Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

CKinnard wrote:

rogan wrote:Does all of this have any meaningful impact on climbing ability, outside body weight? Not in my experience.

It does impact climbing ability in the experience of Australia's top sports dietitians, and the dietitians that advise top pro teams.
It also impacts recovery. But thanks for sharing your experience.

If you're a pro, that last tiny little difference between the boiled chicken the dietician recommended, and the 600g rump steak I'd prefer might become "meaningful", maybe critical. As I said, I'm not a pro. Just because a pro does something doesn't mean I should. In many cases, for a whole host of reasons, I positively shouldn't.

I'm always happy to listen to the opinions of others. But once I've done that, I make up my own mind based on what actually works for me.

rogan wrote:

CKinnard wrote:

rogan wrote:Does all of this have any meaningful impact on climbing ability, outside body weight? Not in my experience.

It does impact climbing ability in the experience of Australia's top sports dietitians, and the dietitians that advise top pro teams.
It also impacts recovery. But thanks for sharing your experience.

If you're a pro, that last tiny little difference between the boiled chicken the dietician recommended, and the 600g rump steak I'd prefer might become "meaningful", maybe critical. As I said, I'm not a pro. Just because a pro does something doesn't mean I should. In many cases, for a whole host of reasons, I positively shouldn't.

I'm always happy to listen to the opinions of others. But once I've done that, I make up my own mind based on what actually works for me.

The thing is, the dietitian has the greater insight into how what you eat in the first 40 years of your life will effect your riding and health in the 2nd 40 years.

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Why not?

List some sound evidence based practical strategies for improving climbing performance based on the above that would be suitable for the audience here and which adds to the fundamentals already outlined.

There is no need for physiology lessons to improve performance. What is needed are evidence based, practical implementable actions, i.e. an understanding of what to apply, when and for how long.

What evidence base are you talking about?
Essentially all celebrated Olympic level coaches in my era don't have published scientific papers backing the strategies they developed through trial and error.
Where's the evidence based practical proof for optimal training stress balance?

Practical implementable actionable strategies are built (and sold) on a clearer communication and understanding of what can be realistically manipulated and what cannot. For as long as customers are treated as patsies too ignorant to comprehend the detail, 'the biggest bro in the gym'' will continue to hold court as the go to guy. There's too many people trying to make a living out of selling unattainable dreams to amateur athletes.

To OP, power to weight does matter, but don't let it get to your head too much IMO.
Just suffer, suffer and suffer some more up those hills, on the flats.... everywhere you go and you'll soon enough get the lightweight jockeys attention hahaha
Don't forget the good things in life like high carb meals at night tho..I'm a firm believer on all grog has to stop..
Flame suit is on

CKinnard wrote:
The thing is, the dietitian has the greater insight into how what you eat in the first 40 years of your life will effect your riding and health in the 2nd 40 years.

No one is denying that subject matter experts know more about their subject than enthusiastic amateurs. But a dietician is highly unlikely to be able to tell me specifically what makes me climb faster.

I'm not talking about general nutrition and health (where a dietician obviously can add value), except as those things relate to climbing.

So perhaps we're at cross-purposes.

CKinnard wrote:

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:Why not?

List some sound evidence based practical strategies for improving climbing performance based on the above that would be suitable for the audience here and which adds to the fundamentals already outlined.

There is no need for physiology lessons to improve performance. What is needed are evidence based, practical implementable actions, i.e. an understanding of what to apply, when and for how long.

What evidence base are you talking about?
Essentially all celebrated Olympic level coaches in my era don't have published scientific papers backing the strategies they developed through trial and error.
Where's the evidence based practical proof for optimal training stress balance?

Practical implementable actionable strategies are built (and sold) on a clearer communication and understanding of what can be realistically manipulated and what cannot. For as long as customers are treated as patsies too ignorant to comprehend the detail, 'the biggest bro in the gym'' will continue to hold court as the go to guy. There's too many people trying to make a living out of selling unattainable dreams to amateur athletes.

?

You raised the prospect of something people should take into account in their training and preparation:

CKinnard wrote:

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:There is no need to make it overly complicated.

The devil's in the detail, as are lots of small and not so small gains....and realistic goals.
Though racing has never really been about informed realistic goals.

I won't elaborate on the latest physiological topic going around sports physiology circles now - autophagy.

I was prompting for more information or insight into how such evidence based information on autophagy can be practically applied by an audience such as this.

CKinnard wrote:For as long as customers are treated as patsies too ignorant to comprehend the detail, 'the biggest bro in the gym'' will continue to hold court as the go to guy. There's too many people trying to make a living out of selling unattainable dreams to amateur athletes.

Strawman argument. I very much doubt anyone here is selling unrealistic dreams.

Most people however do want help and advice on how to improve, and where possible for such help and advice to be based on sound principles and evidence.

I'm very light - 63 kg / 170 cm but I consider myself better on the flats at speed than climbing. The reason being my body/muscles seem more suited to high cadence/aerobic work then sheer muscle / grinding up hills.

BugsBunny wrote:I'm very light - 63 kg / 170 cm but I consider myself better on the flats at speed than climbing. The reason being my body/muscles seem more suited to high cadence/aerobic work then sheer muscle / grinding up hills.

so you're light, you can sustain highish cadence, you have good aerobic capacity, think you need to find a mountain and ride up it.

BugsBunny wrote:I'm very light - 63 kg / 170 cm but I consider myself better on the flats at speed than climbing. The reason being my body/muscles seem more suited to high cadence/aerobic work then sheer muscle / grinding up hills.

You sound like the definition of a good climber to me.

Bluejay87 wrote:

BugsBunny wrote:I'm very light - 63 kg / 170 cm but I consider myself better on the flats at speed than climbing. The reason being my body/muscles seem more suited to high cadence/aerobic work then sheer muscle / grinding up hills.

You sound like the definition of a good climber to me.

+1, you can climb like Froome if you are a high cadence cyclist

Hi guys.

I was trying to highlight the irony here.

In retrospect I realize now that I spent 99% of my riding in the last year (since I started riding) on flats and hardly any training on climbs.

On the climbs I "run out of gears" on gradients greater than say 8-10% hence my cadence drops and I'm finished.

But the real message here is I just need to do more climbs - which I've since started to do.

I just find it interesting that with a climbers physique I seem to hold my own against the sprinting guys. At least those I encounter. [emoji12]

BugsBunny wrote:
I just find it interesting that with a climbers physique I seem to hold my own against the sprinting guys. At least those I encounter. [emoji12]

Having a climber's physique doesnt make you a climber.
You could actually be a sprinter.
Or a time trialler.
Or an all rounder.
Or not much good at anything.

BugsBunny wrote:On the climbs I "run out of gears" on gradients greater than say 8-10% hence my cadence drops and I'm finished.

The answer is here, more gears needed for you to climb up faster

Derny Driver wrote:Or not much good at anything.

I think I've finally found my "cyclist type"!

I've long wondered, rouleur, puncheur or domestique - now I know! All it needs is a catchy French name.

nezumi wrote:

Derny Driver wrote:Or not much good at anything.

I think I've finally found my "cyclist type"!

I've long wondered, rouleur, puncheur or domestique - now I know! All it needs is a catchy French name.

Lenteur?

nezumi wrote:

Derny Driver wrote:Or not much good at anything.

I think I've finally found my "cyclist type"!

I've long wondered, rouleur, puncheur or domestique - now I know! All it needs is a catchy French name.

You and me both

nezumi wrote:

Derny Driver wrote:Or not much good at anything.

I think I've finally found my "cyclist type"!

I've long wondered, rouleur, puncheur or domestique - now I know! All it needs is a catchy French name.

Hahahahaha
"Cycliste d'merde"

Power to weight.
Being able to recruit all your leg muscle groups and share the load.
Staying below FTP on big climbs.
Muscle glycogen levels and fuelling.
Smooth technique, engage strong core to stabilise your hips and body, don't waste energy gripping bars and fighting the bike.
Ability to suffer some.
Train on hills, especially 20-30 minute climbs.
Do constant efforts and varied efforts with sprint recovers or attacks! Do strength training climbs. Low cadence 60+ with high power out put but keep constant as possible. Be careful of knees and strengthen core for support. Think about your quarts, glutes, core and breathing while you are doing this.
Try resting hands on the bar tops comfortably and imagine nothing is happening above your lower torso. I like flat top aero bars for this.
Controlled breathing and being smooth.
Get your gearing right and change between muscle load and cardio load by using gearing where you can.
That's a good start!!!!
Oh! Lighter bike. Stiffer bike. Light wheels with good bearings.
Hope that helps but most of all you need to be able to suffer a lot.

Oh. I forgot to mention - as usual if you are going to hammer yourself with repeat efforts up climbs make sure you allow a good recovery between each interval with plenty water and keep spinning the legs lightly to help flush the acid out of your muscles.

You also need to allow a days rest between these too and make sure your recovery between is good recovery.

As mentioned above too by others. Try eat well with carbs, protein etc low fats and avoid rubbish foods as much as possible. Alcohol is to be minimal. I still have a beer and wine and I still eat maccas on Occassion. I'm not a pro just a guy who loves to ride, ride well and race on Occassion.

Enjoy it most of all. Don't kill your passion by thinking you need to become a pro or as fast as the guy who has been riding since he was born, is 10 years younger and built like a pro.

James

nezumi wrote:

Derny Driver wrote:Or not much good at anything.

I think I've finally found my "cyclist type"!

I've long wondered, rouleur, puncheur or domestique - now I know! All it needs is a catchy French name.

I've always said I'm not a rouleur, puncheur, grimpeur - just a medioceur. That sounds French if you say it the right way, doesn't it?

On more practical matters, from my experience the best way to get better at doing big climbs is to take off the 17kg of camping and touring gear I sometimes carry. But the extra weight does make the big descents into unknown territory something amazing!

I did a charity / fun ride a few years ago and trained for a few weeks before hand. I had a history of riding a bike from transport (or running) from age like 5 till 30, I never drove a car until I was 30. I swapped road biking for a mountain bike at about age 25. Anyway I was known to be a fast long distance runner, I always won or second placed the long distance races at school (in my 20's I was that crazy guy that runs everywhere) and fastest mountain bike rider in my small city always but I never competed as there was no club back then, we just raced around the bush ourselves. Fast forward 12 years and not having riden a bike at all in those 12 years I rode 120kms after 4 weeks training with a single 25km ride once a week. By the end of the four weeks I was able to average 32km/h over 25km/s but the other guys were a few km/h faster than me. In the end I bought a decent bike and did the 120km without too much trouble apart from having torn a ligament in the hip the week before at a sporting tournament, I came into the ride still limping quite badly (I was very sore later on and it's still sore now 3 years later but nothing to do with the ride really). Anyway we came across some hills on that ride and I found even though the guys that had been riding a lot over the years were much faster than me on a flat, I pulled away from everyone easily on the hills and I wasn't even having to struggle. My natural weight is 61kg (AT) 5 feet 10. I've never been any heavier than that. So I would say weight counts for everything for no other reason should I be faster on a hill than guys who were faster than me everywhere else. I'm just starting to get back into it now after my hip is good enough to ride, shorter cranks are helping a lot with the pain.

elfoam wrote:So I would say weight counts for everything for no other reason should I be faster on a hill than guys who were faster than me everywhere else. I'm just starting to get back into it now after my hip is good enough to ride, shorter cranks are helping a lot with the pain.

Maybe at your level but it's really power to weight ratio. For example, there is a guy who is 80+kg but can average 500W doing the 1 in 20.

zill wrote:

elfoam wrote:So I would say weight counts for everything for no other reason should I be faster on a hill than guys who were faster than me everywhere else. I'm just starting to get back into it now after my hip is good enough to ride, shorter cranks are helping a lot with the pain.

Maybe at your level but it's really power to weight ratio. For example, there is a guy who is 80+kg but can average 500W doing the 1 in 20.

At pro level no good climber is even close to 80kg. So yeah, weight matters a lot, even at pro level. 1 in 20 is not really a good indicator of 'climbing ability' it's so bloody short.

Calvin27 wrote:

zill wrote:

elfoam wrote:So I would say weight counts for everything for no other reason should I be faster on a hill than guys who were faster than me everywhere else. I'm just starting to get back into it now after my hip is good enough to ride, shorter cranks are helping a lot with the pain.

Maybe at your level but it's really power to weight ratio. For example, there is a guy who is 80+kg but can average 500W doing the 1 in 20.

At pro level no good climber is even close to 80kg. So yeah, weight matters a lot, even at pro level. 1 in 20 is not really a good indicator of 'climbing ability' it's so bloody short.

Referring to A grade level.

Calvin27 wrote:

zill wrote:

elfoam wrote:So I would say weight counts for everything for no other reason should I be faster on a hill than guys who were faster than me everywhere else. I'm just starting to get back into it now after my hip is good enough to ride, shorter cranks are helping a lot with the pain.

Maybe at your level but it's really power to weight ratio. For example, there is a guy who is 80+kg but can average 500W doing the 1 in 20.

At pro level no good climber is even close to 80kg. So yeah, weight matters a lot, even at pro level. 1 in 20 is not really a good indicator of 'climbing ability' it's so bloody short.

Big Mig.

Besides even Eros Poli beat Pantani to the top of Ventoux. All you need is the right tactics.

Cheers,

Cameron