Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Training & Nutrition
Reload this Page >

Riding far versus fast

Notices
Training & Nutrition Learn how to develop a training schedule that's good for you. What should you eat and drink on your ride? Learn everything you need to know about training and nutrition here.

Riding far versus fast

Old 12-21-20, 12:25 AM
  #76  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,123
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked 247 Times in 148 Posts
[QUOTE=DaveLeeNC;21841595]
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
Really?

FTP was never lab-based.[/QUOTE

I did not say that. It referred to whatever threshold (lab based or field based) you were using as a fundamental parameter of your training at that time.

Here is an interesting question. Assume the impossible where someone came up with a thermometer that would measure in 20 seconds either your ftp or your LT (precise definition of your choice). Which would be the better metric on which to base your training in the manner that we do today with power meters and ftp? I truly do not have an opinion - at least for well trained athletes.

dave
There are countless arguments about which is the best metric but at the end of the day you still have to go out and do the work and raise whatever it is your measuring. The precise definition is immaterial provided you use the same method consistently so you can track performance and the efficacy of a particular training regimen. FTP, MLSS, CP are all very close to one another.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 12-21-20, 04:49 AM
  #77  
atwl77
Kamen Rider
 
atwl77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: KL, MY
Posts: 907

Bikes: Fuji Transonic Elite, Marechal Soul Ultimate, Dahon Dash Altena

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 304 Post(s)
Liked 173 Times in 106 Posts
Call me simple-minded... but if someone rode 105% FTP in one hour, I'd just say "congratulations, you just improved your FTP. It's now 105% of your old FTP."

But in the context of the graph... you can lump me in the "I'd like to see how you can ride 105% your FTP in one hour" group.
atwl77 is offline  
Old 12-21-20, 07:44 AM
  #78  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,388

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2582 Post(s)
Liked 1,374 Times in 685 Posts
Functional Threshold Power was developed by Dr. Andrew Coggan and is specifically defined as ďthe highest power a rider can maintain in a quasi-steady state without fatiguing."


Originally Posted by Andrew Coggan
That is because 1) the exercise intensity-duration relationship is quite flat in that region, and 2) FTP has never been defined as the power you can maintain for 60(.000000.....) min.


...
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 12-21-20, 08:02 AM
  #79  
mr_pedro
Senior Member
 
mr_pedro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 611
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked 53 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by atwl77 View Post
But in the context of the graph... you can lump me in the "I'd like to see how you can ride 105% your FTP in one hour" group.
The graph is not implying anyone to ride at 105% FTP for 1 hour. The unit of the vertical axis is kCal per hour, however that does not mean you need to ride for 1 hour, just like riding at 20 mph can also be done for 30 minutes.
mr_pedro is offline  
Old 12-21-20, 08:29 AM
  #80  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,388

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2582 Post(s)
Liked 1,374 Times in 685 Posts
Originally Posted by mr_pedro View Post
The graph is not implying anyone to ride at 105% FTP for 1 hour. The unit of the vertical axis is kCal per hour, however that does not mean you need to ride for 1 hour, just like riding at 20 mph can also be done for 30 minutes.
How can they denote kCal per hour?

One person's 100% FTP may burn 1300 kCal an hour, whereas someone else's may only burn 600.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 12-21-20, 08:39 AM
  #81  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,188
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 773 Post(s)
Liked 251 Times in 158 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
How can they denote kCal per hour?

One person's 100% FTP may burn 1300 kCal an hour, whereas someone else's may only burn 600.
the plot isnít for everyone. Itís for Rob Gray.
asgelle is offline  
Likes For asgelle:
Old 12-26-20, 09:37 PM
  #82  
SapInMyBlood
Enthusiastic Sufferer
 
SapInMyBlood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 97

Bikes: 2015 Specialized Roubaix, 2014 Salsa Fargo, 2013 Trek Remedy, 2014 Cannondale Synapse

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 27 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
the plot isnít for everyone. Itís for Rob Gray.
Fackin Rob.
SapInMyBlood is offline  
Old 12-27-20, 03:53 AM
  #83  
cubewheels
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 1,596

Bikes: A really old BMX bike, Phantom 20 kid's MTB, Jackal Mio Gravel Bike

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 702 Post(s)
Liked 308 Times in 247 Posts
I just found out that riding far and fast/hard is better / best for me. The holidays gave me the opportunity to do >120 km per ride where my previous longest has been 40 km fast and hard (not a lot of free time unfortunately)

Far and fast (or hard if going up on long mountain climbs) with recovery days or rides in between delivered immediate and significant improvement in performance in just 3 days. So it looks like I still have A LOT to improve in my performance if only I have more free time outside of holidays.
cubewheels is offline  
Old 12-27-20, 04:54 AM
  #84  
Dsheidlo 
Junior Member
 
Dsheidlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Dutchess County
Posts: 11

Bikes: Surly Crosscheck custom build; Cinelli Vigorelli single speed.

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
^ Yes. History of self-reporting on BF over the years says that riders who maintain their normal off-the-bike diet eat back their on the bike expenditure. I think what needs to happen is that the rider needs to get used to having less food in their stomach. My observation is that if I'm never hungry, I'm not going to lose weight. If I eat smaller portions, when a larger portion comes along, I simply can't eat that much. Yay! And I have less desire to eat when I return from a ride. I tend to eat before I ride and then have an apple and plenty of water when I return. An apple is ~80 calories and fills me right up.

Of course it matters how long your daily rides are. If they're 100 miles, you'll eat a half a pan of lasagna when you get back.
When the weather permits, I eat a "normal" amount for long rides, far less on hard ride days and use intermittent fasting on recovery days (not eat till noon and stop around 7 pm). But I don't compete so I am not trying to achieve any performance goals. I've lost 15 pounds that way but gained back 5 this pandemic winter.
Dsheidlo is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.