Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
Consecutive hard training days have been found to be very effective by many people.
Don't understand training jargon
- Thread starter Stonechat
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Consecutive hard training days have been found to be very effective by many people.
Exactly! Three hard days followed by a rest day is a great structure.
30/30 (seconds! sustained for 3 sets of 10 minutes ideally) is definitely a sprint work out, but it's completely inappropriate for someone who wants to improve their aerobic base. 3 x 10 (minutes!) or 2 x 20 (again minutes!) would be far far more useful.
30/30 (seconds! sustained for 3 sets of 10 minutes ideally) is definitely a sprint work out, but it's completely inappropriate for someone who wants to improve their aerobic base. 3 x 10 (minutes!) or 2 x 20 (again minutes!) would be far far more useful.
Dusty Bin
Guest
If you accept the definition of a 'sprint' as a 100% effort, then 30 sec is too long for a sprint interval.
I am not sure I do accept that definition. I would say any effort that is in the neuromuscular zone - Zone 7 in the Coggan terminology. Variable from athlete to athlete, but for me anything up to 2 minutes can be in that zone. I do have a rather high fatigue resistance profile, which means that while my absolute sprint power is not great, I can sustain sprints for longer.
But 30 seconds is definitely a sprint for most.
Defining things as 100% effort is confusing, as I can put out more at 1 second than 5 seconds and that in turn is more that 15 seconds. Which duration is 100% then?
But 30 seconds is definitely a sprint for most.
Defining things as 100% effort is confusing, as I can put out more at 1 second than 5 seconds and that in turn is more that 15 seconds. Which duration is 100% then?
totallyfixed
Veteran
- Location
- The only county without a McDonalds
Hey guys, you are turning this into a tech fest which is of no use whatsoever to stonechat. For those of us involved in racing it's all very interesting but we are in a minority and so of very little interest to most on CC. In any case there are very few absolutes in the human body and having been involved in coaching / training and competing for more years than I care to remember if there is one thing that I have learnt, it is that everyone is different and will respond in different ways to exercise.
All the OP really needs to do at this stage is longer rides and push a bit harder when they feel able to. The real trick is to do something most days, even if it isn't much, fitness will increase noticeably. The training plan is clearly nonsense. When the road bike comes, hill climbing will feel much easier, particularly out of the saddle. You could steal a march on most by learning to ride on the drops for a few minutes at a time, it saves a lot of energy particularly if you are on someone's wheel / into the wind. Most of all don't worry, I'll bet there will be hundreds who will struggle more than you, enjoy yourself!
All the OP really needs to do at this stage is longer rides and push a bit harder when they feel able to. The real trick is to do something most days, even if it isn't much, fitness will increase noticeably. The training plan is clearly nonsense. When the road bike comes, hill climbing will feel much easier, particularly out of the saddle. You could steal a march on most by learning to ride on the drops for a few minutes at a time, it saves a lot of energy particularly if you are on someone's wheel / into the wind. Most of all don't worry, I'll bet there will be hundreds who will struggle more than you, enjoy yourself!
50000tears
Senior Member
- Location
- Weymouth, Dorset
The point I was making was that whilst 3 days hard training may work well for the already fit, as a training method for those "building" to be able to cycle 60 miles it is too much.
Well no, the principles of overload and recovery apply the same to the fit and the unfit. It's just that the unfit will have lower absolute loads. Taking it easy just perpetuates staying unfit.
Dusty Bin
Guest
I don't see anything confusing about defining a 100% effort. I would define '100% effort' as the absolute hardest effort you can muster, regardless of sustainability. In reality, it probably won't be sustainable for much longer than 10-15 secs and it's not really trainable in any meaningful sense.
Do you think Usain Bolt could sustain his 100m pace for two minutes? I don't...
I don't see anything confusing about defining a 100% effort. I would define '100% effort' as the absolute hardest effort you can muster, regardless of sustainability. In reality, it probably won't be sustainable for much longer than 10-15 secs and it's not really trainable in any meaningful sense.
Do you think Usain Bolt could sustain his 100m pace for two minutes? I don't...
OK my 1 s power is 1200w, my 5s is 1050, my 15s is 890 so which of those is 100% that I should be training at for 'sprint'? I think getting hung up defining sprint as 100% is limiting that's all I am saying.
As to UB - the answer to your question is no. He can however sustain it for 200m. He is also thinking of doing 400m. But that is no longer a sprint distance by your definition.
Dusty Bin
Guest
400m is not a sprint distance by anyone's definition - because it is an event with a significant aerobic element, not just a sprint. Anaerobic efforts tend to run out of steam beyond 15-20 secs.
3 to 5 minutes is the commonly accepted duration for anaerobic efforts. 400m is absolutely not an endurance event. Sorry Dusty but I totally disagree with your use of definitions in this case.
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
There won't be a bunch sprint in a sportive.
Dusty Bin
Guest
It's not my definition, just look it up for yourself. 'Anaerobic' literally means 'without oxygen' - in other words, an effort which relies totally on muscular performance, as opposed to aerobic capacity.
