Is there a disconnect between flats riding and climbing ability?

[Sandy]

After a complete layoff from cycling for 4 months, I started riding again. At the latter part of June, I decided to try to improve my cycling, especially climbing. I have lost 30 of the 40 or so that I will lose.

I feel that I am stronger, am able to ride the flats better, and have gained some endurance in the approximate 3 month time frame. I know that I expect too much too soon, but I am disappointed and discouraged with my hill climbing improvement. Although I am a little better in climbing, with the weight loss that has occurred, I would think that I should have improved more. I seem to climb substantially better on some hills, but I think that I do no better than before on the longer steeper hills.

Is there simply a disconnect between hill climbing ability and flats riding? Do some people really simply do better in hill climbing or better in flats riding because of physical characteristics of the person, or is it technique, pedal stroke, muscle fiber, in the brain, inability to efficiently climb,.....?

In other words do I still suck at hill climbing because that is simply my biggest weakness in cycling, or can this weakness be improved to be more congruent with my flats riding (and sprinting) ability. The latter two are mediocre at best , but certainly better than my climbing ability.

I guess an easy way to say it, are you born to climb or can you learn to climb?

Thanks for any input!!

Soaring Sandy

[fstrthnu]

Sandy,

To become a better climber you must climb. Climbing is a skill.

[coylifut]

yes. look at Robbie McCewen. he's tiny like a climber, but sprints like a monster.

[FATBOY]

If I read you correctly you it seems like more of a perception issue than a performance issue. Are you doing this work on climbs that you have timed yourself on in the past and finding that you are little improved? Or is it more of a feeling that you are still suffering as you did pre weight loss? I have a couple of epic days a year where it seems like the miles and the efforts all come easy, the rest always hurt and frustrate me to no end. From the amount of weight you you seem to have lost, if you are not cruising up the climbs better than before, it will not be long before you are. Honestly, expectations suck, give yourself reasonable goals and give yourself every opportunity to achieve them, you lost a lot of weight in a short period of time, the mind still needs to catch up with the new you. Now go drink a light beer, do some lunges and think about that hill you will crush tomorrow!

[Sandy]

Sandy,

To become a better climber you must climb. Climbing is a skill.

Thanks. Especially from someone of your cycling calibre. Guess that means I need to go out and climb more and aquire that skill.


Sandy

[Ray]

Big guys are better on the flats and little guys are better climbers. Gals too. In general. There are exceptions. And either kind of person can improve at their weakness but it will never stop being the weakness.

I'm best at riding slow. It's my strength. My weakness is riding fast. I work at it a little, but it's still my weakness, so I generally play to my strengths.

Regarding improvements in climbing, as the great Eddy once said, "don't buy upgrades, ride up grades".

-Ray

[Sandy]

yes. look at Robbie McCewen. he's tiny like a climber, but sprints like a monster.

Are you saying yes, that you might simply be better at one particular phase, just like Robbie McCewen? Although he is small, he can really generate massive power?


Sandy

[Sandy]

If I read you correctly you it seems like more of a perception issue than a performance issue. Are you doing this work on climbs that you have timed yourself on in the past and finding that you are little improved? Or is it more of a feeling that you are still suffering as you did pre weight loss? I have a couple of epic days a year where it seems like the miles and the efforts all come easy, the rest always hurt and frustrate me to no end. From the amount of weight you you seem to have lost, if you are not cruising up the climbs better than before, it will not be long before you are. Honestly, expectations suck, give yourself reasonable goals and give yourself every opportunity to achieve them, you lost a lot of weight in a short period of time, the mind still needs to catch up with the new you. Now go drink a light beer, do some lunges and think about that hill you will crush tomorrow!

It is all perceptions. No timed climbs. I am not really talking about how difficult the climb is, but the perception as to how fast I am doing the climb. There are some hills that I am almost certain that I am climbing much faster, and easier. That is clear to me. But the perception on long steep hill climbs is that I am not going any faster than before.

One thing is absolutely certain, I am definitely climbing some hills im substantially larger gears, sometimes 3-4 cogs higher, because I am able to do that now, and could not before.

Your response is great! Thanks.


Sandy

[e-RICHIE]

sandy what kind of miles and hours are you putting in atmo?

[Ken Robb]

when climbing you are fighting gravity so power to weight ratio is most important so a really light rider who puts out moderate power may climb better than a big rider who puts out more power but still has a lower power to weigjht ratio.

Speed on flats is power vs. wind resistance or drag. A bigger more powerful rider can get closer to the smaller rider's aero drag number than his weight so the big guy may be faster on the flats.

I know this because at 6'1 and 200 lbs. I can hang with my pals for a hundred meters or so but on a climb they drop me in 20 meters. :rolleyes:

[coylifut]

yeah, that's what I'm saying. look at bettini, on paper he should like a little spanish guy climber, but he's wearing the sprint jersey in the tour of spain. he's got more fast twitch than slow twitch.

it's still a skill and you can improve on it with hard work, but in rare occurances do people swap skill sets like jalabert.

[Sandy]

sandy what kind of miles and hours are you putting in atmo?

September 9- A reasonably slow metric- First one in several years. Seldom ride that far.

September 12- 29 miles, medium difficulty

September 15- Easy 75 miles, mostly flat, a few good hills. The longest ride that I have done in many years.

September 16- 36 miles, not too hard

September 18- 19 very easy miles

September 19- 48 difficult hilly miles (where I was disappointed in my climbing)

I don't record saddle time.


Sandy

[regularguy412]

Climbing is basically power-to-weight. When you lose weight, sometimes you lose power. It might take some time to develop the climbing muscles. It's 'really' important to have a smooth spin and be able to 'feel' the pedal almost all the way around the stroke.

I don't know what kind of crankset you have, but just for fun you might try putting a 42 on as your small ring ( or in the case of a triple, put it on as your middle ring). Then, go out and ride on the flats or small rollers with that gear. Shift your rear der. often. Don't be afraid to 'push' the gear a bit as you roll on the flats, or are just coming up to the crest of a small hill. In this way, you can develop power, but it won't likely drive you into oxygen debt.

I offer this suggestion because some of the guys I routinely ride with encounter similar situations that you relate. They are pretty young guys, too -- on the order of 25-35 years of age. I've suggested to some of them that they should try swapping out their 39 rings for 42s and just 'try' the 42/53 combo for a couple of months.

As with all things anatomical, it will take time to note any changes. It may not work, but it's at least one avenue to try. Really steep or long hills still require the proper gearing -- 39 small ring, a triple,, or a compact crankset.

Mike in AR

[Sandy]

when climbing you are fighting gravity so power to weight ratio is most important so a really light rider who puts out moderate power may climb better than a big rider who puts out more power but still has a lower power to weigjht ratio.

Speed on flats is power vs. wind resistance or drag. A bigger more powerful rider can get closer to the smaller rider's aero drag number than his weight so the big guy may be faster on the flats.

I know this because at 6'1 and 200 lbs. I can hang with my pals for a hundred meters or so but on a climb they drop me in 20 meters. :rolleyes:

I am 6' and 195 now. I relate to being dropped in the first 20 meters. I relate to that very well. Yep. Very well! :rolleyes:

At least we are two of the most handsome riders out there. They may drop us, but they are still jealous of us.... :)


Sandy

[Louis]

Some of this will be a repeat of what RG412 has already posted, but here goes:

When on the flats the most important resisting force is aerodynamic drag and the most important factor there is cross sectional area, with shape (taper ratio and stuff like that) also playing a role. (Aside: drag is proportional to velocity squared, so to go twice as fast you have to put out about four times more power. This causes us to loose lots of extra energy when we speed down hills, after all that effort (mxgxh) we put in to climb them.) So, your speed is determined by your power to drag ratio.

When climbing the most important resisting force is mass x gravity. In this case the rate at which you can climb is determined by your power to mass ratio. That's why most of the good climbers are tiny little guys - low mass.

Because there is not a direct linear connection between cross sectional area and mass (although there is a correlation) you are correct, there is a "disconnect" between performance in the two regimes.

Louis

[e-RICHIE]

September 9- A reasonably slow metric- First one in several years. Seldom ride that far.

September 12- 29 miles, medium difficulty

September 15- Easy 75 miles, mostly flat, a few good hills. The longest ride that I have done in many years.

September 16- 36 miles, not too hard

September 18- 19 very easy miles

September 19- 48 difficult hilly miles (where I was disappointed in my climbing)

I don't record saddle time.


Sandy
atmo there alot of gaps and some inconsistancies with
the distance(s). i think your cycling and fitness would
improve if you did 70 minutes a day and kept it at
90-110 rpm no matter what the terrain throws at you.
suppleness and leg speed trumps all atmo.

[saab2000]

Climbing is basically power-to-weight.

This is the truth. Lose weight. Add power. Climb faster.

As you have noticed, losing 30 lbs has undoubtedly had a positive impact on your riding.

Losing weight on the body probably has 10x the impact of losing weight on the bike.

Like e-Richie says, keeping the spin going is important too. I don't have the power I used to have, so i have to rely on the spin more than I used to.

[Fixed]

suppleness and leg speed trumps all atmo.
i hear music
cheers imho :beer:

[e-RICHIE]

suppleness and leg speed trumps all atmo.
i hear music
cheers imho :beer:
varttina rocks atmo.
taste this (http://youtube.com/watch?v=jWk-Vy1Yx_o) -

[Sandy]

atmo there alot of gaps and some inconsistancies with
the distance(s). i think your cycling and fitness would
improve if you did 70 minutes a day and kept it at
90-110 rpm no matter what the terrain throws at you.
suppleness and leg speed trumps all atmo.

Very interesting comment about cadence. My cadence is all over the place. I have a compact- 50/34. I often find myself riding in a 50/12 or 50/13 when much better and faster riders are spinning in much smaller gears. On the flats, I feel comfortable using bigger gears. I was actullay advised to get a compact as I used to spin at a high cadence. I do some spinning at higher cadences and some riding in larger gears at much lower cadences. I undoubtedly ride in larger gears than most I ride with. When I get in the steeper hills, both my gear choices and spin decrease.

A couple of weeks ago, I went on a hilly ride with Smiley. He pushes me, but he does not try to rde away from me. Interestingly, I found myself spinning at a much higher cadence than normal. I am not sure why. I do know that it made it dasier for me to keep up with him. I used to jack rabbit a lot, but I try not to do that.

I am going on an easy ride tomorrow. I will try to spin at a high cadence for most of the ride. That type of cyling tends to wear me down more that riding in bigger gears.

Thanks for the suggestion. I will try to ride more often, per your suggestion.


Speedily Spinning Sandy

[e-RICHIE]

Very interesting comment about cadence. My cadence is all over the place. I have a compact- 50/34. I often find myself riding in a 50/12 or 50/13 when much better and faster riders are spinning in much smaller gears. On the flats, I feel comfortable using bigger gears. I was actullay advised to get a compact as I used to spin at a high cadence. I do some spinning at higher cadnces and some riding in larger gears at much lower cadences. I undoubtedly ride in larger gears than most I ride with. When I get in the steeper hills, both my gear choices and spin decrease.

A couple of weeks ago, Iwent on a hilly ride with Smiely. He pushes me, but he does not try to rde away from me. Interestingly, I found myself spinning at a much higher cadence than normal. I am not sure why. I do know that it made it dasier for me to keep up with him. I used to jack rabbit a lot, but I try not to do that.

I am going on an easy ride tomorrow. I will try to spin at a high cadence for most of the ride. That type of cyling tends to wear me down more that ridng in bigger gears.


Spinning Sandy
here's the deal - are you riding or training?
the two are not the same atmo. both are
good. at the end of the day, what do you
want? one of the two will deliver it atmo.

ps
it's work.

[Sandy]

Some of this will be a repeat of what RG412 has already posted, but here goes:

When on the flats the most important resisting force is aerodynamic drag and the most important factor there is cross sectional area, with shape (taper ratio and stuff like that) also playing a role. (Aside: drag is proportional to velocity squared, so to go twice as fast you have to put out about four times more power. This causes us to loose lots of extra energy when we speed down hills, after all that effort (mxgxh) we put in to climb them.) So, your speed is determined by your power to drag ratio.

When climbing the most important resisting force is mass x gravity. In this case the rate at which you can climb is determined by your power to mass ratio. That's why most of the good climbers are tiny little guys - low mass.

Because there is not a direct linear connection between cross sectional area and mass (although there is a correlation) you are correct, there is a "disconnect" between performance in the two regimes.

Louis

Damn! You sure know how to explain that is words that even I can understand. Thanks for the great explanation and answer.


Impressed Sandy

[swoop]

here's the deal - are you riding or training?
the two are not the same atmo. both are
good. at the end of the day, what do you
want? one of the two will deliver it atmo.

ps
it's work.


gets it.

[RPS]

Some of this will be a repeat of what RG412 has already posted, but here goes:

When on the flats the most important resisting force is aerodynamic drag and the most important factor there is cross sectional area, with shape (taper ratio and stuff like that) also playing a role. (Aside: drag is proportional to velocity squared, so to go twice as fast you have to put out about four times more power. This causes us to loose lots of extra energy when we speed down hills, after all that effort (mxgxh) we put in to climb them.) So, your speed is determined by your power to drag ratio.

When climbing the most important resisting force is mass x gravity. In this case the rate at which you can climb is determined by your power to mass ratio. That's why most of the good climbers are tiny little guys - low mass.

Because there is not a direct linear connection between cross sectional area and mass (although there is a correlation) you are correct, there is a "disconnect" between performance in the two regimes.

Louis
Louis, did you mean to say that the aero force would go up by a factor of approximately 4, and that the required power would go up by a factor of approximately 8? Either way it's a big difference.

[Elefantino]

Sandy:

It's best if you pattern yourself after someone. Emulation is the easiest way to train.

I, for example, like to think of myself as a combination of Marco Pantani and Mario Cipollini. I can't sprint and I can't climb. But I style.

[RPS]

Sandy, IMO there is a disconnect for both rider size and terrain, but one is easy for me to visualize and the other is not.

Assuming everything else is equal; to go 10 percent faster on flats it takes about 30 percent more power. That’s a lot of improvement by any measure. However, if the rider was able to generate 30 percent more power to ride 10% faster on the flats, he would be able to go up steep hills about 30 percent faster. I would expect that a 30 percent improvement in climbing speed would be much more noticeable than a 10 percent improvement in speed on the flats. Although percent speed improvements should be greater on climbs, many riders still feel the very opposite. That’s not the case for me though – when out of shape I notice deterioration in climbing first.

As to rider size, yes, larger riders have lower cross section to the wind per unit mass (assuming they are built similarly). This gives larger riders an advantage on the flats that does not carry through to climbing (same scenario we talk about as to why tandems supposedly can't climb). Additionally, extra fat around the middle doesn’t affect the cross sectional area as much as the mass, so when a person gains weight it is logical to expect that climbing will suffer more than riding on the flats.

One other factor is the drag on the bicycle itself related to the rider. Although I have not seen data on this, I’d bet that the aerodynamic drag on the bicycle affects smaller riders proportionally more. Granted the weight of bicycles also affects small riders more, but the percent disadvantage due to aerodynamic drag per unit mass of the rider has to be greater than the weight penalty (at the higher speeds of accomplished riders). This is particularly true today as bikes have become lighter to the point of normally weighing in the range of 10 percent of the rider (less for big guys and more for the little guys).

[mtflycaster]

Yes, bigtime, in my experience.

[bironi]

gets it.
:beer: :beer: :beer:
A third vote on this opinion. Being an undisciplined animal, I never train. I ride a fair amount, and enjoy it more than most. I certainly respect those who do train, and can kick my but. They are getting a different kind of enjoyment than I.

Byron

[Sandy]

Sandy:

It's best if you pattern yourself after someone. Emulation is the easiest way to train.

I, for example, like to think of myself as a combination of Marco Pantani and Mario Cipollini. I can't sprint and I can't climb. But I style.

That really gave me a good laugh! And smiles! Thanks!


Stylish Sandy

[labratmatt]

Sandy,

Don't get bogged down with a lot of the details on this subject, the fundamental issue is your power to weight ratio. If you feel fast on the flats, but feel like you suffer on the hills, drop weight or add power. It really is that simple.

In stating the above, I'm by no means trying to belittle the previous comments. They are excellent thoughts. Adding suppleness, getting the right cadence, muscle fiber type, etc. are important, but they are not paramount. They are the things that separate the KOM types from the people who are "pretty good climbers."

[Sandy]

here's the deal - are you riding or training?
the two are not the same atmo. both are
good. at the end of the day, what do you
want? one of the two will deliver it atmo.

ps
it's work.

Now that is one of the best cyling questions I have been asked. And my answer is probably not too good. I don't know. I am trying to balance the following:

1.Cycling fun and camaraderie versus hard disciplined work for cycling improvement goals- so far the fun has won.

2.Realization that for my age and my remarkably poor family health history that I am indeed very fortunate to have the health to participate in my passion for and about cycling versus my nature of becoming discouraged with my riding ability.

3. Realizing that after not cycling for 4 months and doing no exercise, starting back after that and losing 30 plus pounds, I have improved substantially already versus my foolish thoughts that the improvement is not happening fast enough.

4. Realizing fun is the name of the game and I should really not care how fast I go or how well I climb versus a "need" to improve and be more satisfied with how I ride.

So, great question. Lousy answer. Guess what you and others are saying is to make the choice and go for the choice and be satisfied in the choice.

Thanks for the insightful question. I do appreciate it.


Sandy

[e-RICHIE]

Now that is one of the best cyling questions I have been asked. And my answer is probably not too good. I don't know. I am trying to balance the following:

1.Cycling fun and camaraderie versus hard disciplined work for cycling improvement goals- so far the fun has won.

2.Realization that for my age and my remarkably poor family health history that I am indeed very fortunate to have the health to participate in my passion for and about cycling versus my nature of becoming discouraged with my riding ability.

3. Realizing that after not cycling for 4 months and doing no exercise, starting back after that and losing 30 plus pounds, I have improved substantially already versus my foolish thoughts that the improvement is not happening fast enough.

4. Realizing fun is the name of the game and I should really not care how fast I go or how well I climb versus a "need" to improve and be more satisfied with how I ride.

So, great question. Lousy answer. Guess what you and others are saying is to make the choice and go for the choice and be satisfied in the choice.

Thanks for the insightful question. I do appreciate it.


Sandy
you're riding for fun.
enjoy it atmo.

[3chordwonder]

I ride a lot with somebody who's very strong climber, from a family of brothers with a long cycling history at Cat A level, so I tend to listen to him. He has a theory that most have a certain innate speed up serious long hills. No matter how hard he trains, he claims his average speed up hills doesn't seem to vary that much between on or off season. General endurance goes up and down with training, but the climbing speed doesn't ramp up in a big way.

Cadel Evans, no slouch at climbing, mentioned the same in an interview not that long ago: that his actual climbing speed doesn't vary all that much between his on and off season & the training benefit is in the endurance/recovery.

So perhaps, unscientific as it sounds, I wonder if there's something to it - maybe it's true that your cardio system likes to climb at a certain rate and that's it, barring the kind of major body burning and rebuilding work that professionals have the time and medical support for and us rec riders don't & don't wish to.

Once you've done all your homework and have been spending all your riding time on big climbs, there is no more to do except stop being mercilessly competitive about your riding.

Cycling's meant to be a fun hobby for us old duffers, not something to flagellate ourselves over. More and more I'm liking the randonneuring eccentrics with their beards and crazy bikes. I want to install a pouch for my pipe on my handlebars and attach a bar up front. The kind with drinks. What the hey, our climbing speed is likely to remain constant anyway.

[93legendti]

Sandy you ride inconsistently and without a structured plan. Taking 4 months off and never riding more than 2 days in a row is a recipe for casual riding. You want to ride stronger on the hills and on the flats? Ride more and ride with a purpose. Any one of the threads you have started on this topic contain the answer. If you want riding to be fun, casual and all ( as you define it) you will probably never be happy with your performance.

From your other threads on the topic it seems you are adverse, for whatever reason, from doing hard work on the bike, as part of a consistent, strutured plan. That's fine. But really, can you really expect to climb well without working hard? If you can do it, please let me know how, it will free up a lot time to clean my garage.

[Dave B]

To my mentor Sandy:

I wonder if possibly your mind or better yet your perception of "cycling" is getting in the way.

These are thoughts again, so actualality will be different.

If you are riding at all I see this as a great thing. For anyone, do not allow your age to be a factor.

If you are improving in any part of your riding that is also noteable and worthy.

Fun or training both have you on the bike. Both good.

But what I think and remember I am just some schmo, so my opinion is simply that. So if you are riding and are able to push higher gears then you used to, you are already training your body to do one thing, push higher gears. If when you get to the climbs you ride up the climb with your belief that you do not do well, then you have already taken all the physical advantages away. Sure weight loss has already helped you and I am in a strange way almost proud of you for that. But you have to look at climbing ina different way. Either you let it be a weakness for you, which is nothing really, simply state, i am not good at climbing, but it is a part of my route and Iwill need to allow myself to be not as good as I am in other areas.....OR you change your mind about it and train to climb better. Anybody can climb a hill given the right gearing and motivation, but do you want to climb like Boonen or like Lance?

If climbing is a weakness then plan to get better like studying for a Math test. You wouldn't walk into class unprepared and expect to do well on the test would you? No, you would put preperation into it.

Maybe you need a tutor, or a coach to analyze your climbing now and tell/show you how to improve. It is silly to think we all know how to ride, well maybe Justin, but he is much cooelr then us.

I would think as a closet academic like yourself you would agree with my math analogy, but why can't that also apply to a sport?

If you change your mind about what you want to do, then I think your results will change.

Practice the skills you want to improve on and they will improve. what is that old saying, you will get out what you put in? Something like that.

No one here doubts you can do it, and you being a mth person understand how the power and weight thing works, but I don't thik your answer that will help you has to do with math. I think it is more psychology and GYm. Sorry stuck in the school analogy still.

Change your thinking by practice or positive mental imagery. It will work.

Trust me!

[93legendti]

To my mentor Sandy:

I wonder if possibly your mind or better yet your perception of "cycling" is getting in the way.

These are thoughts again, so actualality will be different.

If you are riding at all I see this as a great thing. For anyone, do not allow your age to be a factor.

If you are improving in any part of your riding that is also noteable and worthy.

Fun or training both have you on the bike. Both good.

But what I think and remember I am just some schmo, so my opinion is simply that. So if you are riding and are able to push higher gears then you used to, you are already training your body to do one thing, push higher gears. If when you get to the climbs you ride up the climb with your belief that you do not do well, then you have already taken all the physical advantages away. Sure weight loss has already helped you and I am in a strange way almost proud of you for that. But you have to look at climbing ina different way. Either you let it be a weakness for you, which is nothing really, simply state, i am not good at climbing, but it is a part of my route and Iwill need to allow myself to be not as good as I am in other areas.....OR you change your mind about it and train to climb better. Anybody can climb a hill given the right gearing and motivation, but do you want to climb like Boonen or like Lance?

If climbing is a weakness then plan to get better like studying for a Math test. You wouldn't walk into class unprepared and expect to do well on the test would you? No, you would put preperation into it.

Maybe you need a tutor, or a coach to analyze your climbing now and tell/show you how to improve. It is silly to think we all know how to ride, well maybe Justin, but he is much cooelr then us.

I would think as a closet academic like yourself you would agree with my math analogy, but why can't that also apply to a sport?

If you change your mind about what you want to do, then I think your results will change.

Practice the skills you want to improve on and they will improve. what is that old saying, you will get out what you put in? Something like that.

No one here doubts you can do it, and you being a mth person understand how the power and weight thing works, but I don't thik your answer that will help you has to do with math. I think it is more psychology and GYm. Sorry stuck in the school analogy still.

Change your thinking by practice or positive mental imagery. It will work.

Trust me!
Agreed. To paraphrase Napoleon: "In war, morale is to materiel by a factor of three to one".

[Climb01742]

sandy, i say this with love (of the tough variety): it's your mind that's limiting you, not your body, imho. your mind seems divided...between enjoyment and improvement. to improve, you need to suffer on hard days that are honestly hard. on your recovery days, have fun, spin, smell the roses.

but darn it, sandy, you need to get straight in your own head what you want. if you genuinely what to improve, then get a structured program together and on the hard days, suffer and shut up. (insert smiley face to indicate intended non-harsh tone.)

but if pleasure is what you want, then stop worrying about performance, real or imagined.

this isn't a physical issue for you. get your head pointed in_one_direction and make peace with that direction.

this ends the tough love portion of our show. :beer:

[zap]

Sandy, lets keep it simple.

The biggest improvement you can make right now, other than just riding more, is to improve your position.

If you can comfortably lower your torso just a tad more, you will become more efficient on the flats so that you can save some energy for the climbs. As I mentioned to you, it is painfully (oh, it really hurts me seeing you all scrunched up) obvious that you need to stretch out more so that you can ride comfortably in the drops or lower with your hands on the hoods. A bit more stretch will also allow you to climb with your hands comfortably on the bar tops.

So if you get that longer stem, ride more and most importantly, have fun, then you will lose a bit more weight, improve your straight line stability, handle descents better, ride more comfortably and be faster.

Then we will have a happy speedy svelte sandy.

[e-RICHIE]

drift -

i posted once/twice above.

sandy mebbe it's not meant to be.

thoughts atyo?

[cpg]

I suspect you want to strike a balance between training to race and a leisurely stroll. Upfront I want to say there's no wrong way to ride. It's just wrong to not ride. :) I wouldn't worry about getting on a program. Generally that's a formula for someone to burn out. Sort of an all or nothing mentality. I think the best advice has come from Richard. Ride often and spin. Try to ride every day. Even if it's only 10 miles. If there's only time for that, then spin like crazy. When there's time for more distance then do it. But don't ride because there doesn't seem like there's time. Everyone is busy but there's time for some riding almost everyday. Saddle time makes a huge difference.

Curt

[93legendti]

Now that is one of the best cyling questions I have been asked. And my answer is probably not too good. I don't know. I am trying to balance the following:

1.Cycling fun and camaraderie versus hard disciplined work for cycling improvement goals- so far the fun has won.

...Sandy
Here you go: Ride hard one day and the next day spin easily with friends. Repeat 3 x a week.

Now, what's for dinner Saturday night?

[Louis]

Louis, did you mean to say that the aero force would go up by a factor of approximately 4, and that the required power would go up by a factor of approximately 8? Either way it's a big difference.

What I was trying to say is if you are going V mph and that requires you to put out P hp, if you want to increase that to 2V mph that would require that you put out 4P hp. If you want to go 3V mph then 9P hp, and so on...

Louis

[Sandy]

I went on a 32 mile club ride today. It is a CC ride, not too fast. But each week there are a few strong riders ( interesting to note that they ride lots of miles each year). Their level is way above the advertised CC level. They are strong and have endurance. The ride is divided into three sections of about 10-11 miles each, approximately.

At one point in the first section two of the strong cyclist took off, so I gave chase. I did ok, but after the chase, I realized that I did not do what e-RICHIE suggested- spin at 90-120 rpm. I was all over the place- big gears, little gears, high cadence, low cadence....Not uniform at all.

In a later section of the ride, I was again chasing the strong guys, but I decided to absolutely spin at a high cadence. Didn't catch them in this section either, but I felt much more efficient and was surprised that I could keep a high cadence for a reasonable time (for me). I was pedalling a smoother pedal stroke than expected. My hear rate was higher than before, I believe, but that was expected. It hit 151 (highest I have hit this year is 161-162) but my breathing was fine.

My analysis thus far- spinning is good- real good. But you have to practice a lot in order to become efficient and have endurance doing it, both muscle wise and cardiovascular. One incorporates different sets of muscles spinning versus mashing bigger gears, or at least it appears that way. Not the quads as much but more the calves, I think. I think spinning allows more muscle groups to more evenly help get the pedal around. I think that the idea might be to learn how to spin well, incorporate all the correct muslce groups, and then get stronger so that you can contiue to spin a high cadence but with a bigger gear. That is my guess anyway... I really don't know.....I have rouble sometime rembering my name..... :rolleyes:

Well, I am going to try to spin a lot on my next ride.....

I am probably going to go on a 45 mile hilly ride with a lean (6 feet tall, 150 pound billy goat) and will try to spin a lot. He doesn't care how fast we ride.



Spinning Sandy

[Len J]

sandy, i say this with love (of the tough variety): it's your mind that's limiting you, not your body, imho. your mind seems divided...between enjoyment and improvement. to improve, you need to suffer on hard days that are honestly hard. on your recovery days, have fun, spin, smell the roses.

but darn it, sandy, you need to get straight in your own head what you want. if you genuinely what to improve, then get a structured program together and on the hard days, suffer and shut up. (insert smiley face to indicate intended non-harsh tone.)

but if pleasure is what you want, then stop worrying about performance, real or imagined.

this isn't a physical issue for you. get your head pointed in_one_direction and make peace with that direction.

this ends the tough love portion of our show. :beer:

with all due respect.

I don't think you need to either train or ride, I think you can do both and improve. Now, admittidly, you won't maximize your potential, you won't increase your capability exponentially.....but you will improve.

What I hear Sandy asking is , how does a reasonably fit (I would say and extroidinarily fit )66 YO improve his climbing ability while not killing the passion and fun in riding?

I think you can do both.....as long as you realize that you are looking for improvement not perfection. You want to climb better, climb more. Go harder further on particualr hills than you do now. Work at different cadences and sitting standing combinations and find out what works best for you.

How did you get stronger on the flats? You rode harder, longer on the flats. You worked on position and staying relaxed.

Sorry if I sound snippy but Serious trainers seem to come across with this...."Either train all out, or don't train at all" mentality. I think there is a balance in the middle that allows for both improvement and enjoyment. Most of us non-racers, have enough fitness "Headroom" that we can benefit just by the effort.

IMO

Len

[Ray]

My analysis thus far- spinning is good- real good. But you have practice it a lot in order to become efficient and have endurance doing it, both muscle wise and cardiovascular. One incorporates different sets of muscles spinning versus mashing bigger gears, or at least it appears that way. Not the quads as much but more the calves, I think. I think spinning allows more muscle groups to more evenly help get the pedal around.
Sandy,

Pushing big gears can be easier for your cardiovascular system but puts more strain on your muscles. Spinning smaller gears puts less strain on your muscles but works the cardio system more. The cardio system is where you develop your endurance and it can, once in shape, recover a LOT faster than an overused muscle. Do a few rides in a row where you really concentrate on spinning and I think you'll find you have a lot less soreness in the legs the next day. E-richie suggested riding in the 100-110 rpm or so range to develop leg speed and suplesse. Which, with autumn approaching, brings us back to the question of fixed gear riding, which I think you've expressed an interest in before. Start your next thread on THAT :cool:

BTW, anytime someone named Sachs, particularly with a first initial of "R" makes a suggestion, you should take heed. Particularly when its the other guy.

-Ray

[Sandy]

Sandy,

Pushing big gears can be easier for your cardiovascular system but puts more strain on your muscles. Spinning smaller gears puts less strain on your muscles but works the cardio system more. The cardio system is where you develop your endurance and it can, once in shape, recover a LOT faster than an overused muscle. Do a few rides in a row where you really concentrate on spinning and I think you'll find you have a lot less soreness in the legs the next day. E-richie suggested riding in the 100-110 rpm or so range to develop leg speed and suplesse. Which, with autumn approaching, brings us back to the question of fixed gear riding, which I think you've expressed an interest in before. Start your next thread on THAT :cool:

BTW, anytime someone named Sachs, particularly with a first initial of "R" makes a suggestion, you should take heed. Particularly when its the other guy.

-Ray

I must totally disagree with your last statement. I think both guys with a first initail of "R" have tremendous insight into the world of cycling and a whole lot more. Really!!!!!!!!!


:) Randy :)

[Climb01742]

with all due respect.

I don't think you need to either train or ride, I think you can do both and improve. Now, admittidly, you won't maximize your potential, you won't increase your capability exponentially.....but you will improve.

What I hear Sandy asking is , how does a reasonably fit (I would say and extroidinarily fit )66 YO improve his climbing ability while not killing the passion and fun in riding?

I think you can do both.....as long as you realize that you are looking for improvement not perfection. You want to climb better, climb more. Go harder further on particualr hills than you do now. Work at different cadences and sitting standing combinations and find out what works best for you.

How did you get stronger on the flats? You rode harder, longer on the flats. You worked on position and staying relaxed.

Sorry if I sound snippy but Serious trainers seem to come across with this...."Either train all out, or don't train at all" mentality. I think there is a balance in the middle that allows for both improvement and enjoyment. Most of us non-racers, have enough fitness "Headroom" that we can benefit just by the effort.

IMO

Len

i agree. and i hope my reply did not sound too harsh (even with emocons, tone is hard to calibrate.) there absolutely is a middle ground but based on what sandy has posted -- and i could be misreading -- he doesn't seem to be happy in that middle ground. sandy has clearly made a lot of progress, and he is to be sincerely admired for it. losing that much weight and riding more strongly -- as he seems to be -- is a wonderful achievement. BUT YET...

sandy keeps asking why he can't get even better/fitter still. i'd say, he is taking the middle way yet isn't happy with his progress.

if he isn't happy with the scale or pace of his progress in the middle way, isn't it logical to assume that harder, more structured, more frequent training is one option?

again, i think the core issue is: what does sandy really want? i think he can physically do almost anything he sets his mind to. but i don't quite think he's set his mind yet. and though i enjoy his threads, and am cheering him on from here, more threads and more questions directed at us won't, i'm afraid, help sandy resolve his inner question: if i'm not happy with the progress i'm making, would working harder be worth it? no one but sandy can answer that.

again, i don't mean to be harsh. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D but the best, most genuine, caring advice i can give sandy is: ask not us. ask yourself.

one final: ;)

[e-RICHIE]

I must totally disagree with your last statement. I think both guys with a first initail of "R" have tremendous insight into the world of cycling and a whole lot more. Really!!!!!!!!!


:) Randy :)
gets it ratmo.

[Len J]

i agree. and i hope my reply did not sound too harsh (even with emocons, tone is hard to calibrate.) there absolutely is a middle ground but based on what sandy has posted -- and i could be misreading -- he doesn't seem to be happy in that middle ground. sandy has clearly made a lot of progress, and he is to be sincerely admired for it. losing that much weight and riding more strongly -- as he seems to be -- is a wonderful achievement. BUT YET...

sandy keeps asking why he can't get even better/fitter still. i'd say, he is taking the middle way yet isn't happy with his progress.

if he isn't happy with the scale or pace of his progress in the middle way, isn't it logical to assume that harder, more structured, more frequent training is one option?

again, i think the core issue is: what does sandy really want? i think he can physically do almost anything he sets his mind to. but i don't quite think he's set his mind yet. and though i enjoy his threads, and am cheering him on from here, more threads and more questions directed at us won't, i'm afraid, help sandy resolve his inner question: if i'm not happy with the progress i'm making, would working harder be worth it? no one but sandy can answer that.

again, i don't mean to be harsh. :D :D :D :D :D :D :D but the best, most genuine, caring advice i can give sandy is: ask not us. ask yourself.

one final: ;)

I may be a little overly sensitive to this "Either train all out or don't train at all" attitude that I've seen and heard way too long.

You are right that Sandy needs to decide how much training on climbing he wants to do & how patient and accepting he will be with his progress.

More/harder training + more improvement and (possibly) less enjoyment. He needs to find his balance. My only point was and is that it's a continuem......from JRA (Just riding around) on one end to Serious, structured #1 priority training on the other end. The further you go toward structure that quicker and higher the probability of rapid improvement.....we all need to select our spot on this continuem.

len

[e-RICHIE]

the only way sandy will realize progress is to embrace pedaling atmo.
mph is irrelevant. to a point, so is time on the bicycle. but if the rpm's
are low and/or inconsistant, he'll remain a lover not a fighter atmo.

[jbl]

Hi Sandy,

A lot of good advice has already been written. I think I am like you on the bike. I like to be able to ride fast and keep up, but riding the bike is all about leisure for me. I expend my competitiveness on my running.

Like Len J, I think you absolutely can balance the two. But, you'll have to be willing to work hard and work hard consistently. It doesn't have to be every ride, but why not try riding hard once a week. Tempo pace rides, hill repeats, or just some speedplay (ride hard for a bit, recover, ride hard for a bit, recover, but without the structure of intervals) can do a lot, especially since you are already riding regularly again.

Training doesn't have to mean giving up recreational riding, but it does mean being willing to push your limits on a regular basis. To get faster, you have to give your body the right stimuli to adapt to putting out more power. You won't maximize your power, or improve as fast as if you were focused on training, but I think you'll still see improvements. What was it that Lemond said? "It doesn't get easier, you just go faster?"

Ultimately, though, I have to echo those who have already said that you should first look within yourself to decide what you want to do and what you're willing to do to get there. Once you've got that sorted out, you'll know what to do.

Happy rolling,
J

[wanderingwheel]

What about Lemond's old quote -- it doesn't get any easier, you just go faster. Could it be that climbing hurts as much as it ever did and you're not noticing any sensation of going faster, even though you are using larger gears (and presumably climbing faster)? Maybe you're simply better attuned to your new speed on the flats than when climbing.

For myself, I really couldn't tell you how fast I'm climbing other than "slow", even if I'm going 30% faster than usual. However, I can feel each and every additional mph on the flats.

[MarleyMon]

Sandy

Not to worry about those hills - your new CDA will plane up them!

[Climb01742]

early in this thread, richie nailed it: riding or training? both absolutely valid, but different.