Official Sprocket Rockets Training Thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dantheman

Touring will certainly count a lot more than zero, by my understanding is that aerobic capacity does have a strong activity-specific component so don't expect a 1:1 transfer to cycling.

---

I feel the best way to think about it is that it's raising your baseline fitness. You will still have to train yourself into bike specific shape, but you'll be starting from a more fit place.

When I used to care about biking fast I kept myself pretty damn fit during the cold season, and as the early season bike stuff started it was always kinda weird that I could just bury my legs to the point where they were half numb and pedaling squares and never have to breath hard at all.

As you get older this phenomena increases - there's less fitness crossover than there is when you are younger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by climberevan

Lifting weights, OTOH, actually would make most people faster EVEN IF they gain a few pounds of muscle. The only case where that wouldn't be true is on a steep single climb, perhaps. My recent adventures in the gym have basically eliminated my weird occasional upper back pains, and have significantly decreased my knee pain. I think general strengthening is incredibly important, especially as we age.

---

The guys on the fascat podcast get real worked up about the idea of lifting weights beyond the bare minimum required to ride a bike faster. "We're bike racers, not weight lifters!" Riding bikes as an old guy is supposed to be a fun means to improve/maintain your health, not the primary end.

Weight lifting and cross training are great ways to prevent over use injuries or like throwing your back out picking up a bag of groceries. Both of which are real killers to your cycling performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bean

IMO this comes down to a philosophical question. As far as "counting" it to what extent does that matter? You're keeping fitness up and enjoying your activity - if you're a few % lower in bike-specific fitness come springtime is that going to have a significant drawback somehow? Are you going to have a smaller paycheck or be incapable of doing something you have been working towards?

Same question I have for middle-aged amateur cyclists who don't want to lift weights because a few pounds of muscle might slow them down by a few seconds on a local hill climb.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by climberevan

Exactly this. For me it's about having the most fun possible, and ski touring in the winter is WAY more fun than riding the trainer.

I had an interesting conversation with one of the fastest cyclists in the region a couple of days ago about 5 hours into a 9 hour tour. She's kind of at the point where she's thinking of giving up racing, at least at the pro level, because she'd rather take advantage of the amazing ski conditions we're having now instead of doing bike-specific training that her coach specifies. It's interesting to hear others work through the same thing I worked through in my 20s when I decided to go galavanting around the country instead of continuing to race bikes.

Based on HR data, I get a ton of Z2 and Z3 while touring, and it comes in big chunks on climbs, just like it would on a bike. Yes, it's not 100% sport-specific, but I think it carries over enough that it doesn't matter one whit for a mid 40s guy whose main goal is to be able to go fast so he can go farther.

Lifting weights, OTOH, actually would make most people faster EVEN IF they gain a few pounds of muscle. The only case where that wouldn't be true is on a steep single climb, perhaps. My recent adventures in the gym have basically eliminated my weird occasional upper back pains, and have significantly decreased my knee pain. I think general strengthening is incredibly important, especially as we age.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EWG

I feel the best way to think about it is that it's raising your baseline fitness. You will still have to train yourself into bike specific shape, but you'll be starting from a more fit place.

When I used to care about biking fast I kept myself pretty damn fit during the cold season, and as the early season bike stuff started it was always kinda weird that I could just bury my legs to the point where they were half numb and pedaling squares and never have to breath hard at all.

As you get older this phenomena increases - there's less fitness crossover than there is when you are younger.

---

To be clear, I agree with all of this 100%. However, IIRC, Tailwind races at a fairly high level. So, if he has early season races that he wants to be in top form for getting most of his Z2 from touring is not going to be ideal.

I'm not getting any Z2 from touring lately because after years away from LCC lift served I've had a Snowbird pass the last two winters and have been completely, hopelessly addicted to inbounds charging on big skis with real boots. Go fast, catch air, be happy :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supermoon

Weight lifting and cross training are great ways to prevent over use injuries or like throwing your back out picking up a bag of groceries. Both of which are real killers to your cycling performance.

---

Another thing, is as you age your bone density decreases. If you spend all your time exercising on a bike, your bone density will decrease even more.

Lifting weights helps strengthen your bones.

I attribute not breaking ribs on a specific ski crash simply due to the fact that I was lifting weights. I should have broken some ribs falling from about 10 feet high directly onto my rib cage on refrozen moguls.
It hurt a lot, but I was back skiing the next weekend.

Thanks for the feedback!

I am committed to getting more sport specific base miles this winter. I am new to winter training and I think my struggle point has been ‘what is enough’. I have a 125 mile gravel race in early May that I’m hoping to treat as a tune up for a 100k MTB race in June and a 100 mile MTB in July. So that’s my first baseline.

Last year I was moving and had a bad case of Covid so I didn’t start getting bike miles until May. I also didn’t do much skiing either after February. I had about 10 weeks of riding before a 100 mile MTB race at the end of July but it always just felt like my base wasn’t there.

I’d love to survive the gravel race and trim about 30 minutes off my 100 miler (sub 8 being the goal).

So for now it seems like:
* Work on base fitness and don’t make myself miserable.
* Lift some heavy things
* Bike as much as I’m able

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ironhippy

Another thing, is as you age your bone density decreases. If you spend all your time exercising on a bike, your bone density will decrease even more.

Lifting weights helps strengthen your bones.

I attribute not breaking ribs on a specific ski crash simply due to the fact that I was lifting weights. I should have broken some ribs falling from about 10 feet high directly onto my rib cage on refrozen moguls.
It hurt a lot, but I was back skiing the next weekend.

---

Well damn. This makes me rethink my broken rib last year. It wasn't that bad of a fall, and I wasn't even doing something that cool. :rolleyes:

I know/knew lifting weights strengthens bones - is there any data/insight into the number of reps/sets best for this? I'm lifting again this year - after three years focused on running supplemented with core strength routines, but very little proper lifting - and was curious if X reps is better than Y reps specifically for strengthening bones. (Not regarding strength, hypertrophy, muscular endurance, or other considerations).

I don't recall seeing much data on reps/sets schemes specifically for bone density. Most of those studies focus hypertrophy/strength/ME. If I had to speculate I would guess that higher weight/lower rep is probably better. But, this is also probably a situation where simply doing anything is far more important than what specific thing you do.

Great zone 2 discussion.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=dBbK-0vh-d8&feature=share


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dantheman

I'm not getting any Z2 from touring lately because after years away from LCC lift served I've had a Snowbird pass the last two winters and have been completely, hopelessly addicted to inbounds charging on big skis with real boots. Go fast, catch air, be happy :D

---

If you’re racing gravity/ enduro, this is great training. Nothing like a proper top to bottom.

At my most competitive age group dh and endurbro phases it was winters full of full gas out the High T, doubling and tripling like a moto track, and either straight into frontside to the chair or something off the back with hustling on the sidestep and skating back along the transfer tow. Or groomer fitness laps (many turns down Albion side and skating back) during high pressure…which is apparently a thing that used to happen.




Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fool

Well damn. This makes me rethink my broken rib last year. It wasn't that bad of a fall, and I wasn't even doing something that cool. :rolleyes:

I know/knew lifting weights strengthens bones - is there any data/insight into the number of reps/sets best for this? I'm lifting again this year - after three years focused on running supplemented with core strength routines, but very little proper lifting - and was curious if X reps is better than Y reps specifically for strengthening bones. (Not regarding strength, hypertrophy, muscular endurance, or other considerations).

---

Caveats in advance: the vast majority of studies on resistance training vs. bone density involve old women with osteopenia/osteoporosis. I spent 10 minutes on this at 4:45am. I didn't see any studies directly comparing different relevant lifting protocols.

Most relevant study I could find is this one. They did a 5x5 program of deadlifts, back squat, overhead press. https://asbmr.onlinelibrary.wiley.co...1002/jbmr.3284

My take developed over the years: I think weight-bearing in relevant positions and impact (e.g. from running) are the primary ways you're going to improve bone density. When lifting, look at heavier compound lifts such as deadlifts, barbell squats, OHP, bench. Do them as heavy as you can for the 5-10 rep range. Do a few working sets per session. Do 1-2 sessions per muscle group per week. Above all else don't injure yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fool

Well damn. This makes me rethink my broken rib last year. It wasn't that bad of a fall, and I wasn't even doing something that cool. :rolleyes:

I know/knew lifting weights strengthens bones - is there any data/insight into the number of reps/sets best for this? I'm lifting again this year - after three years focused on running supplemented with core strength routines, but very little proper lifting - and was curious if X reps is better than Y reps specifically for strengthening bones. (Not regarding strength, hypertrophy, muscular endurance, or other considerations).

---

You need to stress the bones to get more bone density, so pretty heavy weights, which means low reps.

Another advantage of heavy weights(corresponding to 5 reps or so) is that you will get stronger, but not gain a lot of muscle mass.

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rod9301

Another advantage of heavy weights(corresponding to 5 reps or so) is that you will get stronger, but not gain a lot of muscle mass.

---

Muscle mass is a good thing.

Yes, but better to be strong and light

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rod9301

Yes, but better to be strong and light

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

---

To what end? Will it affect your paycheck? Because it will affect you in old age. Too many endurance athletes think they’re going to accidentally turn into Arnold if they go into a weight room. If you suddenly find yourself too jacked (which has literally never happened in the history of mankind) just stop lifting for a while.

Thanks all. Good discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dantheman

But, this is also probably a situation where simply doing anything is far more important than what specific thing you do.

---

Yeah, agreed. I think that's frequently the case for a lot of these nuanced questions. Fun to discuss/learn the intricacies while remembering to "not let perfect be the enemy of good," as they like to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bean

My take developed over the years: I think weight-bearing in relevant positions and impact (e.g. from running) are the primary ways you're going to improve bone density. When lifting, look at heavier compound lifts such as deadlifts, barbell squats, OHP, bench. Do them as heavy as you can for the 5-10 rep range. Do a few working sets per session. Do 1-2 sessions per muscle group per week. Above all else don't injure yourself.

---

Thanks, bean. I've been doing the heavy compound lifts - following Phraks Greyskull LP roughly - in the 5-8 rep range and it's been fun. Going to hopefully keep it up if I decide to dive back into an endurance activity like running or biking too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rod9301

You need to stress the bones to get more bone density, so pretty heavy weights, which means low reps.

---

This 100%. The more strain, the better, but however you have to mindful of injury. I only do squats, deadlifts, overhead press and weighted pullups. My heavy sets will be less than 5 reps.

I agree with the sentiment that no one is going to get huge just by adding weight training to their exercise routine. People spend a lot of time and energy trying to add mass and they don't always succeed.

I came here to post my workout from tonight - quick uphill lap at the ski resort after work. From what I can see I did almost an hour in my maximum HR zone. Shouldn't that be near impossible?

This is pretty standard for me while climbing. It felt pretty close to as fast as I could go and maintain that level of effort for a long period of time. Does this suggest that my zones are off?

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...5b12bf318f.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...4650db2d18.jpg

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joetron

If you’re racing gravity/ enduro, this is great training. Nothing like a proper top to bottom.

At my most competitive age group dh and endurbro phases it was winters full of full gas out the High T, doubling and tripling like a moto track, and either straight into frontside to the chair or something off the back with hustling on the sidestep and skating back along the transfer tow. Or groomer fitness laps (many turns down Albion side and skating back) during high pressure…which is apparently a thing that used to happen.

---

Were I Street hot laps part of that program or was that just for fun? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sethschmautz

I came here to post my workout from tonight - quick uphill lap at the ski resort after work. From what I can see I did almost an hour in my maximum HR zone. Shouldn't that be near impossible?

This is pretty standard for me while climbing. It felt pretty close to as fast as I could go and maintain that level of effort for a long period of time. Does this suggest that my zones are off?
Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

---

I would say yes. I think all of your zones should be likely shifted up and likely broadened, especially on the lower zones. Z5 is far to wide based on my experience of mine and others I know data.

This absolutely varies by person, but for context I tapped out around 183 bpm at Max and my Z5 was >170, Z4 161-170, Z3 142-160, Z2 107-141, Z1 < 107. Quick look over some past 2 hr XC race results in had me in Z4 ~40-60%, Z3 20-30%, Z5 15-20%. Flatter races would have lower Z5, climby races would be higher.

I think the beginning of your Z5 is quite a bit too low, for me at least my Z5 was only about 12-15. I took a look back at some race results and most I ever did was 35 minutes in Z5 over two hour XC race, vast majority was that Z4 threshold which is what you're supposed to be able to do for

I have needed to set custom zones in strava and garmin. They seem to be about right and line up with what intervals.icu guesses (although intervals splits it up into more zones). Intervals is nice because it will constantly try to estimate your LTHR, max HR, and FTP based on efforts you do without them needing to be any specific tests. It'll plot a max hr vs time chart as well as a power curve. Anyway, it's free and pretty useful if you have hr and/or power data with your activities.

https://intervals.icu/

If you want to set your own zones, you'll need to figure out your max or lthr and then do percentages from there. I think I used this

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/learn/...setting-zones/

if you scroll down it gives percentages to calculate yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VTskibum

I would say yes. I think all of your zones should be likely shifted up and likely broadened, especially on the lower zones. Z5 is far to wide based on my experience of mine and others I know data.

This absolutely varies by person, but for context I tapped out around 183 bpm at Max and my Z5 was >170, Z4 161-170, Z3 142-160, Z2 107-141, Z1 < 107. Quick look over some past 2 hr XC race results in had me in Z4 ~40-60%, Z3 20-30%, Z5 15-20%. Flatter races would have lower Z5, climby races would be higher.

I think the beginning of your Z5 is quite a bit too low, for me at least my Z5 was only about 12-15. I took a look back at some race results and most I ever did was 35 minutes in Z5 over two hour XC race, vast majority was that Z4 threshold which is what you're supposed to be able to do for

---

Yeah, I agree with all of this. I used to top out at about 193ish, but now that I'm older I think my max is down to about 187 or so. Math says my zone 5 should start at around the mid 160s, which seems about right. But that's not what Garmin uses as a default so I need to customize it.

Talking about zones gets complicated as there are 5 heart rate zones, 7 power zones when talking about FTP, etc. That said...

Do an FTP test and check your heart rate during the bulk of that. That will give you some info. But your biggest problem is likely this: Garmin figures out you maximum heart rate by deducting your age from 220 if you are male (226 for female). So it's is based on general population, not on you. You have to go to settings, user profiles, heart rate zones to change it from default to custom. Do this, add your actual max HR, and it'll update all your zones. See if it makes more sense after that.

Thanks all. If memory serves I did some adjustments based on training peaks a while ago. I have an intervals.icu account and will look around for the HR functionality. I have set custom ranges in Garmin, coros and Strava.

Frustrating thing about Garmin is that some of their data fields and apps need to be set with these custom fields also - it becomes a lot to keep in sync, especially if it changes at all.

Thanks for the input.

Seth

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Just logged into training peaks and here is what it shows in the zones area. This seems better to me but I haven't been doing this for very long.https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...60e5ad75a3.jpg

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bagtagley

Were I Street hot laps part of that program or was that just for fun? :D

---

I St Hot Laps were definitely part of the Training Protocol.
Some of us train like Rocky, some train like Drago.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums