LA seen motorpacing in Austin

"smiles" wrote in message
...

Ummmm tell me where it wrong to try to up leg speed going INTO base
building
so you can do BASE work 1 to 2 MPH higher?? Please be specific

Because to go 1-2 mph faster requires a major increase in power output, and
has nothing to do with "leg speed". After all, bicycles do have gears (well,
road bikes, anyway).

Andy Coggan

warren wrote:
Don't bother trying to increase your "speed" right before base
training. The vast majority of your speed increase before you race next
year will come from the aerobic training you do DURING the base phase
of training.

-WG

What if I'm not a pro who beats the hell out of my body for 6-9 months
then takes 3 months off? What if I use a gym (I just might take a
full-time job working there this Winter) to maintain my base year-round?
Is there some work done on managing competitive seasonal training with
that kind of lifestyle?

If things go well, I could "compete" in speed skating in Winter, cycling
in Summer. We'll have to see about the skating though, since I can't
really skate yet.

--
--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
"I'm not proud. We really haven't done everything we could to protect
our customers. Our products just aren't engineered for security."
--Microsoft VP in charge of Windows OS Development, Brian Valentine.

In article , Raptor wrote:

warren wrote:
Don't bother trying to increase your "speed" right before base
training. The vast majority of your speed increase before you race next
year will come from the aerobic training you do DURING the base phase
of training.

-WG

What if I'm not a pro who beats the hell out of my body for 6-9 months
then takes 3 months off?

Huh? Pros don't take 3 months off. Maybe as long as one month, but
"off" to them means nothing hard. Only when they say, "I haven't
touched the bike" does it mean they weren't riding.

What if I use a gym (I just might take a
full-time job working there this Winter) to maintain my base year-round?
Is there some work done on managing competitive seasonal training with
that kind of lifestyle?

Essentially, you compress your training phases into shorter time
periods. To maintain base? Please be more specific about what it is you
want to maintain. (Partly so you'll understand more about your question
and partly so someone can answer it more accurately.)

If things go well, I could "compete" in speed skating in Winter, cycling
in Summer. We'll have to see about the skating though, since I can't
really skate yet.

Well you do have a nice little rink nearby although it won't be as much
fun without the orange-haired people screaming and singing while you
skate.

-WG

"Andy Coggan" wrote in message
nk.net...
This isn't the norm but as we all know accepting the norm is not always
the
best way to improve ...

This isn't the norm? According to whom?

what you have been saying IS the norm ... i am not suggesting speed training
into/during base is the "norm"

hell I am in no way an expert ... just seems logical to me ... i think we
are all trying to read too much into what someone else is doing;-)

s
http://boardnbike.com

Andy Coggan wrote:

"smiles" wrote in message
...

Ummmm tell me where it wrong to try to up leg speed going INTO base
building
so you can do BASE work 1 to 2 MPH higher?? Please be specific

Because to go 1-2 mph faster requires a major increase in power output, and
has nothing to do with "leg speed". After all, bicycles do have gears (well,
road bikes, anyway).

The leg speed versus a 1 mph delta is not a gear issue at speeds for
which the change of wind drag amounts to a "major increase in power
output."

It depends upon where that 1 mph delta is located. For example, if it
is a matter of bumping from 25 mph up to 26 mph, then it will likely
mean pedaling faster or slower for most bikes, since it is a 4%
difference in speed. It is not common for bikes to have gear steps much
below 6% steps, and for corncobs the geometric mean step is about 7%.
Gears are discrete, not continuous.

So to change from 25 to 26 mph means to either increase leg speed by 4%
or shift to a higher gear and decrease leg speed by 3%. A 2 mph change
is at the fat of the race gear steps, so leg speed can be held pretty
constant there for that particular change (in the 20-30 mph range) --
you are correct. I believe most people can range their rpm +/- 4% with
for specific types of effort with no difficulty whatsoever. I don't
know why Mr. Smiles is so concerned about leg speed. The discrete gear
resolution of 7% on road racing bikes is as good as the 16 bits on my
stereo CDs. Sounds good to me.

gwhite wrote:
(big snip)
It is not common for bikes to have gear steps much
below 6% steps, and for corncobs the geometric mean step is about 7%.
Gears are discrete, not continuous.
(snip)
I believe most people can range their rpm +/- 4% with
for specific types of effort with no difficulty whatsoever. I don't
know why Mr. Smiles is so concerned about leg speed. The discrete gear
resolution of 7% on road racing bikes is as good as the 16 bits on my
stereo CDs. Sounds good to me.

It's way off topic but a stereo CD has one part in 65536 resolution.
( It's 2 to the 16th power. )

Kevin

gwhite wrote:
Andy Coggan wrote:

Because to go 1-2 mph faster requires a major increase in power
output, and has nothing to do with "leg speed".

[snip]

So to change from 25 to 26 mph means to either increase leg speed by 4%
or shift to a higher gear and decrease leg speed by 3%.

But in either of those cases it means an increase in power of about 12%,
which is what Andy was saying.

Isn't this a logic error?

Andy Coggan wrote:


Power at lactate threshold is the most powerful physiological predictor of
performance in events from as a short as a pursuit to as long as a grand
tour.* It therefore follows that all except non-endurance trackies should
devote the majority of their annual training to developing this
physiological characteristic.

I actually have a couple of questions about lactate threshold, from things I've
read about in the popular press.

One article quoted a study where even experienced runners showed remarkable
improvement in a short period of time by doing LT training. But nobody shows
remarkable improvement over a long period of time. So doesn't this mean you
only need to do LT training for a couple of weeks before your racing season?

On a related note, it's often stated that your threshold ranges from about 75%
to 90% of max. But reputable coaches (eg Jack Daniels) suggest training at your
LT pace even if your LT pace is at 90%. This seems to be excessive, assuming
that 'previous' traing at 85% raised your LT from 85% to 90%, and your LT won't
go any higher then 90%. To raise your absolute pace at LT you'd have to now
raise your max.

"Ron Jenkins" wrote in message
...
Isn't this a logic error?

Why? The physiological "limiter" (I hate that term) has been identified, and
therefore an appropriate approach to training chosen.

One article quoted a study where even experienced runners showed
remarkable
improvement in a short period of time by doing LT training. But nobody
shows
remarkable improvement over a long period of time. So doesn't this mean
you
only need to do LT training for a couple of weeks before your racing
season?

No, because people do show "remarkable improvements over a long period of
time".

On a related note, it's often stated that your threshold ranges from about
75%
to 90% of max. But reputable coaches (eg Jack Daniels) suggest training at
your
LT pace even if your LT pace is at 90%. This seems to be excessive,
assuming
that 'previous' traing at 85% raised your LT from 85% to 90%, and your LT
won't
go any higher then 90%. To raise your absolute pace at LT you'd have to
now
raise your max.

There isn't any "either/or" to aerobic training, it's all shades of gray.
IOW, while training at/around LT you'll be increasing your threshold, but
you'll also be increasing your VO2max. Conversely, even intervals aimed at
increasing VO2max will help to "drag up" LT. The question then really
devolves to "what is the optimal training plan?", something that is far, far
beyond the scope of this discussion. I will say, however, that despite
having a high LT (up around 85% of VO2max), I've still had more competitive
success by focussing on that in training, vs. working really hard to try to
raise the "ceiling" imposed by my VO2max.

Andy Coggan

In article , Ron Jenkins
wrote:


One article quoted a study where even experienced runners showed remarkable
improvement in a short period of time by doing LT training. But nobody shows
remarkable improvement over a long period of time. So doesn't this mean you
only need to do LT training for a couple of weeks before your racing season?

This article about some studies seems to agree with you.
http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/dept/coach...1/londeree.htm

Title:
LACTATE THRESHOLD TRAINING RELATIVELY USELESS FOR CONDITIONED ATHLETES

One of the conclusions...

"To achieve maximum values in either lactate or ventilatory thresholds,
8-12 weeks of training was needed. Further training would result in no
further changes in the measures or if there were any, they would be
very small."

What isn't distiguished in the article is whether they were simply
looking for a change in HR at LT or changes in the amount of power
output (or other work) at LT.

-WG