rubiksoval

For me it doesn't.

I always do the workout before the group ride (I'll do 4x5 or 30 min sweetspot or whatever), or just the group ride for what it is; unstructured race efforts and/or steady social-esque riding.

spectastic

Well the group rides I go on aren't social rides. I'm usually one of the aggressors. And the teammates I ride with are also typically aggressors. When I ride with them, I feel like i get a better workout than if I just pushed myself. It doesn't feel very good to do 30s on 30s off for me these days. Often times I think to myself why the f I'm even there. Comoradery is important to me now.

What about structured team training rides? Do a paceline where the guy in front pulls at z5 for 4 minutes, and switch to z3 for 8 minutes, kind of like over unde4 intervals. Or just set Sprint points at various parts along the route to work on short efforts. Pick a hilly route, and we'll all naturally try to drop each other. What do y'all think about that?

rubiksoval

Race sim rides are lots of fun. But for me, that's sharpening stuff and not something I'm going to do at certain times of the year when I need more structure. The problem with pacelines is that after your four minutes, you're coasting or z1 for 3-4 x 4 minutes (however long every one else is on the front). That's a lot of wasted time for targeted training and it's excessive recovery if you're targeting certain intensities. You can always ride out of the draft, but then, what's the point? It's just another factor in which you're not really in control and doing something that's likely suboptimal.

When you're in control, you're really maximizing what you're putting in and getting out. Maybe you can go out and do a race sim and put out a whole bunch of intensity you don't feel like you'd achieve on your own, but what is that intensity actually useful for? Is it building something that you need to build, or is it dipping into fitness that you'll need later on in the season? There's a balance there, and usually it requires quite a bit of experimentation and experience to find it.

I find that I burn out later on in the season if I'm constantly raging on group rides and in races, though.

Instead, I'll use 1-2 weekends right before target races where I'll ride group rides really hard to sharpen up a bit, but the rest of the year I want to be more in control of what I'm doing. That's either with my own workouts or with steadier group rides or just not hitting efforts in group rides that hard. When you're in control, and you're dosing the intensity, hopefully you're accruing the maximum amount of time possible at a duration that's going to help you improve some aspect of your fitness. This is where things like optimized intervals (or experience in what helps you get the most bang for your buck) is really useful over a training ride that may or may not be useful for fitness.

None of that is to say that fitness is the only point of group rides, of course. But it is why I think that the more structured you get with your training, the more you realize how inadequate most group rides can be if you're targeting specific workouts.

Ygduf

great way to foster animosity and ill-will among teammates

Doge

My conclusion is, and has been talent trumps training. Age is part of it.
Time on bike primarily helps endurance and IMO few USA races require the endurance that folks train for.
Speed wins. That comes mostly from hi resistance training. I think weights are more better, but intervals could work too.

I'm only posting now as I recently saw this long held view re-confirmed again.

Ygduf

that's like, literally the definition of confirmation bias

rubiksoval

I think that's a given in just about anything.

Two winters ago I was building up and after a couple of months of solid intervals was starting to crack 400w a few times for 5 min intervals.

An ex-pro runner who joined my team and who'd been riding for two years got off the couch after his fall break and did 2x10 mins at well over 400 on his second ride back... and he weighs 5 lbs less than I do. His training had intervals way higher than what I could ever do and he dropped me like a brick on any climb over a couple of minutes long and in longer races could just ride away.

That's talent. There are not very many people like that, but you sure seem to hear a lot about them when they pop up.

Basically, it doesn't matter what type of training they do, they're going to improve and likely faster and to a much higher level. They can have the crappiest coach in the world and make them look like a genius because they can handle pretty much any training load.

Really isn't applicable in any way to anyone else.

ntnyln

Only when comparing against the unwashed masses. You will eventually reach a point where everyone is talented/gifted. At that point it becomes table stakes and training/work ethic separates those who might of been from those who are.

furiousferret

The most frustrating thing about this sport is we can bust our ass training and once Daylight Savings hits there are 2-3 guys that essentially napped all winter and will leave us in the dust when the weekday group rides hit.

Last month at our clinic we had an Olympic Medalist (Dave Grylls) talk to us about cycling, and essentially what he said is if you want to win, find another sport. Winning is a rare thing so you have to love the process trying to win.

If you're referring to the myriad of crit races like Ontario and CBR I can somewhat agree with that. Many of the guys winning those aren't putting in 20 hours a week on the bike.

burnthesheep

I agree with that.

The only thing I can agree with, if it is the post you were talking about, is that talent does play a part. Whatever the eff that is in cycling. I'd rather call it "born with it". Others would call it "frustrating".

Gaimon calls it "real talent".

Those folks are out there that were born with it and don't need the same work ethic as you, or they still have the same ethic (or more) AND were born with it.

I'm just a chum in cycling. Growing up I did golf. I did have just a tiny touch of the golfing gods reaching down to dip me in the pool of "talent", but not enough for the guys who got tossed into the pool head-first. I claim that because I only play maybe twice a year now. I can go hit a half bucket balls before a round and still go right at par from the big-boy tees.

Doge

My response was intended to be in scope of getting that Cat 1 degree the easiest way possible. And, the Ontario/CBR type crits would be a great way to do it with under 8 hours a week. Some could not do it, others could.
But my point was doing that, is more based on talent than training (at the get-to-Cat 1 any way you can find).

Right now we are planning for junior. Pretty much wrote off the U23 Nats RR because it is 110 miles long and while speed is not an issue, having speed at 100 miles requires lots of time on the bike. Doing a TT (not useful for this thread and upgrading) or Crit can be done on far less time training. And I'd have 3 hours of that training with weights.

Ygduf

on the bell curve of cycling ability, if you trained everyone to their genetic max it would still be a bell curve of cycling ability, just shifted up in performance. That's undeniable.

I was only stating that believing something and then believing in it more strongly because you observe it in a crowd of events is a bad way to build a belief system.

Doge

Depends on sampling size.

My point to THIS thread is talent is the larger determiner of getting to Cat 1 in 8 hour / week than training.

How many hours / week would it take a ski jumper like Primoz turned pro cyclist age 24 (ish) to become a USA Cat 1?
My guess is a couple hours a week.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primo%C5%BE_Rogli%C4%8D

Ygduf

I'm not arguing a point either way, I'm just saying that you're guessing, and trying to help other people see that you are only guessing.

Doge

Do you put any weight on sample size? I am a very good guesser.

I had this idea talent was via the placenta way back.
Figured I'd annoy and kinda explain why my son is so talented. Davis is his mom. I got her into cycling as I saw talent.
Of note: 1st year of racing. 46min Stage race win. Won every race.
Very few Cat 3 men could out-climb her. Very few pro women could stay on her wheel.
Then, I ruined it all, married her and had our 1st world class athlete a year later.

It is just odd that I have 3 world class athletes in the family. It is talent, or my training methods. Which do you think?
Davis Wins Caspers.jpg

topflightpro

I fixed it for you.

Ygduf

lemme find a picture of all the people who can make cat 1 on 8 hours a week



is it talent, or specific training. Ain't nobody know, because it's irrefutably a mix.

You're a good guesser? Great. I'm a good guesser. Know what either of us knows about this definitively? **** all. I'm just not going to speculate.

Advice to OP - try it and find out where you fit.

Ygduf

asked and answered.

Radish_legs

SPec, what kind of lower intensity rides are you doing on the weekends? Trainer work? Group rides? Solo outdoor rides? Sweet spot?

spectastic

if i'm out solo, i'd do long sweet spot tempo ride. if I get up early enough on saturday, I'll do a group ride that's kind of simulates a race. Or I'll race, which has been the case for the last 3 weeks, as well as this weekend.

but everyone's different. i just try my best to listen to my body and getting an understanding of what i should work on this week. not as good as coaching, but good enough for now.

spectastic

so i recently started using golden cheetah, and got to learn about CTL, ATL, TSB, and how they relate to each other. I've been trying to peak for an important race in a couple of weeks, and have been focused on building the CTL, which currently sits at it's highest it's ever been, although it's not impressive, relative to most CTL's seen in my category. My TSB currently has been pretty negative lately, hovering on the brink of -20 over the last couple of weeks, because I've pushed myself hard during my workouts. and my legs have not really felt fresh in maybe a month. so I'm on the verge of overtaining, despite having put in only around 8 hours/week. my plan is to put in another good block of steady training in the next few days, and start tapering off maybe 7 days prior to the race, to bring my TSB back to neutral or slightly positive. Is this a good plan?

Another question I have.. is CTL and FTP mostly useful for personal comparisons? Like if it's trending up, good for you? OR is CTL and FTP some kind of an arbitrary parameter that tells you how fit you are relative to your competition? One thing I notice is that my power meter tends to read 15W lower than those used by people who I would beat on a hard ride. In addition, the FTP and CTL indicated by my training puts me in a cat 3 or cat 4 range, based on charts I find on the internet... and yet, I'm riding with fast riders on the weekends, and kicking their ass, and I have had good results from this season. granted, I know how to play my cards right in a race. but still, I don't know how I should feel about my relatively low CTL and FTP. thoughts?

topflightpro

It's not uncommon for two people doing the same effort to have different wattages. Rankin and I used to train together, and even though we had different target wattages, we often kept pace or passed each other at different points.

Those charts are estimates. Don't put much faith in them.

burnthesheep

Yeah, watt and w/kg charts on the internet are crap. If they were true, I should be able to rock some folks. Lol. It's best to just benchmark yourself and learn what they mean to you.

Also, forget using group rides as benchmarks. For your goal, results in real races will be your best indicator of what to work on. There's lots of quick riders who don't race or formally train, they just log endless group ride miles with some hard efforts in there.

Don't get into the solo or group ride "eternal zone 3 work" viscous cycle. You need what lies on either end if you're short on time. If you want social, but not wasting time and energy on the wrong zones, don't feel lame dropping back a group in the group ride and chilling and chatting. Go out alone and ride your tough intervals. Or learn to love the pain of the solo trainer sessions.

Not sure I posted it earlier, but I've had great success with this book. I'm not into the nutrition heavy duty, yet. But I do the plans religiously a few times a year. Even if the plans don't work for you, the other points in there are pretty good. Or get the "training and racing with a power meter" book. Go hangout on Slowtwitch and read the stuff that Coggan posts. Chung posts sometimes over on Bikeradar.

hack

spectastic

thanks for the replies guys. yea, I definitely need to mix in my intervals, because TSS, IF, duration don't factor in which zones I'm in. I would definitely benefit from doing 5 minute 320W intervals, with 5 minute rests, instead of doing 200W the entire time, and they both would contribute the same way to CTL. It's been a while since I've done proper intervals though. I get my intervals by doing climbs on my rides, which coincides with this race I'm training for. the goal isn't necessarily holding a target wattage, but rather get to the top of the hill, and the necessary wattage usually follows. and most of my riding isn't steady state tempo, the teammates I ride with make it hard, and the hills make it hard, and I usually bust my ass to make it hard for them. my power and heart rate fluctuates quite a bit during a training ride (that's good, right?). though it may not be quite as ideal as structured 5x5, 10x2 at z5 z6 etc, it makes me excited to get out there and ride. intervals feel so much like work (uhhhg)..

I'm somewhat familiar with carmichael's top-down approach. he actually came to Austin to talk to our club last year. my understanding on his training philosophy is that you need to stress different parts of your power curve, according to your strengths and weaknesses. (eg. triathlete wanting to race road would have a great 1h power, but would need to really work on the 5s-10m power). but yea, intervals seems to be the ticket for me, just need to figure out ways to keep them somewhat interesting.