# Intervals or more miles?



## texasnavy05 (Aug 2, 2011)

So, I am just getting in to road riding, but have been mountain biking for a few years. I am currently about 260lbs and have been riding a 20 mile ride three or fours times a week. I have been averaging between 16.2 and 16.6 on the rides. So, I know I am overweight, but im confident it will come down with training. Right now my primary goal is to get faster, and surely the weightloss will follow if i eat a reasonable diet. 

For my main question...Should I be riding more mileage weekly to get in shape quicker and get faster, or should I be doing interval training and the like?


----------



## mtrider05 (Aug 8, 2009)

Ride more.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Nothing is going to make you faster than doing intervals...however, considering you have a fair amount of weight to lose, I'd suggest longer rides with intervals mixed in...it's not hard to do, really.

Three longer rides a week...say 35-40 miles with a few hard 5 to 20 minute intervals thrown in during the ride and you will both get faster, but also lose weight.


----------



## Bethelcat (Aug 13, 2011)

Intervals will make you faster quicker but you will not have the endurance to keep it up for long. Interval training will also slow your weight loss due to the different energy system from that for 'more miles'

Best bet is to go for longer, slower rides which will develop your endurance and accelerate weight loss

You will get faster through losing the weight; and, you may be surprised at how quickly the weight will come down

Good luck!


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

texasnavy05 said:


> So, I am just getting in to road riding, but have been mountain biking for a few years. I am currently about 260lbs and have been riding a 20 mile ride three or fours times a week. I have been averaging between 16.2 and 16.6 on the rides. So, I know I am overweight, but im confident it will come down with training. Right now my primary goal is to get faster, and surely the weightloss will follow if i eat a reasonable diet.
> 
> For my main question...Should I be riding more mileage weekly to get in shape quicker and get faster, or should I be doing interval training and the like?


You don't really ride enough to be concerned with specific interval training, although if you are stuck on an indoor trainer for regular sessions, then interval work is often a good choice as it helps make the session more interesting.

Depending on where you ride, having a ride option that has hills (or a loop course with a hill) usually takes care of simulating intervals anyway.

I would suggest, in order of priority:

0. Sort out your diet. This has, by far, the biggest impact on weight loss. If you took years to get to where you are, then expect that sustainable weight loss will take a long time too.

1. Increase ride frequency to at least 5, maybe even 6 days per week. You will be better to work on this first as there are a lot of benefits to frequency. Even if you do just 30-min on the extra days to start with, and/or make them easy rides. Ultimately you want to make non-ride days the exception to your routine (but give yourself one day off the bike per week).

2. Then work on doing more, but gradually (biggest mistake made is trying to do too much too quickly). Add about 15 minutes per week to your total ride time until you are reaching a limit on available time for your cycling. Only takes 2 months to add 2 hours per week to your regular training load. For someone that hasn't really been riding for long or isn't all that fit, that's quite a substantial change.

3. When you are approaching a ceiling of available training time, then begin to increase the challenge on some rides, by making one of them harder, or attacking the hills a bit more, or do that challenging ride twice per week. This is when you can look at doing some intervals.

Once you get to that level, then there are many options to take yourself to the next level (and you will be ready for it).


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Bethelcat said:


> Intervals will make you faster quicker but you will not have the endurance to keep it up for long. Interval training will also slow your weight loss due to the different energy system from that for 'more miles'


The energy system (and fuel substrate mix) we use is irrelevant. It's the total energy (Calorie / kJ) balance that dictates rate of weight loss or gain.


----------



## locustfist (Feb 21, 2009)

Distance and speed aren't as important as most people think when they frist get started. The quality of the ride and the time spent on the bike are the two factors that will matter more.

When you plan your rides think in terms of how much time you will spend riding more so than how far you're going.

Once you feel like you can put in a quality ride for 3 hours (not fast, just solid and steady) then I would start worrying about intervals and maybe some hill repeats.


----------



## zoikz (Sep 5, 2003)

sounds like a chicken and egg problem. will you get lighter once you get faster, or will you become faster when you become lighter. You need to be doing both of these at the same time.


----------



## Harley-Dale (Sep 2, 2011)

A lot of good talk here on this. Good input for developing your training regimen, Tex.

I will throw in my .02. Heart Rate Training. It is the best tool you can have for exercise, IMO. Using a heart rate monitor (HRM) can ensure you are training at a level that increases both speed and endurance.

Research (google, bing) the subject and you will get a lot of info. But, basically, determine your maximum heart rate and setup your training so that your endurance days are at about 60-70% of your max HR. Stay in that range as long as possible, not going under and staying under as much as possible to ensure you dont over-do it. 

A good endurance workout goal should be about 40-60 minutes. Some say 30 mins is good, but its only to gain some level of fitnet, but not increase it. Bottom line, you need more minutes to increase fitness. You wont see a marathong runner doing 30 minutes training, I can sassure you.

As for intervals, start slow. But, you want to build up the interval so that you are working at least 85% of max HR, or more preferably. Each interval should last a certain period too. Its hard to say what works for you, but maybe start at 30 or 60 second interval at 90% of max HR, with a 30 second recovery between each. Do 5-6 intervals to start, and increase the number and duration of each as time goes on. Recovery between each interval should be about half to the same time of the interval.

Be sure to do several miles warm up and cool down before doing intervals. Same with the endurance sessions. Proper warm up and cool down gets the muscles prepared for work.

There are many different views on HR training for cycling, so I am sure others will weigh in on it here. But, the premise is that the HR is the tachometer for your body and will tell you a lot about where you are working and what level.

I have used HRMs for training since the early 90's. They work great and maximize your training time. I use it for running as well as biking (now that I am back on a bike). I used to race frequently (run and bike) and the HRM helped me get much faster over just traditional training advice.

HTH, and good luck on the weight loss. You are doing something great for yourself, keep it up!


----------



## mimason (Oct 7, 2006)

Biking will be fine to focus on but the best way to lose weight is to mix in swimming and running if possible....as well as the proper diet of course as already indicated.
Consider:
Add 15 minutes(Brick) to your bike workout by following up with a 1-2 mile run/jog or do a 30-45 minute swim followed by your bike routine.

or ride your 3-4 days a week and on the off days fit in a run or swim.


----------



## CyclingVirtual (Apr 10, 2008)

More miles initially especially over the winter, as your new to road you need to build your base before you work specifically on speed. (still have the odd burn up when group riding)
Think of training like a pyramid, the bigger yor base the higher peak you can reach.


----------



## 2gen454 (Sep 3, 2011)

Thanks for all the great tips on building a solid base guys! As someone new to road biking I can definitely put this info to use. I also began a running regimen last year and just completed the Chicago Half Marathon last weekend using similar advice in my training. To add a little to the already great list of tips I will say this,the best tip I was given when first starting was to listen to your body. When first starting out it's so easy to fall into a trap of constantly pushing for more and faster, but if you're able to pick up the small hints your body is sending you will slow down when needed and avoid the dreaded injury bug. Avoiding the injury bug is way easier than working through it!!

Mike

Just a noob looking to do things the right way.


----------



## mimason (Oct 7, 2006)

..and then of course there is this advice:
Chopper Reid - Harden the **** up, Australia - YouTube


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Harley-Dale said:


> As for intervals, start slow. But, you want to build up the interval so that you are working at least 85% of max HR, or more preferably. Each interval should last a certain period too. Its hard to say what works for you, but maybe start at 30 or 60 second interval at 90% of max HR, with a 30 second recovery between each. Do 5-6 intervals to start, and increase the number and duration of each as time goes on. Recovery between each interval should be about half to the same time of the interval.


Just to clarify, one the biggest limitations of using HR to guide training intensity (and there are several) is the lag time between actual effort and HR response. This is especially so for short intervals such as you describe. HR is useless to guide such efforts.


----------



## Taco Brown (Dec 1, 2010)

> I would suggest, in order of priority:
> 
> 0. Sort out your diet. This has, by far, the biggest impact on weight loss. If you took years to get to where you are, then expect that sustainable weight loss will take a long time too.
> 
> ...


Best advice you will get. Right on.


----------



## texasnavy05 (Aug 2, 2011)

alright, thanks everybody for the advice. lots of useful info here. So my goal now is to be to ride 6 days a week vs. 3 or 4 and put more mileage in on those rides. ive got a good loop thats about 20 miles that I can ride twice for a 40 mile ride. Im going to try riding that on mon, wed, fri, and on tues, thurs, and sat do a twenty mile loop. There are some small hills in the loop so I will use those as my intervals. that will be about 180 miles a week. Between that and a healthy diet, i should drop the weight pretty quickly.

Next question, I havent been riding anything much longer than an hour at a time so i havent been concerned with on the ride nutrition. Now, if i am doing a 40 mile loop it will likely take me 2.5 hours to complete. What should i be eating on the bike for rides that last that long?


EDIT: HTFU is always the simplest and probably the best answer!!


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

texasnavy05 said:


> alright, thanks everybody for the advice. lots of useful info here. So my goal now is to be to ride 6 days a week vs. 3 or 4 and put more mileage in on those rides. ive got a good loop thats about 20 miles that I can ride twice for a 40 mile ride. Im going to try riding that on mon, wed, fri, and on tues, thurs, and sat do a twenty mile loop. There are some small hills in the loop so I will use those as my intervals. that will be about 180 miles a week. Between that and a healthy diet, i should drop the weight pretty quickly.
> 
> Next question, I havent been riding anything much longer than an hour at a time so i havent been concerned with on the ride nutrition. Now, if i am doing a 40 mile loop it will likely take me 2.5 hours to complete. What should i be eating on the bike for rides that last that long?
> 
> ...


Please read the first sentence of my point #2. And then read it again a few more times until it sinks in. 

Ramping up ride volume too fast is the most common training mistake. Don't add much to what you are doing now, just a little each week.


----------



## texasnavy05 (Aug 2, 2011)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Please read the first sentence of my point #2. And then read it again a few more times until it sinks in.
> 
> Ramping up ride volume too fast is the most common training mistake. Don't add much to what you are doing now, just a little each week.


I did read that part about the most common training mistake. But I guess I dont understand how its going to be a problem. Im not going to push myself until I get hurt. I am just going to increase my ride lengths and probably ride in a bigger cog than i used to. So, I guess what Im saying is what is the risk of increasing ride lenght too quickly?


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Overuse injury. Over training. That's the two most common problems caused by increasing training too quickly.

HTFU is brainless. Sometimes it's the right answer. Sometimes it's exactly the wrong answer.


----------



## mtrider05 (Aug 8, 2009)

If you suddenly double your riding time you're going to hurt yourself, you may get away with a week or 2 of doing that. By that time, your increase in fatigue will hamper your riding more than anything, so rather than riding 150 miles a week you'll find yourself unable to even handle your old schedule. Increase slowly and work up to it, no one who rides 60 miles a week then suddenly jumps to 200 will be successful.


----------



## Gunnar75 (Feb 15, 2011)

I dropped over 20 pounds last winter to my target weight tracking my calories on Spark People. Helped me get the hang of my calorie needs then commuting 30 miles round trip 3 to 4 days a week with a 40-70 mile ride on weekends trimmed me up very nicely. 

I dropped weight added muscle and even look more muscular in dress shirts! (People ask often if I work out

Spark people is a free website and phone app. There are several webpages like it but this one had a good database of regular foods I eat. Didn't switch to a crazy diet, just ate better. 

I use a Polar heart monitor, some days I go really fast in zone 5 other days I keep in lower hr zones for a long time. Just depends on how I feel as well as how much time I can spare. 
Don's analyze this stuff so much that it makes riding a burden. Have fun and ride your bike!


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

texasnavy05 said:


> I did read that part about the most common training mistake. But I guess I dont understand how its going to be a problem. Im not going to push myself until I get hurt. I am just going to increase my ride lengths and probably ride in a bigger cog than i used to. So, I guess what Im saying is what is the risk of increasing ride lenght too quickly?


Increased susceptibility for illness, increased potential for injury, requirement for more physical recovery time than is ideal, and ending up with an overall slower progress than you would otherwise make over the medium to longer term. 

In the end you will be unable to sustain it, physically, mentally or both, will be forced to take a longer than ideal unplanned break and just go backwards after some initial gains. That screws with the mind and is demotivating.

It's an approach to training that is analogous to crash diets for weight loss.


----------



## Harley-Dale (Sep 2, 2011)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> . HR is useless to guide such efforts.


Is a HRM the best tool money can buy? No. Is it useless? Absolutely not. One needs to learn more about HR training, which was made clear in my original post. 

I understand the statement about interval training and the lag, or actual increase in HR once effort is reduced in an inteval segment. I saw it consistently when I did intervals for marathons and 10k training, as well as hill work on the bikes.

We can agree, there are nuances and limitations to training with a HR that need to be understood. But, I still advocate it over a calendar schedule of workouts and sticking to a workout just because its on the calendar. 

More than once my HR was higher than it should have been due to lack of recovery. I just had to adjust my workout accordingly. So, again, it comes back to knowing more about the tool and learning how to use it properly. But, its not useless.


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> The energy system (and fuel substrate mix) we use is irrelevant. It's the total energy (Calorie / kJ) balance that dictates rate of weight loss or gain.


Thats true, but its almost impossible to burn as many KJs doing intervals as you can riding long and steady.


----------



## mtrider05 (Aug 8, 2009)

kbiker3111 said:


> Thats true, but its almost impossible to burn as many KJs doing intervals as you can riding long and steady.


That's still total energy, interval work outs are usually > 1 hour so obviously riding 2-3 hours at tempo would burn more.


----------



## DM.Aelis (Jun 19, 2007)

Harley-Dale said:


> Is a HRM the best tool money can buy? No. Is it useless? Absolutely not.


If you read Alex's post, he clearly specifies that it a HRM is useless for "such efforts" as short, anaerobic efforts of high intensity such as sprints, neuromuscular work, etc. Not useless in general.

We're all in agreement that HRM's aren't useless.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Have you gone to a doctor for a complete heart makeover? I hope you did before you started to pursue this course of action.

First thing go on the South Beach diet, a lot of overweight people are allergic to carbohydrates, check out the diet and start doing it, give it a 30 day trial and see if the weight doesn't start to tumble off. If it does then stay the course of the diet.

I agree with most of the others about the interval training, don't worry about that till later after you been riding for about a year and your weight has dropped and you have a good solid base of ride miles under you.

Running at 260 pounds could damage your ankles, knees and maybe hips too, so I kind of disagree with that, but you know your ankles, knees, and hips better then I do. I do agree swimming is a good mix but I would mix it with cycling due to less stress on joints. Don't do something because it's faster in the weight loss department, because it could hurt you so bad you won't be able to do anything...you don't want that.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

DM.Aelis said:


> If you read Alex's post, he clearly specifies that it a HRM is useless for "such efforts" as short, anaerobic efforts of high intensity such as sprints, neuromuscular work, etc. Not useless in general.
> 
> We're all in agreement that HRM's aren't useless.


Correct. Used well they can certainly be a helpful guide, provided one understands their limitations. When you talk about short range interval efforts such as those mentioned by Harley-Dale, _even if they are not flat out efforts_, HR response is still too slow to be of any value in guiding such efforts.

That is one of the limitations with using HR. It doesn't mean one can't train well, it just means one can't usefully use HR to guide such efforts.

Even when doing hard (primarily) aerobic intervals, HR is still too slow to guide such efforts properly. As Harley-Dale indicates, you can use HR to guide threshold work provided you understand typical HR response (in particular not starting out by raising HR too fast and then allow for cardiac drift).

See this chart for examples of HR response from long threshold intervals and shorter 4-min intervals that begin to elicit a VO2max type response and you will see how once you go supra threshold, HR becomes useless as a guide to intensity:


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

kbiker3111 said:


> Thats true, but its almost impossible to burn as many KJs doing intervals as you can riding long and steady.


Well of course if you ride for longer (provided you are not tooling along) you'll likely metabolise more energy than you do on a shorter ride, but that's not relevant to what I said which was in response to Bethelcat who suggested:


Bethelcat said:


> Intervals will make you faster quicker but you will not have the endurance to keep it up for long. *Interval training will also slow your weight loss due to the different energy system from that for 'more miles'*


I was pointing out that adipose tissue (fat) loss/gain is simply a matter of energy balance, and the energy system used for the energy metabolised side of the equation doesn't matter.

Also, when a rider does attain a reasonable level of fitness such that intervals are a sensible way to develop their capabilities further, then interval work that raises one's power output at threshold also enhances endurance capabilities. Longer rides at the same absolute intensity become easier due to a range of physiological adaptations which, ironically, change the balance of energy systems used.


----------



## Harley-Dale (Sep 2, 2011)

Alex, great posts. It helps to explain the limitations of a HRM. The chart you provided clearly illustrates the known limitations of HR training that must be taken into account, and have been well documented for years (at least 1992, when I first read of this).

To me, for a recreational athlete, especially the OP who is starting a weight loss plan, I think the HRM has some benefits. But, a wholistic training plan must be developed that encompasses the training principles you have pointed out, in order for the HRM as a tool to be of much use.

You did a great job summarizing a training plan for him. If he follows it religiously and doesnt get caught up in the "more miles is better" mindest, he will gain a healthy body and lower his weight.

To the OP, take the training advise to heart and realize that the road to where you want to be, with your weight or athleticism, is a long one. It takes time to drop the weight and to feel good about riding 10, 20, 50 miles. But, keep the goal there, and follow the training plan and not over do it.

When I trained for competition, it was easy to over train thinking I need to get my fitness level up for racing season. Being in the Army, I was deployed frequently and would go days without training, and when I returned home I felt I had to make up for lost time.

Trying to do too much resulted in a lot of pulled muscles and aggravated tendons. I even had a stress fracture of my fibula from going too hard, too soon preparing for a key running race early season.

Point is, take it easy, and have fun, and dont over do it. My stress fracture took 8 weeks to fully heel before I was back to training, which cost me the entire season. Dont let this happen to you. Follow the coaching advice here and you will do great! 

Good luck, and congratulations on your efforts to lose weight!


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

With higher intensity intervals burning significant glycogen, I think there's an impact on post-workout hunger, not for the better. I doubt I'm terribly unique, but I'd _feel_ much more hungry after a 1 hour interval workout than a 2 hour endurance ride despite burning more calories (at least according to my HRM). 

Trying to lose weight and build strength takes a lot of careful balance. Cut your calories too much and it's easy to make recovery difficult. 

I've always found a patient approach to be the most effective in the long run, but few are patient enough.


----------



## texasnavy05 (Aug 2, 2011)

So I am going to keep riding and add a mile on to each ride each week. for a total of about 5 additional miles each week. sound reasonable? Staying away from interval training for now, other than trying to attack the few hills on my ride. But just trying to keep a pace that is pushing for the entire ride. I am currently running bc my wife registered us for a half marathon in nov. so ive been training for that for about a month now.. so i run 3 times a week. my rides will be mon-21 miles, tues, 13 miles(easy), wed-21 miles, thurs-rest, fri-21miles, sat-10 miles mtn bike ride(easy), sun-21 miles. How does this look? Only difference to my current schedule is im taking away a day of rest for an easy 13 mile ride. total mileage for the week is 84 (hard) miles and 23 miles (easy).

BTW, I am already getting faster. im averaging over 18mph for my 20 mile loop now!


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

texasnavy05 said:


> BTW, I am already getting faster. im averaging over 18mph for my 20 mile loop now!


Your quite the man, 260 pound fellow averaging 18mph over a 20 mile loop?!! I've never heard of anyone ever doing that at that weight. I knew a guy who was 240 pounds of muscle and couldn't do that, not even close; now he can but he's lost 60 pounds and he's been riding very long distances for at least 8 years now.

It sounds like you have some sort of century training schedule, if not here's one: Training for a Century Ride

And here's a lot of how to's for training for a century: Ultra Cycling: Preparing and Riding a Bicycle Century


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Everyone is fast on the internet.


----------



## Harley-Dale (Sep 2, 2011)

Never stop, Texasnavy! Congrats, keep it up!


----------



## texasnavy05 (Aug 2, 2011)

spade2you said:


> Everyone is fast on the internet.


If you live near Austin, TX I would be glad to show you. I understand your skepticism though. I have no reason to make this up. If I were going to stretch the truth about anything I would probably not say I was 260 pounds!!


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

lots of good advice in here. Reminds me of some physiology class that I have since long forgotten a bit


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

texasnavy05 said:


> If you live near Austin, TX I would be glad to show you. I understand your skepticism though. I have no reason to make this up. If I were going to stretch the truth about anything I would probably not say I was 260 pounds!!


Really, I don't care how fast you are or aren't, but everyone is faster on the interw3b. 

Besides, average speed doesn't tell you much. For a 260lb rider going that fast, there aren't hills and it's probably not that windy.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

spade2you said:


> Really, I don't care how fast you are or aren't, but everyone is faster on the interw3b.
> 
> Besides, average speed doesn't tell you much. For a 260lb rider going that fast, there aren't hills and it's probably not that windy.


Austin TX has no hills or wind? Even on flat land without wind a 260 pound guy averaging 18 mph is extraordinary, I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm just saying its extraordinarily rare. If he can do that speed now wait to some of the weight comes off his average speed along with training should be in the mid 20's over a longer distance. I believe that's world class speed, I think the average TDF rider speed is 24mph over a 100 mile route, but still with training?

Your in Austin, why not hook up with Mellow Johnny's bicycle shop and join a team? Or start with Kevin Livingston's indoor training program? You have quite a few options living there for training guidance.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

froze said:


> Austin TX has no hills or wind? Even on flat land without wind a 260 pound guy averaging 18 mph is extraordinary, I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm just saying its extraordinarily rare. If he can do that speed now wait to some of the weight comes off his average speed along with training should be in the mid 20's over a longer distance. I believe that's world class speed, I think the average TDF rider speed is 24mph over a 100 mile route, but still with training?
> 
> Your in Austin, why not hook up with Mellow Johnny's bicycle shop and join a team? Or start with Kevin Livingston's indoor training program? You have quite a few options living there for training guidance.


I was only in Austin for a bit and I don't remember it being particuarly hilly. It was hot as hell without a breeze, but I was only there a short while and I didn't explore the areas where people ride.

Regardless, everyone is faster on the internet and avg speed doesn't tell ya much. I could tell ya how fast my ~20 mile avg is, but avg speed only matters in ITTs and only on race day.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Bethelcat said:


> Intervals will make you faster quicker but you will not have the endurance to keep it up for long.


Really? Ever hear of TABATA? They will increase you endurance as well.



> Interval training will also slow your weight loss due to the different energy system from that for 'more miles'


LMFAO! Are you serious?



> Best bet is to go for longer, slower rides which will develop your endurance and accelerate weight loss


Yes, longer rides will help increase endurance, but so will PROPER Intervals. Weight loss can come with endurance or intervals. Are Sprinters fat? I mean Olympic Sprinters, not cyclists.

Before spreading some advice, please now what your talking about.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

kbiker3111 said:


> Thats true, but its almost impossible to burn as many KJs doing intervals as you can riding long and steady.


No true. Learn to do proper intervals and you could burn more. Also be more productive in less time.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

texasnavy05 said:


> So, I am just getting in to road riding, but have been mountain biking for a few years. I am currently about 260lbs and have been riding a 20 mile ride three or fours times a week. I have been averaging between 16.2 and 16.6 on the rides. So, I know I am overweight, but im confident it will come down with training. Right now my primary goal is to get faster, and surely the weightloss will follow if i eat a reasonable diet.
> 
> For my main question...Should I be riding more mileage weekly to get in shape quicker and get faster, or should I be doing interval training and the like?


I would do both. It keeps the body form falling into a rut.

Do 3-4x 20 mile rides. Then throw in 2-3 Interval rides based on TABATAs. These will take 10-20min total and you will see a HUGE increase in endurance, weight loss, speed and power.

These can be done off the bike via running, swimming or with functional weight program.


----------



## texasnavy05 (Aug 2, 2011)

spade2you said:


> Really, I don't care how fast you are or aren't, but everyone is faster on the interw3b.
> 
> Besides, average speed doesn't tell you much. For a 260lb rider going that fast, there aren't hills and it's probably not that windy.



"everyone" is not faster on the internet. I dont come here to brag. Just to get some opinions that I use to form my own conclusions. So, you can stop insinuating that I am lying or exaggerating, because Im not. 

My average does tell me something. It shows me how i am improving on the same ride I have been riding for three weeks. 

You are correct about the hills. On the ride I have been doing, it is fairly flat. The wind though...I guess I havent ridden enough to know what a bad wind is, and I can imagine it being pretty bad, but there is some wind. I would say between 6-12mph usually.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

spade2you said:


> I was only in Austin for a bit and I don't remember it being particuarly hilly. It was hot as hell without a breeze, but I was only there a short while and I didn't explore the areas where people ride.
> 
> Regardless, everyone is faster on the internet and avg speed doesn't tell ya much. I could tell ya how fast my ~20 mile avg is, but avg speed only matters in ITTs and only on race day.


Sometimes I ride the same "loop"(s) and made note of my average speed the last time I rode them, as far as personal information goes I find knowing the average speed to be helpful to see if there's been any improvements, but I'm not racing so it only matters to me and then only matters a little.

I've through Austin some years ago but I can't remember the landscape either, I thought there were some rolling hills but I may have that confused with Kerrville TX area.


----------



## Bethelcat (Aug 13, 2011)

Dirt Boy - calm down; we are not (yet) talking about a programme for an Olympic athlete and whilst intervals like TABATA are profoundly effective, it may kill a 260lbs athlete or at least his enthusiasm for cycling


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

texasnavy05 said:


> So I am going to keep riding and add a mile on to each ride each week. for a total of about 5 additional miles each week. sound reasonable? Staying away from interval training for now, other than trying to attack the few hills on my ride. But just trying to keep a pace that is pushing for the entire ride. I am currently running bc my wife registered us for a half marathon in nov. so ive been training for that for about a month now.. so i run 3 times a week. my rides will be mon-21 miles, tues, 13 miles(easy), wed-21 miles, thurs-rest, fri-21miles, sat-10 miles mtn bike ride(easy), sun-21 miles. How does this look? Only difference to my current schedule is im taking away a day of rest for an easy 13 mile ride. total mileage for the week is 84 (hard) miles and 23 miles (easy).
> 
> BTW, I am already getting faster. im averaging over 18mph for my 20 mile loop now!


Texas, I've been in the sport for many decades (5) and have seen many well-meaning and enthusiastic bike riders come & go. The biggest factor by far to their demise has been over-enthusiasm and over-reaching. They simply did too much too soon and mentally burned out and/or physically injured themselves (tendinitis, Chondromalacia).

We adapt to stress placed on the body during rest and if enough time isn't provided for this adaptation then our performance goes downhill. Do not underestimate the value of rest and recovery. Please consider taking complete days off - like 2-3 per week. I wish I could check back with you in a few years to see what advice you took and whether you are still riding.


----------



## DIRT BOY (Aug 22, 2002)

Bethelcat said:


> Dirt Boy - calm down; we are not (yet) talking about a programme for an Olympic athlete and whilst intervals like TABATA are profoundly effective, it may kill a 260lbs athlete or at least his enthusiasm for cycling


Nothing I recommended is hard or something that may "kill him", LOL. 

If I have stay at home Housewives doing that type of training, I am sue the OP can.
I also teach and recommend doing TBATAs on a stationary bike. I do my in a Spinning bike.

Oh, I have a 290lbs client doing this. Sorry, now 215lbs after 6 months.  :thumbsup:

But I agree, with Mike T here. Anyone can get burned out if they do too much too quickly.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

froze said:


> Sometimes I ride the same "loop"(s) and made note of my average speed the last time I rode them, as far as personal information goes I find knowing the average speed to be helpful to see if there's been any improvements, but I'm not racing so it only matters to me and then only matters a little.
> 
> I've through Austin some years ago but I can't remember the landscape either, I thought there were some rolling hills but I may have that confused with Kerrville TX area.


Average speed is an alright formula to gauge fitness, but there are lots of variables. I live in an area where the wind can vary greatly. Sometimes I need to slow/stop at intersections, which drops my avg as well. Depending on traffic conditions and weather, my TT speed can vary, which isn't a reflection on my fitness.

Furthermore, if I say my avg is X, it's virtually worthless unless we're all on the same routes. If you asked me what my avg speed on a flat route with minimal wind was, I'd have no idea since I rarely ride those conditions.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

A rider of this size on flat roads with no wind could do 18mph on ~ 200W (~ 1.7W/kg).


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

spade2you said:


> Average speed is an alright formula to gauge fitness, but there are lots of variables. I live in an area where the wind can vary greatly. Sometimes I need to slow/stop at intersections, which drops my avg as well. Depending on traffic conditions and weather, my TT speed can vary, which isn't a reflection on my fitness.
> Furthermore, if I say my avg is X, it's virtually worthless unless we're all on the same routes. If you asked me what my avg speed on a flat route with minimal wind was, I'd have no idea since I rarely ride those conditions.


I've got years of my average speeds documented. There are certain facts about my averages -

Mine vary by 3mph depending on many factors -
Type of ride (easy, intervals, steady tempo, hard steady effort), Terrain (route taken), Temperature, Time of year (fitness), Mood, Humidity, Wind, bike and probably a few other things.

I have a couple or three benchmark routes that I keep notes on the average speeds.

And - averages compared to others are just about meaningless. They're just a fair gauge of one's own relative fitness.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Mike T. said:


> I've got years of my average speeds documented. There are certain facts about my averages -
> 
> Mine vary by 3mph depending on many factors -
> Type of ride (easy, intervals, steady tempo, hard steady effort), Terrain (route taken), Temperature, Time of year (fitness), Mood, Humidity, Wind, bike and probably a few other things.
> ...


I had been using averages over the years. Since wind could vary so much on my TT route, I wanted to _know_ how much of it was wind, aerodynamic factors, and fitness. Using my HRM was a ok for guestimating calories, but on race day, the HRM was virtually useless. Picked up a Quarq and it answered a lot about these. I only wish I did it sooner so I could gauge past fitness.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

spade2you said:


> Average speed is an alright formula to gauge fitness, but there are lots of variables. I live in an area where the wind can vary greatly. Sometimes I need to slow/stop at intersections, which drops my avg as well. Depending on traffic conditions and weather, my TT speed can vary, which isn't a reflection on my fitness.
> 
> Furthermore, if I say my avg is X, it's virtually worthless unless we're all on the same routes. If you asked me what my avg speed on a flat route with minimal wind was, I'd have no idea since I rarely ride those conditions.


I too live in an area with changing weather patterns, so much so that the old saying in the area is that if your bored with the weather give it a minute it'll change. But my post was an average on an average day.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

spade2you said:


> Using my HRM was a ok for guestimating calories, but on race day, the HRM was virtually useless. Picked up a Quarq and it answered a lot about these. I only wish I did it sooner so I could gauge past fitness.


I rode with a HRM for 15-20 years maybe and I thought it was useless but for one good purpose - telling me when I wasn't recovered or I was going to be ill. If I couldn't get the HR up to where I knew it should be then I wasn't recovered or sickness was two days away. I'd go home slowly and put my feet up.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Mike T. said:


> I rode with a HRM for 15-20 years maybe and I thought it was useless but for one good purpose - telling me when I wasn't recovered or I was going to be ill. If I couldn't get the HR up to where I knew it should be then I wasn't recovered or sickness was two days away. I'd go home slowly and put my feet up.


Never thought to use it when to see when I would be getting sick. Not a bad idea! Start pounding the meds ASAP to minimize how long I'm sick.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

spade2you said:


> Never thought to use it when to see when I would be getting sick. Not a bad idea! Start pounding the meds ASAP to minimize how long I'm sick.


I'd cut loose with the first interval of the day and would be expecting to see (let's just grab any number here) 160 pulse on the HRM. I'd be flat out with legs screaming with just (say) 140 showing. How the hell am I gonna get to 160? Answer - I'm not. Reason - not recovered or sickness coming on. Cure for either one - rest.


----------



## Drew Eckhardt (Nov 11, 2009)

kbiker3111 said:


> Thats true, but its almost impossible to burn as many KJs doing intervals as you can riding long and steady.


Nope.

For example, I can fit six hours a week into my schedule split over four days.

With enough hard intervals in the mix I can have an average intensity factor of .8 (including commuting, with excessive stoppage from taffic lights) for a 4060 kj total.

Or I can go for endurance rides every day with a .6 intensity factor for just 3045 kj/week which is 25% less.

This ignores the increase in basal metabolic rate which is higher and lasts longer following hard exercise (healthy young male subjects burned an extra 190 +/- 71.4 Calories a day following 45 minutes at 72.8 +/- 5.8% of VO2max).

It ignores the sustainable power increases that go with interval training and corresponding increase in calories burned with 25%+ increases over three months.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Mike T. said:


> I rode with a HRM for 15-20 years maybe and I thought it was useless but for one good purpose - telling me when I wasn't recovered or I was going to be ill. If I couldn't get the HR up to where I knew it should be then I wasn't recovered or sickness was two days away. I'd go home slowly and put my feet up.


I've never had one. I can tell when I wake up in the morning by checking my pulse if I need to take an easy day or not. And that's all we did back in the mid 70's to the mid 80's when I raced! 

BUT, having said that, I do think that if a person wants to maximize their performance for racing purposes I do believe that's one piece of modern technology that is very useful. 

I will never own one because I have no desire to get that radical, I ride for fitness, to have fun, and to relieve stress, not to put more stress on by checking a HRM to find out what I need to be doing, if I start doing that the fun of riding will vaporize!


----------



## Dream Plus (Feb 4, 2004)

What Meds could you possibly "pound" to minimize how long you are sick?


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Dream Plus said:


> What Meds could you possibly "pound" to minimize how long you are sick?


Capn Morgan rum. Works for me every time


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Dream Plus said:


> What Meds could you possibly "pound" to minimize how long you are sick?


I haven't the slightest. I'm just a pharmacist.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Mike T. said:


> I'd cut loose with the first interval of the day and would be expecting to see (let's just grab any number here) 160 pulse on the HRM. I'd be flat out with legs screaming with just (say) 140 showing. How the hell am I gonna get to 160? Answer - I'm not. Reason - not recovered or sickness coming on. Cure for either one - rest.


You would pick up declined/fatigued performance with a power meter well before a seriously depressed HR set in (or better still, be able to properly manage training loads in such a manner that overdoing it to the point of fatigued induced susceptibility to illness rarely, if ever, happens).

As with many things HR related, by the time you notice something, it's too late.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> You would pick up declined/fatigued performance with a power meter well before a seriously depressed HR set in (or better still, be able to properly manage training loads in such a manner that overdoing it to the point of fatigued induced susceptibility to illness rarely, if ever, happens).
> As with many things HR related, by the time you notice something, it's too late.


Oh I totally agree. HRMs are, IMO, a very limited use tool. HR has too many factors that affect it. A power meter is the perfect tool but back then they weren't available or affordable to the likes of me. They still aren't affordable as I don't race anymore; just train and ride hard.

I like your comment "properly manage training loads in such a manner that overdoing it to the point of fatigued induced susceptibility to illness rarely, if ever, happens". I picked up the Epstein-Barr virus about 20 years ago and it wiped out what was left of my (then) club racing exploits. Its effects, while lessened by the passage of time and the measured doling out of my energies, still occur (like last week) at times of unmanaged stress, either physical or mental. That's why to this day I rarely ride on back to back days or more than 3x per week. And its effects on my stressful job were the reason I retired early.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I think I might be coming down with something, so I'll see what the Quarq and HRM tell me.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

spade2you said:


> I think I might be coming down with something, so I'll see what the Quarq and HRM tell me.


Let us know your findings Spade. It was always quite obvious to me.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Mike T. said:


> I picked up the Epstein-Barr virus about 20 years ago


Yeah that sucks, although it's pretty common, the effects I expect vary widely.

Even with great devices, we can't always pick things like suppressed viruses and the like, and occasionally you get an athlete with something that knocks the stuffing out of them for a long time.

I had one client where inconsistent power performances led us to investigate more than they may have ordinarily done (once you remove the usual things such as diet, sleep, work, other stresses or physical activity etc) and it turned out to be bowel cancer. Caught early, operation to remove, and 5 years later the all clear.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Mike T. said:


> Let us know your findings Spade. It was always quite obvious to me.


Will do. I suspect I was having some mild sinus congestion this morning, but there's also a crud of some sort going around. If I don't get sick now, I work at a hospital and there are always bugs going around.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

Mike T. said:


> Oh I totally agree. HRMs are, IMO, a very limited use tool. HR has too many factors that affect it. A power meter is the perfect tool but back then they weren't available or affordable to the likes of me. They still aren't affordable as I don't race anymore; just train and ride hard.
> 
> I like your comment "properly manage training loads in such a manner that overdoing it to the point of fatigued induced susceptibility to illness rarely, if ever, happens". I picked up the Epstein-Barr virus about 20 years ago and it wiped out what was left of my (then) club racing exploits. Its effects, while lessened by the passage of time and the measured doling out of my energies, still occur (like last week) at times of unmanaged stress, either physical or mental. That's why to this day I rarely ride on back to back days or more than 3x per week. And its effects on my stressful job were the reason I retired early.


MIKE, are you now recovered from it?

I too caught Epstein Bar about 15 years ago and was disabled from it for about 1 year, but I still managed to ride my bike just couldn't go anywhere near as far and of course slept a lot. The doc had to force me to go on the disability because I refused a bunch of times, but some sort of number she was tracking from blood tests got to 900 and something, it scared her to the point she thought I would never recover and quite possibly die from it since she had never seen those numbers go that high in anyone. So one year later the illness mysteriously dropped to like 6 or 7 within a matter of 3 weeks which confused me and the doctor too because I was no longer tired and having to sleep, and that's when the much lower numbers were discovered in another blood test. This doctor said that 98% of the population in the world had this virus but it's dormant 97% of the time, and it shows up in certain blood tests with numbers between 6 to 9 but nobody knows they have it nor does it effect a person. What their not sure of is what triggers it to go active. At least this was the info they had 15 years or so ago, it may have changed by now.

But don't believe Wikipedia or Health Encyclopedia about this illness because I didn't get through saliva transfer and my wife never got it from me which we exchanged saliva all the time. The doctor, who was an expert in foreign and contagious diseases had no idea where it came from, but speculation may have been that I got it while in Moscow for a month...but there were a few people in Bakersfield CA that had it, she also speculated I may have had a touch of Valley Fever and got over it without knowing I had it, but it weakened my immune system allowing me to get Epstein Bar. At the time I got it they had no treatment just lots of rest. There is also evidence that the longer the illness prolongs the greater chance of certain cancers developing, but again this was 15 years ago so not sure how that applies today. 

I can ride back to back rides no problem physically doing that, it's time constraints that keep me from riding back back days. I have no problems riding 100 mile or more rides in one day either.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Thanks for your history on EB Froze. It acts differently on everyone of course. I was a classic case of too much drive and ambition (in cycling) and low natural ability so I was a real over-training (under-resting really) head-banger. I was a Vet in club races and there was an up & coming younger Vet who was pushing me as I didn't want to lose a perfect score (max points in all races) for the year. The day of the last race (a 15km TT) I came down with "flu". I lost that TT by a handful of seconds.

The "flu" feelings (chilled & achy in mid-summer mostly) went on & off for a couple of years and my doc didn't have a clue and had me tested for Lyme and a few other things. I didn't stop riding but it was really curtailed and I picked my days. Then I was sent to a specialist and he didn't have a clue either until, one day, I read a big story in VeloNews of some top cyclists in the USA who had their careers wrecked by the EB virus. Their symptoms sounded JUST like mine. I clipped the article and handed it to the specialist. He did a head/palm (literally) and sent me for the EB blood tests. They came back positive. But as you say, MOST people will test positive for EB and will never have any symptoms. I read that about 85 % of all people coming out of the army test pos for it.

But I think because I was always at the ragged edge of training & recovering that its symptoms affected me. Of course there is no cure but in the last 20 years I've learned to play my stress levels like a violin. I've improved tremendously. With me being Type A and having had a stressful job for 31 years (firefighter captain) and being a cycling performance junkie (head-banger) - I was a candidate for mental and physical stress making the EB virus come out of dormancy once in a while.

I quit racing, eventually retiring early from my job (at age 58, 5 years ago), curtailed hard training (that one was impossible as I still do it 3x per week for no good reason) and now, when stress gets the better of me (like this past week) I feel fluie all over again. So I just back off (just 27 miles at 17.56mph average yesterday!!) and laze around.

I never was a good endurance rider but I cranked out 4x 100~112 km rides this summer plus the training distances leading up to them and lots of shorter 40-50km Interval rides. I'm very happy with that.

So if I don't "overdo" life I get along ok.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

When I first experience problems I thought I had the flu too, but it stayed instead of going away, then I also had a constant sore throat. But being a stupid man, I just passed it off until fatigue set in. The first doctor I went to, my family doc, came up with nothing like yours. But unlike you, I got to thinking that this came on about 3 months after being Russia and though I contacted some sort of foreign bug so I went to a doctor that specialized in that area. And she ran a slew of blood tests and found the problem. At the first discovery of the problem it was still sort of mild with those numbers I told you about at around 300, then later with another blood test it went to 600 and something at which point she urged me to go on disability which I refused, then a couple of months later it skyrocketed to over 900 and it freaked her out which in turn freaked me out so I took the disability.

But for whatever reasons the EB went away fast from over 900 to single digits in 3 weeks and haven't had one issue with fatigue since then. I know why the numbers dropped but people on this forum would rebuke it and it would turn into a huge discussion not related to this post, so I'll just leave the reason alone, if you want to know PM me, but be prepared because you may not want to hear or believe how or why it happened.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

froze said:


> But for whatever reasons the EB went away fast from over 900 to single digits in 3 weeks and haven't had one issue with fatigue since then. I know why the numbers dropped but people on this forum would rebuke it and it would turn into a huge discussion not related to this post, so I'll just leave the reason alone, if you want to know PM me, but be prepared because you may not want to hear or believe how or why it happened.


Well of course you've tweaked my curiosity so I'll bite and PM you. I just hope the cure entails legions of scantily-clad young ladies!


----------



## hozzerr1 (Feb 22, 2011)

Mike T. your knowledge is priceless, it reminds me of that joke I heard long ago.

Something to the effect of - a young bull and an old bull are standing on top of a hill looking down at all the cows down the valley grazing, the young bull turns to the old guy and says "hey lets hurry up and run down there and f^ck that cow", the old guy looks at him and calmly says "no, lets walk down there and f^ck them all".


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

hozzerr1 said:


> Mike T. your knowledge is priceless, it reminds me of that joke I heard long ago.


Ya know Hozzer, I was out riding a couple of days ago after posting in this thread and I thought of that joke and its relevance to this thread. For some reason I decided not to post it (I guess I just forgot) but now you have. Yes that wise old bull's restraint fits many of life's occasions. Thanks for posting!


----------

