Fitness plan. 25-100 Mile

bikerMau5

Hey,

I've been on my bike for about 6 week snows, riding once or twice a week. Not as much as I'd like in truth.

So in an attempt to push things forward I've set myself a goal of 100 miles. I can ride upto around 25 miles ATM so was thinking start with 2x 10 mile during the week and then 1x 30 mile at the weekend, building gradually over time?

Any suggestions would be greatly welcome, experience is something I lack.

Many thanks

imposter2.0

bikerMau5 wrote:

Hey,

I've been on my bike for about 6 week snows, riding once or twice a week. Not as much as I'd like in truth.

So in an attempt to push things forward I've set myself a goal of 100 miles. I can ride upto around 25 miles ATM so was thinking start with 2x 10 mile during the week and then 1x 30 mile at the weekend, building gradually over time?

Any suggestions would be greatly welcome, experience is something I lack.

Many thanks

Fitness plan = address the bit in bold.

StillGoing

Just get out and do it. Anyone can cycle 100 miles and all that is stopping you is your head. It might take you all day at first, but as you get fitter, develop your technique and stop listening to the devil on your shoulder telling you you can't do it, the time it takes will get shorter. Pace yourself, know the route and what gearing to use and go ride. If it takes you 16 hours, it takes you 16 hours although you'll surprise yourself and find you do it in much less than that depending on the terrain. You'll probably never get to do it in the mythical 4 hours and you'll no doubt ache a lot the first time, but riding 100 miles is within reach of anyone that has the use of 2 arms and legs even without training.

ai_1

I'd advise NOT just going out and doing it as suggested above. It may be possible but I doubt it would be enjoyable and we don't want you doing it once and then quitting cycling!
Just add a little to your long weekend cycle each week. Longer cycles are more enjoyable in summer so now's the time to start.
Once you're doing 60 miles+ at the weekend without much difficulty you'll probably manage a 100 mile ride fine.

StillGoing

Ai_1 wrote:

I'd advise NOT just going out and doing it as suggested above. It may be possible but I doubt it would be enjoyable and we don't want you doing it once and then quitting cycling!
Just add a little to your long weekend cycle each week. Longer cycles are more enjoyable in summer so now's the time to start.
Once you're doing 60 miles+ at the weekend without much difficulty you'll probably manage a 100 mile ride fine.

How is it not going to be enjoyable if done at a pace they can sustain? It's no different to a more experienced cyclist going out at their own pace. Are you saying they don't enjoy it too? Any physical activity is an effort, the intensity at which you choose to do it is what matters. I am not advocating the OP going out and hammerfesting it for a 100 miles, but riding it at a leisurely pace to give them the knowledge they can do it. 10mph is sustainable by anyone and will take 10 hours to cover 100 miles. A 6mph average will take some just over 16.5 hours to cover the distance.

For a lot of people until they know they can do the distance, they will continually doubt their own ability. I've taken a few beginners out and kept the distance from them until we've reached the end. If I suggested beforehand going out and doing 70 miles say, they'd cry off. It's only when they realised how far they've just done that you can see their confidence grow on their faces and a ride of a similar distance holds no fear or doubts for them any longer.

finlayson99

^+1

HebdenBiker

philthy3 wrote:

Just get out and do it. Anyone can cycle 100 miles and all that is stopping you is your head. It might take you all day at first, but as you get fitter, develop your technique and stop listening to the devil on your shoulder telling you you can't do it, the time it takes will get shorter. Pace yourself, know the route and what gearing to use and go ride. If it takes you 16 hours, it takes you 16 hours although you'll surprise yourself and find you do it in much less than that depending on the terrain. You'll probably never get to do it in the mythical 4 hours and you'll no doubt ache a lot the first time, but riding 100 miles is within reach of anyone that has the use of 2 arms and legs even without training.

I agree. Set out early and break the route down into 4x 25 mile sections, with coffee breaks in between

navrig2

I think both approaches have a degree of correctness.

Jumping from 25 miles to 100 miles in one step carries the risk of making it a drudge despite breaking it down into manageable chunks. This approach assumes that you have the overall fitness and stamina to keep going beyond that 3rd session. If you don't have that stamina then at the start oif mile 75 your head will be down and youll regret the day out.

I'd suggest get your regular mileage up to 50 miles done at a reasonable pace then try an 80 miler and see how you feel. If that's OK then do the 100.

I'd also have a go at doing two 50 miles back to back on a Saturday/Sunday. That will test your resolve for getting back into the saddle.

Ouija

I don't think the OP was talking about doing 100 miles IN A SINGLE RIDE... so much as doing 100 miles a WEEK (he's only just started, remember).

IanRCarter

I found 100 miles quite tough despite being very familiar with 100k rides. I would advise to build it up, so that you're confident going into that 100 mile ride that you can get through it without needing to go at a snails pace.

Find a club or group of friends to ride with too, they'll motivate you to push yourself harder than you think you can go, support you when things are looking down and be good company on the long hours spent doing your first 100 mile.

ai_1

philthy3 wrote:

Ai_1 wrote:

I'd advise NOT just going out and doing it as suggested above. It may be possible but I doubt it would be enjoyable and we don't want you doing it once and then quitting cycling!
Just add a little to your long weekend cycle each week. Longer cycles are more enjoyable in summer so now's the time to start.
Once you're doing 60 miles+ at the weekend without much difficulty you'll probably manage a 100 mile ride fine.

How is it not going to be enjoyable if done at a pace they can sustain? It's no different to a more experienced cyclist going out at their own pace. Are you saying they don't enjoy it too? Any physical activity is an effort, the intensity at which you choose to do it is what matters. I am not advocating the OP going out and hammerfesting it for a 100 miles, but riding it at a leisurely pace to give them the knowledge they can do it. 10mph is sustainable by anyone and will take 10 hours to cover 100 miles. A 6mph average will take some just over 16.5 hours to cover the distance.

For a lot of people until they know they can do the distance, they will continually doubt their own ability. I've taken a few beginners out and kept the distance from them until we've reached the end. If I suggested beforehand going out and doing 70 miles say, they'd cry off. It's only when they realised how far they've just done that you can see their confidence grow on their faces and a ride of a similar distance holds no fear or doubts for them any longer.

Depends why you cycle and what you enjoy.
I believe most people setting themselves the goal of completing a 100 mile cycle are intending to complete it at a pace somewhat comparable with the shorter cycles they're currently doing. If you say "Anyone can ride 100 miles at a sedate enough pace" that's not really relevant, under those circumstances. If he just wants to complete a 100 mile ride for some reason then sure, set aside a Saturday or Sunday, start early, take it slow and prepare for a sore ass a day or two later. If you want to improve fitness to the point that you can ride somewhat aggressively for 100 miles then start gradually increasing the length of your weekend rides while fitting in some shorter, faster rides during the week and you'll get there im a few months.

StillGoing

I think most beginners when they look at a distance ride, are just grateful to complete the distance. How long it takes is irrelevant initially. More than likely they don't even have a computer device to record how long it actually took them. I remember when I first started all I was interested in was how many miles I'd done. The time didn't matter. Once you're doing big distances or endurance rides regularly, you start looking at time. My first 100 miler had nothing to do with a target time and everything to do with not exceeding a pace I was confident of completing the ride at.

Coming from a military background where you get recruits with no notion of what they are capable of physically, you have to convince them they can do the task required of them. The biggest obstacle to overcome is the voice in their head telling them they are knackered and can't do it. Telling a 17 year old to run a mile when they've come from a life of sedentary activity is like asking them to climb Everest. They've never done it so are convinced they can't do it. It's only when you've dragged them around the course they realise it wasn't so bad and they can do it.

holiver

Comfort can be a big issue when increasing the length of rides significantly.

I'd add 10 miles a ride on your weekend rides myself, but do whatever works for you!

Tjgoodhew

It took me just over a year to go from novice cyclist to completing 100 miles.

I have no doubt i could of done a century over 10 hours with a couple of stops within about 2 months of getting on a bike. But for me that would not of been enjoyable. I gradually increased my mileage and tried to hold my average speed the same over longer distances. When i set off i had a very good idea what to expect, knew that i would eb comfortable on the bike for the 6 hours, knew what fuel i would require, knew roughly what speed and HR i needed to maintain and wa pretty sure that i would be able to do the distance

My enjoyment from cycling comes from riding quickly and pushing myself so riding a 100 miles at walking pace was never on my radar.

It just depends how the OP views a century

opus25

I can only echo what Tj has said above, particularly about not being interested in riding with loads of stops in. Maybe because I ride solo due to where I am and there being no other roadies around, but anything over 5-10 minutes is not in my plans.

Having recently done the magic metric century, I'll briefly describe my way there from zero at 87kg over the last 9 months. I'll use Km as my measure as that's what I'm used to!

1. Began doing three rides a week, mostly flat routes (2 x 40km and 1 x 70km). Focused on stamina, monitoring HRM and tempo riding for weight loss whilst improving cadence up to 90-100 range. Changed routes to vary things up but this was mostly what I did for 3 months to get started and sort out my position. My average speed improved steadily towards 26Km/h.

2. Winter came and I was now closer to 80kg. Cadence was consistent and I felt much more comfortable riding without watching the HRM. Added in a few hilly sections. Could not ride out of the saddle at all up even modest hills. Time to work on that then.

3. Left the UK to find cold but dry winters. Probably only rode a couple of times a week when it wasn't -20C and spent a few weeks in hospital. Started back in Spring with two midweek rides of 2 hours and a 70-120km Sunday ride. This time, I'd do one midweek ride on a 50km rolling/hilly section and the other doing a 10km circuit (5 times) with 3km of that a steady climb. Used this to help with intervals, timing my climb and getting used to climbing out of the saddle by simply forcing myself to do it until I got comfortable and faster! Dropped to 75kg which helps when going up. Bike lost 2.5kgs thanks to a carbon upgrade.

For the weekend ride, I'd mix things up. Either do a combination of the routes I'd do midweek or do a longer, flatter 120km. Found where I need to eat and how much, etc which is very important once you go long, as is comfort and a pair of Castelli Free Aero's helped with that. Weight down to 70-71kgs (187cm tall so stopping here), average speed now almost always 30km/h on the shorter 50-70km rides which was pleasing since I always include hills and longer 5-7% gradients now. Recovered much quicker after rides and almost feel like I could ride every day.

4. Added a shorter 60-90 minute leg-turner on Monday for a few weeks then just decided to do the 100 miles (162km). A mixture of gradients (otherwise I get bored) and managed to not be hungry, not get back pain or other pad issues, and kept to a decent average pace of 28km/h. Stopped a few times for food and a stretch for 5 minutes, plus a 10-minute puncture repair, but found it fine overall.

Biggest tips are to keep getting out there, vary your routes and gradients, invest in decent bibs and a HRM, tweak your position, and actively seek out hills, ride solo into the wind up hills / for long periods, etc. You will see improvements (av. speed, weight, lower HRM, quicker recovery times, etc).

I agree you can easily do a century in a shorter period of time, especially if you can ride in a group and take longer breaks - I've nothing against anyone who does it differently. Depends on how you want to go about it and what's available to you in terms of time, roads, hills, equipment and the rest.

bikerMau5

Wow, as usual an excellent response from all the users on this forum, so thanks to all first off!

In terms of what I'm looking to get from 100m, well I guess I want something to work towards above all and I know that a cyclist first century is a bit of an accolade.

I think that I could possibly achieve this now however it would be a full day exercise rolling at snails pace which isn't really what I want to achieve. I guess I want to build up to a reasonable pace and then extend the distance from there.

A couple of questions,

First, what would be considered a reasonable pace, at the moment I average between 11-13 mph? Or is this dependent of the cyclist.

Second, I want to create a plan, with the goal being to hit 100m whilst maintaining a good pace. How much is a realistic increase per week, both for short mid week rides and longer weekenders and what times scales should I be increasing my distance over? Or again, is this dependent on the cyclist?

Many thanks for all you advice, I don't know how I'd get on with out this community!

BM

craigus89

bikerMau5 wrote:

So in an attempt to push things forward I've set myself a goal of 100 miles. I can ride upto around 25 miles ATM so was thinking start with 2x 10 mile during the week and then 1x 30 mile at the weekend, building gradually over time?

---

In terms of what I'm looking to get from 100m, well I guess I want something to work towards above all and I know that a cyclist first century is a bit of an accolade.

First, what would be considered a reasonable pace, at the moment I average between 11-13 mph? Or is this dependent of the cyclist.

Second, I want to create a plan, with the goal being to hit 100m whilst maintaining a good pace. How much is a realistic increase per week, both for short mid week rides and longer weekenders and what times scales should I be increasing my distance over? Or again, is this dependent on the cyclist?

BM

Fisrtly, I'm sure many will disagree, but my legs don't feel like they have warmed up properly until 7-10 miles into a ride. Can you increase your 2 mid week rides to 15miles?

I would ramp up 5 miles per weekend ride, so this weekend do 30 - pick a slightly flatter route if it helps - next do 35, and if you really struglle on one of them do the same distance the next weekend. It does depend on how much climbing you do, as obviously that will make the miles tougher.

Don't worry about your pace, it is a bit slow but that is to be expected from someone who is new to cycling and we don't know your general level of fitness. It will pick up the more you ride.

fudgey

For what its worth, i have had my road bike for just under 3 months now. This year up until may i had been on the MTB a few times riding to work 10 miles each way and done a couple of event like the hell of the north cotswolds and mountain mayhem. the HONC was my biggest ride ever at 34 miles and mostly off road. i found it pretty tough tbh!

so i got the road bike and after a couple of weeks to work on it upped the milage to 12, then 15 miles each way. was doing a few 25 mile rides in one hit my arse was feeling it at that distance.
then started doing 30, then 35 mile rides at the weekend etc.
a few weeks ago myself and my riding mate done 44 miles, i struggled like hell at 28 miles most likely due to only taking water with a pinch of salt in it - no food...
the week after we decided to the granfondo on strava 130k or 81.25 miles.
fuelled up and with some food/energy blocks we set off, but another mate tagged along whos biggest ride of the year was 25 miles.
we stopped briefly at 1 hour/20 miles as mate needed a pee, so had some flapjack. 35 miles found a pub so had tuna sandwich, pint of coke and refilled water bottles.
by 40 miles the mate who had not rode as much was pushing up hills and struggling, 50 miles his pace dropped right off. stopped at 60 miles for a bit more food, and we managed to drag him round for another 25 miles, covering 85 miles in total - about 5h49 mins.
if it was just my mate and i we would have gone on to do the ton or probably knocked a good 30 mins off that time, we were both in a good place and comfortable but a little tired.
so i managed to bang 40 miles onto my biggest ever ride in a week - because i was more prepared and ate regularly.

i ride at around 17-18mph average usually

StillGoing

bikerMau5 wrote:

Wow, as usual an excellent response from all the users on this forum, so thanks to all first off!

In terms of what I'm looking to get from 100m, well I guess I want something to work towards above all and I know that a cyclist first century is a bit of an accolade.

I think that I could possibly achieve this now however it would be a full day exercise rolling at snails pace which isn't really what I want to achieve. I guess I want to build up to a reasonable pace and then extend the distance from there.

A couple of questions,

First, what would be considered a reasonable pace, at the moment I average between 11-13 mph? Or is this dependent of the cyclist.

Second, I want to create a plan, with the goal being to hit 100m whilst maintaining a good pace. How much is a realistic increase per week, both for short mid week rides and longer weekenders and what times scales should I be increasing my distance over? Or again, is this dependent on the cyclist?

Many thanks for all you advice, I don't know how I'd get on with out this community!

BM

Your questions can't really be answered accurately as it depends on your personal physicality, time available, abilities and equipment, and the terrain to be covered.

Average pace is individual. Some might be able to do 25mph+ for the 100 miles, some will do it at 12mph or even less. Most will be somewhere in between. Age has no relevance on average pace but ability and numbers does. A ride sat firmly in a group will be quicker than a solo effort and someone who gets out and rides plenty of miles will be quicker than someone that gets out very little. As an example, I ride with someone that is almost 23 years younger than me, yet I am around 3.5mph average faster than him. The longer the distance, the bigger the gap and it's all because I ride a lot more than he does and I have a better power to weight ratio. As a beginner, don't think about your average pace until you're able to put in the miles.

The terrain will have an effect on what is a good time. The medals in sportives are adapted to reflect how arduous the terrain is. Gold for a 100 mile route is generally around 6:30 or less which is roughly 15.4mph average.

To train well, you need to build a base for endurance. To do it properly you need to arm yourself with a heart rate monitor. Ride in zones 2/3 for 60-90 minutes and avoid spiking into the higher heart rate zones. It's dull and boring, but it is the base training you need. You'll get plenty of riders coming past you, but ignore the desire to chase after them especially if they're ignorant enough to take the wee-wee out of your pace. It really does work as I've just spent a couple of months riding with beginners at a little quicker than your pace only to find on my solo rides that my average pace has increased by a massive amount and for longer distance over rolling terrain. There's plenty of information out there and in mags like Cycling Plus that cover base training.

Others will advocate just hammerfesting it every ride, but in my view, it will deter you from riding looking for an excuse not to go out.

StillGoing

Here you go, have a read of this which advocates the go slower to go faster.

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/article/h ... sts-28838/

Zerotails99

Speed and mileage means absolutely nothing. Get a power meter. Thats only thing that measures what youre actually doing. If you want to train you need a power meter.

StillGoing

A power meter for someone just starting out? Hardly. Their FTP will be an unknown quantity as yet and the expense of the things means they are at the bottom of most casual riders shopping lists. It'd be the last thing I'd recommend someone shell their money out on especially when it sounds like it'll cost more than the OP's bike itself.

Zerotails99

A power meter is even more important for noobs. It will help them pace out their ride. Even if it costs more than the bike.

The OP wants to train, get fitter and smash out 100 miles. Hardly a casual rider.

If youre just travelling a to b, then you dont need it. But you want to be a bodybuiler then you would need to know how many kg youre lifting.

StillGoing

Zerotails99 wrote:

A power meter is even more important for noobs. It will help them pace out their ride. Even if it costs more than the bike.

The OP wants to train, get fitter and smash out 100 miles. Hardly a casual rider.

If youre just travelling a to b, then you dont need it. But you want to be a bodybuiler then you would need to know how many kg youre lifting.

I can "smash out 100 mile" rides in sportive gold medal times even at my age and I don't use a power meter and never will. Cyclists other than those who race or are seriously competitive do 100 mile plus rides too. If you use your own perceived exertion, you don't need a power meter to know when you're dipping into the red and your own body knows what is comfortable for you to sustain. Of the millions of cyclists out there, how many do you suppose use a power meter? I'll wager the ratio is very few and some of those that have them don't have the first clue how to use them or the technical know how to be able to use the data correctly. If someone can afford to spend only a little on a bike, why on earth would they go and splash out £700 or more on a power meter? Makes absolutely no sense when it's money better spent towards upgrading.

I don't dismiss the use of power meters, but they're only of use to those that can afford them, know how to use them, have the technical know how to analyse the data or can afford the services of a trainer to do it for them. A beginner cyclist is not going to go out doing VO2 max tests, 10 second sprints, FTP tests etc to monitor their progress. As they get fitter and want to further improve, then yes, a power meter is a viable option.

ai_1

Zerotails99 wrote:

......If you want to train you need a power meter.

I've read a lot of silly comments on these forums but I'm struggling to think of a sillier one than this! :shock:

Ouija

Ai_1 wrote:

Zerotails99 wrote:

......If you want to train you need a power meter.

I've read a lot of silly comments on these forums but I'm struggling to think of a sillier one than this! :shock:

Apparently nobody trained before they were invented.....

jgsi

bikerMau5 wrote:

Hey,

I've been on my bike for about 6 week snows, riding once or twice a week. Not as much as I'd like in truth.

So in an attempt to push things forward I've set myself a goal of 100 miles. I can ride upto around 25 miles ATM so was thinking start with 2x 10 mile during the week and then 1x 30 mile at the weekend, building gradually over time?

Any suggestions would be greatly welcome, experience is something I lack.

Many thanks

Do yourself a favour and step away from the 'plan' or 'training' thing.. it will pee you off more than likely.
Get out and ride.... get a couple of shorter rides in during the week , sure.. but plan the wekend ride carefully.. aim for a decent cafe stop and treat yourself for geting there.. get back home if all goes to plan.... which leads me to...

... again and again and again if you want to learn the craft of cycling.. find a good local club.
There are many things to learn and experience comes with age.. honest!
So many beginners (is the impression) rock up on a forum in order to garner a few tips and hey presto.. instant cyclist.
You never know you have a talent for knocking a circa 4 hour 100 but I wouldnt fret about it if you can't.

markhewitt1978

Don't just go out and do it, you'd quite likely end up 70 miles in unable to sit on the bike any more. Best advice is just keep riding, doing a little more each time, once you're up to doing 60 miles then you can go for the 100.

markhewitt1978

Zerotails99 wrote:

Speed and mileage means absolutely nothing. Get a power meter. Thats only thing that measures what youre actually doing. If you want to train you need a power meter.

Some of the most stupid advice ever given to a beginner cyclist.

drlodge

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Zerotails99 wrote:

Speed and mileage means absolutely nothing. Get a power meter. Thats only thing that measures what youre actually doing. If you want to train you need a power meter.

Some of the most stupid advice ever given to a beginner cyclist.

+1

IMO and keeping it simple, training can be split into two categories
- long and slow (endurance pace), e.g. 40, 60, 80, 100 miles to build up ensurance at a pace you can sustain. In other words MILEAGE.
- short and fast e.g. intervals or just simply riding hard, to stress your CV system and legs. In other words SPEED.

I tend to do the first since I enjoy it and have no objective to be fast. Occasionally I will do the second especially on a week day evening when I only have 60-90 minutes available.

Nowhere have I mentioned a power meter :roll:

chrisaonabike

bikerMau5 wrote:

First, what would be considered a reasonable pace, at the moment I average between 11-13 mph? Or is this dependent of the cyclist.

What's reasonable is what you're happy with. There are superstars here for whom a 20mph average over 100 miles or more would be gentle ride!

FWIW, I'm almost 52, started road cycling seriously just under 2 years ago. It was a major achievment when I first averaged more than 15mph over a 15 mile route. Now I do two or three laps of most of the same route at close to 17mph on a good day.

Initially, 50 miles was way out of reach, but I built up the distances a bit at a time, and eventually I pushed past 50 to my first 100 last August, during which I averaged 14.4.

If you're averaging 11-13 now, you'd have to go a lot slower to just ride out the door and do a 100 tomorrow. Personally I wouldn't do it that way - I did it by building up the length of the long rides - from 45 to about 60, to about 70, eventually to 85. That increase took about 7 months from December to July. During the week I only had time for short rides, up to about 30 miles, but I went as hard as I could on those.

Definitely record your rides on Strava or similar, but take the times as a guide only - don't get fixated on average speed. It'll go up and down from ride to ride, not least because of the wind.

As for getting a power meter as a beginner cyclist, sure if you're loaded and love gadgets. Otherwise it's completely unnecessary. A HRM is great, but suggesting that you have to get a power meter is plain daft. I haven't got one, I have no plan to get one, and yet amazingly, I can ride 100 miles