Ironman training - The bike* (with nutrition spin off topic)

Iron Enthusiast

I've been hearing differing opinions regarding how long you should make your longest training spins in preparation for an IM.

Some people (who have completed IM) have been saying they never go further than 150k in training while others are saying you should do the full 180k at least once.

Up until recently I was planning on doing at least 2 x 160k spins and 1 x 180k spin before the race, but now in light of the above i'm wondering would i just be doing junk mles and instead would be better focusing on quality 120k - 140k spins with one 150k as advised above.

I know everyone is different but i'd be interested hear others experiences.
Advice from those with experience of completing/ currently training for IM would as always, be much apprecuated!
IE

hunnymonster

I train to time not distance for the long bike sessions and would usually do 2 or 3 bikes lasting 7 or 7:30 hours (with a short run off the bike). My IM bike time is about 5:35 give or take so even at a training pace I go significantly overdistance in training.

That said, I recover well from these sessions as they are low intensity so it doesn't impact on the rest of my training. If I were you, I would make the decision based on the longest rides you can get away with, without causing an extended recovery time.

tunney

I'm friendly with a few pro IM distance racers and top amateurs, none of them would go over 5:30 in IM specific rides. Would generally be 160km or so. Its all about quality. Training at less than IM wattage will benefit riding at less than IM wattage. Which obviously won't help IM bike splits.

Iron Enthusiast

Thanks HM & Tunney. I can see the beneift of training longer if you can recover, but also see the benefit in capping training rides at 150k if its all quality (same as marathon training).

Will need to ponder this a bit more (while doing my long sessions this weekend no doubt!)
It looks like the debate continues....

hunnymonster

As a matter of course, I would always take Tunney's advice over mine. He is methodical and high performance. I'm a plodder who trains to feel not formula. I do strongly advise running 15-20 minutes off the long bike though.

Clum

I'm in training for my first Ironman too and so far I've three 160km rides done.

While I can see the logic behind Tunney's advice there's also the need for non long distance cyclists to build up mileage. In doing this not every cycle can be done at IM wattage.

Riding 160km is second nature to IM pros whereas for novices it's a long bike ride. Back in November I was putting in 80km cycles which were done at about IM pace. When I added to them and started doing 100km rides they were slower than IM pace initially but my strength eventually improved and I manged to complete the latter 100km rides at what I suppose will be IM wattage. Similarly for 130km and 160km. The first few were slow but I did the latter rides faster.

I intend on doing two 180km spins before the IM event. I don't suffer too much after the 160km rides so would hope to recover fairly quickly after the 180km sessions. They'll be done at less than IM wattage but psychologically it'll be a big boost for me, being a first time IM participant, to cover that distance.

Time wise, it'll probably take 6 hours 30 to complete them.

tunney

Out of curiousity what IM are you doing Clum and Iron_enthausist?

Clum

tunney wrote: »

Out of curiousity what IM are you doing Clum and Iron_enthausist?

IMCH

Iron Enthusiast

Hey Tunney,

I'm doing Challenge Copenhagen so hopefully and nice flat bike course!

tunney

The power you can sustain in a well paced one hour TT is called your Functional Threshold Power.

Using this FTP figure and a power file for a ride you can determine the stress that this training has put on the body. This TSS is used in performance management and monitoring software to not only predict when a rider will peak in cycling but also to ensure peaking when it should occur by monitoring and enabling manipulating of accute and chronic training loads. This TSS figure gives a numeric value to the training load of a session and, amongst other things, indicates how long a particular ride will take to recover from.

A long easy spin, even ones of 180km and longer, will illicit a low TSS score. That is there is no significant training stress being placed on the body. As such its not superhuman powers of recovery that enable people to recovery from long rides but rather there isn't much to recover from.

Long spins at easy pace do have their place - but its in winter and done with specific fuelling, and done to promote fat for fuel usage.

In the final weeks(12 or so) coming up to an IM I would question the benefit of long easy spins. But whatever floats your boat.

tunney

Clum wrote: »

IMCH

Iron Enthusiast wrote: »

Hey Tunney,

I'm doing Challenge Copenhagen so hopefully and nice flat bike course!

Good luck lads, not too long to go!

griffin100

The power you can sustain in a well paced one hour TT is called your Functional Threshold Power.

Using this FTP figure and a power file for a ride you can determine the stress that this training has put on the body. This TSS is used in performance management and monitoring software to not only predict when a rider will peak in cycling but also to ensure peaking when it should occur by monitoring and enabling manipulating of accute and chronic training loads. This TSS figure gives a numeric value to the training load of a session and, amongst other things, indicates how long a particular ride will take to recover from.

A long easy spin, even ones of 180km and longer, will illicit a low TSS score. That is there is no significant training stress being placed on the body. As such its not superhuman powers of recovery that enable people to recovery from long rides but rather there isn't much to recover from.

Long spins at easy pace do have their place - but its in winter and done with specific fuelling, and done to promote fat for fuel usage.

In the final weeks(12 or so) coming up to an IM I would question the benefit of long easy spins. But whatever floats your boat.

Thats very interesting Tunney. So you'd reccomend max. 150-160km rides with more concentration on keeping a high power output for longer than plodding away with more time in the saddle the goal?

tunney

griffin100 wrote: »

Thats very interesting Tunney. So you'd reccomend max. 150-160km rides with more concentration on keeping a high power output for longer than plodding away with more time in the saddle the goal?

Not recommending any min/maxes at all Just that sessions should be focused. You wouldn't go out and faff on the bike and then expect that to translate to sprint distance speed. Same approach here.

If I was training for an IM and I was coming up to the final block of training I'd be looking at doing bikes that were a 2 hour spin followed by 3-3.5 hours of IM paced intervals with a short recovery.

Clum

tunney wrote: »

A long easy spin, even ones of 180km and longer, will illicit a low TSS score. That is there is no significant training stress being placed on the body. As such its not superhuman powers of recovery that enable people to recovery from long rides but rather there isn't much to recover from.

Long spins at easy pace do have their place - but its in winter and done with specific fuelling, and done to promote fat for fuel usage.

The long cycles I do aren't easy spins. I've been trying to do them at IM pace all along but usually the first increase in distance is done a little easier than the same distanced cycles that follow.

tunney wrote: »

If I was training for an IM and I was coming up to the final block of training I'd be looking at doing bikes that were a 2 hour spin followed by 3-3.5 hours of IM paced intervals with a short recovery.

Lately my long cycles include 2 hours of slightly slower than IM pace followed 2 hours at IM pace and then as much IM pace as I can do until I finish. Also, IM pace is obviously slower than OLY pace so I'm not flat out on the bike at any stage.

While I'm here I do have a question about nutrition (a little off topic, sorry). I've read loads about how many calories are burned during an Ironman and people mention 8000 - 9000 calories, or some crazy high number. I've run plenty of marathons and I've only ever taken on about 500 calories during the run, even though I burn about 2500 - 3000 in total. But the body can store most of those calories. Say for example the body stores 2000 - 2500 calories, that leaves me over 6000 calories short for the Ironman. Some of those come from food, others from body fat. The big question is do I have to replace all 6000 calories? I don't believe I do but I can't find an answer. I find it hard to believe I'll take on more than 3000 calories in the whole event. I'd be struggling to eat and drink that much, whatever about 6000. I assume the average weight loss of 2.5kgs during an Ironman is down to body fat being burned for energy?

tunney

Clum wrote: »

The long cycles I do aren't easy spins. I've been trying to do them at IM pace all along but usually the first increase in distance is done a little easier than the same distanced cycles that follow.

Wasn't talking about anyone specifically

Clum wrote: »

Lately my long cycles include 2 hours of slightly slower than IM pace followed 2 hours at IM pace and then as much IM pace as I can do until I finish. Also, IM pace is obviously slower than OLY pace so I'm not flat out on the bike at any stage.

Sounds good

Clum wrote: »

While I'm here I do have a question about nutrition (a little off topic, sorry). I've read loads about how many calories are burned during an Ironman and people mention 8000 - 9000 calories, or some crazy high number. I've run plenty of marathons and I've only ever taken on about 500 calories during the run, even though I burn about 2500 - 3000 in total. But the body can store most of those calories. Say for example the body stores 2000 - 2500 calories, that leaves me over 6000 calories short for the Ironman. Some of those come from food, others from body fat. The big question is do I have to replace all 6000 calories? I don't believe I do but I can't find an answer. I find it hard to believe I'll take on more than 3000 calories in the whole event. I'd be struggling to eat and drink that much, whatever about 6000. I assume the average weight loss of 2.5kgs during an Ironman is down to body fat being burned for energy?

A person can absorb between 280 and 380 kcal an hour.
My personal perference is for 3x100 cal gels an hour.

Forget about solids in IMCH - too hot, you won't want them. Assume calories are from gels and drinks.

Problem with my approach is by the time you get off the bike (17 gels) you won't want another one on the run. I don't like the infinit drinks at alot of IMs and faffing with aerobottles and their impact on aero head tubes means aero bottles are out so I'm stuck with gels.

The weight loss would be water and glycogen.
To store a gram of CHO you need two grams of water.
Plus general water lost.

Clum

I better order more gels...

hunnymonster

I can definitely recommend against the approach I used in IMDE last year. Gels/drink on the bike and Coke on the run. All this resulted in was me being violently ill with tarry black liquid all over a lovely junior doctor in the medical tent after the race.

I disagree with Tunney on the solids front. I think solids can be quite useful in the early portion of the bike (say from 30 minutes in until about 4 hours in). The offer a break from endless gels and I actually find it easier to balance the fluid requirements with real food compared to gels. Get the amount of fluid wrong with a gel and you'll feel awful.

Another thing I've found really useful lately (thanks to le Cheile for this one) is to thing in units of CHO (carbohydrates) rather than calories and to get about 60g carbs per hour (rather than 300 kCal).