General Discussion Triathlon Talk » slow cyclist -- IM training by time? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
2014-11-14 10:13 AM

User image

Regular
477
100100100100252525
Washington, DC
Subject: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
I'm registered for IM Mont-Tremblant in August 2015 and looking at several training plans, including Fink's competitive plan and the Fitzgerald book (from Triathlete Magazine? can't remember the exact title). I'm a weak cyclist, stronger runner and swimmer.

Every training plan I've looked at has the bike workouts by time and not by distance. This makes perfect sense to me in theory. But since I'm so slow -- best HIM bike has been a 3:09 at Eagleman, which is flat, so I'm expecting something more like 7-7.5 hours at IMMT in the best case scenario -- I'm really worried that the time-based approach will lead to pretty low mileage for me. The longest long ride is one 6-hour ride, and I'm sure the plan is designed for people who would get in 112 miles in 6 hours. I will probably only get in 93-96 miles on a hilly course in 6 hours.

Should I bump up the time a little to get in a few rides over 100? Is it meant to be like marathon training where you never do the full distance in training?


2014-11-14 10:36 AM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Expert
3126
2000100010025
Boise, ID
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

 

I followed the custom plan on BT and ended up doing 4 or 5 rides over 100 miles leading up to the race. Come race day I was extremely comfortable with the bike portion because I was fully accustomed to riding 100+ miles on a weekend, there was no intimidation factor.

Bike training is not like marathon training, the risk of injury is less so there is no danger to riding the full distance multiple times before the race. If the bike is your weak point I would recommend at least 2-3 centuries before the race. Even if it doesn't make you a lot faster it will give you a huge mental edge. 

2014-11-14 10:37 AM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Veteran
1900
1000500100100100100
Southampton, Ontario
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
just over 3hrs for a 90KM HIM ride isnt slow in my opinion. Personally I would be much more worried about the hills at Tremblant and would try to incorporate as much climbing as possible in training.
2014-11-14 12:10 PM
in reply to: meggfishy

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Originally posted by meggfishy I'm registered for IM Mont-Tremblant in August 2015 and looking at several training plans, including Fink's competitive plan and the Fitzgerald book (from Triathlete Magazine? can't remember the exact title). I'm a weak cyclist, stronger runner and swimmer. Every training plan I've looked at has the bike workouts by time and not by distance. This makes perfect sense to me in theory. But since I'm so slow -- best HIM bike has been a 3:09 at Eagleman, which is flat, so I'm expecting something more like 7-7.5 hours at IMMT in the best case scenario -- I'm really worried that the time-based approach will lead to pretty low mileage for me. The longest long ride is one 6-hour ride, and I'm sure the plan is designed for people who would get in 112 miles in 6 hours. I will probably only get in 93-96 miles on a hilly course in 6 hours. Should I bump up the time a little to get in a few rides over 100? Is it meant to be like marathon training where you never do the full distance in training?

You're only looking at the long ride, not the total training. How does the rest of it look? It's good that you have the marathon example. It tends to be harder to past on the run than the bike too.

2014-11-14 12:22 PM
in reply to: Aarondb4

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Originally posted by Aarondb4

 I followed the custom plan on BT and ended up doing 4 or 5 rides over 100 miles leading up to the race. Come race day I was extremely comfortable with the bike portion because I was fully accustomed to riding 100+ miles on a weekend, there was no intimidation factor.

Bike training is not like marathon training, the risk of injury is less so there is no danger to riding the full distance multiple times before the race. If the bike is your weak point I would recommend at least 2-3 centuries before the race. Even if it doesn't make you a lot faster it will give you a huge mental edge. 

What were the times for the rides and for the race? That would help more with her questions.

The risk of injury is notably less from more biking than more running, but it's best to take a look at more of the training before deciding to do so. Getting better is not just avoiding injury, but learning how best to apply stress and recovery from it. The big long rides already take a lot out of people and doing more can adversely affect later workouts more than was expected. This is not actually saying to avoid doing it, but rather to think about a larger portion of the training before doing so as it doesn't come with zero cost.

2014-11-14 12:53 PM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

I agree with Ben that you need to look at the whole picture...not just the long ride.

Furthermore, I don't actually think the main objective of a below average cyclist is to train themselves to ride 112 miles.  SAY WHAT?!?!  Here me out.

If you're a below average cyclist...your #1 goal should be to increase bike fitness.  Forcing yourself to do 7-8 hour long rides in training is not a superior way of accomplishing that.  You can still increase your bike fitness by doing shorter rides with more intensity.  The bonus is that it doesn't take as much time, and allows you more time for recovery.  You know...because you still have got a lot of swimming and running to do in the days before and the days after your long ride...along with whatever commitments you have for work, family, friends, chores, etc.  You're going to feel tired during IM training, and finding an extra hour here or there to nap is like finding gold.

Should you still try to do a race distance/time long ride?  Sure...you do need to dial in your pacing and nutrition...but I don't think it's necessary for you fitness wise.

Best of luck to you.

 

 

 



2014-11-14 1:04 PM
in reply to: #5067544


11

Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
Long steady rides at the weekend... plenty of interval work in the week ( turbo if poss) over gearing with resistance, staying in the aero position.. Some fast spinning at high HR... you'll soon be on fire... remember to build in your training.. move forward.
2014-11-14 3:47 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Master
4117
20002000100
Toronto
Bronze member
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

I was in the same boat. I wanted to make sure I got pretty close to the distance even when considering that the training would be by time. I didn't mind the week day rides being by time only but I wanted to know I could make the distance for longer rides.  For me, I am fine with tri training being by time but it is always using the data I have and comparing against whether or not it seems to match the race i am doing and my ability that results from that time. 

I ended up picking a plan that had a long ride that was 6-7 hours and recommended on that ride to ride the distance. Overall i liked the structure of the plan but it was from an old book that my hubby had used when he trained for his first back in 2007.  I had read Fink and didn't use it basically because of that.  

I guess if you really want to do Fink you can always do a quick assessment when you get back to doing long rides outdoors (after winter) and see how it goes. It wouldn't be the end of the world to add some time so you're comfortable with the distance you actually cover.  I wouldn't bother with the trainer because, well, it's not accurate for distance.  In the end, you should be fine if you do 6 hour rides even if you end up longer on race day. You know the saying, better to get to the start undertrained than injured.  You'll make it.  It's more about the mental battle than anything. 

I actually did the IMMT bike in 6:50 on race day.  And I did do a full-distance training ride and couple that were pretty close. So, i was very happy that i did the longer rides and knew what i needed to do to cover the distance. 



Edited by juniperjen 2014-11-14 3:50 PM
2014-11-14 3:50 PM
in reply to: Jason N

User image

Coach
9167
5000200020001002525
Stairway to Seven
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
Originally posted by Jason N

I agree with Ben that you need to look at the whole picture...not just the long ride.

Furthermore, I don't actually think the main objective of a below average cyclist is to train themselves to ride 112 miles.  SAY WHAT?!?!  Here me out.

If you're a below average cyclist...your #1 goal should be to increase bike fitness.  Forcing yourself to do 7-8 hour long rides in training is not a superior way of accomplishing that.  You can still increase your bike fitness by doing shorter rides with more intensity.  The bonus is that it doesn't take as much time, and allows you more time for recovery.  You know...because you still have got a lot of swimming and running to do in the days before and the days after your long ride...along with whatever commitments you have for work, family, friends, chores, etc.  You're going to feel tired during IM training, and finding an extra hour here or there to nap is like finding gold.

Should you still try to do a race distance/time long ride?  Sure...you do need to dial in your pacing and nutrition...but I don't think it's necessary for you fitness wise.

Best of luck to you.

 

 

 




Totally agree with these ideas...look at all the bike volume, not just the long rides. There's no reason a first timer needs to do a 112 mile bike before their first ironman...it depends on how the whole training approach is done.

last year at IM AZ one of my athletes qualified for Kona. Is longest ride ALL YEAR was less than 90 miles.

Everyone is different. Doing multiple centuries may be good for a mental edge, but if a triathlete can be fully convicted that great fitness can be developed without needing to do 3 or more 7 hour weekend training rides they'll still ahve the mental edge and can create a much more structured training plan to help them finish their IM and feel good.

2014-11-14 4:00 PM
in reply to: AdventureBear

User image

Pro
6011
50001000
Camp Hill, Pennsylvania
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Originally posted by AdventureBear
Originally posted by Jason N

I agree with Ben that you need to look at the whole picture...not just the long ride.

Furthermore, I don't actually think the main objective of a below average cyclist is to train themselves to ride 112 miles.  SAY WHAT?!?!  Here me out.

If you're a below average cyclist...your #1 goal should be to increase bike fitness.  Forcing yourself to do 7-8 hour long rides in training is not a superior way of accomplishing that.  You can still increase your bike fitness by doing shorter rides with more intensity.  The bonus is that it doesn't take as much time, and allows you more time for recovery.  You know...because you still have got a lot of swimming and running to do in the days before and the days after your long ride...along with whatever commitments you have for work, family, friends, chores, etc.  You're going to feel tired during IM training, and finding an extra hour here or there to nap is like finding gold.

Should you still try to do a race distance/time long ride?  Sure...you do need to dial in your pacing and nutrition...but I don't think it's necessary for you fitness wise.

Best of luck to you.

 

 

 

Totally agree with these ideas...look at all the bike volume, not just the long rides. There's no reason a first timer needs to do a 112 mile bike before their first ironman...it depends on how the whole training approach is done. last year at IM AZ one of my athletes qualified for Kona. Is longest ride ALL YEAR was less than 90 miles. Everyone is different. Doing multiple centuries may be good for a mental edge, but if a triathlete can be fully convicted that great fitness can be developed without needing to do 3 or more 7 hour weekend training rides they'll still ahve the mental edge and can create a much more structured training plan to help them finish their IM and feel good.

x3.

Additionally, August is still a long ways off.  That leaves plenty of time to take the next few months to focus on shorter, higher intensity rides focused on raising your Functional Threshold Power (FTP / one hour fitness), then a few months before IMMT, switching your training focus from building FTP to a focus on building the endurance you will need on race day.  This approach will have you arrive at your race riding much faster for longer time periods than if you only think about race-specific endurance when training.

 

2014-11-16 8:12 AM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Regular
477
100100100100252525
Washington, DC
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by meggfishy I'm registered for IM Mont-Tremblant in August 2015 and looking at several training plans, including Fink's competitive plan and the Fitzgerald book (from Triathlete Magazine? can't remember the exact title). I'm a weak cyclist, stronger runner and swimmer. Every training plan I've looked at has the bike workouts by time and not by distance. This makes perfect sense to me in theory. But since I'm so slow -- best HIM bike has been a 3:09 at Eagleman, which is flat, so I'm expecting something more like 7-7.5 hours at IMMT in the best case scenario -- I'm really worried that the time-based approach will lead to pretty low mileage for me. The longest long ride is one 6-hour ride, and I'm sure the plan is designed for people who would get in 112 miles in 6 hours. I will probably only get in 93-96 miles on a hilly course in 6 hours. Should I bump up the time a little to get in a few rides over 100? Is it meant to be like marathon training where you never do the full distance in training?

You're only looking at the long ride, not the total training. How does the rest of it look? It's good that you have the marathon example. It tends to be harder to past on the run than the bike too.




Yeah, I should have been clear -- all of the rides look a little short to me. I use the long ride as an example since that makes the mileage difference more dramatic. The plan does offer a lot of intensity on the bike. I think I worry more about the long ride aspect because one of the things I struggle most with on the bike is just flat out physical discomfort after 4 hours (back, neck, sit bones, bad headaches), and that only seems to ease with practicing those long rides.


2014-11-16 6:13 PM
in reply to: meggfishy

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Ok, good to see you get that part. And also over several posts that you have some sense of relating time and distance. Meaning that while it's 112 miles (most) anywhere, this particular course has your estimates at 7-7.5 hrs to complete. From here though, do remember that IMMT is almost 9 months away. It's not forever, but it's a ways off. Would suggest to follow some of the other advice and look more at bike fitness for now. It's good to have a sense of the what the race will take, but you're still a ways off from the more race specific work. See what you can do with the time you have available to drive up your threshold power. (It's not actually necessary to actually measure power for it goes up, that's another helpful training tool, for clarification on that point). The race shouldn't be anywhere near this effort level, but driving this up does have an effect on how fast one can go over much longer distances. Being a more powerful rider will help to cut down on the amount of time out there plus can help with some other concerns listed. Won't necessarily eliminate them, but can help lessen them. Like the saddle soreness. When i ride harder I don't need to take standing breaks nearly as often for this. On some 2 hr trainer rides I might be up once or twice every 5 minutes at more IM level vs every 20 minutes or so at closer to Olympic level power. While no one rides Oly intensity level for an IM, being a stronger rider raises the absolute level of the power being put out, meaning as I get stronger the IM level will go up and I don't need the breaks so often. Also consider that a good development program will can have some volume to it. Not 6 hour rides necessarily, but may have one putting in a couple hours at a time for several of the rides in a week. The regularity of this can help with power output and just being used to riding the bike more. The act of riding hard more often can also help work some of the support areas more too. Make these hard rides count. They won't fix everything, and not all the way for what they do help, but strongly suggest putting in at least a few months of work focused on this for the ways it does help. Wish I knew how to do all things faster like work the neck area better, but the bike fit is good, so do have to put in some time for that to adapt.

2014-11-17 8:07 AM
in reply to: #5067544


35
25
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
Agree with others. You'll be fine. If you do Finks plan, you'd start sometime in January. That gives you maybe 8-10 weeks before then. That's plenty of time to get your bike fitness up. If spend time on the trainer getting in some shorter high quality workouts.

I've been doing trainerroad lately and am loving it. They have a zillion workouts and with 8 weeks that's plenty of time to work the bike fitness and still keep up other two disciplines.
2014-11-17 8:53 AM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Champion
19812
50005000500020002000500100100100
MA
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Beside all the other advice given, sounds to me like you need to get a good bike fit by someone who knows IM athletes. If you are uncomfortable on your bike after 4 hours, long rides is not best way to overcome that, get a fit so you are comfortable.

Once you have a good bike fit, I for one, believe given solid bike fitness you could ride for 6-8-10-12 hours pretty easily if you keep riding easy, hydrated and taking in calories and can deal with any boredom you have.

First IM I did was LP and I was so fearful of the bike and not only did I want to know I could ride 112 miles I wanted to know I could ride those 112 miles so I went up to ride the course two different weekends. Next year I did IMC and longest ride was about 80 miles. I learned after a few IMs like others have said it is more about overall training that just long rides. Usually IM bike is one of the easiest and most fun long rides of the whole season since it is catered, you are well tapered and you are with like minded folks.

My suggestions would be:

1. Get a solid IM focused bike fit and be sure to have follow up as your fitness improves
2. Work on improving your bike with intervals so your FTP increases
3. If you have any weight to lose (you don't appear you do) do so now as hills are easier with a good power to weight ratio
4. Consider focusing winter on improving bike FTP by something like an intense Jorge plan or Endurance Nation for 3-4 months to get your bike in line with your s/r
5. Pick a 12-15 week plan that may be more bike focused and if you feel the need increase your long rides.

 

2014-11-17 12:42 PM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Champion
7542
5000200050025
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Bronze member
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

3:09 for 56 miles is 17.8 mph.  Nowhere close to "slow" IMO.  

If the plan calls for long rides of 6 hours and that gets you 90-100 miles, you're still in good shape for the race.  Yes, your neck and such will suffer the last hour on the bike.  Remember you want to show up to the race still loving your bike and not ready to toss it in the dumpster.  If you stretch your long rides out to 7+ hours, that is what you risk.  

2014-11-17 2:30 PM
in reply to: 0

User image

Veteran
1900
1000500100100100100
Southampton, Ontario
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?


Edited by DaveL 2014-11-17 2:42 PM


2014-11-18 11:20 AM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Expert
2547
200050025
The Woodlands, TX
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Originally posted by meggfishy
Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by meggfishy I'm registered for IM Mont-Tremblant in August 2015 and looking at several training plans, including Fink's competitive plan and the Fitzgerald book (from Triathlete Magazine? can't remember the exact title). I'm a weak cyclist, stronger runner and swimmer. Every training plan I've looked at has the bike workouts by time and not by distance. This makes perfect sense to me in theory. But since I'm so slow -- best HIM bike has been a 3:09 at Eagleman, which is flat, so I'm expecting something more like 7-7.5 hours at IMMT in the best case scenario -- I'm really worried that the time-based approach will lead to pretty low mileage for me. The longest long ride is one 6-hour ride, and I'm sure the plan is designed for people who would get in 112 miles in 6 hours. I will probably only get in 93-96 miles on a hilly course in 6 hours. Should I bump up the time a little to get in a few rides over 100? Is it meant to be like marathon training where you never do the full distance in training?

You're only looking at the long ride, not the total training. How does the rest of it look? It's good that you have the marathon example. It tends to be harder to past on the run than the bike too.

Yeah, I should have been clear -- all of the rides look a little short to me. I use the long ride as an example since that makes the mileage difference more dramatic. The plan does offer a lot of intensity on the bike. I think I worry more about the long ride aspect because one of the things I struggle most with on the bike is just flat out physical discomfort after 4 hours (back, neck, sit bones, bad headaches), and that only seems to ease with practicing those long rides.

 

Training by time is fine, but one of the problems I see with canned plans is that the training is time and the goal is distance. Make sure you know the goal time as well. What I mean by this is that people reference someone like Andy Potts only running 2 hrs for his longest run. Well for Him that going to be close to a 20 mile run. So if someone uses that guide and gets in 12 miles but they will be running closer to a 5 hour marathon, then they are shorting themselves for race day. If your goal time is 7 hours on the bike, make sure your training time reflects that.

2014-11-18 1:07 PM
in reply to: tjfry

User image

Not a Coach
11473
5000500010001001001001002525
Media, PA
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Originally posted by tjfry

Training by time is fine, but one of the problems I see with canned plans is that the training is time and the goal is distance. Make sure you know the goal time as well. What I mean by this is that people reference someone like Andy Potts only running 2 hrs for his longest run. Well for Him that going to be close to a 20 mile run. So if someone uses that guide and gets in 12 miles but they will be running closer to a 5 hour marathon, then they are shorting themselves for race day. If your goal time is 7 hours on the bike, make sure your training time reflects that.

Sometimes, "shorting" oneself for race day is a better solution than stretching oneself too far during training.  Not saying one shouldn't consider the goal on race day in their training, but they also need to triangulate that with their current capabilities and fitness level.  If the goal itself is really a stretch, then it may be wise not to try to reach out that far too often.

2014-11-20 10:21 AM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Master
2500
2000500
Crab Cake City
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
Originally posted by meggfishy

I'm registered for IM Mont-Tremblant in August 2015 and looking at several training plans, including Fink's competitive plan and the Fitzgerald book (from Triathlete Magazine? can't remember the exact title). I'm a weak cyclist, stronger runner and swimmer.

Every training plan I've looked at has the bike workouts by time and not by distance. This makes perfect sense to me in theory. But since I'm so slow -- best HIM bike has been a 3:09 at Eagleman, which is flat, so I'm expecting something more like 7-7.5 hours at IMMT in the best case scenario -- I'm really worried that the time-based approach will lead to pretty low mileage for me. The longest long ride is one 6-hour ride, and I'm sure the plan is designed for people who would get in 112 miles in 6 hours. I will probably only get in 93-96 miles on a hilly course in 6 hours.

Should I bump up the time a little to get in a few rides over 100? Is it meant to be like marathon training where you never do the full distance in training?


Megg,

You are by no means a "Weak Cyclist", I am a WEAK CYCLIST and I finished IMMT just fine!!

I used Fink's Competitive Plan and loved it for IMMT. I loved how it was all laid out and I knew what to do, each day and for how long and it really made planning my workouts and life a lot easier. I think you have sub 7hr in your bike split at IMMT.

One thing that Fink preaches is time vs. distance and how your body does not recognize distance, it recognizes time and I felt that was true (IMO). He has lots of saddle time incorporated into this program and although he preaches Z2, you can always mix it up with intervals and such. Also, living in DC like you do, I am sure a lot of your bike time is done on the trainer. With that being said, its really hard to accurately guage mileage like if you were outside. I think something that you need to think about is that the Bike is just one portion of the race (longest but only 1/3). Training by time and getting enough time in the saddle will set you up well for a good marathon which is crucial. A BT member who I met at IMMT (LarchmontTri) gave me an article to read prior to race day from Endurance Nation that basically said "The IM run course is littered with people walking and talking about their 6hr bike splits" and low and behold, I came off a horrible 8hr bike but I was running past tons of people who were walking. You are a strong and experienced runner, taking a slower bike to set yourself up for a fantastic marathon is not the worst thing in the world. You have no worries about not making cutoff times, trust me.

As for the long rides, he has several 4, 5 and 6 hr rides incorporated into the program. Getting over 100miles is a purely mental thing. I know lots of people who never ride over 90 miles when training for IM, similar to how some people dont go over 20miles for a long run during marathon training. I wanted to make sure I got the 100 mile rides in just to test out how my body would react, nutrition and hydration tests, etc. I did 3, 100+ rides in training and I felt prepared come race day. There is a great race in the summer up in Carroll County, MD that is called the Firemans 50 and they have a 103mile century ride that I did to prepare for IMMT and its pretty hilly and well supported. You can also do the 50 mile loop 2x and it cost like $25 to register. There are tons of organzied centuries to do with people to prepare for IMMT before race day and if you hit one or two, you will be good. If not, I sitll think you will be just fine.

Like others have said, IMMT is a long way away so you have plenty of time to prepare. I am not sure what your goals are for the race but mine was to just finish and I did that easily. I left a lot of time out on the bike and run courses but I didnt care, to me all I wanted to do was finish. You will be fine no matter what plan you decide to choose but I think Fink's plan is just fine and has worked for many, many athletes
2014-11-20 11:54 AM
in reply to: brigby1

User image

Expert
3126
2000100010025
Boise, ID
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?

Originally posted by brigby1

Originally posted by Aarondb4

 I followed the custom plan on BT and ended up doing 4 or 5 rides over 100 miles leading up to the race. Come race day I was extremely comfortable with the bike portion because I was fully accustomed to riding 100+ miles on a weekend, there was no intimidation factor.

Bike training is not like marathon training, the risk of injury is less so there is no danger to riding the full distance multiple times before the race. If the bike is your weak point I would recommend at least 2-3 centuries before the race. Even if it doesn't make you a lot faster it will give you a huge mental edge. 

What were the times for the rides and for the race? That would help more with her questions.

The risk of injury is notably less from more biking than more running, but it's best to take a look at more of the training before deciding to do so. Getting better is not just avoiding injury, but learning how best to apply stress and recovery from it. The big long rides already take a lot out of people and doing more can adversely affect later workouts more than was expected. This is not actually saying to avoid doing it, but rather to think about a larger portion of the training before doing so as it doesn't come with zero cost.

 

My response was more to help her mentally. Based on her HIM pace I think she will be fine for the IM. But there is a lot of peace of mind on race day to be gained by completing the distance a few times before the race. The mental edge of being relaxed and thinking that the distance is no big deal because you have done it multiple times is much preferred to the "unknown" of never having done the distance. Yes fitness wise it really doesn't make a huge difference, but mentally it helps which leads to much more enjoyment on race day IMO. And let's face it, most of us are racing for enjoyment, none of us are going for trophies or cash here. 

2014-11-20 1:09 PM
in reply to: meggfishy

User image

Member
1748
100050010010025
Exton, PA
Subject: RE: slow cyclist -- IM training by time?
Originally posted by meggfishy

But since I'm so slow -- best HIM bike has been a 3:09 at Eagleman, which is flat,


Eagleman had a steady wind this year (invisible hill), if I remember correctly it was a pretty steady 10mph wind. Even though it was flat not too many people were setting PR's on that coarse this year.


New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » slow cyclist -- IM training by time? Rss Feed  
RELATED POSTS

Average times are slower and it's time to "restore speed" Pages: 1 2

Started by trishie
Views: 3125 Posts: 32

2012-11-14 5:18 AM mattramirez

Good runner, slow cyclist Pages: 1 2

Started by philips
Views: 4026 Posts: 27

2011-06-30 10:24 AM philips

Should my training run times be this slow?

Started by tritosbr
Views: 1610 Posts: 19

2009-07-16 5:20 PM JorgeM

Last Month of IM Training Volume vs Race finish Time

Started by rc63413
Views: 1011 Posts: 6

2008-09-26 8:03 PM JeepFleeb

Slow cyclist with volume question...

Started by swishyskirt
Views: 1216 Posts: 14

2008-04-12 10:00 AM swishyskirt
RELATED ARTICLES
date : June 6, 2006
author : TriForrestTri
comments : 0
In order to maintain the rest of our life, we also have to become skilled at time management. Here are a few suggestions for getting workouts in when you can.