Whats better 3x10m or a 30m ride

[Nigelnaturist]

I was wondering what is better, I know the 30m is better for endurance, but what are the benefits of both.
I was wonder if 3x10m is as good for improvement, given the same sort of ride, as the 30m in terms of climbs ect..

 

[Cyclist33]

I favour 300 x 0.1 miles.

 

[Rob3rt]

3x30 bare minimum!

 

[MacB]

depends how you ride them really and your fitness but I'd normally vote for the 30m. When I've ridden a lot the shortest I did for any sort of training, on road, was 14 miles. In the early days I did 10 mile rides but that quickly became too short.

After a while I switched from distances to time on the bike and specifically targetted certain local hills for improvement purposes. I worked on both my seated and standing climbing and also threw in the odd interval on the flat. I generally found that 24-30 miles was fine for a decent workout. I also tried to ensure that I had one ride a week over 50 miles, but rarely more than 60.

 

[numbnuts]

3x30 bare minimum!

What naked

 

[VamP]

A 10 mile ride is barely a warm up, so yeah 30 mile is much better.

Time on bike is a better measure though, especially if you do off-road. Two hour session is better than one hour, but hey it's all good.

 

[black'n'yellow]

What naked

well, he is called 'nigelnaturist'....

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

You do realise the unit of measurement you refer to is metres?

 

[Nigelnaturist]

depends how you ride them really and your fitness but I'd normally vote for the 30m. When I've ridden a lot the shortest I did for any sort of training, on road, was 14 miles. In the early days I did 10 mile rides but that quickly became too short.

After a while I switched from distances to time on the bike and specifically targetted certain local hills for improvement purposes. I worked on both my seated and standing climbing and also threw in the odd interval on the flat. I generally found that 24-30 miles was fine for a decent workout. I also tried to ensure that I had one ride a week over 50 miles, but rarely more than 60.

This is what I have started doing, I was just wondering because sometime I cant get out for long, but might manage 2x15 or 3x10 in a day, I usually avg about 27m a day (when I am out usually 4-6 days a week), but sometimes this is in 2 or three separate rides, for example if I go to Wakefield on a Tuesday to attend a photo group its 10m there and 10 back, I then might do another 10-20 about 6pm but with the nights drawing in time is limiting ( and please dont come back to me about lights, I have some but they really arn't up to the job on the rural roads round here, and funds are very very limited).

What naked

Well I will be at the WNBR in York next year. Though they do tend to be quite short rides.

3x30 bare minimum!

I would be pushed to spend 6hrs a day riding.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

A 10 mile ride is barely a warm up, so yeah 30 mile is much better.

Time on bike is a better measure though, especially if you do off-road. Two hour session is better than one hour, but hey it's all good.

I agree, I just wondered if doing the 30m in three different rides over the day, would be somewhere approaching the same achievement.

 

[marzjennings]

30 miles trumps 3x10 miles(I guess over a number of days) for training any day. Unless those 10 miles are off road, in the mud and include +2000ft of climbing.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

You do realise the unit of measurement you refer to is metres?

Yea I know but I think you know what I meant, but just for you i will clarify it 3x17,600 yards or if you want 3x52,800ft

 

[Rob3rt]

Okay now we have been provided with some background, as opposed to your initial post which did not provide any explanation at all (I took it as 3x10 mile or 1x30 mile per week hence suggesting at least 30 mile 3x per week, seems other's may possibly have also been caught out by the vagueness) I would say 1x30 mile is better, because it affords a few miles for warming up and cooling down and 20 miles in the middle to actually train, i.e. enough time for some intervals or to take in a few climbs! 3x10 mile allows too much rest in between and doesn't afford enough room to warm up, train, then cool down.

 

[Nigelnaturist]

Okay now we have been provided with some background, as opposed to your initial post which did not provide any explanation at all (I took it as 3x10 mile or 1x30 mile per week hence suggesting at least 30 mile 3x per week, seems other's may possibly have also been caught out by the vagueness) I would say 1x30 mile is better, because it affords a few miles for warming up and cooling down and 20 miles in the middle to actually train, i.e. enough time for some intervals or to take in a few climbs! 3x10 mile allows too much rest in between and doesn't afford enough room to warm up, train, then cool down.

I ride 67% of all days, and usually 25 miles +, its just that some days because of other commitments I cant always do the 30 miles in one go. Sorry for not being clearer at the out set. I usually do about 125 miles a week. My speed is increasing, though its been down this wk, ( I think because the rides haven't been so long, or the strong winds yesterday and this morning), I am getting better at climbing hills, those that there are (in and out of the saddle, which until this last fortnight was something I hadn't done since well a long time ago).
I was just curious that with time constraints if a quick 10 mile was worth it.

 

[Rob3rt]

Generally something is better than nothing (unless you are over doing it) even if it just a light spin, it is burning calories after all and could help with weight loss, which will make you better at hills. But 10 mile isn't really far enough for any proper training, but it can have benefits, especially if you work hard. There are plenty of people who are reasonably quick off the back of commuting at a good pace. But the gains are not going to be the same as "proper" training.