I am getting faster - advice welcome

musto_skiff

Hi,

After 15 years off a bike I brought a new one early in the new year ...

I am going to enter my first evining 10TT soon and have been testing on the Tacx.

I am progressing well, see

http://www.force5marketing.co.uk/private/bike/index.htm

Any tips or advice would be welcome.

ut_och_cykla

A quick glance suggests you might be getting faster and that you are trying harder! Two good things but not the same.
The real thing will be very different - wind & weather and adrenailine.
Good luck!

Jeff Jones

Keep doing what you're doing, as it seems to be working!

Toks

musto_skiff wrote:

Hi,

After 15 years off a bike I brought a new one early in the new year ...

I am going to enter my first evining 10TT soon and have been testing on the Tacx.

I am progressing well, see

http://www.force5marketing.co.uk/private/bike/index.htm

Any tips or advice would be welcome.

well done. You clearly are getting faster as long as your set up/testing protocol remains consistent. (trainer warm up time, tyre pressure on roller, etc)Do a search on 2 x 20 threshold intervals

Mettan

musto_skiff wrote:

Hi,

After 15 years off a bike I brought a new one early in the new year ...

I am going to enter my first evining 10TT soon

Any tips or advice would be welcome.

For your first one, start the 10 "conservatively", and ease yourself into the event - there's no point in blowing up after first 3-4 miles. Work your way into it and put the hammer down later.

musto_skiff

Thanks for the advise all; I have dones some 2x20's but I kinda burn out so I have been doing 2 x 10's at a higher power.

The set up is always the same apart of course for the air temp.

I always give it the max so I do think I am getting better ...

I am looking forward to my first 10TT but I don't know when they start; I will swing by tomorrow night to see if they are there & ask if I can join in the following week.

Can't do it tomorrow as I am doing a 10K run with the wife ...

ut_och_cykla

As I said you are probably imporving but....
but a 10 beat difference in your average heartbeat is quite a difference ...(149 vs 159) for me that would be the difference between uncomfy but doable to folding before the end of a 20-30 minute interval. I've done 40- odd sessions on a turbo since january and my average heart beat for any given session type is within 2 or 3 beats - the Watts/distance etc has gone up steadily tho' . I see that as improvement
Good luck anyway!

Toks

ut_och_cykla wrote:

As I said you are probably imporving but....
but a 10 beat difference in your average heartbeat is quite a difference ...(149 vs 159) for me that would be the difference between uncomfy but doable to folding before the end of a 20-30 minute interval. I've done 40- odd sessions on a turbo since january and my average heart beat for any given session type is within 2 or 3 beats - the Watts/distance etc has gone up steadily tho' . I see that as improvement
Good luck anyway!

I wouldn't read to much in to a 10 beat difference in heart rate. A lack of fitness, fatigue, dehydration, over reaching, lack of sleep, increase in fitness, illness, anxiety, freshness could all cause a decrease or increase in hrt. Whats important is whether your sustainable power/aerobic power is improving

musto_skiff

In part I am learning what power output I can manage to sustain for 10 miles.

If you click on the links in the log column you can see in some cases I have started too slow and put the hammer down at the end.

In the most recent test I really started to struggle & fade half way but managed to keep going.

I suspect I will start to level off soon but it's nice to see the times dropping each test.

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

I am progressing well, see

http://www.force5marketing.co.uk/private/bike/index.htm

Any tips or advice would be welcome.

Nice, good progress there .

With 2x20's, if you can't complete them, the drop the power a little. Try 90%-95% of your current 10mi TT power. The aerobic benefits are excellent.

Maybe throw in a MAP test* as well every 6-8 weeks and see how the two compare. It can help you understand more about what elements of your engine could use some focus.

At some stage progress will plateau and you'll want to know "what now?". Until then, keep cranking!


* MAP (Maximal Aerobic Power) Test. Please read the item here about how to go about this test: http://www.cyclecoach.com/pageID-news-Test_yourself.htm.
Also for an example, have a look here: http://alex-cycle.blogspot.com/2006/12/ ... ccess.html

musto_skiff

Interesting exercise at the weekend.

I was talked into running a 10k by some mates.

I had only done one road run a few treadmill sessions so planned to run at 150 - 155 bpm then give it all in the last 2k.

I ran the event in 47:38 which I was quite pleased with with an average of 167bpm ...

Should I be running at a higer average on the bike if I can do that rate for 48 mins?

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Interesting exercise at the weekend.

I was talked into running a 10k by some mates.

I had only done one road run a few treadmill sessions so planned to run at 150 - 155 bpm then give it all in the last 2k.

I ran the event in 47:38 which I was quite pleased with with an average of 167bpm ...

Should I be running at a higer average on the bike if I can do that rate for 48 mins?

HR response, VO2 Max etc are exercise modality specific, so you can't compare one to the other.

Running of course over the longer term will not help your cycling performance improved as quickly as it might otherwise.

musto_skiff

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Running of course over the longer term will not help your cycling performance improved as quickly as it might otherwise.

Sorry Alex, but I don't understand the above ...

Toks

musto_skiff wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Running of course over the longer term will not help your cycling performance improved as quickly as it might otherwise.

Sorry Alex, but I don't understand the above ...

I can't speak for Alex but fitness tends to be sports specific. In other words whatever you practise is what you get good at. Someone posted recently that despite lots of running over the winter and no cycling when they eventually got on the 3 months later bike they really struggled and were not 'bike fit' Its a no brainer really :roll:

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Running of course over the longer term will not help your cycling performance improved as quickly as it might otherwise.

Sorry Alex, but I don't understand the above ...

basically, Toks has it.

If you are untrained then essentially anything will help but once you become a reasonably trained cyclist then nothing will advance performance more than riding your bike. time spent running or other types of training is less effective (and in some cases counter-productive).

I'm not saying running is bad for you, just that if your sole aim was to improve your performance on a bicycle then I would suggest less running and more riding.

musto_skiff

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

musto_skiff wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Running of course over the longer term will not help your cycling performance improved as quickly as it might otherwise.

Sorry Alex, but I don't understand the above ...

basically, Toks has it.

If you are untrained then essentially anything will help but once you become a reasonably trained cyclist then nothing will advance performance more than riding your bike. time spent running or other types of training is less effective (and in some cases counter-productive).

I'm not saying running is bad for you, just that if your sole aim was to improve your performance on a bicycle then I would suggest less running and more riding.

Ah - OK I get you. I just do the 10k's as a social thing really don't train for them much.

I guess what surprised me was that I could maintain a 167bpm average over 47 mins - I would have expected to blow up ... so with that in mind can I push for a higher bpm on the bike?

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Ah - OK I get you. I just do the 10k's as a social thing really don't train for them much.

I guess what surprised me was that I could maintain a 167bpm average over 47 mins - I would have expected to blow up ... so with that in mind can I push for a higher bpm on the bike?

Then my previous post stands. Don't expect one to equate to the other since you are comparing different exercise modalities (e.g. weight bearing running vs partial-weight bearing cycling) but there's only one way to find out

musto_skiff

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

musto_skiff wrote:

Ah - OK I get you. I just do the 10k's as a social thing really don't train for them much.

I guess what surprised me was that I could maintain a 167bpm average over 47 mins - I would have expected to blow up ... so with that in mind can I push for a higher bpm on the bike?

Then my previous post stands. Don't expect one to equate to the other since you are comparing different exercise modalities (e.g. weight bearing running vs partial-weight bearing cycling) but there's only one way to find out

Message recived - I will give it a go when I do my next static 10TT - which will be when my legs have stopped aching.

I will try my first 10TT on the roads next Wednesday with any luck ...

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Message recived - I will give it a go when I do my next static 10TT - which will be when my legs have stopped aching.

I will try my first 10TT on the roads next Wednesday with any luck ...

I hate to say it, but...

Indoor and outdoor training/riding may also generate different heart rate responses

musto_skiff

Still improving on the static 10TT on the Tacx; knocked off another 25 secs.

I will try on the road next Wednesday :evil:

Alex_Simmons/RST

Nice pacing!

musto_skiff

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Nice pacing!

How do I replicate that on the road?

Also; what riding should I do Mon & Tue?

musto_skiff

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Maybe throw in a MAP test* as well every 6-8 weeks and see how the two compare. It can help you understand more about what elements of your engine could use some focus.

The above looked difficult to do my my trainer.

Then I read the bit about a RAMP test in the latest C+ so gave that a go ...

Upped 20w each minute; got to the end of the 360w minute and gave up ...

It was hard keeping the power stead at 360w; often I want over to 380w and somtimes dropped.

See below .... what does this all mean?

Alex_Simmons/RST

if that is a Tacx trainer then perhaps setting the ergo to control the ramp in 10 W increments every 30 seconds would be easier for you. Then all you will need to do is pedal your heart out until you can go no more.

Compare the ratio of 10 mile time trial power (302 W) to your MAP, i.e. the average of the maximal power achieved for a full minute (~360 W).

302/360 = 84%

which is relatively high and suggests to me that if a lift in time trial power is desired, then work on your top end (i.e. your MAP) should be a priority for a while. That is provided your time trial and MAP tests were truly representative of a maximal effort and the recorded power is relatively accurate (i.e. there is no unusual slope to the power/resistance curve of the Tacx trainer).

as for time trial pacing out on the road, that takes practice and you should take note of your perceived exertion levels during your indoor efforts. In the first couple of minutes they should seem "ridiculously easy" and this sensation gradually moves through to "I think I'm going to die" by the time you get to the end.

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Also; what riding should I do Mon & Tue?

I don't think it is possible for me to give you an answer to such a specific question. to do so would really require a significant knowledge of you, your training history, goals etc etc.

musto_skiff

I have an i-Magic trainer but I don't know if it is possible to programme it to ramp up the power so I was changing gear on the bike and then aiming for target cadences to give the 20w power steps.

Next time I test a 10TT on the trainer I will aim for 310w.

Legs are pretty knackered today as I did the test in the morning then 3 hours sailing.

I think I'll do an easy ride this eveing then just a gym session tomorrow and then the 10TT on Wednesday.

I will report back on my time

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Legs are pretty knackered today as I did the test in the morning then 3 hours sailing.

They are short these MAP tests but sure can take the bite out of your legs.

musto_skiff

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

musto_skiff wrote:

Legs are pretty knackered today as I did the test in the morning then 3 hours sailing.

They are short these MAP tests but sure can take the bite out of your legs.

What does MAP stand for? and is RAMP an abbrv or does it just describe the graph?

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

musto_skiff wrote:

Legs are pretty knackered today as I did the test in the morning then 3 hours sailing.

They are short these MAP tests but sure can take the bite out of your legs.

What does MAP stand for? and is RAMP an abbrv or does it just describe the graph?

Maximal aerobic power (MAP) is the highest average power you generate over 60-seconds during an incremental test to exhaustion. Typically this is the final minute of such a test.

Further details on the protocol used and how to conduct your own MAP test are contained here:
http://www.cyclecoach.com/pageID-news-Test_yourself.htm

The RAMP is simply referring to the rate at which power is increased during such a test. In your case you had a ramp rate of 20W/min (5W/15seconds), which is the normal ramp rate used for elite males. For non-elite/masters we typically use 25W/min (5W/12 seconds).

The ramp rate used (protocol) is very important as the outcome is very protocol dependent.

musto_skiff

Ah right, well as a 41 year old newbie I will go for the later and try again ... I guess it will be a little easier.

I tried some 10 minute intervals at 310w tonight; I could only manage one, then another 5 minute one :oops: couldn't keep that up for a 10TT ... yet :P

Alex_Simmons/RST

musto_skiff wrote:

Ah right, well as a 41 year old newbie I will go for the later and try again ... I guess it will be a little easier.

It never gets easier. It is a test to exhaustion, irrespective of the protocol.