Asphalt Junkies Spring 2013 - Closed (Page 48)

Jo,  Most of the time when people think we are crazy, it's with a sense of reverent awe.  Sort of the way I would say to a 100-mile ultra runner, "you're crazy!" with an expression of admiration.

Say it any way you want Jeff, you ARE crazy.

questions for the Junkies...  Does the gearing of bikes make it faster such as Tiagra, 105 or Ultegra etc?

What bike do you train with? State if it is a road bike or tri bike, whether it is 105, Ultegra or whatever and if it is named.

I train with a Fuji roadbike and it just has Tiagra gears and shifters.  name is Island Time cause it is so slow.

About a month before a tri I start riding my tri bike Cervelo and has 105 everything, name is Tallulah...remember the movie "Cool Running".

In all seriousness, sometimes I do think to myself that I am crazy...

questions for the Junkies...  Does the gearing of bikes make it faster such as Tiagra, 105 or Ultegra etc?

What bike do you train with? State if it is a road bike or tri bike, whether it is 105, Ultegra or whatever and if it is named.

I train with a Fuji roadbike and it just has Tiagra gears and shifters.  name is Island Time cause it is so slow.

About a month before a tri I start riding my tri bike Cervelo and has 105 everything, name is Tallulah...remember the movie "Cool Running".

Karl I have heard the same thing. I know this a little bit off target but I have heard that some of the pros who do Ironman take in very few calories as compared to the AG'ers during the actual race. Where an AG'er might do 250-300 calories an hour some of the pros are doing 100 calories an hour. I find it very interesting that they can do that but I'm sure they've trained themselves to be able to do that. I know this has come up recently and been discussed by the group and I know Jeff and Dirk have weighed in on this as well.

That is certainly intuitive.  But the amount of calories it takes is close to being consistent only with distance.  ie. the Work (in the sense of physics) requires a certain amount of calories (a measure of energy).  Work is only related to weight and distance.

Think of it this way.  If they go 50% faster than a given age grouper, then they would be using 50% more energy PER HOUR, but be doing so for 50% less time.

Now, due to less than 100% metabolic efficiency, there is a certain pace that is the most efficient for a person and changing speed decreases that, but it's fractional.

but it's not just a simple matter of saying "Ironman takes x calories to complete".  The pros are so incredibly efficient that if you and a pro were running at the same pace that pro might be using half the calories you are.  At their race pace they may not be using much more than you.

So a pro DOES use less calories over the course of the race than an age grouper as a generalization.  And that may be what enables them to add only 100 per hour without running out of glycogen before the finish line.

Another reason is that the pace these people are moving is a pace that tends to shut down the body's digestion process....Similar to the effort you might be putting out in a Sprint triathlon.  So taking in 300 calories an hour at that pace might cause them to puke.

Is that overkill?  Sorry to go verbose.

So much to comment on in this post!  First, this type of run is typical of groups runs (and rides) where we set out to do a certain pace and end up doing a much more aggressive pace.  It’s human nature to turn every session into at least a little bit of a competition.  This is one of the negatives of group training, unless you have a VERY disciplined group, especially the leader.  But it can be a positive as well.

Second, running a sub nine pace is significantly faster than the upper 9’s.  So the HR jump doesn’t seem all that alarming, I think it’s simply a function of a much faster pace and the hills.  Also, did your HR climb throughout the run?  I can’t see from your logs how hilly some of your other runs are, but this one was quite a bit longer than you’ve been going and HR drift is also typical as the runs get longer.

In terms of should you run easier – I’d say for optimal training the answer is yes.  I’d really like to see you add that 4^th run, and even a 5^th or 6^th if there’s any way to fit it in.  We don’t run easier just to run easier – we run easier so we can run more and stay healthy (see Jeff’s post on the forces of run speed).  But also consider, we do this sport for fun, so if running with some friends stretches you and is fun, I’d say go for it if as long as it’s within your capabilities and you aren’t getting injured.

As an example of running pace, I listened to a podcast where they interviewed three elite runners.  I understand these are runners only, so I’m not sure exactly how this translates to triathlon and sharing training time, but here’s the Reader’s Digest version.  They were a 1500 meter Olympic runner, a sub 2:10 marathoner, and a US champion master runner.  All three ran a HUGE percentage, like 85-90%, of their miles at ridiculously easy paces.  Like 1:30-2:00 slower than their marathon pace.  As a percentage, that’s like 35-40% slower than they run a marathon.  For a shlep like me, who runs a half in the upper 1:40s, that would mean a typical training pace around 11:20!  I don’t think I’ve ever run at that pace.

I’m just mentioning this as a reminder.  Most of our running can be a lot slower than we run and still be very beneficial – it’s more about the time on your feet.  The current trend is to say "how can you race fast when you don't train fast", but then I see a guy training at 7:00 pace and running 4:50s for an entire marathon and I'd say that argument isn't valid.  But when it's time and you’re ready to run hard, run hard.  Even in very small doses speedy running has a huge impact.

That is certainly intuitive.  But the amount of calories it takes is close to being consistent only with distance.  ie. the Work (in the sense of physics) requires a certain amount of calories (a measure of energy).  Work is only related to weight and distance.

Think of it this way.  If they go 50% faster than a given age grouper, then they would be using 50% more energy PER HOUR, but be doing so for 50% less time.

Now, due to less than 100% metabolic efficiency, there is a certain pace that is the most efficient for a person and changing speed decreases that, but it's fractional.

but it's not just a simple matter of saying "Ironman takes x calories to complete".  The pros are so incredibly efficient that if you and a pro were running at the same pace that pro might be using half the calories you are.  At their race pace they may not be using much more than you.

So a pro DOES use less calories over the course of the race than an age grouper as a generalization.  And that may be what enables them to add only 100 per hour without running out of glycogen before the finish line.

Another reason is that the pace these people are moving is a pace that tends to shut down the body's digestion process....Similar to the effort you might be putting out in a Sprint triathlon.  So taking in 300 calories an hour at that pace might cause them to puke.

Is that overkill?  Sorry to go verbose.

In all seriousness, sometimes I do think to myself that I am crazy...

questions for the Junkies...  Does the gearing of bikes make it faster such as Tiagra, 105 or Ultegra etc?

What bike do you train with? State if it is a road bike or tri bike, whether it is 105, Ultegra or whatever and if it is named.

I train with a Fuji roadbike and it just has Tiagra gears and shifters.  name is Island Time cause it is so slow.

About a month before a tri I start riding my tri bike Cervelo and has 105 everything, name is Tallulah...remember the movie "Cool Running".

Down 1.5 lbs this week for a total of 5.5 lbs since Jan 1. I'm getting closer to running the entire 30 mins in the C25K program.