Distances, Increasing them

2»

Comments

  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    trek_dan wrote:
    You need to set yourself a target instead of just battering short rides as fast as you can. How can you train effictively without something to aim for? Book a long weekend in the Alps, do the coast to coast in a day (that'll show you some decent hills!) or book a climby 100 mile sportive away from your pan flat comfort zone where you live.

    Sportives would be the best choice IMO. Choose a long route where you just have to do it. He'll probably end up dying at the end, which'll learn him ;)

    Oh yes, etape pennines coming up shortly, if that doesn't 'learn him', nothing will :wink:
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • Blasting short rides as fast as you can isn't really going to help with doing longer distances. Only doing longer distances will do that. Everytime I do a ride that is longer than I'm used to I always drop my expectation of avg. speed by 2-3mph (or more if it's hilly > 60ft / mile). The goal the first time at a longer distance is just to complete it - regardless of time, but by dropping the average speed by a few mph it should be in the ballpark of a pace that's comfortable to sustain.

    Only once I've accomplished a new distance will I push it the next time.

    Also, if you are that interested in your average speeds then targeting lots of hills into your rides will help you in the long run. If found doing lots of hills recently has helped me to sustain harder efforts for a lot longer on flatter sections, to the extent that I'm not regularly getting 20.5mph+ for my 20 mile commute to work (albeit flattish with 600ft-900ft) of climbing ... before targetting hills into my rides I would normally be mid 18mph ... and last year when I first got my road bike I was around 15.5-16mph.

    I've recently set up a dedicated page on my Garmin that has :- current speed, gradient, heart rate, cadence, elevation. This was originally indented for use when I was climbing hills ... so I could monitor my cadence in relation to heart rate and gradient. I've found myself using this more, even on the flat ... so I'm starting to move away from always being obsessed with my average speed. It's actually refreshing to cycle at a slower, less intense pace, as you can take in more of your surroundings etc. and you're not completely spent afterwards meaning you can go out more often.
  • Dizeee
    Dizeee Posts: 337
    sancho_uk wrote:

    However what constitutes as a flat ride for some, may be hilly for others depending on where you live. As you state Surrey is pretty flat so this is probably about as hilly as he can make it? I dont know i dont know the area.

    Compare that to the Peak District

    This really, yes I do a fair few flattish rides but I also do what climbing I can in the hills. They may not compare to some if the hillier places in the UK but they do contain some horrid climbs of varying length. I don't consider box hill a challenge either as its a low gradient just longer whereas there are a fair few shockers in the mix too.