Well, I've learned at least one! That is, sometimes you have to train at 9 at night, else you'll never get anything done.
:05 2 x 6s HCLR:1 (39x23 : 46")
:10 2 x 7s PG+12 (107") SS (R,L):4
:18 4 x 7s BGSS (116") seated L,R,L,R:3
:30 4 x 6s BGRS (116") (20) seated:3
:42 2 x 12s HCLR:2
Which program looks deceptively similar to one just a moon or so ago... excellent! Chance for a direct comparison, no? Well... no. Or at least, not really. Last night I was training out on the verandah in a thunderstorm. Actually, the thunder had gone by then and it was just rain, but that's not quite so impressive. So humidity was high, and though nothing was wet, I suspect that affected the results. But for all that...
107" SSes, which I've been doing a bit of, hit a top of 149/76.9km/hr. Wow! Bestest result ever!!#*! Well, for a few minutes, anyway...
Going through the 116" SSes the numbers just kept on climbing, until I hit 142/80.2km/hr. 80.2! That's insane. I'm sure I'm getting stronger, and I've certainly had plenty of rest lately, but it's still suspicious. It's not a spike, because everything last night was high (from minute 10 to minute 39, the lowest result I had was my first one, at 76.5km/hr) but that just points towards lowered resistance due to humidity. So I'd expect that next time my numbers will be lower than this. If I hit 80 again, inside, on a 'normal' day, perhaps then I'll get a bit more excited. I'd be more excited about hitting 65 on the velo though!
Anyway, stats are here, for what they're worth!
Showing posts with label BGRS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BGRS. Show all posts
09 November 2011
12 October 2011
Spin Harder
I know that for many aeons I've held that spin is nothing to get excited about. And it's not, really, because it's not Real Life. Still, sometimes one needs something on those sunny spring afternoons of the soul...
Not that today's session was without its own share of controversy. And it started mildly enough - doing the same program as 2 days ago, I recorded just 182 in the second HCLR and 137/70.3 in the 106"SS. At this point I was wishing that I'd gone lift heavy things instead.
But I gritted the teeth and slapped the thighs and gave it everything for the 116"SSes. And recorded just 72.2 for the first one. Well, I thought, ain't nothin' to it but to do it and pulled out a 133/74.4. Excellent! But, thinks I, that's so close to 75, surely I can do better? And too right I did - 74.5, in fact. Hmm. Not quite what I had in mind. Curses! So I huffed and I puffed and I blew my way to 135/75.3km/hr. Woooo! First time above 75km/hr on the trainer, so I reckon that's worthy of being happy about. No, it's not a KKRM, but hey, it's what I got, oright?
This got me thinking though ("Oh no!" goes up the collective groan.) Last time I managed to go faster on the rolling starts, no? So... let's see what we can do! So as not to bore everyone to absolute tears, I managed a catching-my-breath 72, solid 74.8 and 75.1, before one final effort... and that's where the controversy begins!
See, Garmin Connect just shows max speed/cadence in a lap, which is handy. Golden Cheetah, on the other hand, gives the actual second-by-second values from the unit. According to Garmin Connect I hit 136/76.2. Woot! But Golden Cheetah gives a top of 123/71.97... and 135/70.00km/hr. Eh? So... well, actually, so what! Maybe we get excited about a photo finish for the gold medal. For a PB on a trainer? Not so much. Any way it adds up - is good.
Then for shits and giggles, 24 seconds of HCLR goodness, hitting a top of 203 (and this one does seem to be accurate!) in the last 12s effort. Noice.
Oh, and after much analysis and reflection I'm of the opinion that the problem with my squat can be traced back to having the bar too low on my back. I've been wondering about it for a bit as the weight gets heavier, and I know that I'm always trying to shove the bar as low as I can manage to, thinking that that's the way to do it. And at lighter weights, that's okay - but as the weight gets heavier, it wants to go further down my back. So I have to lean further forward to keep in balance, and rather than attempt to keep my chest up, I'm allowing my back to round to keep the weight on my back - and occasionally rolling it forward. To a position, in fact, probably closer to where it's meant to be - on the posterior delts. Not underneath them. Which is part of the reason I was hoping to get to the gym today - to test my theory. Watch this space come Friday...
Not that today's session was without its own share of controversy. And it started mildly enough - doing the same program as 2 days ago, I recorded just 182 in the second HCLR and 137/70.3 in the 106"SS. At this point I was wishing that I'd gone lift heavy things instead.
But I gritted the teeth and slapped the thighs and gave it everything for the 116"SSes. And recorded just 72.2 for the first one. Well, I thought, ain't nothin' to it but to do it and pulled out a 133/74.4. Excellent! But, thinks I, that's so close to 75, surely I can do better? And too right I did - 74.5, in fact. Hmm. Not quite what I had in mind. Curses! So I huffed and I puffed and I blew my way to 135/75.3km/hr. Woooo! First time above 75km/hr on the trainer, so I reckon that's worthy of being happy about. No, it's not a KKRM, but hey, it's what I got, oright?
This got me thinking though ("Oh no!" goes up the collective groan.) Last time I managed to go faster on the rolling starts, no? So... let's see what we can do! So as not to bore everyone to absolute tears, I managed a catching-my-breath 72, solid 74.8 and 75.1, before one final effort... and that's where the controversy begins!
See, Garmin Connect just shows max speed/cadence in a lap, which is handy. Golden Cheetah, on the other hand, gives the actual second-by-second values from the unit. According to Garmin Connect I hit 136/76.2. Woot! But Golden Cheetah gives a top of 123/71.97... and 135/70.00km/hr. Eh? So... well, actually, so what! Maybe we get excited about a photo finish for the gold medal. For a PB on a trainer? Not so much. Any way it adds up - is good.
Then for shits and giggles, 24 seconds of HCLR goodness, hitting a top of 203 (and this one does seem to be accurate!) in the last 12s effort. Noice.
Oh, and after much analysis and reflection I'm of the opinion that the problem with my squat can be traced back to having the bar too low on my back. I've been wondering about it for a bit as the weight gets heavier, and I know that I'm always trying to shove the bar as low as I can manage to, thinking that that's the way to do it. And at lighter weights, that's okay - but as the weight gets heavier, it wants to go further down my back. So I have to lean further forward to keep in balance, and rather than attempt to keep my chest up, I'm allowing my back to round to keep the weight on my back - and occasionally rolling it forward. To a position, in fact, probably closer to where it's meant to be - on the posterior delts. Not underneath them. Which is part of the reason I was hoping to get to the gym today - to test my theory. Watch this space come Friday...
10 October 2011
Surprise!
Right when you least expect it, a secret spin session gets snuck in while you're almost looking the other way... the essence of track sprint, really! But I wasn't about to be caught off-guard, oh no!
:05 2 x 6s HCLR:1 (39x23 : 44")
:10 2 x 7s PG+12 (107") SS (R,L):4
:18 4 x 7s BGSS (116") seated L,R,L,R:3
:30 4 x 6s BGRS(20) (116") seated:3
:42 2 x 12s HCLR:2 (44")
Deceptively simple, no? And I do like a good strength workout. But that's not because they're easy - they're just a different kind of hard!
HCLRs: 186. Takes a little while for the neurons to start firing properly, to start spinning rather than stomping really quickly.
107"SSes... a bit ordinary really, 138/71 is a good few percent off my best. Not actually bad, as such, just not particularly good.
116" SSes... well, there's no immediate comparison, but back a few months ago doing these I was getting numbers around 117/61. Today's 4 efforts produced a very consistent 130-132/72.4-73.7 so again, numbers on the trainer clearly improved over the last 6-odd months. I wonder about the interpretation of such results in the current context though - should my BGSSes be faster (and only 6rpm less shpinny) than my PG+14SSes? Am I strong, but not powerful? Or is this exactly what Perko would do, only plus 20% or so? Email time...
Interestingly (perhaps) for once my RSes produced very similar results to my SSes in the same gear, and very marginally higher - a top of 131/74, and still accelerating (if only just) at the end of the 6 seconds - 7 or 8 second efforts would have seen me hit 75, I reckon (at least for the first three. The last one I might have hit 26 and then fallen off the bike, exhausted.)
12s HCLRs to finish off and by then my neurons were properly firing, and weren't so roasted as to have gone on holidays - top of 191, and held for 7 or 8 seconds at that 'suspiciously high cadence' as Golden Cheetah calls it for the duration of the interval.
So there we have it. Brief stats here. Satisfactory, but, well, it's spin, hard to get excited about it at the minute!
:05 2 x 6s HCLR:1 (39x23 : 44")
:10 2 x 7s PG+12 (107") SS (R,L):4
:18 4 x 7s BGSS (116") seated L,R,L,R:3
:30 4 x 6s BGRS(20) (116") seated:3
:42 2 x 12s HCLR:2 (44")
Deceptively simple, no? And I do like a good strength workout. But that's not because they're easy - they're just a different kind of hard!
HCLRs: 186. Takes a little while for the neurons to start firing properly, to start spinning rather than stomping really quickly.
107"SSes... a bit ordinary really, 138/71 is a good few percent off my best. Not actually bad, as such, just not particularly good.
116" SSes... well, there's no immediate comparison, but back a few months ago doing these I was getting numbers around 117/61. Today's 4 efforts produced a very consistent 130-132/72.4-73.7 so again, numbers on the trainer clearly improved over the last 6-odd months. I wonder about the interpretation of such results in the current context though - should my BGSSes be faster (and only 6rpm less shpinny) than my PG+14SSes? Am I strong, but not powerful? Or is this exactly what Perko would do, only plus 20% or so? Email time...
Interestingly (perhaps) for once my RSes produced very similar results to my SSes in the same gear, and very marginally higher - a top of 131/74, and still accelerating (if only just) at the end of the 6 seconds - 7 or 8 second efforts would have seen me hit 75, I reckon (at least for the first three. The last one I might have hit 26 and then fallen off the bike, exhausted.)
12s HCLRs to finish off and by then my neurons were properly firing, and weren't so roasted as to have gone on holidays - top of 191, and held for 7 or 8 seconds at that 'suspiciously high cadence' as Golden Cheetah calls it for the duration of the interval.
So there we have it. Brief stats here. Satisfactory, but, well, it's spin, hard to get excited about it at the minute!
30 May 2011
Spinning Pain
I don't know what it was this week, but I wasn't quite right. My legs felt mostly okay, but I was getting out of breath far more quickly than I should, especially for shorter, more intense exercises. I got through all but the last effort; I started that one twice, but just couldn't keep going, even with a little extra rest.
:00 E1
:05 2 x 6s HCLR:1
:10 2 x 8s PGRS(80, seated):3
:16 2 x 8s PG+4"RS(70, seated):3
:22 2 x 8s PG+8"RS(60, seated)
:28 2 x 7s BGRS(20, seated):3
:34 30s PG-4RS r/up (10:110, 10:135, 10:max)
The HCLRs were fine, though slightly lower than last week - 181 and 180, respectively. PGRS was okay - 151 and 155. Just mediocre. The +4 and +8 sets I did on the same gears as last week's +4 and +6, which are actually +5 and +11. So I didn't increase the difficulty, which is probably part of the idea, but I'm already well beyond where I should be. Good thing? No idea! Results were 147/151 and 137/140, so about 6 RPM lower than last week - and I should note that I did the program before it was slightly amended, so that I started from 80(ish) RPM, not 70 and 60. BGRS felt okay, reaching 112 and 125, respectively. Then the ramp up... I got about 15 seconds through the first time, after considering giving myself an extra couple of minutes to rest, then about 10 seconds through the second time, after another couple of minutes rest. I considered going back in the evening just to do that, but... didn't seem worthwhile.
Brief stats here.
:00 E1
:05 2 x 6s HCLR:1
:10 2 x 8s PGRS(80, seated):3
:16 2 x 8s PG+4"RS(70, seated):3
:22 2 x 8s PG+8"RS(60, seated)
:28 2 x 7s BGRS(20, seated):3
:34 30s PG-4RS r/up (10:110, 10:135, 10:max)
The HCLRs were fine, though slightly lower than last week - 181 and 180, respectively. PGRS was okay - 151 and 155. Just mediocre. The +4 and +8 sets I did on the same gears as last week's +4 and +6, which are actually +5 and +11. So I didn't increase the difficulty, which is probably part of the idea, but I'm already well beyond where I should be. Good thing? No idea! Results were 147/151 and 137/140, so about 6 RPM lower than last week - and I should note that I did the program before it was slightly amended, so that I started from 80(ish) RPM, not 70 and 60. BGRS felt okay, reaching 112 and 125, respectively. Then the ramp up... I got about 15 seconds through the first time, after considering giving myself an extra couple of minutes to rest, then about 10 seconds through the second time, after another couple of minutes rest. I considered going back in the evening just to do that, but... didn't seem worthwhile.
Brief stats here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)