Faster or Farther?

ahstueyman

Im fairly new to road riding, brief history when i was younger in mtb 4x and bmx but new when it comes to uphill struggles and going the distance.

My question to the knowledgable folk on here is: Should be focusing on going father, currently doing 17-30 mile routes, could probably up to 50 if i was wanting to really push myself....or carry on the sort of distances im doing but look to up my speed which at the moment I feel is relatively slow, doing the 17 mile ride in pretty much bang on an hour and doing 30 miles in just over 2 hours. I do live in hilly north devon if this adds any difference but essentially a completely flat route is pretty much impossible!

Thanks....

t.m.h.n.e.t

What do you want to do? Eternally condemn yourself to short routes hard or long routes steady?

It's not a matter of what you "should" be doing,more a matter of what you aim to do.

Pross

Mix it up or you'll become a rider who can either churn out slow, steady miles or can ride fast for short distances but lacks stamina. Slightly simplistic but you get good at the things you do regularly.

ahstueyman

I guess what im trying to ask ism whether or not there is a best way to go about things....i dont desire to condemn myself to either but essentially become the best rider I can. The thing that bugs me is that I still feel like i really should be going alot faster, should I focus on getting the speed up or accept that because im starting out its just a case of keep going and the speed will come in time. Also, is there much point in doing 50 mile rides if im only churning them out at and average or 13mph?

alihisgreat

longer rides build endurance, faster rides build speed. simple.


so you want to go faster for longer? then do both.

jim453

I think speed work and max effort interval training is far more beneficial to any type of riding (including endurance) than grinding out slow long rides (which i personally think just makes you a slow rider)

Quite useful really as it saves time.

Not that it isn't good to throw the odd long one in but don't worry about doing it all the time.

No doubt someone will be along shortly to tell me how wrong I am.

ahstueyman

To be honest jim453 that is exactly my train of thought....i was just curious if anyone cycling geeks and any facts to back up the theory etc

wardieboy

I'd go along with Jim, most of my training has been focusing on climbing and the odd turbo interval during the frosts. I've been averaging 14 mph on lumpy rides, I went out a couple of weeks back and for a change did a flat 60 miler and concentrated on speed, ended up getting round with a 17 mph average, it really hit my legs in a different way - pushing a bigger gear for a sustained period. I know it's not batshit fast but I was really chuffed. Completed the 71 mile VO2 sportive at the weekend which took in some big climbs and finished with a 15 mph average and finished in the gold category.

I'll certainly be looking to introduce more flat speed training sessions now.

sub55

jim453 wrote:

I think speed work and max effort interval training is far more beneficial to any type of riding (including endurance) than grinding out slow long rides (which i personally think just makes you a slow rider)

Quite useful really as it saves time.

Not that it isn't good to throw the odd long one in but don't worry about doing it all the time.

No doubt someone will be along shortly to tell me how wrong I am.

Why do peeps think long rids have to be slow and grinding. plenty of testers out their can do 100 mile tt`s in under 4 hours

as for the OP it all depends what the end goal is. But fundamentally the two go hand in hand. Though i would personally edge towards the distance aspect , as you need a decent base to build on. that's not to say there'd be easy mile`s

jim453

Presumably if the OP could bosh out 100 miles at an average of 25mph he wouldn't have been asking the original question. Did you have anything sensible to add?

ianbar

whatever you enjoy doing then do it. i personally havnt been aiming for a much faster pace but it happens naturally i find. i have been looking to build my distance and also hit more climbs, as a bigger chap i find climbs quite hard but i am getting there, plus hill are speed work in disguise

sub55

jim453 wrote:

Presumably if the OP could bosh out 100 miles at an average of 25mph he wouldn't have been asking the original question. Did you have anything sensible to add?

that paragraph so in response to your post and i will stand by it

cwm

been riding a couple of years now(3+) and have always gone for distance,plod plod and have found that i cant keep with my mates for most of the ride and still feel pretty fresh at the end but have always been scared to have a go just incase i blow up.
went out today to do a lumpy plodding 60m but got beaten by the wind after 5m so cut the ride short to a 26m and gave it a bash.
tried a couple of lumps and having a go on the flats on the route using a bigger gear instead of plodding in an easier gear and really suprised myself and enjoyed the effort.
think your question and subsequent replies have answered some of mine queries so will try to hit it harder and see how it goes.
thanks for that

Secteur

Again, I think it's personal preference and ultimately depends on what you want to get out of riding.

I always ride alone, and I dont plan to race so my targets are probably different to someone who wants to join the club run every Sunday.

As a consequence, I rarely do more than 25-30miles with my usual "lunchtime" route being 17.5miles (but all very hilly).

I used to just plod around and nothing changed, so recently I started experimenting with really attacking each and ever hill and do maximum effort intervals, with rests on the flatter bits inbetween, and after just 3 weeks I am already seeing my previous personal bests tumbling and my average speed and power rising. However, when I get back home I am totally exhausted - I pace my effort such that I get back with nothing much left in the tank.

I also have found a new "attack" acceleration which I didnt used to have when I would grind around all day. OK, I'm not fit enough to hold it yet for really long periods, but I'm not doing bad for a reformed couch-potato.

My aim, once I can really blast my shorter routes and my times continue to fall, and I get fitter & stronger, is to try getting back to longer 30-50 mile rides in the spring / summer, hopefully with ultimately the same speed & power as my shorter rides are now, thereby making me more of an all rounder.

Note - I am built more of a rouleur and that seems to suit my style, but to be honest, as much as I love cycling I get bored after 40 miles or so.

kentphil

No one has mentioned using a Heart rate monitor yet. This can be a very scientific way to to do quality rather than quantity when riding.

hope this helps:
http://www.bikeradar.com/fitness/articl ... ics-28838/

Pross

jim453 wrote:

I think speed work and max effort interval training is far more beneficial to any type of riding (including endurance) than grinding out slow long rides (which i personally think just makes you a slow rider)

Quite useful really as it saves time.

Not that it isn't good to throw the odd long one in but don't worry about doing it all the time.

No doubt someone will be along shortly to tell me how wrong I am.

Riding 60 miles as fast as you possibly can cover that distance is far different to grinding out a long, slow ride. OK, it might only be 15mph to start and will always be slower than you can average over 20 miles but if you are pushing yourself you will improve. Do you think top level riders only ever ride high intensity, short rides?

rick_chasey

Mix it up - therefore both will become easier.

Always mix it up. More fun, become a better all round rider, and they mutually benefit one another.

Roughly.

ShutUpLegs

sub55 wrote:

jim453 wrote:

Presumably if the OP could bosh out 100 miles at an average of 25mph he wouldn't have been asking the original question. Did you have anything sensible to add?

that paragraph so in response to your post and i will stand by it

Good advice Sub. Has Jim453 pulled his head out of his ar$e yet?

hulla the hulla

As per RC, miles, lots of them, up, down, flat, wet, windy, sunny, with people, without. All of this will make you better.

Roughly

nickel

Best thing I ever did was joining a club, I always used to go out on long slow hilly rides by myself. Riding my clubs faster saturday ride has made me get a lot better at riding fast over long distances.

RoadMeridaBen

jim453 wrote:

I think speed work and max effort interval training is far more beneficial to any type of riding (including endurance) than grinding out slow long rides (which i personally think just makes you a slow rider)

Quite useful really as it saves time.

Not that it isn't good to throw the odd long one in but don't worry about doing it all the time.

No doubt someone will be along shortly to tell me how wrong I am.

As sub55 said there is no reason why your distance rides have to be slow, my solo distance rides are done at an average of 18-19 but as others have said doing 1 hour rides isnt going to help you when you are doing 4 hour rides at a sustained effort.

As a Time Trialist last year was my first season and I mainly did 1 hour rides and maybe a 2 hour ride on a saturday but that was a rare thing, my 10-25 mile times were decent with a 21 minute 10 and a 53 minute 25. But riding a 50 was a different story and my average speed would drop dramatically because I havent trained to ride that distance at speed

Long story short the answer is to mix it up a bit, mix the long with the short aswell as the intensity

amaferanga

Why do so many people think long rides need to be slow? LSD should be Long STEADY Distance, not Slow. I've never ridden deliberately slowly in my life. Long rides for me are always at a pace that I know (or think) I can maintain for the planned distance.

So in line with most of the good advice on this thread, my advice to the OP is to do long STEADY rides and shorter, more intense rides. Intervals undoubtedly work, but are no substitute for doing longer rides.

ahstueyman

In reply to many on here....I dont think I ever said I was deliberately riding slow, I think many are missing the point of the original question, essentially I want to go as fast as possible over any distance, from a beginners point of view im asking should I be looking at doing easier 20 mile distances and really push it for time or should I be doing longer distances and just try as hard as possible to keep as strong a pace as possible. I dont want to focus on 20 mile rides and speed to then shoot myself in the foot because when i try to do a 50 miler I die after riding the first 20 too fast.

With regards to my aims im looking at doing 100 mile sportives so distance is very important, however my competetiveness makes me want to do it fast not just bimble round!

nathancom

ahstueyman wrote:

With regards to my aims im looking at doing 100 mile sportives so distance is very important, however my competetiveness makes me want to do it fast not just bimble round!

You need to be aiming to complete 100 miles in your training rides then. There is no benefit in being fast if your endurance is shot after 50 miles.

Work up to 100 miles and then keep doing long road sessions and your speed will increase as your endurance (ie ability to maintain the power output over time) increases.

No harm in mixing in some hillwork and some intervals to stop getting bored but you really do need to build up your endurance before anything else.

Pross

nathancom wrote:

ahstueyman wrote:

With regards to my aims im looking at doing 100 mile sportives so distance is very important, however my competetiveness makes me want to do it fast not just bimble round!

You need to be aiming to complete 100 miles in your training rides then.

Not necessarily. You can ride 60 or 70 miles in training at a higher intensity. Not many people throw in a marathon length training run in preparation for a marathon. I know very few cyclists who ride 100 miles in training and yet I know a lot who would easily complete a 100 mile sportive or race.

joshr96

Honestly just do what feels right for you.

Personally I am much better at short, fast rides, therefore I might be taking out 10 mile rides at a time, but I'm doing them as fast as I can.

Personal choice though

nathancom

Pross wrote:

nathancom wrote:

ahstueyman wrote:

With regards to my aims im looking at doing 100 mile sportives so distance is very important, however my competetiveness makes me want to do it fast not just bimble round!

You need to be aiming to complete 100 miles in your training rides then.

Not necessarily. You can ride 60 or 70 miles in training at a higher intensity. Not many people throw in a marathon length training run in preparation for a marathon. I know very few cyclists who ride 100 miles in training and yet I know a lot who would easily complete a 100 mile sportive or race.

Ok, you don't need to complete 100 miles in one ride before you attempt a sportive...but if you want to have developed a good level of endurance you should generally aim to be able to complete the distance of the event comfortably in training.

If you aim to hit 100 miles before you get to the event you are giving yourself the best chance of having a good time during the event.