Cycling Training · Public discussion

Vet's Training - The Rant

Started by edd · · Last activity · 8 posts · 1,391 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Training
Published
27 January 2008
Last activity
28 January 2008
Original author
edd
Posts
8
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,391
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–8 of 8
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. The problem with training, be it for any sport, in this case bicycling, is to get the balance right. if you're a weekend warrior then it's not quite as important as it is for a professional cyclist, still you can over do it and get ill or injured just before the peak you were aiming for. I just posted a poll on Vets training to see what most people do and was surprised that most had similar training volume, there are the odd exceptions. If I was to take an average it would be 11 hrs per week though nine out of the 16 posts trained for 8 hrs a week, myself included.

    Volume v Intensity … It is well known you can work hard or you can work long, you can't do both, well of course you can but you miss the point if you do. The most extreme example is what you can do for a minute all out effort is very different then what you can do on a bike tour over nine consecutive days. The problem with volume is you need time to do the work load. The problem with intensity is you need the rest to recover from the training and also the freshness to be able to perform at that high intensity.

    Specificity … It is known, maybe not as well as it should be, that muscles are very dumb ! they lean one thing and are unable to make anything else from that. If you what them to know two or three things you have to teach (train) them that too. They will never figure it out for themselves. So the whole concept of specificity is based on this. Your fitness is very action, activity, velocity specific … action ( what your ride), activity (over what terrain), velocity (at a cadence of). Specificity demands very specific variations, bit of a paradox, huh ?

    Recovery … is what is needed so your body can adjust-mend-strengthen-adapt to the new and ever increasing demand. if you are able to back up what you do day after day. Then you need to ask yourself " Do I need an increasing adaptation demand in my training ?"

    In a perfect world … I would train (bicycle, all the other stuff, weights etc not relevant) 12 hours a week on the bike, However I choose to sacrifice training volume for intensity. Because I can recover at work, sitting at a desk writing reports.

  2. I kinda lost the point of the post 😕

    What are you ranting about? Have fewer hours available so make the most of 'em by training at higher intensities. OK, what's the problem?

  3. Alex Simmons said:

    I kinda lost the point of the post 😕

    What are you ranting about? Have fewer hours available so make the most of 'em by training at higher intensities. OK, what's the problem?

    1) Getting the balance right

    2) adding enough variation and building adaption demand in the training

    3) Is 8 hrs a week enough volume, intensity of no ?

    I said it was a rant, looking for interest and comment, not just answers

  4. edd said:

    3) Is 8 hrs a week enough volume, intensity of no ?

    To achieve what?

  5. flipper said:

    To achieve what?

    good question !

  6. edd said:

    1) Getting the balance right

    2) adding enough variation and building adaption demand in the training

    3) Is 8 hrs a week enough volume, intensity of no ?

    I said it was a rant, looking for interest and comment, not just answers

    1 & 2: It's possible.

    3: Well, depending on your training history, you could readily attain reasonably good fitness but perhaps would have a shortish season or peak period with that level of fitness.

  7. Alex Simmons said:

    1 & 2: It's possible.

    3: Well, depending on your training history, you could readily attain reasonably good fitness but perhaps would have a shortish season or peak period with that level of fitness.

    "It's possible" seems slightly uncertain, like you would like to see a greater volume. Yes ?

    The problem is everybody's problem, not just mine. If you think not me, my program/regime is perfect, think again. it is only perfect for so long.

  8. edd said:

    "It's possible" seems slightly uncertain, like you would like to see a greater volume. Yes ?

    The problem is everybody's problem, not just mine. If you think not me, my program/regime is perfect, think again. it is only perfect for so long.

    It's possible if you know what you're doing and how to go about it.

    Volume is what it is. If you have a restriction on time available, then you work with that. And having more time available is not always automatically a good thing, I mean you can't just go and ramp up your hours big time overnight - it takes quite some time to build up to that level of training, maybe a season or two.

    It's like working within a budget - you learn to spend it wisely.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.