cubewheels

Not like I have a choice since I only ride in the city with lots of braking. Just curious which one is better workout, riding in nearly empty uninterrupted country roads, never braking with intensity intervals or "forced" intervals in city riding with lots of braking and then sprinting afterwards?

I end up pedaling out of the saddle most of the time in my city rides to accelerate quickly from stops and to chase green traffic lights. At times, I get painful lungs with such daily routine.

Fortunately, my stops are only very short. There's only two to three traffic stops where I may spend up to 30 seconds fully stopped in my one hour city ride. The rest are very brief few seconds stop.

rubiksoval

Daily high intensity is worse than anything, regardless of how it's accrued.

cubewheels

I'm not sure how that answers my question. Please elaborate. Did you read my post or just the title?

jpescatore

Good article here on "normalized power" and training load of different types of rides.

asgelle

The quality of a workout can only be assessed based on the goals of the rider and in the context of an overall training plan. Sometimes the best workout is a four hour ride going as hard as you can so that you can barely pedal home at the end. Other times the best workout is a 30 minute ride going so easy it feels like there's no chain on the bike.

rubiksoval

Yeah, and all your posts.

Like I said, daily high intensity, regardless of how it's obtained, is a very poor training methodology.

wolfchild

Neither one is better than the other, they're just different and they both provide different stimulus and adaptation to the body. High intensity intervals isn't a short cut to fitness and it's not a substitute for longer duration lower intensity roadwork. For optimal results you should do both... None of the pro athletes do high intensity training daily or multiple times a day. Majority of your training should be spend in the lower intensity zones because that's how you build an aerobic base. It's pointless to do intervals without first building a strong aerobic base.

cubewheels

My heart rate is around 80 to 90% of max. I never reach 100% in these activities.

I really can't do long duration, lower intensity, even in the indoor trainer. I still have a job and other responsibilities. So I break it down in multiple short sessions per day, maximum of 1 hr each and up to 3 hrs cumulative time per day. No problems so far with it in terms of pain or soreness.

Carbonfiberboy 

Agreeing with Rubi . . . sooner or later, you'll peak, stagnate, and then probably decline. Yours is not a good long-range plan. That said, does it matter? Since long rides are not an option, do whatever you're safer doing outdoors.

cubewheels

Yes, unfortunately. Long rides for me are only once in a few months thing. I still get time in the trainer but have to spread it to multiple shorter sessions.

Thinking something might hatch out of it eventually!

rubiksoval

That really doesn't matter. You can still do short, easy rides.

Though to be frank, there's zero chance you're doing the intensity you claim for the amount of hours you're claiming, so this is all moot anyway.

Het Volk

What are your goals? To stay in shape? If so, HIT training with some longer rides as you can fit in is better than most people. And instead, enjoy the time you get, and stop worrying. If you do not have time to train properly to race, then don't race. Unless a Jr., unemployed or already wealthy and can to what you want, time is always a constraint, and do not let riding a bike cost you, your family or career because you want more training. Take what you can, and accept it.

Het Volk

Yup. Better to be sitting on his ass gaming. Good post.

Het Volk

Without context, this is garbage.

asgelle

10 min. warm up; 45 min. @85-95% of threshold; 5 min cool down done once to three times a day is a very effective aerobic training day.

rubiksoval

There's context. That you're unaware of it is your own issue to remedy.

rubiksoval

Ah, look, you're resorting to farcical, fallacious nonsense.

That's cute.

rubiksoval

Why are you quoting my posts while asking the OP questions that have already been answered and rehashed and answered again in half a dozen other threads?

Again with that context you're clearly missing.

cubewheels

Good, detailed, and eye-opening reply, thanks!

I already done a few lower intensity long rides (not more than once a month). Just my discovery I can almost reproduce the same experiences (soreness, numbness, fatigue or even pain in some parts of the body, especially the lungs, hands, and back) of long rides in short rides by simply increasing the intensity.

Also, if I train for lower intensity for more than a week, the next time I do high intensity ride, my performance will be significantly less and see more pain especially in my core muscles.

asgelle

There are many books on training for cyclists. I suggest you seek them out. They will give you a complete, well developed picture of basic physiology and how to develop and execute a training plan. You have many misconceptions; for example, just because the sensations from a short high intensity session are the same as a long aerobic one are the same does not mean they produce the same adaptations.

DrIsotope

I still want to know what the OP is using as a measuring stick for his performance. Based on his reported level of intensity and riding frequency, he should be performing a LTHR/FTP test every other week. Because in my admittedly limited experience, one does not simply do 80-90% efforts every day, day after day.

I note that the OP mentioned intensity of 80-90% of max HR, which goes to answering my initial question-- that's a broken ruler at best. I have no idea what my max HR is right now, because I haven't hit it in probably a year. I do have a fairly good idea what my LTHR and FTP are, because those are trainable numbers. My typical daily ride is 65-70% intensity; a "spirited" ride is in the low-80s. But 90%? My last 20 minute test wasn't even 90%, because there's warmup and cooldown.

Then I remembered that the OP doesn't have a PM and is just riding by RPE, which is going to work wonderfully right up until the day that it doesn't.

cubewheels

Your earlier reply is about what I do. Though I sometimes get stabbing pain in the lungs if I push a little bit more. I've been downloading pdf training and research articles in road cycling. I'm actually more interested in the latest scientific research side of it rather than the matured tried and tested methods. Because many of the these plans will not work for me given my limited options. I even work weekends so that's that. I can take days off but not like every week. More like once a month. I'm looking for ways to adapt my training to my constraints.

That's the reason why made this thread. I wish to know how lots of braking and accelerating will affect intensity because I train entirely in the city streets. So far, no one has gave me an answer how and why.

DrIsotope

Well they're different things, aren't they? Accelerating from a stop is physiologically different from holding a steady output over a long period of time. They're different forms of training. Repeatedly stopping and taking off again is a simple form of interval training.

And as you're only doing an hour at a time, you should be doing intervals interspersed with Z1/Z2 days. Or you're never going to build any muscle, you're just going to keep breaking it down.

asgelle

If you’re interested in the latest scientific research, why are you here? You should be on Pub Med.

cubewheels

I'm still saving up for the right tools. I don't make a lot of money. The tools alone would be more than twice as expensive as my bike!

My only "tool" for now is racing with local club members who does long rides up in the mountains and see how I stack up to them. I race them in our 2 to 5 km hills after I do a 1 hr circuit of these.