Wigans goes there. Cadence!

[Franklin]

What would you suggest he do instead of 32,000m elevation during that 2 weeks. Keeping in mind he will be racing the Tour for 3 weeks. ie how many meters elevation for that 2 week block + largest day of elevation gain?

Metres elevation are as meaningful as "What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?"

Of course I can't say how many metres at what intensity Wiggo needs to ride. I haven't trained a GT winner, nor do I have any idea of his data. That said, I'm not a phyiologist, but 6 queenstages in two weeks is ridiculous. You don't need to be Ferrari to see that's just way too much.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Guys, certaintly I never made a claim that photos of two people either side-by-side is scientific by any means.

It is definitive? Absolutely not. But, it is a better methodology to compare and estimate weight than 99.9% of all of the complete nonsense and "speculation" regarding weight that goes in this thread. Based on photos and comparisons of such, I can guess their weight within 4lbs.

I'm an expert at the carnival weight guessing game.

Don't worry, you're in good company here

 

[thehog]

One of the 'lessons' from 2010, was he struggled at altitude. (based on both his and DB comments after the fact)

Not necessarily the climbing directly, but the lower oxygen levels atop the peaks.

That seemed to be fixed by 2011 when using Teide and sleeping high.

2010 was spent drinking and not training.

Altitude had little to do with it.

 

[Catwhoorg]

2010 was spent drinking and not training.

Altitude had little to do with it.

There is that of course...


Mind you plenty of that happened later in 2012 as well.


At the end of the day If Wiggo told me it was 7:30 in the morning, I'd want to check my watch before believing him.


Nothing he says in an interview is to be taken as gospel, be it weight, power output, training sessions.


He is a classic example of a sportsperson, who when a microphone is thrust into his face can't keep a coherent message.

 

[Netserk]

Metres elevation are as meaningful as "What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?"

Of course I can't say how many metres at what intensity Wiggo needs to ride. I haven't trained a GT winner, nor do I have any idea of his data. That said, I'm not a phyiologist, but 6 queenstages in two weeks is ridiculous. You don't need to be Ferrari to see that's just way too much.

What? 2300m takes what? 2 hours? 3 hours at low intensity? How on earth can that be too much workout?? If he trains 5h a day he can easily climb that much without going in the red. Easily.

 

[Bexon30]

What? 2300m takes what? 2 hours? 3 hours at low intensity? How on earth can that be too much workout?? If he trains 5h a day he can easily climb that much without going in the red. Easily.

Is it not the mountain training day in day out that becomes too much and detrimental to a persons benefit from training? I'm intrigued on a personal level. Does day after day of 1000 to 2000m and above actually hinder training? From amateur to professional.

 

[thehog]

There is that of course...


Mind you plenty of that happened later in 2012 as well.


At the end of the day If Wiggo told me it was 7:30 in the morning, I'd want to check my watch before believing him.


Nothing he says in an interview is to be taken as gospel, be it weight, power output, training sessions.


He is a classic example of a sportsperson, who when a microphone is thrust into his face can't keep a coherent message.

Perhaps a 26 hour training ride with no food?

Perhaps Kerrison could interview people who have lived PoW camps to get tips?

I believe the only thing starved here is the brain. Although Keith Richards once told a story of a 96 hour bender with no food or sleep. He was skinny as well. Might be something in all of this.

 

[Franklin]

What? 2300m takes what? 2 hours? 3 hours at low intensity? How on earth can that be too much workout?? If he trains 5h a day he can easily climb that much without going in the red. Easily.

*SIGH*

It's Live High-train low for a reason. See levine and others. So no, climbing to 2300 metres is not an efficent idea. It's a nice way to loose power

Besides, Wiggins most certainly does not talk about easy training.

So if Sky/Wiggins have found some way to all of a sudden make Live High-Train High work they are revolutionizing current knowledge of humans at altitude. Seems not very likely, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Franklin]

Is it not the mountain training day in day out that becomes too much and detrimental to a persons benefit from training? I'm intrigued on a personal level. Does day after day of 1000 to 2000m and above actually hinder training? From amateur to professional.

Yep, it's well known that training at altitude is inefficient as you will loose muscle strenght. Add in that you recovery is slower at altitude, so even training low has a caveat: you won't be able to get the intensity in your training as you would have if you live at sealevel.

And that last bit is just another WTF about Wiggo's preparation.

 

[Netserk]

So the problem is no longer the workload, nor the amount he climbs, but the altitude?

You do know it's possible to climb 2300m every day at low altitude?

 

[Bexon30]

Yep, it's well known that training at altitude is inefficient as you will loose muscle strenght. Add in that you recovery is slower at altitude, so even training low has a caveat: you won't be able to get the intensity in your training as you would have if you live at sealevel.

And that last bit is just another WTF about Wiggo's preparation.

So the best climbing for the body would be from sea level to 1000m which could be a climb of 15-20km's. Which would be a decent length and ride in preparation for mountain stages, also smaller climbs could be done more in this situation. Where as if you are starting from 800m+ then going up a thousand on top of that it would not be as beneficial?

 

[Franklin]

So the problem is no longer the workload, nor the amount he climbs, but the altitude?

You do know it's possible to climb 2300m every day at low altitude?

Oh I know, but what does Wiggins himself say?

Just about every daily ride we do here ends with a 2,000-metre ascent up the mountain back to our hotel.

Uhuh.

“Going uphill is just part of my life now. And a lot of those climbs are divided into efforts, 12 minutes flat out at threshold as if racing or staying with a break, and five minutes 'easy’ going at the pace you would normally ascend.”

So get this: not only does he do a 12/5 interval, those "easy minutes" are cruise speed for a TdF stage, so not nearly real low effort.

I could go on... that AFAIK 8/2 is seen as more effective, etc. etc. It's just all really not in line with how modern training insights are.

 

[stutue]

Perhaps a 26 hour training ride with no food?

Perhaps Kerrison could interview people who have lived PoW camps to get tips?

I believe the only thing starved here is the brain. Although Keith Richards once told a story of a 96 hour bender with no food or sleep. He was skinny as well. Might be something in all of this.

Keith Richards doped

 

[Catwhoorg]

Keith Richards doped

Though it is up in the air if doing so ever enhanced his "performance."

 

[Netserk]

Oh I know, but what does Wiggins himself say?



Uhuh.



So get this: not only does he do a 12/5 interval, those "easy minutes" are cruise speed for a TdF stage, so not nearly real low effort.

I could go on... that AFAIK 8/2 is seen as more effective, etc. etc. It's just all really not in line with how modern training insights are.

So because he rides up to his hotel, the whole training is high altitude? I call BS.

 

[Von Mises]

I was confused by Sir Wiggo's use of the phrase sleeping in an oxygen tent on Mallorca.

Surely an oxygen tent (oxygen rich) would undo the effects of altitude (though it probably would aid recovery).

I assume he meant a low oxygen tent.

Any insight folks ? Is my understanding wrong ?

Oxygen tent and altitude tent are quite often confused. Even in cyclingnews stories it is quite often called oxygen tent (though what they relly mean is low-oxugen tent).

 

[Franklin]

So because he rides up to his hotel, the whole training is high altitude? I call BS.

Okay, lets see...

1. Approx 2300 metres a day if he doesn't have downtime (article sure doesn't make much downtime likely).
2. Just about every daily ride ends up with a 2000 metre climb. (The riding back to the hotel)
3. Most climbs are intervals at treshold

So if he slowpedals to the hotel he has left 300 metres a day to do his 12/5 intervals. I assume you see the problem here.

If we go with Wiggo's article the ride back to the hotel simply can't be easy and is an integral part of his training. Otherwise the numbers don't add up.

I'm going with the easy explanation: What Wiggo claims is BS. He does not really train like that, he just spun an uber-heroic pitch for his public. His real training most likely is a lot less bizarre.

 

[Netserk]

Okay, lets see...

1. Approx 2300 metres a day if he doesn't have downtime (article sure doesn't make much downtime likely).
2. Just about every daily ride ends up with a 2000 metre climb. (The riding back to the hotel)
3. Most climbs are intervals at treshold

So if he slowpedals to the hotel he has left 300 metres a day to do his 12/5 intervals. I assume you see the problem here.

If we go with Wiggo's article the ride back to the hotel simply can't be easy and is an integral part of his training. Otherwise the numbers don't add up.

I'm going with the easy explanation: What Wiggo claims is BS. He does not really train like that, he just spun an uber-heroic pitch for his public. His real training most likely is a lot less bizarre.

Yes he MUST ride down to sea level...

Which somehow means he is living high AND training high...

 

[Franklin]

See the problem with the mentioned training method?

If Wiggo is right it seems unavoidable that there is quite some (very!) high altitude training at high intensity going on... and that's just not jiving with modern research. Hence I say: Obsolete.

Either Wiggo is full of it, or Sky has revolutionarized human physiology and shows Levine and other scientists that they are wrong

 

[Netserk]

I think you forgot to turn your sarcasm detector on.

 

[oldcrank]

And the fact that he'd be asleep for 8 hours prior to that. So his last meal was at say 7pm the day before.

If he can stay on a bike with no food for nearly 20+ hours then there probably isn't a reason to eat at all.

My learned friend, if the King of Kilburn consumes his
CNP ELITE PEPTIDE or his CNP PRO PEPTIDE
(Wiggo prefers the banana flavour) as directed last
thing at night, the time released protein will ensure
the amino acid building blocks required for repairing
muscle will be available over a seven hour period while
he sleeps.

Remember Froomey lost his CNP PRO PEPTIDE to a
clever South African baboon earlier this year. There
was no report as to whether the baboon enjoyed
the banana flavour or would have perhaps preferred
the chocolate mint.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

One of the 'lessons' from 2010, was he struggled at altitude. (based on both his and DB comments after the fact)

Not necessarily the climbing directly, but the lower oxygen levels atop the peaks.

That seemed to be fixed by 2011 when using Teide and sleeping high.

Ugh no way someone rides like he did in 2009 - at altitiude - and then suffers at altitude in 2010. BS, surely?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Metres elevation are as meaningful as "What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?"

Of course I can't say how many metres at what intensity Wiggo needs to ride. I haven't trained a GT winner, nor do I have any idea of his data. That said, I'm not a phyiologist, but 6 queenstages in two weeks is ridiculous. You don't need to be Ferrari to see that's just way too much.

Ok your 6 week blocks are obsolete, IMO. At pro level, overtraining biomarkers and daily recovery measurements (and subsequent training modifications), coupled with power monitoring to track plateaus is where I'd train a rider. If they're still imrpoving, keep going. If they're plateauing, time to change. It's how I am training an amateur on anti-transplant rejection medication. You can respond but I am no longer interested in discussing this as your claims to greatness in terms of training and understanding the latest methods / tech are pushing my BS button. Hard.

If an amateur working full-time can train 1000km a week, a pro can kick that to the curb. Easily.

 

[oldcrank]

Yep, it's well known that training at altitude is inefficient as you will loose muscle strenght. Add in that you recovery is slower at altitude, so even training low has a caveat: you won't be able to get the intensity in your training as you would have if you live at sealevel.

And that last bit is just another WTF about Wiggo's preparation.

While it is certainly not the final word on the subject,
my learned friend, a very small study by Nishimura et
al published in the International Journal of Sports and
Performance (Dec/2010) suggests that resistance
training under hypoxic conditions can increase muscle
strength and induce muscle hypertrophy.

Of course, all nutritional requirements must be met, and
they may be different than nutritional requirements
under normoxic conditions.

EDIT: International Journal of Sports Physiology
and Performance.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Ugh no way someone rides like he did in 2009 - at altitiude - and then suffers at altitude in 2010. BS, surely?

Wasn't the issue in 2010 that Wiggo hadn't done enough altitude work and was simply not acclimatised to riding at the higher altitudes?

Training at altitude to acclimatise to the altitude is a different (and seemingly well accepted) concept to training at altitude to go faster in general (which is not so widely accepted as a concept).

Any mountaineering guide will emphasise the importance of reacclimatising to high altitude each year, even if you've successfully climbed Everest without bottled oxygen in the past. By this logic, Wiggo's acclimatisation to altitude in 2009 would have no impact for 2010.