Interval Training - Any "programs" or links/tips?

[dougp]

I'd like to get back into cycling, and I'm well aware my cardio has taken a huge hit since I used to ride regularly. Last year I did the MS150 which goes between Houston and Austin - I only made it 47mi before my upper thighs gave out on me. This was in part due to my messed up training schedule (I had severe sinus infections that took about 2-3 months of training time out of the 5 months I had) and what I feel is my terrible cardio. I have a indoor trainer for my bike, along with a HRM, Cadence and speed sensors. The speed is on the front wheel, but since it's interval, I know the primary concern is HR & cadence. Does anyone know of or use a free program that can help me get back on my bike and more confident in my distance riding? I used to be able to do 60-100 mile rides with no problem, but I was 10 years younger.

 

[KMc]

I use a specific heart rate-based training plan that I've tweaked for myself over the years, but I'm now 44 and have been riding 1,500-2,000 miles per season for a long time, so I don't know how well it would translate for someone who has been out of cycling for 10 years.

It sounds like you have all the tools you need to get started. Bicycling magazine has TONS of training plans available just for the google-ing. Here is but one example:
http://www.bicycling.com/training-nutrition/training-fitness/100-mile-goal

 

[blinky8225]

I'm a fan of the Tabata protocol combined with steady-state training. It's only a four minute workout, but it's 4 minutes of perfect hell. It saves time, and I've seen great results using it with my running.

 

[gar655]

I'm thinking your legs gave out from not enough miles not from lack of cardio- you can always slow down if you're starting to gas.

I don't really ride on the road but put in about 4 hrs/week on my trainer and crosstrain with my C2 rower and occasional running.

For cycling being able to do 100 miles without your legs giving out is more about putting in the time rather than worrying about your cardio.

Doing intervals is great but it's not really going to help you do 100 mile rides. You really need to concentrate on putting in the time/miles and the cardio will come along naturally.

Once you get comfortable with that kind of mileage then you can if you want work intervals or more intervals to increase your speed.

 

[edcarman]

I have a indoor trainer for my bike, along with a HRM, Cadence and speed sensors. The speed is on the front wheel, but since it's interval, I know the primary concern is HR & cadence.

Is there any way you can move the sensor from the front to the back wheel? Speed will give you much more useful information from your trainer than cadence.

Unless you always ride in the same gear, cadence is pretty meaningless. 100rpm in 53-11 is definitely not the same workout as 100rpm in 39-25. Also, when comparing past workouts, you can't be sure that the lower HR at a certain cadence is due to fitness or simply because you used a a lower gear. With speed, the intensity at a certain speed is fairly consistent so, for example, if you did one ride at 30km/h and 100rpm and another at 31km/h 95rpm, both at the same HR, you'd put it down to an improvement in fitness. If using cadence, you'd think your performance had dropped, since the second cadence is lower.

There're some free training plans here:
http://www.fittrack.co.za/TrainingP...hallenge Base Preparation Training Plans.aspx

 

[dougp]

I'm thinking your legs gave out from not enough miles not from lack of cardio- you can always slow down if you're starting to gas.

I don't really ride on the road but put in about 4 hrs/week on my trainer and crosstrain with my C2 rower and occasional running.

For cycling being able to do 100 miles without your legs giving out is more about putting in the time rather than worrying about your cardio.

Doing intervals is great but it's not really going to help you do 100 mile rides. You really need to concentrate on putting in the time/miles and the cardio will come along naturally.

Once you get comfortable with that kind of mileage then you can if you want work intervals or more intervals to increase your speed.

I acknowledge that my legs giving out was not cardio, but cardio did play into it since I didn't have adequate training. But, I know how to train for distance - I still need to get into shape though and bring my heart beat down. That's why I'm interested in cardio.

Is there any way you can move the sensor from the front to the back wheel? Speed will give you much more useful information from your trainer than cadence.

Unless you always ride in the same gear, cadence is pretty meaningless. 100rpm in 53-11 is definitely not the same workout as 100rpm in 39-25. Also, when comparing past workouts, you can't be sure that the lower HR at a certain cadence is due to fitness or simply because you used a a lower gear. With speed, the intensity at a certain speed is fairly consistent so, for example, if you did one ride at 30km/h and 100rpm and another at 31km/h 95rpm, both at the same HR, you'd put it down to an improvement in fitness. If using cadence, you'd think your performance had dropped, since the second cadence is lower.

There're some free training plans here:
http://www.fittrack.co.za/TrainingP...hallenge Base Preparation Training Plans.aspx

I always ride in the same gear - I just have my bike mounted on the trainer. Cadence is important for someone who's trying to maintain an optimal pace & HB. I don't look at increased RPM as necessarily meaning my fitness has improved - because, to be honest, some of the hills here will kill your average RPM And unfortunately, I cannot move my sensor - it's a specific one from Trek that goes in the fork on my bike. I do have a spare sensor that I can setup a separate computer for though to track my speed - but speed is an extremely poor measure of a workout when you're indoors and not utilizing a good trainer that can do variable magnetic resistance. I can hop on a bike at 24 Hour Fitness and go 25mph for an hour, but on the lowest setting, it means jack shit.

 

[edcarman]

but speed is an extremely poor measure of a workout when you're indoors and not utilizing a good trainer that can do variable magnetic resistance. I can hop on a bike at 24 Hour Fitness and go 25mph for an hour, but on the lowest setting, it means jack shit.

I agree that trainer speed is a poor absolute measure but, provided the trainer isn't completely messed up, it can be a very good relative measure for performance. 25mph on the trainer may be nothing like 25mph on the road, but going from 25mph on that trainer to 27mph is a reasonable indication of increased effort.

Trainer speed is especially useful if you can get hold of, or create, a reliable speed vs. power curve for your trainer. 200W on the trainer is pretty much the same training effect as 200W on the road, or 200W on a hill, or 200W in a headwind etc. Some software, such as SportTracks, have plugins with a number of built-in curves that will do the conversion for you.

 

[gar655]

I acknowledge that my legs giving out was not cardio, but cardio did play into it since I didn't have adequate training. But, I know how to train for distance - I still need to get into shape though and bring my heart beat down. That's why I'm interested in cardio.

If you know how to train for distance then you should know that your cardio will improve along with your ability to do distance. This works the same way with running, rowing etc...

You can certainly train for a 100 mile ride without ever doing more than say 20 or 30 miles but you won't be as good as if you put in the 60 mile plus rides.