Cycling Fitness / Training Advice

I've started having some proper refined sugar before a morning turbo session (can of Coke or a handful of sweets) and find I can train much harder. I had never thought about it before but realised I wasn't getting much from a bowl of oats that hasn't digested and I am eating light in the evenings to help with sleep.

What do others tend to eat before training?

If it's an hour or less, even if intense, just strong coffee. Otherwise make a smoothie with bananas and oats, sometimes with maple syrup. Even then, too much sugar intake first thing and I suffer more than running out of energy mid-ride.

If 0.85IF for 100mi is 'comfortable' you need to retest your FTP.

Normally I try to stick to the blood of virgins but with belts tightened I've had to make do with blended rat hearts.

Heard your belt is always tight.

On a related note - think I might need to retest, a recent road race had me at 0.96IF for 2hrs (1hr30 in the break - so not much sprinting/chasing).

Can I work back from that to estimate my FTP?

Toight

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu31VyXlTzo

Whoop whoop. Saw the physio this morning and got the good news that I've had a miraculous escape from my recent heavy crash. Grade 1 ACJ. Back to training proper asap.

Well I suppose it's all subjective, isn't it...? I would describe 'comfortable' as pushing hard but not breathing hard/hanging on for dear life/wishing for death. I've only ever done one 10 mile TT effort and I've not come close to that level of effort in a long time. Confession: I haven't tested FTP in a while, I just use the WKO4 mFTP, so it may be a bit lower than it ought to be.

Last two weeks have been:
63 miles, 4000ft, 0.84 IF;
40 miles, 1500ft, 0.9 (pushing hard on the way back);
75 miles, 4000ft, 0.85 (felt hard because I was still tired from the previous one);
45 miles, 2000ft, 0.91

• a few odd 25-30 miles at 0.9ish (with intervals).
  
  

Based on how I've felt on the longer rides, I don't think my performance would drop much over another 25 miles. I'm hopefully riding a 40 mile chaingang later today, which may give me an idea of whether my IF/FTP is accurate...

Be wary of mFTP, unless you're being careful to feed the model good data, regularly. That is, giving it maximum power data at FRC, FTP/FRC, FTP etc.

I think it may be artificially low because I've been doing a lot of climbing/vo2max and very few TT like efforts. My vo2max is way higher than my 20 min FTP, which I suspect (as you say) is based on not giving it enough info. My mFTP is actually set to drop over the next week or so, possibly because I've just been doing hard, short efforts midweek and then lots of hills with steady group riding between them at the weekend.
mFTP is 3.8w/kg and 20 min (x0.95) is 3.32, whereas 5 min is 4.75w/kg which I'm reasonably happy with.

Confession: I haven't tested FTP in a while

Off you go.

mFTP >>>

Yeah, but it's soooo much easier!

Trainerroad, worth it?

If you can stick to it then I suggest it is. I got bored and couldn't commit to all sessions so preferred zwift but a mate has been following it since November, doing all sessions and has gone from distinctly average (like Me) to a v. strong rider. I just found it too hard to work it around uni, work and family demands but if you can stick to it I suspect it works.

Difficult to say with so little info/context supplied.

But, yes. It's good.

Well I'm looking to structure my training. At the moment I'm going on feeling and then just means I have a few too many rest days

Perfect description thank you, I'll give it a go and see how the progress goes

I don't follow a plan on TR. I tend to pick two or three sessions from whichever plan is most relevant at the time - so currently threshold and VO2 max intervals.

Even without sticking rigidly to a plan it has made me a much stronger/fitter cyclist.

So yes - I'd recommend it.

The biggest benefit I found was training to virtual power numbers. Suddenly I realised that I'd been working too hard during the easier bits and too easy during the harder (if that makes sense?).

If you've been training on rpe and hr alone, that will make a big difference I would expect.

I tried for the first time this year to actually do the training plans. SS Base and Sustained Power build. Pretty much completed both to the session. My take - the latter stages of the build, even on medium volume was pretty tough going as 3/5 sessions a week were 90+ minutes and for me that was just too much time on a static bike. I'm sure it does the business but I wish I'd done the majority of those sessions outside instead, as it put me really close to burnout. Was supplementing with all the recovery stuff outside, but still, I found it mentally pretty taxing.

Think I'll give just the short power programme a go next winter, low volume, to support sprinting and strength work. My 5s power is still laughably low.

3/5 turbo sessions a week = fuck that.

Think I averaged about 6hrs a week on the turbo from Nov-March. Normally 5 times a week, although sometimes only 3 or 4.
That was using Zwift but 90% of rides were doing training sessions rather than just "riding" along.

I thought the whole "riding along" in zwift thing would be attractive but it does nothing for me in comparison to the training sessions. Something about an upcoming red gate followed by a much needed grey one and floods of XP that really works wonders imo.
Currently getting 3-4 hrs in a week depending on how often i can go outside due to a 6 month old.

I was using TR for longer sessions over winter when the weather was shit or I wanted condensed effort but when I started doing shorter intervals/speed work it just became annoying - it's just as easy for me to set a wattage on my Computrainer and go - don't need TR for that. I might resume TR next winter and if I get a better second PC I might try Zwift again.

It also depends on how much time you have to ride 'properly'.

Like the RAAM guys that do their whole winters on turbos... eeeew.