogging along at 50 rpm on hills you're overgeared.

-Dave

 

[edd]

As for the other part, I think you're still stuck thinking in terms of strength as in the way a lifter thinks of strength instead of thinking in terms of sustainable power. I was just looking at some power vs. pedal torque data from recent rides. If I want to sustain 350 watts at my typical cadences(80-90 rpm) I'm putting a bit less than 50 pounds into each pedal stroke. Just about any healthy adult can do countless 50 pound single leg presses. But most can't do them 80 to 100 times a minute for hours or even minutes. The question is not about peak strength, it's about the ability to efficiently deliver energy to the working muscles.

The key to developing better climbing or time trialing or general riding fitness is about training those systems that deliver energy to the muscles for repeated quick contractions. As long as you focus on the strength component you'll miss the point for everything except standing starts and final sprints but even those won't matter much if you don't have your aerobic sytems working really well. So read up on the kreb cycle or aerobic and anaerobic glycolysis or just cut to the chase and read up on L3-L5 power training in Hunter and Coggan's book. That's the kind of stuff that will make someone a better climber and it doesn't rely on starting out at really low cadences and suffering in huge gears which can't be good for connective tissue or joint health.

If your hills force you to 50 rpm then you need lower gears, either a wider range rear cluster or a compact crank or both. Heck if it takes a triple to let you ride at more reasonable cadences, then get one. I do think it's good to expand your useable range of cadences from a narrow 80-90 rpm to something more versatile like 70-110 rpm or even higher. Extending the top end is particularly helpful for responding to sudden surges and attacks without always having to shift first. Specificity certainly comes into play, but if you're slogging along at 50 rpm on hills you're overgeared.

-Dave

no argument from me, don't get where you think I'm focussed on strength ? if one is sustaining a load for a prolonged period at any cadence then it is power output that is being trained. Maybe starting at cad. of 50 is a bit slow and 60 would be less of a strain. It is the nature of progressively lifting the cadence as a training method which is the question here.

 

[daveryanwyoming]

no argument from me, don't get where you think I'm focussed on strength ? if one is sustaining a load for a prolonged period at any cadence then it is power output that is being trained. Maybe starting at cad. of 50 is a bit slow and 60 would be less of a strain. It is the nature of progressively lifting the cadence as a training method which is the question here.

Fair 'nuff, I guess it was the reference to gym training coupled with 50 rpm that led me to think you were strength focused. Even 60 rpm on a hill sounds low for the sake of my knees, especially in this day of wide clusters and compact cranks. I think extending your power range to a wider range of cadences is a good idea. I'm just not convinced you need or want to train for efficiency at low cadences which imply higher peak pedal force and higher stress on your joints.

-Dave

 

[edd]

. I do think it's good to expand your useable range of cadences from a narrow 80-90 rpm to something more versatile like 70-110 rpm or even higher.
-Dave

Here's the rub … lot of bods can spin along a flat or even a slight incline at 110, soon as they hit a hill they **** out, cadence drops to 65 and they slow right down. I like to climb at 75, if i need to chase I can lift but if I sustain 95 + I soon **** out too.

Something I noted, when one is in the big chain ring little sprocket, a lift in cadence has an enormous effect on ones bike speed as the bike slows down and the gears go to small chain ring big sprocket one ability to produce a sustained power becomes more of the thing.

 

[edd]

Fair 'nuff, I guess it was the reference to gym training coupled with 50 rpm that led me to think you were strength focused. Even 60 rpm on a hill sounds low for the sake of my knees, especially in this day of wide clusters and compact cranks. I think extending your power range to a wider range of cadences is a good idea. I'm just not convinced you need or want to train for efficiency at low cadences which imply higher peak pedal force and higher stress on your joints.

-Dave

If you check out most weekend pack riders, they climb a a pretty low cadence, just their adaptation I guess

 

[daveryanwyoming]

If you check out most weekend pack riders, they climb a a pretty low cadence, just their adaptation I guess

Could be, but if you're offering a training program do you want to mimic what folks happen to be doing or what they should be doing?

 

[postal_bag]

I think the best way to get better at climbing is to improve your power to weight ratio. You don't even need to ride hills to do this. Lose weight, off you and/or the bike, and work on increasing your power output.

If you are doing hill repeats, choose a comfortable cadence and pace that you can maintain for the entire set. No need to use a hard gear, unless you are training for the 50 rpm Wolrd Championships. Then, work on increasing your speed, as you progress.

 

[edd]

I think the best way to get better at climbing is to improve your power to weight ratio. You don't even need to ride hills to do this. Lose weight, off you and/or the bike, and work on increasing your power output.

If you are doing hill repeats, choose a comfortable cadence and pace that you can maintain for the entire set. No need to use a hard gear, unless you are training for the 50 rpm Wolrd Championships. Then, work on increasing your speed, as you progress.

very good point, only the guy who asked me about improving his climbing looked like he weighed 40 kg nothing left for him to loose I reckon.

AND your point … do the same thing over and over and you get better at doing the same thing ?

 

[edd]

Could be, but if you're offering a training program do you want to mimic what folks happen to be doing or what they should be doing?

mmmm … where do you start ?

I would think at what they can do …

 

[postal_bag]

very good point, only the guy who asked me about improving his climbing looked like he weighed 40 kg nothing left for him to loose I reckon.

AND your point … do the same thing over and over and you get better at doing the same thing ?

No, I said to try to increase your speed as your training progresses. Same principle as what you proposed, really, except trying to remain at a more comfortable cadence. This should be done using the same hill for comparison of similar workouts.

 

[daveryanwyoming]

mmmm … where do you start ?

I would think at what they can do …

I'd start by getting them to shift down on long hills. In fact I've started this way with countless new riders over the years that mistakenly feel they're not working unless they're pushing hard.

 

[edd]

I'd start by getting them to shift down on long hills. In fact I've started this way with countless new riders over the years that mistakenly feel they're not working unless they're pushing hard.

okay … and then what ?

 

[daveryanwyoming]

okay … and then what ?

Then your plan or any other that ramps their power as they adapt works fine. You could do the same climbs in the same gears and ramp cadence as you suggest. You could do the same climbs and ramp gears over time as they progress and hold cadence in a small range. You could pick longer hills to hold them at L4 longer. You could pick steeper hills that push them to ride at higher power in the same or even lower gears. Anything that gets them to ramp training load to stay a step ahead of adaptation gets the job done.

I've got no argument with your basic observation and approach but it is only one way to ramp intensity with time and I'd definitely train at moderate to high cadences rather than accept slogging away in overly big gears.

-Dave

 

[edd]

Then your plan or any other that ramps their power as they adapt works fine. You could do the same climbs in the same gears and ramp cadence as you suggest. You could do the same climbs and ramp gears over time as they progress and hold cadence in a small range. You could pick longer hills to hold them at L4 longer. You could pick steeper hills that push them to ride at higher power in the same or even lower gears. Anything that gets them to ramp training load to stay a step ahead of adaptation gets the job done.

I've got no argument with your basic observation and approach but it is only one way to ramp intensity with time and I'd definitely train at moderate to high cadences rather than accept slogging away in overly big gears.

-Dave

Between the lines there are some intersting issues. For one, at high cadence ones aerobic capacity is taxed considerably and developing that capacity is important.

Why do most, if not all cyclist climb at a lower cadence then they ride a level road ?

I'm not pretending to know the answer to this. It's a genuine question.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Why do most, if not all cyclist climb at a lower cadence then they ride a level road ?

Physics. and the size of your gearing.

ric

 

[dm69]

Agree with what someone else said earlier. To climb a hill better you need to train the sytems needed to get yourself over the hill as fast as possible. There is no wonder workout you can do in the gym & there is no magic cadence that will make you faster.

Its about increasing your power over the time frame it will take to climb the hill. I am on the pro weights side & I believe it has helped certain aspects of my daily life and cycling but nothing I do in the gym will replace on the bike fitness. If you believe gym work will simply make you climb hills better then your missing the point!

 

[edd]

Agree with what someone else said earlier. To climb a hill better you need to train the sytems needed to get yourself over the hill as fast as possible. There is no wonder workout you can do in the gym & there is no magic cadence that will make you faster.

Its about increasing your power over the time frame it will take to climb the hill. I am on the pro weights side & I believe it has helped certain aspects of my daily life and cycling but nothing I do in the gym will replace on the bike fitness. If you believe gym work will simply make you climb hills better then your missing the point!

I don't think anyone believes gym work wil make you better on the bike …

 

[edd]

Physics. and the size of your gearing.

ric

That's concise …

So we inherit the gearing the powerful pro rider use and struggle up hills in a 39/23 and at a 65 to 75 cadence … is that a fair interpretation ?

would we be more effective climber in an easier gear if we had one and spin at 90 cadence ?

 

[legs gone]

can anyone explaine why is it that a person can spin 90-100rpm on the flats but as soon a hill comes up he cant even spin at 70 and higher.What training needs to be done to over come this.