For the "pedaling technique doesn't matter crowd"

[CoachFergie]

Wouldn't it be more helpful to those who are following this thread for you to volunteer why it was wrong, rather than make people drag it out of you?

Yes I guess it's a bit like answering "no" to everything or Urg and Phooey

Wouldn't it be more helpful to those who are following this thread for you to volunteer why it was wrong, rather than make people drag it out of you?

Yes it would Frank.

My own thoughts are that "bonking" would be better handled by training the body to better metabolize fat stores than by trying to delay depletion of carbohydrate stores, especially for the ultra-endurance events.

If you had power files you would know for a fact that most cycle races occur at an intensity well above the level where one burns predominately fat.

 

[CoachFergie]

Strength-1 is the accepted jargon definition of strength, max force for one rep.
Strength-100x60 would be max force repeatable for 100 reps at 60 reps per second.
Strength-10,000x90 would be max force repeatable for 10,000 reps at 90 reps per second.

Those would be useful definitions to facilitate cycling and running science, I would think.

Strength
ST Power
MT Power
LT Power

Then we lose this notion that endurance is a function of strength and people stop deluding themselves that their 1RM has any influence on their 6,000RM.

 

[FrankDay]

If you had power files you would know for a fact that most cycle races occur at an intensity well above the level where one burns predominately fat.

Really? As far as I know there are only three possible energy sources. Fat, protein, and carbohydrates. If the body starts out with 6-800 gms of stored carbohydrate, that calculates to only about 24-3200 stored calories in the form of carbohydrate. So, if they are burning 1,000-1,500 calories per hour, what pray tell are they burning for 6 hours and where are they getting it? While some carbs can come from ingestion during exercise, last I heard the intestines were incapable of absorbing calories at that rate, especially during intense exercise.

Look, if the demand goes beyond the store of carbs and the body cannot absorb carbs at the demand rate, the difference must be made up from either fat or protein. You had better hope it is mostly from fat. Whether calories actually burned come from "mostly fat" or not, IMHO it is this ability to burn fat to make up energy deficits that determines the level at which an endurance athlete can perform, not the amount of carbohydrate stored at the beginning of the event.

 

[FrankDay]

Strength
ST Power
MT Power
LT Power

Then we lose this notion that endurance is a function of strength and people stop deluding themselves that their 1RM has any influence on their 6,000RM.

Your terms seem somewhat vague and undefined. Might be more useful to everyone if you told us how they were defined. Then, let's see if we can get Dr. Coggan to agree.

 

[oldborn]

If you had power files you would know for a fact that most cycle races occur at an intensity well above the level where one burns predominately fat.

What kind of PM is that? Please i would buy it for sure.

 

[oldborn]

Your terms seem somewhat vague and undefined. Might be more useful to everyone if you told us how they were defined. Then, let's see if we can get Dr. Coggan to agree.

He knows a definition very well as max force or 20000kg in one RM, but he is afraid to tell us in front of his adorable peer Andrew

But it is free world why two scientists should agree about so simple thing. Ups i forgot Fergie is not scientist

 

[CoachFergie]

Your terms seem somewhat vague and undefined. Might be more useful to everyone if you told us how they were defined. Then, let's see if we can get Dr. Coggan to agree.

Strength = Maximal force
ST Power = 1-10 sec
MT Power = 10-60 sec
LT Power = 60sec plus Neumann breaks LT power into a several stages that can be classified in terms of lactate, heart rate, ventilation, RPE. I prefer to just use classifications like...

5min power
20min power
60min power etc

Just like to point out that no cycling event is run over less than 10sec which is why I am averse to most forms of strength training and excessive amounts of alactic training for cyclists even the NZ and World Masters Sprint Champions I have worked with.

 

[FrankDay]

Strength = Maximal force
ST Power = 1-10 sec
MT Power = 10-60 sec
LT Power = 60sec plus Neumann breaks LT power into a several stages that can be classified in terms of lactate, heart rate, ventilation, RPE. I prefer to just use classifications like...

5min power
20min power
60min power etc

Just like to point out that no cycling event is run over less than 10sec which is why I am averse to most forms of strength training and excessive amounts of alactic training for cyclists even the NZ and World Masters Sprint Champions I have worked with.

But, your definition seems to only be about power. Now everyone here knows that is all you care about but some here would like to be able to break power down into its two components, force and speed. So, we need a term that allows people to talk only about the force component. They now try to use the term "strength" but Dr. Coggan simply won't let them use that term. Your terms may be useful, but I don't see them being useful to those who want to talk about the muscle force side of the power equation.

 

[CoachFergie]

Well as I said the categories can be defined by lactate levels, heart rate, ventilation or RPE but currently there is no lactate monitor that provides constant updates on lactate in the muscle. Heart rate is influenced by a wide variety of factors. A portable gas analysis machine is a tad impractical for day to day training and racing. RPE is okay, for those without power I prescribe this rather than HR but it's not like you can get a record of each section of a ride or each interval from a ride.

Yes it's almost like you need a way of determining average effective pedal force and circumferencial pedal velocity from a training ride or race. Andy, any ideas???

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Really? As far as I know there are only three possible energy sources.

This chart from Astrand and Rodahl's book, Textbook of Work Physiology should help, but probably won't in your case.

 

[JayKosta]

This chart from Astrand and Rodahl's book, "Textbook of Work Physiology" should help, but probably won't in your case.
... image not shown again

================================
Alex,
That is a good illustration - a very important part is the last sentence -
"Prolonged exercise, endurance training, and diet can markedly modify the metabolic response."

My assumption about the illustration is that it applies to a situation where the test subject HAS an adequate supply of 'quick access' carbohydrates to supply the energy demands.
It would be interesting and significant to have a similar chart after several hours of high intensity exercise.
For situations of 'prolonged exercise', obtaining the necessary 'fuel' for the muscles is necessary to perform well for an entire event.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[FrankDay]

This chart from Astrand and Rodahl's book, Textbook of Work Physiology should help, but probably won't in your case.

[/IMG]

Should help me how? Here is what I said that you highlighted when posting this: "Really? As far as I know there are only three possible energy sources." What does that graph say that I missed?

 

[JayKosta]

Should help me how? Here is what I said that you highlighted when posting this: "Really? As far as I know there are only three possible energy sources." What does that graph say that I missed?

======================================

Hello Frank,

I am not Alex, but maybe the confusion about 'energy sources' is whether the discussion is about 'food', or about the physiological paths of 'energy production'.

The chart that Alex posted showed only 2 of the 3 food types - fat, and carbs, but not protein.

For 'energy production' there are also 3 types:
ATP-PC stores - for very short term bursts
Lactate Path - for 1-3 minute duration
Oxygen System - for long duration events

My information comes from the book "Fitness and Sports Medicine" 3rd edition, by David C. Nieman, DrPH, FACSM

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

 

[FrankDay]

======================================

Hello Frank,

I am not Alex, but maybe the confusion about 'energy sources' is whether the discussion is about 'food', or about the physiological paths of 'energy production'.

The chart that Alex posted showed only 2 of the 3 food types - fat, and carbs, but not protein.

For 'energy production' there are also 3 types:
ATP-PC stores - for very short term bursts
Lactate Path - for 1-3 minute duration
Oxygen System - for long duration events

My information comes from the book "Fitness and Sports Medicine" 3rd edition, by David C. Nieman, DrPH, FACSM

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

Well, my comments had gone to energy sources during aerobic exercise so, at least, I am talking "food". They didn't show protein only because it is usually only an energy source in starvation conditions.

Carbohydrate stores are very limited and the body does all it can to preserve them. They are used initially because they are readily available but as soon as they start to drop the body starts to use fat to preserve carbohydrate stores as best it can. That way, you will be better prepared after 2 hours of running to do short bursts if you suddenly find yourself being chased by a sabre tooth tiger. The more fat it can use early on the longer the carbohydrate stores will last (that is a much more efficient way of prolonging carbohydrate stores than trying to increase the stores at the beginning I would submit). Storing a few extra grams of carbohydrate into the muscles at the start of an event will have very little beneficial affect on the ability of the athlete to perform, IMHO. Anyone who claims the contrary should provide proof that such benefit is real. Otherwise, their argument is nothing more than mine, a theoretical one. (edit: I might add this is one reason I have argued that endurance athletes should consider restricting carbohydrate intake during long training rides in order to better train the fat metabolism pathways.)

 

[acoggan]

Storing a few extra grams of carbohydrate into the muscles at the start of an event will have very little beneficial affect on the ability of the athlete to perform, IMHO.

Below is a table from my review article that I mentioned earlier. Reference 14 is of course the classic study of Bergstrom et al. (Bergström J, Hermansen L, Hultman E, Saltin B. Diet, muscle glycogen and physical performance. Acta Physiol Scand 71:140-150, 1967), although as I indicated it has been known since around 1900 that endurance performance is enhanced by consumption of a high carbohydrate diet.

Table 2. Pre-exercise muscle glycogen concentration and time to fatigue during prolonged exercise in men consuming different diets. Modified from Table II of Reference 14.

Diet Muscle glycogen (g/100 g) Time to fatigue (min)
High protein/fat 0.63±0.10 56.9±1.7
Normal mixed 1.75±0.15 113.6±5.3
High carbohydrate 3.31±0.30 166.5±17.8

 

[FrankDay]

Below is a table from my review article that I mentioned earlier. Reference 14 is of course the classic study of Bergstrom et al. (Bergström J, Hermansen L, Hultman E, Saltin B. Diet, muscle glycogen and physical performance. Acta Physiol Scand 71:140-150, 1967), although as I indicated it has been known since around 1900 that endurance performance is enhanced by consumption of a high carbohydrate diet.

Table 2. Pre-exercise muscle glycogen concentration and time to fatigue during prolonged exercise in men consuming different diets. Modified from Table II of Reference 14.

Diet Muscle glycogen (g/100 g) Time to fatigue (min)
High protein/fat 0.63±0.10 56.9±1.7
Normal mixed 1.75±0.15 113.6±5.3
High carbohydrate 3.31±0.30 166.5±17.8

First, I have not said that it couldn't have any affect, but for ultra-endurance events, like the TDF or an Ironman I can't see it having much affect. Let me revise my original statement. Instead of not seeing carboloading haveing much effect in events lasting longer than an hour or two I will revise that to it not having much effect in events lasting longer than 2-3 hours. Increasing the time to fatigue to 166 minutes would seem would have little affect on an event lasting 500 minutes. How does one increase the time to fatigue to 500 minutes (or longer), surely not with carbohydrate loading. And, I would like to see the study that shows that actual race performances are substantially improved in well-trained athletes. Anyhow, in ultra-endurance events it seems the biggest effect would come from being able to increase performance after that 166 minutes are up. Carbo loading, it would seem, could play no role there.

 

[CoachFergie]

Have you observed any performance benefits from all the back pedalling you do Frank?

 

[FrankDay]

Below is a table from my review article that I mentioned earlier. Reference 14 is of course the classic study of Bergstrom et al. (Bergström J, Hermansen L, Hultman E, Saltin B. Diet, muscle glycogen and physical performance. Acta Physiol Scand 71:140-150, 1967), although as I indicated it has been known since around 1900 that endurance performance is enhanced by consumption of a high carbohydrate diet.

Table 2. Pre-exercise muscle glycogen concentration and time to fatigue during prolonged exercise in men consuming different diets. Modified from Table II of Reference 14.

Diet Muscle glycogen (g/100 g) Time to fatigue (min)
High protein/fat 0.63±0.10 56.9±1.7
Normal mixed 1.75±0.15 113.6±5.3
High carbohydrate 3.31±0.30 166.5±17.8

As I think about these numbers a bit I am becoming a little confused. Perhaps you could clarify exactly what was gathered in that table. Here is the problem. In my experience, once I had a reasonable running base, I cannot once think of a single instance where my "time to fatigue" was anywhere near 57 minutes — even in training (when one would expect carbohydrate stores to be a little low) regardless of the diet I was on. My typical "long training run" on the weekend lasted 2.5 hours without any "fatigue" and without being on a high carb diet or any taper. And, back then the only thing we took in during a run was water.

So, while I don't doubt that was the data they collected I can only say, based upon my own experience (and the experience of almost every distance runner I know), that those numbers make no sense applied to experienced endurance athletes. Could you clarify the specifics of how they were gathered?

 

[CoachFergie]

Time to fatigue would depend on the intensity you would try to maintain.

The study is pretty simple. You would expect those on a high fat/protein diet would have low muscular glycogen stores. Those on a mixed diet would have normal muscular glycogen stores and those on the high carbohydrate diet would have high muscular glycogen stores. This hypothesis was supported by performance on a test to fatigue.

This runs counter to your assertion that muscular glycogen stores have no influence on performance.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Should help me how? Here is what I said that you highlighted when posting this: "Really? As far as I know there are only three possible energy sources." What does that graph say that I missed?

Your misunderstanding about the importance of CHO to performance, and the fact that most races rely heavily on this fuel substrate, a point with which you disagreed with Fergie.

 

[FrankDay]

Your misunderstanding about the importance of CHO to performance, and the fact that most races rely heavily on this fuel substrate, a point with which you disagreed with Fergie.

Even though most races rely heavily on CHO as a fuel substrate does not interfere with my argument. Especially for endurance events where a substantial portion of the fuel substrate is coming from the fat. The higher the fat contribution the less the CHO stores are depleted or the higher the effort can be for the same depletion. I contend that this has a more significant affect on performance in endurance events (especially "ultra" endurance events) than trying to manipulate CHO stores at the beginning of the race.

 

[CoachFergie]

Which shows a lack of appreciation for the demands of cycling and the intensity that most races involve. Most teams follow a strategy of ingesting large amounts of CHO while racing to sustain this intensity beyond the 60gr/hr they previously thought was the limit.

But anyway, think we have demonstrated that a cyclist can make performance improvements from specific training in terms of one or all of the following factors...

-Increased strength (neuromuscular or hypertrophy)
-Increased CHO stores
-Better CHO management in race and training
-Better pacing
-Improved efficiency and economy
-Anaerobic and aerobic adaptations in the muscle (mitochondrial dilution and various enzymes, protein signalling etc, AMPK, mTOR)

While the evidence for improved cycling performance from using more muscle (ie psoa's or hamstrings) remains scant.

 

[Captain Serious]

Ahhhh yes if only we had power meter data could we really answer that question.

I dunno if it's accurate, but this site about the Hour Record stuff has output estimates.
http://www.bikecult.com/bikecultbook/sports_recordsHour.html

Sosenka 430w
Boardman 400
Boardman 445
Rominger 468
Rominger 460
Indurain 477
Obree 400
Boardman 410
Moser 446
Merckx 485

 

[CoachFergie]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21193924

It's surprising considering no one has found any performance gains or even phsyiological gains (questionable as they may be) since Luttrell that these studies finding no benefits keep getting published.

But while they are lets celebrate another nail in the coffin

 

[Captain Serious]

Ha! I forgot about that. ^

I assumed you've posted that on Frank Day's Gimmickcrank spam thread?