How can I increase my distance?

bobtbuilder

After two years of frustrating injuries limiting my riding, I'm hoping to have an injury free 2009, and my main goal is to push the distance that I am able to ride up to 100 miles and above.

I am currently able to ride 60-65 miles before my legs turn to jelly and I have to drop down to the small ring to keep going on the flat!

During British Summer Time, I commute to work 3 times per week (57 mile round trip), and have one free day at weekends, where I usually get in a 60-65 mile ride.

Outside of BST I continue to ride once per weekend, but don't have access to a turbo.

If possible, I don't want to commute in the dark, as the roads are psycho-infested!

Any help on training, ride nutrition, etc. would be much appreciated.

Patrick1.0

If you want to ride for longer and faster, you need to increase your power output. Don't concentrate on riding lots and lots of miles slowly. Do your endurance rides of 60 miles as tempo rides. Go hard up hills and so on. Also, I'd suggest sessions on the turbo. 5 x 5 minutes at 95% of your best with a slow-spinning recovery between efforts, if you have a heart rate monitor, use it and wait for your pulse to come down below 115 before the next effort. You'll see the effects of the training for yourself that way; it should take increasingly longer for your heart rate to come back down between each of the efforts. BUT you have to wait for it to come down to 115. Don't go too soon with the next effort. That's not how it works.

After two or three weeks of that you can build it up to 5 x 10 with the same percentage of effort and same recovery process. If you're interested in doing any races, then about a month beforethe season starts, you should do 3 x 20 minutes at 95%. By the third effort, you should be really very tired. It's a tough session but you'll see your ability to ride long and hard go way up.

I should also add, that is just one session you can fit into your weekly training schedule. Fit in recovery days around your 60 mile tempo rides and the said session. Have at least one rest day a week and at least one recovery ride where you don't stress at all. Just spin the muscles very lightly.

bobtbuilder

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for the advice. It's totally different to all the advice I have received elsewhere, which has amounted to "lower your ride speed, and your distance will go up accordingly".

Unfortunately, I do not have access to a turbo, so I am unable to do the interval training until I can get out on my bike. I could turn one leg of my commute into this method of training though.

Cheers.

Rob.

Patrick1.0

bobtbuilder wrote:

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for the advice. It's totally different to all the advice I have received elsewhere, which has amounted to "lower your ride speed, and your distance will go up accordingly".

Unfortunately, I do not have access to a turbo, so I am unable to do the interval training until I can get out on my bike. I could turn one leg of my commute into this method of training though.

Cheers.

Rob.

No worries.

Decreasing your speed and riding for longer is not going to make you faster. Provided we are relatively fit, we can all turn the pedals over slowly for 60-80-100 miles, provided we take the right fluids and food out with us.

I would suggest a turbo because when the winter really sets in you'll not want to be doing quality work out in the cold air. You'll just get it on your lungs and airways and then the colds will come.

Do specific training with the time you have. Train in two - three day blocks and then take a rest day/recovery ride. Take two if you need to for your body to recover. I can't stress enough how much better it is to ride at tempo than at a slow pace for long, long periods. That combined with the sessions I've mentioned, and the all important recovery time, and you'll be able to fly for 80 - 100 miles no problem because although the pace will be pretty fast and sustained throughout, it will be a good deal beneath your five minute, twenty minute and one hour pace.

That's what I will be concentrating on as I approach the spring anyway.

bobtbuilder

I'm not too concerned about my speed yet. Just to reach 100 miles will do for now! I'm a fairly Chunky Monkey (88kg), and I just find my legs give out around the 65 mile mark. All of a sudden I will go up a hill and my legs just won't recover and then I find that I'm giving it 100% just to keep going on the flat!

Patrick1.0

bobtbuilder wrote:

I'm not too concerned about my speed yet. Just to reach 100 miles will do for now! I'm a fairly Chunky Monkey (88kg), and I just find my legs give out around the 65 mile mark. All of a sudden I will go up a hill and my legs just won't recover and then I find that I'm giving it 100% just to keep going on the flat!

Honestly, the two go hand in hand. If you increase your one hour power, you can't not enhance your endurance. What speed you can ride for 100 miles at will be a percentage of your one hour power. Climbing is slightly different, but not much.

Ok, you're not worried about speed but if you give the interval sessions a try and sustain them - improve them in the way I suggest - over a period of a few months, you'll find longer rides a doddle.

If you want to lose weight, which will massively improve your all round game, you don't have to do anything spectacular, just train and eat pretty much good foods, and your weight will tumble off until you get down to a nice lean size and shape for you.

andrewjoseph

... You'll see the effects of the training for yourself that way; it should take increasingly longer for your heart rate to come back down between each of the efforts. BUT you have to wait for it to come down to 115....

Can you explain further the purpose of this. my understanding is that as fitness increases time to recovery decreases. And why the 115, shouldn't this be a percentage of the riders max hr?

Patrick1.0

andrewjoseph wrote:

... You'll see the effects of the training for yourself that way; it should take increasingly longer for your heart rate to come back down between each of the efforts. BUT you have to wait for it to come down to 115....

Can you explain further the purpose of this. my understanding is that as fitness increases time to recovery decreases. And why the 115, shouldn't this be a percentage of the riders max hr?

Sure.

First of all, 115 is pretty much the recovered point for most people. I don't know bobtbuilder's max hr so I am just giving him that figure. Time to recover will decrease with time, yes, and that is the whole point. The time it takes for his hr to come back down to 115 between efforts, with the passing of weeks and months, will be drastically reduced. The time it takes for his hr to come back down to 115 in between efforts in the session, will consistently go up. That's the session doing it's job and making him fatigue.

If the steps are completed successfully, his one hour speed will go up massively. By the time he's doing 3 x 20's at 95% he'll be way ahead of where he was when he first started doing 5 by 5's.

Individualising the training is something I can't do because I am not a coach for one thing, and I am not his coach. Most training really is common sense.

a_n_t

if you can do 60 you can do 100. I'd look more at your food/liquid intake than anything else.

bobtbuilder

I'd look more at your food/liquid intake than anything else.

Are there any guidelines to follow for food intake?

I usually have an energy bar or gel every 45-60 mins.

a_n_t

probably but I make do with a bag of jelly babies, 2 bottles and a cafe stop!

Patrick1.0

bobtbuilder wrote:

I'd look more at your food/liquid intake than anything else.

Are there any guidelines to follow for food intake?

I usually have an energy bar or gel every 45-60 mins.

energy bar every 45-60 minutes is perfect. Drink all of your fluids in the first 80-5% of the ride. Any consumption after that point is pretty much too late.

mididoctors

a_n_t wrote:

if you can do 60 you can do 100. I'd look more at your food/liquid intake than anything else.

I agree...

basically you crack at 60 miles

take on more fluids and gels when you set off

have a cup of tea half way round..


other advice is aimed more at performance...

a midweek effort of some sort... perhaps dare i say a run twice midweek for 30-45mins would suffice

if injuries negate running a hour in the pool should be ok...

Mettan

bobtbuilder wrote:

After two years of frustrating injuries limiting my riding, I'm hoping to have an injury free 2009, and my main goal is to push the distance that I am able to ride up to 100 miles and above.

I am currently able to ride 60-65 miles before my legs turn to jelly and I have to drop down to the small ring to keep going on the flat!

During British Summer Time, I commute to work 3 times per week (57 mile round trip), and have one free day at weekends, where I usually get in a 60-65 mile ride.

Outside of BST I continue to ride once per weekend, but don't have access to a turbo.

If possible, I don't want to commute in the dark, as the roads are psycho-infested!

Any help on training, ride nutrition, etc. would be much appreciated.

From a different angle, one way of achieving it would be via an event like a Sportive or Charity ride (like the Manchester 100 miler) - with other riders around you and a definate purpose, it provides a large motivation to do the 100 miles - I found the first 70 miles quite quick and easy (its a flatish 100 (3000ft total)), and then from 70 - 85 miles (approx) quite "lifeless" and "empty" - in that period I just just stuffed 2 or 3 energy gels/and some jaffa cakes (probably too much) and plenty of fluids down me to get through that period - in the final 15 miles, I felt good again, no doubt down to getting closer to the finish and a general buzz amongst the riders. The Events themselves can definately provide a big motivation when you're going through your darker moments on the bike. [To give you an idea of my training at the time, I did this 100 on regular 30 - 35 mile (1000-1200 ft) HIT training rides]

andrewjoseph

The time it takes for his hr to come back down to 115 in between efforts in the session, will consistently go up. That's the session doing it's job and making him fatigue.

OK, so you're talking fatigue training.

thanks for that

dennisn

From the sound of it, you seem to be telling us that you're riding 65 miles at a pretty
good pace(you say big chainring). Hopefully you're NOT saying to yourself "well, I can ride 65 miles at such and such a speed therefore I should be able to work up to
100 miles at the same speed." Not trying to be a smart a*s, but I have heard people talk like this. 100 milers are a bit of work but are well within the abilities of most somewhat experienced riders. I would advise trying to take it a bit easier when you set out to try
one. Don't go out there and hammer till you drop. Ease up on the big gears and try to remember how far you have to go and that you are under no pressure to break any
kind of time limit or average speed. You just want to do it, then worry about how fast you do it on subsequent 100's. Once the first one is out of the way the rest come a bit easier.
A good idea is to eat(power bars, gels, bananas, whatever) at least every 25 miles. Riding a 100 without eating is not something that will go well. The word "bonk" comes to mind. Drink lots. Stop and get off the bike for a minute or two and replenish you water and food supply, then hit it again. It's not something that you have to do without stopping.
Good luck. You'll do it.
Dennis Noward

Patrick1.0

Sorry, I always look at performance rather than the enjoyment side of it. If you want to just go out and do a 100 miler for purely your own satisfaction, then the advice that others have put forward should see you through.

Can I just ask why you want to do a 100 mile ride? Is it just for satisfaction levels? As far as training is concerned, it's not really something you need to do. The best idea - from a performance point of view - is to train hard and smart and then do a sportive or similar event over 100 miles with other riders.

Hope it goes well for you.

bobtbuilder

Thanks everyone for all the advice!

Can I just ask why you want to do a 100 mile ride?

It's just a distance that appeals to me, and I enjpy long rides. I used to be able to achieve it 5-6 years ago, but 2 years of lack of time followed by 2 horrible years of injuries has pretty much sent me back to square one.

I'm not really concerned with my speed. I have no desire to race, as I have other sports that I play at competetive levels. I just love riding more than anything else!

I don't really focus on my speed when riding, I just like to ride at a hard but comfortable pace (not twiddling along). When I look at my ride info afterwards, my average speed is usually in the 18-20 mph range, depending on the route.

Bronzie

I agree with Dennis, I'm not sure interval training is the answer for you - it just sounds like you are riding too hard. Knock the average speed back a bit and see if you can break the 65 mile barrier that you are hitting at the minute.

Audax riders are a great example - very few ride at averages much over 16/17mph, but they can knock out 200km no problems.

bobtbuilder

Audax riders are a great example - very few ride at averages much over 16/17mph, but they can knock out 200km no problems.

I think that this is where I would like to get to in the long term.

polemann

bobtbuilder wrote:

Audax riders are a great example - very few ride at averages much over 16/17mph, but they can knock out 200km no problems.

I think that this is where I would like to get to in the long term.

To be honest - it almost sounds like its psychological. There seems to be no reason why it always around the same place -- ride a different route to force your self to get there. ie plan 65 miles 35 miles from home -- then you are screwed if you don't want to finish.

Your already doing a bunch of riding at a good rate -- commuting is generally not slow. In saying that if 100 miles is really your goal get a cheap HRM and learn to find a point where your heart rate makes you tired at 65 m and then ride below that

bobtbuilder

I don't think it's strictly psychological, but maybe subconciously I adjust my effort levels based upon the planned distance of the ride.

For example, towards the end of some rides it actually gets to the point where I struggle on even the 2-3% gradient on the road to my house.

I have a decent HRM, but don't tend to use it that much. I will start to wear it more often and monitor the results.

oldwelshman

I agree with most on here. If you can do 65 miles you should manage 100 quite quickly.
I certainly would not consider intervals and turbo training to be able to do 100 mile ride, what a bloody bore that would be, just go out and ride and enjy it.
Too many people read too much into training and methods, the fact of the matter is if you ride more, you will get fitter and faster irrespective of hr, power output etc. This methods just enhance training and make it more efficient, but bottom line is ride and you get fit.
PAtrick I have no idea where you get your hr or 115 for recovery, it is totally depnedent on individuals.
For example I have done some rides at 115 and averaged 20 mph. I would be ecstatic if that was recovery effort though. It is just that my rhr is 42, then when I ride decent club run pace it gets to about 110 to 120 and does not alter much even though effort changes.
The big difference is when I race road or track when it jumps to 155 to 170 (max)
Recovery pace for me is less than 100.
For the OP it could be 130 if he has high hr so to say 115 for everyone is incorrect.
Rule of thumb, recovery is gentle effort and able to hold conversation without being out of breath at all.

It is also individual for food and drink.
I have seen some riders in sportives stuff energy gels and bars down like clockwork every 30 minutes!!
Personally for a 100 mile sportive I would take two bottles and probably fill up once, and take 2 bananas (pick up another couple on route) and two gels for reserve.
As some said, some food and cafe stop is good for personal rides.
In races up to 60 miles I just takle two bottles and two bananas.

It also depends on your effort as you may need more if you try to do 100 miles quick
Diet in days up to ride are as important as on the ride.
If you do not eat well for two days before the ride you will get jelly legs.
If you eat balanced diet with something like a porridge breakfast with fruit and an energy drink over hour or so before ride, you have a good start.
Eat nothing and you may struggle.
It may be trail and error until right balance is found.

Patrick1.0

oldwelshman wrote:

I agree with most on here. If you can do 65 miles you should manage 100 quite quickly.
I certainly would not consider intervals and turbo training to be able to do 100 mile ride, what a bloody bore that would be, just go out and ride and enjy it.
Too many people read too much into training and methods, the fact of the matter is if you ride more, you will get fitter and faster irrespective of hr, power output etc. This methods just enhance training and make it more efficient, but bottom line is ride and you get fit.
PAtrick I have no idea where you get your hr or 115 for recovery, it is totally depnedent on individuals.
For example I have done some rides at 115 and averaged 20 mph. I would be ecstatic if that was recovery effort though. It is just that my rhr is 42, then when I ride decent club run pace it gets to about 110 to 120 and does not alter much even though effort changes.
The big difference is when I race road or track when it jumps to 155 to 170 (max)
Recovery pace for me is less than 100.
For the OP it could be 130 if he has high hr so to say 115 for everyone is incorrect.
Rule of thumb, recovery is gentle effort and able to hold conversation without being out of breath at all.

It's not a bore to do interval training on the turbo, where do you get this from? Have you done any? The fact is, you will not increase your power output by just riding lots of steady miles as much as you wil by training specifically with intervals and tempo rides. I just suggested the best way to be able to ride 100 miles comfortably, at whatever pace the op wants to. If he's genuinely struggling to do 65 miles - something you don't recognise - the only way to overcome it is by increasing one hour power and then when attempting 100 miles, to ride a comfortable percentage within that.

Given that not everybody has all day to go out and do 4/5 hour rides, the best way to use the time you have is efficiently. What's the problem with that? I don't spend all my time on a turbo, I go out and do three 80 odd mile training rides a week but I incorporate lots of climbing and do them at tempo. If you asked me to do a 120 mile ride tomorrow, I'd do it easily but it's not the best training and it's very heavy on time which not everybody, as lucky as myself and maybe yourself, has.

But yes, you're right about the 115 hr figure. i should have taken age and other determining factors into account. I just know that's the figure I use with a max hr of 200.

Infamous

Patrick, how will riding short-fast rides help him to ride long-slow rides ? surely all he needs to do is keep putting hours onto the bike, rather than raise his lactate threshold ? Not that intervals wont help, but he has already said he only rides 4 days a week in summer and 1 day a week in winter, it seems obvious to me that all he needs to do is ride more, especially in winter.

Also, doing intervals based on heart rate is flawed IMO what with cardiac drift and given the innacuracy of heart rate as a power measurement. Also, 115 ? apart from it being abitrary, that seems way too low to me.

Patrick1.0

Infamous wrote:

Patrick, how will riding short-fast rides help him to ride long-slow rides ? surely all he needs to do is keep putting hours onto the bike, rather than raise his lactate threshold ? Not that intervals wont help, but he has already said he only rides 4 days a week in summer and 1 day a week in winter, it seems obvious to me that all he needs to do is ride more, especially in winter.

Also, doing intervals based on heart rate is flawed IMO what with cardiac drift and given the innacuracy of heart rate as a power measurement. Also, 115 ? apart from it being abitrary, that seems way too low to me.

So you should do it with a stopwatch? Got it. Although, I'd like to see what basis you have for saying that 115 is too low for somebody with a max hr of 200. Would it surprise you if you knew that after the first five minute effort it takes less than half a minute for the 115 figure to be achieved? You would suggest a 15 second recovery spin instead? I think there'd be people falling off their turbos left, right and centre .

Read some articles on interval training. It'll show you why you do not need to go out for hours on your bike every day to get fit. Long, slow miles do practically nothing for you other than make you fatigued and unable to do any quality work during the week.

Infamous

Patrick1.0 wrote:

So you should do it with a stopwatch? Got it. Although, I'd like to see what basis you have for saying that 115 is too low for somebody with a max hr of 200. Would it surprise you if you knew that after the first five minute effort it takes less than half a minute for the 115 figure to be achieved? You would suggest a 15 second recovery spin instead? I think there'd be people falling off their turbos left, right and centre .

Yes you should do it on a stopwatch. Be it, 5 mins on, 5 mins off, or 20 seconds on, 4 minutes off (or whatever) Heartrate is much too innacurate, especially for the shorter intervals.

As for 115, lets assume someone's Max HR is 200, and their resting HR is 50, 115 would be about 43% of their working heart rate. I don't know about you, but I never go that low in any kind of bike ride, short of coasting a lot.

Patrick1.0 wrote:

Read some articles on interval training. It'll show you why you do not need to go out for hours on your bike every day to get fit. Long, slow miles do practically nothing for you other than make you fatigued and unable to do any quality work during the week.

He wants to increase the distance of his long slow rides, therefore doing more long slow rides will acheive this. Doing short fast rides will make him faster, but only marginally increase his long-slow endurance. Also, tempo rides would help him a lot more than intervals anyway imo.

To me, the answer to his original post is easy, just ride more.

mclarent

Can't be bothered to actually add anything to this debate, I'm bored of people who believe anything low intensity is "junk miles". I ain't a scientist, but I think this case is well argued:

http://meinnovations.com/Endurance.htm

"In summary, training for 2 or more hours at an intensity to carry on a conversation teaches the body to use fat as a primary energy source, preserving the less efficient, but higher energy producing anaerobic energy pathways for the next hill, sprint, bridge, or long breakaway. Applying that over a period of about 3 months results in development of a strong foundation on which to build strength and develop the anaerobic energy systems for optimum performance."

and this one...

http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/article/training-how-to-ride-long-16961

Patrick1.0

Infamous wrote:

Yes you should do it on a stopwatch. Be it, 5 mins on, 5 mins off, or 20 seconds on, 4 minutes off (or whatever) Heartrate is much too innacurate, especially for the shorter intervals.

As for 115, lets assume someone's Max HR is 200, and their resting HR is 50, 115 would be about 43% of their working heart rate. I don't know about you, but I never go that low in any kind of bike ride, short of coasting a lot.


He wants to increase the distance of his long slow rides, therefore doing more long slow rides will acheive this. Doing short fast rides will make him faster, but only marginally increase his long-slow endurance. Also, tempo rides would help him a lot more than intervals anyway imo.

I made it quite clear that tempo rides would be good.

Let's just say our opinions on hr as a recovery tool are completely different.

I use the 115 figure when on a turbo, therefore I can basically spin very slowly and I allow it to come back down to that level. As I get more tired, it takes more time to come back down to this meaning I adjust my recovery time by however many seconds it takes for me to be able to start each rep from the same place: 115 on my hr monitor. Tell me why it's better to do it with a stopwatch. Explain the science of that to me, is a stopwatch more connected to your body and better at judging recovery than your heart rate? No.

I would never use my stopwatch to judge recovery because it's not scientific at all, it's just more of the tradionalist approach that has no scientific base. Work this out for yourself, get your hr monitor out next time you do an interval session. Pick out a figure that is realistic - between say 115 and 125 - as your "ready to go point" and time how long it takes you hr to come back down to this point after every rep. I absolutely promise you that by the last effort, it will have taken you a lot longer to get back down to the recovery point, a level at which you can talk again and don't feel like you're reaching for air. It's not too difficult to work out your own "zone" in this way and it's a damn sight more scientific than 4 minutes on 4 minutes off which means what exactly? Setting a figure like that is wrong for the simple reason it might be too much recovery time after the first rep, it might be about right halfway through the session and it might be not enough time at the end of the session.

Infamous

Surely a big part of intervals is the fact that you don't recover fully after every interval. As well as riding hard for x minutes, you are trying to train your body to recover in the short period of time between sets, you don't want to fully recover after every interval. Otherwise, we would do intervals in our long rides, have 5 mins on, 30 mins off etc.

The aim is to keep the heart rate up, no ?

fuzzynavel

Infamous wrote:

Surely a big part of intervals is the fact that you don't recover fully after every interval. As well as riding hard for x minutes, you are trying to train your body to recover in the short period of time between sets, you don't want to fully recover after every interval. Otherwise, we would do intervals in our long rides, have 5 mins on, 30 mins off etc.

The aim is to keep the heart rate up, no ?

I would agree, Intervals are supposed to stress the body and help you (your body) learn to deal effectively with lactate buildup caused by stressful efforts. I am not sure that they have much use in long rides. The only way that intervals would have any use is in racing where you need to deal with changes in pace quickly and chasing down break aways.