Parson

I recently read Thomas Chapple's book Base Building for Cyclists. In an oversimplified explanation, what I took away from the book is that during the early stages of base training, one should do a lot of riding in zone 2, and avoid higher intensities. He theorizes that this will help train the body to utilize fats rather than glycogen.

I have been following the book's advice, but recently joined Trainerroad which has confused me. The Trainerroad base plan incorporates a lot of intervals into zone 5. The volume seems to be pretty low on Trainerroad's plan as well, even for a beginner, but apparently newer, higher volume plans are going to be released.

What do people think of Trainerroad's base plan? Are the intervals too intense for base training? Are they fine, and I misunderstood the advice in Base Training for Cyclists?

Thanks.

gsteinb

it depends

Parson

Depends? Is there something I can clarify in order to get more helpful responses?
Anyone else?

jsutkeepspining

well for one thing, z2 is great if your riding 15+ hours a week, and doing two 4+ hour a week rides, but if you're riding a very small number of hours say 10-12 z3 is a very good substitue on shorter rides. If you're riding under 10 hours the best option is to mix in z4 workouts. the whole true base thing only works if you ride enough, if you ride too little then you're not forcing adaptation (base still leads to adaptation, just not super race level adaptation. i often find that ftp is higher after a winter of base, so take what you want from it).

for example, the next three weeks in school are very stressful, and jam-packed (1 class all day every day= loads of homework everynight), so my coach and i are focusing on z2-z4 right now, with longer z3/z4 rides (ex. 1 hour w/40 mins of mid-high z3) in the middle of the week, then two true base rides on the weekend (ex. 4 hours of z2 w/ 3x10's at z3 at 50 rpms in the last hour of the ride).

RollCNY

Rpm is already plural. Just saying. Perhaps next week your coach could work on spelling.

pdedes

here is a question op. why are you wishing to build a base?

Parson

Hey Pdedes, thanks for your interest. Before I answer your question, thanks for being helpful. I remember that you've been helpful with previous questions I've had.

I want to build a base because I'm new to cycling and to cardio training in general. I'd like my body to make adaptations so that I/it become(s) more efficient in using my energy. This is important so that I can train harder later on to improve my fitness and cycling further.

In a previous thread, you mentioned cycling up Sydenham Rd in Dundas. At this point I wouldn't make it far. I'd like to be able to ride up and down the escarpment without worrying about if I'm going to make it or not without stopping.

hhnngg1

I don't think you can go wrong with either, and I don't think either is necessarily better. You're right in the TR's workouts are shorter/harder in general, but that's because they have a big catalog of 60 min workouts. They actually also have a good catalog of 90 min workouts that are are pretty hard as well but sub pretty well for a longer 2-3 hr workout of lesser intensity.

I personally would just go trainerroad and do the Int Build 1 programs or something similar if you're intent on doing a lot of indoor work - the objective data and tracking mean that it keeps you WAY more honest than typical non-powerbased program. I'm really impressed with it - it's going to be my virtual 'coach' in terms of workout this winter, because the quality of the workouts are so high when I do them with TR.

pdedes

as you are in sw ontario, and the peak riding/racing season is may through july, i would begin by using this month for general fitness. if you can, a couple of outside rides per week, weight training, plyometrics, trail running, etc. january is base building time. if you have lots of time, most of your riding is at z2, otherwise as mentioned above you will need some additional intensity. feb is the time to add lactate threshold intervals and taper weight training. that is a good and adaptable base building regime. i know it is short on specifics, i don't know how fit you are, or how much time you have. the goal is to build your ability to adapt to much harder intensity as the season progresses. good luck

jsutkeepspining

How about you shush!

Racer Ex 

It's about a 2 hour conversation if anyone actually knows enough to design a program.

If you want to get something decent out of a generic cookie cutter program send a note to someone who knows what they are talking about like Friel and ask them what tey would recommend vs. someone with a slick website and not a single name attached to it.

hhnngg1

Simple non wise ass answer here:

If you're ok with indoor training, and have a good trainer, you can't go wrong with Trainerroad and their 'Base plans.' It's as close as you can get to a customized training plan for your level of ability without having to pay for a coach to run all the power numbers for you or spending a lot of time designing some power-based periodized seasonal schedule like a diehard racer would do.

For $10/month, you get AWESOME stats and logs of your rides, as well as a very slick modern program to push you to the right power zones. It's pretty awesome. I usually reserve my praise, but $10/month for this is definitely the best $10 I've spent on anything in cycling for getting better.

Here's just one of many of the prebuilt 'plans' they have - I'm doing this one now, and it's surprisingly difficult (but not gutbusting so you won't burn out and have room to go harder later in the season) given the power adjustment to your level.
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/plans/91

and here's the list of plans in case you feel like you need something different
https://www.trainerroad.com/cycling/plans

An added plus is that by using the "TSS" score and the "intensity factor" score, you can quickly tell which workouts are going make you suffer more (higher intensity factor) or wear you out more (TSS score - might be less intense, but make up for it with more miles at intensity.) This is standard stuff for people with powermeters, but it's a real cakewalk with TR - you know what you're gonna get for each workout, so you can really plan your training load with trivial amounts of work. It's really good stuff.

Racer Ex 

You can go wrong with any unaudited program, in all sorts of ways.

hhnngg1

Of course, but let's not get all extreme 'end-of-world' scenario here. For a typical person without real medical limitations, you do the TR 8min or 2 x 20 minute testing, and you get your workouts tailored to your level of ability, as well as real objective feedback on your training load and intensity, which is wayyyy better than almost any other nonindividualized plan out there.

If you do that base plan as well, it's not like it's forcing you into high intensity work right away - most of it is subthreshold 'steady state' work, which seems perfect for off season. I'd say it's pretty unlikely for you to go way wrong by doing TR's base plan -you're not going to get injured or overtrained with that training load, and if you're getting suddenly stronger, you can just retest and the power levels will ramp up accordingly so you're always getting a decent training stimulus.

Is it as good as a knowledgable cycling coach's personal recommendations? Of course not. But for a new rider without a powermeter or even the knowledge to properly use it, TR makes it a cakewalk, and provides some basic structure for some good progress. It's not the be all end all, but I think it's great stuff.

The only real 'caveat' that I definitely see with it that will affect a majority of riders is that it's a TRAINER-based program. And we all know how many riders just love the idea of training indoors most of the time. That's probably enough to tank the majority of interested riders right from the get-go.

Racer Ex 

Yep, what would I know...other than it's probably not the best idea to have someone asking if they should be riding Z1 or Z5 self selecting a training program with no outside input or audit.

benajah

OP,
i would recommend sticking with lower intensity for the following reason:
You state that you are new to cycling.
building base isn't just about building base cardio fitness, but also about toughening up the tendons and ligaments, and muscles. Building this base with moderate and low intensities, toughening up the muscles, is important to reduce the chance of overuse injury.
ill offer an anectodal personal experience. I'm training for my first season back in racing after two years off due to having a baby (wife had the baby anyway). I have raced bikes since 1993, but my riding since may 2010 has basically been the occasional mountain bike ride, occasional road ride, and a lot of grocery getting, often with the kid in a bike seat. So three months ago I start training seriously again....but with a young kid, 4, 5 hour rides are out of the question except maybe once a week so I jumped right into intervals with little base. Used to be a road racer, decided to concentrate on crits due to training time, jumped into intervals way too early....IT band issues, patellar tendon issues, foot issues, hip issues, knee issues. I slowed down, rested a week, then spent a month at low intensity base riding at night after the kid was asleep, and the issues went away.
a big part of base is about keeping your joints and tendons tough enough to deal with the stresses of interval training. Both are important, but you can only build the base with long steady distance rides. Stressful intervals done without a strong base is an easy way to injury.

hhnngg1

You haven't looked at the TR program properly then. There's almost no riding in Z3+ in that entire Int Base program I recommended. Furthermore, the odds of a newb getting that zone3 right is much, much higher when done with TR than guesstimating it on their own, likely incorrectly.

That Int Base 1 focuses on higher Zone2 and zone 3 "steady state" subthreshold efforts - the weekend 90 minute ride might have something like 3 x 20 minutes in this steady state so it's clearly NOT a hammering intensity interval (despite it being ratjher uncomfortable on the 3rd one.) It only introduces short threshold intervals after 5 weeks, and short ones at that. Perfect for off season training.

Again, can't see how a rider, even a new one, could go wrong just by doing the Int Base 1 build of TR, unless they willfully ignore the workouts, or are specifically looking for a much more aggressive plan that's more like an inseason racing intensity plan.

topflightpro

I cannot recall where I read this, but I read a research report a few years ago comparing long low intensity rides as base building vs. lots of shorter harder intervals.

From what I remember, the gist was that during the short term racing period, both types of workouts produced positive, almost equal results. But, as the season wore on, the riders who had spent substantially more time doing longer, lower intensity rides were able to continue competing at a higher level while those who had done lots of shorter, harder intervals started to fade.

gsteinb

and again, it depends.

for instance, how long are the races in the study and how long are the races one is doing.

hhnngg1

Most endurance research 'logically' supports this.

VO2 and even lactate threshold systems improve very quickly, but plateau very quickly. Hence the rapid improvement in beginners who start working out hard - they're usually improving primarily their VO2/lactate systems (beginners often can't even train long enough to use other systems). They get very excited about their rapid gains, but then find they taper off very quickly. It takes a tremendous amount of painful work to further improve that VO2/LT even by 1% once you're plateau'd, and that plateau occurs within 3-4 months or less if you're doing regular hi-intensity repeats.


In contrast, the aerobic efficiency component, which has a lot to do with the sport-specific muscular capillary buildup in your muscles as well as your heart, are best trained with long (90+ min) low-intensity efforts. Long rides, (or hi TSS/lower intensity) workout support this very well. It's also very hard to train this system without those long workouts. The good part is that that this component, while much slower to improve, also plateaus a lot more slowly. It's why elite endurance athletes, whether it be a cyclist, swimmer, or runner, trains high volume. Almost all of Michael Phelps's races are well under 5 minutes in length, yet he swims close to 70 miles per week. (Guesstimating that would be nearly 500 miles per week of cycling.) Same with runners - elite milers who run the mile in under 4 minutes, usually run over 100 miles per week.

Thus, it makes logical sense to work on that slow building aerobic efficiency component in the off season so you can 'peak/sharpen' with that rapidly plateauing VO2/LT during race season. There have been coaching methods today that try mixing this up, some throwing the speedwork first so it can 'carry over' to the endurance, but usually those work best in special circumstances, such as elite athletes who have already done the aerobic basework.

Even Carmichael in his Time-Crunched training book acknowledges this reality of training - he emphasizes that with his time-crunched method, you'll have to really be careful about energy conservation if you're planning to ride a century, as you'll have a big gaping hole where that aerobic efficiency mileage base is missing.

rbart4506

Hey a fellow Hamilton boy!

Listen to Rx and gs, they know their chit...

Personally I think waiting until January to start your base building is a bit late, but that's me and what the heII do I know. I personally feel that if you have tons of hours to ride then yea doing traditional base is fine, but for most of us working stiffs that just isn't the case. Plus, being you are in Hamilton I highly doubt you will be able to ride outside enough (comfortably and safely) to get the hours in that you need for traditional base building. Then trying to do base indoors is a mind numbing exercise. That is where adding in some higher intensity work will make things more interesting and provide you with a better workout.

Now figuring out what you need to do that is specific to your goals and needs is the task...

Parson

Thanks everyone for all the help. I tried to write a PM, but I got an error msg that says I need 50 posts.

Based on the feedback, I think I'll stick with trainerroad's base plan, but increase the duration of the workouts as tolerated, and avoid any of the higher intensity interval workouts in the plan to avoid injury.

hhnngg1

I think you might be surprised with how hard even those steady state rides are.

I thought going into it that it would be a lot easier than I'm used to given that I normally ride a LOT more outdoors than the measly-sounding 3hrs30mins in week 1 of Int Base 1, but with the much high quality of the rides, I think you'll be surprised too at how hard you're working. I can say with confidence that I have no desire to continue longer after the 90 minute steady-state weekend ride (it doesn't leave you destroyed, not by a longshot, but it hurts bad enough that you'll be SO glad it's over, and then proud that you hammered out that final interval.) What it lacks in training hours, it makes up for with properly tuned intensity at subthreshold effort so you don't get burned out.

I actually run on the days between TR sessions now in the offseason, and I run pretty hard, so it shouldn't tax you anywhere near the point of breakage.