One year on - average not improving

[gbb]

Not really check your route, you might find that some hills have a longer steeper climb and a more level decent, thus keeping the speed average down, could well be a faulty computer read out, if thats what you're basing your average on.

Any number of factors could come into it, but the main thing is, you've said you feel fitter, so some improvement has been made, I'd be happy with that myself.

I've thought about this many times. While locally, it may be true that there's a steep hill, gradual ascent, if you do a loop, you start at x feet above sea level...and end at the same x, so ascent and descent overall are the same.

I equate it to my rides...and these include rolling hills, no more than 1 mile long and not particually steep...it makes no difference whether i ride my 'hilly'..(lumpy may be a better description) route...or a flat route. My averages are the same.

No doubt, sharp steep hills will affect your times, but rolling hills dont (for me anyway)

I'm not insisting i'm right, i don't do long steep hills, but my experience tells me sometimes hills make no difference...dependent on the kind of 'hills'.

 

[Norm]

I've thought about this many times. While locally, it may be true that there's a steep hill, gradual ascent, if you do a loop, you start at x feet above sea level...and end at the same x, so ascent and descent overall are the same.

Unfortunately, some areas (such as the Chilterns) seem to have a road running along every valley. That means every ascent is from a standing start and every descent is on the brakes and that can really mess with your averages. And your brake pads.

 

[briantrumpet]

if you really want to get fit just take up running, there really is a massive increase in fitness stamina endurance running say 10 miles a day than any amount of cycling unless you are riding up Alp d;huez which is unlikely in the UK

riding on the flat is next to useless

Erm, no.

Sure, if you're older and want to put your knees under much more stress, running is fine, but if you're suggesting that training to ride hard for an hour or four isn't going to do wonders for anyone's fitness, then I think you're mistaken. And riding hard on the flat is as hard as anything, if you're really pushing it - I find it just as exhausting as the hills of Devon. At least with hills you have short periods of coasting, if you do need a breather: on the flat if you stop pedalling you just stop. If you ride on the flat for an hour and are not completely shot, you're not trying hard enough.

My own way of both pushing myself and measuring progress has been to keep spreadsheet of my rides over 20 miles, and to set myself targets (one of which has been a 20mph average) - it doesn't lead to comfortable riding, but it does focus the mind and encourage me to push each time. I've got a series of loops from 20 to 70 miles that I choose from depending on mood and weather, then see what I can do.

The only time I never worry about speeds or averages is on the 4-mile commute, which I use just for short bursts - my version of interval training, in a very haphazard way. Seems to work for me though.

 

[TheCharityShop]

Reaching your optimum fitness on a bike is incomparable to reaching your peak as a runner

Most good cyclists think nothing of doing 70+ miles

but could you run that far?

no, of course not because the endurance/stamina you gain cycling has alot lower threshold to what a runner gains

i have been cycling for years on end but my weight,physique, fitness has stayed the same

but in periods where i have started running, i lose weight, i feel much much healthier stronger, fitter

and it also complements my cycling as i can ride alot harder for longer periods and negotiate very steep inclines

running 25 miles is a hell of alot tougher than freewheeling that distance, try it

 

[Nebulous]

Well I'm just shy of 50, took up cycling almost a year ago, from never having done any competitive sport and have seen huge improvements. It has been a huge amount of work though.

I made a lot of progress over 6-7 months, then had a chest infection, a bereavement and went on holiday very close together. That month or so set me back about 3 months in my training. It was difficult to pick it up again but I did, and reckon I have just about passed the level I was at in May.

I do concentrate on average speeds, and have a loop I do occasionally as a test. It extends to just under 30 miles and I knocked half-an-hour off it in 6 months. I certainly appreciate that level of improvement isn't sustainable - but I think there is a little bit left in me yet! It becomes harder and harder though. You need to keep up the miles, mix it up and set yourself goals. I don't do the 'can I do this?' what I do is 'what will it take to do this?'

The other thing is it is important to me. Being able to ride faster is one of the main reasons I do it. I can quite see that it isn't important to everyone, and that's fine, but its also fine for me to chase targets related to speed.

 

[pshore]

And riding hard on the flat is as hard as anything, if you're really pushing it - I find it just as exhausting as the hills of Devon. At least with hills you have short periods of coasting, if you do need a breather: on the flat if you stop pedalling you just stop. If you ride on the flat for an hour and are not completely shot, you're not trying hard enough.

+1 to that.

I live in the flat Fens and I managed to train myself to make it up a 2000m Tour de France climb in the Pyrenees.

The flat is good for endurance training because it is never ending. You up your speed to your desired pain level and see what you can do and for how long.

 

[pshore]

So is my average now being limited by the bike or me?
Should I be happy with it?

Sounds like you know a thing or two about keeping fitness in general. Eg interval training.

It sounds like you do a lot if activities. Do you get sufficient rest before really going out hard on the bike ? It might help you to set a new record or push it hard enough to get out of that plateau.

The other non obvious areas to look at are based around technique. Do you coast anywhere on your rides ? Do you push yourself over a hill and back up to full speed before resting in the downhill. Is your cornering fast and smooth. Can you get a lower position (harder on a flat bar) ?

Next up is equipment. Are you using spds ?

 

[briantrumpet]

Reaching your optimum fitness on a bike is incomparable to reaching your peak as a runner

Most good cyclists think nothing of doing 70+ miles

but could you run that far?

no, of course not because the endurance/stamina you gain cycling has alot lower threshold to what a runner gains

i have been cycling for years on end but my weight,physique, fitness has stayed the same

but in periods where i have started running, i lose weight, i feel much much healthier stronger, fitter

and it also complements my cycling as i can ride alot harder for longer periods and negotiate very steep inclines

running 25 miles is a hell of alot tougher than freewheeling that distance, try it

There's no arguing with that sort of logic, so I won't try.

 

[briantrumpet]

Next up is equipment. Are you using spds ?

I'll be interested to see where this leads...

 

[brockers]

I largely agree with this. If I stay riding bikes then my fitness plateaus, or at least there are marginal gains depending on how much short and nasty interval work I do. Having started running again, I've found that bombing up short hills on a bike is a whole bunch easier and I feel as though all the base fitness levels have been 'pulled up' as a result (agreeing with the theory), making me faster - on the flat and up hills - for the same amount of effort and without going into the red. It makes me think that if your time is short, then running is bang-for-your-buck a pretty good way of getting fit and a quicker way of geting there than cycling. Though if you want to go out and win a World Championship or a Grand Tour, then sitting on a bike for six hours a day and knocking out 120 miles or more to build up cell mitochondria, fat oxidisation and all that, is probably the best way to go. That said, I'm not a runner, and struggle to go for three miles (but increasing slowly) so can't do the endurance stuff that I can on a bike.


I find thaat running and cycling complement each other.

Reaching your optimum fitness on a bike is incomparable to reaching your peak as a runner

Most good cyclists think nothing of doing 70+ miles

but could you run that far?

no, of course not because the endurance/stamina you gain cycling has alot lower threshold to what a runner gains

i have been cycling for years on end but my weight,physique, fitness has stayed the same

but in periods where i have started running, i lose weight, i feel much much healthier stronger, fitter

and it also complements my cycling as i can ride alot harder for longer periods and negotiate very steep inclines

running 25 miles is a hell of alot tougher than freewheeling that distance, try it

 

[buggi]

i've been riding for 8 years and am still the same average speed, but i usually ride on my own and, personally, i think you only get faster if you do some rides with people that are faster than you. otherwise, you're only training against yourself and it's easy to go all out and then tail off, ending up with the same time. if you're with someone faster than you, you have to keep up all the way.

Obviously, don't go out riding with a pro.... they'll drop you after the first 10 yards! what i mean is, go out with someone who naturally rides 2 mph faster than you. before you know it you'll be up to their speed.

i have noticed that when i do charity rides, i'm faster when i get back, and i put this down to the four days i spend keeping up with people! But then after a few weeks of riding on my own, however, my speed drops down to my "norm".

 

[TheCharityShop]

I largely agree with this. If I stay riding bikes then my fitness plateaus, or at least there are marginal gains depending on how much short and nasty interval work I do. Having started running again, I've found that bombing up short hills on a bike is a whole bunch easier and I feel as though all the base fitness levels have been 'pulled up' as a result (agreeing with the theory), making me faster - on the flat and up hills - for the same amount of effort and without going into the red. It makes me think that if your time is short, then running is bang-for-your-buck a pretty good way of getting fit and a quicker way of geting there than cycling. Though if you want to go out and win a World Championship or a Grand Tour, then sitting on a bike for six hours a day and knocking out 120 miles or more to build up cell mitochondria, fat oxidisation and all that, is probably the best way to go. That said, I'm not a runner, and struggle to go for three miles (but increasing slowly) so can't do the endurance stuff that I can on a bike.


I find thaat running and cycling complement each other.

Finally i have someone who agrees with my hypothesis, but its not really a hypothesis its a reality

Im not sure why cyclists are so resistant to this idea of running improving strength and endurance on the bike

Cycling is great after a long lay off from most regular exercise, i mean anyone who gets off their backsides and starts cycling is to be applauded and rewarded particular if it takes a car off the road

But after a while you gain a good level of fitness and become accustomed to that level and it is very hard to move beyond that merely cycling plus getting good mileage in is pretty impractical in the UK with the diabolical behaviour of dangerous motorists
everyday i go out on my bike im constantly worrying it may be my last

When i took up a running regime my fitness just elevated to a level i couldnt dream of riding a bike
yes its tough at first, a couple of miles a day for a few weeks, then a 5 miler, 10 miler
15 miles

my strength becomes extraordinary, the knowledge that i can run 25 miles in around 3 hours makes me feel ontop of the world, in a very small percentage of people who can actually do that


anyone can ride 50-75 miles no stop on a bike providing you have a quality bike but the ability to run long distances is something i value way over distance cycling in terms of the actual level of fitness you need

like i said getting up very steep hills, long rides are a doddle after a proper few months running

plus the confidence you have dealing with agressive idiots is a relief from the strength you gain through running

i mean what the hell are the slobs going to do to me with the strength and stamina i gain from running 100 miles a week?

and thats what its all about, being able to defend yourself against the scum

 

[brockers]

and thats what its all about, being able to defend yourself against the scum

Personally, I like keeping in shape as I like to fool myself that I'm still young and it means I can knock back the odd bottle of Pinot Noir without putting on weight. I'd probably pack some sort of weapon or get proficient at boxing and ju-jitsu if I was that worried about defending myself against the scum. Though at least I hope I'd be able to outrun them should things kick off!

 

[Stuartaw11]

I have a similar issue but I have started concentrating on time rather than average speed, my night time training route is 6 miles of cycle paths, a bit through wollaton park ( bloody big hill!) and then more cycle paths, my average speed is just under 14mph, which altho not fast it is not bad when u consider I am constantly stopping and starting, what I am more happy with is the fact my route used to take me 32 mins and it now takes under 25 mins.

 

[amaferanga]

Finally i have someone who agrees with my hypothesis, but its not really a hypothesis its a reality

Im not sure why cyclists are so resistant to this idea of running improving strength and endurance on the bike

Cycling is great after a long lay off from most regular exercise, i mean anyone who gets off their backsides and starts cycling is to be applauded and rewarded particular if it takes a car off the road

But after a while you gain a good level of fitness and become accustomed to that level and it is very hard to move beyond that merely cycling plus getting good mileage in is pretty impractical in the UK with the diabolical behaviour of dangerous motorists
everyday i go out on my bike im constantly worrying it may be my last

When i took up a running regime my fitness just elevated to a level i couldnt dream of riding a bike
yes its tough at first, a couple of miles a day for a few weeks, then a 5 miler, 10 miler
15 miles

my strength becomes extraordinary, the knowledge that i can run 25 miles in around 3 hours makes me feel ontop of the world, in a very small percentage of people who can actually do that


anyone can ride 50-75 miles no stop on a bike providing you have a quality bike but the ability to run long distances is something i value way over distance cycling in terms of the actual level of fitness you need

like i said getting up very steep hills, long rides are a doddle after a proper few months running

plus the confidence you have dealing with agressive idiots is a relief from the strength you gain through running

i mean what the hell are the slobs going to do to me with the strength and stamina i gain from running 100 miles a week?

and thats what its all about, being able to defend yourself against the scum

It sounds like you're comparing cycling at a leisurely pace with running, which is daft. The fact that you don't think it's possible to push yourself on a bike if it's flat just demonstrates your apparent ignorance of how to train properly on a bike to improve. Sure if you just keep riding around on the same roads, doing the same distances each ride and each week then you'll quickly plateau. You seem to think the thing to do then is to start running, where as if you wanted to really improve your cycling you'd actually learn how to train properly on a bike (e.g. intervals of varying durations and intensities). You certainly don't need a mountain to ride at threshold for 20 or 30 minutes (which happens to be one of the best ways of increasing your threshold and therefore increasing your average speed).


Also, you don't need strength to ride a bike. If you're strong enough to walk up stairs then you're strong enough to ride a bike. That's because cycling is an endurance sport. Perhaps you're confusing strength with power? And while running will undoubtedly improve your cardiovascular fitness, it really is a crap way to go about improving your cycling fitness.

I really do despair at some of the advice offered on this forum, especially when such nonsense is put across in such an authoritative way as it certain to mislead the unwary and gullible.