The pointlessless of the long distance cyclist

Lumen

I've recently started cycling after 10+ years off the bike (previously did fast recreational riding as a student).

I'm currently at "34 y/o slim couch potato" level - I walk fast about 90 minutes a day, and that's it. I am trying to put together a winter training programme that allows me to join group rides in the spring, of the "80km in 3-4 hours" variety. As I have two small children I need to make best use of the available time.

After a few shortish rides over the past month, I've established that my leg muscles are the weakest link - I attempted to establish my max HR on the bike on Sunday morning using this, and couldn't push it past 172 bpm - my legs were burning but I wasn't really out of breath. I assume that'll fix itself soon enough.

Reviewing the information on Cycling Performance Tips, it seems that

• maximum aerobic conditioning (increasing VO2max) occurs with 3 workout days per week
• maximum aerobic improvement occurs at 85-90% of your max. heart rate
• use of the "long slow distance" approach where your maximum heart rate is always kept at 60 to 80% VO2max will not optimize your personal performance for high level aerobic events

I find passing references to "improving endurance" and "muscular/skeletal conditioning" but can't pin this down to anything more specific - slower rides seem to be a technique for having fun on rest/recovery days rather than achieving anything in particular.

Obviously if I want to ride a long distance I need to practice it at some stage, but arguably the best way to make long rides easier is to be able to cycle them at lower effort for a given speed, which I'll only do by improving aerobic capacity (on short, hard rides).

It seems therefore that from a training perspective, I can spend the winter doing 3 sub-1hr rides a week, and come springtime I should have no trouble keeping up.

Am I missing something?

btw, I'll be joining a boards spin as soon as my legs are up to it!

Morgan

I lost concentration about halfway through that.

How about just riding your bike for 90 minutes a day instead of all the walking? That'll bring you up to "group ride" speed in no time at all.

Raam

Morgan wrote: »

I lost concentration about halfway through that.

How about just riding your bike for 90 minutes a day instead of all the walking? That'll bring you up to "group ride" speed in no time at all.

Aye, sounds fierce compli-mi-cated.
OP: are you enjoying your cycling? That's the main thing. If you are, then the endurance will come in time.

unionman

+1 what Raam said.

I can only tell you that with a few long spins under my belt since July, I feel different. Endurance and fitness have improved in ways that I wouldn't have known how to measure.

In July I did my first Boards spin, Sally Gap and home, 83km. I felt exhilerated but there was a certain amount of (short lived) pain in the recovery. I had no clue as to how to climb, and wiped out a number of times in the attempt. Then I scared myself half to death on the descent (it still amuses me that the speed of downhill surprised me as much as it did).

Gradually, each spin (and my reasonable effort at the Tour of Kildare) revealed a bit more appetite and ability for greater distance. I really like climbing hills, which is another surprise.

Yesterday I did 86km with Orwell Wheelers beginners group. There is a huge difference in how I performed on that first 80k ride and yesterday. More significantly, there is a measurable improvement in my recovery time.

My point is, and I think I have one, get out and do more spins. Are you enjoying them? Then just keep it going. Join a group spin, it's a whole new experience to going out on your own. My guess is your appetite will be whetted by what you can achieve and learn in a group. The rest will come naturally.

Lumen

Sorry for all the detail, I tend to be a bit analytical about things.

Yes I'm loving the riding, although frustrated that I can't yet do the 15km each-way commute every day, probably because I'm unable to ride slow enough to avoid a build up of fatigue on successive days. I also need to preserve my back, the reason I had to give up cycling previously. I'm currently doing the commute twice a week, i.e. 4x40 min fast rides plus an hour or so at the weekend.

Basically, the question is "does long, slow cycling actually make you faster, or is it just a nice way to spend a Sunday?".

eta: unionman has sort of answered that, so I'll be joining a spin as soon as I can comfortably spend 2+ hours on a bike!

rflynnr

Before even attempting an answer (and there are others here better qualified than I): what's your definition of a "slow cycle"? Average speeds in the 15-20kmph mark? Slower still? Or faster?

Raam

The best thing you can do is establish a base. Build up by 10% per week, is the general rule of thumb. It won't take long before you can do long spins, but don't try and rush it.

scottreynolds

Lumen wrote: »

I'm currently doing the commute twice a week, i.e. 4x40 min fast rides plus an hour or so at the weekend.

To be honest the best thing you could do, which will require no more time away from th family, is to increase your commutting times per week. I was in your boat a few months ago and just increased the rides to three (there and back six) times a week and then four. It doesn't matter if you drop down some weeks to relax again or ifwork changes but make sure that you at least do two times per week. I found in the past that its easy to do two one week and none the next :-).... and once you stop its even harder.

But keep i up... I just did 100kms in the weekend for the first time in a long time. Once your doing 4 rides per week then a few hours at the weekend won't seem so bad... and then t will be 80kms no worries.

With regards o you first post about legs strength the best wy to build up leg strength is on the bike.... especially when beginning

Lumen

rflynnr wrote: »

Before even attempting an answer (and there are others here better qualified than I): what's your definition of a "slow cycle"? Average speeds in the 15-20kmph mark? Slower still? Or faster?

My 9.5 mile commute from D15 to Baggot St takes me 35-45 minutes depending on traffic (and direction), which is 20-26 km/h. This is about as fast as I can cycle comfortably (i.e. without really suffering). I doubt I could sustain this for more than an hour.

I haven't measured the pace of a "slow" (effort wise) cycle yet.

BaBiT

Hmm, firstly I would quote Mr Merckx and just say "ride lots"...

But that said if you want to be really analytical about it (and i must admit ti being a bit of a gadgets and data freak on this too) well then your zone for maximum aerobic benefit is actually zone 3 which is 70-80%....Theoretically if you are between 85-90% you may aswell be sitting at home on the sofa having a beer and eating crisps (well ok, anything s better than sitting on a sofa etc)..

What I did last winter was start watching my heart rate and keeping it below 80% and I noticed over time that my average speed began to climb with the same HR so a clear sign of a fitness increase..

If you want to be really analytical I would recommend reading something like 'The Heart Rate Monitor Book for Cyclists' by Sally Edwards and Sally Reed...If your going to watch your heart rate you may aswell know what you are watching..You'll probably find that on amazon..

BUT...that said, I think you should do like I did and just join a club now...You'll be amazed at the distances you can cover in a group, you'll get great advice and support too

Good luck

blorg

Personally I started with the long and slow approach and only really got into the fast stuff when I started going out with groups and pushing myself more this year. Slow being 60-80% HR I reckon (although I didn't have a heart rate monitor at the time.) Certainly this worked for me regards endurance and recovery. As Scott says, best way to work it in is through your commute.

rflynnr

Lumen wrote: »

My 9.5 mile commute from D15 to Baggot St takes me 35-45 minutes depending on traffic (and direction), which is 20-26 km/h. This is about as fast as I can cycle comfortably (i.e. without really suffering). I doubt I could sustain this for more than an hour.

I haven't measured the pace of a "slow" (effort wise) cycle yet.

If you're doing 20-26k - an entirely respectable clip - commuting and assuming you're on the same bike for the commute and spin, you're probably averaging somewhere in the 20kph region even on a 2-hour ride which is a pretty decent speed. It certainly isn't useless in terms of your overall endurance.

However, to reinterate the point others have made, shifting to a daily commute will do more than any other single thing to improve your overall fitness and endurance levels. I've known three friends in the past couple of years who, after a year or so of daily commuting graduated to longer rides (mainly touring) aand have all been surprised at the relative ease with which they made the transition. One subsequently went the whole hog, bought a road bike, converted an old bike to a fixie and can now fairly comfortably take on spins of the length (80k) you mention.

Can I ask if kiddie commitments demand you use the car on those days you don't cycle?

Lumen

rflynnr wrote: »

Can I ask if kiddie commitments demand you use the car on those days you don't cycle?

No, it's walk+train+walk or cycle. If not cycling, the "walk" part takes about 60 minutes a day (the 90 mins I quoted in the OP was a typo).

At the moment, the walking on rest days feels like it helps recovery, in terms of joint comfort and general mobility.

You're not going to suggest I run to work, are you?

:eek:

Freddy687

Lumen wrote: »

- I attempted to establish my max HR on the bike on Sunday morning using this, and couldn't push it past 172 bpm - my legs were burning but I wasn't really out of breath. I assume that'll fix itself soon enough.

Have you had your bike fit checked. I know a couple of lads whose legs gave out but still felt they had a lot left in the tank. One lad had his bike fit checked and found the saddle height was far too low.
His new setup is giving him more power and HR has increased before the legs start to give.

Lumen

Freddy687 wrote: »

Have you had your bike fit checked. I know a couple of lads whose legs gave out but still felt they had a lot left in the tank. One lad had his bike fit checked and found the saddle height was far too low.
His new setup is giving him more power and HR has increased before the legs start to give.

I spent a bit of time on the fit using this. The position feels much the same as I had as a student, and I can do 100+rpm without rocking or any specific discomfort (just general burny feeling).

The only problem position-wise I can feel is that the bars are a bit low (6cm below saddle, I'd prefer 3cm to start off with) which I can fix using an adjustable stem.

My cleat positioning is a bit "middle of everything", I'll a fiddle with that tonight based on tips on the other thread.

Searching the archives earlier I discovered that Blorg knows a man who does professional bike fitting; I may bother him for the details if I don't get comfortable in the next week or two.

Raam

Lumen wrote: »

The only problem position-wise I can feel is that the bars are a bit low (6cm below saddle, I'd prefer 3cm to start off with) which I can fix using an adjustable stem.

Searching the archives earlier I discovered that Blorg knows a man who does professional bike fitting; I may bother him for the details if I don't get comfortable in the next week or two.

Often, you can flip your existing stem upside down to get a more relaxed fit.
Cycleways also do fittings.

Lumen

Raam wrote: »

Often, you can flip your existing stem upside down to get a more relaxed fit.
Cycleways also do fittings.

It's already in the "up" position That'll teach me to guess the frame size....

It was actually cantalach who had the bike fit details:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=56149804

...but cycleways may be handier, ta.

SetOverSet

If you're just returning to cycling after a long lay-off, I personally I wouldn't be too worried about VO2 Max and HR zones yet. I would second Merckx advise to 'Ride lots'. Your immediate goal should be to build up a good mileage base. Commuting daily is a great way to start. If you're going on longer spins at the weekend vary the duration of your rides and try to ride faster over the shorter distances and I think the general guideline is not to increase your distance each week by more than 10%. You'll soon be fitter and faster. Above all have fun!

Liamo08

SetOverSet wrote: »

If you're just returning to cycling after a long lay-off, I personally I wouldn't be too worried about VO2 Max and HR zones yet. I would second Merckx advise to 'Ride lots'. Your immediate goal should be to build up a good mileage base. Commuting daily is a great way to start. If you're going on longer spins at the weekend vary the duration of your rides and try to ride faster over the shorter distances and I think the general guideline is not to increase your distance each week by more than 10%. You'll soon be fitter and faster. Above all have fun!

I'd pretty much agree with everything here, I've just recently gotten back on the bike and I'm now up to the 70km mark on my longer spins after about 2 - 3 months and my average speed is now up around the 27km/hr mark. I'm pretty much finding that with every spin I'm noticing slight improvements whether its with my general speed, climbing ability or general stamina. I'm keeping a detailed log of all my training including distance/average speed/ pulse zones etc. to monitor how I'm improving but I'm trying not to get obsessed with the numbers. The most important thing is just getting out there and enjoying it. The daily commute to work is a bonus and will definitely improve your fitness and that's the most important thing initially. If you just get the miles in your legs your performance will quickly improve and then you can focus more on the technical stuff once the initial base is there.

DirkVoodoo

Definitely get out on a boards spin as soon as you can. I was quite nervous about heading out in some kind of group spin, imagining a tour de france peloton of swish bikes and hard faces. Aside from the odd swish bike (which people use as a talking point and not to punish your cycling ability with) it is the most easy and relaxed atmosphere to start building the miles in.

A Dundrum-Sally Gap-Dundrum spin is about 3 hours with plenty of climbing to test out the legs.

rflynnr

Lumen wrote: »

No, it's walk+train+walk or cycle. If not cycling, the "walk" part takes about 60 minutes a day (the 90 mins I quoted in the OP was a typo).

At the moment, the walking on rest days feels like it helps recovery, in terms of joint comfort and general mobility.

You're not going to suggest I run to work, are you?

:eek:

Not quite - if anything running is going to place much more stress on your joints. (I speak as a man currently operating with a calf muscle tear after a triathlon.)

I only ask about obstacles to commuting because a 10 mile commute seems like such an ideal base from which to build. I have a much shorter commute (4 miles a day) but I find even that's enough to maintain a basic level of "cycling legs" as long as I get in a decent (i.e 60k plus) spin at some stage during the week. (Oddly I actually wish my commute was a bit longer and I've been known to take some fairly extensive detours to extend it.) You may not be in a position to do it now but once you do start doing them everyday, 100k cycles at the weekend will be comfortably within your range.

You might also consider - if you haven't already - exploring pre-cycle stretches. I can't point to online sources as I picked up mine from a physio. But at least one of the stretches (for my knee) performed little short of a miracle on a recurrent knee issue.

Finally - I sympathise with the difficulty of fitting cycling around family. The boards cycle is a great idea but the domestic politics of disappearing on a Saturday morning (possibly not to return till early afternoon ) can be difficult to negotiate. Hence, thus far, I've only gone out once but found them all extremely warm and friendly. If you can find a way to go on one - even if only once a month - it's a great introduction to longer, more challenging routes.

Alkers

Sorry for going off topic but whats the standard on the boards spins like? Used to cycle everywhere and mountainbike a good bit but got a moped at Christmas and never am on the bike anymore. Is it all racers or would I keep up being not fit and having a mtb with slicks?
Cheers

TinyExplosions

Simona1986 wrote: »

Sorry for going off topic but whats the standard on the boards spins like? Used to cycle everywhere and mountainbike a good bit but got a moped at Christmas and never am on the bike anymore. Is it all racers or would I keep up being not fit and having a mtb with slicks?
Cheers

It's very relaxed, and about as fast as the slowest people.... you're more than welcome to come out on a mtb with slicks -we welcome anybody!

scottreynolds

rflynnr wrote: »

Finally - I sympathise with the difficulty of fitting cycling around family. The boards cycle is a great idea but the domestic politics of disappearing on a Saturday morning (possibly not to return till early afternoon ) can be difficult to negotiate. Hence, thus far, I've only gone out once but found them all extremely warm and friendly. If you can find a way to go on one - even if only once a month - it's a great introduction to longer, more challenging routes.

Perhaps there should be a 8:30am die hard ride (aka Boardies with Other Responsibilities Group).... back at start point by 12pm. Surely thats a good enough ride :-)

Raam

scottreynolds wrote: »

Perhaps there should be a 8:30am die hard ride (aka Boardies with Other Responsibilities Group).... back at start point by 12pm. Surely thats a good enough ride :-)

That's the time I prefer to go riding at. In fact earlier is better.

rflynnr

Well alright!!! (Soon as me calf (muscle) is back on track, let's do an early morning ride.)

scottreynolds

Raam wrote: »

That's the time I prefer to go riding at. In fact earlier is better.

8am -- -- I have a 1:30pm deadline....as agreed with the wifey.

TinyExplosions

scottreynolds wrote: »

8am -- -- I have a 1:30pm deadline....as agreed with the wifey.

If we're going to go early, why not go early -7am -gives us plenty of time for a long spin, and still be back for lunch!

Chips Lovell

Raam wrote: »

That's the time I prefer to go riding at. In fact earlier is better.

+1 Big believer in an early start.

unionman

el tonto wrote: »

+1 Big believer in an early start.

Me too.

Muller_1

The old cycling phrase comes to mind. "You can add speed to miles but you can't add miles to speed." The more time you spend in the saddle will increase your endurance once you have that work on your speed.