|2 rides a day in zone 2 for base||Gall|
Sep 19, 2002 2:37 AM
if i would ride 30 mins in the AM and then 30 in the PM in zone 2 for base training, will i gain the the same benefits as if i rode 60 mins continuously?
Sep 19, 2002 3:15 AM
|Yes. According to Friel, all of the benefits of aerobic / base training time are cumulative and no problem or drawback to splitting the time up.|
|Wow, I was wondering the same thing...||853|
Sep 19, 2002 6:40 AM
|My job,family and other constraints will only allow me to work out about an hour at a time. In the a.m. for an hour and then again in the afternoon for about an hour and a half. From my understanding I thought base was long (over 2 hours). At least I get the weekend to do that, Saturdays for about 2 hours and Sundays for about 4 hours plus.
I hope this is enough for base training since that's about all the time I'm allowed.
Sep 19, 2002 7:45 AM
|perhaps mr friel is correct about AEROBIC gains (then again, perhaps not), the primary objective of base training is to make your body more efficient at utilizing fat as fuel.
Typically, a person does not begin tapping fat stores until 25-30 minutes of activity. By splitting the workout up, youre providing the body time to replish protein and glycogen, thereby inhibiting 30 minutes of 'fat burn'.
By splitting the workout, youre not conditioning the body for more efficient fat/glyco consumption, and will therefore not extend your 'bonk' zone.
If your goal is simply heart and lung stimulation, maybe; but that's not the goal of base training.
|Not sure about aerobic gains either||scottfree|
Sep 19, 2002 8:36 AM
|Depending on who you listen you, aerobic gains come from SUSTAINED minutes (either 20 or 30 minimum) in the target zone. You'd really have to jack it up quick and come to a skidding halt without any cooldown to get those minutes in within a half hour.|
|good point. nm||Steve_0|
Sep 19, 2002 8:41 AM
|Goal of Base period, etc.||TrekFurthur|
Sep 19, 2002 10:15 AM
|I was under the assumption that the primary objective of the Base period was to ready your body for doing the more intensive work of the Build periods--this would involve pushing more capillaries through your muscle tissue, teaching your heart to pump a higher volume per stroke, etc. In short, most of these gains are aerobic, although one's body does learn to utilize fat more efficiently as a fuel (I guess the idea is that it will burn fat loose in your system before it goes to glycogen and then to stored fat--not too many pros with enough stored fat; guess that's why they eat all the time).
Anywho, the original posters times specified thirty minutes AT zone 2; of course, that's assuming that he warms up properly. No matter how much time he spends in zone 2, he wastes it without a proper warm-up.
|Goal of Base period, etc.||Jon Billheimer|
Sep 19, 2002 11:12 AM
|In the current issue of Performance Cycling Conditioning Brian Adams, a Cat 1 racer, physical therapist, and sports medicine specialist, recommends short 30 min rides in the morning, prior to eating, followed up in the afternoon or evening with one's regularly scheduled workout. The rationale for these short morning rides is that since blood sugar levels are low, fat mobilizing and glycogen mobilizing enzyme production are boosted. Consequetly peripheral aerobic capacity is increased over a period of time due to higher enzyme levels. Some old rat research at Berkelely years ago, although quite different from this protocol, also demonstrated the important role that enzyme production plays in aerobic capacity, quite aside from central aerobic development and/or mitochondrial size and density. So this perhaps is another reason why two-a-days during the base period might be more useful than one might think.|
Sep 19, 2002 11:15 AM
|these are certainly objectives of a base for the inactive; I'm kinda presumptuous here that we all have an aerobic base from our daily activities...So i was assuming he's talking about an endurance-aimed base.
If he is starting from scratch, the 1/2 hour alone may be enough.
agree with the warmup comments.
Sep 19, 2002 9:31 PM
|Higgie....is that you?|
Sep 20, 2002 3:00 AM
|no? i think.|
|Steve O has it right... Aerobic gains yes, and..||Old_school_nik|
Sep 19, 2002 12:33 PM
|health benefits of exercise, yes, especially losing weight, protecting against Heart disease, sleep better, increased capilarization of muscles, mitochondria etc - but.... the all important fuel sytems for exercise would not get a training effect from intermitent exercise - so he is right on when he says energy pathways would not improve as much as with continuous ex.
So for racing or getting to be a much stronger cyclist intermittent not as good as continuous ex.
BTW, The ACSM specifically recognizes "discontinuous exercise" as being benefical - provided that the bouts are in your training zone...