what do you notice when fitter?
inaperfectworld
Posts: 219
i'm in my 50's and a commuting/touring cyclist. this summer i rode to get fit in order to go to the alps and had a wonderful week incl. alpe d'huez and galibier. i assumed cycling would be a revelation when i got home but i can't say things feel a lot different. i think perhaps hilly bits don't feel as hilly as they did, but in terms of breathing i don't feel less puffed. the week after returning i had a walking holiday with a friend in luxembourg who is not particularly fit and i found i got equally puffed on the steep climbs from the valleys.
i don't think my average speed has gone up markedly, but of course terrain and wind make it difficult to establish reliable figures. in fact i think the difference is that i can just keep on going for ages without getting tired and i feel to have a bit more push in the legs to use if i feel like it
is that really the difference then, just increasing stamina? presumably if you were training to go faster you'd need to exercise specifically to that end?
i don't think my average speed has gone up markedly, but of course terrain and wind make it difficult to establish reliable figures. in fact i think the difference is that i can just keep on going for ages without getting tired and i feel to have a bit more push in the legs to use if i feel like it
is that really the difference then, just increasing stamina? presumably if you were training to go faster you'd need to exercise specifically to that end?
0
Comments
-
ive found that cycling has had a tremendous effect on my running,when running i simply cannot replicate the same lung busting cardio vascular effort that cycling provides. Im a long distance plodder by the way. I commute 18/20miles a day...as fast as i can ,early 40's ..suprised you havent noticed a difference when walking.0
-
inaperfectworld wrote:i'm in my 50's and a commuting/touring cyclist. this summer i rode to get fit in order to go to the alps and had a wonderful week incl. alpe d'huez and galibier. i assumed cycling would be a revelation when i got home but i can't say things feel a lot different. i think perhaps hilly bits don't feel as hilly as they did, but in terms of breathing i don't feel less puffed. the week after returning i had a walking holiday with a friend in luxembourg who is not particularly fit and i found i got equally puffed on the steep climbs from the valleys.
i don't think my average speed has gone up markedly, but of course terrain and wind make it difficult to establish reliable figures. in fact i think the difference is that i can just keep on going for ages without getting tired and i feel to have a bit more push in the legs to use if i feel like it
is that really the difference then, just increasing stamina? presumably if you were training to go faster you'd need to exercise specifically to that end?
inaperfectworld, I have commented in another thread called "how can I increase my distance?" On how, if you want to go markedly faster, you have to have some high intensity training in your training schedule.
There is actually quite a big difference in feeling when you're super fit and when you're not fit at all but because it takes time for that fitness to build and lots of time again for it to gradually diminish, you do not get to weigh the two different states up against one another. The only super noticeable difference is your body. It's usually a lot more slim and defined than when you're not exercising.
Remember, it takes a few weeks for the body to supercompensate after you've overloaded. The effects of any training you do come through more than a week after doing it. Strange thing the body.0 -
inaperfectworld wrote:. i think perhaps hilly bits don't feel as hilly as they did, but in terms of breathing i don't feel less puffed. the week after returning i had a walking holiday with a friend in luxembourg who is not particularly fit and i found i got equally puffed on the steep climbs from the valleys.
i don't think my average speed has gone up markedly, but of course terrain and wind make it difficult to establish reliable figures. in fact i think the difference is that i can just keep on going for ages without getting tired and i feel to have a bit more push in the legs to use if i feel like it
is that really the difference then, just increasing stamina? presumably if you were training to go faster you'd need to exercise specifically to that end?
Virtually all of that sounds perfectly correct and as it should be - re. the Hiking though, if it gets steep enough and your walking quick enough, it'll still push your heart rate up hugely and probably tax your breathing (even for a fit-ish cyclist) - sounds perfectly normal to me. Regards Cycling, what you probably will find if you do a set route (at same speed/intensity) over and over, your heart rate will typically be lower at any particular point and you'll get less and less "out of breath" at any particular hilly point during the ride - and you'll recover quicker after any particular hilly bit - you'll probably even get to the point that many inclines/hills hardly touch your breathing at all (obviously depends on how hard you attack an incline/hill) - it's a weird feeling when you get to that stage - almost as if you can manage any hill and any ride with a certain "ease" (that's not to say you can do, of course, it just feels that way, because alot of inclines/small hills become much easier with training) - you're basically just getting substantially "fitter" (cycling-wise).0 -
Also worth remembering that cycling fitness is a lot about efficiency, particularly if you're a long distance, lower speed type.
That efficiency counts for nothing when you get to an unfamiliar exercise such as hill walking.0