I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels. This is a measurement of speed, distance, cadence in average and maximums spread over a 3 week period. All other factors (my weight, % & grade of hills, road conditions, traffic, etc.) are equal.
Could the lower, denser air be making that much difference or should I be inspecting my Bianchi for shipping damage? I gave it the once & twice over when it arrived and all seemed well. I've been too busy to take it to my LBS for a tune up/inspection.
"Ken Bessler" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:2rrajiF1d5cfgU1@uni- berlin.de:
Quoted message said:
I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels.
The thicker air at lower elevations will make a difference. Weather (heat and humidity) will also make a difference; less so after you get used to it.
"Ken" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Ken Bessler" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:2rrajiF1d5cfgU1@uni- berlin.de:
Quoted message said:
I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels.
The thicker air at lower elevations will make a difference. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ On the other hand, isn't it true that athletes often train at high altitude, and gain an advantage as the body adapts to aerobic output in the thinner air. I believe the blood gets thicker (so to speak.) Shouldn't this be working in your favor at the new low elevation?
"Ken Bessler" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:2rrajiF1d5cfgU1@uni- berlin.de:
Quoted message said:
I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels.
The thicker air at lower elevations will make a difference. Weather (heat and humidity) will also make a difference; less so after you get used to it.
Hmmm. Training at altitude causes decrease in near sea-level performance?
I go from the Piedmont area to the Beach and seem to notice a few percent increase in ability, though hard to discern from training variations (good day, bad day, etc.)
Give it a week and if still having problems check the bike? <shrug>
"Leo Lichtman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
On the other hand, isn't it true that athletes often train at high altitude, and gain an advantage as the body adapts to aerobic output in the thinner air.
Living at high altitude increases the oxygen-carrying capacity of your blood. It's like doping, but it's legal (today, anyway.)
Training at high altitude decreases the effort you can put into training. This comes from reduced VO2 max, reduced cardiac output, and reduced tolerance for lactic acid buildup resulting in reduced anaerobic threshold, even after you've acclimated to the altitude. Reduced effort means reduced training and reduced strength.
The trend today is "sleep high, train low." Many endurance athletes sleep in hypoxic tents to induce their bodies to produce EPO.
Badger_South <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
Ken said:
"Ken Bessler" <[email hidden]> wrote in news:2rrajiF1d5cfgU1@uni- berlin.de:
Quoted message said:
I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels.
The thicker air at lower elevations will make a difference. Weather (heat and humidity) will also make a difference; less so after you get used to it.
Hmmm. Training at altitude causes decrease in near sea-level performance?
I go from the Piedmont area to the Beach and seem to notice a few percent increase in ability, though hard to discern from training variations (good day, bad day, etc.)
Give it a week and if still having problems check the bike? <shrug>
-B
No question you should see a performance boost when losing 5000' in altitude. Other wise Mt Everest would be easy and that bridge in Florida would be epic.
Training at high altitude decreases the effort you can put into training. This comes from reduced VO2 max, reduced cardiac output, and reduced tolerance for lactic acid buildup resulting in reduced anaerobic threshold, even after you've acclimated to the altitude. Reduced effort means reduced training and reduced strength.
It also increases calorie expenditure under heavy exhertion.
About 22 kcal per hour per 100 feet altitude.
I honestly have no idea why, that's just what "they" say. It could be as simple as the extra work your diaphragm gets, but you wouldn't think a 100-foot change would make that big a difference in that. Maybe your heart also has to start pumping faster because even with more lung activity you're getting less oxygen into the blood.
So his loss of performance is probably not due to energetic limits.
Training at high altitude decreases the effort you can put into training. This comes from reduced VO2 max, reduced cardiac output, and reduced tolerance for lactic acid buildup resulting in reduced anaerobic threshold, even after you've acclimated to the altitude. Reduced effort means reduced training and reduced strength.
It also increases calorie expenditure under heavy exhertion.
Ken, sometimes you might have a cold, you can have a bug or a cold for a week or two, you may feel ok, but will ruin your athletic performance. Try taking a couple days off.
"BringYouToLife" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Ken, sometimes you might have a cold, you can have a bug or a cold for a week or two, you may feel ok, but will ruin your athletic performance. Try taking a couple days off.
That's interesting as I had a bad cold for the week before I moved.
"Ken Bessler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels. This is a measurement of speed, distance, cadence in average and maximums spread over a 3 week period. All other factors (my weight, % & grade of hills, road conditions, traffic, etc.) are equal.
Could the lower, denser air be making that much difference or should I be inspecting my Bianchi for shipping damage? I gave it the once & twice over when it arrived and all seemed well. I've been too busy to take it to my LBS for a tune up/inspection.
Air resistance alone will slow you down about 1 MPH, according to the Bicycle speed & power calculator:
"Ken Bessler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels. This is a measurement of speed, distance, cadence in average and maximums spread over a 3 week period. All other factors (my weight, % & grade of hills, road conditions, traffic, etc.) are equal.
Could the lower, denser air be making that much difference or should I be inspecting my Bianchi for shipping damage? I gave it the once & twice over when it arrived and all seemed well. I've been too busy to take it to my LBS for a tune up/inspection.
Air resistance alone will slow you down about 1 MPH, according to the Bicycle speed & power calculator:
(1MPh difference is assuming 160 watts power output on the flat as well as some other things about the bike, tires, weight, etc.)
Nifty toy. Virtually nails the speed difference I see when going from the top of the bars to the drops at the same power output. (It ought to feed this difference back out through the cadence variable also but for some reason it doesn't).
But I don't think it takes into account the altitude when calculating the calorie output. As I've posted before, a reputable source (which of course I do not have the bibliographic data for at the moment) indicates that every 100 feet in altitude is worth an extra 22 kcal per hour of aerobic exercise (regardless of weight and the exact level of effort).
"Ken Bessler" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...
Quoted message said:
I just moved from 5400 ft altitude to 700 ft. I've noticed about a 15-25% decrease in performance or an equal amount of an increase in effort to equal my old levels. This is a measurement of speed, distance, cadence in average and maximums spread over a 3 week period. All other factors (my weight, % & grade of hills, road conditions, traffic, etc.) are equal.
Could the lower, denser air be making that much difference or should I be inspecting my Bianchi for shipping damage? I gave it the once & twice over when it arrived and all seemed well. I've been too busy to take it to my LBS for a tune up/inspection.
Air resistance alone will slow you down about 1 MPH, according to the Bicycle speed & power calculator:
(1MPh difference is assuming 160 watts power output on the flat as well as some other things about the bike, tires, weight, etc.)
--Brent bhugh[at]mwsc.edu www.MoBikeFed.org
at such a lower power output, speed will not be affected as much by the difference in air resistence. 1mph seems right, at 15-20mph.
the original poster should definitely see an increase in power output at the same effort level. speed will be about the same, because of the greater air resistence at a given speed. but he should be producing more power because of the greater oxygen supply. if he doesn't have a powermeter, then a good way to test this is to climb some hills. he should feel like he is climbing hills faster at sea level.
