in 1998, Having lived in the flatlands for my entire life, I had the opportunity to work down in Charleston W.Va for a couple of weeks. I was truly amazed at the terrain there. Every road I went on seemed to go up…For miles at a time. I hit the hills every day.
I came down with a very nasty case of strep throat after two weeks. Then I was called back to my “home” office. End of sad adventure.
Guess I wasn’t very clear. Obviously you can do too many hills in the sense of “overdoing” it. Just like you can do to many flat miles.
I was wondering if at some point doing courses that are very hilly become a limiting factor of some sort vs the same time on a flat course. Kinda like always doing intervals and never doing a LSD.
IOW if a person chose a course that had “5X” amount of climbing but took 5hrs to do vs a course that had “X” amount of climbing but also took 5hrs to do is there an advantage or disadvantage to doing the hilly one all the time.
do you have any power measurement devices on your bike? If you learn how to control your intensity I’d bet it would boil down to simple personal preference.
In 1992, I moved from Toronto to Vancouver and the climbs that I did went from maxing out at 10 minutes to maxing out at an hour! I found that my cycling, particularly my climbing and time-trialing went to a completely new and significantly higher level after doing big, hour long mountain climbs. I am not sure how this is backed up on the physiology front, but doing big climbs regularly in training made me a much better cyclist.
Power measurement…for me? Do they measure at that low of a number?
No no power measurement.
Point is this. Let’s say on both courses the power output for teh entire ride was exactly the same. The Flat course would be a lower but more constant number. The hilly course would be a series of peaks and valleys. Another thing to consider is the grade of the climbs. Serious climb vesus “Rolling”.
Again intervals versus LSD or tempo. In running you want to do both but running is much less power dependant than biking. Swimming is more power dependant than running and it seems that alot of people do intervals only. I’m wondering if an “interval only” biking plan is superior to LSD stuff.
Most area around me is flat. However I’m lucky enough to be within 60-90 minutes or less of, what I would call hilly. 90 minutes to what I would call real climbs, although nothing like what you people in the mountains have to deal with.
I live in Jax, FL where there are no hills. I train with some roadies once a week doing laps on a bridge in downtown. Once a year, I go to North Georgia and do the 6 Gap Century ride through the mountains. Doing laps on a bridge doesn’t prepare me very well for mountains, but it’s better than nothing.
Ok, I’m venturing into territory owned by HE THAT IS EXPONENTIALLY MORE KNOWLEDGEBLE THAN I (S McGregor), if you had a chance to appropriately analyze and crunch some numbers with some “black f***ing magic” you might discover that terrain doesn’t really make or break the workout. Just your power output relative to your “threshold”, and how you pace yourself.
LSD. Tempo. High-intensity Intervals. They all have their place. Personally, if It was intervals all the time on the bike I would start contemplating suicide after a week. And I wouldn’t have the enduance to make it to the finish line anyway.
With questions like these, you really should be consulting a coach about your goals and limitations, instead of looking for advice here. After all, you get what you pay for.
“With questions like these, you really should be consulting a coach about your goals and limitations, instead of looking for advice here. After all, you get what you pay for.”
It’s more of a “knowledge search” than reality of application. My limitation is simply “I don’t ride enough” or run enough or swim enough. I just like to learn new stuff. Doesn’t mean It’ll ever really apply to me.