Training for monthly centuries

"gds" wrote in message
om...
"Peter Cole" wrote in message
news:8mQod.559018$mD.552187@attbi_s02...

Peter, you seem to have a need to find lots of things as being stupid
and useless. You don't believe aero bars work (much), you don't
believe in periodicity.

"gds" (if I can call you that), you seem to have a need to believe in
things in an unqualified way. "Periodicity" is a training technique used by
elite racers. These are people that are trying to squeeze the last few
percent out of their genetics, since that's all the difference between
finishing first and last. There is really no applicability to recreational
cyclists, certainly not for someone who's just trying to finish centuries.

I also do "believe" in aerobars (as I have used them for years), but the
effect is much smaller than many claim. That's my experience and it seems
to agree with the wind tunnel data.

You don't seem to believe in much other
planning in devising a training schedule.
That's OK and you can certainly ride any way you want. But I think
that in the face of all the published and anecdotal evidence that
these things work for most folks that it is pretty unhelpfull to
reccommend against everything without presenting much in the way of
either evidence or experience other than your own - especially as your
expereince seems to be different from most others.

My experience is consistant with a fairly large group of distance riders
that I ride with. The subject was distance riding, not time trialing or
crit or stage racing. It was also for a relative newbie. People like that
don't need a "training schedule", they just need to ride.

Now, back to the question in this thread. It doesn't matter if the OP
has only 3 days per week to train. There is lots of evidence that a
structured training plan will yield better results than "just riding."
I'm not against just riding without a plan. That is great fun and I
often follow that path. But it is not the most efficient way to
improve performance which is how I interpet the original question.

Well, you cited a book, did you read it? The author recommends
"periodicity" only "after a year or two of building endurance". He admits
that "periodicity" is mostly a racing technique, but mumbles something
about it perhaps being useful for a tour or century prep. Beginning riders
should just "keep intensity low to moderate and build frequency and time".
Wow! What a revelation!

You seem to feel that lots of things are just for racers. Well in most
sports it is the competitive front edge that moves performance for
everyone forward. In cycling much of the progress in both equipment
and training comes from racing. Sure, as a recreational cyclist you
may not ride a $10K bike or train 5 hours a day. But you are riding a
bike that has technology developed for racing and can benefit from the
training principles if not the total effort developed to improve
racing performance. To argue otherwise is just silly.

You really believe all that magazine-speak? You're a Madison Ave. poster
boy. "Racing" technology poorly serves recreational riders, ditto for
exotic training schedules. What about hypobaric chambers? EPO?

One of my favorite memories was of a friend, who was a very strong rider,
merrily clanking along on a "fast" club ride, on a rusty, vintage Raleigh
3-speed (mixte frame), complete with fenders and chainguard, a bike he had
just rescued from the dump. You either have the legs or you don't, he did.
The rest of the crap is just posing and make-believe.

Peter Cole wrote:
|| "Roger Zoul" wrote
|||
||| Increasing distance gradually is the easiest way
||||| to go, it avoids "death marches". As I said originally, you can
||||| even ramp up on consecutive days -- lots of people do this on
||||| long tours (like cross USA).
|||
||| But there should be a desire to do centuries within a reasonable
||| time as well. So merely training endurance may not give optimal
||| results. I'd rather do a century in 6 hours as opposed to 8. YMMV.
||
|| OK, if you want to change the goal to speed, you'll want a different
|| approach.

That's not what I was saying. The goal is to do a century a month. If
speed were really the goal, then I might have said doing a century in less
than 6 hours.

The idea is to ride a century but not take forever to complete it.

Even if you're looking to ride long distances fast, you're
|| better off building a base first. The conventional wisdom is to do
|| that with "LSD" (long, slow/steady, distance). If you're just going
|| for distance, you can stop there. The OP didn't mention wanting to
|| go fast, so my advice was in that context.

I've read some books and one account how this guy (kinda oldish) would did
and won several RAMs used to use teh LSD method of riding, doing, as I
recall, 1000+ miles per week (a lot of LSD). However, one year some guy who
was a racer decided to enter and this old fellow decided to change his
routine. So he did club rides which we road fast and short, but kept his
distance riding to the weekends (saturday as I recall). After training this
way for a while, the won the next rase across america in record time. You
may recall the story better than I, but that is the gist (sloppy, I know) of
his comments. Simply doing LSD is supposedly not the best way to get there,
even if the goal is endurance. Of course, not having done it personally I
can't make any real claims, but this is the gist of what someone with a lot
of edurance experience relates in a book I own. If you like, I'll find the
book and the account and provide more accurate details.


||
||||| I ride to get away from schedules. I can't think of anything that
||||| reduces cycling to drudgery faster than cranking out a calculated
||||| number of miles on prescribed days. If that's your idea of fun,
||||| then we live on different planets.
|||
||| The way you describe makes it not sound like fun, but keep in mind
||| that you're expressing your POV (I admit you have a lot more
||| experience than I do).
||
|| My "POV" is based on what I and a lot of (better than me) distance
|| riders do. To build endurance, you have to go long. If you want to
|| increase endurance as fast as you can, you should go as long as you
|| can as often as you can. People I know who train for distance often
|| never do fast rides, but they can go forever. The strongest distance
|| riders I know put in well over 10K miles/yr., they can comfortably
|| do events up to 1200K (750 miles).

Well, one can wonder if conventional wisdom is correct. People used to
claim that long slow cardio was the best way to burn fat, but more recent
research suggest short bouts of high intensity cardio mixed with bouts of
low intensity cardio results in greater fat burn.

||
||
||| Well, then, what that rider did was indeed drudgery for him. I
||| would say that his problems stem for more than just riding a
||| schedule, however. I find riding to my schedules to be fun and
||| easy to stick to, but part of that is because i'm in no way afraid
||| to change my schedule as I see fit. After all, this is supposed to
||| be fun, right?
||
|| It's burn-out, that's all. You're just starting out, come back in a
|| decade, we'll compare notes.

Well, why the burn-out if it was supposed to be fun?


||
||| Interesting. I did some of this over the summer. I did the
||| various charity rides in my area, starting with a 35, then a
||| metric, another metric, and then a century. I didn't complete the
||| first metric as it was way more hilly than I was expecting and I
||| attacked too hard on some hills. I got the second metric, however.
||| I only made 80 miles on the century before my legs gave out, but
||| that ride had the greatest amount of climbing I'd done to day. I
||| would be better if I had a hillier routes from my house, be
||| compared to many of the lovely rides in this area my typical
||| home-based routes just aren't that hilly. Hopefully, I've built up
||| enough on my legs to complete a flat century on the Saturday after
||| next. Problem is I haven't been riding much in the last month, due
||| to a variety of reasons. We'll see.
||
|| Fatigue is cumulative, endurance is how much fatigue you can
|| tolerate and how fast you can recover. Most experienced distance
|| riders will rate a ride based on total climbing as much as distance.
|| If you don't have convenient hills, you just have to compensate by
|| riding longer rides.

Longer rides certainly will allow greater cumulative climbing, but I'm not
sure if that is the best. if I ride 150 miles with 5000 ft of elevation
gain, does that mean I can do 100 miles with 5000 ft of el. gain? I would
think the latter would feel much harder than the former. The best solution
would be to match or exceed my training distance and el. gain with that of
the course I plan to ride. Of course, that's not so easy to do.

||
||||| It's been my experience that multi-day tours also can be
||||| "train-as-you-go". I frequently do a 360 mile 3-day tour over
||||| Memorial day, when I typically haven't done a ride longer than
||||| 50-60 miles since the previous summer. The first day can be
||||| pretty tough, but the surprising thing is that the subsequent
||||| days don't seem that hard. If the weather and scenery are nice,
||||| the miles just go by. I love those rides, but I've seen riders
||||| come & go, often the really gung-ho ones burn-out and don't come
||||| back. They're not a whole lot
||||| of fun to ride with while they're around, either.
|||
||| That sounds like fun. HOwever, my butt would be a limiting factor
||| in doing 360 miles over 3 days after only doing 60 miles. My guess
||| is that you just maintain a level of bike fitness year-round that
||| can allow you to do this. Such may not be the case for your typical
||| newbie or inexperience cyclist.
||
|| Yes, but that fitness comes from doing long base miles.

I'm not convinced that hard-riding doesn't translate, to some degree, to
benefits in endurance riding. I definitely think it is necessary to do some
endurance riding but I'm not convinced that all of, or even the majority of,
ones riding needs to be endurnace riding to make gains there.


|| Part of the
|| distance learning curve is fine-tuning your equipment and setup so
|| that your bottom/feet/hands don't get beat up.

Agreed.

You also need to
|| learn pacing, eating/drinking, stretching, etc. I went through many
|| saddles and shoes before I found what would let me get past the 250
|| mile mark. It takes time to work this stuff out, that's why taking
|| it slow & steady is the best approach. Any distance rider will have
|| horror stories of nausea/cramping/dehydration/bonking/hypothermia,
|| etc., etc. People get those stories when they try to go too far, too
|| fast.

Yes, that sounds plausible. However, I'm not sure how exactly that fits
with the century per month goal. It's not that great a distance. I would
imagine,as one ramps the miles up, that there are a variety of issues that
become of concern at various distances. As some examples, I found out that
the original saddle that came with my bike gave my butt problems at 45 miles
or so. So I got a new saddle. Then I found out that in the summer, my feet
would burn like heck at around 60 miles. While I bought some platform
pedals, I also found that just wearing my shoes looser would go a long way
to address that issue. My guess is that some harder soled shoes would
provide a better solution.

Peter Cole wrote:
|| One of my favorite memories was of a friend, who was a very strong
|| rider, merrily clanking along on a "fast" club ride, on a rusty,
|| vintage Raleigh 3-speed (mixte frame), complete with fenders and
|| chainguard, a bike he had just rescued from the dump. You either
|| have the legs or you don't, he did.

In the end, that's the bottom line.

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:20:15 -0600, Harry
wrote:

Our local bike club has scheduled a series of 16 centuries (100-145
miles) during 2005. There is one about every month with 4 months
having 2 per month. My wife and I are thinking about the feasibility
of attempting this series. The first ride is scheduled in mid January.

We are in our early 50s (yes, I've read the thread about one's age -
which is a factor!) and have been riding our tandem since the fall of
2003. We have logged about 2500 miles during this year, with our
longest ride being about 70 miles. Our schedule is such that we
usually have only 3 days per week available for riding, with 2 of
those days being a Saturday and Sunday. I have the following
questions:

1) Is it possible to successfully ride centuries monthly with only 3
days per week of training?

2) If the answer to question #1 is yes, are there any published
schedules for this type of training? I have found many 6 day and a few
5 day schedules, but non with 4 or 3 day rides per week.

3) If there aren't any schedules for 3 day training, does anyone have
suggested guidelines?

TIA,
HarryB

I wish to thank each of you for taking the time to help me think
through these questions. Here is the "training schedule" I think we'll
adopt based on meshing your advice with our (little) experience:

1) We will do our best to ride at least three days a week, with our
mid week ride (about 23 miles) being the one in which we will push for
faster speeds than we plan on riding on our centuries. The terrain of
that ride is a little less hilly than that of the typical century
route.

2) We'll plan on increasing the length of our weekend rides over time,
with the Saturday ride being shorter than the Sunday one. For the
Sunday ride we will try to ride part of the next scheduled century's
route as far as our ability allows.

3) The original goal of doing all 16 centuries is too ambitious for us
at this time. (The LBS is awarding an attractive prize for completing
all 16 centuries or lesser prizes for completing certain mileages for
the year.) We will target a specific overall mileage as the season
progresses.

4) We need a different bike since the one our tandem dealer sold us
isn't comfortable. I feel that he took advantage of our ignorance and
enthusiasm a year ago and sold us one that appears to be too big (it's
an extra large frame and I'm 5'7" with a 34" inseam.) However, since I
haven't discussed this with him yet I'm holding out the possibility
that our lack of cycling experience (none in the previous 30 years)
was a big factor in us ending up with a bike that isn't right for us.
That is the subject of another thread since we are able to ride some
longer distances on this bike, but I'm sure it will be a serious
impediment for our goal of longer rides.

5) Keeping my stoker happy is my primary goal because if a tandem
team's stoker isn't happy there won't be a tandem team for very long.
I am blessed with a wonderful companion (of 31 years) whose desire to
ride with me makes all the difference in the world. She has forgiven
my mistakes (like the time I failed to unclip in time and we both went
down...) and wants to continue to explore the open road with me.

Thanks,
HarryB

Harry wrote:
|| On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:20:15 -0600, Harry
|| wrote:
||
||| Our local bike club has scheduled a series of 16 centuries (100-145
||| miles) during 2005. There is one about every month with 4 months
||| having 2 per month. My wife and I are thinking about the feasibility
||| of attempting this series. The first ride is scheduled in mid
||| January.
|||
||| We are in our early 50s (yes, I've read the thread about one's age -
||| which is a factor!) and have been riding our tandem since the fall
||| of 2003. We have logged about 2500 miles during this year, with our
||| longest ride being about 70 miles. Our schedule is such that we
||| usually have only 3 days per week available for riding, with 2 of
||| those days being a Saturday and Sunday. I have the following
||| questions:
|||
||| 1) Is it possible to successfully ride centuries monthly with only 3
||| days per week of training?
|||
||| 2) If the answer to question #1 is yes, are there any published
||| schedules for this type of training? I have found many 6 day and a
||| few 5 day schedules, but non with 4 or 3 day rides per week.
|||
||| 3) If there aren't any schedules for 3 day training, does anyone
||| have suggested guidelines?
|||
||| TIA,
||| HarryB
||
|| I wish to thank each of you for taking the time to help me think
|| through these questions. Here is the "training schedule" I think
|| we'll adopt based on meshing your advice with our (little)
|| experience:
||
|| 1) We will do our best to ride at least three days a week, with our
|| mid week ride (about 23 miles) being the one in which we will push
|| for faster speeds than we plan on riding on our centuries. The
|| terrain of that ride is a little less hilly than that of the
|| typical century route.
||
|| 2) We'll plan on increasing the length of our weekend rides over
|| time, with the Saturday ride being shorter than the Sunday one. For
|| the Sunday ride we will try to ride part of the next scheduled
|| century's route as far as our ability allows.
||
|| 3) The original goal of doing all 16 centuries is too ambitious for
|| us at this time. (The LBS is awarding an attractive prize for
|| completing all 16 centuries or lesser prizes for completing certain
|| mileages for the year.) We will target a specific overall mileage as
|| the season progresses.
||
|| 4) We need a different bike since the one our tandem dealer sold us
|| isn't comfortable. I feel that he took advantage of our ignorance and
|| enthusiasm a year ago and sold us one that appears to be too big
|| (it's an extra large frame and I'm 5'7" with a 34" inseam.) However,
|| since I haven't discussed this with him yet I'm holding out the
|| possibility that our lack of cycling experience (none in the
|| previous 30 years) was a big factor in us ending up with a bike that
|| isn't right for us. That is the subject of another thread since we
|| are able to ride some longer distances on this bike, but I'm sure it
|| will be a serious impediment for our goal of longer rides.
||
|| 5) Keeping my stoker happy is my primary goal because if a tandem
|| team's stoker isn't happy there won't be a tandem team for very long.
|| I am blessed with a wonderful companion (of 31 years) whose desire to
|| ride with me makes all the difference in the world. She has forgiven
|| my mistakes (like the time I failed to unclip in time and we both
|| went down...) and wants to continue to explore the open road with me.
||
|| Thanks,
|| HarryB

That's all good stuff Harry. Please report in on your progress!

"Harry" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 12:20:15 -0600, Harry
wrote:

I wish to thank each of you for taking the time to help me think
through these questions. Here is the "training schedule" I think we'll
adopt based on meshing your advice with our (little) experience:

1) We will do our best to ride at least three days a week, with our
mid week ride (about 23 miles) being the one in which we will push for
faster speeds than we plan on riding on our centuries. The terrain of
that ride is a little less hilly than that of the typical century
route.

2) We'll plan on increasing the length of our weekend rides over time,
with the Saturday ride being shorter than the Sunday one. For the
Sunday ride we will try to ride part of the next scheduled century's
route as far as our ability allows.

3) The original goal of doing all 16 centuries is too ambitious for us
at this time. (The LBS is awarding an attractive prize for completing
all 16 centuries or lesser prizes for completing certain mileages for
the year.) We will target a specific overall mileage as the season
progresses.

4) We need a different bike since the one our tandem dealer sold us
isn't comfortable. I feel that he took advantage of our ignorance and
enthusiasm a year ago and sold us one that appears to be too big (it's
an extra large frame and I'm 5'7" with a 34" inseam.) However, since I
haven't discussed this with him yet I'm holding out the possibility
that our lack of cycling experience (none in the previous 30 years)
was a big factor in us ending up with a bike that isn't right for us.
That is the subject of another thread since we are able to ride some
longer distances on this bike, but I'm sure it will be a serious
impediment for our goal of longer rides.

5) Keeping my stoker happy is my primary goal because if a tandem
team's stoker isn't happy there won't be a tandem team for very long.
I am blessed with a wonderful companion (of 31 years) whose desire to
ride with me makes all the difference in the world. She has forgiven
my mistakes (like the time I failed to unclip in time and we both went
down...) and wants to continue to explore the open road with me.

Thanks,
HarryB

It sounds like a great plan and I expect that you and your stoker will have
fun season.

On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:54:44 -0600, Harry wrote:

I wish to thank each of you for taking the time to help me think
through these questions. Here is the "training schedule" I think we'll
adopt based on meshing your advice with our (little) experience:

1) We will do our best to ride at least three days a week, with our
mid week ride (about 23 miles) being the one in which we will push for
faster speeds than we plan on riding on our centuries. The terrain of
that ride is a little less hilly than that of the typical century
route.

2) We'll plan on increasing the length of our weekend rides over time,
with the Saturday ride being shorter than the Sunday one. For the
Sunday ride we will try to ride part of the next scheduled century's
route as far as our ability allows.


That sounds like a plan.

3) The original goal of doing all 16 centuries is too ambitious for us
at this time. (The LBS is awarding an attractive prize for completing
all 16 centuries or lesser prizes for completing certain mileages for
the year.) We will target a specific overall mileage as the season
progresses.

Sensible.

4) We need a different bike since the one our tandem dealer sold us
isn't comfortable. I feel that he took advantage of our ignorance and
enthusiasm a year ago and sold us one that appears to be too big (it's
an extra large frame and I'm 5'7" with a 34" inseam.) However, since I
haven't discussed this with him yet I'm holding out the possibility
that our lack of cycling experience (none in the previous 30 years)
was a big factor in us ending up with a bike that isn't right for us.
That is the subject of another thread since we are able to ride some
longer distances on this bike, but I'm sure it will be a serious
impediment for our goal of longer rides.

34" inseam at 5'7? If that's right then you aren't likely to find a great fit
on any off the shelf bike. That's an inseam that goes with a large frame and a
reach from a medium small.

I'm a returning rider myself and am amazed at how my bike's fit has changed
every few hundred miles. As I recover what little style I ever had the thing has
gone from awkwardly big to small, light and tossable. Turns out to be a near
perfect size for me and my riding.

In any case, fit is hugely important. Tandem fit probably has its own arcana and
subtlety that's entirely beyond me. On the other hand, I'm sure if you can be
accomodated in a position that lets you pedal well and comfortably the rest
works itself out.

5) Keeping my stoker happy is my primary goal because if a tandem
team's stoker isn't happy there won't be a tandem team for very long.
I am blessed with a wonderful companion (of 31 years) whose desire to
ride with me makes all the difference in the world. She has forgiven
my mistakes (like the time I failed to unclip in time and we both went
down...) and wants to continue to explore the open road with me.

Makes you a lucky man.

Have fun and keep us posted.

Ron

"Roger Zoul" wrote in message ...
Peter Cole wrote:
|| One of my favorite memories was of a friend, who was a very strong
|| rider, merrily clanking along on a "fast" club ride, on a rusty,
|| vintage Raleigh 3-speed (mixte frame), complete with fenders and
|| chainguard, a bike he had just rescued from the dump. You either
|| have the legs or you don't, he did.

In the end, that's the bottom line.

Yes! The question is how you get the legs (and lungs, and heart).

Let me just end my contribution to this thread by saying that with
over 40 years of training in cycling and other sports I simply
disagree. Sure, one needs a base upon which to build more intense
training. But the base is part of general fitness and need not be
sport psecific for several years.

I have read Friel's books and many others. I also have a long period
of persanal experience. That expereince is with my body and with the
results of many training partners. Although I have raced I am
certainly not nor have ever been elite. But structured training
(including periodicity) ahs resulted in performance gains for me and
all of my training partners.

We all have the experience of seeing a superior atthlete perform at a
high level (compared to us) with little training or inferior
equipment. That's what superior means. I once knew an olympip gold
medalist who smoked a pack a day. His comment was to the effect "well
I hold the world record so it can't be bad for me" My thoughts were
always "gee, think how mch greater he'd be if he didn't smoke."

In any case folks should do what they want and have fun.