A good time for 10km TT?

Donald Munro wrote:
Donald Munro wrote:
I'd be very surprised if there are any pros (apart from crit pro) only
doing 10 hours a week.

Ron Ruff wrote:
Yes... pros who don't do long road races or stage races. Most US races
are crits.

Dunno how long your criteriums are but I've done 80-100km flat races and
criteriums in strong cross winds where I've needed all the endurance I had
just to stay in the bunch and contest for a place in the echelon.

dumbass,

ron is right in the sense there are some "pros" (depending on what you
mean by that) who are only competitive in criteriums.

it's not so much a question of endurance as it is power:weight ratio.
"criterium specialist" might be a euphemism for fattie.

Donald Munro wrote:
To much intensity can result in not doing enough intensity. If you try
ride hard every day you won't be able to ride hard enough when it matters.

I agree... and this is also why a lower volume of training is necessary
if you are focusing on intensity... and why 10hrs can be enough. You
need to balance the intensity of the workouts with adequate recovery...
and the shorter the workouts, the greater the intensity can be.

After a long ride you will also need to recover. The other problem is
that long tempo rides are not effective for increasing your lactate
threshold.

I honestly wouldn't prescribe this sort of training for everyone, but
it seems to work well for some elite riders who compete in shorter
races.

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
On 7 Jun 2006 18:20:58 -0700, "Ron Ruff" wrote:


8-10hrs a week is plenty... some domestic pros do well on that amount.

Who? And do they average 8-10 or are you including just the weeks
they are resting before/after a key event?


I think that is 10 hours per week not including their day job as a
spinning instructor.

Joseph

Ron Ruff wrote:
Donald Munro wrote:
To much intensity can result in not doing enough intensity. If you try
ride hard every day you won't be able to ride hard enough when it matters.

I agree... and this is also why a lower volume of training is necessary
if you are focusing on intensity... and why 10hrs can be enough. You
need to balance the intensity of the workouts with adequate recovery...
and the shorter the workouts, the greater the intensity can be.

I think the trick is to have it play out as planned. Somebody can have
a plan and full intention of doing something, but in reality it doesn't
work out that way. So I think it may be easy to slightly overdo it, or
even easier slightly underdo it and think you are following the plan.

After a long ride you will also need to recover. The other problem is
that long tempo rides are not effective for increasing your lactate
threshold.

Long rides (at lower intensity) may not increase your LT, but among
other things they increase your ability to tolerate above LT levels of
exertion. So you really need both.

I honestly wouldn't prescribe this sort of training for everyone, but
it seems to work well for some elite riders who compete in shorter
races.

I suppose if they can use intensity to get their power output so high,
the rest doesn't really matter as they make short work of any extra
efforts in a short race.

Joseph

amit.ghosh wrote:
ron is right in the sense there are some "pros" (depending on what you
mean by that) who are only competitive in criteriums.

it's not so much a question of endurance as it is power:weight ratio.
"criterium specialist" might be a euphemism for fattie.

Oh you mean all the crit pros.

in message , Donald
Munro ') wrote:

amit.ghosh wrote:
ron is right in the sense there are some "pros" (depending on what you
mean by that) who are only competitive in criteriums.

it's not so much a question of endurance as it is power:weight ratio.
"criterium specialist" might be a euphemism for fattie.

Oh you mean all the crit pros.

Crit pro quo?

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; better than your average performing pineapple

wrote:
Donald Munro wrote:
Donald Munro wrote:
I'd be very surprised if there are any pros (apart from crit pro) only
doing 10 hours a week.

Ron Ruff wrote:
Yes... pros who don't do long road races or stage races. Most US races
are crits.

Dunno how long your criteriums are but I've done 80-100km flat races and
criteriums in strong cross winds where I've needed all the endurance I had
just to stay in the bunch and contest for a place in the echelon.

dumbass,

ron is right in the sense there are some "pros" (depending on what you
mean by that) who are only competitive in criteriums.

it's not so much a question of endurance as it is power:weight ratio.
"criterium specialist" might be a euphemism for fattie.

I prefer the term "big boned" with all that implies.

Joseph

Donald Munro wrote:
Donald Munro wrote:
I'd be very surprised if there are any pros (apart from crit pro) only
doing 10 hours a week.

Ron Ruff wrote:
Yes... pros who don't do long road races or stage races. Most US races
are crits.

Dunno how long your criteriums are but I've done 80-100km flat races and
criteriums in strong cross winds where I've needed all the endurance I had
just to stay in the bunch and contest for a place in the echelon.

Depends I guess what you mean by endurance.

I define endurance as the how long I can maintain consistency in my
output, no matter what level of exertion it may be. When the
consistency fails, my endurance has reached it's end. I get tired.

When I am fresh I exactly how long I can maintain any given level of
power-output, and I know what level of exertion is required to do so.
When endurance runs out, the levels of available power go down, yet the
exertion goes up. Endurance lasts to the point where consistency fails.

If I get dropped in a hilly and/or windy short (100km) race it is
because I don't have the power to keep up, not due to lack of
endurance. In other words my performance is consistent and tractable,
just not powerful enough.

In theory my 10km TT time would be the same after a 10min warm-up or a
50km ride, as these distances/times are well within my endurance range.
After some longer distance/time, my 10km TT time would go down of
course. How far/long before it does is what I think of as endurance.

Joseph

Donald Munro wrote:
Oh you mean all the crit pros.

Simon Brooke wrote:
Crit pro quo?

We have several members of the crit pro genus on rbr. They normally
result from the mating of gorillas and chimpanzees and can be recognised
by their tendency to accuse everyone who finished ahead of them in race of
doping.

Tom Kunich wrote:

The fact is that aero stuff and TT bikes make almost no contribution to
a person unless they're already averaging over 25 mph.

This is nonsense. There is no minimal speed at which a reduction in
aerodynamic drag isn't helpful (even if only to a very small degree).
In fact, in terms of absolute time saved, slower riders stand to gain
the most from the use of aerodynamic equipment


In ANY case, a person should be setting records for his area without
Aero stuff before he starts using it.

Why?

Andy Coggan (still CSO of r.b.r.)