# Base building contradictions?



## ozstriker (Aug 1, 2012)

I have been researching 'base building' and a lot of the info out there seems to condradict itself so im getting confused about how to go about it. 

Idea 1 says that you should do a lot of hours of slow long distance a week to build your aerobic system.

Idea 2 says that for people that can only afford to ride 7-8 hours a week should base build by supplementing intervals and a lot of them.

I fit into the idea 2 category as I don't have forever to spend on a bike next week, but the way I was understanding it was that you base build to build your aerobic system, and by doing intervals your training your anaerobic system, and not building a good base for your muscles to be supplied with oxygen on endurance rides.

Thoughts?


----------



## IKnowYouRider (Jul 1, 2003)

Forget the "slow long distance." I'm a big proponent of building a solid base, but that'll include lots of threshold intervals, tempo/sst and even some V02 and anaerobic stuff. Intervals are just that, intervals, a specific amount of time at some level of exertion. They may be short anaerobic/sprint intervals, 20 min. threshold, SST intervals, whatever. The correct way for you to build a solid base is largely dependent on your level of experience, time constraints, etc.

-w


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Cut and paste from an online nordic skiing newsletter I subscribe to. 



> Aerobic Efficiency: Running and Rollerskiing
> By: Chad Salmela
> 
> It doesn't seem to make much sense to say you have to go slower to go faster, and it makes even less to say that to go fast skiing, you need to run. In fact, "need" is a strong word for either notion, but if we are talking about the optimal training adaptation for aerobic efficiency, then "need" fits.
> ...


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

> The faster an athlete moves at AeT, the faster that athlete usually moves in competition too.


Yes, ... but



> This is important to remember, because AeT for most non-elite athletes is at a very slow velocity if it has never been tested, addressed, or focused upon. *It can't change if training never happens slightly below and slightly above it.*


this is rubbish.



> The easiest way to specifically know your intensity is to get metabolically tested. That is not a commonplace opportunity for many. More and more programs are using lactate analyzers. One of the easiest measures for aerobic efficiency is taking lactates in the field on workouts that are designed to be base-building workouts. If you are over 1.5 mMols in the field, that's too hard. If you can't rollerski under 1.5 mMols, then try to see if you can get under that while running, and run that intensity for a while. Try to get down to the 1 mMol range before you go back to rollerskiing, and/or pick up your base running pace.


Oh dear.

Fortunately on bikes we have far better ways of determining, fitness, abilities and intensity with a power meter.


----------



## ozstriker (Aug 1, 2012)

I rest my case haha

I noticed you replied in an earlier thread that riding below 'threshold' is building base.

What is your threshold a certain heart rate %


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

ozstriker said:


> I rest my case haha
> 
> I noticed you replied in an earlier thread that riding below 'threshold' is building base.
> 
> What is your threshold a certain heart rate %


Not sure if I understand your question.

Threshold HR (or HR range) is the HR that you regularly see when riding at threshold (e.g. from a longer TT of say 30-60 minutes).

If you mean, "what % of that HR should I ride at in order to improve threshold power?", well, pretty much all HR levels above recovery will do that. Some levels will tend to elicit a response more quickly per hour of effort than others.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Alex-Thanks for your responses to our misguided questions and misunderstandings. It has to be painful setting us straight time and time again, but I think everyone reading really appreciates you and other knowledgable people cutting to the chase. 

I found the 3rd and 4th paragraphes in the above article interesting and why I posted. I guess I was under the impression (from a former coach) that capillary bed density development is maximised with slower riding (LSD=Capillary bed development). Old way of thinking I guess as I just ran across this By Joe Friel:

Aerobic Threshold Training | Active.com


----------



## plx (Mar 28, 2011)

obv you need lots of hours, why do you think euro pros are so good?
they train in a day what most people train in a week


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

woodys737 said:


> I found the 3rd and 4th paragraphes in the above article interesting and why I posted. I guess I was under the impression (from a former coach) that capillary bed density development is maximised with slower riding (LSD=Capillary bed development). Old way of thinking I guess as I just ran across this By Joe Friel:
> 
> Aerobic Threshold Training | Active.com


Increased capillarisation in muscles occurs from training at all aerobic levels, however the rate of adaptation induced is greatest when training is performed at supra threshold levels, i.e. at levels that will induce a state of VO2max. 

As a summary of physiological adaptations from training at various intensity levels, see this summary from my blog:
Alex's Cycle Blog: A Graphical Representation of Training Levels

The adaptations are another way of viewing the data as presented by Andy Coggan in his items of power training levels, and is also pretty much as you will find in any good exercise physiology text book (e.g. Astrand & Rodahl: Textbook of Work Physiology).

Keep in mind of course that the intensity of effort has an impact of the duration/volume we can do at that level, and so total load is a function of intensity and duration. It's not a linear equation though.


----------



## ozstriker (Aug 1, 2012)

RichardFudnavis said:


> At present there is a subjective difficulty for our Party in the Northeast. Large numbers of our cadres and armed forces in the Northeast are newcomers, unfamiliar with the place and the people. Cadres are dissatisfied because we cannot occupy large cities and they are impatient with the arduous work of arousing the masses and building base areas. These circumstances are in contradiction with the present situation and the tasks of the Party.


Umm come again


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

ozstriker said:


> Umm come again


It's a base building contradiction. Simply really.


----------

