2x 50 in a day; how much less training benefit than 1x 100?
Why dont you try 4 x 25 with 1 gel after each repfar better IMO than 1 x 100
Just been pondering after I had to go into work on my nominal day off, so did 50, had a couple of hours off (working) then did 50 back home. RW seems to recommend double days for plenty of training benefit without the extreme tiredness of 1 long run, so wondered if anyone had any info on its effectiveness for cycling.
I have a 24 mile loop, so have done 4x 24 with brief rests at the house; 'twas ok.
Did Fink tell you to do that or did you use A.N Other?
I get my sessions from That Crash Hamster's "How The Fuck Can I fit It In Today?" Plan. Seems fine so far, as they said on the Titanic at half way.
I think you do have to be careful taking advice from random strangers'a kill's a kill unless its moider'
i do something like that = on mondays a do a 50 followed my another 50 the next monday, does it count, surely if i can still feel it in my legs its doing me some good
2 shorter sessions gets my vote. I've been commuting on the bike this summer. Albeit only 20 miles each way. The benefits are very clear to me.
A serious question?
Less benefit than 1 x 100, assuming all other things are equal. Just like 1 x 20mile run is better than 2 x 10mile. But thats not to say there are no benefits of 2 x 50miles, not least if there is no option of getting the 1 x 100 mile in instead! How you approach particularly the second ride would seem important to me, and I would be looking to complete both rides in less time than the 100 would take, preferably with a negative split for the second.Seems like a reasonable way of logging some more bike hours, but its not going to totally replace the need for the long rides, which I am sure you appreciate anyway.
Yeah, that's 'bout what I thought.
Having been reading round running training this year, I was struck by the phrase 'the most reliable predictor of [time-based] successful performance was total running volume.'
If this is applied to cycling, and 2x50 and able to train the next day gives more volume than 1x100 plus a rest day, then it has to be worthwhile. Obviously not as a complete replacement for 100 milers, but as a useful adjunct.
I'm also considering 70/30s as 70 takes me past my 50-60 bonk...
I find i really suffer at 60 miles........and once I can get pass the next fewq miles I feel much better.........thats why i prefer century rides to 60 rides as i always feel better at 100 than i do at 60 miles
Obviously you are doing this for time reasons but I would say 1x 100 is better as it replicates fatigue, nutrition and more importantly pacing as if I'm doing a 50 I will cane the crap out of it... If I'm doing 100 I won't go quite as crazy! My 2 cents
Consistant training trumps the one off 'must accomplish that distance' physically for sure, however being a mental game I think that newbies need the goal of a 100 mile ride under their belt psychologically. My philosophy about IM and beyond is that it is a mental head fuck and I use the analogy of a jigsaw puzzle, you do the training but you don't see the finished picture until the day.
I really do think that you have to blindly trust in the training, and also as said on another thread in so many words, if you mind can finish the race, your body can.
This doesn't answer your question but I did a lot of 80s for Lanza which left me in a fitter state to run long the next day. I couldn't long run in the week and needed something left in me. I found there was little magic in taking it to triple digits.
Hey guy's, im pretty new to cycling but have some relitively experienced runners legs on me for my age. I can vouch that with running it tends to be your ability to hit the total mileage count over a week, however! as wizKid points out theres going to be a big jump along the experince curve with hitting the longer rides in one go. Theres no way to replicate the fatigue and mental state youll be in at 60 and 70 miles, if youve stopped for half hour at 50??? That would be the case for running anyway.
On a side note, as i said im fairly new to cycling and have so far edged my way to a 40 mile ride from Witham in Essex to Hornchurch which took me 2:30. As far as my tri ambitions go i have an average swim time (about 15 minutes over 750m) and a good run (19:20 5k) but sustaining 20+ mph for 20+km seems to be mission impossible! I dont know wether its my technique i.e. riding position, but my quads just burn up esipically toward the knee! Any ideas on how to maintain the pace?? Recently did a tri with an 18 mile ride and crossed into t2 on 1 hour exactly.
i do 6 x 8 mile rides a week (commute) half i plod half i go as fast as i can. Then a 'long' ride weekends
Wow sorry for the book i just wrote!
I'd do 2 x 50 faster than 1 x 100 - getting more specific pace training?
Iron1day - if your quads are burning it's possible you aren't warmed up enough - if you are riding at say 10 mile time trial pace ideally you'll have 30 minutes warm up with some anaerobic efforts in that - ok so you aren't always going to manage that but a minimum 15 minutes structured warm up or you will be more likely to feel your legs burning when you start the effort.
As for sustaining the pace - fitness, aerodynamics, weight are the main ones. with a few tweaks to your training you'll soon be flying - aim for 3 sessions a week say a long ride and extend two of your commutes into training rides where you can do say a warm up and then 20-40 minutes hard constant efforts and ride the rest of them easy. A lot of triathletes I know are doing 150-250 miles a week but that can come later!!
Visit the official Triathlete's World page
Follow Triathlete's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
About Triathlete's World