When do you begin winter training?

dzp1

Dammit I've just realised its trev again stirring up ! sorry everyone I bit

For the OP - my input is probably valueless compared to the RST boys but what I've decided to do is keep building off the back of this seasons CTL and FTP gains, and I know there's be enforced breaks around christmas when the kids bring colds home from school, there might be low TSS weeks when its snowing, and I'll prob go skiing in feb for a week, so no reason to take a break now.

My logic behind that is that, regardless of when you start your winter training - its how fit you are when you start that training (I regard fitness as a combination of CTL and FTP) .. that determines the level you can start training at. So if I can start on a CTL of 70-80 with my summer FTP still intact, I'll have opportunities to grow that to 100 or 120 which hopefully means a very good season ahead, whereas if I start on a CTL of 40 cos I took a month off, then I'm gonna be spending at least two months to get back to 80, and it will be at a lower FTP, so less valuable in terms of training benefits. Growing from 40 to 100 or 120 over winter just seems waay too daunting.

Anyway, thats just my logic.. I would be interested in what approach others do here.

BenderRodriguez

In reply to dzp1

I also find that my heart rate at certain levels of intensity provides very useful feedback, especially about how well recovered I am. For example, when fresh my threshold is around 173 Bpm and I will be able to hold this for a 20 -30 minute climb with no real problem. (Obviously, I can also ride at a supra-threshold level for an extended period, say 178 -180 Bpm, but I would rate this as being 'bloody hard'). Some days I will find that the perceived intensity that I normally experience at 173 Bpm on a long climb results in a heart rate of only 165 Bpm, or less. Clearly, if my pace was actually the same, this might indicate that my cardiac capacity had improved, but if my pace is also lower this indicates to me that I am in fact insufficiently recovered, and I will be able to modify my plan for that particular training ride accordingly.

Thing is, with heart rate is that you have to really 'know yourself' to make sense of it. For example, I had to take almost 4 months off this year due to a problem with tachycardia and undiagnosed ventricular hypertrophy (all sorted now). On one of my early 'comeback' rides I did a big local col that usually takes the best part of an hour. My maximum is around 192 Bpm, and on this climb I managed to average 188 for an hour! All very unusual, but easily explained by my cardiologist who noted that whilst my legs had quickly re-adapted to my training, my heart was still much reduced in capacity due to my lay-off. (In fact he was very pleased that I had followed his advice and stopped training altogether, which he said was evident from the way my previously hypertropic heart was now quite normal!) Of course, 4 months later my heart has once again increased in capacity and so no longer needs to beat as fast to supply the demands placed upon it, and my 'normal' threshold heart rate is right back to where it was before my lay-off.

BenderRodriguez

dzp1 wrote:

Dammit I've just realised its trev again stirring up ! sorry everyone I bit

Please, please, someone explain this 'Trev' thing to me! As I said I could find no posts on here by this seemingly legendary figure, but no seems to want to explain who he is or why some posters on here seem to have an 'issue' with him.

By the way.

I AM NOT 'TREV'!

BigFatBloke

BenderRodriguez wrote:

dzp1 wrote:

Dammit I've just realised its trev again stirring up ! sorry everyone I bit

Please, please, someone explain this 'Trev' thing to me! As I said I could find no posts on here by this seemingly legendary figure, but no seems to want to explain who he is or why some posters on here seem to have an 'issue' with him.

By the way.

I AM NOT 'TREV'!

Trev The Rev was a fictional online character who got banned from timetrialling forum.

dennisn

Just noticed that winter officially begins on December 21st. So I'm guessing that if you "train" year around that your winter training would start on that date. We're all still summer training until Sept. 22nd. At which time it will switch to fall training. Here in the states we also have what's called Daylight Savings Training Time. It's very complicated as it starts before summer training and ends after fall training begins. You will need professional training help with that system in order not to interfer with the other training seasons.

bigpikle

BigFatBloke wrote:

BenderRodriguez wrote:

dzp1 wrote:

Dammit I've just realised its trev again stirring up ! sorry everyone I bit

Please, please, someone explain this 'Trev' thing to me! As I said I could find no posts on here by this seemingly legendary figure, but no seems to want to explain who he is or why some posters on here seem to have an 'issue' with him.

By the way.

I AM NOT 'TREV'!

Trev The Rev was a fictional online character who got banned from timetrialling forum.

fictional? he's been banned from several forums I believe but constantly reinvents user names and appears all over the place trolling his useless crap all day long and spoiling some good discussions everywhere he/she goes...

dzp1

Bigpikle wrote:

fictional? he's been banned from several forums I believe but constantly reinvents user names and appears all over the place trolling his useless crap all day long and spoiling some good discussions everywhere he/she goes...

Hah.. thing is, if you look above, I commented after "bigfatbloke" posted, that this seems to be trev or whatever, and who should reply with "I am not trev" ... "benderrodriguez" !! QED they are one and the same

Nice one Trev

Toks

ManxShred wrote:

My goals are longer distance sportives, rather than racing every weekend. Next year I plan to go back to La Marmotte and improve my time considerably compared to this year.
I don't have a problem with building endurance, and this year my training allowed me to get around the course with no problems at all, although I did take it a bit too easy.
For me, I would rather use the winter months working on increasing my speed and power, doing shorter harder rides including intervals on the turbo. I will also be out on the MTB for some variety and doing longish road rides when the weather is good.
Once the summer comes around, I will build on this by increasing the duration of my rides and improving my endurance leading up to my events.

Its sounds like you're doing the right thing. If like most of us you haven't got loads of training time available probably the best way to increasing speed/power on endurance rides (assuming your well fuelled ) is to add a fair sprinkling of short faster (threshold,sweetspot, 2 x 20's etc ) rides into your training regime.

Contrary to popular belief you don't have to ride at 14-15 mph for the next 4-6 months to get faster. In fact I did that for two seasons in a row and suffered with loads of miserable colds both winters; but, I lost a bit of weight and interestingly enough was really strong the following spring/summer as long as the average pace on longer rides remained under 16mph. Imagine my surprise when on the 3rd season I was able to average 18-19mph for 3-4 hours by myself without needing to to do more or longer endurance rides. This was achieved by following some scientific training clap trap posted by some fella called Ric Stern nearly 10 years ago now

BenderRodriguez

dzp1 wrote:

Hah.. thing is, if you look above, I commented after "bigfatbloke" posted, that this seems to be trev or whatever, and who should reply with "I am not trev" ... "benderrodriguez" !! QED they are one and the same

Nice one Trev

QED? Problem is, once again...

I am NOT 'Trev'! :x

BenderRodriguez

madasahattersley wrote:

He was accusing BigFatBloke of being trev when you (an unrelated stranger) retaliated with "I am not Trev."

Can you see where you've gone wrong here?

No, given that, on several previous occasions, I have already being accused of being this 'Trev' character and was merely try to preempt another chorus of this nonsense! :evil:

BenderRodriguez

Toks wrote:

Contrary to popular belief you don't have to ride at 14-15 mph for the next 4-6 months to get faster. In fact I did that for two seasons in a row and suffered with loads of miserable colds both winters...

Do you really think that is a 'popular belief' or are you just trying to set up a straw man? There is a world of difference between what you say you did and a varied program that includes a cycle where the emphasis is on 'base' work, ideally 'getting in the miles' when the weather is suitable, perhaps as part of a 'Reverse periodisation strategy'.

http://iceskatingresources.org/Enduranc ... ngPlan.pdf

Also relevant:

http://www.sportsci.org/2009/ss.pdf

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/enduran ... very-41932

Toks wrote:

If like most of us you haven't got loads of training time available probably the best way to increasing speed/power on endurance rides (assuming your well fuelled ) is to add a fair sprinkling of short faster (threshold,sweetspot, 2 x 20's etc ) rides into your training regime.

I had thought that everyone had already agreed that, regardless of the benefits to be had from doing a cycle of 'base' training, if you have limited time to train the best strategy is to make the most of that time by riding harder!

bigpikle

its the term 'base training' that does it....most people think of loads of long slow distance rides from the 'old school' era.

I much prefer the way Hunter Allen terms it as 'Power Foundation' and his views on how to make the most of it when you dont have 12-30 hours a week to train. Interesting article on his description...

http://www.bluetoad.com/display_article.php?id=920614

dzp1

What my ex coach said to me, which I think is pretty much the right idea - you need to create a constant level of stress over a period of 3/4/5 weeks - through that period you'll slowly get more and more tired, and eventually you'll need to come up for air. He was against doing any big bang type shocks to the system, no epic rides, just a constant draining fatigue and you're pretty much hanging by the end of the "block" just from the consistent and constant stress and not from any single session. That means that every ride creates just the right amount of tiredness, no more, no less, and training is planned out on that basis.

I think this is right for the best method of forcing improvement. However at higher CTLs I've found that you can also ease back just slightly, on the ctl ramp rate, so perhaps 3 ctl points per week instead of 5 for example, and then you don't ever need to come up for air (or when you do, its just a slight ease off and not a big loss of CTL), and you're just that little bit fresher so its easier to live the rest of your life without having to manage that fatigue or be brain dead in work or falling asleep at the dinner table

So doing 6 hours a week of zone 2 isn't going to cause any meaningful stress or fatigue, and if you don't stress the body, its not going to adapt (why would it?).

But that particular coach still advocated some 3 or 4 hour rides in zone 2 - as well as plenty of tempo and sweetspot, again, all nicely spaced out so you're keeping that stress and fatigue at a constant level. I think the basis for that is simply that you want to stress all the energy systems including the fat burning one, but I'm just guessing there

He was against anything above ftp, which I disagreed with really, because I think you should be allowed a bit of fun and as long as you're not creating "hypertrophy" a bit of hard stuff up the hills or sprinting for the odd sign with yer mates doesn't hurt in moderation, and indeed a bit of that will hold your ftp up, so you don't have to spend the winter training at a lower level as a result of your ftp dropping.

Please feel free to point out anything wrong here

BigFatBloke

I am not BenderRodriguez. No idea what some of you lot on here have against him. I am Trev so I will probably get banned soon anyway.

Toks

BenderRodriguez wrote:

Do you really think that is a 'popular belief' or are you just trying to set up a straw man? There is a world of difference between what you say you did and a varied program that includes a cycle where the emphasis is on 'base' work, ideally 'getting in the miles' when the weather is suitable, perhaps as part of a 'Reverse periodisation strategy'.

Good articles; its not my intention to set up a straw man argument.I haven't got facts and figures for you but I reckon the ride slow(base mile) philosophy definitely still exists. I recently spoke to a guy riding with a bunch of triathletes and he told me their coach had specifically told them to ride @ 15mph on long rides for the next 3 months. Obviously I don't know what else they were doing. I hope it wasn't just slow endurance rides

dzp1

Toks wrote:

Good articles; its not my intention to set up a straw man argument.I haven't got facts and figures for you but I reckon the ride slow(base mile) philosophy definitely still exists. I recently spoke to a guy riding with a bunch of triathletes and he told me their coach had specifically told them to ride @ 15mph on long rides for the next 3 months. Obviously I don't know what else they were doing. I hope it wasn't just slow endurance rides

Well it worked for Stuart Dangerfield. Although he was probably doing 20+ hours per week, with a bit of vo2, and apparently, not a lot inbetween those intensities. (google for Gordon Wrights pdfs on High Wycombe CC)

BenderRodriguez

Toks wrote:

I haven't got facts and figures for you but I reckon the ride slow(base mile) philosophy definitely still exists. I recently spoke to a guy riding with a bunch of triathletes and he told me their coach had specifically told them to ride @ 15mph on long rides for the next 3 months. Obviously I don't know what else they were doing. I hope it wasn't just slow endurance rides

I don't know the level of the triathletes you refer to, but perhaps the coach simply didn't want them to overcook things too early so that they peak in March and are wasted by June.

For me, one of the main theoretical advantages of 'base' work is that it promotes the use of fat at ever higher levels of intensity. This does seem to makes sense, as if you only train at a high intensity, burning almost exclusively carbohydrates, the body is not being subjected to the sort of demands that directly promote the use of fat. Yes, there will be some increase in endurance as a result of doing higher quality work, as being 'fitter' means that at any given pace you will burn a smaller proportion of carbohydrate than previously, but to me doing only higher quality work is addressing only half the equation.

Conversely, if you never train or race for more than a couple of hours the ability to be able to ride for extended periods burning a high proportion of fat might well be an irrelevance. This suggests that, as a first principle, how long your 'base building' rides need to be should reflect the duration of the events you will be riding. As a second principle, any 'base' work also needs to impose a significant training load if it is to promote adaptation. I would suggest that, generally speaking, however long you ride you should be getting somewhat tired towards the end. Cruising along for 2 hours so you get home feeling as though you haven't done anything is hardly likely to promote adaptation.

Taking the above, for a rider who races in short time trials and road races of under 2 hours and / or has limited time available, 2 - 3 hour rides at tempo and sweet spot levels of intensity would constitute most of their 'base building' work. On the other hand for someone aiming to do well in Alpine sportives taking 6-8 hours to complete, it seems to make sense that at least some 'base building' rides really should be of 5 hours or more, at a correspondingly lower pace but resulting in a similar level of fatigue.

For someone who is really time limited any sub-threshold work, even doing 20 minute intervals, could be considered to constitute their 'base building' miles. For an article discussing 'base' in such terms see:

http://www.biketechreview.com/index.php ... format=pdf

It could well be concluded from the above that 'base building' is just about any training that is done at a sub-threshold level of intensity!

BenderRodriguez

P.s.

As to whether it is sensible to do high-quality efforts all year round, I would say yes, as long as these are done in moderation, due regard is taken of the total training load when a lot of 'base building' miles are being done at the same time, and the rider ensures that these high intensity efforts do not prevent them from fully recovering, especially psychologically, from the intensity of the racing season.

As with many things, it is not a case of doing exclusively one thing or another, but of varying the balance between them.

Also, don't just do one type of training, as variety will stave of boredom and help to prevent the body from becoming habituated to the stresses placed upon it, so slowing or halting progress.

Another basic principle should be 'Do what you enjoy doing'. There is more than one way to maximise your potential and if you love miles and hate thrashing on a turbo, then do the miles, as long as you do them at a level of intensity that you can recover from on a day to day basis. Ample evidence indicates if you are able to get the miles in, which necessitates a polarised approach, then your form will last longer and you will reach a higher peak than if you do a lower overall volume of training, even if you make this consistently harder in order to compensate.

Of course, for many a polarised approach is impractical because the time they have available is limited. In that case quality has to stand as a substitute for quantity.