14 weeks to the Marmotte; what can/should I focus on?
Comments
-
It's a shame that all this has got a bit toxic because there is some good advice on here.
I think that the whole pedalling thing, technique or not, is important and something that catches alot of people out. I'm talking about the relentless climbs where you have to grind away without ever getting a break and are forced to pedal full circles. I think Bahzob has talked about long constant efforts done on the flat. it's also linked to the idea that riding hills (in the UK) isn't always helpful because you get too many breaks (on the decents!).
I find doing long tempo efforts in a slightly too high gear so I have to concentrate on getting 'over the top' of the pedal stroke, replicates the effort on an alpine climb.
FWIW, I've done the Marmotte (and about 15 other french sportives) and I suffered like a dog. Went out too fast I think, but i always do that. Going to try and hold back in l'etape this year. Better to finish and enjoy a beer afterwards, than finish 500 places higher and have to fall straight into bed!0 -
barrybridges wrote:Thanks for your advice - it's been really helpful.
;;;;
I feel like I could comfortable (well, uncomfortably) complete the distance in itself, but haven't factored in the climbs yet. One area where I think I'm weak at the moment is in my general 'leg strength' if that makes sense. I can ride at a good pace for 50 - 60 miles but then the pace drops (and my HR goes up at the same effort) any further.
FWIW here is my advice. You can listen to it or the others here, choice is up to you.
1. Take the positives out of the past.
Not completing 2008 is in a way a good thing when you look at things now. You have a very real, achievable target for 2013, completing the course and feeling you have ridden well. You also have the experience of riding the event to learn from. This is not just a platitude, my very first event I finished fourth. Fourth from dead last. While not the best of results it did at least mean improving the next time out was something to aim for.
Notwithstanding the comments above the fact that you have completed several marathons is an indicator that you have the right mental approach and base endurance for an event like the Marmotte. Which is "harder" is largely a personal thing. I have done several Marmottes and many similar but never a marathon and don't fancy doing one either.
2. Get a bike fit if not already done so.
If your bike is not correctly set up then you will be wasting effort and riding will be much harder than it should be. This could be one reason why the base endurance that you have is not transferring from running to bike.
A good bike fit is the single best investment anyone can make if cycling. It needs to be "good" though and that should require a long 1-2 hour fitting including time on a turbo. If all they do is measure your inside leg go elsewhere.
3. Get more gears.
For your objective gearing is simple. You want as many low gears as it is possible to fit on your bike and you want them to be as closely spaced as possible. The best possible option would be a triple. Don't be ashamed of using one, it's my preferred choice. You want to get this fitted asap. Then you want to find hills of varying gradients and get used to associating a given %slope with a given gear. Cadence should be your guideline, use whatever gear you need to sustain a steady 60-70rpm. The steepest section on the whole Marmotte route is around 14% so try to find a slope of 15% or more, you should be able to ride up seated at 60rpm+ in your lowest gear. That way you know you have an escape gear for the event if needed.
4. Set up a test route and ride it regularly.
In a marathon you can choose your own pacing. To a large extent the same is true of most long rides in the UK. Events like the Marmotte, however, force a pacing strategy on you. You have to alternate long periods of hard effort with long periods of recovery. This can catch you out if your normal strategy is slow and steady all the way. Slow may just be too slow for the hard sections and leave you trailing.
As I said in a previous post the best way to train for this is have a couple of long routes that pretty much mirror the Marmotte route in terms of effort. If you go out and do a long ride then you should do one or other of these and make a very conscious effort to try to simulate the actual event when you ride them (e.g. something like 20 mins easyish then 90-120 mins medium NON STOP hard to simulate the start to the top of the Glandon, then 20 mins recovery (Glandon descent) 30 mins steady effort (base to Telegraph) 60 minutes non stop hard effort Telegraph climb).
5. Find your climbing zone.
The training you are doing now is very good and appropriate for the event. If you can bear to do long sessions on a turbo it is better than doing an outdoor ride as you can more exactly match the demands of the Marmotte. The "boring" climbing session you are doing on the turbo is great and I do exactly the same. The aim is to find a "tempo" zone that you can just dial into when you ride. I use a power meter so can easily do this but even without one its possible to look at things like perceived effort or HR. In fact despite using a power meter my most reliable indicator is how I breathe. My climbing zone for events I want to enjoy is just at the point when I am breathing hard in and out of the mouth without having to gasp for every lungful. I sync my pedalling with breathing and just establish a routine at the bottom that I keep to the top.
This zone is the one you want to find on your simulation rides. It will be less than the one you use during sessions like 2x20 but these are worth continuing with and doing as they will make the climbing zone feel easier and you will get faster/sustain it for longer by doing them.
6. Don't over recover.
If you are restricted to 4 days a week by other constraints then fine, you can train perfectly well on this schedule. However if you are only training because you have been told to "recover" you will get better through training more days a week. The harder you push your body the fitter you will get. While it is true that you need recovery time to build up and get the fitness gains from training this can be overstated 24 hours is enough for most amateurs. One reason pros are more powerful than us is simply they train more, 25+ hours a week at much higher relative intensity too. Following massive events like the tour de France, while they will be knackered by the end of it, after a few days recovery they will probably be fitter than when they started. One reason I ride well is that I really like training, so I will do it 6-7 days a week. I know there are some days I can't train so use these as recovery. Otherwise I will only skip a session if I feel like crap and miss a training target.
7. Don't do too may short climbs
Climbing mountains is quite different from climbing hills. I would advise against using short UK hills for Marmotte training as it can lead to bad habits, working over hard for a few minutes then having a nice recovery.
I am worried by you saying you "attack" the Chalkpit climb and cite the ADH. The very last thought you should have at the bottom of any of the Marmotte climbs is "attack", especially the Alpe. I spend the first couple of hundred metres of any climb taking things very easy, just making sure I am in the right gear and warming myself up (as you are often cold after a descent or food stop). Many folks do attack and it's a pretty fair bet they will be the first to be hauled in on the way up.
(FWIW my specific advice for the bottom of the Alpe is take things very easy up the steep section to hairpin 20. If you arrive there feeling OK you can get a huge mental boost from thinking the worst is over and pushing on. If on the other hand you arrive there having blown from overextending the next 11km will feel like a very long way)
When planning training routes if I can't avoid hills I will always aim to go up the easiest side and down the steepest so that I have to work as long as possible and have little recovery time.
There are 2 reasons I would schedule in short climbs
- For VO2 sessions. Hill repeats are great to really push yourself and build power above threshold, so long as you don't get confused and try to repeat this sort of effort during the event. The best way to do these however is simply ride hard up, turn round at the top, descend and repeat. Doing the occasional hill hard every now and then is not anyway near as good. These sessions are also great mental training. If you do them to exhaustion the way you feel on the last one should be way worse than at any point on the Marmotte. It can help during an event to think "well this is tough but I've suffered much worse".
- To test gearing as mentioned above.
8. Get the most value out of each and every training session
You will be spending a lot of time on a bike. Aim to maximise this time by having several goals for every session. Simply putting in the hours/miles is a massive wasted opportunity. Some things I do are
- Visualise: most every interval I think of as an actual event situation. E.g. a 2x20, the 20mins will be a 10mile TT, 5 min VO2 will be trying to escape and hold a lead from a chasing pack to a race finish.
- Feed/drink like the event: If doing long rides I will use a schedule to eat and drink a small amount at regular intervals so it becomes habit. It's easy to forget to do this in the excitement of an event itself.
- Work on technique. Notwithstanding the comments above it is just plain daft to assume that you are pedalling as perfectly as it is possible for any human to do. It's worth experimenting with things like rpm. A good drill while in a climbing zone is simply to keep the same effort while going through various gears so that you end up pedalling in a range something like 50-100+rpm. Another good thing to do during long climbing efforts is focus on various individual muscles and sense what they are doing. During a long effort some will tire and power will be lost as a result. The "dropping heel" of Nibali mentioned above is a classic case in point. I know it happens to me and simply by focussing on it I end up generating another 5-10W and feel less tired.
- Pain Management: Training should hurt. One thing to practice when doing it is managing the pain so you can repeat when in an event. That's another reason why focusing on technique is a good idea. I find that if one part of my body hurts simply concentrating on another helps manage the pain, while keeping power constant.
9. Check nutrition.
If you have done marathons then you should be used to fuelling for endurance events. However if you feel less strong after 50-60 miles then it may be a sign that you are not feeding right. Simple rule is aim to eat 1g-1.5g carb per kg per hour of riding.
10. Lose weight.
Events with lot of climbing punish the heavy. Every pound lost between now and the event will make it a bit easier.
11. Do a practice event
Enter some UK sportives. The main reasons for doing so are to get used to riding in big groups and the training benefit you will get. You can choose to pace with a view of the Marmotte in mind.
Specifically, getting dropped on the Glandon is a big mistake. You really want to be in a big group at the bottom of the following descent as there is a nasty valley drag to the bottom of the Telegraph. If you get stuck alone or in a small group you will suffer. If, on the other hand, you are in a big group you can coast along effortlessly while making sure you are fuelled up.
So your pacing should include a steady effort up the Glandon keeping in with the main bunch. So if you have a choice pick a sportive with some long steady climbs early on and aim to keep pace with a group on the climbs going ever to slightly too fast for you to feel comfortable with up these. This may well involve going over normal climbing zone, no matter so long as you are conscious of this. If it doesn't then great.
That's what I can think of now and probably more than enough. Good luckMartin S. Newbury RC0 -
inseine wrote:I think Bahzob has talked about long constant efforts done on the flat. it's also linked to the idea that riding hills (in the UK) isn't always helpful because you get too many breaks (on the decents!).
I find doing long tempo efforts in a slightly too high gear so I have to concentrate on getting 'over the top' of the pedal stroke, replicates the effort on an alpine climb.
FWIW, I've done the Marmotte (and about 15 other french sportives) and I suffered like a dog. Went out too fast I think, but i always do that. Going to try and hold back in l'etape this year. Better to finish and enjoy a beer afterwards, than finish 500 places higher and have to fall straight into bed!
No I am not talking about efforts done on the flat. I am specifically talking about climbing efforts, something I am quite sure I know more about than anyone else here, both in term of the quantity and quality of mountain climbs done.
Climbing exposes weaknesses in technique because errors you can get away on the flat hurt.
"Bad" pedalling is characterised by a spikey force profile over a revolution. This doesn't matter much on the flat because when you are not applying any force to the pedals your momentum keeps you going forward.
It does matter on a climb because as I pointed out earlier mountains are not flat.
So each time you stop applying force the bike loses momentum, the steeper the hill the worse this is. So your progress, if you pedal badly is not a constant speed. It is a series of accelerations and decelerations which is both inefficient and tiring. This is most obvious in those who over gear. You can actually see their pace changing as they painfully struggle up a hill at 40rpm or so, a burst of speed as they mash a pedal down then grinding to almost a complete stop before they grind the next one down.
As for having a beer at the finish, well I like a beer as much as the next man. I take the opposite view though, the quicker I go the quicker I can have a beer. And I can get a good place outside in a bar and watch others come home. Believe me if you have watched as many as I have its very very obvious who is pedalling well and who isn't and what a difference it makes.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
The Marmotte is an attritional event. Eventually, some part of your body will become the limiting factor in that you reach the point where irrespective of any other part of your body, you will just not be able to go faster. For me, it is my back. I can't get my heart rate over 145 on the Alpe as I couldn't pedal hard enough.
Thus, any "free" gains in terms of efficiency should not be casually discarded. All other things equal, a smooth pedalling action, which can be worked on during normal training efforts, will help as it reduces peak forces (delaying the point at which your weakest link fails) and excess upper body movements (which simply waste energy).
Relaxing on the descents is also worth considering. A white-knuckle ride may save you five minutes on the Glandon, but a more lesiurely descent will involve much less tension in the body, thus saving physical reserves for later.
Obviously, if the weak link is aerobic endurance or eating enough then such efficiencies won't solve the problem, but they won't hurt and involves very little effort/cost.
Re gearing, I've never heard anyone ever say their lowest gear was too low. Even a 34*28 at a cadence of 60-70 results in a fairly speedy rate of ascent, so there's no harm investigating lower gears.
Long turbo sessions are very good in the absence of alpine style climbs. Doing 60 minutes, resting for 30 and doing another 60 is a good session if you've got the time. If you can judge the effort in the first 60 to enable you to ride the second 60 comfortably at the same pace, then it helps massively with pace judgement on the Glandon.
Good luck to everyone Marmotting this year, however we are going to be pedalling and whatever our ratios!!0 -
bahzob wrote:No I am not talking about efforts done on the flat. I am specifically talking about climbing efforts, something I am quite sure I know more about than anyone else here, both in term of the quantity and quality of mountain climbs done.
There you go again - such breath-taking arrogance. You cannot possibly know that - and to assume it is a gigantic mis-calculation. Unless you're just trolling of course - in which case, carry on.0 -
twotyred wrote:I don't think anyone would dispute that form and technique begins to deteriorate when you tire. Surely on that basis, the obvious answer is to extend the point at which you begin to tire (by improving aerobic fitness and sustainable power), rather than work on some marginal 'pedalling technique' - which, on tired legs, will make very little difference anyway.
I know we've had our differences in the past but that's spot on.
The point is that you can improve your sustainable power by improving your pedalling technique. This is generally the case, it is even the more so when the power needs to be expended on a long climb since this exposes poor form.
I mentioned dropping the heel before and its a very clear example. It's a common fault and something that happens to me.
Think about it. If your heel drops due to fatigue during the downstroke it's acting as a shock absorber, and some of the force generated by the leg is not passed to the pedal. What's worse the power drops off very sharply at the bottom of a stroke, so more momentum is lost and consequently the drive phase of the next stroke needs to be greater than it need be to accelerate the bike again.
I ride with a power meter and it makes the results of all this crystal clear. On long climbs my concentration can go and one sign, like I said, is I let my heels drop. If I spot this, simply focussing on keeping them maintaining good form adds 5-10W and makes the climbing feel easier.
This is exactly how you actually go about "improving sustainable power".Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
Imposter wrote:bahzob wrote:No I am not talking about efforts done on the flat. I am specifically talking about climbing efforts, something I am quite sure I know more about than anyone else here, both in term of the quantity and quality of mountain climbs done.
There you go again - such breath-taking arrogance. You cannot possibly know that - and to assume it is a gigantic mis-calculation. Unless you're just trolling of course - in which case, carry on.
Sorry but I don't think it is a gigantic miscalculation. Nobody has posted anything to indicate otherwise, feel free to post your experience.
(Just for the record the last time I did the Marmotte I was in the top 200 fastest up the Glandon, top 250 up the Galibier and top 100 up the Alpe.)
As for arrogance, like I said initally I simply offered the OP advice on a subject I am very familiar with and got trolled.
Subsequently correcting these people and pointing out their lack of relevant qualifications isn't being arrogant in my book.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
Do you have any evidence for this?bahzob wrote:"Bad" pedalling is characterised by a spikey force profile over a revolution.
Do you have any evidence for this?bahzob wrote:The point is that you can improve your sustainable power by improving your pedalling technique.
p.s. 'think about it' doesn't count.0 -
bahzob wrote:Just for the record the last time I did the Marmotte I was in the top 200 fastest up the Glandon, top 250 up the Galibier and top 100 up the Alpe.
...
Subsequently correcting these people and pointing out their lack of relevant qualifications isn't being arrogant in my book.
Worth noting though that the best coaches in any discipline are frequently those who were relatively poor performers at their sport.
GB's rowing and cycling programmes are prime examples of this. Ironically, the most successful rider on the non-cycling GB roster for the last two Olympics has designed the bikes rather than done any coaching.0 -
bahzob wrote:twotyred wrote:
Riding out to the course doing the TT and then riding back home would be better.
That's why the French, who have real mountains in their country, have come up with the term "Souplesse" to describe how to climb.
The point here is that many amateur riders don't even have a clue where their heels are or should be in the first place.
You may think you know better than me and Bradley Wiggins.
I think you will find the term 'Souplesse' refers to a popular medieval French dish containing mainly soup and peas.
It doesn't matter where your heels are- everyone rides differently.
Give Bradley my best wishes when you see him next.0 -
thiscocks wrote:bahzob wrote:twotyred wrote:
Riding out to the course doing the TT and then riding back home would be better.
That's why the French, who have real mountains in their country, have come up with the term "Souplesse" to describe how to climb.
The point here is that many amateur riders don't even have a clue where their heels are or should be in the first place.
You may think you know better than me and Bradley Wiggins.
I think you will find the term 'Souplesse' refers to a popular medieval French dish containing mainly soup and peas.
It doesn't matter where your heels are- everyone rides differently.
Give Bradley my best wishes when you see him next.
http://www.velominati.com/tradition/look-pro-souplesse/
And it does matter where your heels are.
It's true that everyone rides differently though. For example you can spot a bad rider by the way their heels drop, especially when they start getting fatigued.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
bahzob wrote:Imposter wrote:bahzob wrote:No I am not talking about efforts done on the flat. I am specifically talking about climbing efforts, something I am quite sure I know more about than anyone else here, both in term of the quantity and quality of mountain climbs done.
There you go again - such breath-taking arrogance. You cannot possibly know that - and to assume it is a gigantic mis-calculation. Unless you're just trolling of course - in which case, carry on.
Sorry but I don't think it is a gigantic miscalculation. Nobody has posted anything to indicate otherwise, feel free to post your experience.
(Just for the record the last time I did the Marmotte I was in the top 200 fastest up the Glandon, top 250 up the Galibier and top 100 up the Alpe.)
As for arrogance, like I said initally I simply offered the OP advice on a subject I am very familiar with and got trolled.
Subsequently correcting these people and pointing out their lack of relevant qualifications isn't being arrogant in my book.
What exactly are your 'qualifications' then?? And don't say finishing in the top 200 in some event or other, because that is not relevant. That doesn't make you right. Evidence and proof of your claims makes you right - or al least it may give them some credibility. But I ain't seen any.
My focus is crits and road races, so your 'sportive awesomeness' means nothing to me. I don't believe my heel position has ever lost me a race. Who knows...0 -
Wallace and Gromit wrote:bahzob wrote:Just for the record the last time I did the Marmotte I was in the top 200 fastest up the Glandon, top 250 up the Galibier and top 100 up the Alpe.
...
Subsequently correcting these people and pointing out their lack of relevant qualifications isn't being arrogant in my book.
Worth noting though that the best coaches in any discipline are frequently those who were relatively poor performers at their sport.
GB's rowing and cycling programmes are prime examples of this. Ironically, the most successful rider on the non-cycling GB roster for the last two Olympics has designed the bikes rather than done any coaching.
Fair point. On that basis many of those posting here might want to consider a career in coaching.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
Imposter wrote:bahzob wrote:Imposter wrote:What exactly are your 'qualifications' then?? And don't say finishing in the top 200 in some event or other, because that is not relevant. That doesn't make you right. Evidence and proof of your claims makes you right. But I ain't seen any.
My focus is crits and road races, so your 'sportive awesomeness' means nothing to me.
Lol. Seriously? Look at the topic of this thread. My experience makes it very relevant to this topic while if yours is limited to crits and road races in countries without real mountains its pretty useless.
I won't tell you how to ride a crit race. But I will give constructive advice to those asking for it about part in events I have done and done well at.
Now go troll elsewhere.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
bahzob wrote:Lol. Seriously? Look at the topic of this thread. My experience makes it very relevant to this topic while if yours is limited to crits and road races in countries without real mountains its pretty useless.
I won't tell you how to ride a crit race. But I will give constructive advice to those asking for it about part in events I have done and done well at.
Now go troll elsewhere.bahzob wrote:The point is that you can improve your sustainable power by improving your pedalling technique.
Hold on there, tiger. You said pedal technique could improve my sustainable power, so I'm obviously interested, as that is something that transcends most performance-related cycle disciplines, regardless of whether they go uphill or not. So I'm wondering where the evidence is. I'm open minded, so let's see it....0 -
bahzob wrote:thiscocks wrote:bahzob wrote:twotyred wrote:
Riding out to the course doing the TT and then riding back home would be better.
That's why the French, who have real mountains in their country, have come up with the term "Souplesse" to describe how to climb.
The point here is that many amateur riders don't even have a clue where their heels are or should be in the first place.
You may think you know better than me and Bradley Wiggins.
I think you will find the term 'Souplesse' refers to a popular medieval French dish containing mainly soup and peas.
It doesn't matter where your heels are- everyone rides differently.
Give Bradley my best wishes when you see him next.
And it does matter where your heels are.
It's true that everyone rides differently though. For example you can spot a bad rider by the way their heels drop, especially when they start getting fatigued.
(oh no) It doesn't.
So anyone who rides flat footed is a bad rider?0 -
Fair do's, I'm sure your experience in these sort of events gives you some insight into their specific demands.
It does not mean you are automatically right, and that we should accept your word without question. I wonder if you genuinely believe this? You seem affronted that anyone would question what you have said.
It won't surprise anyone to see you trotting out this stuff yet again, I don't remember you being such a jerk about it before though?
The act of pedalling is not unique to the Marmotte.0 -
" Bradley Wiggins has said he looks at the pedalling style of his rivals to see if they are flagging. He specifically mentions that he knew Nibali was cooked when his heels started to drop."
"It's true that everyone rides differently though. For example you can spot a bad rider by the way their heels drop, especially when they start getting fatigued."
Does this mean Nibali is a bad rider since his heels drop as he fatigues !
The sad thing is that most of the advice given by bahzob is relevant and helpful, but boy can he/she make it difficult to focus on the good stuff.0 -
Here is an example of what I mean.
Stage 14 of last years tour featured the steepest section of the route. I know it well and its a bitch. It goes up for over 2 miles at an average of 12% with parts close to 20%. Further it's a ramp, going straight up along a very narrow road so you have no way to make the climb easier. Here's the profile, the hard bit is the last bit ofc.
http://www.climbbybike.com/fr/profil.asp?Climbprofile=Col-de-P%E9gu%E8re&MountainID=6316
By comparison it's not quite as steep as Hardknott but it is longer, climbs higher and has no hairpins where you can catch a quick respite.
Here is the TV coverage of the tour going up it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1dxx2jlFLg
Skip to 16 mins in. Sky are running the show at the front and putting out a steady "tempo".
Their "tempo" will be close to 400W/6 w/kg. Relative to how those tackling the Marmotte and similar this will be higher effort relative to maximum. (see e.g. here of actual power from one of those in following group
http://home.trainingpeaks.com/races/tour-de-france/2012/stage-14.aspx#.UVxLbzfkrgU
Look at how smooth and relaxed the lead group is pedalling.
I have ridden in many sportives and climbed many mountains. I have never seen any amateur rider look anything like this on a similar climb or even ones much much easer. This is despite the fact that they will be putting out less actual power as a proportion to their maximum.
The only time most come close is when they are pootling along at a comfy pace.
Now what is arrogant?
- The opinion that there may be a case for folk who are not as good as those here looking at how they ride their bikes and learning.
- Or the view that you are already riding perfectly and these guys can teach you nothing.
Ofc my opinion is pretty clear. It's the former and has resulted in me improving my sustainable power which has resulted in me climbing even better. I still recognise I have stuff to learn though and would not claim to be as good as they guys here.
If you are of the latter then please, post a video of you doing a climb like this at similar effort. I have an open mind, if it can teach me anything I'll be happy to learn.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
Mccaria wrote:" Bradley Wiggins has said he looks at the pedalling style of his rivals to see if they are flagging. He specifically mentions that he knew Nibali was cooked when his heels started to drop."
"It's true that everyone rides differently though. For example you can spot a bad rider by the way their heels drop, especially when they start getting fatigued."
Does this mean Nibali is a bad rider since his heels drop as he fatigues !
The sad thing is that most of the advice given by bahzob is relevant and helpful, but boy can he/she make it difficult to focus on the good stuff.
No ofc Nibali isn't a bad rider because he let's his heels drop as he fatigues. But he will realise its a fault.
On the other hand if you really don't know or care what your heels then you don't really know if you are a bad rider or not.
The reason I bang on about this is three fold:
- I simply cannot understand the logic of the alternative which is that everyone everywhere pedals their bike perfectly and has absolutely nothing to learn on that score.
- There is no downside to working on your technique. You simply integrate into your normal workouts.
- I have improved the way I pedalled and it has resulted in a significant improvement in my sustainable power (and it was pretty good before).
I really don't care about those with closed minds who post here. But it pisses me off that I spent so many years training without thinking about technique due to them and people like them.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/bl ... t-is-best/
Read this a while back. It's interesting as a perspective on pedal technique.0 -
The pros are 'good'. Some of them look smooth.
Still no evidence that looking smooth=good.
How did you establish cause and effect here?bahzob wrote:- I have improved the way I pedalled and it has resulted in a significant improvement in my sustainable power (and it was pretty good before).
If you can do so (and I have given you this free advice before), get in touch with the makers of the next gen of power meters that can measure this. They will want to give you lots of money for the information.0 -
bahzob wrote:Mccaria wrote:" Bradley Wiggins has said he looks at the pedalling style of his rivals to see if they are flagging. He specifically mentions that he knew Nibali was cooked when his heels started to drop."
"It's true that everyone rides differently though. For example you can spot a bad rider by the way their heels drop, especially when they start getting fatigued."
Does this mean Nibali is a bad rider since his heels drop as he fatigues !
The sad thing is that most of the advice given by bahzob is relevant and helpful, but boy can he/she make it difficult to focus on the good stuff.
No ofc Nibali isn't a bad rider because he let's his heels drop as he fatigues. But he will realise its a fault.
Very much doubt Nibali sees that as a fault (if he even noticed or cared anyway)
I agree pedaling technique is important (smoothness ect) but to simply say dropping your heels is bad is ridiculous and unproven. Everyone will have different leg geometry (for want of a better word) when pedaling and I think it is widely acknowledged there is no 'correct' pedal stroke motion but simply a natural way which will work best for one person.
As mentioned in Mccarias post, most champion riders had totally different pedaling technique. At the end of the day when you are falling out of your arse up a climb, you do what is most comfortable.0 -
bahzob wrote:- I have improved the way I pedalled and it has resulted in a significant improvement in my sustainable power (and it was pretty good before).
I'm still waiting for more evidence of this. Clips of pros riding uphill on Youtube does not count, by the way. i won't be holding my breath for anything more meaningful than that though, tbh...
It's a shame, because some of the stuff you say is eminently sensible - but unfortunately it is overshadowed by nonsense like this.0 -
thiscocks wrote:At the end of the day when you are falling out of your ars* up a climb, you do what is most comfortable.
Comfortable isn't necessarily most efficient though.
In rowing, swimming and running, even experienced exponents tend to adopt a sub-optimal technique that feels comfortable. The trick is to learn and practice a more efficient technique until it becomes comfortable. (For road runners, the comfortable technique is "heel-striking". How many top Ethiopians and Kenyans do you see doing this though? None. They all go for the more efficient but very strange when you first try it "toe-striking" technique.) This learning takes time, but is done in training, so it's not an additional time requirement.
I'd be gobsmacked if attention to technique didn't yield some benefits in cycling, though I've no evidence to support this. The comment earlier about how easy the pros made a particular section of a Tour climb look rings so true, though. Top rowers, runners and swimmers make it all look so easy, smooth and fluid, even if they've got steam coming out of their ears. Those with poor tecnhique don't make it at the top level as they get beaten by people equally gifted physiologically, but with better technique.
I would be prepared to admit that cycling up a road climb is less technical than the other sports I mention, particularly swimming, but those marginal gains all add up.0 -
bahzob i've read all of your posts and found them very useful, I consider myself an educated causal determined cyclist keen to improve but mostly to enjoy my cycling.
I only have my own limited cycling experiences so useful advice from more experienced cyclists is always welcome but seriously there's no need to be quite so aggressive when posting and responding, this goes for most that posts in the training, beginner and general sections, now before you shout me down yes this is a training section "of a casual" cycling forum, useful information as you've posted is more readily digested and accepted in a constructive way if its not "my way or the highway" again don't take this personally anyone, I just feel everyone would benefit so much more by personal experiences and advice rather than barked instructions.
FWIW i'm doing my first Marmotte this year, of course i'm fully expecting to win anything less would be a complete FAILRule #5 // Harden The Feck Up.
Rule #9 // If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.
Rule #12 // The correct number of bikes to own is n+1.
Rule #42 // A bike race shall never be preceded with a swim and/or followed by a run.0 -
People can write what they like but when training advice is shrouded by so much 'personal experience' it just becomes well... plain anecdotal.. worth reading perhaps, or perhaps not.
There are a few posters on here thank goodness who actually do possess professional coaching quals - I tend to pay more heed.
Good luck on the Marmotte.0 -
i may have said this before.... but bahzob, you just come across as a bit of a know it all and rather big headed about your achievements...of which we really do no nothing about or your qualifications, even top 200 puts you some 70 to 80mins (approx) behind the winners time.
Try being a little more humble in your "teaching approach" and perhaps you might get a better response?
Or better still, back up your claims with some scientific evidence, instead of just stating your beliefs and pointing to romantic articles on Jacques A ...ah!...remind me, what "tecnique" did he use to ride up cols
0 -
bahzob wrote:I am lucky enough to be one of the better riders in the Marmotte and similar, finishing in the top couple of hundred.
I think the answer comes in several parts, some covered above:
- First and foremost analyse the reasons for your failure in 2008 and decide what needs to be done to avoid a repetition. Post specifics here if you need help with this.
- The main focus of training should be towards the demands of the climbs, not long distance per se. The best training for these is to find a local cycle club and enter their time trial events . You don't need to worry about your finishing position or relative time to the others. The simple fact of being involved in a "race" will help push yourself hard, make you fitter and get used to pushing out steady consistent power for long durations. These efforts will be harder than you will do the climbs at, but are great for training both mind and body.
If you are training on a turbo you can also simulate these climbs by doing long "tempo" efforts at target pace. These should let you identify exactly how to pace. As it happens I am doing a series of these at the moment and will post example here later this week.
- Other training should be a mixture of harder shorter efforts to improve threshold effort and longer distance rides for pacing.
--- The shorter efforts should be intervals, some sessions with of 12-20 minutes, others 4-6 minutes. Just do sets going very hard for the interval duration, rest 5 minutes and go again. Repeat until you can't complete. My personal favourite way to do these is to use power/speed as a measure. First time I will do the intervals at 95% or so effort setting a target mark in terms of power or speed. Then every time I do the session again I aim to go a bit harder/faster. I find this challenging making it easer to complete the intervals and naturally it will mean slowly increasing intensity with time which is the basis of a good training plan.
(Note: These intervals are at a much higher intensity than you will be riding the event itself. Their purpose is to make you fitter, not to act as a pacing guide. If at any time you find yourself going as hard during the Marmotte, ease off.)
-- The longer rides should be structured. The ideal imo is to have 2 rides that simulate the course itself:
--> One that replicates the timing/effort profile from the start to the top of the Telegraph.
--> A second that replicates the timing/effort profile from the top of the Telegraph to the finish.
---> So they will not be steady efforts but a series of very long tempo intervals followed by long recovery efforts. Paradoxically this will probably mean the route is pretty flat avoiding steep climbs.
----> Do these regularly, imagining you are riding the route itself and check out pacing and other factors like food etc.
---> 2-3 weeks before the event itself do a full ride of both routes as a full simulation of the event itself. If it goes well then bank the experience and resume normal training. If it goes badly learn from it and repeat hopefully with success.
- The long rides will help check out factors like bike setup and feeding. Still if you have not already had a proper bike fit I would get one done asap.
- It would also be good to find a local hill with around a 8% long slope. Do some climbs on this at target effort, aim is not so much to train body but be sure gearing is correct. At your target pace on this sort of slope you should have enough low gears to turn legs over at 70rpm and still have at least one more gear to change down to.
- All in all you will be spending a lot of hours on the bike. Aim to maximise this time by doing more than just putting in the miles. One specific thing to work on is pedal technique. How you pedal can make a big difference to how easy/hard the long climbs are. The aim is summed up in one word: smooth (the French call it "souplesse"). You should imagine you are pedalling in circles putting out a flat line of power with no peaks/troughs through each pedal revolution. The nature of the pedal stroke makes this impossible to achieve in practice but you can feel you are getting close during recovery sections of rides. When switching to the work sections this will be a lot harder and you will notice a peak on each leg each rev. Aim to make this peak as smooth as possible, it should feel as if its 25% or so of a rev not 5%. If you can achieve this it translates into a much less fatiguing way of climbing the mountains that feature in the Marmotte and similar.
Just for the record, this was my first post here. Not a negative word to be found anywhere I think you will find and pretty humble to boot.
After this I got trolled. By folks who it turns out don't really have much experience of this subject. I even got criticised for citing experience of riding the Marmotte in a thread about the Marmotte from someone who has never even ridden the Marmotte.
So sorry if I seem a bit pissed off. It's because I am. I started cycling several years ago and its a sad reflection on this forum that had I used it them I would not be anywhere near as good as I am now.Martin S. Newbury RC0 -
Bahzob,
I don't imagine this forum is very different from many others, there will be good advice and bad advice, mixed in with the flippant and totally irrelevant.
Your points 1-11 post was an excellent and pretty succinct guide for preparing for a major European sportive. The discussion on the pedalling technique was a bit of a sideshow that unfortunately took away from the main body of your advice. I am still not convinced on the Nibali argument !
I am not sure starting your post "I am lucky to be one of the better riders in the Marmotte" is my definition of being pretty humble, but then again if I had achieved a top couple of hundred finish I would have told everyone by now and sod the humility......0
