do you ride by time or miles?

[Fredwina]

Actually , I'm in agreement with Darcy and SK - you can't compare your miles to another persons miles - too many variables , (body, bike, goals) and it's a trap that too many people get into - If i do the xxxK brevet , ill be ahead of Studette on bike journal. The number of hits on my journal there only increase right after I do a brevet. And that's one of the reasons I DNF'ed my last one - I just riding to get back to start, and not having a lot of fun (I usually send an invoice to folk who make me work and not have fun )

[SouthernBelle]

I started out this season with a specific, increasing schedule of days and mileage. I finally realized that I was taking the fun out of it for myself. I ride for 2 reasons, fun and fitness. I'll still hit one or 2 of my goals for the year. I'll still continue to improve.

That all came to mind with the term junk miles. That mileage was turning my rides into junk.

[DarcyInOregon]

I think a cyclist can only determine if their personal miles are junk miles or not. I will never categorize another cyclist, no matter if I am perceiving words or actions, because I lack the knowledge to know all of the variables.

However, I think cyclists who ride in packs and who are familiar with each other, that will result in a more intimate knowledge of each other's fitness levels, life conditions and other factors that contribute to a ride, and then one can secretly think thoughts about the other members of their packs.

For myself, I've never had a junk ride, thus I've never had junk miles. I've only had rides that were too short because of the weather conditions, or I've had rides that were too slow because of the riding conditions.

I can't set times for my riding goals like other cyclists because even though I might repeat a route, the weather and road conditions will alter considerably from day-to-day and week-to-week. Wind and rain are the big factors for me. But other things will happen with respect to road condition, like getting stuck behind a large piece of farm equipment that takes up both lanes and with machine parts poking out the sides into the shoulders of the road, and the size of the machine doesn't leave me any room to pass. Therefore I've found myself pedaling at 4 mph behind farm equipment for a mile or more. Those miles haven't been junk miles either, because I learned I can pedal real sloooooooooow if I have to do so.


Darcy

[Batbike]

I started out this season with a specific, increasing schedule of days and mileage. I finally realized that I was taking the fun out of it for myself. I ride for 2 reasons, fun and fitness. I'll still hit one or 2 of my goals for the year. I'll still continue to improve.

That all came to mind with the term junk miles. That mileage was turning my rides into junk.

I am with you ... having set a mileage goal and speed/cadence goal at beginning of year, only to discover that the numbers were taking the fun away. I literally would have days where I felt I "had to ride" and with that attitude, the rides became **junk mile** rides.

Weird part: I ride by time -- trying to ride XYZ amount of time and hope for XZY amount of miles (toward my goal). No fun ... doesn't help my fitness because my inner soul is not filled ... yep, to me that is junk!

New goals ... time is good; miles will come ... I will improve my self because myself will be physically, mentally, and spiritually improved!

[smilingcat]

Yes... the main reason I quit downhill (besides being too small physically) was that the fun factor had disappeared long before. Most kids would love to go ski. I reached a point where I would do anything to get out of it. First few years of racing camp was okay... Then it got serious.... then it wasn't fun anymore...

I quit then moved over to freestyle skiing. We did it because we were too stupid to realize that crashing result in major pain. It took several major crashes before I realized that the two were somehow inexplicably related.

--------------
Same thing with cycling. Everyone has different goals. Some want to be on the podium and for others, just to be able to ride is a big accomplishement.

Darcy, I really have to applaud your friend for riding the three miles. She is really a tough person. If you had fun then it was a great.

Enjoy the ride for what it is. If the goal you set for yourself is making you unhappy then seriously re think about your goal. Or is your goal really to be riding 200miles a week no matter what or train 20 hours a week?

smilingcat

[IFjane]

New goals ... time is good; miles will come ... I will improve my self because myself will be physically, mentally, and spiritually improved!

Bat - you have summed it up perfectly right here. Riding should be fun. If fitness improves, great. If speed improves, great. But make it fun. I know I feel MUCH better when I can get out on the bike. I hope to get faster, but I don't really care. Hop on the saddle & ride your ride. That's what counts!

[pooks]

I schedule my clients in time. There are no miles indicated in their training programs at all. It's up to them to choose the appropriate route for the type of workout I've prescribed for a given day. The only other metrics I use is watts (for my power-based clients) and elevation gain (for my clients focusing on events like the death ride).

Miles are not a true indicator or your effort. Your total miles will vary by terrain (ie hilly or flat), wind, traffic, road ride vs mtn bike ride, etc.

I've been keeping track of my miles because it was the obvious way to track my riding. Now that I'm on sparkpeople and they measure by time and mph, I'm keeping track both ways.

I know that the best thing would be to get a heart monitor but I haven't managed that yet. But when I look at the sparkpeople numbers I'm confused. I'm counting my time as at 10-11.9 mph. Now that I've got a new bike computer I'll have an even better handle on my mph.

BUT -- I'm on a 38 pound bike and carrying a lot of extra weight on my body. Does that make me burn more calories than if I were a more normal weight on a road bike? Or am I just having a bit of wishful thinking, here?

[Geonz]

It's physics. Push a heavier thing - you need more force; you need to do more "work" as in the physics kind. WOrk takes calories. More work takes more calories.

Of course, it's not a linear relationship and the fitter you are the less difference it makes! I burned extra calories today on my big red bike toting the cooler with the ice and bananas and yogurt and the blender apparatus... and didn't have *too* much smoothie to undo it

I'm afraid I'm just plain addicted... and right now tired enough so that even though the next ILlinois rider is a big fat four miles ahead of me I have *no* intention of taking th3 5 mile route home Let 'em go... my rides are **my** rides. (And when I *am* feeling competitive, I tell that side that welp, none of the folks ahead of me are on 40 pound hybrids most of the time )

[velogirl]

It's interesting to see how the term "junk miles" has been perceived on this thread. Junk miles (in a training/coaching perspective) refers to miles that have no specific training value, meaning they do not create physiological adaptation.

For example, one of my clients commutes to work in SF each morning and again in the evening. Her commute is very short (3 miles each way) and is interspersed with stop lights. She doesn't get a sustained effort and her HR stays low. There is no true training adaptation that will take place during these 3 miles, so those are referred to as junk miles.

Another example is a traditional training route from SF into Marin county. In order to get out to the main loop, you have to ride through a bunch of little towns (again, stop & go like the first example). Even though there is time on the bike, the effort is not sustained and never reaches a high enough intensity to create adaptation, so those would also be considered junk miles.

I don't think there's any judgement intended in the term. It's simply a term that's trickled down from the coaching world to describe time in the saddle that doesn't really have training value.

Here's another example that might be meaningful to some of you. Let's say you workout at the gym twice a week. Your total time commitment to train includes the time to transport yourself to the gym, change clothes, and put your belongings in a locker (let's say that's 30 minutes total). Now, even though all those things are necessary to do your workout, none of them help your body adapt (ie there is no training stress). So, those 30 minutes wouldn't be considered training time (ie they would be junk miles).

[DarcyInOregon]

It's interesting to see how the term "junk miles" has been perceived on this thread. Junk miles (in a training/coaching perspective) refers to miles that have no specific training value, meaning they do not create physiological adaptation.

Except a lot of cyclists who are members of this forum are fitness/fun riders, who do not belong to clubs, and who never intend to race. If a cyclist who races is going to use a specific term that is used by racers, then the term should be clarified. I know for myself, all my time on the bike is good because I get a cardio workout and I burn calories and best yet - I always have fun and enjoy myself. Therefore, no junk miles for me.

Pooks, when you bike on a heavy bike, yes, technically, you will burn more calories if you are able to pedal it like a road bike. Remember, I am one of many who biked on one of those heavy bikes and I still own it. I know for a fact that with the heavy bike I could not get my heart rate up as high because the bike was too heavy to pedal with as much effort as I give the road bike. Therefore, I actually burn more calories on my road bike per hour because I am able to pedal faster and stronger, go up steeper and more hills, and go for longer distances with more time spent on the bike. With respect to your question about the charts on your internet site, I haven't found a single chart that gave me an accurate number. The HRM gives a better estimate, and it still is not exact. Most of the charts will tell me I am burning more than twice the calories per hour than what my HRM says. I will go by the HRM because if the higher number on the charts was the real deal, then by golly, I would be very skinny - and I am not.

For example, the following activity charts says a person of 190 pounds who bicycles at 12-13.9 mph burns 690 calories per hour, at 14-15.9 mph 863 calories per hour, and 16-19 mph 1035 calories per hour. I pedal in the range of 14-19 mph, depending upon all of the variables, and I can tell you on a good day with a brisk wind and a lot of steep hills I might, just might, burn 500 calories an hour. That is how huge the difference is for me and what the charts say.

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist.htm


Darcy

[RoadRaven]

Hey there Darcy...

Unfortunately "junk miles" is one of those terms which can be interpreted as a put-down, like "comfort bike" to describe a "hybrid" or "town/city" bike.

By all the people I have heard use the term "junk miles", and in all the articles and books I have read that refer to "junk miles", I have never known it to be used in a derogatory way.

It's just another way to define the type of ride you have done... aerobic or anaerobic, hill reps or intervals, recovery ride or junk miles, sprint training or enduro miles...

And its not a term I will be ousting from my vocab, because it is just a way to describe the miles I got in today/this week/etc... It is a way that people over the English speaking cyclind world use, and I assume there is some similar term for non-specific miles put in with no training purpose in other countries...

Sorry if I am waffling on, but I just want you/whoever to realise that this term, which will undoubtedly be used again on this forum, is never a critique on anothers riding skills, or enjoyment... it is just a way to define a ride.

[pooks]

For example, the following activity charts says a person of 190 pounds who bicycles at 12-13.9 mph burns 690 calories per hour, at 14-15.9 mph 863 calories per hour, and 16-19 mph 1035 calories per hour. I pedal in the range of 14-19 mph, depending upon all of the variables, and I can tell you on a good day with a brisk wind and a lot of steep hills I might, just might, burn 500 calories an hour. That is how huge the difference is for me and what the charts say.

http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist.htm


Darcy

Thanks for the site. I'll bookmark it.

And thanks for all the info. As always, very helpful to me.

I really just need to ride and not worry about it, because for me at this point, anything I'm doing is beneficial because I've been sedentary for so many years. I would like the satisfaction of plugging more calories burned into the equation, but the downside is that when the new wears off and I'm finding it more difficult to stay within my daily caloric allowance, I'll be much more likely to justify splurges if I've convinced myself I'm making up for it on the bike, which definitely defeats the purpose!

Although I do know how to build in a splurge if I want to. Haven't done it yet, but it's always there if I decide I want it. My favorite candy is Reese's Peanut Butter Cups. One cup is 110 calories AND is made with sugar, not high fructose corn syrup. So when the day comes that I can't exist without a sugar splurge, I know what it will be!

[SadieKate]

Except a lot of cyclists who are members of this forum are fitness/fun riders, who do not belong to clubs, and who never intend to race. If a cyclist who races is going to use a specific term that is used by racers, then the term should be clarified.

Darcy, if you use a word in a conversation that your hearer doesn't understand do you know they haven't understood until they ask? Try google. Loads and loads of articles show up defining junk miles. Like Road Raven, I'm neither going to remove the word from my vocabulary or worry that someone is not familiar with a term. I was raised to run for the dictionary before being offended.

I consider myself a fitness rider but I have many of the same goals as a racer - get faster, fitter, climb stronger, lose weight, etc -- and I suspect you have the same goals. The best way to achieve them is to think about the type of rides you want each week. Or if you have an event, what type of training will get you there. It is important for all of us to understand what junk miles can be in our own particular case so that we don't waste our valuable time and energy on them. If you aren't achieving your goals, you have to go back and look at your plan.

I'll stick by my statement that "I'm for quality miles not junk miles." How you define quality is up to you. I'll define it my way.

Here are some articles which will help.

http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/6/...nk-miles.shtml
http://mysite.verizon.net/jim2wr/id26.html
http://thesportfactory.com/site/trai...nk_Miles.shtml

I'm not a sports nutrition expert, but I know that my weight is kept in better check when I ride intervals, not just meander through the countryside at a steady aerobic pace, but a meandering ride at times may be the perfect thing for my goals.

[Batbike]

In training terms, yesterday I rode my "endurance ride" of 3.5 hours, roughly 50 miles; today I ride my "recovery ride", 1 - 2 hours, depending on legs, roughly 15-25 miles.

I will take tomorrow off, ride a couple hours on Thursday -- how and where yet to be determined, and hope to rest and get a massage on Friday! Saturday I ride again, an endurance ride with friends, at the Tour de Madison in Madison, VA!

If I am doing what I like, it is all good! If I am riding for the sake of riding, then I need to reevaluate my goal for the day and decide if I REALLY want to ride. Sometimes it is yes, I need the fresh air and alone time, not a big work-out, just some me time; sometimes it is no, it is just one thing I HAVE to take the time to do. If no and I ride, then I have just hit MY definition of junk miles!