Correct and effective base training

You need a good coach.

I'm no coach but i suppose i could interject a few thoughts about what you have stated and are asking...

a) From everything i have read and understand, to obtain any real adaption from high cadence riding you have to be consitent and use this style of riding during ALL your training sessions. To top that off, it could take well over a year for you to realize any benefit from this...

b) For most cyclists, riding at a high cadence (subject to individual interpretation) causes the body to work harder aerobically. So for any given speed/effort being maintained by a higher cadence pedal stroke you would be taxing your aerobic engine (lungs/oxygen uptake) more than you would be at a lower cadence for the same speed / effort...

c) Most everything i have read up to this point has indicated the same, that base training should be occuring below 75% MHR. However, if your feeling fatigued and you feel as though you need rest more often you might want to take a look at your diet. What kind of meals are you eating? fat content, protien, and carbs? What kind of recovery meals are you eating and how soon after your training sessions are they consumed. How long are your training sessions? What was your fitness level prior to starting your training?

Just some thoughts i had in regard to what you asked 🙂

Overtrainer said:

Hi,

I want to know what are your opinions on doing base training. Mark Allen says to stay below 75% of Max hr, Joe Friel says that during base 1-3 your sessions go up to zone 3 which is just below threshold. I do not have a problem with my hr during base training but I'd like to know at what cadence should base training be done. When I did base training three months back I stayed below 75% of max hr. In order to built cycling strength (because I don't believe in going to gym) I do hills in a heavy gear whilst keeping my hr low. The problem I find with this is that it brings me up to a very good condition very fast and thus shortly after I feel drained and it feels like I need to rest. But it is only base training and I kept my hr low, I have not even started intervals yet and then I need to rest and thus I have not reached my potential. In order to do proper periodisation I believe now that the low gear strength building sessions should now be done in Joe Friel's built period only. I do not follow a structured training program but I do have rest weeks, every 3rd or 4th week. Now my question is should the base period consist of mainly long low hr kilometers with high cadence speed sessions thrown in? What adaptation will high cadence, low power give me during the base period? Any ideas on your favourate base training sessions?

I thought I'd chime in with a few comments etc.:

(1) High cadence riding: Depending in the type of interval you'll get different adaptions.
- Low resistance/power will give you better cycling effiency through smother stroke and increased (doeh 🙂) ability to handle high cadence for use in sprints etc.
- High resistance/power works on your VO2Max
As mymilkexpired wrote, you'r looking at a serious commitment to increase your overall cadence. Also some research has found reduced efficiency, when moving above 100+ rpm in realistic TT-type tests, so riding 80-95 rmps is probably a very safe bet for you, in order to remain maximal effiecient and not spending quality trainingtime trying to raise cadence towards higher rmps, where you wouldn't gain any further benefits.

References:
ncbi.nlm.nih.govquery.fcgiOpen ↗
jap.physiology.org823Open ↗

(2) Using Max-HR for determining training-intensity: For endurace training staying below 75%-Max HR is a pretty good guideline, judging from most litterature. Doing endurance training in Friels zone 1-3, will not put you even close to LT-threshold(page 41 'the cyclist training bible'😉
That said, this is the only intensity description I'd use based on max-HR! Friel and many other coaches uses a system based on the result from a test (LT or other) to dertermine intensities for training. Much more precise andadjustable based on the training period. Based on your physical condition, period of year and method used to determine max-HR, the hill-work you decribe might very well be done at intensities that is taxing your highend aerobic system or even featering around at you LT-HR.
References:
Example of a test see:
cyclingnews.comfitnessOpen ↗

(3) On-the-bike strength training: the "heavy-gearing-low-rpms-uphill" workouts are intense muscular workouts and should leave your tired 😄. So you'll need to add rest/pure endurance miles between them. Most of the training systems I've read uses this type of workourt during the base-period, as you'll need the strength for later periods. Personally I haven't done them since back in december, but they created a good foundation for more intense power-work and overall helped strengthen my legs.
(4) Suggestions for base-periode workouts: Endurance miles(and lots), some of the stuff you'r already doing: high cadence/low resistance, hill-works with high resistance/low HR. Later start addingTempo(highend aerobic), some highend-aerobic hill-work to further tax your aerobic engine and establish&train climbing specific cycling.

Allthough you didn't ask for advice on this, here it is anyway 😉:
(5) The structured plan: This is something I would suggest you look into! Friels book has all you need to get going, and is pretty much in sync with most methodologies offered by professional coaches.
That said, getting a prof' coach will buy you a lot help in taking the guesswork out of your training: what intervals, how long, what kind of recovery, proper periodization and lots of other great stuff :p. Following a structed plan will make a world of difference for you, even one that you lay down yourself!

toa said:

- Low resistance/power will give you better cycling effiency through smother stroke

This has never been demonstrated; efficency most highly correlates with percentage Type I fibres.

toa said:

and increased ability to handle high cadence for use in sprints etc.

The neuromuscular limitations you describe are highly unlikely except in sprints at *very* high cadences. There is probably no need to train specifically for this unless you are a track cyclist

toa said:

- High resistance/power works on your VO2Max.

Erm, no. Your VO2max is a measure of aerobic power. Anything which sufficiently stresses your aerobic metabolism, or more specifically oxygen delivery, is likely to have a training effect on your VO2max, regardless of cadence.

toa said:

<snip> Also some research has found reduced efficiency, when moving above 100+ rpm in realistic TT-type tests, so riding 80-95 rmps is probably a very safe bet for you, in order to remain maximal effiecient and not spending quality trainingtime trying to raise cadence towards higher rmps, where you wouldn't gain any further benefits.

The vast majority of research seems to point to the idea that:
i. trained cyclists have a higher cadence than untrained individuals
ii. metabolically 'optimum' cadence rises with increasing power output (see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=15232702 )
iii. there is more to the 'optimum' cadence than just efficiency, although it's unclear why (please ask for the references on this if you want them)
iv. cyclists appear to naturally self-select the most appropriate cadence without any outside help (as indicated in the first reference that you quoted)

Taking all this into account, I personally believe that artificially manipulating cadence is probably a waste of time (which I think is probably the conclusion that 'toa' was drawing, but coming at it from a different angle)🙂
A recent paper by Ed Coyle on Lance Armstrong (JAP) has only served to reinforce this to me; it makes the case that Armstrong's cadence rose naturally and was not, as some people calim, deliberately changed.

L.

Overtrainer said:

Hi,

I want to know what are your opinions on doing base training. Mark Allen says to stay below 75% of Max hr, Joe Friel says that during base 1-3 your sessions go up to zone 3 which is just below threshold. I do not have a problem with my hr during base training but I'd like to know at what cadence should base training be done. When I did base training three months back I stayed below 75% of max hr. In order to built cycling strength (because I don't believe in going to gym) I do hills in a heavy gear whilst keeping my hr low. The problem I find with this is that it brings me up to a very good condition very fast and thus shortly after I feel drained and it feels like I need to rest. But it is only base training and I kept my hr low, I have not even started intervals yet and then I need to rest and thus I have not reached my potential. In order to do proper periodisation I believe now that the low gear strength building sessions should now be done in Joe Friel's built period only. I do not follow a structured training program but I do have rest weeks, every 3rd or 4th week. Now my question is should the base period consist of mainly long low hr kilometers with high cadence speed sessions thrown in? What adaptation will high cadence, low power give me during the base period? Any ideas on your favourate base training sessions?

Hi Overtrainer!

Just a couple of brief points:
i. there is absolutely no compelling reason why you can't do intervals all year round. the idea that you *must* keep HR low during the off-season is probably a case of general advice becoming popular dogma.
ii. low-cadence intervals are highly unlikely to build strength. the only plausible rationale for them that i am aware of is that they recruit more Type II fibres and force them to become more oxidative.

May I suggest a good coach? Alternatively, and for a different view of periodisation may I suggest Jack Daniel's Running Formula. The idea that periodisation only consists of the system mostly devised by Tudor Bompa and popularised by Joe Friel (among others) is a shame. It is more art than science and is worth playing around with to see what suits you best.

Hope this helps.

L.