Can an untrained bloke in his 60's join the 300watt Club?

2»

Comments

  • Alex_Simmons/RST
    Alex_Simmons/RST Posts: 4,161
    Mike Willcox wrote:
    Training by power means diddly squat at the end of the day.
    Which is why the athletes I work for train with power and not by power. :wink:
    RST Sport : Coaching - Training Plans - Powermeters -- My blog -- AeroCoach Australia
  • bahzob
    bahzob Posts: 2,195
    Mike Willcox wrote:
    Face it guys your super fast times are no better than they were 25/30 years ago. Training by power means diddly squat at the end of the day.

    Not a cycling boffin so which records are still standing from 25/30 years ago?

    + I know same holds for athletics but these are also records in disrepute due to drugs.
    e.g.
    100m 10.49 Flor. Griffith Joyner USA 16 Jul 88 Indianapolis
    200m 21.34 Flor. Griffith Joyner USA 29 Sep 88 Seoul
    300m 34.1 Marita Koch EGer 6 Oct 85 Canberra
    400m 47.60 Marita Koch EGer 6 Oct 85 Canberra

    For the records that are still standing does this also hold true?
    Martin S. Newbury RC
  • acoggan
    acoggan Posts: 26
    Mike Willcox wrote:
    we've even had the mad professor himself throwing insults and smears. "Just because he's a champion" blah de blah de blah - "bragging about" blah de blah de blah - and get this , he adds "that's what I would do" :D pathetic.

    If you consider those comments to be "insults and smears", then I'd say that you are quite thin-skinned.
    Mike Willcox wrote:
    Face it guys your super fast times are no better than they were 25/30 years ago.

    Yes, that's why a no-name pro (Sosenka) can now ride farther in one hour than arguably the greatest cyclist who ever lived (Merckx). :roll:

    You are right about one thing, though: merely putting a powermeter on your bike doesn't automatically make you faster, i.e., you have to apply the knowledge you gain to obtain any benefit. Of course, there have always been people who could figure things out without access to such data - that's why I've long said that the real impact of such tools isn't to make the fastest faster, but to make more people fast (which in turn tends to spur even non-powermeter uses to new heights, but that's really a smaller, secondary effect).
  • Mike Willcox
    Mike Willcox Posts: 1,770
    bahzob wrote:
    Mike Willcox wrote:
    Face it guys your super fast times are no better than they were 25/30 years ago. Training by power means diddly squat at the end of the day.

    Not a cycling boffin so which records are still standing from 25/30 years ago?

    + I know same holds for athletics but these are also records in disrepute due to drugs.
    e.g.
    100m 10.49 Flor. Griffith Joyner USA 16 Jul 88 Indianapolis
    200m 21.34 Flor. Griffith Joyner USA 29 Sep 88 Seoul
    300m 34.1 Marita Koch EGer 6 Oct 85 Canberra
    400m 47.60 Marita Koch EGer 6 Oct 85 Canberra

    For the records that are still standing does this also hold true?


    If you can't work it out for yourself I'm not going to tell you.
  • Mike Willcox
    Mike Willcox Posts: 1,770
    acoggan wrote:
    Mike Willcox wrote:
    we've even had the mad professor himself throwing insults and smears. "Just because he's a champion" blah de blah de blah - "bragging about" blah de blah de blah - and get this , he adds "that's what I would do" :D pathetic.

    If you consider those comments to be "insults and smears", then I'd say that you are quite thin-skinned.
    Mike Willcox wrote:
    Face it guys your super fast times are no better than they were 25/30 years ago.

    Yes, that's why a no-name pro (Sosenka) can now ride farther in one hour than arguably the greatest cyclist who ever lived (Merckx). :roll:

    You are right about one thing, though: merely putting a powermeter on your bike doesn't automatically make you faster, i.e., you have to apply the knowledge you gain to obtain any benefit. Of course, there have always been people who could figure things out without access to such data - that's why I've long said that the real impact of such tools isn't to make the fastest faster, but to make more people fast (which in turn tends to spur even non-powermeter uses to new heights, but that's really a smaller, secondary effect).

    I'll settle for that. 8)
  • bahzob
    bahzob Posts: 2,195
    Still confused. Which records from 20+ years ago are still standing today?
    Martin S. Newbury RC
  • bahzob
    bahzob Posts: 2,195
    Ignore last post just found following which shows that yes most cycling records are ancient.

    http://www.uci.ch/english/palmares/track/record_index.htm
    Martin S. Newbury RC
  • acoggan
    acoggan Posts: 26
    bahzob wrote:
    Ignore last post just found following which shows that yes most cycling records are ancient.

    http://www.uci.ch/english/palmares/track/record_index.htm

    You should know that those data are woefully out of date. For example, the women's 3 km and 500 m records as well as the men's sea level 1 km record were all set at the 2004 Olympics.
  • SteveR_100Milers
    SteveR_100Milers Posts: 5,987
    He he after reading this thread you might decide never to buy a power meter, nor trust your own senses! Wonder if we might have seen as much vitriol had the OP subject referred to TIME instead :wink:

    I'm off to buy a £10 stopwatch from argos...
    http://www.pontypoolrcc.co.uk/
    www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=44397853765
  • Toks
    Toks Posts: 1,143
    Seeing as 'age' has cropped up quite a few times recently in a few threadsI thought I'd bump this thread back up :D Appologies for peeing off my mate Mike Wilcox in advance 8) 8)
  • Mike Willcox
    Mike Willcox Posts: 1,770
    Toks wrote:
    Seeing as 'age' has cropped up quite a few times recently in a few threadsI thought I'd bump this thread back up :D Appologies for peeing off my mate Mike Wilcox in advance 8) 8)

    And who are you then? Peter bloody Pan? :D
  • toontra
    toontra Posts: 1,160
    Toks, thanks for linking to the Cyclingforums thread. I read it (or most of it) back in February and it has completely revolutionised my training, and cycling.

    As background, I'm 52 and never cycled competatively, only in the last couple of years taken up "long distance" stuff (i.e. 150 miles per day light touring and some shorter audaxes). I'd spent many, many hours training on the road and in the gym, but it was all unstructured and I never saw any real improvement (although my general fitness probably improved a fair bit).

    Since starting the "power training" intervals outlined in the thread, my hill-climbing and speed have both increased significantly. I can now keep up with the fast group on the club run, my Richmond Park 3-lap time is down 7 minutes on last year and I generally feel far more confident about my ability.

    I'm currently showing an FT of around 250w, and my aim is to get to 300w sometime next year.

    I don't really care about all the competing training theories - I'm not a pro, but this has changed my cycling in a big way. Cheers.

    a serious case of small cogs

Categories