Notices
Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area Looking to enter into the realm of track racing? Want to share your experiences and tactics for riding on a velodrome? The Track Cycling forums is for you! Come in and discuss training/racing, equipment, and current track cycling events.

Crosstraining / Other Sports

Old 03-22-16, 06:22 AM
  #51  
dunderhi
Senior Member
 
dunderhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: 130 miles from Ttown
Posts: 435

Bikes: Little Wing, XTRACK, Electron Pro, SuperCorsa, Paramount, & Thunderdrome

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by carleton
Pro Tip #1 of Masters Track Racing: Don't be Fat

That will make you faster than any frame, wheels, helmets, power meter, or any other equipment.
I thought track racing was the only place in bike racing where one can get away with being fat, especially as a Master. I gained 35lbs over the course of last racing season and my results were fairly consistent over the season. I know I'm a bit of an anomaly since my "after picture" (I used to be much fatter) is worse than most people's "before pictures." That said, I think anyone thinking about track racing can take a look at me and say, well if he can do that, I most certainly can do that too.




Getting back on topic. My alternate sport was wrestling. One year while we were all juniors, my teammates and I all wrestled for our winter training. Funny thing is that we each wrestled for different high schools, but never directly competed against each other.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg
Argyle Time Trial(ts).jpg (103.9 KB, 24 views)
dunderhi is offline  
Old 03-22-16, 06:44 AM
  #52  
Dalai
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,163
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 89 Post(s)
Liked 8 Times in 6 Posts
The best tip, but as a Masters athlete the hardest to achieve! Best is don't get fat to start with if you can!

Each time I've put on weight the last couple of years - 2014 Broken collarbone with complications and 2015 6 months no riding with minimal exercise whilst caring for my wife through chemo it's been a real struggle to drop the kg's afterwards.

After the collarbone, it was a good 6 months and finally an 11 day solo bikepacking trip that finally got me back to ideal weight. Now I'm back on the bike commuting, it has stopped the weight from continuing to rise but not enough to drop it more than a kg... Already reducing calories, looking like I'll need to up the km's and back running if I can manage the niggles!
Dalai is offline  
Old 03-22-16, 07:09 AM
  #53  
carleton
Elitist
Thread Starter
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 77 Posts
Originally Posted by dunderhi
I thought track racing was the only place in bike racing where one can get away with being fat, especially as a Master. I gained 35lbs over the course of last racing season and my results were fairly consistent over the season.
Ha! I'm not really sure what happened. Wait...aren't you an Engineer? How do you explain it?
carleton is offline  
Old 03-22-16, 09:59 AM
  #54  
dunderhi
Senior Member
 
dunderhi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: 130 miles from Ttown
Posts: 435

Bikes: Little Wing, XTRACK, Electron Pro, SuperCorsa, Paramount, & Thunderdrome

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Originally Posted by carleton
Ha! I'm not really sure what happened. Wait...aren't you an Engineer? How do you explain it?
The mass is a linear component of the power required for me to accelerate, thus if I weigh 15% more, I require 15% more power. Assuming I don't have 15% more power, then I will accelerate more slowly. This is why I prefer pursuits over kilos. The acceleration portion of the kilo puts me at too much of a disadvantage. This is also why it's better for me to sprint long vice short. So, despite a W/kg disadvantage the proper employment of tactics can help overcome some disadvantages. This is all well and good, but it doesn't explain consistency over the course of a season despite a significant weight gain. I believe this was caused by different factor: fitness level. What? How can I say my fitness level improved while I gained so much weight? Well, as the season progressed I found I had more time to spend at the track and I got in more quality training, despite the fact that my diet went downhill. So, it's likely that my power increased as my weight increased. I've already seen that type of power increase since I started using a power meter this winter, so I know it's possible.

I would like to add a thought on aerodynamics. Since aero drag is proportional to velocity squared, it is more important than weight in my book. I have three pursuit times to compare: Eddy Merckx style (2:59@253lbs), Full aero (2:46@256lbs), and Full aero again (2:48@273lbs). Assuming my mid-season conditioning was roughly equivalent, less aero drag brought me more improvement than my weight hurt me. That said, I probably won't be able to do a 2:35 pursuit unless I get below to 200lbs. That is, unless this power meter-based training is working. I'll find out this summer.
dunderhi is offline  
Old 03-22-16, 10:56 AM
  #55  
carleton
Elitist
Thread Starter
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 77 Posts
Yeah, you probably got faster and more fit as the season progressed.

It's totally possible to out-eat your training.

As much as I hate to say it, my weight is what kept me from reaching what I was capable of doing. I guess it's doubly-hard to lose weight in middle age as it is in your teens or twenties.

One thing that also bothered me was that my legs were really lean but my torso wasn't. I believe that I also carried more subcutaneous fat in my torso than legs. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that cycling and where I focused my weightlifting was all lower-body. It is said that fat distribution is independent of the limbs you are using, but I wonder if that's not true. Basically, I wonder if I were training using activities that focused on core (swimming, jogging, tennis), if I would have lost the extra baggage I had in my core area.

Of course, it could be genetic. When I was the fittest ever in my teens and early 20s, I was never close to having a 6-pack. Strong but never lean.
carleton is offline  
Old 03-22-16, 05:29 PM
  #56  
taras0000
Lapped 3x
 
taras0000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 43.2330941,-79.8022037,17
Posts: 1,723
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 325 Post(s)
Liked 23 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by carleton
One thing that also bothered me was that my legs were really lean but my torso wasn't. I believe that I also carried more subcutaneous fat in my torso than legs. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that cycling and where I focused my weightlifting was all lower-body. It is said that fat distribution is independent of the limbs you are using, but I wonder if that's not true. Basically, I wonder if I were training using activities that focused on core (swimming, jogging, tennis), if I would have lost the extra baggage I had in my core area.

Of course, it could be genetic. When I was the fittest ever in my teens and early 20s, I was never close to having a 6-pack. Strong but never lean.
It's partially genetics, and partially activity type, and partially diet. There is an old saying "Spot reduction doesn't work for fat loss". In the short term, this is true (at least without chemical help). It only works in the long term if you've put your body into a state that stores fat in one location. This is due to your hormonal make-up.

Diet and genetics go together to dictate your hormonal state. The presence of certain hormones, and their balance compared to others can determine how you store, access, and burn body fat. Basically, body fat storage associated with high spikes of insulin will result in "mass centralization". So you can workout all you want, but if you spike your insulin at the wrong time while you are consuming an excess of calories, you will store it around your gut. Your prolonged biological baseline (your "climate" in a way), will also determine your hormonal profile. If you're getting enough rest, working out, eating right, and not stressed out; then your hormonal profile will be vastly different from someone who is sleep deprived, sedentary, eats junk, and suffers from anxiety. The first profile is an ideal climate for body composition. Basically things will sort of take care of themselves. The second situation is where little things snowball and every calorie seems to add up.

Your genes will determine how you look to certain degrees, but any person can achieve a six-pack, as long as they are on the right diet FOR THEM. I always did better (body comp, and performance) on diets that stayed away from simple carbs, even though it seems I can't stay away from them( I have a sweet tooth and a meat tooth). Consequently, I pack it on around the middle. Even expending 5000 calories a day, I only got lean once I laid off the pastas and breads. If I needed a quick hit of energy during a workout, fruit juice, Gatorade, or Honey in water did the trick. I got leaner once I learned to rely on fat for fuel. Someone like me who eats a fattier and protein laden diet will distribute their bodyfat much more evenly. Basically, my body like to operate on diesel fuel. Other bodies are optimized on high octane fuel. I don't know if blood type has anything to do with it (some say it does, and my blood type and optimal diet seem to follow that hearsay), but there are many factors at play that can help or hinder how you look, feel, and perform.

It also helps to maintain constant motion. You'd be surprised just how much constant low-level activity will lean you out.
taras0000 is offline  
Old 03-22-16, 08:52 PM
  #57  
carleton
Elitist
Thread Starter
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 77 Posts
Originally Posted by taras0000
It also helps to maintain constant motion. You'd be surprised just how much constant low-level activity will lean you out.
Ha! That's something to think about. Thanks!
carleton is offline  
Old 03-22-16, 09:26 PM
  #58  
taras0000
Lapped 3x
 
taras0000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 43.2330941,-79.8022037,17
Posts: 1,723
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 325 Post(s)
Liked 23 Times in 20 Posts
Yeah. As a modern society, if we're not using our feet to get us somewhere, we tend to be sitting. I went from a job that involved lots of heavy lifting, but also lots of sitting (paramedic); to one that has me on my feet all day and moving around (industrial/Commercial plumbing). I dropped 35 lbs, and that was without any working out, and I'm pretty sure I was eating a lot more. As a medic, I would work out and absolutely drain myself of energy while at the gym. I haven't seen a gym in over two years, and am never as "worked out" as I had been previously.

Ever hear the expression "A six pack is 10% working out and 90% diet"? I think a more accurate representation is 10% working out, 50% diet, and 40% what you do when you're not working out. You can work out and eat the right food, but if you're on your butt most of the day, how do you think you're going to look?

It's sad that I had to learn these things the hard way, lol.
taras0000 is offline  
Old 03-23-16, 05:27 AM
  #59  
carleton
Elitist
Thread Starter
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 77 Posts
Originally Posted by taras0000
Yeah. As a modern society, if we're not using our feet to get us somewhere, we tend to be sitting. I went from a job that involved lots of heavy lifting, but also lots of sitting (paramedic); to one that has me on my feet all day and moving around (industrial/Commercial plumbing). I dropped 35 lbs, and that was without any working out, and I'm pretty sure I was eating a lot more. As a medic, I would work out and absolutely drain myself of energy while at the gym. I haven't seen a gym in over two years, and am never as "worked out" as I had been previously.

Ever hear the expression "A six pack is 10% working out and 90% diet"? I think a more accurate representation is 10% working out, 50% diet, and 40% what you do when you're not working out. You can work out and eat the right food, but if you're on your butt most of the day, how do you think you're going to look?

It's sad that I had to learn these things the hard way, lol.
That's a good point. I can recall a time when I did lose a lot of weight when I would walk a couple of miles during my lunch break every day because I needed to get out of the office.
carleton is offline  
Old 03-23-16, 07:50 AM
  #60  
tonski 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 255

Bikes: Ritte 8055, Felt TK3, Cervelo S2 & P3, Giant TCR

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
like @Dalai - I also boulder indoors and out except I go year round.

Last edited by tonski; 03-23-16 at 07:55 AM.
tonski is offline  
Old 03-26-16, 10:18 AM
  #61  
DMC707
Senior Member
 
DMC707's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
Posts: 5,390

Bikes: Too many to list

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1764 Post(s)
Liked 1,121 Times in 744 Posts
Originally Posted by carleton
Yeah, you probably got faster and more fit as the season progressed.

It's totally possible to out-eat your training.

As much as I hate to say it, my weight is what kept me from reaching what I was capable of doing. I guess it's doubly-hard to lose weight in middle age as it is in your teens or twenties.

One thing that also bothered me was that my legs were really lean but my torso wasn't. I believe that I also carried more subcutaneous fat in my torso than legs. I wonder if this has something to do with the fact that cycling and where I focused my weightlifting was all lower-body. It is said that fat distribution is independent of the limbs you are using, but I wonder if that's not true. Basically, I wonder if I were training using activities that focused on core (swimming, jogging, tennis), if I would have lost the extra baggage I had in my core area.

Of course, it could be genetic. When I was the fittest ever in my teens and early 20s, I was never close to having a 6-pack. Strong but never lean.

Out eating you're training is far too easy to do. I had a recent group ride where I had a max heart rate of 183 with long stretches of flat Road were we were hovering a bit over 30 mph. It was fun, exhilarating, and really rewarding.
The caveat was that an hour after the ride was done I was ravenous and half the group went to an Italian deli for pizza and beers. I ate and drank like a man on death row getting his last meal

It was as if my body knew I had put out a lot of effort and was preparing me to do it again the next day-but the problem was I didn't ride for two or three days after. The body seems to be great at preparing you for future activity.
The flipside is if I go for a zone 2 LSD fat burning ride, afterwards I may feel just a bit nauseated and may just eat a salad with some chicken strips or something like that washed down with some mineral water or a light beer or 2. (But not 8)



regarding not being lean enough to have a 6 pack, -- A prominent local football coach who is now sportscaster has said before that he prefers a smoother athlete-not fat, but think Mohammed Ali, or Tim Tebow'esque. His theory is a smoother athlete has more fluidity in motion and a touch of extra fat helps cushion the joints just a bit , preventing the types of mitochondrial level micro-tears and strains that plague a lot of super lean guys.

to be fair though, he wasnt talking about guys with beer guts like i have, - but rather guys with 14-16% bodyfat but who still have flat bellys and are fit
DMC707 is offline  
Old 03-27-16, 08:49 AM
  #62  
carleton
Elitist
Thread Starter
 
carleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 15,965
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1386 Post(s)
Liked 92 Times in 77 Posts
Originally Posted by DMC707
regarding not being lean enough to have a 6 pack, -- A prominent local football coach who is now sportscaster has said before that he prefers a smoother athlete-not fat, but think Mohammed Ali, or Tim Tebow'esque. His theory is a smoother athlete has more fluidity in motion and a touch of extra fat helps cushion the joints just a bit , preventing the types of mitochondrial level micro-tears and strains that plague a lot of super lean guys.

to be fair though, he wasnt talking about guys with beer guts like i have, - but rather guys with 14-16% bodyfat but who still have flat bellys and are fit
That's a good point.

Pro cyclists and runners are all pretty lean, but pros from other sports like baseball or football tend to look like normal fit people.
carleton is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
tararogue
Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area
24
04-02-17 07:39 PM
houleskis
Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area
28
01-31-17 11:31 AM
thenomad
Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area
7
06-22-12 11:21 PM
jduvall
Training & Nutrition
1
08-18-11 08:37 PM
sjmartin
Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area
14
03-24-11 12:25 PM

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 -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.