No stop strategy

[Samuel D]

Regarding your last point, I heard about a pro who once averaged 98 W on a flat stage in a grand tour. Presumably there was a headwind. Might be apocryphal.

[Greenbank]

The problem I find is that whilst that happens, you will automatically ride a bit quicker, keep the heart rate the same and keep working with the same % of glycogen you had before, because it is comfotable to do so. I've never actually met anyone who got fitter but kept an identical moving speed.

Have you met Steve Abraham?

It'd be interesting to see how Steve's numbers have changed over the years he's been doing his OYTT efforts. I don't have the time to go trawl his Strava profile for the HR data.

I think the extent of his riding goes way beyond any previous scientific trial that current thinking is based upon. And you wouldn't be able to trial/test at these extremes as you simply won't be able to find (or fund) 30+ people who are willing to ride 12+ hours a day every day for several years.

Yesterday (https://www.strava.com/activities/1268919053/overview) he rode 338.6km in a shade under 12 hours moving time (28.2kph) with an average HR of just 91bpm. Calorie usage correlates well with HR.

[whosatthewheel]

The problem I find is that whilst that happens, you will automatically ride a bit quicker, keep the heart rate the same and keep working with the same % of glycogen you had before, because it is comfotable to do so. I've never actually met anyone who got fitter but kept an identical moving speed.

Have you met Steve Abraham?

It'd be interesting to see how Steve's numbers have changed over the years he's been doing his OYTT efforts. I don't have the time to go trawl his Strava profile for the HR data.

I think the extent of his riding goes way beyond any previous scientific trial that current thinking is based upon. And you wouldn't be able to trial/test at these extremes as you simply won't be able to find (or fund) 30+ people who are willing to ride 12+ hours a day every day for several years.

Yesterday (https://www.strava.com/activities/1268919053/overview) he rode 338.6km in a shade under 12 hours moving time (28.2kph) with an average HR of just 91bpm. Calorie usage correlates well with HR.

I am aware of Steve's effort and I know he religiously keeps his HR under 100 BPM. However, I am only aware of a handful of people who have set themselves the target to ride 200-250 miles a day for one year. That is somewhat different from someone riding a 200 km Audax on a sunday.
In my experience as folks get fitter, they tend to go faster and if you were to correlate the moving speed with some fitness parameter (say FTP to name one) among typical cyclists you would find an almost perfect fit

[mattc]

Who cares what the "typical" cyclist does? Are you a lemming??

There is science available to improve your audax experience - Steve et al have shown it can be done. If you don't want to use this knowledge, it's your choice.

[Greenbank]

In my experience as folks get fitter, they tend to go faster and if you were to correlate the moving speed with some fitness parameter (say FTP to name one) among typical cyclists you would find an almost perfect fit

FTP is unlikely to result in a good fit. An FTP of 200W on a 60kg rider will result in a vastly different moving average to 200W on a 90kg rider over a typical lumpy Audax. W/kg would be better than pure FTP but still far from perfect. Most people don't know how much power they put in on a ride let alone their FTP.

The problem I find is that whilst that happens, you will automatically ride a bit quicker, keep the heart rate the same and keep working with the same % of glycogen you had before, because it is comfotable to do so. I've never actually met anyone who got fitter but kept an identical moving speed.

I can think of plenty. Mainly when a group of people enter and ride an Audax together. If one person makes improvements in their fitness you'll still be riding at the speed of the weakest.

Moral is whichever way you look at it, the number of calories consumed and where they com from in your body tends to stay pretty much the same for a given distance. The only real way to save calories is to go quicker whilst using less power, or in other words "drafting".

Couldn't disagree more with those statements.

Aerodynamic improvements will make a significant difference to an Audaxer. I'm not suggesting a pointy helmet, skin suit and trip socks, but there are simple changes that would make a noticeable change.

( Sure, people are free to Audax exactly how they want, but I'm writing this in the context of this thread where someone is looking for ways to stop less which you can achieve in many ways. )

* As you say, riding in a group will help, but that's not for everyone and doesn't help should you end up riding alone.

* Slimming down and/or re-positioning luggage (panniers are probably the least aerodynamic option but sometimes seen on audaxes). Rackpacks might be a better option than a big saddlebag. Certainly carrying less will help. I know I'd carry a lot less on a 300 now than I did when I first started.

* Positioning on the bike will be a big one. Clip on tri-bars, using the drops more or just adopting the 'hands on hoods with forearms flat' position.

* From here were into diminishing returns. Things like clothing choices (Flappy jackets or jerseys, etc).

[Karla]

Does it to a useful degree? My understanding was that our efficiency at converting calories to work done does not actually change much, and furthermore that it’s not very different between me and Chris Froome. Is that not the case then?

As a thermodynamic machine you can't improve.

Wrong.  Muscular efficiency is a thing, it hovers around 20 %, it is variable with several factors (though not by a massively drastic amount, as Samuel says).

Muscular efficiency is trainable.  See, for instance, this paper about a well-known Texan. 

Muscular efficiency and endurance are also affected by diet; see e.g. here.

Muscular efficiency decreases as work rate increases - so if you have larger muscles, they'll be working less hard and will be more efficient: Reference

[LittleWheelsandBig]

Coyle's paper has been quite correctly rubbished for many years now. Not taking account of doping leads to an assumption that efficiency improves.

[GPS]

Coyle's paper has been quite correctly rubbished for many years now. Not taking account of doping leads to an assumption that efficiency improves.

We'd better get on 'the program' then.

Should we start dope testing UK audaxes ?

[whosatthewheel]

In my experience as folks get fitter, they tend to go faster and if you were to correlate the moving speed with some fitness parameter (say FTP to name one) among typical cyclists you would find an almost perfect fit

FTP is unlikely to result in a good fit. An FTP of 200W on a 60kg rider will result in a vastly different moving average to 200W on a 90kg rider over a typical lumpy Audax. W/kg would be better than pure FTP but still far from perfect. Most people don't know how much power they put in on a ride let alone their FTP.

The problem I find is that whilst that happens, you will automatically ride a bit quicker, keep the heart rate the same and keep working with the same % of glycogen you had before, because it is comfotable to do so. I've never actually met anyone who got fitter but kept an identical moving speed.

I can think of plenty. Mainly when a group of people enter and ride an Audax together. If one person makes improvements in their fitness you'll still be riding at the speed of the weakest.

Moral is whichever way you look at it, the number of calories consumed and where they com from in your body tends to stay pretty much the same for a given distance. The only real way to save calories is to go quicker whilst using less power, or in other words "drafting".

Couldn't disagree more with those statements.

Aerodynamic improvements will make a significant difference to an Audaxer. I'm not suggesting a pointy helmet, skin suit and trip socks, but there are simple changes that would make a noticeable change.

( Sure, people are free to Audax exactly how they want, but I'm writing this in the context of this thread where someone is looking for ways to stop less which you can achieve in many ways. )

* As you say, riding in a group will help, but that's not for everyone and doesn't help should you end up riding alone.

* Slimming down and/or re-positioning luggage (panniers are probably the least aerodynamic option but sometimes seen on audaxes). Rackpacks might be a better option than a big saddlebag. Certainly carrying less will help. I know I'd carry a lot less on a 300 now than I did when I first started.

* Positioning on the bike will be a big one. Clip on tri-bars, using the drops more or just adopting the 'hands on hoods with forearms flat' position.

* From here were into diminishing returns. Things like clothing choices (Flappy jackets or jerseys, etc).

Obviously, but from the point of view of physics drafting and being more aero are the same thing... in both cases you reduce your aerodynamic drag. What's that got to do with fitness or food?
You can have extremely fit riders with terrible drag and extremely unfit ones who slice through the air better.

FTP correlates very well with speed actually, given the way the human body scales, in the same way as other fitness parameters do correlate well with speed, being that VO2 max (hard to train though). The point is you will find that statistically folks with higher numbers average higher speeds, rather than keeping the same speed but using less fuel to do so. It's human nature, if you are comfortable to go faster, you will go faster.

In the absence of speed limits, the speed you will do on a clear motorway is a function of the engine you drive... some cars feel comfortable at 60 mph others at 120. I struggle to think you will keep 60 to save fuel

[rob]

FTP and VO2max on an audax board.....I usually have to the TT forum for that stuff and there be dragons there.   

I also keep reading this as no strop strategy.   Anyone been saying hello to Mr Tetchy ?

[whosatthewheel]

FTP and VO2max on an audax board.....I usually have to the TT forum for that stuff and there be dragons there.   

Well, to be fair you started it by mentioning gels and energy bars in an Audax forum... 

[Greenbank]

Obviously, but from the point of view of physics drafting and being more aero are the same thing... in both cases you reduce your aerodynamic drag. What's that got to do with fitness or food?
You can have extremely fit riders with terrible drag and extremely unfit ones who slice through the air better.

Because you can't draft someone if you're riding alone which the OP says quite often happens and that they often prefer. Even if you're in a group or drafting the more aero you are the less energy you'll use.

We're talking about this (rather than just fitness or food) because the OP is looking for ways to become faster in order to get around longer rides within the time limits. It would be foolish to ignore the simple and easy gains that can be made by looking at ones aerodynamics (along with everything else).

FTP correlates very well with speed actually, given the way the human body scales, in the same way as other fitness parameters do correlate well with speed, being that VO2 max (hard to train though). The point is you will find that statistically folks with higher numbers average higher speeds, rather than keeping the same speed but using less fuel to do so. It's human nature, if you are comfortable to go faster, you will go faster.

I'd agree that there would be a general trend that "higher numbers average higher speeds", but that's quite a bit different to what you originally said:-

if you were to correlate the moving speed with some fitness parameter (say FTP to name one) among typical cyclists you would find an almost perfect fit

I was simply disagreeing that using FTP would be "an almost perfect fit". It wouldn't (IMO) given the huge differences in Audaxers build and power outputs. I personally made considerable performance gains by losing 18kg (and maintaining roughly the same power output).

[CrazyEnglishTriathlete]

I've tried no stop / low stop strategies.  They don't work for me on rides above 200km, and are a reason why I've abandoned a couple of very hard 600s where such an approach has been essential for me to try to complete the ride.  There are some riders who can do this but I'm not one of them. 

I did do a couple of 24 hour time trials and about the same time, riding through a 600 without sleep.  None of those things would rank in the top 20 of my most enjoyable long events. 

I've also found myself riding past lots of weary cyclists who've adopted such a strategy on the second day of a not-so-extreme 600.  I certainly feel better than they look.  So my strategy now is to stop and eat properly and ride faster.