Base miles and other training stuff

So, I'm bound by the super ninja USA coaching code of ethics to chime in regarding the base building conversation

 

If you're not interested in reading a long, funny at times, informative e-article....please hit DELETE now.

 

For the rest of ya, I'll be generalizing a lot and keep in mind that generalizations will generally not apply to you, generally speaking!  I'll also try and keep to the point and not spin out of control on any one subject.  If you have any questions about any of this, feel free to email me and I'll point you to more confusing information.

 

What the heck is base building or base miles?

The short of it, a period of lower intensity training.  Also known as endurance training or Long Slow Distance (LSD).  The duration of the period ideal for base building varies from athlete to athlete and is dependent on a number of factors including athletic/race goals, athletic maturity (i.e. cycling age versus calendar age), fitness, hours available for training, life style (including stressors and support systems), etc.  Lower intensity is also subjective; what Dave might consider low intensity might in fact be over my threshold.  It's important for you to figure out your program and not copy anyone else's.

 

What the heck is it good for?

Get your muscular/skeletal system ready for the anticipated demands of higher intensity training and eventual racing.  Also, help build physiological systems to assist with energy utilization and recovery.  This last part delves into the building blocks of energy utilization and consumption with fancy terms such as mitochondria building, ATP utilization, Lactic Acid buffering systems, beer, etc...we'll skip over this.  Just know that it's a good thing, unless you're limited by the number of hours you can train (more on this later).

 

How the heck long does it go for?

That depends on a lot of factors such as your season, current fitness, goals, shoe size, ATM pin, etc.  Generally speaking, if you're fit and free from injury and assuming you're racing sometime in the future, then a period of at least 6 to 8 weeks of base building is ideal.  This does not include the incorporation of strength training into your program, which totally counts as a form of intensity introduced very gradually and carefully over the course of your off season training.  Unless you're old like me, in which case doing some sort of strength training once per week might do you a lot of good (yes, Yoga counts).

 

==>An absolutely important variable most people forget to account for is LIFE!  It's like this Ya'll, if you've got all day to train and don't have to work a traditional job, if you don't have family/life/school obligations that put demands on your time and energy, if you can afford to put your feet up after training and recovery, and if you have a live in massage therapist/Sushi chef named Yoshi, then you might consider doing long slow distance base miles for a number of weeks.

 

But, if you just happen to live in the real world with life obligations, someone who has limited time to train, then just doing base miles might not be the right path for you.  My rule of thumb is that if you have less than 8 total hours per week to train, then consider mixing base miles with some intensity.

 

How the heck do I know how much base building I should do?

Sorry kids, there is no clear cut answer.  It really depends; how many total hours do you have to train on a weekly basis?  Do you race or are ya in it just for fun/fitness/socialization?  If you race, what's your racing schedule for the next season?  Have you picked out your A/B/C races?  Whose legs do you think are bigger; mine or Erik The Jackal's?

 

As a rule of thumb, try doing just base miles for 4-6 weeks, then gradually introduce some intensity into the mix.  Start out by figuring out how many realistic hours you have during the week to train, then see if you can do 90% of your total weekly training time in your base zone and introduce 10% of your weekly time with a bit of intensity, do this for two weeks then increase the intensity to 15-20% of your total time, another couple of weeks and go up to 20-25% of intensity for your total time, and so forth until you're at a 50/50 ratio about 3-4 weeks prior to a major event/race.  Then begin a gradual decrease of intensity for tapering.

 

How the heck do I know what my base and/or intensity level is?

Ahhhh, you're astute!  We're now talking about an objective measure of your fitness and in my not so humble opinion, the most objective way to measure your current fitness is via an LT/VO2mx test.  For example, we recently scheduled a series of tests for Swami's (my team in San Diego) and about 25 people took advantage of the testing through the Fit Stop Human Performance Lab.  Ideally, I would like to have my athletes tested quarterly to gauge improvement in fitness and to ensure their training utilizes their latest numbers.  These tests give us an objective snapshot of your fitness by eliminating any guess work.  From the results of the test, heart rate training zones are outlined for you to follow.  It just couldn't get any better or easier!

 

If you're not one for testing, there's literally hundreds of formulas you can use to guess your training zones and I'm sure you're all familiar with them.  The most popular one seems to be the 220 - your age = good approximation of your MaxHR...you then take 75% of this number and that's your endurance zone.  In my case 220 - 39 (as of next week!!!) = about 180, my projected MaxHR...and 75% of this is 135.  Give and take 5 points because I'm a Libra and my endurance zone is between 130-140.  Not bad!

 

Another formula I came across about 10 years ago by Phil Maffetone has been very reliable for me and here it goes:

180 - your age = base training HR

In my case 180 - 39 = about 140

Now, you can add or subtract between 5 to 10 points depending on your fitness and health history; if you've been free from sickness AND injury during the past 3 months, then add 10 points.  If you've been sick at all or injured at all during the past 3 months, subtract between 5-10 points.  This gives you an endurance range and the low level intensity zone to work with.

 

I like this formula better only because it gives you a range and is not fixated on a specific number, as is the case with the 220 formula.

 

What the heck is up with the Power thingieMAjig you keep wanting me to buy....is it necessary?

Well, a Watt meter might tell you WHAT'S going on, but it won't tell you why or how.  I truly recommend the use of at least a good heart rate monitor; one that stores data and can be downloaded later.  If you want to take it one step further, get a Power Meter and pay attention to your HR & Power profile and energy consumption in addition to all the other cycling related information (AV speed, distance, etc.)  But don't get too geeked about collecting data.  If you don't use it to your benefit, it's a waste of time, money and energy.  And, it's all rather simple once someone explains it to you.

 

Will Kam ever shut up?

Yes, I've typed enough.  Raceplan coaches, Patrick Jak, Teddy Allen, Karla Bland and I are here to help if you need it.  Don't be shy...we're coaches because we get a kick out of helping people succeed, not because we want to get rich.  Don't be afraid to ask for help!

 

Also, Raceplan has partnerships with Polar and Cycle Ops in case you're interested in ordering a HRM or Power Meter.  Our cost is yours.

 

Kam Zardouzian Chief Instigator Raceplan Coaching & Racing Kam@Raceplan.com www.raceplan.com tel: mobile: 858-414-2624 858-414-2624

Add me to your address book... Want a signature like this?

 

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.6/111 - Release Date: 9/23/2005

Dave Z's ITT win.

Follow this link to a video of Dave Z's prolog win as seen from CSC's follow
car with Bjarne. The video took a bit to download for me but it was worth
the wait.

http://www.cervelo.com/movieviewer.aspx?id=7

Kam

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.15/82 - Release Date: 8/25/2005

Food for thought....literally.

I saw this from Joe Friel's latest newsletter and it hit a home run with me so I'm sharing.

Around the time of the Tour de France there are often questions about how an athlete should go about losing weight in order to climb better. There’s little doubt that being lighter means climbing faster. Pro cyclists who contend for the yellow jersey, the polka dot jersey or who need to support their team leader in the Alps and Pyrenees try to be lean by the time the terrain turns upward. The best climbers are generally less than 2 pounds of body weight for every inch of height (divide your weight in pounds by your height in inches to find this number). It’s rare to find a rider in the pro peloton at 2.5 pounds per inch or greater. A lot of them who are not climbing specialists are around 2.1 to 2.2. The latest average I have for the TdF field shows an average of 2.151 pounds per inch (thanks to Gregory Byerline for providing that data).

Every pound of excess fat shaved from your body saves you about 3 watts in a climb. In running it is something like 2 seconds per mile per excess pound in a race. For most endurance athletes, a 1-point shift in weight-to-height ratio means about 5 percent loss of weight—around a 7- to 9-pound loss of love handles. That can be done safely over a two-month period if there is a big A-race with lots of climbing or the need to run faster on the calendar a couple of months from now.

How is it best for an athlete to lose weight? Unfortunately, there have been few studies of serious athletes that looked at this question.

One group of researchers, however, has examined the issue in an interesting way. They compared eating less to exercising more to see which was more effective in dropping excess body fat.

They had six endurance-trained men create a 1,000-calorie-per-day deficit for seven days by either exercising more while maintaining their caloric intake, or by eating less while keeping exercise the same. With 1,000 calories of increased exercise daily—comparable to running an additional 8 miles or so each day—the men averaged 1.67 pounds of weight loss in a week. The subjects eating 1,000 fewer calories each day lost 4.75 pounds on average for the week.

So, according to this study, the old adage that “a calorie is a calorie” doesn’t hold true. At least in the short term, restricting food intake appears to have a greater return on the scales than does increasing training workload.

Notice that I said “on the scales.” The reduced-food-intake group in this study unfortunately lost a greater percentage of muscle mass than did the increased-exercise group. That is an ineffective way to lose weight. If the scales show you’re lighter, but you have less muscle to create power, the trade-off is not a good one.

How can you reduce calories yet maintain muscle mass? Unfortunately, that question hasn’t been answered for athletes, but it has been for sedentary women. Perhaps the conclusions are still applicable to athletes.

In 1994, Italian researchers had 25 women eat only 800 calories a day for 21 days. Ten ate a relatively high-protein and low-carbohydrate diet. Fifteen ate a low-protein and high-carbohydrate diet. Both were restricted to 20 percent of calories from fat. The two groups lost similar amounts of weight, but there was a significantly greater loss of muscle on the high-carbohydrate, low-protein diet. It appears that when calories are reduced to lose weight, which is more effective than increasing training workload, the protein content of the diet must be kept at near normal levels. This, of course, assumes that you’re eating adequate protein before starting the diet, which many athletes aren’t. When training hard, a quality source of protein should be included in every meal, especially when trying to lose weight.

Joe Friel is president and founder of Ultrafit Associates and the author of the Training Bible book series. For more information on training, racing and coaching go to www.Ultrafit.com

Kam Zardouzian Chief Instigator Raceplan Coaching & Racing Kam@Raceplan.com www.raceplan.com tel: mobile: 858-414-2624 858-414-2624

Add me to your address book... Want a signature like this?

Taking time off

A question about taking time off was posed recently.

Question: I am thinking now of starting up my training in a more serious form after I get to Santa Cruz in September (or when I get back here in October). I know that I should take some time off, but I am not sure how much and when. my goal is to train for next season

Answer: Taking time off is one of the trickiest things in cycling. It needs to happen but everyone reacts differently to it. One big mistake is that people take complete time off from the bike as well as physical activity. That's a mistake in my opinion, especially if you're healthy....i.e. if an injury is not forcing you away from activity.

Taking time off is meant to let your little sores and aches heal, get your body to use different muscles, and your mind to refreshen itself. I usually take one big two week break from the bike but substitute the hours away from riding with tennis, hiking, running, yoga, surfing, etc. I also take at least two one week or partial week times off in the middle of the season but totally reduce all activity and let my body heal from things....you'll get to appreciate the need for these little breaks as you age!

No matter what you do, the biggest favor you can do for yourself is to free your mind from any angst of being away from riding when you do take time off. For example, on my recent surf trip to Sinaloa where riding a bike was just not happening, I simply made peace with that fact and enjoyed all the other activities that were available to me. Certainly 4-7 hours of surfing every day did the job nicely, but I also threw in some fast paced walking and canoeing to mix it up. It took me a day and a half to let it all go and while my body recovered from the specific demands of riding, I also let my mind refreshen itself from the demands of "being on" with training and racing.

Coming back home and resuming training was done very gradually and to say I eased into it is an understatement. I always feel a bit awkward getting back on the bike after some time but I know through experience that fitness will come back, form will comeback, strength will come back much better if your time off the bike is one that maintains your fitness while refreshes your mind.

My suggestion is to take 10-14 days from riding certainly to coincide with your trip to Peru where I'm sure you'll do some hiking. But also for when you get back. Your move to and from Chicago has a physiological and psychological cost, even if you think you can just push through. Allow yourself a few days of moderate activity to settle down from the energy you spend moving. Then get into it gradually and with ease.

Your season is a way off and you have loads of time. You don't need to be peaked anytime soon so focus on enjoying your life!

Are you happy to see lance retire?

Some food for thought on this beautiful Monday.

There is loads of hoopla in the news about Lance and his retirement.  I've been running an informal poll on my web site for the past week asking if people are happy to see him retire (www.receplan.com).  As of today, 27 votes for yes, 10 for no.

I intentionally left the language loose because I wanted to capture as many reasons as possible as to why people are happy or not to see Lance retire. Now that enough sample votes are in for me to guess what the results are, I'm starting to wonder what those reasons might really be.  For example, could people be happy to see Lance retire because they're bored watching him dominate the Tour?  do they have Lance-Lash?  Or, do they just dislike Lance?  How many of my voters are US residents versus, say, from France or Germany where love for Lance is scarce. Or, looking at it from a complete different angle, what portion of these folks is happy to see Lance retire so he can spend time with his kids, spend all his hard earned money, run for public office and sing back up for Sheryl Crow?

How about the loyal fans who are not happy to see him retire.  They obviously connect with him in some way.  How many might be cancer survivors who see Lance as a source of hope?  How many are new to cycling and have not yet built immunity to the Lance Lone Star?  How many are kids?  How many women and how many men?

What ever the reasons might be, I know that as much as I have experienced Lance-Lash, I still get goose bumps watching some of the classic footage of him tear up the competition.  I get goose bumps knowing I ran into him at the 1988 Texas Hill Country Triathlon, where the brash 15 year old was weaving stories about his girl friend.  I still get goose bumps thinking this kid came back from near death to do what has never been done.  All of these reasons, in addition to the ones I can't currently think of, motivate me to excel in my life...in all areas of my life.

The big question for me is whether I'd still get these nostalgic feelings about the power of Lance if he had not retired.  For now, I will access my memory banks for the images, sounds and files of this amazing human being and marvel at this impact on the human race at this specific moment in time.

Long Live Lance!

Kam

Competitor's Radio Show Podcast meeting. Bob's ready to rumble......

Competitor podcasting meeting. Bob looks ready to digitize!