Posts Tagged ‘cycling’

An alternative elite cycling model

Elite cycle training in the snow


You may want to train like a pro cyclist but in reality it is often not possible. Elite cyclist tend to train as much as 3-8 hours per day (100-240km) and use stage races to peak for big event like olympics (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12048333). That sort of volume is simply not compatible with work or family life for most people and if you live in a cold climate it is also dangerous and unpleasant.

That’s why I was so interested to read a case report of a Norwegian elite cyclist using a low volume approach with specific training modifications to be more compatible with their cold climate (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22124353).

They report over the course of one year “VO2max improved by 10.5 %, from 66.6 to 73.6 ml·kg-1·min-1 and the ergometer TT performance improved by 14.9%” while on a program consisting of just under an average of 5 hours cycling per week. His weight and body fat percent were unaltered during the time. That sounds far more realistic to me than any elite cycling program I have seen in the past and coincidentally is very similar to my own weekly average cycling.

Now don’t get too excited it is not quite that easy. While this represented a reduction in total volume from their traditional cycling program, they still maintained a total average of 11 hours per week by the inclusion of running (and we assume functional and strength work) in their program.

This is desirable because it is more compatible with a cold climate but is only effective assuming the gains in VO2 max are transferable between sports, which certainly seems to be the case in this instance.

Støren et al 2012 table 1
Støren et. al. 2012

This low cycling volume approach used high aerobic intensity training (HAIT) consisting of sessions between 90-95% heart rate max. Two intensive blocks of 14 and 15 sessions in 9 and 10 days respectively were separated by more moderate training with just 3 HAIT sessions per week.

Interestingly while the HAIT sessions in the intervening periods were cycling sessions, the HAIT session durring the intensive blocks were all running sessions consisting of 4x4min treadmill sessions.

This report represents the closest model I have seen to something that could be applied to the age group triathlete. With the low volume of cycling and inclusion of running it describes a method to improve performance across disciplins (his running VO2 max also increased substantially)!

Low volume with high intensity sessions across multiple disciplins can be very effective and it seems cycling large volumes at low intensity during the winter is not the only route to cycling success.

Ensuring effective tempo training

Power distribution for different rides


Tempo training can be extremely effective when used well and can allow you to achieve similar results on far far less training time. By tempo training I mean training between aerobic threshold (AeT) the part of training when you just start working and anaerobic threshold (AnT) where you can race for 30-60min at most.

Sometimes I get irked when I hear tempo training getting criticised for being ineffective or even detrimental. The truth, I believe, like all sorts of training is that it is done badly, here is why I think that is.

Not enough discipline When athletes train at a low volume the averages creep up, the intensity of recovery rides, aerobic base rides warm ups cool downs and intervals breaks all creep up. It is important to keep clear distinctions between your intensities and not end up with all your riding quite hard but not hard enough to get the effect you want or easy enough to allow recovery. When you look at a power file you should be clearly see when you were riding tempo and when not, if you can’t your probably going to hard the rest of the time.

Not enough variation of intensity Training a range of intensities will allow you to develop in a balanced way and give a number of different stimuli. There is no ‘magic’ intensity do not over emphasise 70%, 80%, 90% 100% of threshold or you will stagnate and not improve.

Not enough recovery If you are using a lower volume tempo training approach you need more recovery. More days off and more longer breaks to allow complete recovery. Too often I see athletes struggling because they have free time and throw in extra training because they feel good. Just like an interval session you need to see clear differences between your rest periods in terms of days and occasionally weeks.

The hardest thing for an athlete to do is not train. You can’t sit still. You feel like you should be out there working
Graeme Obree

Aerobic threshold and metabolic fitness

Metabolic fitness


A brief word of caution following my comments on training at or above aerobic threshold in the Base Control post.

While this may be the most efficient intensity to develop aerobic endurance it relies heavily on having the metabolic fitness to back that up.

In the case of this example I have already used you can compare the first athlete who has a fatmax (highest absolute amount of fat burned) in the top on their tempo zone compared to a second whos fatmax is probably of the bottom on the range tested.

This means that while the first athlete can happily train well above aerobic threshold and develop fitness efficiently the second athlete may have to be more patient and train at or below aerobic threshold (which was 9kph in this case) to develop their metabolic and aerobic fitness.

It will be of no surprise athlete 1 is an experienced long distance athlete having done 6 ironmans while the second is a junior training for sprint events.

This is also a good demonstration of why more low intensity training can be appropriate for younger athletes trying to develop endurance for longer duration events such as triathlon.

Base control

Base build peak

Observations of the German junior elite cycling teams training behaviours (href=”http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20861522) prompted some discussion among athletes and coaches. After a 15 week base building period, it seemed those who improved the most logged significantly more low intensity ‘aerobic’ training hours and less high intensity ‘threshold’ hours. While there there are many confounding factors it does raise the question is high intensity simply no substitute or can it actually be detrimental to aerobic development?

It is not my view that higher intensity training is detrimental rather the unstructured, undisciplined way it is conducted here that is the problem.

“Why the benefit of lower intensity vs higher is a good question” asks leading triathlon coach John Dargie “and I’m not sure I have the answer. The lower intensity is to my mind much more reproducible – if done properly and fueled appropriately it can be done every day. Threshold stuff is fatiguing, levels more variable day by day. Also threshold is often badly done, with average intensity correct but control of intensity within sessions too variable. You don’t need to go much over threshold (3-5% or less) for it to be very fatiguing and hence unsustainable”

It is well accepted that focused low intensity aerobic training or ‘base training’ is important to stimulate adaptions required to perform to your potential. These adaptions include:

Metabolic- adaptions allowing better fuel utilisation, oxygen transport and lactate clearance. For instance increases in beta fatty acid oxidation, increased muscle myoglobin and an increased propoetion of LDH-H.

Cardiovascular- adaptions resulting in increased cardiac output, muscle oxygenation and oxygen transport. For instance increased stroke volume and heart rate, increased capillarisation of muscles and increase plasma volume and red cell number.

Pulmonary- adaptions allowing improved blood gas exchange for example strengthening of respiratory muscles and increase tidal volume.

It my experience the way to train any physiological system is to frequently repeat a stress that targets the system. When it comes to the aerobic system that target is the aerobic threshold (AeT) which is basically which is hard to pin down but is basically where your breathing become such that you can no longer comfortably breath through your nose. It will be around the last baseline point on a lactate curve or below VT1.

When training at the aerobic threshold all of the key aerobic systems are stressed and the stress can be sustained for extended periods at a time without disproportionate levels of fatigue.

“The problem with base workouts” says Joe Friel author of Triathletes Training Bible,“is that it seems too easy at first so the athlete is tempted to abandon their aerobic zone and start riding variably paced with hard and easy efforts – fartlek intervals, essentially. And by so doing reduces the aerobic benefits of the day’s workout.”

It is possible that the high intensity work could be detrimental for instance by increasing the production of catabolic hormones such as cortisol and glucagon. It is likely however that it was the riders that showed the most discipline to remain in their optimum training range rather than giving in to the temptation to let pace vary that reaped the rewards.

In short, take care to control your efforts, reserve hard efforts for specific workouts, make your basic aerobic training count and if your coach tells you to go easy then they probably mean EASY!