Beginners 100 Mile Training

chazsizeland
chazsizeland Posts: 10
edited March 2012 in Training, fitness and health
Newbie advice please. Sorry if this has been covered before but I had a quick search and couldn't see anything.

Basically I'm a runner but have injured myself half way through training for the London Marathon in April. To keep my fitness levels up I bought a road bike on a whim and have really enjoyed going out for a spin.

A couple of the guys in my office ride reguarly and they have challenged me to enter the Norwich 100 at the end of May and, possibly stupidly, I have agreed to the challenge.

Obviously my basic fitness is pretty good from running and yesterday I managed 20 miles riding at a fairly fast pace without stopping so feel I could probably get round but I have no idea how to prepare myself for it.

Do the basic principles of training for runs apply to this? ie, 3-4 rides a week with an interval session, a threshold session and a long ride at the weekend to build up endurance? Is there anything else I should be doing? What sort of time/distances should I be looking to cover?

Thanks in advance for the help!

Comments

  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    The Norwich 100 is obviously quite flat, so I'd suggest your focus should be on endurance rather than strength.

    Build up from 20 miles to 70 miles at whatever you set as your target speed. 70 miles solo should see you good for 100 miles in groups.

    The important thing is to make sure you are properly fed as the distance increases. You'll use around 30 cals per mile, so 3000 per 100 miles. If it's the BHF 100 there were good feed stations, but if I remember correctly you have to stay in one of them for 20 minutes to make sure you don't overdo it!

    Good luck
  • simon_e
    simon_e Posts: 1,706
    A couple of articles:

    http://www.bikeradar.com/road/fitness/a ... live-25833
    http://www.bikeradar.com/road/fitness/a ... tive-20320

    Can you use the bike to commute?
    Aspire not to have more, but to be more.
  • sub55
    sub55 Posts: 1,025
    GiantMike wrote:
    The Norwich 100 is obviously quite flat, so I'd suggest your focus should be on endurance rather than strength.

    Build up from 20 miles to 70 miles at whatever you set as your target speed. 70 miles solo should see you good for 100 miles in groups.

    The important thing is to make sure you are properly fed as the distance increases. You'll use around 30 cals per mile, so 3000 per 100 miles. If it's the BHF 100 there were good feed stations, but if I remember correctly you have to stay in one of them for 20 minutes to make sure you don't overdo it!

    Good luck
    You'll use around 30 cals per mile, so 3000 per 100 miles.

    not sure how you calculate calories to mils
    constantly reavalueating the situation and altering the perceived parameters accordingly
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    sub55 wrote:
    not sure how you calculate calories to mils

    On a hardish hilly 55 mile solo ride I use 2269 kJ of energy. 1 kCal is roughly equivalent to 1 kJ (depending on the efficiency of the body). This equates to roughly 41 kCals per mile.

    Riding in flatter terrain and within bunches of riders, I'd estimate this would equte to around 30 kCals per mile.

    Why do you think you can't calculate calories from miles or vice versa?
  • doyler78
    doyler78 Posts: 1,951
    GiantMike wrote:
    sub55 wrote:
    not sure how you calculate calories to mils

    On a hardish hilly 55 mile solo ride I use 2269 kJ of energy. 1 kCal is roughly equivalent to 1 kJ (depending on the efficiency of the body). This equates to roughly 41 kCals per mile.

    Riding in flatter terrain and within bunches of riders, I'd estimate this would equte to around 30 kCals per mile.

    Why do you think you can't calculate calories from miles or vice versa?

    Would it not be easier just to estimate it on time and effort as miles will vary with both. Would make it a bit less complicated :wink:
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    doyler78 wrote:
    Would it not be easier just to estimate it on time and effort as miles will vary with both. Would make it a bit less complicated :wink:

    There are lots of ways to do it, but if you have a power meter you know exactly how many kJ you use on a ride and it's very easy to use this understanding to transfer it to other situations.
  • doyler78
    doyler78 Posts: 1,951
    GiantMike wrote:
    doyler78 wrote:
    Would it not be easier just to estimate it on time and effort as miles will vary with both. Would make it a bit less complicated :wink:

    There are lots of ways to do it, but if you have a power meter you know exactly how many kJ you use on a ride and it's very easy to use this understanding to transfer it to other situations.

    So the OP has a power meter?
  • sub55
    sub55 Posts: 1,025
    GiantMike wrote:
    sub55 wrote:
    not sure how you calculate calories to mils

    On a hardish hilly 55 mile solo ride I use 2269 kJ of energy. 1 kCal is roughly equivalent to 1 kJ (depending on the efficiency of the body). This equates to roughly 41 kCals per mile.

    Riding in flatter terrain and within bunches of riders, I'd estimate this would equte to around 30 kCals per mile.

    Why do you think you can't calculate calories from miles or vice versa?

    because there is to many variables like gradient, wind speed and direction, air pressure, temperature. etc you are also implying that your calculations apply to everyone, which they plainly don't .

    also not entirely sure 1 kCal=1 kJ
    constantly reavalueating the situation and altering the perceived parameters accordingly
  • Cleat Eastwood
    Cleat Eastwood Posts: 7,508
    chazsizeland wrote:
    Newbie advice please. Sorry if this has been covered before but I had a quick search and couldn't see anything.

    Basically I'm a runner but have injured myself half way through training for the London Marathon in April. To keep my fitness levels up I bought a road bike on a whim and have really enjoyed going out for a spin.

    A couple of the guys in my office ride reguarly and they have challenged me to enter the Norwich 100 at the end of May and, possibly stupidly, I have agreed to the challenge.

    Obviously my basic fitness is pretty good from running and yesterday I managed 20 miles riding at a fairly fast pace without stopping so feel I could probably get round but I have no idea how to prepare myself for it.

    Do the basic principles of training for runs apply to this? ie, 3-4 rides a week with an interval session, a threshold session and a long ride at the weekend to build up endurance? Is there anything else I should be doing? What sort of time/distances should I be looking to cover?

    Thanks in advance for the help!


    100 miles is surprisingly easier than it sounds - it would be a bit tough on your own but with other sportivers around you you'll find yourself stopping and starting and joining groups and leaving groups and all of these little micro breaks do help. What would help would be to have a long session in the saddle - don't worry about speed or distance just get your body use to long hours on the bike it will help you work out when to eat and drink etc.

    One accepted rule is to increase your distance by 10% each time but as your endurance grows I found that the body can easily cope with much more and the problem isnt riding too little but too much.

    For my first 100 i did a few 70 milers as I figured if i could do that then the last 30, no matter how slow I went would be ok - and sure enough it was better than ok, as on the day just being pulled along by others and the adrenalin of it all made not only easy but fun.

    You sound more than capable to do it - enjoy it all.
    The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns
    momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself.
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    sub55 wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    sub55 wrote:
    not sure how you calculate calories to mils

    On a hardish hilly 55 mile solo ride I use 2269 kJ of energy. 1 kCal is roughly equivalent to 1 kJ (depending on the efficiency of the body). This equates to roughly 41 kCals per mile.

    Riding in flatter terrain and within bunches of riders, I'd estimate this would equte to around 30 kCals per mile.

    Why do you think you can't calculate calories from miles or vice versa?

    because there is to many variables like gradient, wind speed and direction, air pressure, temperature. etc you are also implying that your calculations apply to everyone, which they plainly don't .

    also not entirely sure 1 kCal=1 kJ

    This: "Seven cyclists did 3 time trials of 800 kilojoules each. A kiloJoule (kJ) is a measure of mechanical energy expended; 1 kcal = 4.184 kJ. Considering that an experienced and fit cyclist is about 23% efficient, this means that they were riding as intensely as they could until they expended roughly 880 kcal." is from the Joe Friel blog. He knows his stuff. It's from here: http://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2 ... chive.html. Google is also quite useful for searching for information you're sceptical about. It can be found at http://www.google.co.uk

    I'm not telling the OP that he will use exactly the same kCals per mile as I will. But, as he's somebody who is asking for advice, I thought it was worth pointing out that he needs to make sure he's properly fed to complete the route. BTW, a circular route will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.
    doyler78 wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    doyler78 wrote:
    Would it not be easier just to estimate it on time and effort as miles will vary with both. Would make it a bit less complicated :wink:

    There are lots of ways to do it, but if you have a power meter you know exactly how many kJ you use on a ride and it's very easy to use this understanding to transfer it to other situations.

    So the OP has a power meter?

    I don't know if the OP has a powermeter, but the laws of physics apply to everybody whether they have a powermeter or not.
  • cougie
    cougie Posts: 22,512
    Impossible to quote a figure for calories per mile. How big is the rider ? How aero ? How hilly ? How windy ? Alone ? In a group ?

    100miles isn't too difficult. Id say pacing and eating were the key and the OP will find this for themselves.
    Just extend the riding distance gradually. You can increase faster than you can with running.
  • carl_p
    carl_p Posts: 989
    As a veteran of 3 Norwich 100s I can confirm it is definitely do-able with a reasonable fitness level. I agree with GiantMike in that if you can for ride for 70 miles then the extra 30 miles on the day is not too hard. Apart from the bits around the North Norfolk coast it is flat, and as fast as you want to make it. 3 months training for it is ideal. It's a great ride. Enjoy.

    And if you love it that much there's the Boudicca Sportive (Snetterton to Hunstanton) 100 miler 2 weeks later :wink:
    Specialized Venge S Works
    Cannondale Synapse
    Enigma Etape
    Genesis Flyer Single Speed


    Turn the corner, rub my eyes and hope the world will last...
  • chazsizeland
    chazsizeland Posts: 10
    Cheers for the suggestions guys.

    I only live a 10 minute walk from work so a commute isn't an option. I'm going to try to get out at least twice if not 3 times a week of 10-15 miles and do the 10% increase rule to get up to 70-80 milers before I taper going into the last 7-10 days before the event.

    Unlike the marathon I don't really mind how long it takes me to do the ride so think I'll just concentrate on getting some miles in my legs for the time being!
  • SBezza
    SBezza Posts: 2,173
    chazsizeland wrote:
    Cheers for the suggestions guys.

    I only live a 10 minute walk from work so a commute isn't an option. I'm going to try to get out at least twice if not 3 times a week of 10-15 miles and do the 10% increase rule to get up to 70-80 milers before I taper going into the last 7-10 days before the event.

    Unlike the marathon I don't really mind how long it takes me to do the ride so think I'll just concentrate on getting some miles in my legs for the time being!

    Why is commuting not an option, get up an hour earlier and ride an extended route into work :wink: , or back home and then walk to work. You can up mileage fairly easy on a bike, the 10% rule is OK for complete beginners but anyone with some fitness will be able to increase mileage by a bigger chunk each week, especially if it is only one long ride a week, only you will know what sort of increase you can sustain. I went from doing weekly 40 mile club runs to suddenly doing a 150km audax without any issues when I first started riding.

    Even during the week you should be able to do longer rides than 10-15 miles when the daylight gets a bit longer. If you can't spare more than an hour, then do them at a high tempo pace, or with some threshold type effort thrown in, not much point doing these short rides at an tradition endurance pace, they are just too short really.

    As for calories used, that is totally dependant on the power you put out and for how long you ride for. I would guessimate for about 600-700 per hour however, though this is a pure guess to be honest. Feeding wise, just eat a good breakfast and top up with energy drink and food every hour. You won't be able to digest as much as you use, but at an endurance pace you will use fat as a fuel as well, so don't need carbs for every calorie used.
  • ozzy1000
    ozzy1000 Posts: 73
    I did my first 100miler last summer. I don't think i'd ridden more than 65-70miles prior to it, but on the day i fine and suprised myself at how well it went. I have to say trying to get in a few rides of 70miles would have been better as i definately hit a bit of a wall around 75-80 miles on the day. the biggest thing for me was thinking about eating, I read somwhere that we can digest around 1gm of carb every minute so when on the bike we should aim to consume 25-30gms of carbs every half an hour. it seems like alot of food, but it does work well for me, I tend to snack on bannanas, flapjack, figrolls, gels ect, somthing every half an hour...

    i bought and read "the time crunched cyclist" i found it quite handy for thinking about how to structure training, and if you stick to one of the training programs you'll definately see progress,

    all the best, and good luck!!
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    GiantMike wrote:
    BTW, a circular route will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.

    I was going to say b****cks but it'll get censored so I'll just say tosh.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    Tom Butcher wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    BTW, a circular route will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.

    I was going to say b****cks but it'll get censored so I'll just say tosh.

    Please explain why this is tosh for an almost completely flat course, on a normal UK day (i.e. average windspeed at 10m being 8.8kts, so about 10 mph, so around 6 at ground level) [source: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/ ... isham.html ]. Considering I said MOST.
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    ozzy1000 wrote:
    I read somwhere that we can digest around 1gm of carb every minute so when on the bike we should aim to consume 25-30gms of carbs every half an hour. it seems like alot of food, but it does work well for me, I tend to snack on bannanas, flapjack, figrolls, gels ect, somthing every half an hour...

    You should be careful offering advice on a forum unless you have done a scientific analysis on the course/rider/weather first. :wink:
  • sub55
    sub55 Posts: 1,025
    GiantMike wrote:
    Tom Butcher wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    BTW, a circular route will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.

    I was going to say b****cks but it'll get censored so I'll just say tosh.

    Please explain why this is tosh for an almost completely flat course, on a normal UK day (i.e. average windspeed at 10m being 8.8kts, so about 10 mph, so around 6 at ground level) [source: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/ ... isham.html ]. Considering I said MOST.

    i am with Tom Butcher on this you`r talking tosh
    you never get back on the easy bits as much as you put in on the hard bits
    constantly reavalueating the situation and altering the perceived parameters accordingly
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    sub55 wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    Tom Butcher wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    BTW, a circular route will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.

    I was going to say b****cks but it'll get censored so I'll just say tosh.

    Please explain why this is tosh for an almost completely flat course, on a normal UK day (i.e. average windspeed at 10m being 8.8kts, so about 10 mph, so around 6 at ground level) [source: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/ ... isham.html ]. Considering I said MOST.

    i am with Tom Butcher on this you`r talking tosh
    you never get back on the easy bits as much as you put in on the hard bits

    I agree with you and Tom, which is why, in my original post, I used the caveat MOST. Perhaps you're trying to not understand my points or maybe you're just bored.

    Please feel free to answer the question I asked Tom though, because I don't think that for a flat course in light winds there would be more than a 5% penalty compared to a still air day. As this was originally advice to a newbie and I was offering him guidance on nutrition, I really don't think that marginal effects of wind on the time he would spend in the saddle are overly important.
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    I just used this website http://www.cyclingpowermodels.com/TimeT ... lysis.aspx to run an analysis of the effect of a 12kph ( 8 mph) wind on times. The increase in time required to complete a 100 mile route with no wind was 303 mins (200W and all other parameters constant). Doing 2x50 mile segments, 1 into a headwind and the other with a tailwind increased this time to 316 min. This equates to an increase of around 4%.

    So as I said above, I agree that you do suffer some penalty as a result of wind and/or gradient, but MOST of it is negated by a circular course. This was my original point. Hence the use of the word MOST.

    Still tosh?
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    GiantMike wrote:
    Tom Butcher wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    BTW, a circular route will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.

    I was going to say b****cks but it'll get censored so I'll just say tosh.

    Please explain why this is tosh for an almost completely flat course, on a normal UK day (i.e. average windspeed at 10m being 8.8kts, so about 10 mph, so around 6 at ground level) [source: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/ ... isham.html ]. Considering I said MOST.

    You said a circular course will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.

    Alpe D'Huez is 14k - so if I were to ride up it and back down again that is equivalent to riding 28k on the flat ? Surely your common sense tells you it's harder to ride a given distance in a given time through hilly terrain than on the flat.

    As far as wind goes there are more angles in which it makes it harder than easier - so a headwind is worst but a cross wind is also a disadvantage.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    I didn't realise that the OP was riding up Alpe D'Huez. I thought he was riding an almost flat course in the UK in the middle of summer where the average windspeed is less than 10 mph. I got that from the topic title and the description in the question he asked. I'm not offering him advice on pacing for a 100 mile TT. This is why I said
    GiantMike wrote:
    .....as he's somebody who is asking for advice, I thought it was worth pointing out that he needs to make sure he's properly fed to complete the route. BTW, a circular route will negate most of the effects of gradient and wind.
    Tom Butcher wrote:
    Surely your common sense tells you it's harder to ride a given distance in a given time through hilly terrain than on the flat.

    Yes, I do. I said that in my post above.
    GiantMike wrote:
    On a hardish hilly 55 mile solo ride I use 2269 kJ of energy. 1 kCal is roughly equivalent to 1 kJ (depending on the efficiency of the body). This equates to roughly 41 kCals per mile.

    Riding in flatter terrain and within bunches of riders, I'd estimate this would equate to around 30 kCals per mile.

    Are you not bored of this yet? Have you not realised that you're both trying to make an argument out of nothing? :roll:
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    Hang on - you asked me to explain why your comment about the circular route negating the effects of wind and gradient was tosh - so I did.

    As it turns out apparently you meant to say that on a still day on a flat course the wind and gradient wont have much affect - in which case you should have said that in the first place and saved all this fuss.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    Tom Butcher wrote:
    Hang on - you asked me to explain why your comment about the circular route negating the effects of wind and gradient was tosh - so I did.

    As it turns out apparently you meant to say that on a still day on a flat course the wind and gradient wont have much affect - in which case you should have said that in the first place and saved all this fuss.

    No. I asked you to explain why a circular route didn't MOSTLY negate it (within the context of a post about a flattish British summer 100 miler). I've said nothing about a still air day and my example of it being MOSTLY negated included a UK average wind.

    So, as we appear to be arguing about semantics, do you agree that if the average rider rode a flattish course in average UK wind conditions then most of the effects of wind and gradient would be negated (for example using the figures I put through cyclingpowermodels)?
  • Tom Butcher
    Tom Butcher Posts: 3,830
    GM - it was the circular route bit I didn't agree with. I was reading into it an implication that a descent made up for a climb and a tail wind made up for a headwind - so in effect gradient and wind speed wasn't that important. That would be, I hope you'll agree, tosh - but if I've inferred something that wasn't meant you have my apologies.
    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • GiantMike
    GiantMike Posts: 3,139
    hug__by_Defies.jpg
  • simon_e
    simon_e Posts: 1,706
    GiantMike wrote:
    Are you not bored of this yet?
    Very.

    Calories per mile, powermets, variables, Alpe d'Huez? What a load of b*ll*cks!

    Why hasn't anybody told the OP he needs a £2500 carbon bike with bling wheels, carbon bottle cage, Garmin, the right apps, Strava...?

    :roll:

    The simple fact is, he needs to ride his bike. If he does he will soon work out how much to eat and what kind of food goes down well and maybe even which way to point his bike when he leaves his house.
    Aspire not to have more, but to be more.

Categories