Nutrition whilst on long rides?

13

Comments

  • Trev The Rev
    Trev The Rev Posts: 1,040
    Well said.

    I would add that sports drinks, gels, & bars are worse than sugar as they also contain additives and flavourings which have no performance benefit.

    If you really do need an 'energy drink' for longer rides there is nothing better than water, sugar & salt, this is Dr Coggan's opinion who did a lot of the research often quoted.
  • marz
    marz Posts: 130
    Herbsman wrote:
    Even professional riders don't rely on sports products when racing nearly every day for three weeks. Why would an amateur rider doing a sportive on one day need to?

    .

    And yet they do rely heavily on sports products...
    An example from one team...

    6 Clif Bars (Nectar, Mojo, Z bar)
    5 Clif Gels
    4 Clif Bloks
    2 cans Clif Quench electrolyte
    0.5 can Clif recovery
    2 Clif Builders protein bars
    2 sachets apple cider recovery (hot tea)
    1 sachet hot chocolate recovery for chocolate fix!!!
    7 home-made basmati rice cakes
    4 fruit jellies

    And a picture from another...

    tdf07st0Xbc-contents.jpg

    And while yes, the fat in our body does contain plenty of energy to ride a 100 miles, a fit cyclist can burn available carbs faster than their body can convert fat to carb. And in fact the faster a ride goes, the more effort used the less the body uses fat and the more it uses carbs.
  • Trev The Rev
    Trev The Rev Posts: 1,040
    marz wrote:
    Herbsman wrote:
    Even professional riders don't rely on sports products when racing nearly every day for three weeks. Why would an amateur rider doing a sportive on one day need to?

    .

    And yet they do rely heavily on sports products...
    An example from one team...

    6 Clif Bars (Nectar, Mojo, Z bar)
    5 Clif Gels
    4 Clif Bloks
    2 cans Clif Quench electrolyte
    0.5 can Clif recovery
    2 Clif Builders protein bars
    2 sachets apple cider recovery (hot tea)
    1 sachet hot chocolate recovery for chocolate fix!!!
    7 home-made basmati rice cakes
    4 fruit jellies

    And a picture from another...

    tdf07st0Xbc-contents.jpg

    And while yes, the fat in our body does contain plenty of energy to ride a 100 miles, a fit cyclist can burn available carbs faster than their body can convert fat to carb. And in fact the faster a ride goes, the more effort used the less the body uses fat and the more it uses carbs.

    And how much is the team paid by the sponsors / manufacturers to say they use these products. The riders have been brought up consuming these types of products and are given them by the team, that does not mean what they are using is the best food available, even if they do really use them.

    Note the home made basmati rice cakes - the rest is no more than sugar & a bit of salt.

    There is not any good evidence that you benefit from anything other than water, sugar, and salt. Sucrose (common table sugar) is as good, if not better than, any other source of carbohydrate when used in a sports drink. The only possible advantage to maltodextrin is it isn't as sweet ounce for ounce as sugar, which some people may find more palatable. There are claims a mixture of sugar & fructose can be absorbed faster than sugar alone (Juekendrup). But then honey is a mixture of sugar and fructose. Odd how now he is head of Gatorade Sports Science Institute, there is no fructose in Gatorade. Mind you he was also part of the Rabobank team and wrote a book with Geert Lienders the doctor Sky got rid of recently. Wonder if Gatorade run a strict no dopers system like Sky? Jeukendrup works with Sky, has Brailsford asked him to sign anything?
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    marz wrote:
    And while yes, the fat in our body does contain plenty of energy to ride a 100 miles, a fit cyclist can burn available carbs faster than their body can convert fat to carb. And in fact the faster a ride goes, the more effort used the less the body uses fat and the more it uses carbs.

    This is true but for a 100 mile training ride, you can still do it on pure fat in the body if you wished, there is no need to actually take on food whilst riding* I utilise more fat at higher intensities because I am fit, and I have trained the body to do it, if you can train the body to spare glycogen and use fat at higher intensities why not do it. I burn about 700 calories per hour during an endurance ride, I can not get this from food alone not matter what food it is, the body just will not process it quick enough, so the majority comes from my stored fat.

    * the exceptions being, you might start getting hungry, you might be wise to take on food to help keep glycogen stores topped up (your body will always burn glycogen not matter what intensity, just the proportion of it changes), but it doesn't need to be specialist food. You may be doing back to back long training rides, and ideally you want to be consuming food during the ride so that you start the following day with better glycogen stores.

    Showing examples of pro food intake, yes for a multistage race they will take on sport products as well as normal food, but they aren't just doing a single 100 mile ride are they, they are racing, and need to get the calories in for the following days. If they just tried to replenish glycogen after the ride, they just wouldn't be able to eat enough to keep stocked up, hence they eat throughout the day, this is alot different to what an amatuer needs to do.
  • Trev The Rev
    Trev The Rev Posts: 1,040
    Not sure the body uses less fat the more effort just it uses more carbs in relation to fat the more the effort. You still burn more fat with more effort, you don't start burning less fat?
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    Trev The Rev wrote:
    Not sure the body uses less fat the more effort just it uses more carbs in relation to fat the more the effort. You still burn more fat with more effort, you don't start burning less fat?

    Yes that is true Trev, it is just the percentages of each substrate that changes, and this percentage can be manipulated by training the body, the fitter you are the higher the percentage of fat used at any intensity, as long as you don't keep shoving shedloads of sugar down your throat.
  • marz
    marz Posts: 130
    Trev The Rev wrote:
    Not sure the body uses less fat the more effort just it uses more carbs in relation to fat the more the effort. You still burn more fat with more effort, you don't start burning less fat?

    Dunno, it depends on the paper you read, but some research does seem to show that at the limits of effort (+90%), fat burning shut's down completely.
    Graph showing effort and % of CHO or Fat used.
    Fat-v.-CHO-burn.jpg

    from here ... http://mybloodybikeblog.com/lipid-power/
  • marz
    marz Posts: 130
    SBezza wrote:
    marz wrote:
    And while yes, the fat in our body does contain plenty of energy to ride a 100 miles, a fit cyclist can burn available carbs faster than their body can convert fat to carb. And in fact the faster a ride goes, the more effort used the less the body uses fat and the more it uses carbs.

    This is true but for a 100 mile training ride, you can still do it on pure fat in the body if you wished, there is no need to actually take on food whilst riding* I utilise more fat at higher intensities because I am fit, and I have trained the body to do it, if you can train the body to spare glycogen and use fat at higher intensities why not do it. I burn about 700 calories per hour during an endurance ride, I can not get this from food alone not matter what food it is, the body just will not process it quick enough, so the majority comes from my stored fat.

    * the exceptions being, you might start getting hungry, you might be wise to take on food to help keep glycogen stores topped up (your body will always burn glycogen not matter what intensity, just the proportion of it changes), but it doesn't need to be specialist food. You may be doing back to back long training rides, and ideally you want to be consuming food during the ride so that you start the following day with better glycogen stores.

    Showing examples of pro food intake, yes for a multistage race they will take on sport products as well as normal food, but they aren't just doing a single 100 mile ride are they, they are racing, and need to get the calories in for the following days. If they just tried to replenish glycogen after the ride, they just wouldn't be able to eat enough to keep stocked up, hence they eat throughout the day, this is alot different to what an amatuer needs to do.

    Agreed and I have ridden long rides on little more than a big breakfast, but at low to mid effort levels averaging less than 15mph. As my average speed has increased (+20mph/100mile) over the years I have both increased my calorie burn rate while at the same time improved my efficient use of body fat while riding, but I find it's still not enough and I need to take on calories as I ride otherwise I'm wasted well before the end of the ride.

    And while it would be great to pack and carry a decent cheese sandwich or malt loaf, these things are just to bulky to carry and don't do well in +100f rides in the sun. Hence power bars become a light weight and simple alternative to bulky real food.

    Interestingly enough from here ... http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=50 ...it seems even the pros are only able to produce 400 cals an hour from fat. And if my burn rate is +1200cal an hour, my body can only produce 200 cals an hour, then I'm done in about 2 hours. Which from experience is about my no food limit.
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    You ain't going to be riding at 90% (of VO2Max) for 5-6 hours though are you ;) Graph doesn't show you much really, it is a bit basic. Fat is likely to be used for any aerobic intensity in all honesty, once you start getting anaerobic, then yes fat is not used, but anything over 60 secs is likely to use fat still. An unfit person would burn alot less at higher intensities, but a rider who is fit and has trained their body to use fat effeciantly as a fuel, will be burning fat a fair amount even at the higher intensities.

    It is this nugget that is important, you can train the body to adapt, but it means not shoving lots of sugary stuff down your throat in the mistaken belief that is will make you fast/better etc.
    In any given individual, 60% VO2 max might have them burning 95% glycogen, where another might burn 22% glycogen (or even the same person after some type of intervention).

    Don't forget the graph is for percentages as well, so although the percentage drops down, you could still be burning a good amount of fat (whilst aerobic)
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    marz wrote:
    Interestingly enough from here ... http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=50 ...it seems even the pros are only able to produce 400 cals an hour from fat. And if my burn rate is +1200cal an hour, my body can only produce 200 cals an hour, then I'm done in about 2 hours. Which from experience is about my no food limit.

    Well your burn rate will not be 1200+ per hour, not a cat in hells chance, unless you are a top pro rider of course. As for food, making your own natural falpjacks is easy, weigh no more than a energy bar, and can contain pure whole foods, and not mass produced crap.

    Again speed is not a measure to use, I do 100 miles at around 20 mph and normally just have water (or coconut milk and water), and a couple of flapjacks (homemade of course), this is enough food for me, isn't bulky and is convienient. This would be using about 700 calories per hour, so a 5 hour ride would be 3,500 calories, and the body has enough fuel stored for this expenditure. I have trained my body to use it's fat more than the stored glycogen. Rides under 3 hours I don't even eat food, and only have water as there is enough stored fuel in the body.

    Even with full glycogen stores and using 100% glycogen (as per my previous post, you are unlikely to be able to manage this for more than a couple of mins max), you have enough glycogen for about 2 hours (2,400 calories are stored roughly though this can be trained as well to a certain degree) of work. Truth is even at say higher L3 effort you will be using a fair amount of fat as well as glycogen and you should be able to last greather than 3 hours. The only thing stopping you would be fatigue as trying to do high level 3 effort for 3 hours is bloody hard work, especially if unfit.
  • chrisaonabike
    chrisaonabike Posts: 1,914
    marz wrote:
    Interestingly enough from here ... http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=50
    Yeah, like the author of that article has any relevant experience... ;)
    Is the gorilla tired yet?
  • marz
    marz Posts: 130
    SBezza wrote:
    marz wrote:
    Interestingly enough from here ... http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=50 ...it seems even the pros are only able to produce 400 cals an hour from fat. And if my burn rate is +1200cal an hour, my body can only produce 200 cals an hour, then I'm done in about 2 hours. Which from experience is about my no food limit.

    Well your burn rate will not be 1200+ per hour, not a cat in hells chance, unless you are a top pro rider of course. As for food, making your own natural falpjacks is easy, weigh no more than a energy bar, and can contain pure whole foods, and not mass produced crap.

    Really, I thought I was being conservative with +1200 cal per hour. Maybe I should have stuck with 1000 cal per hour, which is what I normally use for working out how much food I need to carry.

    I know online calorie calcs are not accurate, but you tell me, for a 6'5" man weighing 16.5stone averaging 20mph. What's my calorie burn rate?

    You make flapjacks, I buy clif bars; sugar/syrup/oats/fruit in both, pretty similar. You carry two flapjacks (~600 cals) I carry 4 clif bars (~1000 cals), I'm guessing I weigh more than you and so it looks like we both have similar energy requirements over 100 miles. Additional food to add to the slow oxidation of calories from stored fat.

    I failing to see the issue you have with energy bars.
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    marz wrote:
    Really, I thought I was being conservative with +1200 cal per hour. Maybe I should have stuck with 1000 cal per hour, which is what I normally use for working out how much food I need to carry.

    I know online calorie calcs are not accurate, but you tell me, for a 6'5" man weighing 16.5stone averaging 20mph. What's my calorie burn rate?

    You make flapjacks, I buy clif bars; sugar/syrup/oats/fruit in both, pretty similar. You carry two flapjacks (~600 cals) I carry 4 clif bars (~1000 cals), I'm guessing I weigh more than you and so it looks like we both have similar energy requirements over 100 miles. Additional food to add to the slow oxidation of calories from stored fat.

    I failing to see the issue you have with energy bars.

    Your burn rate will depend on what power you put out, it is hard to estimate from weight and speed alone unfortuantely, like I say speed is not a good measure of intensity, I could be go at 25mph+ with very little power with a tailwind, and hence use very little energy accordingly. Even 1000 per hour might be an overstatement, though it would depend on terrain etc, then again given your weight I would expect you to use more energy than myself, as I would expect you to be able to put out more power.

    I don't use sugar and syrup in my flapjacks, I use honey and everything else are wholefoods, not sugar and flavourings as used in energy bars, also mine will contain no artifical stuff, or trans fats (coconut oil or butter will go in mine), see the difference. The difference is mine will contain a high proportion of fat and protein in comparison to the carbs, and the only sugary carbs is honey and normally dried apricots.

    I wasn't particulary talking about your choices, and to be honest they seem very sensible, it was more about the people about having pockets stuffed with energy gels, shot blocks, energy drinks etc, that is just overkill and truely is not needed unless perhaps you are racing where eating food is near on impossible due to the intensity.
  • Trev The Rev
    Trev The Rev Posts: 1,040
    Additives in energy bars & price - along with the packaging which is fiddly to open and the nasty colour scheme and graphics of the packaging added to the awful taste.

    I fail to see the issue you have with real food.
  • marz
    marz Posts: 130
    Trev The Rev wrote:
    Additives in energy bars & price - along with the packaging which is fiddly to open and the nasty colour scheme and graphics of the packaging added to the awful taste.

    I fail to see the issue you have with real food.

    I don't really* have an issue with real food for fueling longer rides, I just choose to buy energy bars 'cos I can't be arsed to prepare my own food.

    *(except most real food is inedible after a few hours in the hot Texas sun)
  • GBY73
    GBY73 Posts: 20
    SBezza,

    Did you ever train on empty, ie. fasted, on endurance rides in order to train your body to burn fat more efficiently?



    SBezza wrote:
    marz wrote:
    Interestingly enough from here ... http://www.53x12.com/do/show?page=article&id=50 ...it seems even the pros are only able to produce 400 cals an hour from fat. And if my burn rate is +1200cal an hour, my body can only produce 200 cals an hour, then I'm done in about 2 hours. Which from experience is about my no food limit.

    Well your burn rate will not be 1200+ per hour, not a cat in hells chance, unless you are a top pro rider of course. As for food, making your own natural falpjacks is easy, weigh no more than a energy bar, and can contain pure whole foods, and not mass produced crap.

    Again speed is not a measure to use, I do 100 miles at around 20 mph and normally just have water (or coconut milk and water), and a couple of flapjacks (homemade of course), this is enough food for me, isn't bulky and is convienient. This would be using about 700 calories per hour, so a 5 hour ride would be 3,500 calories, and the body has enough fuel stored for this expenditure. I have trained my body to use it's fat more than the stored glycogen. Rides under 3 hours I don't even eat food, and only have water as there is enough stored fuel in the body.

    Even with full glycogen stores and using 100% glycogen (as per my previous post, you are unlikely to be able to manage this for more than a couple of mins max), you have enough glycogen for about 2 hours (2,400 calories are stored roughly though this can be trained as well to a certain degree) of work. Truth is even at say higher L3 effort you will be using a fair amount of fat as well as glycogen and you should be able to last greather than 3 hours. The only thing stopping you would be fatigue as trying to do high level 3 effort for 3 hours is bloody hard work, especially if unfit.
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    GBY73 wrote:
    SBezza,

    Did you ever train on empty, ie. fasted, on endurance rides in order to train your body to burn fat more efficiently?

    Yes I do, not so much on endurance rides as mine are generally 5 hours+, so I make sure I have eaten before doing them, but I do ride to work most mornings before breakfast, and if I train 2 times in one day, the early morning session will be before breakfast.

    You body will naturally burn more fat in everyday life if you minimise the amount of sugar going into the body, this would translate to burning more fat whilst training. Simple thing is, if you keep on eating lots of sugar the body has no need to burn fat efficiently it will use the sugars. This may not be the best thing for the body however, especially when racing, as you can't possibly eat enough food/gels/drinks to fuel the hourly burn rate whilst racing, so you need the body to be able to burn fat as efficiently as possible.

    Getting the body to burn fat efficiently isn't just about training, it is mainly about everyday nutrition. I do not eat like an typical endurance athlete, yet I have no issues with the ability to ride for long periods without bonking etc.
  • Trev The Rev
    Trev The Rev Posts: 1,040
    SBezza,

    Out of interest, do you know anything about the work Tim Noakes is doing on this? I read he is doing tests on cycling endurance and feeding etc but have not seen anything recently.

    I never have any problems on long rides and I hardly ever eat anything with sugar in it. This is due to a few incidents I had back in the 1980s where I almost fell asleep after eating sugary foods. Had tests done and it turned out I was glucose sensitive. The sugar causes a massive insulin overreaction and consequent fall in blood sugar which takes hours to go back to normal.

    Thanks

    Trev.
  • mmacavity
    mmacavity Posts: 781
    http://www.mensfitness.co.uk/exercise/s ... ggins.html
  • Herbsman
    Herbsman Posts: 2,029
    marz wrote:

    Really, I thought I was being conservative with +1200 cal per hour. Maybe I should have stuck with 1000 cal per hour
    Hmmm. During a 2 x20 session with a power meter, warming up for 10min from 150w to 200w, 20min at 275w (95%FTP), 5 min at 150w between the 20min intervals and 10min cool down from 200w to 100w the estimate is about 1000 calories. I don't think I could maintain that intensity for a 100 mile ride.... Are you some sort of powerhouse?
    CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!
  • okgo
    okgo Posts: 4,368
    He clearly is more of a powerhouse than you ;)

    I'd say 1k per hour was about on the money given what he has said. 250W AP for 4 hours see's me burn 1k per hour (as per powermeter)
    Blog on my first and now second season of proper riding/racing - www.firstseasonracing.com
  • Herbsman
    Herbsman Posts: 2,029
    Worth a read: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2235907/
    CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!
  • chrisaonabike
    chrisaonabike Posts: 1,914
    Herbsman wrote:
    ...the estimate is about 1000 calories.
    How does the powermeter (and its associated software, presumably) convert from integrating the power output over time to get total energy output, to estimating the energy consumed by the body?

    Is there some accepted percentage efficiency function?
    Is the gorilla tired yet?
  • marz
    marz Posts: 130
    Herbsman wrote:
    marz wrote:

    Really, I thought I was being conservative with +1200 cal per hour. Maybe I should have stuck with 1000 cal per hour
    Hmmm. During a 2 x20 session with a power meter, warming up for 10min from 150w to 200w, 20min at 275w (95%FTP), 5 min at 150w between the 20min intervals and 10min cool down from 200w to 100w the estimate is about 1000 calories. I don't think I could maintain that intensity for a 100 mile ride.... Are you some sort of powerhouse?

    I try and have averaged +200w over 100 miles, which sounds great, but my w/kg sucks due to my fast arse slowing me down. The plan this year is to maintain the power output while dropping a whole bunch of lard aiming for cat 1 in 2014.
  • okgo
    okgo Posts: 4,368
    Where are you getting those watt figures? At your size for you to go 20mph avg over rolling terrain you'd need more power than me (12.5 stone who needs about 250 to avg 20 mph and burns 1k cals per hour at that power) which is why I thought your figures might be about right but you certainly need much more than 200, and more than me too likely, nearer 300 for someone your size perhaps.
    Blog on my first and now second season of proper riding/racing - www.firstseasonracing.com
  • Herbsman
    Herbsman Posts: 2,029
    ChrisAOnABike wrote:
    Herbsman wrote:
    ...the estimate is about 1000 calories.
    How does the powermeter (and its associated software, presumably) convert from integrating the power output over time to get total energy output, to estimating the energy consumed by the body?

    Is there some accepted percentage efficiency function?
    Somewhere between 20 and 25%, so there could be 20-25% error.

    Stravas estimates assume about 23% metabolic efficiency if I remember correctly.

    Output 927kj on a turbo ride, this is approx 222kcal, and the estimate of calories used was 1033kcal.

    (222/1033)*100 = 21.49%
    CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!
  • Trev The Rev
    Trev The Rev Posts: 1,040
    How many calories per hour can we ingest through the stomach wall and actually use? We can stuff loads of calories in but I think there is a limit how many we can process per hour, 60 grams of a single carbohydrate - sugar or 90 grams with 2:1 mix of fructose and glucose. This is if Jeukendrup's research is correct. So taking the absolute maximum you can use, only 240 to 360 calories per hour get into your blood stream no matter how many gels, bars or sports drinks you stuff down your throat.
  • Herbsman
    Herbsman Posts: 2,029
    That's about 3 gels or 1-2 bars per hour. I'd be sick if I had that much.
    CAPTAIN BUCKFAST'S CYCLING TIPS - GUARANTEED TO WORK! 1 OUT OF 10 RACING CYCLISTS AGREE!
  • marz
    marz Posts: 130
    Trev The Rev wrote:
    How many calories per hour can we ingest through the stomach wall and actually use? We can stuff loads of calories in but I think there is a limit how many we can process per hour, 60 grams of a single carbohydrate - sugar or 90 grams with 2:1 mix of fructose and glucose. This is if Jeukendrup's research is correct. So taking the absolute maximum you can use, only 240 to 360 calories per hour get into your blood stream no matter how many gels, bars or sports drinks you stuff down your throat.

    Yep, sounds about right.

    For maybe a 5 hour ride, if I start out fueled with about 2000cals of stored energy, my effort produces a gross burn rate of 1000cals an hour, I'll eat a 200cal bar every 30 mins (400cal intake, but maybe only 350 absorbtion) and I guess my body is creating glucose from fat at about 300cals an hour. So my net calorie loss per hour is about 340cals.

    This seem to fit with how I feel after +5 hour rides, symptom of hypoglycemia as I'm probably down to 200-400cals of stored energy.

    I may be over eating at about 50cals an hour.

    I often think whether a cheap glucose meter would be interesting to buy to track levels before and after training.
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    marz wrote:
    I try and have averaged +200w over 100 miles, which sounds great, but my w/kg sucks due to my fast ars* slowing me down. The plan this year is to maintain the power output while dropping a whole bunch of lard aiming for cat 1 in 2014.

    200 watts is around 700 calories an hour no matter what you weight or where you ride. It just happens my 5 hour rides are done around this effort and this can equate to 20 mph average on occasions.

    Quite easy to do this on 500-600 calorie intake for the whole 5 hours, with the body supplying the rest in the form of fat, how do I know, I did it this weekend without too much hassle. Most of that calorie intake was from the fat in coconut milk as well.

Categories