Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
m_hoop wrote:
wife/daughter's birthday weekend,

Ummm…….

a) I really hope they aren't the same person.

b) I hope this means that they have birthdays that are close together and you just do a joint birthday celebration....

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [JasoninHalifax] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JasoninHalifax wrote:
m_hoop wrote:
wife/daughter's birthday weekend,


Ummm…….

a) I really hope they aren't the same person.

b) I hope this means that they have birthdays that are close together and you just do a joint birthday celebration....

Hahaha. Youngest daughter was born on my wife's birthday. Ultimately I don't think either one of them will be happy about it.
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You're catching a lot of flack, but I totally get the competitive spirit and using it as a motivator.

If you want to be data driven, go swim a 500m time trial, your FTP test is done, run a 5km time trial. Those are your baseline metrics. You say you are training 4/5 times per week, that is only 1-2x per sport. Not going to show significant progress that way.

If you want to be competitive in your AG you are going to need those numbers to be around 7:30, 3.5w/kg, and <20min (for local sprint races, much faster to be competitive at larger/IM races). Shoot for that, measure progress with testing every 3-4wks. Follow a periodized training plan. Sounds like you have money to blow if you are signing up for races and not attending, consider a coach to hold you responsible and build up smartly
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I can get wrapped up in the numbers and over analyze. I'm an accountant so it's fun for me. I trained for 7 months before I had my first race, a sprint, and I took 3rd AG (30-34) 20th overall. I was proud of myself for mixing it up near the front, but I really regretted not getting out and racing sooner because it was more fun than any training session. Nobody really cares how do you out there. Most of the field is there for a good time and don't take this stuff nearly as seriously as anyone posting on this board. You're only focus should be improving. It's okay to set some benchmarks here and there like 3w/kg FTP, 1:45 swim pace etc. but don't live by it. Check out some training programs like TrainerRoad, Sufferfest, Training Peaks, and go from there.
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [flyinryan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
flyinryan wrote:
I can get wrapped up in the numbers and over analyze. I'm an accountant so it's fun for me. I trained for 7 months before I had my first race, a sprint, and I took 3rd AG (30-34) 20th overall. I was proud of myself for mixing it up near the front, but I really regretted not getting out and racing sooner because it was more fun than any training session. Nobody really cares how do you out there. Most of the field is there for a good time and don't take this stuff nearly as seriously as anyone posting on this board. You're only focus should be improving. It's okay to set some benchmarks here and there like 3w/kg FTP, 1:45 swim pace etc. but don't live by it. Check out some training programs like TrainerRoad, Sufferfest, Training Peaks, and go from there.

An accountant! My people! I'm in debt collection (and credit) so excel is life.

Also probably adds some color to my dedication to numbers. Eh. It's a living.

Anyway, haven't heard of Sufferfest, so I will check it out and add to the list.
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The "poor man's FTP test" - find a local hill, that takes a decent amount of time to climb - ideally 10-20 mins, if possible.

Go hammer the shit out of that climb once a week, for several weeks, and keep track of how your time improves on it.
You can use this hillclimb TT as a benchmark for cycling fitness (and also W/kg, since that's what climbing is all about), and it's not only a great test, it;s also a great workout.

Do 2 reps on it occasionally, see how that goes.
Maybe 3-4 reps if it's a shorter climb.

Biking is a very blue collar sport - do the work, and the results WILL come.

Also - Just Ride Your Bike - Lots and lots and lots.
TITS - Time In The Saddle.

A great quote from Rich Strauss, formerly of Crucible Fitness/Endurance Nation -
"You can never ride your bike too hard or too far - that's what cell phones are for!" ;-)


float , hammer , and jog

Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [Murphy'sLaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There is likely a bike club that will have organized or semi organized rides in your area. Find out where and when they start the rides and go introduce yourself. You will learn a lot about how to conduct yourself in a group and it's a lot of fun to keep pace with stronger riders. Be humble, listen and pay attention. You may find that a number of 65+ year olds (men and women) are way faster than you.

This was my reintroduction to cycling about 4 years ago, it got me focused and put me in the mood to do some racing as I got faster.

"They know f_ck-all over at Slowtwitch"
- Lionel Sanders
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
m_hoop wrote:
flyinryan wrote:
Check out some training programs like TrainerRoad, Sufferfest, Training Peaks, and go from there.
Anyway, haven't heard of Sufferfest, so I will check it out and add to the list.


Hey Hoop. David, founder of The Sufferfest here. Welcome to the glorious world of training hard and seeing personal improvement! Here's a couple of articles from our Chief Science Officer that you might find useful as you look for the best way for you to train:


David McQuillen
Founder & CEO of The Sufferfest
Last edited by: The Sufferfest: Jul 24, 19 16:21
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [g_lev] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
g_lev wrote:
m_hoop wrote:

Weight: 142 lbs (64.5kg)


Now, with this in mind - the purpose of my FTP test was to subsequently calculate my power-to-weight ratio - I hear it's important. Mine was...ready? 2.02.

Just to clarify, did you calculate watts per kilogram? Or watts per pound? If W/kg then your FTP is 130. I honestly have a hard time believing that a guy who is in decent shape at your size has an FTP that low. Most males your size, even in reduced training states, would consider that nearly recovery.

Now if you calculated that as watts/lb, then your FTP comes out to 286 which is perfectly respectable.

Was this answered? This is an important clarifying point
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Didn't see it raised here, bit on a slight side note, if you are a genuine 5-6% body fat day in day out, you must be either;

a) extremely miserable, or
b) some kind of genetic freak, or
c) extremely miserable

I've been there for about 3 weeks, felt like death. I was waking up in the middle of the night dreaming about food, hardly any energy to train, and struggled concentrating at work.

Point being, it might actually be beneficial to put a little bit of body fat back on. If you were a genuine 5-6%, your hormone profile would be all sorts of messed up
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [PedalNowNapL8r] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
PedalNowNapL8r wrote:
g_lev wrote:
m_hoop wrote:

Weight: 142 lbs (64.5kg)


Now, with this in mind - the purpose of my FTP test was to subsequently calculate my power-to-weight ratio - I hear it's important. Mine was...ready? 2.02.


Just to clarify, did you calculate watts per kilogram? Or watts per pound? If W/kg then your FTP is 130. I honestly have a hard time believing that a guy who is in decent shape at your size has an FTP that low. Most males your size, even in reduced training states, would consider that nearly recovery.

Now if you calculated that as watts/lb, then your FTP comes out to 286 which is perfectly respectable.


Was this answered? This is an important clarifying point

Sadly I think I did it right. I think. My peloton told me my avg output for my 20 minute FTP effort (average) was 137. I converted my weight - 143 to kg (64.5) and put those numbers in the calculator. It spit out at me that I should consider shuffleboard as a hobby instead.

@rock - snap of my test from late last year. I'm no genetic freak; just skinny. It does play hell with hormones and some weird things happen. But, it's life (for now) and putting on some padding would not be unwelcome.

M
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, I'm not sure where to start on this. I have the view as relative beginner and in your age group with 3 young children. So, I totally get the life. I also get the competitive spirit. I found triathlon after shoulder surgery (from a rugby injury) and getting back in the pool for rehab (swam competitively as a youth). I loved it and my body could take the training much better than playing rugby as a 32 year old. So, I bought a $200 used tri-bike from a friend (only owned a mountain bike). I followed a super simple free Garmin plan and got to work. You need to love the training. That is where you will spend most of your time. I signed up for my first triathlon (Olympic) as part of a charity team to raise money for Save the Children. It gave me a little extra motivation and accountability because I wasn't going to bail on that after I had also received so much support from family/friends. The day after I finished that race I signed up for my next Olympic and haven't looked back since. Now, I have a coach and geek out on all the numbers like FTP and threshold pace and blah blah blah. I guess my point is enjoy the process and put in the work. The results will come. That's for sure. You aren't going to win your first race but it might not take as long as some people are telling you.

https://www.strava.com/athletes/23685202
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
m_hoop - that 137 FTP just doesn't make sense to me if you can squat 280 something and have at least some level of athletics in your background. My fiancee and I also own a Peloton. She did the FTP test and got a 120 FTP at about 120 pounds body weight. My point being, I just don't think your true FTP is actually 137

Go into your Peloton ride history, what was your average cadence and average Peloton resistance level for your 20 min FTP? I'm pretty familiar with the Peloton resistance levels so I'm curious if your issue was cadence, resistance or both

Also, have you done any of the Peloton classes? They're actually pretty good, especially for a beginner. Just getting into decent "spin class" shape will give you a pretty good base to start with
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [PedalNowNapL8r] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
PedalNowNapL8r wrote:
m_hoop - that 137 FTP just doesn't make sense to me if you can squat 280 something and have at least some level of athletics in your background. My fiancee and I also own a Peloton. She did the FTP test and got a 120 FTP at about 120 pounds body weight. My point being, I just don't think your true FTP is actually 137

Go into your Peloton ride history, what was your average cadence and average Peloton resistance level for your 20 min FTP? I'm pretty familiar with the Peloton resistance levels so I'm curious if your issue was cadence, resistance or both

Also, have you done any of the Peloton classes? They're actually pretty good, especially for a beginner. Just getting into decent "spin class" shape will give you a pretty good base to start with

FTP Ride details:

Total Output - 163kj
Distance: 6.11m
Avg Cadence: 85
Avg Resistance: 42
Spd: 18.4

I think I'm honestly just kind of strong (*for my size) with a really bad engine.

I haven't done a lot of dedicated Peloton rides recently, but previously I was a dedicated Wilpers/PZ ride guy. Looking more into intervals for this training period, maybe.
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [m_hoop] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Did you wear a heart rate monitor by chance?
Quote Reply
Re: Geeking out on and Training for Bad Numbers [PedalNowNapL8r] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I do, yeah. Typing on my phone in bed right now so I’ll give more details tomorrow. According to the peloton my max HR is 185. My average for the ride was 155. Spent 54% of the ride in Z4.
Quote Reply

Prev Next