Tips on riding slowly?

pjh

This sounds daft I know but I'd really appreciate some tips on riding more slowly!

Whenever I get on the bike with the intention of just 'spinning my legs' a bit or building up my base endurance I quickly find that I'm flying down the road with my HR at 170+ !!

It's actually kind of annoying that I don't seem able to control myself; I constantly have to keep reigning myself in. As I'm new at cycling I've read quite a lot on this great site and recognise the importance of some low/medium intensity rides as well as pushing myself ... just find it near impossible to do!

Any tips would be appreciated

Cheers

Paul

cougie

Ride with a pal ?
Other than that - its up to you. You know what you need to do - so just do it.

Nelson Longflap

Remove your large chainring - seriously! Or find some slower people to ride with, if your pride will let you. (But you'll need to go out for longer than you might be used to.) The best thing though is probably to join a club and try to get a ride going with like-minded individuals.

Failing that, what about trying a 200k audax with the intention of just enjoying the scenery/cake?.

BeaconRuth

How far do you go on your rides? Do you do 60-70 miles flat-out with your HR over 170bpm? I think not.

I'm guessing, since you're new to cycling and you seem to delight in riding so hard, that you're not yet doing rides long enough to mean you need to conserve your energy. Maybe you just need to think about longer rides sometimes? I defy anyone to belt off like a maniac when they have 70+ miles to cover. There's no harm riding hard though if your rides are only an hour or so.

Ruth

pjh

Ruth - you're correct

I'm doing about 25-30 miles on average taking me around 1 hr 30-45 mins! I'm also riding solo as you correctly guessed.

Anyone living near to Wansford (Nr Peterborough) ... I'd love to hear from you as riding with a.n.other/s would help me a lot.

I have been extending my rides gradually (5 miles a week) and I know that sooner or later especially as I get to 2 hrs + that conserving energy and taking on fuel during the ride is gonna become important.

I know that longer rides WILL make me pace myself ... it's just that I've never been good at that (pacing myself)

chrisw12

Can I expand on your question?

Out last night at the club bash and one of the more evperienced riders was telling me that he's doing all his ridding at level 1/2 at the moment and being quite strict with it. Now given that one of the responses to the original question was 'remove the big ring' I've got to ask why would you purposely go out to go slow?

I have the philosiphy that I will do every ride as hard as I can given the distance and how tired or trainned I am, I would never go out intentionaly to go slow. Am I missing something.

itsallinthelegs

Haha a common problem for a lot of riders methinks - I know it is for me. I train very frequently, so can't afford to blast out every training ride or I'd soon become a frail shadow unable to get on with the rest of my life outside cycling (if you believe there is such a thing?! )

Here's one that works for me - try riding while only breathing through your nose. If you find that you are needing to breathe through your mouth, then ease off a little (obviously this can be relaxed on steep hills or you'll never get up them!). This is a good guide for a low-intensity ride as your exertion will be based on your cardio ability...

Toks

pjh wrote:

This sounds daft I know but I'd really appreciate some tips on riding more slowly!

Whenever I get on the bike with the intention of just 'spinning my legs' a bit or building up my base endurance I quickly find that I'm flying down the road with my HR at 170+ !!

It's actually kind of annoying that I don't seem able to control myself; I constantly have to keep reigning myself in. As I'm new at cycling I've read quite a lot on this great site and recognise the importance of some low/medium intensity rides as well as pushing myself ... just find it near impossible to do!

Any tips would be appreciated

Cheers

Paul

Er as Ruth suggests doing a few 3/4 hour rides would certainly curtail some of that speed. But for the most part, why do you want to slow down anyway? Anyone who has even an ounce of competitive spirit in their bones wants to ride as fast as they can - more so newbies If the intensity of these rides are making you feel tired or unwell I could understand, or if you were pissing people off in group rides then yes you need to slow down.;

But on solo rides as Chris says ride as fast as you can for the duration. But without fatiguing yourself so much that you can't put in a similar effort the next day. However if you do become fatigued or tired in subsequent rides then pacing your rides (perhaps 85-90% of your best for the duration) or having more rest days will sort out the problem.

Laurent7

A good guide is to train at conversation pace for most of your ride and put in efforts every now and then on hills or winding up the pace on the last few miles. You could do some specific speed and hill work to build up your anearoibic fitness. But to do every ride as a flat out time trial is asking for trouble-you will get very tired and jaded.

pjh

Why should I want to ride slower ... it's a good question.

My answer is simply that as a newbie and reading lots on this forum ... that it would seem to be the recommended method of training/improving fitness etc.

Most seem to suggest that a variety of workout intensities is desirable? Certainly with very cold weather (not here just yet) .. I can only imagine that avoiding lungfulls of freezing air is probably a good idea

I'm no expert and that's why I've asked the question. I'm trying to absorb as much knowledge and train in a manner that's going to improve me in the quickest way.

If riding at 90%+ of HRMax all the time is the right way ... then my original problem doesn't exist

chrisw12

pjh wrote:

Why should I want to ride slower ... it's a good question.

1) My answer is simply that as a newbie and reading lots on this forum ... that it would seem to be the recommended method of training/improving fitness etc.

2) Most seem to suggest that a variety of workout intensities is desirable? Certainly with very cold weather (not here just yet) .. I can only imagine that avoiding lungfulls of freezing air is probably a good idea

3) I'm no expert and that's why I've asked the question. I'm trying to absorb as much knowledge and train in a manner that's going to improve me in the quickest way.

4) If riding at 90%+ of HRMax all the time is the right way ... then my original problem doesn't exist

I hope you don't mind but I've added numbers to your paragraphs to help me deal with your thoughts and to relay mine.

1) I don't know if you've interpreted things right. Ok, there are times when you need to be going slower but I personally don't see how going faster at times is going to hurt.

2) Yes definitely a variety of intensities, but I think the intensity should be controlled by how far you are ridding and how you feel/got planned for the week. I don't know if it should be artificially controled so that you are going slow on purpose.

The cold weather and the lungs. Well lets be fair, it's not that cold in this country and I can't see how that would have any adverse effects on lung functioonality. If it did then x-country sking would be a banned sport.

4) I think your question doesn't exist, I remember when I strated off, I could quite easily get my hr up and would ride around like a lunati,c but as I got fitter and more experienced I naturally became more controled. I think tbh when you start out you have bit of a honeymoon period where you can't help but improve and you can't help but ride at high intensity, just don't worry about it and don't try to over think it yet!

Klassiker

It all depends on what you are aiming to do with your cycling.

A) If you are happy to go out and simply have fun riding your bike, and don't have any competitive urges, then the last thing you need to do is get bogged down with all the training theory. Just carry on pedalling as fast and as hard as your legs will take, if that's what you feel like, and stop worrying about doing it "wrong".

If, on the other hand, you want to get fitter and be able to ride faster for longer and maybe race competitively, then you need to devote at least some of your cycling time to following a training plan. This means riding at different intensities on different days, and sometimes requires a lot of self-discipline.

If your answer is A, then you don't need the boring stuff which follows.

If your answer is B, then you need to do a lot of your riding at a lower intensity, even if your rides are not long enough to make riding slowly an absolute necessity.

By riding in the aerobic zone you will be developing the capacity of your aerobic energy system, using predominantly fat, and making your body less ready to burn carbohydrates. This is important if you want to ride longer than a couple of hours or race because you have much more energy available in your body in the form of fat than in the form of carbohydrates. You need to keep your carbohydrates in reserve for when make those high-power efforts in races (anaerobic). If you run out of carbohydrates on along ride you will suffer what cyclists call the bonk, or hunger knock, which brings with it feelings of weakness, dizzyness, pins and needles and nausea. When this happens (and it will, sooner or later) get something to eat asap!

Even if you want to ride just the short races, like 10s or 25s, or you want to ride your 25-30 mile loop significantly faster next year, you will still need to increase your aerobic capacity.

Your aerobic system burns lactate as well as fat. Your anaerobic system produces lactate. Lactate above certain concentrations in your bloodstream and muscles causes that burning and aching sensation and eventually stops your muscles working.

So, a highly developed aerobic system is better at keeping the lactate out of your system meaning you can ride at a higher pulse rate than before, and therefore produce more power and speed.

Of course, a complete training programme is not just about "riding slow", but it is easy to underestimate how important these steady base miles are for improvement in the long term. I did, for years and years.

Also,
If you want to ride slower (=lower pulse), change down a couple of gears. Try it, it works!
If you want to ride with others, join a club. You can learn a lot and some of my best friends are cyclists.

Mike Willcox1

There is a tendency to look at your watch when you get on your bike and then to check it out when you reach a certain land mark and then use the time taken as a measure as to how well you are going. If there is a head wind then you can rationalise any delay accordingly etc.

If you do the same ride over and over again then you will always try to beat the unofficial world record even though you know that for some of the rides you should go out for longer and slower.

As a tip try varying your routes and don't look at your watch. I hesitate to mention that word cadence, but IMO pedalling lower gears will slow you down and improve your pedalling skills. On the other hand according to some it it makes no difference.

BeaconRuth

Klassiker wrote:

It all depends on what you are aiming to do with your cycling.

A) If you are happy to go out and simply have fun riding your bike, and don't have any competitive urges, then the last thing you need to do is get bogged down with all the training theory. Just carry on pedalling as fast and as hard as your legs will take, if that's what you feel like, and stop worrying about doing it "wrong".

If, on the other hand, you want to get fitter and be able to ride faster for longer and maybe race competitively, then you need to devote at least some of your cycling time to following a training plan. This means riding at different intensities on different days, and sometimes requires a lot of self-discipline.

If your answer is A, then you don't need the boring stuff which follows.

PJH - I agree with Klassiker that it might be an idea to ask yourself what you want from your riding. It seems a smidgen bizarre to make riding slower your goal just because you understand that cyclists sometimes train by riding slower. Why do they ride slower? Sometimes it's for recovery purposes and sometimes it's to bring about specific training benefits such as endurance from long rides. But unless you need to recover, or you need to acquire endurance and plan to do long rides, riding slower might not be what you need at all.

It sounds to me as though you'd enjoy and would benefit from riding with a cycling club. I think the Welland Valley CC is in your neck of the woods. From what I understand they're a large, well-established and traditional club. Might be worth looking them up?

If your answer is B, then you need to do a lot of your riding at a lower intensity, even if your rides are not long enough to make riding slowly an absolute necessity...........

I think this could be misconstrued. Surely you're not suggesting that someone who only does, say, 3 short rides a week should lower the intensity for the sole purpose of introducing 'slow rides' into their training plan?

...........Your aerobic system burns lactate as well as fat............

I presume you don't mean 'burns' in the sense of converting it into useful energy?!

Ruth

Klassiker

I think this could be misconstrued. Surely you're not suggesting that someone who only does, say, 3 short rides a week should lower the intensity for the sole purpose of introducing 'slow rides' into their training plan?

Hmmm...good point, I suppose it depends on what you mean by short. Personally, if I was riding 3x1.5hrs or longer a week, I'd be doing two of the sessions at a steady pace without having to breathe hard. The other would maybe be intervals or hard tempo. If the rides were shorter than that, I would describe it more as keeping fit rather than training.

I presume you don't mean 'burns' in the sense of converting it into useful energy?!

Is that controversial? If it is, then surely only because it's an incomplete description of the process?

OK, the aerobic system doesn't burn lactate, it metabolises a product of the anaerobic system called pyruvate. If the aerobic system can't handle the amount of pyruvate being produced by the anaerobic system, the pyruvate converts to lactate.

If that's not right, I would be interested to read a better explanation. Maybe you could start another thread, because we are getting off-topic?

chrisw12

If I was ONLY ridding 3x1.5 hours per week I'd be absolutely blasting them, it would be rude not to.

BeaconRuth

Klassiker wrote:

Hmmm...good point, I suppose it depends on what you mean by short. Personally, if I was riding 3x1.5hrs or longer a week, I'd be doing two of the sessions at a steady pace without having to breathe hard. The other would maybe be intervals or hard tempo. If the rides were shorter than that, I would describe it more as keeping fit rather than training.

I'm with Chris. If your total amount of riding per week is just 4.5hrs, I don't really see any point in doing anything other than riding pretty hard for all of it.

I presume you don't mean 'burns' in the sense of converting it into useful energy?!

Is that controversial?

Not controversial, no. I suppose conventionally we often talk about people 'burning' calories or 'burning' fat or glycogen, meaning that we are converting them into useful energy for riding our bikes. I just thought the suggestion that we might 'burn' lactate to sustain us on our rides was an intriguing one. I have this weird mental picture of someone dying horribly on a ride, getting the bonk, but deciding to sprint up a hill to generate some lactate in order to fuel the remainder of their ride............ Sorry. :oops:

Ruth

Klassiker

Ruth, do you mean that 3 sessions of 1.5 hours aweek is too little to provide any training benefit, and so you might as well enjoy it by riding hard, ot do you mean that always riding hard would be more benficial for improving race performance (eg 10 or 25 tt) than what I suggested?

At what point (hours per week) do you recommend introducing slower rides into a training programme, and why?

BlackHelmet

I was on a club ride one Sunday and was advised that I needed to learn how to cycle 1 mph slower... When I asked exactly why I'd want to learn how to cycle slower he couldn't answer me. I don't do club rides anymore.

When I started running I always did the same 5-mile route and always went as fast as I could. After initial improvements I leveled out and never improved again until I added some distance and pace variety. This also helped greatly with enthusiasm and motivation.

So I'd suggest you look to add some variety rather than look to go slower. E.g. change one ride to about 75 mins and do intervals, up another ride to 2 hours and ride tempo. Then once a week, try to go for a longer distance. If you can't ride with others then you'll learn over time what kinda pace you can comfortably maintain over the longer distances.

Enjoy your cycling

BeaconRuth

Klassiker wrote:

Ruth, do you mean that 3 sessions of 1.5 hours aweek is too little to provide any training benefit..............

Not at all. You get some benefit from any training.

......... and so you might as well enjoy it by riding hard, ot do you mean that always riding hard would be more benficial for improving race performance (eg 10 or 25 tt) than what I suggested?

At what point (hours per week) do you recommend introducing slower rides into a training programme, and why?

It's very hard to say. There's no fixed number of hours per week at which everyone should start to do 'slower rides'. I've given this quite a bit of thought and try as I might I can't come up with a suggestion or rule of thumb that makes sense. There are simply too many variables to talk generically. I think there are advantages to doing a long ride from time to time if you have the time, but not at the expense of shorter, harder training if you do not have the time. (I really dislike using the term 'slow rides' because the only rides I would ever set out to do slowly are very very easy recovery rides.)

Ruth

Klassiker

I think there are advantages to doing a long ride from time to time if you have the time, but not at the expense of shorter, harder training if you do not have the time.

I think we differ on this point and I'd like to get it cleared up for my own benefit as much as that of pjh.

My understanding of the way the body responds to training hard is (put briefly) as follows:
If you spend a lot of your time training near to your anaerobic threshhold you develop your anaerobic capacity, but not your aerobic capacity. Sounds like a good thing cos we all want to be good at riding anaerobically, but is in fact bad, because over time you lower your anaerobic threshold (i.e. the pace at which you can ride a 25). The reason is, the body learns to produce energy more readily using the strengthened anaerobic system, and less readily using the weakened aerobic system. The result (after maybe a few months of training like this); at a relatively low pulse the aerobic system is swamped by pyruvate which it doesn't have the capacity to metabolise and the pyruvate turns to lactate. Above this pulse, the lactate accumulates rapidly and shuts down the muscles. (I am neglecting the opposing effect of the increase in lactate tolerance)

So, my point with the 3x1.5 hours a week example was that even if you train relatively little, you need to spend most of your time developing your aerobic capacity (65-75% MHR). Not much fun, antisocial, and at only 4.5 hours a week, it would hardly feel like training either, because it's too little volume. Nevertheless, the proportions are important. Obviously, more volume brings bigger benefits (up to a point), but I chose the 1.5 hour sessions because I wanted to emphasise why I think "slow" rides are important. You, on the other hand, equate aerobic training (leaving recovery aside) with long rides. You seem to believe that the best reason for aerobic training is to make long rides possible ( to increase endurance?), whereas I believe that aerobic training should form the core of any serious training, due to the reasons above.

So, I've gone on a bit more than I wanted to, but I hope it's clear where I'm coming from and if you disagree I would be really interested to understand why.

Absolutely no hurry though, cos I'm going on holiday now for three weeks (without internet access - will I survive?)

Mike Willcox1

Klassiker makes some very good points.

You can't reach your potential for speed without spending time on building a base. Slower definitely equals faster. I can guarantee that out of the OP's 3 x 1.5 hours efforts in a week if he was to spend 2 of them at moderate pace then on the third he would go faster than he is doing so right now.

When you start serious training it would be better to build a base of 4 moderate rides in a week totalling if possible a minimum of 8 hours (try and make one ride 3 hours+) and one fast one @ 1.5 hours (tempo/intervals).

On the moderate effort rides concentrate on high cadence to develop an efficient pedalling technique going down the gears when climbing drags and hills.

BeaconRuth

I hope you're going to come and find this thread when you're back then, Klassiker!

Klassiker wrote:

If you spend a lot of your time training near to your anaerobic threshhold........

Not sure what you mean by 'anaerobic threshold'. The threshold we usually talk about is called all sorts of things, but if you work at or near that level you are definitely working aerobically, not anaerobically.

........you develop your anaerobic capacity, but not your aerobic capacity.

No, you only start training your anaerobic system when you start doing short intervals or very intensive short bursts. None of any of my above comments about training 'hard' refer to training anaerobically. You can ride really quite hard and still be training aerobically.

Sounds like a good thing cos we all want to be good at riding anaerobically, but is in fact bad, because over time you lower your anaerobic threshold (i.e. the pace at which you can ride a 25). The reason is, the body learns to produce energy more readily using the strengthened anaerobic system, and less readily using the weakened aerobic system. The result (after maybe a few months of training like this); at a relatively low pulse the aerobic system is swamped by pyruvate which it doesn't have the capacity to metabolise and the pyruvate turns to lactate. Above this pulse, the lactate accumulates rapidly and shuts down the muscles. (I am neglecting the opposing effect of the increase in lactate tolerance)

Not sure about any of the above. I personally don't aim to excel at riding anaerobically - not much use to a time-triallist!

So, my point with the 3x1.5 hours a week example was that even if you train relatively little, you need to spend most of your time developing your aerobic capacity (65-75% MHR).

Why not develop your aerobic capacity up around 80, 85 even 90%MHR?

Not much fun, antisocial, and at only 4.5 hours a week, it would hardly feel like training either, because it's too little volume. Nevertheless, the proportions are important. Obviously, more volume brings bigger benefits (up to a point), but I chose the 1.5 hour sessions because I wanted to emphasise why I think "slow" rides are important. You, on the other hand, equate aerobic training (leaving recovery aside) with long rides. You seem to believe that the best reason for aerobic training is to make long rides possible ( to increase endurance?), whereas I believe that aerobic training should form the core of any serious training, due to the reasons above.

I think you've misunderstood me. Long rides are not the only type of training which is aerobic. What about 2hrs of 'tempo' or, say, 2x20mins just below your 25 mile race pace? It's all superb aerobic training.

Ruth

J2R2

The best way to learn to ride slowly is to start racing and get a season of road races or time trials under your belt. After six months of pushing yourself to the limit you'll appreciate spending a few months pottering round the lanes at conversation pace.

I started riding just under three years ago and when I started I was pushing myself to the limit every time I went out. Now I've learned to save the hard efforts for when they matter.

Alex_Simmons/RST

BeaconRuth wrote:

Klassiker wrote:

At what point (hours per week) do you recommend introducing slower rides into a training programme, and why?

It's very hard to say. There's no fixed number of hours per week at which everyone should start to do 'slower rides'. I've given this quite a bit of thought and try as I might I can't come up with a suggestion or rule of thumb that makes sense. There are simply too many variables to talk generically.
Ruth

As Ruth said, there are many variables which makes this quite a difficult question to answer in a generic sense, however (and please don't shoot me folks ) there are defnitely rules of thumb you can use if you are tracking (and planning) your riding with a power meter.

The gradual overload (increases in intensity and duration of rides) over the course of a block of training during a generic aerobic build period can be effectively sustained as long as the ramp rate of one's Chronic Training Load* is less than 8 TSS** per week on average, and typically between 3-7 TSS/week. (Links to definitions shown below). TSS is a score of Training Stress for each workout and is a function of duration (linear) and intensity (non-linear).

Less than 3 TSS/week increase is usually insufficient overload, whereas >8TSS/wk, if sustained will generally lead to an increased susceptibility to illness or overtraining. This "build" of CTL is very important to enable effective specific training to occur later on.

During race season or pre-race prep, then often the CTL ramp rate is zero or falling as intensity of rides are high and recovery is needed to ensure quality of workouts is sustained.

These numbers of course are not the only factors to consider (e.g. athlete stress levels) but they have shown to be remarkably consistent at predicting (usually in a retrospective manner) or preventing an unsustainable increase in training load. They are also remarkably good at making sure the athlete is getting sufficient increase in workload and preventing peaking at the wrong time.

So when do you ride slow? Well that depends on how many TSS you should be aiming for in each workout (and each week) and the time available in order to attain an optimal increase in your CTL.

* http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/pow ... anager.asp
** http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/pow ... efined.asp

chrisw12

and in English, or at least a dumbed down version?

I kind of see why the owner of biketechreview.com doesn't allow some of the 'science/training' terms on his forum now

Mike Willcox1

chrisw12 wrote:

and in English, or at least a dumbed down version?

I kind of see why the owner of biketechreview.com doesn't allow some of the 'science/training' terms on his forum now

Reminds me of when the then new manager of Chelsea, Claudio Ranieiri, was asked his views at the end of his first match in charge. He replied animatedly and at length in Italian (he couldn't speak any english). The translator turned to the cameras and said "it was a game of 2 halves" to which all the press laughed their heads off.

I think we need an equally brief summary of Alex's post.

Alex_Simmons/RST

Mike Willcox1 wrote:

I think we need an equally brief summary of Alex's post.

Yeah - I thought as much when I posted. Let me work on something that reads a little more easily and come back to you all. The links I posted are useful reading.

As for BTR - well that's just silly - they are the only names / concepts etc he won't allow on his site. But that's his choice.

Alex_Simmons/RST

A picture is worth a thousand words. I'd already written something on this is fairly plain english, so have a look here:

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2006/10/ ... chart.html

Oh - and you don't need the CP WKO+ software to do all this - it can be done in excel as all the algorithms/formulas are publicly available. But the software makes it a whole lot easier.

ut_och_cykla

lactate gets' burnt'? Yes- my understanding is that lactate is always being generated in muscles, it only becomes a problem when it builds up beyond a certain, somewhat individual level. Lactate generated in one part of a muscle is used as an energy source by other parts of the muscle.

Mike Willcox

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

A picture is worth a thousand words. I'd already written something on this is fairly plain english, so have a look here:

http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2006/10/ ... chart.html

Oh - and you don't need the CP WKO+ software to do all this - it can be done in excel as all the algorithms/formulas are publicly available. But the software makes it a whole lot easier.

I'm impressed.

But how do you use this performance manager to differentiate between how much speed work and how much steady state riding is required in your build up to a peak. Bearing in mind that the "score" could be the same on a ride of 3 hours steady as 45 minutes interval training, you may e.g. have done insufficient speed work.

At the end of the day there has to a common sense approach based on sound principles of training.

P.S. I've managed to post this under my old C+ membership which was banned under C+. It would seem that there was an amnesty when it was taken over by Bike Radar.