[PatBranch]

Slight Derailment:

In a DH race (the pedally courses that I have been doing around the lower half around CA), I try to have a steady sprint the whole time, but I get tired and have to slow down.
What could I do to fatigue less?

I was riding coldsprings trail the other day. I can ride the trail fine, but in the rocky parts with switchbacks in the lower top area, my arms and upper body were getting tired, so I took a few breaks (partly to let my freind catch up).
What would help to keep going through rough stuff? Pull ups and stuff?

Thanks ahead of time for any help.

 

[BC VAN]

EC

Your post was definitely the main reason I created this thread but there was another thread that had this come up as well so I thought it best to start fresh with this post.

Also, I can not argue with results. You're obviously a legend and what you have done has worked great. However, when you really look at the evidence I stand by my conclusion. Use of excessive aerobic exercise will have a negative impact on muscle mass (while you may not want to gain it you certainly don't want to loose it), on strength and on power. This means that at best we re-train those qualities and then hopefully add some more on top later into the program.

I feel that there is a better way. First, using aerobic exercise as active recovery (60% estimated max heart rate for 20-30 min.). Second, using a low volume of sprint and gate start intervals, simply to maintain form and anaerobic strength. Third, add in some strength training that is targeted to body control, strength-to-weight ratio and strength/ power endurance (anaerobic endurance) specific to MTB riding. Lastly, a good flexibility/ mobility program. This will avoid the step back we all agree aerobic training gives you in strength and power while maintaining our anaeorbic endurance so we can better work on it as well as we progress.

I just feel that there is a better way for us to train as MTB athletes/ riders. Stuff that has worked in the past may not be the best way.

Thanks for your support so far, I hope that I did not offend you with this post. I am simply trying to present another point of view on the subject.

I have to say that I, like you, always look for ways to improve my fitness and performance.
I know you have lots of knowledge about the body and they way to improve it.

You in no way offend me; if your knowledge is superior to mine on the subject I have learned something.

I support you because there are not a lot of coach’s looking for ways to improve this segment of the sport.
but I don't completely support all you stand by for two reasons, first being I have been taught a bit different, second I would like to see the results of this science in action...hopefully Rich will improve on his great year last year with your program , til then it's hard to just say "ok..this must be the way" what I have been taught is slightly different then what your suggesting here, I still believe that using my road bike to develop overall fitness is important for me to stay sharp and focused through the rigors of 5 months of global travel in all sorts of conditions...the season wears on you in ways only a person who has done a full year of world cup/ norba and any other event to keep you wide open for 5 months, just the travel will wear you out, let alone the competition.
I have been doing lots of the stuff as far as lifts and strength training you suggest here for almost 7 years...I’m sure there is stuff that hasn't been brought up that your customers learn specifically
(That is smart business) but I don't think the exercises are new just the science to stand behind it?

Zutroy brings up some good points as well I think (or as far as I have been taught) about fast twitch and slow twitch being genetic. You get what your dealt I don't know about the fat burning anaerobic/aerobic issue...it's never been a problem for me so I have never had to address it. But I have always been told to eat while I train?
I have lots of overlap in the pre season phase, I know you don't believe in the periodization, but I have found that if can overlap my cycling training efforts or blocks at the transition phase instead of very strict blocks (say a road ride of 2 hrs under at but not cruising one day and then the next day do 4x runs and strength work in the gym) that overall I feel much better then if I only do my strength training work (which includes a host of core stabilization exercise and plyo's) and I have tried seasons with both approach’s.

I completely agree with you that doing tons of long road miles (long being 3 to 4 hr rides every other day) is not needed for today’s dh and 4x racers...the sport has evolved past that.
Case in point Rich won National Series last year, and I know what he did...and it wasn't a bunch of road miles.

Although some are getting heated up in here…this is great stuff, I love being exposed to this new stuff…I can tell you I will take notice of Rich’s improvements as the season draws closer, if you can get his big azz outta the gate it’s already a success.

 

[BC VAN]

my next post will come in paper and hard back copy...jeeze, sorry everyone

 

[PatBranch]

hahahaha.... Cool, when?

 

[BC VAN]

hahahaha.... Cool, when?

it might be done tomorrow, but don't hold your breath...or maybe you could, it will be anerobic training.

 

[JeffD]

JeffD: Got Pull? What are your thoughts on what the top bmx pros are doing as far as training? I have an idea what it entails, and some is likely to have been covered here in some shape or form, but there may be other ideas as well. (I guess should have spent more time at South Park when Bittner and Warlock were living there...)

I have no idea who's doing what now and what worked in the late 90s isn't as relevant today as it was back then due to the shift from big gears/long cranks/flats to small crannks/gears/clips. There are also a lot less races now due to both sanctions having points series. Back in 98-99, we'd often go 4+ weekends in a row, so we were just trying to survive and train when we could. Nowadays you could plan out a "season" much better than BITD.

Personally, my regimen was nothing out of the ordinary - heavy lifting, sprints (both bike and on foot), plyos/calisthenics and some road riding for active recovery. Rode XC/DH for fun when time permitted but it was strictly fun - not for trainign effect. Looking back, if I could do it again, I'd have ridden more and cross-trained less. I was a better athlete than most of the guys on the gate but less of a rider.

You strictly 4X nowadays Jody? I went to a buncha DH races this year and don't remember seeing/hearing your name.

 

[banj]

I wasn't referring to muscle mass, just bodyfat. And as a broad generalization, distance runners do carry higher levels of bodyfat, despite burning countless times the amount of energy sprinters do in the course of their training. You can just judge the value of one type of exercise vs. the other for body comp effects by how long you cna perform them before sputtering out - sprinting elicits hormonal responses that keep metabolic rate jacked for hours after exercise, low intensity aerobics don't.

Regardless, not trying to start a pissing contest. Five years from now, science will prove both of us wrong. And yeah, for most casual DHers, ANY training would be of some benefit.

What distance runners have you been hanging around?

 

[doc gravity]

A short time period? Race season usually ends end of Sept/Beg of Oct. Then season doesn't really start until Sea Otter in April for some people, and most early may. That's a minimum of 7 months. That's a pretty damn long time.

That's fair, I may have understated the length of the offseason. Our training schedule is pretty well geared for a transition to interval work by middle of December (anticipating regional pre-season races for the end of March). With that, there's only potentially 2 to 2 1/2 mos. where aerobic work fits in. This excepts its use as an active recovery modality later in training or during the season.
Shifting gears, the article quoted by James in support of pulsatile periodization is very specific, dealing only with a single lift (bench press), in a very strict linear periodization. I would doubt that most people's weight routine approximates this.
The more interesting part of this question (for me), is that much of this discussion seems based on taking regimens for the supplemental portion of one's training, (weights, maybe running intervals) and applying it to the fundamental activity, cycling.
There is no doubt that many of the same principles apply to both the on-bike training as well as supplemental training, but determing the optimal balance of cycling components for the off-season is tough. People have had success with a lot of different training programs. Given the broad range of riders and experience on this board, individual variation makes it tough to isolate what's "best". It still makes for a great discussion. Scott

 

[banj]

Probably running a marathon over a week's period, but ya, certainly not at once that is for sure. It was probably 75/25 split between sprint specific stuff and aerobic base.

A 200m is about as far as a human can go at 100% - even then it's a bit much at around 20 seconds (19.32 if you are a complete freak).

Isn't it actually about 60m? After about 60m sprinters will stop accelerating and start to slow down.

200m definitely is not a 100% effort.

 

[Zutroy]

Isn't it actually about 60m? After about 60m sprinters will stop accelerating and start to slow down.

200m definitely is not a 100% effort.

Actually at the elite level it is. When Johnson set the world record in the 200m in atlanta he ran a 10.12 on the curve 100 and a 9.2 on the straight. If that's not flat out, i don't know that is.

Keep in mind the current 100m world record is 9.77

And that also was the most impressive athletic feat i have ever seem in my life.

 

[banj]

Just because his second 100m split is faster it doesn't mean he's running 100%. As I said for the 100m it takes elite sprinters about 60m to reach there top speed. Not long after they can no longer maintain the effort and they begin to slow down. In the last 40m of a 100m race the runners who finish strong are just slowing down less.

 

[Transcend]

Isn't it actually about 60m? After about 60m sprinters will stop accelerating and start to slow down.

200m definitely is not a 100% effort.

200m is flat out at the top levels, no question. Even at the university level where guys are olympic hopefuls running low 20s and high 19s, it is indeed flat out. It is probably 98%, not 100%. It is a more controlled run than a 60m or 100m where you are basically exploding the entire time. Stride length is important in a 60/100 it is ridiculously important in a 200m.

 

[Zutroy]

Just because his second 100m split is faster it doesn't mean he's running 100%. As I said for the 100m it takes elite sprinters about 60m to reach there top speed. Not long after they can no longer maintain the effort and they begin to slow down. In the last 40m of a 100m race the runners who finish strong are just slowing down less.

The accelration has stopped usually by 60m true, there is some minor slowing like .01-.03 seconds for a 10m split, but they are still at a 100% effort. Most of the slowing is in there ability to transfer the force into the ground, ie stride length get slighty short, turn over remains the same. Interesting enough, the women tend to have a longer acceleration period, but hold the speed ever so slightly longer than the men in the splits.

 

[banj]

200m is flat out at the top levels, no question. Even at the university level where guys are olympic hopefuls running low 20s and high 19s, it is indeed flat out. It is probably 98%, not 100%. It is a more controlled run than a 60m or 100m where you are basically exploding the entire time. Stride length is important in a 60/100 it is ridiculously important in a 200m.

That's all I'm saying. If you ran flat out in a 200 you wouldn't blow up in the last 100. So like you said it's very close to 100% but it's definitely not 100%.

Zutrov: If you look at 10m split times/calculated instantaneous velocities in 100m races of world record races, the deceleration is greater than you're saying. For example Donovan Bailey's 96 olympic win he reached his top speed of 11.8m/s at 60m. By the end of the race he'd slowed to 11.0m/s. That's over a 9% decrease in velocity. Not minor slowing.

I think our definition of 100% effort is different. You can run for 100% effort for much longer than 60m but as soon as you start to dip below your 100% top speed are you really running 100%?

 

[bizutch]

Wow...this is possibly the best thread ever done on Ridemonkey, excluding a pure Spomer photo thread!

OK...so I derived a few things in the 5 pages since I last posted by sort of reading between the lines here.

One thing I got was some of the resistance to the regimen bikejames proposes is "fun factor". What he prescribes, if followed through an entire year, would essentially take the fun out of riding. If followed to the letter, you wouldn't get to climb that beautiful mountain near your house on your road bike on Sunday afternoon and look at the scenery. We don't want to give that up...so we resist the concept emotionally.

I see alot of emotional reasons behind everybody disputing his theories. Trail rides wouldn't be nearly as fun if you thought about how you were setting yourself back in your training regimen.

Reading EC's post about his road riding felt more to me like he was describing recapturing his sanity as the cause for road miles moreso than fitness or long term recovery from "physical" burnout.

Add to that, it's hard to dispute a program that EC prescribes to because he's the top dog. Apparently it works. But, at the same time, one could argue that the reason he's the top dog is, whether he's training the perfect way or the "near" perfect way...he's training harder, longer and being far more dedicated with his overall efforts than anyone else. That alone could be his reason for success, when added to his already present skillset.

Based on EC's description of his training regimen, I'd doubt that 85% or more of the US pros out there put half that time in. Pretty impressive routines. There's not anybody out there in 4x/Dh in the US to put head to head with EC or Lopes and say "This guy is a top dog and trains in a completely different manner than these 2 guys...and he's faster!"

Like EC said, if Big House comes out on top, bikejames gets far more credit for his concepts.

last thing I've got to say because everyone has "eluded" to a theory, but not really broken it down for the casual reader of this thread. I'm gonna wing it...and I mean WING IT. This is as close as I can recount what I read. Someone will probably need to correct me on a few counts, but I think I can get close....???

The whole concept behind aenorobic plus diet being a better path to weight loss than aerobic plus diet has been based off studies I've read about involving subject groups performing the varying difficulties of exercise in a controlled environment, usually 3 subject groups doing various exercises, etc.
Essentially, if you get on a treadmill and gradually build up your pace over a 5,10, 15 minute period to a max aerobic intensity, then ease back down and stop...you do burn quite a few calories. But subject group 2 then hops on and doesn't do a warm up, but goes right into a hard, extended effort to aneorobic failure. Subject 3 jumps on and just cruises at a medium aerobic pace for the duration of the test, typically 30 minutes.

The person who hops on and cruises burns a significant amount of calories, but their metabolism over the long term, 24, 48, 72 hours...gradually drops. So they burn the least amount of total calories.

The group that warms up, runs hard, then cools down has a more significant metabolic spike that lasts longer than the cruisers

The group that hops on, pins it for max effort and duration then burns out and stops has the most significant spike in metabolism and that spike lasts the longest.

Add to that the fact that the max effort subject potentially adds more muscle mass with proper nutrition and they increase their calorie consumption(at rest) further because more muscle burns more calories.

Was I halfway close to accurate??

 

[Jeremy R]

Well, I always give 110% and leave it on the field.
But that's just how I roll.....

 

[Jeremy R]

Trail rides wouldn't be nearly as fun if you thought about how you were setting yourself back in your training regimen.

He is not talking about trail rides being aerobic.
What he is talking about is pretty much the most boring type of riding on the face of the earth. Going out on a road bike for miles and miles on easy terrain and just spinning keeping your heartrate at 60 to 65%.
Trailrides for me are always anaerobic. Even if the climbs are not bad, I waste my legs sprinting the DH sections.
However, I remember Tomac saying once that when he quit racing XC and focused on DH that his trailrides would only be like 1 1/2
hours or so to keep power up.

 

[Zutroy]

That's all I'm saying. If you ran flat out in a 200 you wouldn't blow up in the last 100. So like you said it's very close to 100% but it's definitely not 100%.

Zutrov: If you look at 10m split times/calculated instantaneous velocities in 100m races of world record races, the deceleration is greater than you're saying. For example Donovan Bailey's 96 olympic win he reached his top speed of 11.8m/s at 60m. By the end of the race he'd slowed to 11.0m/s. That's over a 9% decrease in velocity. Not minor slowing.

I think our definition of 100% effort is different. You can run for 100% effort for much longer than 60m but as soon as you start to dip below your 100% top speed are you really running 100%?

I think probably the best way to word it would be your not able to run at 100% of your maximal velocity, to me effort implies something different.

 

[Transcend]

I think probably the best way to word it would be your not able to run at 100% of your maximal velocity, to me effort implies something different.

For track they are pretty much one in the same for measurement purposes though. I can maintain about 98% of what I can do in a 100m, in a 200m. Of course, my 100 is about (was, anyways) about 10.2. My 200m time was about 20.5 to 21 depending on the day. I am still giving 100% effort, but my velocity is slowed in the last straightaway. My advantage was that i could maintain my velocity longer. as I woudl inevitably pass people in the last corner and down the straight and my stride was much slower (my turnover was much higher).

For reference, my 40yard dash time during football combines was 4.28.

 

[bizutch]

....

For reference, my 40yard dash time during football combines was 4.28.

A buddy in my dorm that was a punter for the football team got in deep for being a crappy 11th man tackler. The coach wanted him to drop his 40 yd dash. The day they timed him, he had the trots.

He came back to the dorm and we asked:
"How'd you do?"
"I shat myself, literally"

He said the coach never timed him again after that though....

 

[Cant Climb]

Best training talk here in a long time, i'm glad BikeJames showed up to stir the pot....he has alot of really good points.

- There is definitely a place for wieght training in DH/4X and most people need a coach because they have no clue what to do....most people follow the bodybuilding mantra which is crappola.

- Lots of road riding will make you into a weak man on the DH bike but there is place for some road riding. And for most DH racers some road riding is too much anyway....

- He never implied training wasn't or couldn't be fun. Training is a ton a fun and a great journey to reach your maximum potential. He just has a slightly different take.

- I think the tone of original postings was too aggressive but maybe that was by design.....

 

[Heath Sherratt]

I believe Nico-the greatest of all time in the DH world was very into the periodization workout. I have also done both in terms of training and I agree with metal guy. When I do base and build with plyometris my endurance and power are at it's peak. When I just do plyo or ride intervals I find my endurance lacks and getting through the weekends is a lot harder. Especially because I do Dual, DH, and Super D. If you look at guys like Weir, Kircaldie, Nico...they all use periodization. There are even articles from about four to five years ago from Nico and Peaty about it. H

 

[bizutch]

Arnold (The Terminator) was the greatest of all time in bodybuilding. That doesn't mean what he did is better than the science out there now.

Nico did things on a bike no other rider could duplicate...line choices, handling skills, carrying momentum where no-one else could. Gapping rock piles in mud when others went around. Hard for me to prescribe to his "workouts". His physical skill on the bike was his greatest attribute. I also watched the guy almost beat Lopes in round of 8 at Deer Valley riding his full on DH...not just in 1 lane either...both.

I just don't give much credit to his periodization being the key to his overall dominance. He kept up that dominance from day 1 as a youth. He was a freak of nature in terms of talent. My feeling is that his training regimen merely kept him fit enough to use that skill.

 

[richhouseman]

Whoa! Lots of discussion on this topic eh? Well, I'm giving the MTB Fitness program a shot, because I feel James has a unique way of applying "training" to your racing program.

We'll see how it goes? I can tell you guys that I'll be in better shape this upcoming year.

I should be more competitive on a consistent basis, and that's what I want.

Stay tuned!

Big HOuse

 

[Akula_7]

Right then, I have been contemplating replying to this topic for a bit now, and I think after all the “discussion” so far that maybe my knowledge will be of use to someone.

Now most of this is directed to bikejames, but I think it is all relevant to the discussion.

Firstly James, I agree with the vast majority of your thinking and ideas. And to give you some background. I have been studying Sports Science and Coaching for over a year now, which goes some way I hope to making my points a little bit more valid then your average. On top of that I have just spent a season racing World Cups, so I would like to think that I have some of the specific fitness skills required to be a good DHer.

The first problem I see with your posts is not the validity of your ideas; know one is questioning your knowledge. However I think your idea of what an average or even top level Downhill racer regards as “base” training is slightly warped. OK some riders might think that going for an 80mile road ride or a 3 hour blast at a moderate intensity (60-70% Max HR). But I think most would regard “base” training as something a lot less time intensive with a far higher intensity. I have always and will always continue to include a “base” phase into my pre-season plan, as after taking over a month off after the end of the season (hitting the sauce a bit, eating the odd mars bar etc…), I feel that my body and mind need some period to ease themselves back in to a heavy winter of training. Now my base phase of AEORBIC work will never include epic low intensity road rides, but what it will include is some higher intensity road rides (35-45mins), with some very high and lower intensity phases, almost like interval training but not quite. My base phase though will not just include road stuff I will also work on my cardiovascular fitness in the swimming pool and by playing a lot of different team sports etc…I just like to have fun and get my body sharp before I start my sport specific stuff. I can’t see how this approach to a pre-season aerobic base phase will have anything but a positive effect on my training and season. After all I’m not going to be out there hammering away for 3-4hours burning huge fat reserves, reducing my muscle mass and pushing my body to silly aerobic thresholds. What I will be doing however is getting myself extremely fit and agile for the unbelievably dynamic sport that DH is.

Also from my knowledge of aerobic training, some of the huge benefits it provides have to cross over to any sport. Things like, increased number and size of mitochondria, increased blood vessel network, increased ability for the muscle to hold myoglobin. The arteries and heart become larger and stronger etc… Surely all of these things gained from some aerobic training are of a huge benefit to any DH athlete not only in their race and quail run but also throughout practice.

After all why would one of the worlds top DH coaches (Scott Sharples) have his Aussie junior squad, go on some “short” XC rides?

Secondly, I am assuming you have at some point in your life raced DH. Now I have to assume you have ridden a multitude of tracks and can relate to the fact that they are all quite unique. Your incessant use if the word ANAEROBIC is annoying me. From my knowledge DH is by no means an exclusively anaerobic sport; it is in fact a vicious mixture of both Aerobic and Anaerobic (one of the things that make a race run so damn hard). When I leave the start gate of the Fort William World cup track I don’t see or feel it as a sprint, after all I among my bike for more then 4mins and the track is over 2.5KM long. Yes the sprinting out of corners and down the flatter straight aways is pure anaerobic glycolysis, however beyond that my whole body is working for those 4mins or so, just to keep me upright and alive. Surely it’s the base underlying aerobic ability that has aloud me to keep supplying oxygen to the muscles of my legs, core and upper body when I’m not sprinting but just trying to hold on. On of the key things that make a fit DHer is the quick recovery time between anaerobic sprints. From my knowledge a good aerobic base will make this process faster and more efficient.

Also what do you say when I am racing on a track like Schladming, where there is a maximum of 25-30 pedal strokes. (Christ Sam Hill would have won without a chain, no joke). On a track like this it is the core and limb strength and power that you so rightly focus on in your programmes that make you fast, not a good anaerobic sprint. And in that situation it is the aerobic system that is supplying the oxygen to burn the glycogen in my muscles to keep me hauling ass.

I know you are not saying to anyone on here that the need to cut out aerobic training completely, you are just saying that doing countless base miles at low intensity is useless which it is, but you need to make that more clear to people on here. From your earlier posts it seems like you are 100% against aerobic training. When in actual fact I think you are totally aware of the huge benefits of aerobic interval training. You just got to make yourself clearer.

To anyone who read this far well down, what a rant! Mine is going hardback BC Van!!!

 

[Heath Sherratt]

Yeah, what he said.

 

[stoney]

James,
Base aerobic fitness it vital to your overall fitness as well as your anaerobic levels. My background is as an athlete on a multiple (ie 50+ in the last 80 years) national championship winning collegiate crew team. Our coaches and trainers know what it takes to win. Our races were max power, 6min races in which you would go anaerobic 3-3.5 min into the race.
Our pre-season workouts consisted of daily 2x20min aerobic pieces at 80% HR, 2 hours on water holding 75% max HR, strength training, as well as stadium sprints at anaerobic levels. There was some changes where we would add in a 3x20min, or a 2x 30, even the occassional 1x60.
We put in hundreds of hours of base cardio which allowed us in turn to run anaerobic for longer periods at higher levels of power output.
Having power is key to sprinting, but if you do not have the base cardio to sustain that level of power output, you will tire, which will take away from your ability to ride with a clear head.

You need to train in a manner that trains your body to do the following things:
1. Train your body to react on instinct. You need to be able to ride without thinking, because the further you delve into your anaerobic threshold, the less focused you will be.
2. Ability to function for 4+ minutes at your anaerobic threshold. Most people hit their threshold and can not maintain for more than a minute at most. The deeper your base, the longer your body will be able to hold off hitting your anaerobic threshold. This is determined by your base heart rate. The more fit you are, the lower your base heart rate. Your anaerobic threshold is determined by your HR. You can stretch your anaerobic levels by lowering your HR through aerobic levels.
to be cont in 45min. I have to go.

 

[bikejames]

Real quick...I have never advocated dismissing a "base" period altogether. People take everything to an extreme. I am saying that spending 4-6 weeks doing a lot of aerobic training is a step backwards and that the base period should be re-thought for the DH/ 4X rider.

Second, trail rides and rides that are "sort of like intervals" are not what I am talking about. 1-2+ hours with your heart rate at 60-70% of max are.

Lastly, aerobic fitness will not have a great carryover to anaerobic endurance, period. DH/ 4X is anaerobic dominant (I know that nothing is exclusively one evergetic pathway or another). Anaerobic endurance has nothing to do with lowered heart rate or mitchodrial density - it is about clearing out metabolic wastes and replenishing anaerobic fuel sources as efficiently as possible. Only by exposing your body to these conditions can you increase your body's ability to do this. It's called the SAID principle - specific adaptation to imposed demands. Only anaerobic work will strengthen anaerobic metaolic pathways. Aerobics strengthen the aerobic pathway. This is not debatable, it is a fact.

It is a riders ability to recover from anaerobic bursts (sprinting out of the gate or out of a corner, for example) as quickly as possible that holds him back, not the ability to maintain a slow pace for extended periods of time.

 

[Jeremy R]

Real quick...I have never advocated dismissing a "base" period altogether. People take everything to an extreme. I am saying that spending 4-6 weeks doing a lot of aerobic training is a step backwards and that the base period should be re-thought for the DH/ 4X rider.

Second, trail rides and rides that are "sort of like intervals" are not what I am talking about. 1-2+ hours with your heart rate at 60-70% of max are.

Lastly, aerobic fitness will not have a great carryover to anaerobic endurance, period. DH/ 4X is anaerobic dominant (I know that nothing is exclusively one evergetic pathway or another). Anaerobic endurance has nothing to do with lowered heart rate or mitchodrial density - it is about clearing out metabolic wastes and replenishing anaerobic fuel sources as efficiently as possible. Only by exposing your body to these conditions can you increase your body's ability to do this. It's called the SAID principle - specific adaptation to imposed demands. Only anaerobic work will strengthen anaerobic metaolic pathways. Aerobics strengthen the aerobic pathway. This is not debatable, it is a fact.

It is a riders ability to recover from anaerobic bursts (sprinting out of the gate or out of a corner, for example) as quickly as possible that holds him back, not the ability to maintain a slow pace for extended periods of time.

FYI, on your website if you check "add to shopping cart" you just get an error reading.
I want my newsletter too.:biggrin:

 

[Zutroy]

You say you understand that there is no such thing as only one system, but yet you keep explaining things like they are. Once again making wrong scientific statements, twisting things to fit what you want them to and presenting then as widely accepted fact, when they are not.

First there is no such thing as a metabolic “waste” products, no body has used that term in sport science since the 70s.

You say aerobic pathways are unimportant in performance, but the body of evidence out there says the exact opposite. Even in events under 10 seconds. M. Leveritt & A. Ross found that in an all out 10 second sprint 13% of the energy was coming from aerobic metabolism, 27% for a 20-30 second effort, and it only goes up from there. All the metabolic pathways work hand and hand to allow someone to perform at their max potential, to slight one if training is shooting yourself in the foot, why do you think even marathon runners do speed work?

You state “Anaerobic endurance has nothing to do with lowered heart rate or mitochondrial density - it is about clearing out metabolic wastes and replenishing anaerobic fuel sources as efficiently as possible.” Once again a completely false statement, oxidation accounts for 75% of lactate clearance, this takes place in the mitochondria. All that huffing and puffing of air just isn’t for the fun of it.


Also as I think I saw a couple posts ago, I am in no way against periodization it is the only way to train properly. What I am against is the type James is pimping, which is what is widely used, and does not despite his statements all over the place have any evidence showing it is vastly superior of traditional models. The article he gave as his support, is specific to a one rep max bench and leg press improvement (not really something that careers in to sports performance directly) as was stated earlier. Through the own authors admission the study has a lot of issues with the way it was done, and was very limited in scope.

Also I am not against speed work, intervals, strength training,…etc….they all belong in a properly designed program.

Training for 4x and DH does have some specific issues, there is a need to train the skill side of things, and that does cause some challenges on program design, but they can be worked around.

Question of EC and Rich if they read this.

Have you guys ever been tested in a lab for VO2, or max power output? If so you remember the numbers?

 

[JeffD]

Before this thread turns into 100% academic masturbation, I'm curious as to what most of yall's empirical/anecdotal experiences and training history are.

 

[Heath Sherratt]

empirical...anecdotal...visa vi...concordantly...ergo...

 

[Zutroy]

empirical...anecdotal...visa vi...concordantly...ergo...

nice....

 

[JeffD]

Alright, alright...

Who here has trained themselves or somebody else in in a regimented manner and seen some results that back up the points being made here? And if so, give some details like EC, not just stdy references.

Yes, I did sneak "regimented" into the post. Bite me

 

[SuspectDevice]

I've been trying to stay out of this, because I really like what james has to say... Except DH is an aerobic dominant sport dammit!

I did my batchelor's thesis on energy system utilisation in cycling, and have performed expired gas telemetry (albeit with a shoddy metabolic system) with DH racers on DH runs. I also have metabolic lab testing data from proffesional road, and 'cross racers that compares favorably with the few DH riders I have done testing with in terms of aerobic and anaerobic power.
My data, and data that can be gathered through common sense, or extrapolated by common rules of thumb show a much more even split between aerobic and anaerobic glycolisis %45-%45 with approximately the last %10 coming through the CP system. That estimate likely overestimates the anaerobic contribution to DH, and more likely closely resembles 4x or BMX. 40-40-20 is considered the standard for the 3rd man in the olympic sprint (the position Lopes was testing for back in '02). A more conservative estimate would put DH (especially sea otter or a mud race) at more like 85% aerobic.

We will soon have reliable measures of mechanical power output available for DH and BMX use, but they will not tell the whole story as the "support and control" functions of the upper body and core are larger source of metabolic demand than legs by a long shot. In testing the riders that I work with tend to be only 10-15 seconds slower over a 4 minute DH course without a chain on their bikes! Yes, there is explosive and dynamic movement occuring, but it is more simialr to double poleing a set of skate skis than anything else...

The energy demands of a DH race are much more similar to a pursuit on the track than a BMX race, and I train atheletes accordingly. Total work duration for a Dh race means that if a rider is working maximally they are at or close to VO2max for the duration of the event. Obviously raising aerobic capacity needs to be a cornerstone of the training program. In aerobic sports the primary thing that seperates the elite from the non-elite is the ability to work at very high lactate concentrations. The bulk of those adaptations are engendered through longer duration (2-8 minute) high intensity interval training.

I personally can and do start the season with no consitent, planned lower intensity longer duration endurance training, but I am a special case, as I have been racing endurance bicycle events for 13 years now and rarely significantly detrain. I even have eliminated the classical base period for an elite road and 'cross racer I work with with nothing but positive results.

I do agree that there is merit in James' statements, but his phrasing and rhetoric are perhaps excessively inflamatory. Which might be a good thing, as it is getting people thinking.

Mickey-
USAC Expert coach, CSCS, Bathchelors exercise phys, coach of the winningest pro male DH racer on the East Coast, and the '06 NBL 19+ expert cruiser and 20" champ.

 

[bizutch]

Mickey...I knew that was you.

You're still one of us down South worms no matter how far north you go!!! Anytime you want to come back down to the land of sweet tea, squirrell gravy and rebel flags....we love ya...

 

[bikejames]

I've been trying to stay out of this, because I really like what james has to say... Except DH is an aerobic dominant sport dammit!

I did my batchelor's thesis on energy system utilisation in cycling, and have performed expired gas telemetry (albeit with a shoddy metabolic system) with DH racers on DH runs. I also have metabolic lab testing data from proffesional road, and 'cross racers that compares favorably with the few DH riders I have done testing with in terms of aerobic and anaerobic power.
My data, and data that can be gathered through common sense, or extrapolated by common rules of thumb show a much more even split between aerobic and anaerobic glycolisis %45-%45 with approximately the last %10 coming through the CP system. That estimate likely overestimates the anaerobic contribution to DH, and more likely closely resembles 4x or BMX. 40-40-20 is considered the standard for the 3rd man in the olympic sprint (the position Lopes was testing for back in '02). A more conservative estimate would put DH (especially sea otter or a mud race) at more like 85% aerobic.

We will soon have reliable measures of mechanical power output available for DH and BMX use, but they will not tell the whole story as the "support and control" functions of the upper body and core are larger source of metabolic demand than legs by a long shot. In testing the riders that I work with tend to be only 10-15 seconds slower over a 4 minute DH course without a chain on their bikes! Yes, there is explosive and dynamic movement occuring, but it is more simialr to double poleing a set of skate skis than anything else...

The energy demands of a DH race are much more similar to a pursuit on the track than a BMX race, and I train atheletes accordingly. Total work duration for a Dh race means that if a rider is working maximally they are at or close to VO2max for the duration of the event. Obviously raising aerobic capacity needs to be a cornerstone of the training program. In aerobic sports the primary thing that seperates the elite from the non-elite is the ability to work at very high lactate concentrations. The bulk of those adaptations are engendered through longer duration (2-8 minute) high intensity interval training.

I personally can and do start the season with no consitent, planned lower intensity longer duration endurance training, but I am a special case, as I have been racing endurance bicycle events for 13 years now and rarely significantly detrain. I even have eliminated the classical base period for an elite road and 'cross racer I work with with nothing but positive results.

I do agree that there is merit in James' statements, but his phrasing and rhetoric are perhaps excessively inflamatory. Which might be a good thing, as it is getting people thinking.

Mickey-
USAC Expert coach, CSCS, Bathchelors exercise phys, coach of the winningest pro male DH racer on the East Coast, and the '06 NBL 19+ expert cruiser and 20" champ.

Excellent points...thanks for your insight on the more scientific side of this debate. It is kind of ironic as I was planning on making a post explaining my thoughts a little better and this ties right into it...

I was getting dragged into the classic internet debate - I was defending a position I never took and in the process started to look like some sort of anti- aerobics/ anti- base period fanatic.

I never stated that aerobic training had no place in a riders regimine. Actually, if you check my original post I laid out a plan to use aerobics while minimizing the potential negative effects of too much aerobics training for the strength and power athlete. And I most certainly agree with the need for a base period. My point was very specific...4-6 weeks spent working on easy road miles in an effort to maximally build aerobic endurance was not needed and potentially harmful to the DH rider. That is it, nothing more and nothing less.

And I could be wrong, but your post kind of proved my point...the best way to gain the type of endurance needed by the DH racer is not long, slow rides. It is though more intense activites, in which I include a properly designed strength training program.

By using more progressive periodization schemes we can get away from the exclusive focus on one physical attribute for a 4-6 week block and instead design a base period that will let us maintain our anaerobic and aerobic fitness and let us focus on things like mobility and rehab/ prehab work. As the program progresses you ramp up the intensity and/ or volume of the anaerobic/ aerobic strength endurance and switch to maintaining the mobility and specific strength gained in the base period.

Anyways, sorry for the retoric and fanaticism, I should have known better than to fall for that internet debate tactic. I strongly believe that a balanced approach is always right (what that means will vary for each athlete) but that the vast majority of DH racers will benefit more by not focusing exclusively on aerobic fitness to start the off season.

 

[Mani_UT]

Anyways, sorry for the retoric and fanaticism, I should have known better than to fall for that internet debate tactic.

Haha I like what you wrote.

Beside you an expert on training talking to experts in internet debate. It's not easy but some good info is coming out of it

 

[SuspectDevice]

Right on James, I was agreeing with you. There is a lot of semantics that can be confusing for people who are not 100% versed in sportsci that has mostly led to this maelstrom I would think... I consider any effort lasting more than about 20 seconds as "aerobic", as it facillatates adaptations in the oxygen-dependent metabolic pathways. That is pretty much the standard used in the endurance community, and the NSCA's position as well. Being an orthodox and classically trained kind of guy when it comes to nomenclature that is what I stick to.

 

[bizutch]

...semantics .....maelstrom .....facillatates....orthodox and classically trained.....nomenclature.....

Keep those words up and some random bully will break in your house and yank your underoos up over your noggin....irate2: irate2: