|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
http://pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=9472
A bunch of high-level pro riders (national/world class) let Nimmerichter et al. 2011 see their power data for a year. This was an observational study. Stephen Cheung reports the news to Pez readers. Summary: -Pros do more slow rides than you. 73% of training time spent in zone 1-2, or in other words, these nutters spend a ton of time riding slow and easy. Huh. -hours of training were 500-880 for the year. The good news? The low end of that is nearly a sensible fatty-master training regimen, if you are annoying enough to get shooed out of the house three times a week. The bad news? "Number of training sessions (268 +/- 60) and total training time (689 +/- 191 h) were strongly correlated with the subject’s overall classification." -Chung bait (mentions cadence): "FTP was most strongly correlated with total training time spent doing “strength” workouts, which consisted of low cadence (40-60 rpm) high gear efforts for 2-20 min." I guess I'm the only one surprised that low and slow is still the core of elite-level training. I don't think my commute to work is done in Zone 1, so I may be doing something wrong. This study implies there are elites who spend about 3 minutes/WEEK in their max-HR training zone. Even broken up into 20-second intervals, that's not much. I think I managed nearly that much redline time in last night's race, and I only lasted 2 laps*. *I am aware this may be why I only lasted 2 laps. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
Dumbass,
1. Don't bait me until I get my new laptop re-configured. 2. Who does that Cheung guy sleep with to keep his job? I'm presuming that's the explanation cuz it ain't the depth of his insights. 3. Guys who're averaging 15 hours/week of training? They can't do all of it at high intensity. The more hours/week, the lower the proportion of high intensity. In your case, this is irrelevant. You need to be spending more time at high intensity. You also need to be spending more time at low intensity. Thinking about it, you also need to lose some weight, change your shirt, and sit up straight. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
On Jul 6, 9:06*pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
http://pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=9472 A bunch of high-level pro riders (national/world class) let Nimmerichter et al. 2011 see their power data for a year. This was an observational study. Stephen Cheung reports the news to Pez readers. Summary: -Pros do more slow rides than you. 73% of training time spent in zone 1-2, or in other words, these nutters spend a ton of time riding slow and easy. Huh. Recovery from 2-3 days racing per week. Most strength training is accomplished in racing. A little speed work, enough to accomplish fluidity with power and no more than possibly two minutes strength training is possibly all a rider requires between racing. -hours of training were 500-880 for the year. The good news? The low But what is the toal load of riding including racing? end of that is nearly a sensible fatty-master training regimen, if you are annoying enough to get shooed out of the house three times a week. The bad news? "Number of training sessions (268 +/- 60) and total training time (689 +/- 191 h) were strongly correlated with the subject’s overall classification." Sound like very few are likly to overtrain. -Chung bait (mentions cadence): "FTP was most strongly correlated with total training time spent doing “strength” workouts, which consisted of low cadence (40-60 rpm) high gear efforts for 2-20 min." I guess I'm the only one surprised that low and slow is still the core of elite-level training. I don't think my commute to work is done in Zone 1, so I may be doing something wrong. Unless your commute takes 3 hours then it's unlikely it will benefit at that level, unless you are assessing a change in position or saddle (tip: don't change saddles mid season). If you can do it in two minutes then it's eyeballs out all the way. Something in between requires something in between, but 99% of your stuff shouldn't hurt unless you have time to recover, as in pre-season, before racing. This study implies there are elites who spend about 3 minutes/WEEK in their max-HR training zone. Even broken up into 20-second intervals, that's not much. I think I managed nearly that much redline time in last night's race, and I only lasted 2 laps*. *I am aware this may be why I only lasted 2 laps. Try an oxygen mask. If your time to 'exhaustion' does not improve you know it has nothing to do with aerobic capacity. It therefore becomes obvious that training based upon supposed aerobic benefits is futile. Training to be wiser with energy expenditure is easier than changing genetics. Of course you probably need a better brand of coffee. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
In article
, Robert Chung wrote: Dumbass, 1. Don't bait me until I get my new laptop re-configured. 2. Who does that Cheung guy sleep with to keep his job? I'm presuming that's the explanation cuz it ain't the depth of his insights. 3. Guys who're averaging 15 hours/week of training? They can't do all of it at high intensity. The more hours/week, the lower the proportion of high intensity. In your case, this is irrelevant. You need to be spending more time at high intensity. You also need to be spending more time at low intensity. Thinking about it, you also need to lose some weight, change your shirt, and sit up straight. Where do you put your effort and attention during low intensity training? Riding a pace line? Pedaling technique? (please don't laugh) Holding an aerodynamic position? -- Old Fritz |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
On Jul 6, 7:57*pm, Frederick the Great wrote:
In article , *Robert Chung wrote: Dumbass, 1. Don't bait me until I get my new laptop re-configured. 2. Who does that Cheung guy sleep with to keep his job? I'm presuming that's the explanation cuz it ain't the depth of his insights. 3. Guys who're averaging 15 hours/week of training? They can't do all of it at high intensity. The more hours/week, the lower the proportion of high intensity. In your case, this is irrelevant. You need to be spending more time at high intensity. You also need to be spending more time at low intensity. Thinking about it, you also need to lose some weight, change your shirt, and sit up straight. Where do you put your effort and attention during low intensity training? Riding a pace line? Pedaling technique? (please don't laugh) Holding an aerodynamic position? {cue lilting bamboo flute} If the mind is happy, grasshopper, is not the body strong? R |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
On Jul 7, 2:24*am, RicodJour wrote:
On Jul 6, 7:57*pm, Frederick the Great wrote: In article , *Robert Chung wrote: Dumbass, 1. Don't bait me until I get my new laptop re-configured. 2. Who does that Cheung guy sleep with to keep his job? I'm presuming that's the explanation cuz it ain't the depth of his insights. 3. Guys who're averaging 15 hours/week of training? They can't do all of it at high intensity. The more hours/week, the lower the proportion of high intensity. In your case, this is irrelevant. You need to be spending more time at high intensity. You also need to be spending more time at low intensity. Thinking about it, you also need to lose some weight, change your shirt, and sit up straight. Where do you put your effort and attention during low intensity training? Riding a pace line? Pedaling technique? (please don't laugh) Holding an aerodynamic position? {cue lilting bamboo flute} If the mind is happy, grasshopper, is not the body strong? R Doesn't matter how strong you are if you are too ****ed to get the power down on the road. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
On Jul 6, 10:33*pm, thirty-six wrote:
On Jul 7, 2:24*am, RicodJour wrote: On Jul 6, 7:57*pm, Frederick the Great wrote: In article , *Robert Chung wrote: Dumbass, 1. Don't bait me until I get my new laptop re-configured. 2. Who does that Cheung guy sleep with to keep his job? I'm presuming that's the explanation cuz it ain't the depth of his insights. 3. Guys who're averaging 15 hours/week of training? They can't do all of it at high intensity. The more hours/week, the lower the proportion of high intensity. In your case, this is irrelevant. You need to be spending more time at high intensity. You also need to be spending more time at low intensity. Thinking about it, you also need to lose some weight, change your shirt, and sit up straight. Where do you put your effort and attention during low intensity training? Riding a pace line? Pedaling technique? (please don't laugh) Holding an aerodynamic position? {cue lilting bamboo flute} If the mind is happy, grasshopper, is not the body strong? R Doesn't matter how strong you are if you are too ****ed to get the power down on the road. Right on. Numbers don't win races. Racers win races. Wake up you fuggin clams. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
Frederick the Great wrote:
Where do you put your effort and attention during low intensity training? Enjoying the countryside, taking some snaps. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
On Jul 7, 6:12*am, "A. Dumas" wrote:
Frederick the Great wrote: Where do you put your effort and attention during low intensity training? Enjoying the countryside, taking some naps. Post corrected. R |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Cheung, not Chung, but still all about power
On Jul 6, 10:06*pm, Ryan Cousineau wrote:
http://pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=fullstory&id=9472 A bunch of high-level pro riders (national/world class) let Nimmerichter et al. 2011 see their power data for a year. Isn't the grouping term for racing cyclists "peloton" as in: "Cowering peloton of unshaven cyclists howling at the roubaisian Moon." -ilan |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|