chelvel

Nope. Maximum for 30 minutes in one hour. Other 30 minutes were in zone4. The speed was higher, but so was the HR. I hit max HR one or two times a year. New record this year BTW. Plus 1 from previous.

chelvel

Eh, I'm happy man - I can get those endorphins without hard work!

I don't think that we are the product of true evolution. I see us as a genetic work on somebody who was on the planet at that time.

Sure... But I feel more danger and it spoils the fun. It's OK for me to be not the fastest. I feel that there is a message in cycling but it escapes me.

rubiksoval

Not necessarily.

In the summer time my hr will be 10-15 bpm higher at a given power output. Heat and humidity can jack you up.

Conversely, in the midst of a big overreaching block my hr can be 10-15 bpm lower at a given power output simply due to a ton of fatigue.

HR can be a tricky thing.

rubiksoval

Say huhhhh?

Carbonfiberboy 

How have you determined your zone boundaries? Did you use a lactate threshold test, and if so , which protocol? Going by max HR doesn't give one meaningful numbers.

In general, intervals range in length between 30" and 20', done in one or more sets of 3-6 repeats. The object of the interval workout is, at the end, to be unable to complete another repeat at the same level of effort. That's how you know how hard to go, which takes practice at doing each particular protocol.

Here's a good discussion of the interval concept and application, in a series of articles: Joe Friel - Intervals, Part 1

If done consistently and with proper rest, results are obvious.

chelvel

I read a lot about all that stuff and made my own zones 7-8% each. No lactate tests.

What are the options?

Well... For my muscle mass I'm fast... I think. And my mass do not change for decades. May be @Average@ is not about me. I'm slim and don't have any hope to change this.

Roadlizzard

I'm 68YO on a two and have hour ride I will reach a high of 162 a number of time and average 123 for the two and have hours.

Carbonfiberboy 

Ah, that's what I thought. Your Z5 probably isn't accurate. One must take one or more lactate threshold tests to set zones. No other way to set zones unless one is a very experienced rider who has taken their LTHR test many times. Then one gets a feel for it.

BTW, skinny is fast, not slow. Ideal cycling BMIs are in the 19-22 range.

I see that you are anti-science. The training advice on this forum does have a scientific basis, and thus may not be of any value to you.

chelvel

OK. At least upper limit for Z5 is set perfectly. It's HRmax. Then we are talking about setting lower limit of Z5.

In what zone according to the science is lactate threshold? I see LT more like a moving target that tries to escape definition.

fstrnu

To keep it simple, try the following:
-

• Have easy days and hard days
• Simplest way to distinguish easy days from hard days is via time
• You'll be able to ride for one hour much harder than you will be able to ride for 4 hours
• So, for example, if your normal ride is 4 hours then once or twice per week do a shorter one hour ride and bust it
• Alternatively, you can do intervals twice per week
• For intervals, let duration determine your intensity
• For example, one day per week do 4 x 4 as hard as you can manage while riding all intervals at the same intensity
• One day per week do 2 x 20 as hard as you can manage while riding the second interval as hard as the first
• The interval / combined duration will naturally govern how hard you can go
• It may take a few tries to get the pacing right
• As you get stronger your interval speed will go up
• Monitor your recovery via resting heart rate, perceived effort (higher effort for same speed is indicator of fatigue), sleep quality, energy levels, appetite, mood and motivation

Carbonfiberboy 

MHR is the problem number. The only way to find it for sure is to be chased by a wild animal on foot for about 1/2 hour. When the animal brings you down, you will have achieved MHR. All other numbers are suspect. Another way which is sometimes done is to do a long climb, say an hour, gradually increasing the intensity. At some point, come out of the saddle and sprint as hard as you can until you begin to black out, or as some say, you see Jesus or Moses. That's at least pretty close. A serious problem with either of these tests is that MHR varies a lot from day to day and with training load.

LTHR doesn't vary as much, is fairly easily measured, and has a lot more to do with the training effects of HR zones than does MHR. Perhaps the easiest test to perform can be found here: https://trainright.com/cts-field-tes...-calculations/

chelvel

Thanks! That's over the top for me, but I'm still interested and have some questions.

Imagine me having average speed 10mph for 1 hour ride with AHR 150 (with a lot of start-stops). What distance should I ride in a year to have significant changes? By significant I see changing AHR 150-->130 or speed 10-->14mph (all other things staying the same). Now I'm riding 750 miles per year fixed gear several years. Yes, that's not much, but I'm sure is better than nothing.

I'm mashing type guy. Fast twitch muscles? Does it matter or not?

chelvel

More or less it discribes how I get my MHR once a year while Cat 9 races. Thanks for the link!

fstrnu

Check out this post:

https://www.bikeradar.com/forums/vie...9265#p20425961

Carbonfiberboy 

Technical muscle type makes very little difference and it's modifiable. It's much more about technique than muscle type. Buy a geared bike, quit mashing and teach yourself to spin, say 90 on the flat and 75-80 climbing. Learn to push forward at the top and pull back at the bottom. Clipless pedals, right?

For yearly distance, if you want to really go, ~5000 miles. To get by, 3000 miles. Personal experience. This includes trainer mileage and presumes year-round riding. I've heard it said that 100 miles a week is easy to do! All you need is one 60 mile weekend ride, and two 20 miles weekday rides. This is true, but demands a lot of consistency as well as the endurance to do the one long ride. I recommend working up to that weekend distance goal. That one long ride should be hilly. A good metric is 50'/mile, so ~3000' gain over 60 miles. The long ride makes all the difference. Massive effect on metabolism in all sorts of ways. Obviously, a geared bike is the way to go for this. Really, really hard to get there fixed. After you can do the typical 100 mile week and 60 mile hilly ride, you can consider riding fixed some in the winter. First, get in shape and learn to pedal.

You don't need a fancy geared bike. A $200 craigslist bike with 12 or so speeds will do fine. Once you've built the engine, something fancier will be attractive.

chelvel

I'll try to believe that.
Too much... If that's the price I do not buy it.

I quit.

wphamilton

It was pretty easy to increase the yearly mileage by about half each year, probably starting around 1500 -2000 miles. Less than that, it's not going to be easy to see gains unless you're doing a lot of intervals and sprinting.

I agree with Carbonfiberboy that fast twitch vs slow twitch isn't a discernible difference at this stage. On a fixed gear, it's not clear what "mashing type" means, because mashing = going slow. In that case, it's a matter of training more than muscle type.

Carbonfiberboy 

There ya go. See, that was easy wasn't it? Now you can have a nice winter and not worry about why you're not getting much faster.

chelvel

I see only that your advices are useless at least and can make certain harm even. I quit your advices.

I have a winter bike and several winters under my belt. Have a nice teaching on a BF.

chelvel

What I (we all?) need is training without traditional training. Killing time riding is a strange thing to me. I like riding, but it all looks like vortex. I predict changes in training in the nearest future. We still know nothing about bodies that we own.

I dont know... I am comfortable with this stage. My gear is 86" in summer and I walk 14% hills. It's ok to me. Smaller gears are not comfortable to me. Only at winter, but it's a different story.

wphamilton

We know quite a bit about training. Some of the people giving advice in this thread are very accomplished. All I can tell you is how I accomplished what you're asking.

So continue what you're doing, 750 miles per year, 40-60 cadence I'd guess if your 10 mph is correct, and maybe you'll improve. I gather it's no great issue if you don't improve, so it's all good.

chelvel

Great! I have a question. Faster = bigger leg muscles. More or less. Every picture shows that. OK. Lets not discuss when it is not true (greater efficiency, more nerves, etc.) . In many cases it is so.

Then... Muscles work on blood. For the same work muscle will use the same amount of blood. So there will be the same heart rate after muscle becomes bigger, than before training...

What's wrong with this picture?

redlude97

no. Here's what one of the fastest guys in the world looked like at his peak

To the second part about blood and HR, one of the primary results of training are increased blood volume and increased red blood cell count(hematocrit) so for the same HR you are moving more red blood cells around to the muscle, along with a lot of other adaptions

wphamilton

Unless you're talking about track sprinters, I don't agree with any of that. Cycling is aerobic.

chelvel

Why no? Compared to his hands his legs are huge. If he didn't train his legs will be much smaller too.

I tried not to talk about adaptations in my question. Only about muscle mass. Only about muscle mass.