Priorities!...

The foundations for successful riding

Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Thu Apr 09, 2009 4:33 pm

Did I spell that right? :roll: ...So I have 101 days till the Etape...it will be the highlight of the year for sure,but I am only entering to survive (especially if it is hot).My priority for the year is to win the points competition for my region from the road race comp....well at least top 3!.My problem is 100kgs!!!.I was hoping to be at 92kg's by now...but well I ain't :oops: ...so I either aim to lose 1 kg every 10 days ....or I die a 1000 deaths on the slopes on Ventoux.I know plenty of people can lose a lot more than that but do wonder if it can be done while racing and training hard.I hear people say 500 gram a week is realistic but when you are 100 then I am sure you can get rid of a bit more.
Just thinking aloud :wink:
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14458
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

by BNA » Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:15 pm

BNA
 

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Chanboy » Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:15 pm

It probably depends if you are 100kg of hulking iron man muscle mass... or 100kg of blubbery whale fat... :-) :-)

Training hard build's muscle which is heavier then fat.

101 days is more then 3 months, you can loose at least 5kg easily enough in that time. You will have to be very careful of what you eat. Which of course may be hard if you are training hard and have a big appetite.
Chanboy
 
Posts: 690
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 8:51 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Priorities!...

Postby sogood » Thu Apr 09, 2009 6:39 pm

How lean are you? If your body contour isn't like paper on muscle, then you have fat to lose. Get rid of them. :wink:
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17012
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Thu Apr 09, 2009 8:31 pm

I've lost 9kg in the last eight weeks - went from 93kg to 84kg. All the while getting faster on the bike (partly better fitness, partly less of me to haul up hills).

There's no two ways about it - losing weight is going to impact your muscle mass no matter what you do. However, the trick (if there is a trick I suppose) that I found that worked was a bit of cross training and cutting down on the booze and between meal snacks. Especially the booze. I really love a beer or six but I now keep that to once a week and don't eat the salty/fatty rubbish that goes with it.

I belt myself up some hills on a short-ish run (about 4km) followed by some core strength exercises and work with a chain dumbell that's on the running course, followed by hill sprints up a hill until exhausted. I don't do it on cycle training days.

I've been reading your reports and you probably do more actual physical exercise than me, so I'd take a good hard look at your food and you could be 90kg when you start the etape. I'm not kidding.
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Thu Apr 09, 2009 8:50 pm

I was 85 when mtbing...and had a bigger upper body back then (10 yrs ago)...so definately got some ways to go.
Problem is I don't drink...don't eat rubbish...I just have a big hunger when training hard. :roll:
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14458
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Thu Apr 09, 2009 9:45 pm

toolonglegs wrote:I was 85 when mtbing...and had a bigger upper body back then (10 yrs ago)...so definately got some ways to go.
Problem is I don't drink...don't eat rubbish...I just have a big hunger when training hard. :roll:


It has to be the amount - can't help you with that (and I'm no nutritionist) but maybe there's a way of staggering your food intake so you're not so hungry and working on at least one slow but very long training session - say 1.5 hours at 60% or something to keep your heart rate around 120-130 or so for a sustained period (although did you say in one of your reports that you were only doing that during a race already?). Perhaps you're too cardio-vascular fit to burn any fat :?

I'm struggling to slow the weight loss down at the moment - my end year goal was 82 but I'll be there next week at this rate. I was coming off a much lower base of fitness than you though.
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:42 pm

drubie wrote:
toolonglegs wrote:I was 85 when mtbing...and had a bigger upper body back then (10 yrs ago)...so definately got some ways to go.
Problem is I don't drink...don't eat rubbish...I just have a big hunger when training hard. :roll:


It has to be the amount - can't help you with that (and I'm no nutritionist) but maybe there's a way of staggering your food intake so you're not so hungry and working on at least one slow but very long training session - say 1.5 hours at 60% or something to keep your heart rate around 120-130 or so for a sustained period (although did you say in one of your reports that you were only doing that during a race already?). Perhaps you're too cardio-vascular fit to burn any fat :?

I'm struggling to slow the weight loss down at the moment - my end year goal was 82 but I'll be there next week at this rate. I was coming off a much lower base of fitness than you though.


Absolutely it is about quantity...also being a vege doesn't help.
Haven't really got time for long slow fat burners now...for me a long training ride would be 4-6hours.But racing every weekend now it is about recovery and intensity.So it will all come down to diet.I am very economical it seems and unless I am pushing myself very hard I don't burn thru a lot of fuel!.People who start cycling can lose a lot of weight very quickly with out doing a huge amount of km's.When you have been doing roughly the same km's every year for 12-15 you lose it a lot more slowly.
But next year is my goal...next year I will go into the next age cat so will have a chance in some bigger races...at the moment it is all about getting back into it...but 175km and 3500m climbing at a very hard pace is still a bit scary :roll:
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14458
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:05 am

That is a scary prospect - especially when you're carting three bikes up the hill instead of just one. You need to fill up your stomach on some of those HTFU pills you've been using to win races :mrgreen:
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Fri Apr 10, 2009 8:22 am

drubie wrote:It has to be the amount - can't help you with that (and I'm no nutritionist) but maybe there's a way of staggering your food intake so you're not so hungry and working on at least one slow but very long training session - say 1.5 hours at 60% or something to keep your heart rate around 120-130 or so for a sustained period (although did you say in one of your reports that you were only doing that during a race already?). Perhaps you're too cardio-vascular fit to burn any fat :?

That makes no sense.

The fitter you are, the higher proportion of fat (FFA) is used as a fuel source at any given sub-maximal intensity, not that that matters from a weight loss perspective anyway, where it's simply the overall calorie balance that matters, not what proportion of fuel substrate (FFA, CHO) is utilised when riding.

Train to get fit.
Eat to get lean.

Keep a food diary and make it accountable to someone.
Dropping 1kg / week to 10 days is not going to be helpful for performance IME.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:41 am

Alex - I was of the simplistic understanding that fit == efficient, so as you get fitter you'll go through periods where weight loss is harder. I don't think there's any question at all that you have to be burning more calories than you are consuming though.
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby sogood » Fri Apr 10, 2009 12:26 pm

toolonglegs wrote:Problem is I don't drink...don't eat rubbish...I just have a big hunger when training hard. :roll:

You are eating too much! ;) :lol: :lol:
Bianchi, Ridley, Montague, GT, Garmin and All things Apple :)
RK wrote:And that is Wikipedia - I can write my own definition.
User avatar
sogood
 
Posts: 17012
Joined: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Fri Apr 10, 2009 4:22 pm

Oh I know thats my problem :roll: ...I am also realistic that if I aim for 10 I might get 5,I have dropped 4 kgs since Jan but not enough time left now...next year should be a good year thou if I can start the year at 90!.
Went out with the club race training ride last night...Alex would have laughed,their idea of training was a 2 hour ride with 1 1km 20% climb (which I obviously sucked at) and maybee 3 five minute efforts...by which time I had ridden everybody off my wheel except for 2 young guys (one who was very strong) and then we had to wait for everyone to catch up.Luckily after next week it is too difficult to get to them as I need to look after the kids.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14458
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Sat Apr 11, 2009 4:08 pm

drubie wrote:Alex - I was of the simplistic understanding that fit == efficient, so as you get fitter you'll go through periods where weight loss is harder. I don't think there's any question at all that you have to be burning more calories than you are consuming though.

That's OK but it's statements like that can perpeturate myths about fitness, hence why I tend to pick up on them here and there. :)

Indeed, efficiency (mechanical energy delevered to the cranks as a proportion of the body's total energy production/conversion) is something that doesn't change very much either, and is not correlated with fitness. Efficiency might gradually change over years and years of riding mega miles, but untrained people are, on average, as efficient as trained cyclists. They just don't produce as much power.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:56 pm

Untrained riders as efficient but merely not producing enough power? Now I'm confused.

To me, power = torque * (revs over time) - I can see where somebody who is unfit simply can't produce (revs over time) due to running out of "puff". Now, running out of puff for a cyclist might be due to a few things: the energy requirements of hauling a flabby body, or in the longer run poor energy conversion efficiency.

For somebody like toolonglegs, who has no trouble producing (revs over time), he'd be greatly enhanced by the reduction in power required to lift a lighter body. Over 12 months, you can substantially improve (revs over time), but over 2 months the improvements would be much harder to see. Given that in that two months he could drop 10kg by eating HTFU pills instead of pasta, surely his performance would benefit far more from the weight loss than any ability to produce (revs over time) that he already has or will potentially lose if he continues to train at his current level.

I see this phenomenon in myself - the combination of being able to spin harder for longer vs. having to haul less of me up the hill. Clearly, improvements in both would be fantastic for the untrained, but toolonglegs doesn't have that luxury and is stuck with exclusively reducing his weight to improve his performance.

Am I wrong?
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Ant. » Sat Apr 11, 2009 10:38 pm

300W = 300 J/s = 1080 kJ/hr. Cycling at 300w burns one muesli bar per hour?!

This is what efficiency is: Losses in energy due to heat (primarily), frictional losses from muscle filaments sliding over each other, and who knows what else. Cycling humans are about 23%, give or take a couple of %.


HTFU pills instead of pasta... you're assuming he will only lose fat and fitness will stay stagnant, which is not at all true. It's pretty hard to not lose the good stuff, and downright impossible losing 10kg in 2 months.
Cervélo R3
Cervélo P3C
BT Blade
Ant.
 
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Perth

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Sat Apr 11, 2009 11:10 pm

On a flat road you might be burning a muesli bar per hour, but we're talking ventoux here. Its up! I think I'd rather be light an slightly unfit than fit and overweight, simply due to the physics of climbing that mountain. I'm guessing it's worth giving up a bit of fitness/muscle on a quest to trim down for that particular challenge.
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Sun Apr 12, 2009 3:11 am

I think I would be happier been at my fittest..and carrying a bit of extra weight.Lemond apparently always said endurance is a by product VO2 max...(does that make sense?).I don't want to lose any power as I am racing every weekend and staying at the front of that is important.It is now 99 days 11 hours...so 3 months plus a drible...I will definately try for 5 kilos...but recovery will have to come before diet.I seriously think I can lose 10 kilos without any power lose...actually I think I can lose 10 kilos and get quite a serious power improvement (not taking in to account an improved power to weight ratio)...but not in 3 months...but I would like to start next year at 85 - 87.5 kilos and a ftp up another 10%....possible...will have to see :D .
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14458
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Sun Apr 12, 2009 7:42 am

drubie wrote:Untrained riders as efficient but merely not producing enough power? Now I'm confused.

You are confusing someone's ability to generate power (their fitness) with their efficiency (energy delivered to the pedals as a propotion of total energy produced). There is no difference in efficiency between when you are fit or unfit.

As for climbing, well that's simply dictated by your power to weight ratio.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Sun Apr 12, 2009 7:49 am

toolonglegs wrote:Lemond apparently always said endurance is a by product VO2 max...(does that make sense?).

No. but I don't know what he actually said.

e.g. there are plenty of Audax riders with pretty modest VO2 Max values.

VO2max is but one of several key physiological factors but is not, on it's own, all that helpful for determining performance potential. You also need to know other things including efficiency and the % of VO2 Max one can sustain for, say, 1 hour (or longer).

Considering VO2 Max on it's own is like asking what the volume of a rectangular prism is when someone only gives you it's height.

But as with most things, performance is best assessed by performance itself.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3463
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Ant. » Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:09 am

drubie wrote:On a flat road you might be burning a muesli bar per hour, but we're talking ventoux here. Its up! I think I'd rather be light an slightly unfit than fit and overweight, simply due to the physics of climbing that mountain. I'm guessing it's worth giving up a bit of fitness/muscle on a quest to trim down for that particular challenge.

It was a rhetorical question... you expend more than 1080 kJ/hr at 300W.
300W is the mechanical power you are putting out, 1080 kJ is the mechanical energy you expended, and that is ~23% of the dietary energy consumed to create that mechanical energy (ie, 4700kJ or 1120kcal). THAT is what efficiency is, and is pretty much the same for every cyclist despite fitness levels.


But again, you're saying "slightly" unfit and giving up "a bit" of fitness - I'd like to know what you are basing that assumption on.
Cervélo R3
Cervélo P3C
BT Blade
Ant.
 
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Perth

Re: Priorities!...

Postby drubie » Sun Apr 12, 2009 10:32 am

Ant. wrote:.
But again, you're saying "slightly" unfit and giving up "a bit" of fitness - I'd like to know what you are basing that assumption on.


A bald guess. There's a tradeoff in there somewhere, although toolonglegs has already said he prefers the power so he can keep doing well in shorter races and on a flat course that's probably a good strategy. I don't blame him for that - he's clearly a successful cyclist and hardly needs advice from a total amateur like me. I was merely chipping in on the weight loss side and I still think 10kg over eight weeks can be done without giving up too much power, especially with the sheer amount of training he's doing.
So we get the leaders we deserve and we elect, we get the companies and the products that we ask for, right? And we have to ask for different things. – Paul Gilding
but really, that's rubbish. We get none of it because the choices are illusory.
User avatar
drubie
 
Posts: 4617
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 10:12 am
Location: New England

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Hebden » Sun Apr 12, 2009 1:05 pm

I was always confused with your weight TLL, your previous estimates of calories don't compute for me. I am very surprised that you’re still over 100kgs given the estimated caloric intake you have posted on other threads and the kms you are doing. :?

My best suggestion would be swim or run or play some team/ball sport. I know you don't run so maybe swim or tennis, soccer, touch football?

Here is my idea not based on any scientific studies, just on my own experience. Your body has become super efficient at cycling, your muscles and nervous system have been well tuned to push a pedal and use minimal fuel in the process. If you were to start a new sport which use different muscle groups your body will initially be inefficient and therefore burn more fuel per hour than when you are cycling.

Being a veggie can be tricky too, meat is quite filling and a lot of vegetarian dishes are big on oils. Maybe you can move to lite dairy too? We only use lite dairy in our house and if I ever have full cream or full fat “real” butter, at friend’s houses, I am shocked at the richness of it. It may be hard at first but over time you will get used to the lite dairy and butter alternatives. And if this is a larger part if your diet (assuming Vegetarianism and hard training, you need protein form somewhere) then you could cut back a fair amount of fat (not good fat either) from your diet.

Also, everyone is different so you just have to experiment and find what works for you. I understand it can be frustrating, but at the end of the day you are a very strong rider, much stronger than these whippets that fly up the mountains. Maybe you could try your hand at TT’s, it is the “race of truth” after all ;-)

Good luck.
User avatar
Hebden
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:47 am
Location: Katoomba, NSW

Re: Priorities!...

Postby toolonglegs » Sun Apr 12, 2009 4:03 pm

Thanks Hebden...all good advice...but no good for me on the matter of other sports.Only for the reason that I can not run...I have too much ankle damage from motorbikes and rugby.Which leaves swimming....but being a pretty good teenage swimmer meant 5km plus a day for WAY too many years... now I just could not face doing mindless laps in a pool.Plus I find that swimming bulks me up especially in the upper body....nothing that I want as a cyclist.
On the food...weight...this morning I was 99.5kgs.Only have light milk,no butter...very little olive oil...actually I eat very healthily and light but must have a metablolism to survive an ice age.My daily intake is about 2000kcal (a bit more with a 2 hour plus ride) spread over 5 to 6 small meals.Protein is the struggle and I need to watch that...I don't drink...so can't cut that out.I seriously have to feel like I am starving myself to lose weight...oh well..thems the breaks.
PS...I think the lack of meat may be the reason...not because of the meat itself but because it fills you up quickier... I probably over eat a bit on some meals.
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14458
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Priorities!...

Postby Ant. » Sun Apr 12, 2009 6:24 pm

toolonglegs wrote:On the food...weight...this morning I was 99.5kgs.Only have light milk,no butter...very little olive oil...actually I eat very healthily and light but must have a metablolism to survive an ice age.My daily intake is about 2000kcal (a bit more with a 2 hour plus ride) spread over 5 to 6 small meals.Protein is the struggle and I need to watch that...I don't drink...so can't cut that out.I seriously have to feel like I am starving myself to lose weight...oh well..thems the breaks.
PS...I think the lack of meat may be the reason...not because of the meat itself but because it fills you up quickier... I probably over eat a bit on some meals.

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Keep a food diary and make it accountable to someone.
Cervélo R3
Cervélo P3C
BT Blade
Ant.
 
Posts: 758
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:34 am
Location: Perth

Re: Priorities!...

Postby twizzle » Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:02 am

Hey TLL - how often do you go lactic when training? For racing, it's obviously self-defeating, but from my (brief) research I'm pretty sure lactic acid production is tied up with triggering muscle building and fat loss. I don't know about you, but I find it bloody hard to go lactic without deliberately killing myself up the hills. And the only recent time I've had significant weight loss was when I started racing... and once the leg muscles caught up the weight loss stopped.
I ride, therefore I am.
...real cyclists don't have squeaky chains...
User avatar
twizzle
 
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 11:45 am
Location: Taking a break.

Next

Return to Training

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit