why the training?

poynedexter

there is a lot of talk on here about scientific training, watts/kg, intervals, strava times and a whole other manor of things involving numbers.

my question would be, why are you doing this "training". its not a dig or snub, just a query about what you want to achieve. is it for racing? sportives? because you like seeing data of improvement? fun? does data help you or motivate you to keep at it? (just to get an idea of who does this for what reason)!

i only ask this because i know if i personally tried this method using data, i would quickly become governed by numbers and lose the essense of why i started riding push bikes, and that was fun! i enjoy pushing myself on the bike a lot but also cruising with chums that keeps it fresh. if i feel i'm working well thats as much as i need to know.

btw, i'm training for some 2013 racing, but riding my bike with a few friends and our shiny toys

StillGoing

So how do you know you're improving or what works for you if you aren't using numbers to measure? I can't believe you're considering racing next year without knowing if you're going to have to reserve a season ticket on the broom wagon.

amaferanga

If you're training to race by just riding around with your mates then I predict your first race will be a short one

slunker

Just my tuppence worth.

My club mate trains with power cranks meters HR and all other sort of gubbins. I train on feel.....sometimes hard sometimes out for a jolly and I'm afraid I get much better results in races and TT's than him. we started out at the same time but I seem to have progressed more.

I think all this data and equipment is a bit gimmicky and sold to people as guaranteeing they will get quicker. Of course if you have a coach analysing your data and tweaking your training it will help but I reckon this is only if your a 1st cat and above rider. I'm a 2nd cat at the moment but don't want governed by numbers and then not enjoying going out on my bike. I like to look at the scenery not a digital read out.

Just my perspective.......

ShutUpLegs

poynedexter wrote:

there is a lot of talk on here about scientific training, watts/kg, intervals, strava times and a whole other manor of things involving numbers.

I've not seen any threads on here discussing Strava :?:

amaferanga

slunker wrote:

Just my tuppence worth.

My club mate trains with power cranks meters HR and all other sort of gubbins. I train on feel.....sometimes hard sometimes out for a jolly and I'm afraid I get much better results in races and TT's than him. we started out at the same time but I seem to have progressed more.

I think all this data and equipment is a bit gimmicky and sold to people as guaranteeing they will get quicker. Of course if you have a coach analysing your data and tweaking your training it will help but I reckon this is only if your a 1st cat and above rider. I'm a 2nd cat at the moment but don't want governed by numbers and then not enjoying going out on my bike. I like to look at the scenery not a digital read out.

Just my perspective.......

Could it be that you are just better than your mate? So no matter how he trains he might never be as good as you?

As for your comment regarding guarantees of getting quicker - do you really think that's what people that train with power meters or other gadgets think? Do you think we're all just idiots that think if we spend a few hundred quid on a gadget then we will get quicker? One thing is for sure though - they're more likely to lead to improvement than that set of £2000 wheels or £3000 bike.

Power meters, HR monitors, etc. are aids to training. If you buy them and just ride the same as before then they'll make chuff all difference, but if you use them intelligently then they can help you get the most out of your training.

And if you're out for a ride and looking around and enjoying the scenery then you're not training whether you have a gadget or not. Nothing wrong with that if that's what you want to do. Similarly, just because you train with power or whatever, doesn't mean you can't just go for a nice bike ride just for enjoyment sometimes.

ric/rstsport

slunker wrote:

Just my tuppence worth.

My club mate trains with power cranks meters HR and all other sort of gubbins. I train on feel.....sometimes hard sometimes out for a jolly and I'm afraid I get much better results in races and TT's than him. we started out at the same time but I seem to have progressed more.

I think all this data and equipment is a bit gimmicky and sold to people as guaranteeing they will get quicker. Of course if you have a coach analysing your data and tweaking your training it will help but I reckon this is only if your a 1st cat and above rider. I'm a 2nd cat at the moment but don't want governed by numbers and then not enjoying going out on my bike. I like to look at the scenery not a digital read out.

Just my perspective.......

as a coach, who is interested in data, i've never said that an athlete can't look at the scenery. i think it's crucial (looking around). if you're just staring at your power meter display you're doing something very wrong.

ric

poynedexter

i'm not saying that data cannot be helpful, and i have done some racing this year and its very hard work. but i dont need data targets to know ehen i'm working hard and effectively. it just feels right. i just question the "overuse" of numbers as if they reflect what cycling is about.

in order to progress your fitness, its more about working through mental and physical barriers, rather than achieving data goals.

i just get a little lost with all this data related training, especially when most replies to "how to ride faster" threads seem to be, ride your bike longer, faster, rest, repeat. simple. (oh and lose body fat!)

StillGoing

So to train for endurance (100 miles plus) you'd just go head down and go would you? Zonal training as one example has long been advocated as a beneficial technique to improve performance. How do you know you're in that zone without using some form of measuring? Just blasting around with your HR at peak for long periods might benefit you anaerobic ally (there are reports that max HR should be done only for short periods to avoid damage) but won't in other areas. How do you know what works best for you if you aren't comparing results?

danowat

I race, if I didn't race, I wouldn't cycle.

Alex_Simmons/RST

poynedexter wrote:

there is a lot of talk on here about scientific training, watts/kg, intervals, strava times and a whole other manor of things involving numbers.

my question would be, why are you doing this "training". its not a dig or snub, just a query about what you want to achieve. is it for racing? sportives? because you like seeing data of improvement? fun? does data help you or motivate you to keep at it? (just to get an idea of who does this for what reason)!

There is a difference between "exercising" and "training". You exercise for general health and well being, and for enjoyment. Training is for when you have a specific performance improvement objective and so ride accordingly. Naturally you can also have the benefits of exercise from training.

poynedexter wrote:

i only ask this because i know if i personally tried this method using data, i would quickly become governed by numbers and lose the essense of why i started riding push bikes, and that was fun! i enjoy pushing myself on the bike a lot but also cruising with chums that keeps it fresh. if i feel i'm working well thats as much as i need to know.

Training by data doesn't get you very far. Indeed it can be mentally counter-productive as you have described.

You need to learn to train with the data. Once you understand that, then the paradigm shift takes you into a new realm.

Alex_Simmons/RST

poynedexter wrote:

i just get a little lost with all this data related training, especially when most replies to "how to ride faster" threads seem to be, ride your bike longer, faster, rest, repeat. simple. (oh and lose body fat!)

If someone comes here and asks about how to improve, and it's clear that the amount of training (exercising) they do is pretty modest, then yes, that's reasonable general advice, although some ways to go about that challenge are better than others, and it will work in most cases, but perhaps not be as effective as it might be.

However such advice falls down once you reach a certain level of performance, and a lot more thought needs to go into how to take the next steps up the performance ladder.

okgo

Train for racing. Use power to help.

I got to the stage I'm at now without really using power or HR, but going forward its useful stuff to have.

ut_och_cykla

Train (sort of) to stay fit, manage weight a little , be able to cycle all day with my grown up kids now and again, visit some stupendous places by bike, enjoy the countryside, meet like minded people, etc etc. I'll never win a race but I don't mind -

Tom Dean

philthy3 wrote:

Just blasting around with your HR at peak for long periods

This (whatever it means)is the alternative to training with a power meter is it? You can and should apply the same principles to your training however you choose to measure what you are doing.

poynedexter

i reckon the use of data, depends largely on what level you are at. personally, i've exercised/ trained for 20 + years but only in the last 12 months have i focused on cycling. the gains i've made in that time have been easy to see for me. when i race i see the gulf that i still need to cross and thats only at a local level. i really dont think i need to measure my efforts too much yet, just make the effort, rest and eat properly.

when i train i dont just go flat out with no thought, i mix different work rates in but do it by feel. numbers would only lead to frustration if they dont add up over the weeks.

what has brought me on recently has been racing, and its way harder than any training session i could do. its a very mentally tough deal and is about not giving up, holding the wheel when your legs say no. thats the bit which no data could push me to do. but its giving me the results i want.

maybe in 5 years when i'm going no better suddenly, i'd need to see why, but by that stage i'll have realised its no big deal anyway.

StillGoing

Tom Dean wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

Just blasting around with your HR at peak for long periods

This (whatever it means)is the alternative to training with a power meter is it? You can and should apply the same principles to your training however you choose to measure what you are doing.

I think you're misquoting me; I fully agree with the use of measuring performance whatever means a rider uses, but it has to be reliable. If you could guarantee what wattage you are putting out or what HR you're at just by feel, then fair enough, but I can't. I need to use something that allows me to verify what I'm doing. It doesn't mean watching it all ride long, it's a guide occasionally glanced at. That day's performance can then be compared against previous days to gauge whether improvements have been made.

Tom Dean

So who was suggesting training like that?

SBezza

danowat wrote:

I race, if I didn't race, I wouldn't cycle.

This sums it up for me, I want to race at a high level and to do that I need to train bloody hard. It isn't fun alot of the time, but the results I have achieved far outweigh the downsides.

I would ride a bike still, but it would only be back and forwards to work and the weekend club runs, I certainly wouldn't train as such. I use a powermeter so my coach and I can gauge performance increases, but I certainly don't live by numbers, I can train pretty much at the right level for the majority of the time without looking at the figures.

StillGoing

Tom Dean wrote:

So who was suggesting training like that?

The OP

.

poynedexter wrote:

i'm not saying that data cannot be helpful, and i have done some racing this year and its very hard work. but i dont need data targets to know ehen i'm working hard and effectively. it just feels right. i just question the "overuse" of numbers as if they reflect what cycling is about.

in order to progress your fitness, its more about working through mental and physical barriers, rather than achieving data goals.

i just get a little lost with all this data related training, especially when most replies to "how to ride faster" threads seem to be, ride your bike longer, faster, rest, repeat. simple. (oh and lose body fat!)

Tom Dean

Sorry, I didn't get that sense from the OP and his later post shows that's not what he is doing. You seemed to imply that 'zonal' training is only possible with a PM or HRM which is not the case. Your comments that 'blasting around' for long periods could only be of use anaerobically or that max HR could be reached for anything other than short periods confused me.

slunker

amaferanga wrote:

slunker wrote:

Just my tuppence worth.

My club mate trains with power cranks meters HR and all other sort of gubbins. I train on feel.....sometimes hard sometimes out for a jolly and I'm afraid I get much better results in races and TT's than him. we started out at the same time but I seem to have progressed more.

I think all this data and equipment is a bit gimmicky and sold to people as guaranteeing they will get quicker. Of course if you have a coach analysing your data and tweaking your training it will help but I reckon this is only if your a 1st cat and above rider. I'm a 2nd cat at the moment but don't want governed by numbers and then not enjoying going out on my bike. I like to look at the scenery not a digital read out.

Just my perspective.......

Could it be that you are just better than your mate? So no matter how he trains he might never be as good as you?

As for your comment regarding guarantees of getting quicker - do you really think that's what people that train with power meters or other gadgets think? Do you think we're all just idiots that think if we spend a few hundred quid on a gadget then we will get quicker? One thing is for sure though - they're more likely to lead to improvement than that set of £2000 wheels or £3000 bike.

Power meters, HR monitors, etc. are aids to training. If you buy them and just ride the same as before then they'll make chuff all difference, but if you use them intelligently then they can help you get the most out of your training.

And if you're out for a ride and looking around and enjoying the scenery then you're not training whether you have a gadget or not. Nothing wrong with that if that's what you want to do. Similarly, just because you train with power or whatever, doesn't mean you can't just go for a nice bike ride just for enjoyment sometimes.

And who says I have a 2k set of wheels and £3k bike??????

Just my perspective of seeing a few people throwing money at gadgets (including bikes and wheels) and expecting them to be faster. As for looking at the scenery it's about enjoying the bike as much as blowing out your arse very ride you go out on and then getting pissed off as you don't see any improvements.

Some folk are too serious about there riding. I train hard when I need to but also enjoy the social aspect of riding. People do get caught up on the 100gram lighter wheels will make you faster, using power taps will make you more powerful. I turn up to races and see this every week, but if they want to do this then batter in it's your money.

springtide9

Some people feel numbers distract them from their hobby. Other people find figures useful as feedback to their hard work.

A bit of a pointless discussion/argument when we all have very different personalities and are motivated in different ways. It's like arguing black is white.

I think it's a case of each to their own and people should get on with riding their bike how they want to ride, rather than listening to internet opinions on 'how they should be riding'

dw300

Because I want to get to a good standard in 8 years instead of 10 since I'm a late starter.

mmacavity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZZG-mux ... re=related

99thmonkey

I just ride each and everyday, sometimes hard, sometimes easy, Im always tired by the end of the ride / day and always ready to ride the next day (But I do ride tired) Im training for nothing other than to feel good and get stronger

ju5t1n

dw300 wrote:

Because I want to get to a good standard in 8 years instead of 10 since I'm a late starter.

Why 8 years? why not get to a good standard in three years, or one?

dw300

ju5t1n wrote:

dw300 wrote:

Because I want to get to a good standard in 8 years instead of 10 since I'm a late starter.

Why 8 years? why not get to a good standard in three years, or one?

Arbitrary numbers .. I figured it wasnt important and that people would get the point. But if you have a training regime that allows you to hit your peak in a year or even 3 you should be charging for it!

Pross

I'm still very much at the stage of just riding my bike, sometimes harder than others. I suspect this is why my time trial times are modest and I am a 4th cat roadie. However, I intend structuring my riding through the winter ready for next season (which to me takes it to the level of training). If I could afford a power meter I would have one as I believe it is the best way of monitoring a ride and assessing what level I should ride at for the various types of session I need to do in order to improve the different facets of cycling ability. I do not think that a power meter is a way of going faster and don't know anyone that gullible (or indeed any manufacturer that makes that claim). It is simply a tool that enables you to monitor your work level and progress and like all tools needs to be used correctly to be of use. As I can't afford a power meter I will be using an HRM and will accurately determine my zones in advance. I could use perceived effort but unfortunately my biggest weakness is, and always has been, the mental side of riding which results in me convincing myself I am making a greater effort than I actually am.

If you are able to accurately gauge your effort then don't bother with 'gadgets' and you should get on fine. However, riding without any structure is unlikely to enable you to reach your potential. Again, you may just be happy to ride around enjoying cycling for cycling's sake - there's nothing wrong with that and I suspect the vast majority of Bike Radar posters are the same but as this is the training section it is generally inhabited by those who want to push themselves to improve their performance. For me, making use of the excellent advice given on here and using a tool to ensure I do things properly will hopefully enable me to hit the goals I'll be setting myself next season.

As for Strava, well that's just a genuine gimmick but it can add a bit of fun to a ride and get you to push a bit harder or try out new routes. It won't help you improve your cycling but can spice it up a bit.

okgo

Riding my bike sometimes harder than other times and sometimes for longer than other times is to this day all I've ever done. I've still not done an interval set, or anything like that, I use power so I can understand when something is a total waste of time, but it still doesn't stop me doing those rides

It really does depend on how much you want it, and how much time you're willing to put into cycling I think, a chap I know who has just got to elite has done so without a power meter, and pretty sure I've never heard him mention intervals, just rides his bike, hard, and sometimes easy, and races a lot.

I do like the techy side of things, and am interested in it, but thus far I've not let it rule my cycling, I do that on feel. But I think many people over complicate things, and I'd say its possible for most people to get to 2nd cat without really taking things too seriously.

Herbsman

I'm sure training with power ensures no wasted training, and completely efficient use of your limited time. But the day I start measuring and analysing instead of just going out and riding is the day I stop cycling just for the fun of it.