A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The sweet spot in biking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old October 22nd 04, 05:09 PM
amh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bill Baka wrote in message ...
On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:07:03 -0600, Paul Cassel wrote:

amh wrote:
Badger_South wrote in message
. ..

A few folks here have mentioned getting into cycling directly or
incidently
after having problems with jogging, a great activity, but problematic
for
quite a few after years or even sooner.


How so? I've been running since 1979. No major problems that prevent
me from anything. Running does no damage if done properly (warm up,
down, stretch) with good shoes.


Gee, is this a silly and annoying type of post. I know of someone who
drinks a quart of whiskey a day, eats nothing but fat and is in great
health at 90 years old. Why not then say that if you drink whiskey and
eat fat right, you'll be a healthy 90 year old? Makes as much sense.

-paul


I have to agree that the sweet spot is just getting on the bike
and doing it. Jim Fixx found the sweet spot, permanently, some years
back. So much for that line of thinking.


Jim Fixx found the sweet spot permanently because he refused to visit
a doctor for something as simple as a checkup. This despite his
history of obesity in his own life and heart disease his family's
life. He would have been dead many years earlier from heart disease
had he not taken up running. He would have lived many years longer had
he seen a doctor.

But that is the way I'd like to go, hopefully many years after now.
Doing something I love, whether it be cycling, running, hiking......

Andy
Ads
  #22  
Old October 22nd 04, 05:12 PM
Badger_South
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 22 Oct 2004 08:45:18 -0700, (SlowRider) wrote:

Cycling has been a wonderful alternative. I don't feel the same
"high", but I do so love doing long climbs, so I suspect it's a
similar experience to a runner's high.


There are two highs (ime) in running. One is the weird and wonderful
sensation where you go from being just about blown up at 90 minutes in, and
suddenly you are kicking ass and feel like you could run forever...er, jog
that is (6-7 min/mile pace)

The other high is the neat 'it's always autumn in my mind and I want to
quit working and run ultramarathons' feeling.

I'm finding this second kind now, on the bike, and just a little of the
other kind. I suspect it occurs at the 60-100 mile ride range, or 4-6 hours
into the ride, as opposed to 1-2 hours running.

What's so surprising about riding little hills is that I have absolutely no
butt numbness, or hand numbness that occurs at about the 60-70 min mark
riding the flats at tempo. OK, maybe not surprising, b/c I'm shifting
position so much. But what I'm saying is that I'm working much harder on
the rolling hills and feeling it like, not at all.

The mental distractions
(gears, traffic, etc.) aren't so bad once you get a lot of miles in
your legs and it becomes second nature, but it still probably detracts
from exercise-induced nirvana.

I'm now doing some swimming for my off-season training and it seems to
have similar characteristics (once you get your body past the "oh
s--t, I have to BREATHE!" sensation). No traffic to worry about, and
once you get into a rhythm, the laps just keep going by.


Was an avid swimmer and worked as a pool lifeguard/WSI for several seasons,
so I know of which you speak. (The things to learn are breathing to either
side and flip turning). I don't swim much anymore b/c of the overcrowding
at the local pools, but I defiinitely recall the golden sparklies at 20 min
into the 2 miler where the sun and water and stuff come together.
Unfortunately I developed a small bone spur on my left clavicle due to
rather poorly planned intensity/over use syndrome that caused me to stop.

Still, I can't wait to get back on my bike...


If I'm not riding, I'm watching TdF vids and/or dreaming about it or
looking at bike magazines. sigh It's all good, particularly since I can
immerse myself in it, being retired now. ;-D

-B
Though I'm thinking about getting a part-time job to support my growing
addiction, lol.

  #23  
Old October 22nd 04, 06:39 PM
B i l l S o r n s o n
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Badger_South wrote:

There are two highs (ime) in running. One is the weird and wonderful
sensation where you go from being just about blown up at 90 minutes
in, and suddenly you are kicking ass and feel like you could run
forever...er, jog that is (6-7 min/mile pace)


I gotta call bull**** here, Badg. 6-7 minute/mile pace is hardly
"jogging" -- 9 minutes in much less 90! (Works out to a ~3-hour marathon,
easily good enough to qualify for Boston if I'm not mistaken.)

Bill "you're not THAT super, man" S.


  #24  
Old October 22nd 04, 07:04 PM
Badger_South
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 22 Oct 2004 09:05:35 -0700, (amh) wrote:

Running is different in that it doesn't react with the body. If you
take measures to reduce injury (stretch, wear proper shoes, don't over
do it, eat properly, etc) the body will adapt to the running just
fine.


I'd submit that stretching never prevented any injury, ever, but probably
caused a few, certainly if done cold before running.

How do you know what proper shoes are? In truth, maybe 2 out of 10 runners
or more, really need orthotics, b/c their supination/pronation problem is
sufficiently severe to cause problems. Problem is, how many joggers can
afford to go that route. If I had done this, d'oh, I'd probably still be
running, but as a 20y.o., I had no idea and few MDs did either. (back in
the 70s). I only learned that I need shoes with stiff outer support like
two years ago -still can't remember if I'm pronating or supinating - I have
noticeable bow-leggedness. Many foot strike problems originate in the lower
spine, knee, and hip. It's quite often very difficult to find the root
cause.

Eat properly? Who the hell eats properly? What is eating properly? There
are as many ideas about this as there are people who eat, lol. It can take
a lifetime of following others' advice, only to learn that it's your body,
your science experiment.

Huge room for error with the above.

Upshot: if you're still running after all these years (40s, 50s) you're
very lucky, freakishly gifted with correct anatomic posture, or doing 8.5
min per mile, @3 miles, three times a week jogging.

-B


  #25  
Old October 22nd 04, 07:15 PM
Badger_South
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:39:08 GMT, "B i l l S o r n s o n"
wrote:

Badger_South wrote:

There are two highs (ime) in running. One is the weird and wonderful
sensation where you go from being just about blown up at 90 minutes
in, and suddenly you are kicking ass and feel like you could run
forever...er, jog that is (6-7 min/mile pace)


I gotta call bull**** here, Badg. 6-7 minute/mile pace is hardly
"jogging" -- 9 minutes in much less 90! (Works out to a ~3-hour marathon,
easily good enough to qualify for Boston if I'm not mistaken.)

Bill "you're not THAT super, man" S.


This is the pace I ran, but to qualify my statement, it was 8:00 for the 10
mile, 7:10 for the 10K, 6:30 for the 5K (at 180lbs definitely a
clydesdale). This is clearly middle to back-of-the pack pace. All jogging -
though it felt like running to me, lol. Among runners, that pace is
jogging.

9 min per mile for marathon distances is good, but for me, I needed the
intensity _and_ the duration to find the endorphin rush. So 90 min at 7:20
pace, then, is jogging. Under 7 min is running. OK?

Basically I'm saying I was never a good runner, not that I'm super. Decent
jogger, b/c I was dedicated and ran hill repeats and stuff.

-B


  #27  
Old October 22nd 04, 08:30 PM
Bill Baka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:39:08 GMT, B i l l S o r n s o n
wrote:

Badger_South wrote:

There are two highs (ime) in running. One is the weird and wonderful
sensation where you go from being just about blown up at 90 minutes
in, and suddenly you are kicking ass and feel like you could run
forever...er, jog that is (6-7 min/mile pace)


I gotta call bull**** here, Badg. 6-7 minute/mile pace is hardly
"jogging" -- 9 minutes in much less 90! (Works out to a ~3-hour
marathon,
easily good enough to qualify for Boston if I'm not mistaken.)

Bill "you're not THAT super, man" S.


I was going to just watch all the flaming here but a 9 minute mile
is easy. I was in the Boy Scouts around 1960 (61?) and one of the
things we were taught was how to do a 9 minute mile as a group. It
was run slowly for xx seconds then walk for xx seconds and repeat
as needed, all day even. My group came in just 4 seconds under
9 minutes and nobody was even breathing that hard. What I have
noticed is that all the biking never gets me to a high and I wouldn't
want to be there anyway since if I got there I would probably
bliss out and crash. Different activities need different approaches.
Bill Baka


--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
  #28  
Old October 22nd 04, 08:43 PM
B i l l S o r n s o n
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bill Baka wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:39:08 GMT, B i l l S o r n s o n
wrote:

Badger_South wrote:

There are two highs (ime) in running. One is the weird and wonderful
sensation where you go from being just about blown up at 90 minutes
in, and suddenly you are kicking ass and feel like you could run
forever...er, jog that is (6-7 min/mile pace)


I gotta call bull**** here, Badg. 6-7 minute/mile pace is hardly
"jogging" -- 9 minutes in much less 90! (Works out to a ~3-hour
marathon,
easily good enough to qualify for Boston if I'm not mistaken.)

Bill "you're not THAT super, man" S.


I was going to just watch all the flaming here but a 9 minute mile
is easy. I was in the Boy Scouts around 1960 (61?) and one of the
things we were taught was how to do a 9 minute mile as a group. It
was run slowly for xx seconds then walk for xx seconds and repeat
as needed, all day even. My group came in just 4 seconds under
9 minutes and nobody was even breathing that hard. What I have
noticed is that all the biking never gets me to a high and I wouldn't
want to be there anyway since if I got there I would probably
bliss out and crash. Different activities need different approaches.


For God's sake Bill learn to read. Badger was talking about 6-7 minute
miles *90 minutes* into a run. I said that pace was hardly "jogging" even
*9* minutes into a run, much less 90. I never mentioned 9-minute miles at
all. (It's just a coincidence that that was my pace no matter HOW long I
ran! )

Bill "slow and steady (may not win the race, but gets there)" S.


  #29  
Old October 23rd 04, 03:19 AM
Bill Baka
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:43:21 GMT, B i l l S o r n s o n
wrote:

Bill Baka wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:39:08 GMT, B i l l S o r n s o n
wrote:

Badger_South wrote:

There are two highs (ime) in running. One is the weird and wonderful
sensation where you go from being just about blown up at 90 minutes
in, and suddenly you are kicking ass and feel like you could run
forever...er, jog that is (6-7 min/mile pace)

I gotta call bull**** here, Badg. 6-7 minute/mile pace is hardly
"jogging" -- 9 minutes in much less 90! (Works out to a ~3-hour
marathon,
easily good enough to qualify for Boston if I'm not mistaken.)

Bill "you're not THAT super, man" S.


I was going to just watch all the flaming here but a 9 minute mile
is easy. I was in the Boy Scouts around 1960 (61?) and one of the
things we were taught was how to do a 9 minute mile as a group. It
was run slowly for xx seconds then walk for xx seconds and repeat
as needed, all day even. My group came in just 4 seconds under
9 minutes and nobody was even breathing that hard. What I have
noticed is that all the biking never gets me to a high and I wouldn't
want to be there anyway since if I got there I would probably
bliss out and crash. Different activities need different approaches.


For God's sake Bill learn to read. Badger was talking about 6-7 minute
miles *90 minutes* into a run. I said that pace was hardly "jogging"
even
*9* minutes into a run, much less 90. I never mentioned 9-minute miles
at
all. (It's just a coincidence that that was my pace no matter HOW long I
ran! )

Bill "slow and steady (may not win the race, but gets there)" S.


I repent. Sometimes I get in a hurry to go through all the posts.
There are 4 LINUX groups that I am looking at for information
and this group has outposted all 4 of the LINUX combined.
This thread (slightly unraveled.) has gotten me to wondering how
fast I actually could do a mile. I do know that all the biking
has helped but I wonder how much. Any biker/runners out there other
than the OP?
Bill Baka
  #30  
Old October 23rd 04, 03:30 AM
B i l l S o r n s o n
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Bill Baka wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:43:21 GMT, B i l l S o r n s o n
wrote:

Bill Baka wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:39:08 GMT, B i l l S o r n s o n
wrote:

Badger_South wrote:

There are two highs (ime) in running. One is the weird and
wonderful sensation where you go from being just about blown up
at 90 minutes in, and suddenly you are kicking ass and feel like
you could run forever...er, jog that is (6-7 min/mile pace)

I gotta call bull**** here, Badg. 6-7 minute/mile pace is hardly
"jogging" -- 9 minutes in much less 90! (Works out to a ~3-hour
marathon,
easily good enough to qualify for Boston if I'm not mistaken.)

Bill "you're not THAT super, man" S.


I was going to just watch all the flaming here but a 9 minute mile
is easy. I was in the Boy Scouts around 1960 (61?) and one of the
things we were taught was how to do a 9 minute mile as a group. It
was run slowly for xx seconds then walk for xx seconds and repeat
as needed, all day even. My group came in just 4 seconds under
9 minutes and nobody was even breathing that hard. What I have
noticed is that all the biking never gets me to a high and I
wouldn't want to be there anyway since if I got there I would
probably
bliss out and crash. Different activities need different approaches.


For God's sake Bill learn to read. Badger was talking about 6-7
minute miles *90 minutes* into a run. I said that pace was hardly
"jogging" even
*9* minutes into a run, much less 90. I never mentioned 9-minute
miles at
all. (It's just a coincidence that that was my pace no matter HOW
long I ran! )

Bill "slow and steady (may not win the race, but gets there)" S.


I repent. Sometimes I get in a hurry to go through all the posts.
There are 4 LINUX groups that I am looking at for information
and this group has outposted all 4 of the LINUX combined.
This thread (slightly unraveled.) has gotten me to wondering how
fast I actually could do a mile. I do know that all the biking
has helped but I wonder how much. Any biker/runners out there other
than the OP?


That's fine, but just remember that running ONE mile is very different from
running 5, 10, 15 or more miles. Kind of like the difference between a 5 km
time trial and a 165 km road race?

Bill "or something like that" S.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Take A Kid Mountain Biking Day--Oct 2 IMBA Jim Mountain Biking 8 September 30th 04 04:52 PM
FS: 57cm Spot Singlespeed Cyclocross - MUST SELL! Jon Marketplace 0 July 11th 04 04:18 AM
Vacation Biking and the Internet Badger_South General 1 June 3rd 04 07:46 PM
Little biking accident Badger_South General 11 May 22nd 04 02:23 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.