# How Much Base Training??



## rocdog

Hey all! Two seasons ago I got serious about my training got a coach (who was a local pro) and started in. I didn't have much base just a dozen or so rides off road as at that time I was strictly an MTB racer. My coach had me mixing long rides with sprints, LT intervals, hill repeats and form work like one -legged pedals all at the same time. This started in FEB and I was racing by April. I competed quite will during April and the first part of May. After that I burned out and that was it. I did not even want to ride for fun. Last season I had a neck injury (from sking) and did not race-just rode for fun. During my recovery I tried a couple of road races and was hooked. This season I want to get back into MTB and Road racing. But this time I want to do it right from the start. So, how much base should I get in prior to any serious LT type work? I have read Friel like everyone else but still there are so many different opinions out there. At this point my plan is to spend about 10 to 12 weeks just riding mosltly road in zones 1,2. and then pick up with the training plan that I mentioned above. Does that sound about right. Thanks


----------



## BeeCharmer

Old school wisdom was always to get in about 1000 miles before doing serious interval work. That's about 55-60 hours. But it's a lot more involved than that. You're building on previous seasons of work, dealing with limitations in your personal life and body, and what you're motivated to do. 

This is what works for me. One long ride a weak, three break through rides which early in the season focus on strength and leg speed and as the early season approaches, these become interval workouts, also two recovery rides and a day off. Variety is good, in effort and length. Figure out your aerobic threshold and base your workouts around that.


----------



## iliveonnitro

10-12 weeks base, 5 weeks build. Average about 10-12hrs/wk, including the horribly slow and dreaded winter months on the trainer (which are typically only 6-8hrs/wk).


----------



## bill

is the burnout because the rider actually "lacks base" or is it mental?
I'm not sure that I know what "lacking base" means. I know what it's supposed to mean, but the annual "base-building" period seems more about a few months of riding without hurting to preserve your mental health so that your brain is fresh enough to hurt when you really need to hurt.
Not that mental burnout is to be dismissed, but I think people get way too dogmatic about this stuff. You see guys scolding you that you will waste your season if you ride too hard in December and January. That's BS. I rode hard last year, all year, with time and the rest of my life being my limiters pretty much all year round -- I have more time to train in the summer than in the winter, which is backwards from the gospel -- and I was never faster than last season. Last week I was out on a noon ride that in the summer is blazing fast, with the fastest riders of the district regularly killing each other. Well, there was maybe a little less bloodshed, but it still hurt like hell. Maybe not all of the district's fast guys were out there for that hour, but most of the guys out there were among the district's fastest.
Train what you want to be able to do, pure and simple.


----------



## iliveonnitro

bill said:


> is the burnout because the rider actually "lacks base" or is it mental?
> I'm not sure that I know what "lacking base" means. I know what it's supposed to mean, but the annual "base-building" period seems more about a few months of riding without hurting to preserve your mental health so that your brain is fresh enough to hurt when you really need to hurt.
> Not that mental burnout is to be dismissed, but I think people get way too dogmatic about this stuff. You see guys scolding you that you will waste your season if you ride too hard in December and January. That's BS. I rode hard last year, all year, with time and the rest of my life being my limiters pretty much all year round -- I have more time to train in the summer than in the winter, which is backwards from the gospel -- and I was never faster than last season. Last week I was out on a noon ride that in the summer is blazing fast, with the fastest riders of the district regularly killing each other. Well, there was maybe a little less bloodshed, but it still hurt like hell. Maybe not all of the district's fast guys were out there for that hour, but most of the guys out there were among the district's fastest.
> Train what you want to be able to do, pure and simple.


But the idea is to peak when you want to. What good is being at 90% of your capabilities all the time when you need to be at 100% to win the big races?

This is a lot more understandable if you were to test out trainingpeaks and get a grasp of FTP, CTL (chronic training load) and TSB (training stress balance). FTP being how fast you can go and CTL being how long you can go fast.

Going hard all season long doesn't build your CTL to high levels.


----------



## bill

well, I do have some knowledge of what those things are. but I would like to learn more.

serious question -- not a smug challenge, but a serious question. 

how am I better off if my CTL looks like a mountain range versus a flat line, if the mountain tops never go higher than the flat line? because, if I understand this stuff at all -- which I may not, I know -- it seems that I'll put valleys in, but the mountains won't get any higher because my chief limiter is time. I may spend as much time as I can, but I don't think I ever scrape the top of what my body really could handle if I had all the time I needed to train.

Periodization makes a lot more sense for the fifteen-twenty hour of week guys. for those of us who can put in 7 to 10, maybe 12 if we have a forgiving period in our lives, I am not at all sure that it offers much.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

Periodisation is no more than breaking up one's training into block of training time (weeks/months) with a specific purpose. That purpose might be an endurance block, raising of power at LT, race specific prep etc. 

The use of periodisation is just as applicable to a 6-7 hr/week guy as it is to a 15-20 hr/week guy.

Remember that the basis of CTL is the daily TSS. And TSS is a function of duration AND intensity. So when looking at the direction CTL is moving (up/down/plateau), one needs to also consider the composition of training.


----------



## bill

with that definition of periodization, what do I get out of a block? If I'm doing long road races in May, a time trial in July, and cyclocross in October, okay, it makes sense to do training blocks like that. I'm going to train differently for these events. but that's not the way most of us with families and jobs view our seasons. we race when it gets warm enough to race, we race around soccer and visits to grandma, whatever the event, and much more thought than that can become self-defeating, because life comes at you fast, as the man says. maybe if I really focused my training around a much smaller handful of events I might have more success in those few events, but doesn't my approach depend on my goals?
and, I have to say, some of the fastest, most successful guys I know don't really do this. they may take a little time off here and there, but for the most part they go hard. if they are breaking their training into defined blocks of weeks/months, I've seen no evidence of it.
I have a reputation for arguing to horse, beaten, dead. I don't want to do this. I want to understand.


----------



## Guest

bill said:


> and, I have to say, some of the fastest, most successful guys I know don't really do this. they may take a little time off here and there, but for the most part they go hard. if they are breaking their training into defined blocks of weeks/months, I've seen no evidence of it.


I hear what you're saying and agree with much of what you said, but the devil's advocate on the above is: Are they riding well because of the way they go about their training or in spite of it?


----------



## iliveonnitro

kytyree said:


> I hear what you're saying and agree with much of what you said, but the devil's advocate on the above is: Are they riding well because of the way they go about their training or in spite of it?


Building on what kytyree said, how do you know they are going fast all the time or what their definition of fast is? Group rides are a different mentality and speedwork is usually the primary goal. Maybe they're doing less anaerobic sprint work and more 5min pulls to work VO2max. They may still be doing those 5min pulls at 30mph...

For example, I used to ride with a domestic pro (leadout man for Baden Cooke). He would regularly do 3-4hr rides at 23mph average, with me sucking his wheel the whole time hoping not to get dropped. Is that fast? To me, it was; to him, it was just an endurance ride.

Buy or go to the library and get this book. It does wonders explaining even the finder details.
http://www.amazon.com/Periodization...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1233062237&sr=8-1


----------



## bill

I think that there is some of that -- emphasis on longer duration efforts -- VO2 max, higher effort aerobic -- rather than sitting in, sitting in, and then jump or sprint. to that extent, yes they likely are using periodization, but the difference is subtle. and it's not as if they're never jumping or sprinting, but they are using more of their matches on a killer three minute pull. 
I think what a lot of guys have in their heads is that they will ruin their season if they breathe hard in January, and that's more what I'm talking about.


----------



## stevesbike

Bill, you're neglecting a critical element of periodization: if you train at the same level all the time you're not training hard enough - adaptation depends on progressive training stimuli, not a constant training load. One of the reasons so many amateur cyclists first rapidly gain fitness and then plateau (never get out of a 3 or 4 category) is because they don't progress in their training load. This doesn't have to be 20+ hours/week. It can be an increase in interval intensity, volume etc. In fact, I think most US amateur cyclists should focus on intense training precisely because this is the main limiter in US racing (unless you're doing a 250km race). If you have limited time, shift to VO2max work, etc (look up Peter Laursen for Tmax intervals). You need to build in substantial recovery time with these - after all, it's during recovery when your body makes its adaptations...


----------



## bill

I understand the principle -- that to improve you need to up the level of performance progressively. the way that this has worked for me is to mix it up on rides and training races with 1's and 2's, who push me harder than any interval I can wrap my brain around. 
but periodization as it has been preached is this period of time off, followed by a loooonggg period of aerobic training, followed by increasing intensity, followed by a race period and then a peak period, where your volume is way down but intensity remains up. That's not terribly realistic for the weekend warrior, nor does it seem necessary, because it entails de-training and then rebuilding. Why should that be necessary, barring mental burnout?
Look also at the inherent contradiction in what you're saying -- I need to increase my training load, but that increase doesn't have to involve greater volume. Really? I can increase volume or intensity. or both, but I think we all agree that that doesn't work terribly well. so, if I increase intensity, I'm losing volume. Looks zero sum to me, unless I deliberately work valleys into the program. which doesn't seem to me to increase the training load any higher than if I plateaued. If I deliberately de-trained in order to work in those valleys, I don't think I would be riding with the 1's and 2's.

I, too, have read that it is during rest that the adaptations occur, but is there evidence for this? how about those guys that "ride into" the Tour de France or whatever? I don't know man.

that's not to see that there aren't seasons. but for the weekend warrior whose mental attitude remains good and whose limiter is time, they all involve a fair level of intensity, and it's about more or less rather than this or that.


----------



## stevesbike

you're only considering the macrocycle component of periodization - I agree with you that it should be different for a weekend warrior compared to a professional cyclist. But, the principle of microcycles and mesocycles are important to the amateur cyclist - my own experience is that most amateur cyclists do not incorporate nearly enough mesocycle structure into their training. 

Yes, riders who race into shape definitely take time to recover between major races and particularly focus on tapering before a major stage race...


----------



## bill

well, resting in anticipation of a target event is not the same thing as adaptation requiring rest. you must be rested in order to perform your best at any given level of fitness, but it is not at all clear (to me, anyway) that the adaptations that bring you to a level of fitness require rest. the little cellular adaptations theoretically could occur without rest, and I have yet to see this issue addressed scientifically.


----------



## moab63

*Hey I have that book along with*



iliveonnitro said:


> Buy or go to the library and get this book. It does wonders explaining even the finder details.
> http://www.amazon.com/Periodization...bs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1233062237&sr=8-1


many others and a few semester of school too 

The whole time is about what energy system are you using, progressive overload is required and thats the way it is. Now how much base and how hard, depends on many factors your current shape, prior training, target races and so on.

So no easy answers, listen to your body it will definetly tell you if your pushing too hard. But as you adapt you become stronger, so you have to change your training to keep your body from a plateu. Back to real work.


----------



## manandjoe

Wow,

2 points!!
I am kinda with Bill on this. Based on my realtive inexperience (3yrs of road about 5k per year) and riding as a weekend warrior who has 6hr to 10hrs at best, the go hard and feel works. Winter training on mtb biking sub zero once or twice per week plus 1-2 indoor training rides is all that is doable with work and kids.

Spring time my goal is to stay on with the racers on their group rides. So far it has worked. 

Where is my base? from last year? maintaining what I have. No power meter just heart rate training, in zones. Trying to stick with 2 x 15, 3x15, 3x20 steady state intervals.

How do I measure my watts? and know if I am improving? By staying with the faster guys that eat drink and live by this stuff.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

bill said:


> but periodization as it has been preached is this period of time off, followed by a loooonggg period of aerobic training, followed by increasing intensity, followed by a race period and then a peak period, where your volume is way down but intensity remains up.


Who's preaching that?

Periodisation is about doing the right block of training at the right time for your individual needs. Those needs vary for each individual.

I'm unaware that periodisation means following some pre-determined path as you describe.

Certainly there is some sense in choosing carefully when to do a block _focussed _on super-threshold work (since the time course for resulting adaptations is not all that long - weeks - compared to months for LT) but that doesn't mean one shouldn't do some super-threshold work early on in a training plan. Indeed it might well be the best thing to do, particularly if training time is limited.


----------



## bill

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Who's preaching that?
> 
> Periodisation is about doing the right block of training at the right time for your individual needs. Those needs vary for each individual.
> 
> I'm unaware that periodisation means following some pre-determined path as you describe.
> 
> Certainly there is some sense in choosing carefully when to do a block _focussed _on super-threshold work (since the time course for resulting adaptations is not all that long - weeks - compared to months for LT) but that doesn't mean one shouldn't do some super-threshold work early on in a training plan. Indeed it might well be the best thing to do, particularly if training time is limited.


if you read Friel's book -- although his latest edition has got more nuanced -- basically that's what he teaches. and an awful lot of people believe it. fewer than even a few years ago, but a lot.


----------



## iliveonnitro

bill said:


> if you read Friel's book -- although his latest edition has got more nuanced -- basically that's what he teaches. and an awful lot of people believe it. fewer than even a few years ago, but a lot.


That is periodization. But, the problem is that it is a blanket book that tries to turn a cookie-cutter plan into the right one (read: "personalized") for everyone. What works for someone looking to peak once or twice a year on some super stage race is very different than preparing for cross nats, a 2-day-3-stage race, a 1 or 3 week tour...and changes a lot based on body, experience, and event.

Not quite personalized...but you can label it a periodization plan. Just not _the_ periodization plan.


----------



## stewie13

Bill,

Everything you have said makes a lot of sense and really isn't that much different from the people who have a slightly different point of view. The people that you are really disagreeing with aren't even here to defend themselves.

I think outsiders do not realize just how beneficial those lunch times rides are (HP, correct?). I would be shocked if there are a significant number of people who get better workouts in 60 minutes than the people really putting in an effort on those lunchtime rides. Those rides are amazing for improving power efforts for 5 sec. to about 10 min (plus variable repeated efforts which is probably where most of the benefit lies) and even gives you some solid threshold work as well.

As for peaks and valleys on your CTL... I would guess that your CTL is still increasing assuming you don't do the exact same thing every week. You can get as fast as you need to be for racing with only 7-10 hours of training and doing the fastest group rides around is probably the best way. Obviously if you are doing a lot of 4+ hour races or 40K TT's then you would have to balance the group rides out a little more with more specific work.

As for peaking...I would be very nervous about structuring my training based on 1/2 peaks per year. The large, large majority or races for most people are not decided by FTP or W/kg... there are way too many other factors that go into race results. Striving to improve FTP is a goal that everybody should shoot for but many people win races year round even when they aren't peaking.

For the record, basically the first thing I do after a ride is download my data and analyze it.


----------



## bill

HP is the bomb.
I love it. Absolutely love it.
Although to look at my power profile, I probably am a bit of a V kind of guy. Although my real short term power, my sprint, is for sh*t, I can hit some big numbers for about a minute, and my twenty minute power is pretty good. there is a bit of a dropoff at around 1:30. I think I need to up my VO2 max, which is something I've been working on.


----------



## Eric_H

*I'm with him (Bill)*

OK, I have to chime in on this as well.

I have been racing and training for 18 years now, the majority of it at the cat 1/2 level. All of this has been done while I have had a full-time job except for one season early on in my cycling life. I have done it several different ways - periodized, methodical training and race-into-shape. What I have found is that I am not able to adequately follow a rigid periodized plan, mostly due to variables that are often out of my control. For example, winter weather is one variable. Work is another variable. I cannot speak from the perspective of those who have kids, but that is probably the largest variable. In my world, I have anywhere from 8 to maybe 14 hours per week to train but most of my weeks are 10-12 hours.

My best seasons have been when my winter training has consisted of steady 8-12 hour weeks making sure I get in one long ride of 4 hours, and adding intensity on the shorter rides. I don't follow a structured intensity plan, some days I do sprints, some days hills, and some days sweet-spot. I train largely by the annoying and intangible method of "how I feel on the day". My rest periods tend to be forced, either due to travel or exceptionally bad weather rolling in. My big weeks are usually if I have a couple of days off work and the weather is exceptional.

Now, I am not completely naive or stupid when it comes to periodization. I do tend to work on sub-threshold efforts and sweet-spot efforts early in my preparation and I focus more on sprints and maximum efforts as the racing season nears, but I rely on the racing to really sharpen up my top end. If I have a race coming up in a month that I am focusing on then I will address training needs as required. But in general, I start racing in March, the form builds and in a normal season sometime from late May through mid-July I am usually in good form. Sometimes it comes on earlier, sometimes later.

My main point is this: I think a lot of guys who are racing amateur and who have other major commitments in life are kind of missing out on a lot of great racing opportunities when they follow a very structured periodized program. And in the past 8 or 9 years this has become more of a common thing, as coaching has evolved to an industry. There are a lot of guys racing with disposable income who are perfectly happy to spend money on a coach and program and follow it blindly when, IMO, they would be better off racing more frequently and taking the form (and results) as it comes. Of course this flies in the face of this forum to some degree.


----------



## STARNUT

bill said:


> Look also at the inherent contradiction in what you're saying -- I need to increase my training load, but that increase doesn't have to involve greater volume. Really? I can increase volume or intensity. or both, but I think we all agree that that doesn't work terribly well. so, if I increase intensity, I'm losing volume. Looks zero sum to me, unless I deliberately work valleys into the program. which doesn't seem to me to increase the training load any higher than if I plateaued. If I deliberately de-trained in order to work in those valleys, I don't think I would be riding with the 1's and 2's.
> 
> I, too, have read that it is during rest that the adaptations occur, but is there evidence for this? how about those guys that "ride into" the Tour de France or whatever? I don't know man.


There is a huge assumption here; not all TSS is created equal. The adaptations from a LSD ride in low zone two for 5 hours is wholely and totally different than adaptaions from a 2.5-3 hours zone three/tempo. While the TSS score for the two ride may be similar, the effects will not be. Thus the reason the PMC chart as only as good as what you put into it. Given enough time, anyone can increase their CTL to acceptable "racing" levels but a CTL whole built on LSD is not going to do much for you, unless you're doing 24 hours mtb races or something.

Periodization and specificity still rule in training. When was the last time one of your races was longer than an hour and lower than zone three for NP?

It's a loaded question........


Starnut


----------



## porksoda87

This is the latest and greatest in sports periodization, its called the Block Training System. While similar to the traditional periodization models originally developed by L.P.Matveyev and made popular in the states by Tudor Bompa, (Periodization Training for Sports, Joe Friels Training Bible) this form of training was originally developed for track and field athletes that needed multiple peaks throughout the year. It is now being used in a wide variety of sports including cycling. Heres a few links to check out. The youtube video is just an introduction to the BTS and a little hard to watch, but give it a chance.

http://www.amazon.com/Block-Periodization-Vladimir-Issurin/dp/0981718000 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGkJ4jcdcZM

http://www.athleticscoaching.ca/Use...ngisser An Introduction to block training.pdf

http://www.verkhoshansky.com/


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

Eric_H said:


> My main point is this: I think a lot of guys who are racing amateur and who have other major commitments in life are kind of missing out on a lot of great racing opportunities when they follow a very structured periodized program. And in the past 8 or 9 years this has become more of a common thing, as coaching has evolved to an industry. There are a lot of guys racing with disposable income who are perfectly happy to spend money on a coach and program and follow it blindly when, IMO, they would be better off racing more frequently and taking the form (and results) as it comes. Of course this flies in the face of this forum to some degree.


Interesting. So who are all these inflexible coaches out there?

I certainly don't dissuade anyone from racing, with perhaps some exceptions for those where it really would conflict with their prep for a priority 1 goal event(s). Indeed, the mere fact that someone puts a number on their back with reasonable frequency is very motivating and part of good preparation and training. A good race makes for excellent sweetspot training.

I don't expect people to follow a program blindly. They are informed about their training, what the intent of sessions are, and they can certainly ask questions. I also expect to help an athlete self coach to a degree, so that they can make sensible choices on a day to day basis with their training. But I do expect they trust my judgement about the training program. Otherwise what would be the point in hiring me in the first place?

Finally, achieving goals requires some commitment and sacrifices. So if you are not prepared to do the work to attain the goals set, well that's another issue altogether.


----------



## bill

you know what, the pressure comes not from coaches but from other riders, and it's worst this time of year. guys scold you for going too fast and how you'll be "flying in February, dying in July," and they cite some coach. meanwhile it's mostly that the guys who are flying in February are really breaking your a$$ in two come July.


----------



## function

Eric_H said:


> OK, I have to chime in on this as well.


+1 wholeheartedly


----------



## wfrogge

bill said:


> if you read Friel's book -- although his latest edition has got more nuanced -- basically that's what he teaches. and an awful lot of people believe it. fewer than even a few years ago, but a lot.



Friel's method (though he has chanced his tune with rev 4 of his "bible") are 20+ years old and are not followed by most cyclists anymore.


----------



## heathb

The biggest limiter for me when it comes to getting into the top 5 of my races has been my ability to hold max power with limited recovery. 

Base miles were never an issue with sub 100 mile races. 

For any racing cyclist that is serious about winning the key is power plain and simple. There are gobs and gobs of riders that can go out everyday and ride 100+ miles, I used to ride at least 60miles every single day with two 100 mile rides on sat/sunday. This didn't do crap for my race results. It wasn't until I started training for power that I finally was able to hold that intense level of pain for a extended period of time. 

Less miles and more time spent under the squat rack at your local gym. The best racers at least in my area have tree trunk sized legs.....you won't get those with tons of base miles.


----------



## CyclingVirtual

Just seen some useful base training books


----------



## iliveonnitro

heathb said:


> The biggest limiter for me when it comes to getting into the top 5 of my races has been my ability to hold max power with limited recovery.
> 
> Base miles were never an issue with sub 100 mile races.
> 
> For any racing cyclist that is serious about winning the key is power plain and simple. There are gobs and gobs of riders that can go out everyday and ride 100+ miles, I used to ride at least 60miles every single day with two 100 mile rides on sat/sunday. This didn't do crap for my race results. It wasn't until I started training for power that I finally was able to hold that intense level of pain for a extended period of time.
> 
> Less miles and more time spent under the squat rack at your local gym. The best racers at least in my area have tree trunk sized legs.....you won't get those with tons of base miles.


At what point would you use those muscles in your legs while on a bike? What kind of force do you expect to put out while on a bike?


----------



## CyclingVirtual

Base training is like a pyramid, the higher you build the base the higher the peak.


----------



## porksoda87

IMO lifting for cyclist is benifical, but misunderstood. Weight training is going to give cyclist minimal if any gains in performance. The real benefit from lifting is injury prevention. Stabilizing joints by strengthing the surrounding muscles and tendons will help you train more with less injury.


----------



## heathb

The force that you can deliver to the pedals is directly linked to the speed you will travel. 

How many sprinters do you see with chicken legs? How many worldclass TT guys do you see with chicken legs. How many top Crit riders do you see with chicken legs. 

In all my races it was the guys with the huge legs that kept the relentless heat on. All of us can go the distance, the strong guys however can do it faster.

So while on a very long road race all things being equal the guy with the smaller build/chicken legs has a very good chance, the shorter more intense races almost always have the bigger guys out front.


----------



## bill

Ben Brooks, a pro sprinter/all-rounder for Jelly Belly (I believe he raced last year for Kelly Medifast, although I think he may have ended his career this year), stayed at my house in 2005 fo a local pro race. He is a little guy, with chicken legs. 
Force is not generally the limiter. Power is. You can generate an awful lot of power with good leg speed.


----------



## STARNUT

heathb said:


> The force that you can deliver to the pedals is directly linked to the speed you will travel.
> 
> How many sprinters do you see with chicken legs? How many worldclass TT guys do you see with chicken legs. How many top Crit riders do you see with chicken legs.



Uh.......... Force is only exactly half of the supply side of the equation for speed. More force does not equal more speed/power all things being equal. In fact, you use more force to get up off the couch or climbing stairs than you do pedaling a bike.

Coming from someone who has "chicken legs", size has little to do with power and race results. The gym did little for me if anything.

Starnut


----------



## Guest

These guys are all pretty good, truthfully great sprinters, none of them huge.


----------



## heathb

Lets put it this way. You got a 40 mile race on a fairly flat course.

Your competition is:

Marty Nothstein (massive beast) well known for spending time in the gym.
Michael Rasmussen (chicken legs)

Which one are you going to be more scared of. 

My bet is Nothstein.


----------



## Guest

heathb said:


> Lets put it this way. You got a 40 mile race on a fairly flat course.
> 
> Your competition is:
> 
> Marty Nothstein (massive beast) well known for spending time in the gym.
> Michael Rasmussen (chicken legs)
> 
> Which one are you going to be more scared of.
> 
> My bet is Nothstein.



The Chicken was no sprinter.


----------



## Guest

I should also add that while Nothstein was a really good track cyclist his palmares on the road does not compare to McEwen who is tiny. The other two I posted pictures of have both already been very successful and Cavendish is just getting started.

We can pick courses and scenarios to suit specific riders all day, but there is a reason there aren't many professional road riders who are 200+ pounds, in fact there aren't many at 185. Track cycling is entirely different at least in the sprint events. I don't believe that is what we are discussing.


----------



## heathb

Yes the chicken wasn't a sprinter, but do you know any sprinters that look like the chicken. 

To me Robbie is a compact ball of muscle. That picture of Cav is going to look different in about 5 years when he starts packing on more muscle. 

I'm not sure where you guys come up with the idea that elite cyclists don't spend time in the gym. Just a few issues of cycling sport magazine had an interview with David Miller and he went into some detail of his lifting routine and it shows. 

If you can turn a bigger gear with less effort than why not spend some time under the squat rack.


----------



## heathb

kytyree said:


> We can pick courses and scenarios to suit specific riders all day, but there is a reason there aren't many professional road riders who are 200+ pounds, in fact there aren't many at 185. Track cycling is entirely different at least in the sprint events. I don't believe that is what we are discussing.


I agree that few 200 pound riders can drag their bodies over mountains and or suffer though some of the classic 150 mile road races.

Of course in America we have big riders that don't concern themselves with long endurance style racing. Seems there's more interest in the Crit style racing where a big muscled rider can perform quite well.

All I know is that many of the guys I race against preach up and down that they spend as much time in the gym as they do on their bikes. These guys don't seem to have any problem getting to the finish line and more often then not they put a severe hurt on those that lack their power.


----------



## Guest

heathb said:


> Yes the chicken wasn't a sprinter, but do you know any sprinters that look like the chicken.
> 
> To me Robbie is a compact ball of muscle. That picture of Cav is going to look different in about 5 years when he starts packing on more muscle.
> 
> I'm not sure where you guys come up with the idea that elite cyclists don't spend time in the gym. Just a few issues of cycling sport magazine had an interview with David Miller and he went into some detail of his lifting routine and it shows.
> 
> If you can turn a bigger gear with less effort than why not spend some time under the squat rack.



I didn't say that none of them lift weights but they are not trying to get big legs, or big anything else.


And you are right Robbie is a ball of muscle. But a 5'7" 150lb pretty small ball and he may lift weights, don't know, but he is a great sprinter because he is fast, fast, fast not because he is strong. If strength was what it took to be fast how would he ever beat Thor, Boonen, or any of several other sprinters that are bigger and stronger than him (but still 185 or less).

Why would Cavendish start packing on muscle? Is he wanting to spend more time in the grupetto as he grows older and less time fighting for the win?

David _Millar_ is over 6'3" and weighs about 170, hardly the poster child for getting big in the gym.


----------



## Guest

heathb said:


> I agree that few 200 pound riders can drag their bodies over mountains and or suffer though some of the classic 150 mile road races.
> 
> Of course in America we have big riders that don't concern themselves with long endurance style racing. Seems there's more interest in the Crit style racing where a big muscled rider can perform quite well.
> 
> All I know is that many of the guys I race against preach up and down that they spend as much time in the gym as they do on their bikes. These guys don't seem to have any problem getting to the finish line and more often then not they put a severe hurt on those that lack their power.



But as I believe I said earlier in this thread are they doing well because of their training or in spite of it?

What would there results be if instead of pounding weights in the gym they spent that time on their bike?

And IMHO anyone who spends as much time in the gym as on their bike and calls themselves a bike racer is either riding too little or lifting too much. EDIT: I am speaking of racing on the road here not the track.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST

This is the fastest man in the world over 200 metres:


----------



## heathb

Just out of curiosity and completely off subject, but do track cyclists use cleats and toe straps together or just toe straps? 

And Theo Bos does have some meat on those drumsticks, he would look more impressive in person if you had to race him.


----------



## STARNUT

kytyree said:


> And IMHO *anyone who spends as much time in the gym as on their bike and calls themselves a bike racer is either riding too little or lifting too much*. EDIT: I am speaking of racing on the road here not the track.


2nd. You don't pedal with your arms. There is some new info out that suggests that the gym is great for injury prevention and nothing else.

I have one of those ball things I do ab, lower back, and core stuff on. Thats like 30min a day in the offseason maybe. Truth be told I do it enough to keep the back from hurting which is 2-3 days a week at most so about 1-1.5 hr a week for 6 weeks a year. 

I was waiting for a pic of Hoy to pop up.................... I'd love to see how he fairs in a RR, probably about as well as my skinny ass in a match sprint :lol:

Starnut


----------



## hooj

Sure guys...do hundreds of hours of LSD noodling and then hit the gym...You'll get fast

I've tried them both. Squatting 4 x 20 with 100-120kg didn't make me any faster on the bike, but I sure was able to squat. If I would need to choose one, I would probably do long distance because even that makes you faster than wasting your time at the gym.

And by the way, pro road racers are skinny buggers. People call Boonen a big guy, but when you stand next to him, you'll realize how skinny he is. It doesn't mean that the big guy is fast even if he wins your local crits, it might just be that the others are slow.

EDIT: And chicken man would be pretty fast even in flat crit as long as it would be a fast one instead of just waiting for the sprint.


----------



## bill

there's a guy in my club that has a Super Bowl ring. He's not even a very, very big guy (although he's pretty big). He's in shape; he works as a personal trainer and has a gym. And li'l ol 5'8" me, who hasn't seen the inside of a gym in eons, can kick his ass six ways from Sunday on the bike.


----------



## Guest

heathb said:


> Just out of curiosity and completely off subject, but do track cyclists use cleats and toe straps together or just toe straps?
> 
> And Theo Bos does have some meat on those drumsticks, he would look more impressive in person if you had to race him.



There are several ways to go about it. Older Shimano 7400 series pedals with cleats, straps and maybe toe clips is a popular way though maybe starting to get dated. There are some pedals like Keywin's that are seen more on the track, and then some modify more traditional road pedals like Looks or Shimano spd-sl's to also use straps.

If you go over to fixedgearfever there are plenty of posts there about the options. Lots of ways to go about it but they all tend to be pretty firmly attached.


----------



## iliveonnitro

heathb said:


> Just out of curiosity and completely off subject, but do track cyclists use cleats and toe straps together or just toe straps?
> 
> And Theo Bos does have some meat on those drumsticks, he would look more impressive in person if you had to race him.


Track cyclists use both. Now back to the subject.

Correlation is not causation. Big legs do not equal faster riders. And to counter your Cavendish argument, Cavendish doesn't lift weights -- ever.

Power = force*velocity. The only time you'll use a significant amount of force is at a very low cadence (like, standing starts in track). Your peak power is typically seen at cadences around 130+rpm, which has a surprisingly little amount of force associated with it.

Weight lifting is good for injury prevention or general health.


----------



## bill

we used to have a very fast woman in our club. husband and babies and such took over, etc., and I miss her every day, but she was fast. She also was very slight, with great legs (not "drumsticks") and shapely -- everything. slim, nice butt (oh my), not huge. Man, could she roll. right there with the big boys.


----------



## allervite

The bigger the base the higher the peak!


----------



## pbayne

To the OP. Check out these two books: Base Building for Cyclists and Performance Cycling: Training for Power, Endurance, Speed. Both have more updated training theory than Friel. They advocate for more intensity during what is traditionally the base period. Neither advocate lots of Z1,Z2 miles. I put together my training year based on a little of Friel and a little from each of these two books. Seems to work for me. I haven't increased my training time at all (in fact it has gone down). But I am slowly getting faster.


----------



## 853

Just a few muscles:


----------



## iliveonnitro

853 said:


> Just a few muscles:


Ahh, the peak of the doping days and the off-season steroids.


----------



## function

And Thor? Cancellara? Ps. i'm not advocating weight lifting for cycling performance specifically. Only injury prevention.


----------



## zphogan

function said:


> And Thor? Cancellara? Ps. i'm not advocating weight lifting for cycling performance specifically. Only injury prevention.



Hushovd. Holy sh!t.


----------



## muscleendurance

bill said:


> is the burnout because the rider actually "lacks base" or is it mental?
> I'm not sure that I know what "lacking base" means. I know what it's supposed to mean, but the annual "base-building" period seems more about a few months of riding without hurting to preserve your mental health so that your brain is fresh enough to hurt when you really need to hurt.
> Not that mental burnout is to be dismissed, but I think people get way too dogmatic about this stuff. You see guys scolding you that you will waste your season if you ride too hard in December and January. That's BS. I rode hard last year, all year, with time and the rest of my life being my limiters pretty much all year round -- I have more time to train in the summer than in the winter, which is backwards from the gospel -- and I was never faster than last season. Last week I was out on a noon ride that in the summer is blazing fast, with the fastest riders of the district regularly killing each other. Well, there was maybe a little less bloodshed, but it still hurt like hell. Maybe not all of the district's fast guys were out there for that hour, but most of the guys out there were among the district's fastest.
> Train what you want to be able to do, pure and simple.


+1 ...listen to this guy..(and me also by association  )


----------



## muscleendurance

allervite said:


> The bigger the base the higher the peak!


sucker...


----------



## heathb

Those legs will intimidate if nothing else. 

I've seen legs like that up close in a race or two, they work and work well.


----------



## muscleendurance

Enough that you progress to the point of riding approximately your longest goal ride for the season. If this is a 2.5hr race, then 3hrs base is plenty. If your longest is going to be the death ride or something, then you need some 5-6hr rides as winter/spring base.


----------



## crispy010

muscleendurance said:


> Enough that you progress to the point of riding approximately your longest goal ride for the season. If this is a 2.5hr race, then 3hrs base is plenty. If your longest is going to be the death ride or something, then you need some 5-6hr rides as winter/spring base.


I disagree with this training approach. I train not just to race well, but to go faster and go further all the time. My training is not based around specific races but around making me faster and more comfortable being on the bike for hours on hours. 

Put another way, the base training I do this year is not set up around *just* the races I'll do this season, but around all the long and fast rides I might do in the many years to come.

It seems silly to me to purposefully limit the amount of riding you'd do. For me, all riding is fun, and winter is a great time for going a little slower (i.e. base building) simply because of environmental factors.


----------



## asgelle

muscleendurance said:


> Enough that you progress to the point of riding approximately your longest goal ride for the season. If this is a 2.5hr race, then 3hrs base is plenty. If your longest is going to be the death ride or something, then you need some 5-6hr rides as winter/spring base.


Then how do you explain riders whose longest race is 4 km doing 200+ km training rides?


----------



## muscleendurance

crispy010 said:


> ....I train not just to race well, but to go faster and go further all the time. My training is not based around specific races but around making me faster and more comfortable being on the bike for hours on hours.


base training doesnt make your go faster, it makes you more economical over your ride length. 



crispy010 said:


> Put another way, the base training I do this year is not set up around *just* the races I'll do this season, but around all the long and fast rides I might do in the many years to come.


then in *your* case, you are doing the right thing *for you* and anyone else who wants to follow a similar route, thats the way to do it  



crispy010 said:


> It seems silly to me to purposefully limit the amount of riding you'd do..base building.


yes, with your goals it might be construed as that alright...but for someone with the intention of riding 3hr races top, then 3hrs base is plenty - horses for courses.


asgelle said:


> Then how do you explain riders whose longest race is 4 km doing 200+ km training rides?


they have ambitions of riding long road races of that distance/time in the future.

Now, Ive answered some of your questions, how about you answer my one?
What is a person trying to achieve by base building?? - what do you think is the function of it?...or do you know?, or they just do it cause eveyone else does? - answer me that.


----------



## STARNUT

muscleendurance said:


> they have ambitions of riding long road races of that distance/time in the future.



Correct question, incorrect answer. Asgelle is refering to track cyclists (specifically pursuiters of all distances). They will never do long races and don't aspire to, they train for 500m to 4km races. 

The answer to the question is in the requirements of being sucessful at that disipline. 

Starnut


----------



## crispy010

> base training doesnt make your go faster, it makes you more economical over your ride length.


Base training trains your body how to ride for long distances and survive. Part of that is being more economical, part of it is mental, and part of it is an actual change in how your body metabolizes fuel. By altering how your body and mind function on the bike, base training sets you up to get a lot faster later.


----------



## PhysioJoe

I think the concept of workload should not be underestimated. For guys training for track events, or even road/crit events of <2 hours, they clearly need to be able to do ALOT of intensity in training. The ability to repeat 30sec-5+ minute efforts above threshold or even above vo2max is crucial in training. I have a huge base from the winter, and I now recover much faster from very intense workouts. Not claiming a scientific fact or anything, but seems like if being accustomed to a high trianing workload (even at low intensities) can aid recovery from more intense workouts, then this would be beneficial even to track racers, who need to be able to repeat those hard efforts day after day in order to get faster.

PhysioJoe


----------

