Training to improve

[Rodswain]

Just wondering. I spent the past 10 years doing triathlons of various lengths at a very sociable pace. I am no longer running and after a very lazy you have decided to give cycling ago. In March I did my first event which was the Canberra big bike ride, 120 K, and I loved it. I am planning to stick with the cycling and was wondering if two 1 hour rides mid week and then 80 to 100 K ride on Saturdays is enough volume to improve as a recreational cyclist. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you

[Alex Simmons/RST]

It will be enough until it isn't.

IOW if the workload is more than you've been doing, then you will improve to begin with, however a stagnant workload will mean your performance improvement will eventually plateau.

To continue to improve requires increasing the workload (duration, frequency and/or intensity) to provide further performance stimulus (up to a point when recovery management also becomes crucial). If duration/frequency is constrained then one can introduce more intensity, but that has a practical physiological limit.

So it really depends on knowing at what level of performance will you be satisfied?

Whether that's attainable on 3 rides / week is impossible to know. Much depends on what the current performance gap is, your natural attributes, prior training response and so on.

[Derny Driver]

Triatletes always amaze me with how little training they think they can do. 10 hours a week for all 3 disciplines would be a lot ( disclaimer: i was a triathlete once upon a time). For a cyclist, 10 hours cycling a week is standard. You will not improve on 4-5 hours training.

[Rodswain]

That is what I suspected. Thanks for the advice

[g-boaf]

That's just too little to get any benefit. Maybe if those 1 hour sessions were really hard ones? Then you do a pair of 4-5 hour rides on the weekend, perhaps that might be about the minimum I'd be thinking of.

I just don't know enough about what level your are at currently. Some people find it hard to get the fitness back, others get it back really quickly.

[Alex Simmons/RST]

It's not too little to get benefit, as I said...

it really depends on knowing at what level of performance will you be satisfied?

In any case whatever the OP ends up doing, keep it fun.

4-6 hours/week of aerobic exercise is way more than the majority of the population do and certainly enough to be able to enjoy being outside and cycling and complete cycling events/sportives/fondos etc. If nothing else it will mean they will be far more likely to have better cardio health and that will help them enjoy rest of life more.

Will they be at the pointy end of events, set land speed records or blitz their local Tuesday night worlds? No, but that may not be the objective.

Since we don't know much about them or what they are looking to achieve, then ruling out achieving their objective is too dismissive. What we can say is that sort of time constraint means performance will reach a plateau and is unlikely to significantly increase without additional workload. The issue is whether that plateau is high enough for their objectives.

Keep in mind that in the lead up to setting a masters world hour record, one of my clients averaged 8 hours/week. Another did it on less than 10 hours/week. Talented sods.

[Rodswain]

To “complete” fondos and events up to around 120k such as the Canberra big ride or the Bowral 90k rouleurs is exactly the goal. I will extend my weekend ride out to 4hrs and make one mid week ride a hilly hour and one to include some efforts. I will see how that goes. Thanks all for the advice. This weekly load will leave the rest of my life unaffected, hopefully meaning no pressure and a great hobby.

[jules21]

a 4 hr ride is a big ride. it will leave you pretty spent if you are only doing shorter 1 hour sessions during the week. you can make it an easy pace, but I'd suggest you'd get more benefit out of doing slightly harder 1-2 hour rides. it might be easier to stay motivated by more, but shorter rides. that's personal preference though.