Performance increases and time

I am assuming that no one has answered your question because there are so many variables that go into determining differing performance levels that there is no straight answer. That being said, one year is a short time for training in cycling. I have read on this site and elsewhere it can take ~2-5 years to reach your physiological potential from training. Of course, you have to train well to maximise your improvement!

As for your friend, he may have raced in college because he was genetically gifted in cycling and therefore still utilizes that "ability" when he keeps up with you twice a week. Or maybe, and probably more likely, you haven't reached your potential and he can still hang with you for this reason. If in another year he still keeps up with you when your ftp is 300+ and he still only rides twice a week, then he is definitely gifted!

The pros probably peak in their late twenties and early thirties because that's when the drugs are most effective. I recently read something saying that before the EPO era, a lot of grand tour greats were at their best in their early to late 20's. Just my opinion, of course...

mortimer99 said:

Before I ask the question here is a little background.
I have been road biking for about a year now and am 40. I use to mtn bike on and off maybe 3 hours a week since I was about 20. In the past year I have ridden about 7-10 hours per week, climbing about 10,000 feet a week. When I started I had a FTP of about 180, now its about 260, and a long ride for me was 15 miles, now its 60.

So here is the question.
I have noticed some peaks and valleys in my performance, but I always hear that the longer you ride (in number of years) the stronger you tend to get. I have some friends that I ride with that use to race in college, and even if they are not riding as much as I am, they typically don't have an issue keeping up on a 3-4 hour weekend ride, even if they are only riding once or twice per week.

So, how does the progression work? What happens to your body over they years, and how come it takes so long? How can my buddy that raced in college only ride once or twice a week stay with me, on a 4 hour ride, while if I tried that two years ago I would have never made it? In that same vane, why do pros typically have theri peak performance in their late 20's and early 30s?

The [font=&quot]curiosity[/font] is killing me [img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img]

:p 🙄 😄 😄 😕

[quote="millzebub"]I am assuming that no one has answered your question because there are so many variables that go into determining differing performance levels that there is no straight answer. That being said, one year is a short time for training in cycling. I have read on this site and elsewhere it can take ~2-5 years to reach your physiological potential from training. Of course, you have to train well to maximise your improvement!

As for your friend, he may have raced in college because he was genetically gifted in cycling and therefore still utilizes that "ability" when he keeps up with you twice a week. Or maybe, and probably more likely, you haven't reached your potential and he can still hang with you for this reason. If in another year he still keeps up with you when your ftp is 300+ and he still only rides twice a week, then he is definitely gifted!

The pros probably peak in their late twenties and early thirties because that's when the drugs are most effective. I recently read something saying that before the EPO era, a lot of grand tour greats were at their best in their early to late 20's. Just my opinion, of course...



:p 🙄 😄 😄 😕

Thanks for the insight. Your answer help me to distill my questions a bit, since as I read back my OP, I realize that I wasn't that clear. The question is, how come it takes years to develop, and what happens to your body that requires the amount of time? I am not impatient, just curios. [img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img]

mortimer99 said:

So here is the question.
I have some friends that I ride with that use to race in college, and even if they are not riding as much as I am, they typically don't have an issue keeping up on a 3-4 hour weekend ride, even if they are only riding once or twice per week.The [font=&quot]curiosity[/font] is killing me [img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img]

maintenance takes a little effort.

Improvement takes a lot of effort … and time !

mortimer99 said:

So here is the question.
I have noticed some peaks and valleys in my performance, but I always hear that the longer you ride (in number of years) the stronger you tend to get.
The [font=&quot]curiosity[/font] is killing me [img]cyclingforums.comsmile.gifOpen ↗[/img]

Not so !

I have ridden a bike constantly for the past 27 years. It has only been in the last four years that any real improvement has happened. Because before that I never really tried to increase the demand on myself.

If you keep training with improvement in mind you will find the others will eventually have trouble keeping up … that's excluding the genetic freaks

mortimer99 said:

The question is, how come it takes years to develop, and what happens to your body that requires the amount of time?

Oh. See if this helps: home.hia.notimecors.htmOpen ↗

Lots of good stuff on that website, too, if you're curious about other things. 🙂

frenchyge said:

Oh. See if this helps: home.hia.notimecors.htmOpen ↗

Lots of good stuff on that website, too, if you're curious about other things. 🙂

Perfect! This was exactly what I was looking for! Thank you

frenchyge said:

Oh. See if this helps: home.hia.notimecors.htmOpen ↗

Lots of good stuff on that website, too, if you're curious about other things. 🙂

According to that page, it appears to be futile and a waste of time to target VO2MAX after been training for a year, or it's just a misinterpretation of mine? 😕

Simone@Italy said:

According to that page, it appears to be futile and a waste of time to target VO2MAX after been training for a year, or it's just a misinterpretation of mine? 😕

That artical assumes a lot about how one is training. My understanding is that VO2max efforts have a training effect on more then a few isolated organs and improvement can continue from 2 to 4 years,

after that …

nothing stays up by itsself, you have to keep it up !

Death to all spam

Simone@Italy said:

According to that page, it appears to be futile and a waste of time to target VO2MAX after been training for a year, or it's just a misinterpretation of mine? 😕

A couple thoughts:
1) the article is obviously a bit dated (1996), with the references to lactic acid and the like. I still think it's generally useful as a primer.
2) I'd say that depends on whether or not you were able to get everything out of your VO2max in the first year or whether you stopped training it before you really saw a plateau. Consult with your coach.
3) Just below the bottom diagram the article mentions that all those lines really fluctuate up and down during different parts of the season. IOW, even after years of training you will still need to train VO2max to get it back up to peak value (say, after the winter), even if that peak value has plateaued year-on-year.

frenchyge said:

A couple thoughts:
1) the article is obviously a bit dated (1996), with the references to lactic acid and the like. I still think it's generally useful as a primer.
2) I'd say that depends on whether or not you were able to get everything out of your VO2max in the first year or whether you stopped training it before you really saw a plateau. Consult with your coach.
3) Just below the bottom diagram the article mentions that all those lines really fluctuate up and down during different parts of the season. IOW, even after years of training you will still need to train VO2max to get it back up to peak value (say, after the winter), even if that peak value has plateaued year-on-year.

Ok, now it makes sense. Thank you