group105

Every time I read a thread about people who want to get faster a lot of the responses seem to be "You need more saddle time...more miles"...I've asked the question myself and most of the answers were "More saddle time"

This makes no sense to me...how can you get faster if you're just out to ride longer...you're not focused on intervals or speed work...you're focused on a longer distance...

Shouldn't your goal be more quality than quantity....The BF members that race are an exception and validate my point since they mainly always talk about how many hours they ride and not how many miles.

I want to know what the rest of BF members think?

johnny99

Depends where you're starting from. If you're out of shape, I think you need to develop a basic fitness and endurance level before you should focus on speed work. If you're already in shape, then yes, intervals and such will be more efficient and improving your speed.

group105

Maybe this is what I don't understand (and this is relative). What is in shape and what is out of shape? I think everyone else considers in shape and out of shape differently.

MONGO!

Intervals.

phoenity

Probably the distance you can ride. Does 40 miles at a moderate pace wear you out?

As I understand it, you want good base mileage on the bike with good form and getting the fit straightened out before you start working on speed.

Gromit

Time in the saddle is a very important part to your training (but not the only part). To use a term from running, I'll call this "long slow distance (LSD)"


LSD is beneficial for multiple reasons:

It takes your your muscles, ligaments and tendonspast their normal exercise duration, and force them to build and strengthen. You add new muscle fibers and mitochondria - the energy powerhouses of the muscles. Additionally, you burn more fat.


Here's an article using the training techniques of running legend Arthur Lydiard and applying them to cycling to increase wattage:

https://www.training4cyclists.com/lon...ance-training/

LowCel 

Correct, but you must (in my opinion) first have a good base. Which means, saddle time!

group105

I think it would be helpful to make a chart where it's all broken down based on the riders ability.

Use 10-20-50 miles (to cover all the ranges of beginner riders).

Then say: If you can ride 20 mph @ 15mph avg then you need to do intervals of XXX duration with XXX breaks.

If you can ride 20 miles @ 16.5 you need to do XXX intervals of XXX duration.

(all assuming relatively flat roads).

bdcheung

How bout this:

If you want to get faster, get a coach. Or a training plan.

group105

What is a good base? I just started riding 7 weeks ago and I've done 440 total miles.

bdcheung

During the winter, my base was about 2.5 times what you've done.

LowCel 

To me a good base is about 1,500 - 2,000 miles. I did my base January - March. I had about 1,900 miles in. What your body requires and what others require is not necessarily the same though.

group105

So everyone's base is different.

I'm looking for ways of determining what my base should be.

'nother

Yes, the goal should be more quality than quantity, but for some, quantity (distance) may equate with quality, depending upon goals (i.e. pure endurance events...though I think there has been some recent research that shows short-but-intense training has a benefit for endurance).

In general I agree that time in the saddle is a better measure of training than distance, but even that doesn't tell the story. It needs to be combined with intensity to judge the "quality". There is the old standby, Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE), but that's extremely fallible. While not perfect, time-in-HR-zones is a pretty good indicator. Even better would be time-in-Power-zones, though that may be out of reach for many. There is also software like Cyclingpeaks that can analyze stuff in additional and interesting ways...way off the deep end for most recreational cyclists, but some people are number junkies

johnny99

Most beginners will find that their speed will increase fairly quickly by just riding more (a couple of hours every other day or so). When your speed starts to plateau, then you should start doing more high intensity work like intervals. This will probably be somewhere around 15mph (average over 1 hour).

LowCel 

If you just started riding 7 weeks ago then this whole year is going to be base. Just ride for a while and enjoy it. Training should come later. At this point you are going to get stronger and faster no matter what you do. Don't risk burn out so early.

indygreg

If you are in good shape, but not bike shape (this was me a few months ago, and to some extent still is) - like a runner or swimmer it simply takes time for you to build your muscles up. Internvals and pure saddle time do that I think. The more I ride the faster I get.

Now, if you are a seasoned rider and put in a decent amount of miles, I am not sure 'more miles' will always result in being faster.

I can relate it to running, which may or may not apply. Very fast mid distance runners (1k-10k) run distances far longer than the event calls for. this is how they build a base. they do sprints and other workouts as well of course, but they get their miles in. To the other end marathoners often do not run more than about 20 or 22 miles at a time, even know their event is 26.2.

crtreedude 

I don't race and I do more than that just moving from point a to point b. And yes, I am becoming faster all the time. Last night was a good example - I ended too far away without a light and had to hammer it all the way home. No chance for a rest. I went a lot faster than normal. The endurance was there and the conditioning - all I needed was the proper motivation (like being in the pitch dark in the jungle...)

group105

Can you give me some numbers (avg mph per XX mile ride) so I can figure out where I am?

LowCel 

Nobody is going to be able to give you "real" numbers. Everyone's rides are different. Different terrain, different wind, etc, etc. Best thing to do is find a loop. Once every couple of weeks do that loop and time it. Then you will see how you are improving.

Also, pick up "The Cyclists Training Bible" by Joe Friel. It will tell you everything you need to know (debatable of course).

Psydotek

Everybody needs more T.I.T.S. and A.S.S.
Time In The Saddle and Anerobic Short Sprints

group105

The loop idea is great. I record all my runs and I ride this 18 mile loop which I'm using for measuring the progress.

'nother

^^ you are not going to find any (meaningful) specific real numbers.

Back up for a second and think about your goals (I am going on the assumption that you want to do something, go somewhere, etc., which is driving why you are asking "where you are"). What do you want to achieve with your training? Identify that kind of stuff, and figure out a repeatable test of where you are on that goal. Do an initial test now, to see where you are relative to the goal, train, then come back in a couple of weeks, a month, a year, whatever, and see how you've moved.

Edit: keeping some kind of diary or training log will help. You can do this with a simple spreadsheet; there are also websites like bikejournal.com, and numerous other systems. It doesn't need to be too complicated, especially just starting out.

indygreg

I am too new to cycling to really answer your question, but I can offer this. Per one HR training book (John Parker, Jr) that I like, when you are running or riding a 'base building' type day (staying under 70% MHR using his formula) there is no real benefit to anything over 2 hours except pure calories burnt. He explains it with some science, i will not try to touch it.

group105

My goal is to be able to keep up with my local group ride (and they say they always want to attract new members...probably to torture them ). I've done the 52 mile GR last week in 3 hrs and 16 minutes with a 15.8mph avg (this was my 2nd 50 mile + ride)...just tired of being dropped (some of the group members forget it's a GR and not the Tuesday Thursday night *fast* rides they also have here).