Base training

[simonp]

i admire your discipline simonp, i have to raise my own game too!

Yes, if you want to continue to be far faster than me. 

[zigzag]

i admire your discipline simonp, i have to raise my own game too!

Yes, if you want to continue to be far faster than me. 

i don't have this particular objective, but i want to do well (i.e. my best) in the 24hr tt

[simonp]

i admire your discipline simonp, i have to raise my own game too!

Yes, if you want to continue to be far faster than me. 

i don't have this particular objective, but i want to do well (i.e. my best) in the 24hr tt

Yes, good luck!

[TimC]

Anyone used one of the sufferfest videos for inspiration?
I'm using music but still it's kinda boring doing my 3 x 10 mins intervals @ at.
Thinking one of the endurance or base vids playing on a tablet while on the gym bike may help as I can alter the resistance on manual to simulate the difference in effort.

Just wondered what the consensus is regarding them?
Thanks

John, I use Sufferfest quite a lot. At home I have a smart trainer (BKool) which is controlled by either the Sufferfest App, or by TrainerRoads on the computer with Sufferfest running within TR (or I just use Zwift). As I spend a great deal of time away from home, I use gym bikes more than I use my trainer, and on those I use simple RPE and vary the resistance to get the right RPE for the video, which I play using the app. As I know my FTP, the app will tell me what power I should be aiming for in each interval, and most gym bikes will give a power readout. Some aren't very accurate, but it doesn't take long to adjust your effort and derive a correction factor to make it about right, based on feel. They are a great way to make intervals fun, and help you get more out of indoor training than you otherwise might. The semi-pros above may be working on the bleeding edge of their capabilities; I don't, but I'm getting better than I was last year or the year before. I won't be troubling the leaderboard in the club TTs, but I'll at least know I'm giving it a good effort!

[JohnR]

Thanks for that Tim,

I now have sufferfest's Blender video which I have used once recently on the gym bike playing on my android tablet and also using my rpe relating it to the load readout on the bike. First impressions are great as it gives the mind something to concentrate on and the video keeps you motivated by changing power and cadence etc. So far it's made my first use a better workout as a result. Looking forward to more of the same and maybe trying the android app when it's available.

[Ningishzidda]

What does that methodology class as ‘Endurance’? Is it referring to a five hour roadrace?

On this website, ‘Endurance’ means AT LEAST a 10 hour 200 km ride. This is completed at approx. 100 W Average with 130 W ‘steady riding’ and occasional excursions to 320 W uphill.

[Ningishzidda]

What’s to be remembered is the aerodynamics of the bicycle change the kCals/mile ( workload ) for the rider.
On a Turbo, this is usually fixed, or adjustable by tweaking the machine’s magnetic or fluid brake module.

For any meaningful workout to simulate a specific type of event, the machine’s brake module should be adjusted to simulate the aerodynamics of the bike for the event.

Mine is 30 kCals/mile for my Audaxy bike, 20 kCals/mile for my TT bike and 45 kCals/mile for my commute lugger.
This is based on flat road, 16 Deg C and still air.

[rob]

2 * 90min tempo workouts this week - Mon & Thu - and a 5hr ride planned for Sunday morning.

Last few weeks have hopefully been a blip.

[simonp]

What does that methodology class as ‘Endurance’? Is it referring to a five hour roadrace?

On this website, ‘Endurance’ means AT LEAST a 10 hour 200 km ride. This is completed at approx. 100 W Average with 130 W ‘steady riding’ and occasional excursions to 320 W uphill.

It's based on the power training zones used by the likes of Coggan, Friel etc. In this context, endurance is something like 55-75% FTP. The definition of the zone therefore varies according to the training state of the rider. A typical duration in this zone according to Coggan would be 2-5 hours but may be longer or shorter.

For me, the endurance zone would be 142-195W based on my last FTP test. 100W is active recovery. I would expect to be able to average 150W+ on a 200k ride, and my NP for the 109km ride on Saturday was 183W, also in the endurance zone, but with excursions as high as 800W on short hills.

[TimC]

What does that methodology class as ‘Endurance’? Is it referring to a five hour roadrace?

On this website, ‘Endurance’ means AT LEAST a 10 hour 200 km ride. This is completed at approx. 100 W Average with 130 W ‘steady riding’ and occasional excursions to 320 W uphill.

Bollox. It might on the Audax board, but this is The Knowledge and it applies to all and any type of cycling. Just because you're an endurance magi does not mean others are aiming for the same thing. For most of us, an endurance ride is anything over an hour (which covers any TT that normal people are likely to be interested in!). It's a bonus if we can stand up and/or hold a conversation afterwards. And that is a perfectly reasonable state of play. Audax, Racing and long-distance TT-relevant boards and forums are available for those who are specifically looking for advice on those pursuits.

[bikenrrd]

Team pursuit is an endurance event.

[Ningishzidda]

I hope you’re joking. 

IIRC, an ‘Endurance event’ is any activity which completely depletes the natural storage of glycogen in the body and then continues.
To maintain activity, nutrition needs to be ingested.

Some folks on this website have stated they go out for a 100km ‘fasted’, and don’t bother stopping for food. For them, 100km is not ‘endurance’.

I ride 25 milers ‘fasted’, using most of my glycogen stores in the event. For me, that’s not ‘endurance’.

The threshold for ‘endurance’ for each individual depends on their level of fitness and pulmonary efficiency, ie VO2 uptake.

[TimC]

An endurance ride is anything that goes on long enough to stop you getting a normal meal or hitting opening time at the pub. So there.

[rob]

I'm no good at any time trial that lasts less than 4hrs.   It takes me that long to warm up.

By Tim's definition I am not normal.

[TimC]

Yep, I'd go with that!

[Chris S]

Time to give up your bedtime cookies?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26741119

[simonp]

Makes sense: if you ate well before bed, you're less likely to be in a genuinely 'fasted' state in the morning. My late night snack is usually greek yoghurt and berries with nuts.

[Pedal Castro]

Train low strategies

[Ningishzidda]

"Fasted" = "Nil by mouth 24hrs".

[simonp]

FTP and fat burning test at bw cycling in Bristol today.

FTP 280-300W.

Peak fat burning 66%.

Both are PRs. Well pleased with the results of the sweet spot base training plan. Particularly the fat burning number is better than I'd feared.

[Pedal Castro]

FTP and fat burning test at bw cycling in Bristol today.

FTP 280-300W.

Peak fat burning 66%.

Both are PRs. Well pleased with the results of the sweet spot base training plan. Particularly the fat burning number is better than I'd feared.

I assume that peak cat burning was measured via respiratory exchange ratio,  but 66% of what?

What were your numbers before the base training plan?

[simonp]

FTP and fat burning test at bw cycling in Bristol today.

FTP 280-300W.

Peak fat burning 66%.

Both are PRs. Well pleased with the results of the sweet spot base training plan. Particularly the fat burning number is better than I'd feared.

I assume that peak cat burning was measured via respiratory exchange ratio,  but 66% of what?

What were your numbers before the base training plan?

I did FTP tests at home using TrainerRoad which were low-mid 250s FTP after PBP. Tested again, mid-plan early February, 259W FTP. The intensity and volume stepped up after that, and recently the work-outs based on that FTP have seemed pretty easy. I wasn't making so much progress until I switched from "Traditional Base" to "Sweet-Spot Base".

As for the fat-burning, it's % of total calories burned. In absolute terms, it tends to follow a hyperbolic curve, with the peak typically around 50% VO2max. YMMV. This seemed to bear out for me today.

I've done this test 3 times last year; Feb 220W, peak fat 25%. April 240W, peak fat 55%. August, 260W, peak fat 35% (disappointing fat burning just before PBP).

What is interesting is that the indoor training programme is getting better results both on FTP and fat-burning than doing lots of long steady distance (feb-april last year I did 6 weekends in a row of Audax events ranging from 200-400km). Another factor, probably, is consistency of training. After PBP I started training on the following Sunday having finished the ride on Wednesday evening. Though there have been missed workouts, and the odd week with little to no training, I've been pretty dedicated over the winter, to the extent that I trained on Christmas Day and Boxing Day.

In the past, the tests done in TrainerRoad and done at BW Cycling have been fairly consistent, so I'll put 280W into TR as my FTP value and see how the work-outs pan out. If 280 is in line, then despite being heavier than in August, this is also a PB for FTP/kg (since I've been testing anyway).

[Pedal Castro]

I've done this test 3 times last year; Feb 220W, peak fat 25%. April 240W, peak fat 55%. August, 260W, peak fat 35% (disappointing fat burning just before PBP).

This doesn't make any sense to me. I would have expected it to be all very similar if it is the peak value % of calories produced by fat burning for different exercise intensities, as in general the lower the intensity the greater the % fat burning. I was expecting a % of HRmax, anaerobic threshold HR or FTP, etc. for when the body switches from predominately fat burning to carbs.

[simonp]

It's not a switch. But that was around 60%?FTP

[simonp]

In a rest interval now. Fat burning as an absolute climbs then is flattish until approaching FTP. At lower intensities it dominates.