Rollers and momentum

[OakLeaf]

Good advice here, and I'd especially listen to Indy who knows your terrain.

I don't think there's much momentum effect until you get over 10% on both the climbs and the descents... at least over 25 mph and maybe 30.

Learning your shift points and how to maintain cadence is a prerequisite to maintaining momentum. Focus on the former and the latter will come.

If you're finding yourself spun out at a relatively low speed and cadence, downhills are a great place to practice a nice circular pedal stroke. Back in the day we did downhill intervals for just that purpose. Let gravity propel you, stay in whatever gear you climbed in, and spin with just enough pressure on the pedals that you're not freewheeling, until you start to bounce. Since you don't have to put pressure on the pedals to propel yourself, you can concentrate on using the same amount of pressure all the way around.

But that's an intermediate-to-advanced drill... work first just on learning your shift points and shifting smoothly. On the steep stuff, you may find you want to shift several cogs at once, or you may want to go one gear at a time, pedal a few strokes and on to the next one. You may be lucky and find some of those ideal hills where you can just shift your chainring for climbing/descending, and stay in one of the middle freewheel cogs.

[laura*]

I have tried to pedal downhill, but found that it was just free-wheeling and just odd - however I didn't try to shift into a harder front gear.

So what I am hearing is that I need to practice more, of course, and resist the temptation to coast downhill. I LIKE coasting downhill - it is fun

Pedaling downhill has a secondary usefulness. If you coast too long, your muscles can cool off. Then you'll find it hard to resume pedaling.

There's a long downgrade hereabouts. I once set out to see just how far I could coast. According to Google Earth, I coasted at least 3 miles, maybe 3.5. My legs did not like to restart! Since then I'll pedal to speed up where possible, or at least keep slowly spinning (free-wheeling).

[DarcyInOregon]

The two smartest things Catrin can do to improve her hill climbing skills are: 1)get clipless pedals, 2)use a GPS bike computer and learn the grades. Without clipless pedals, going up steeper grades will just be mashing the pedals. It is equally important to know what the grade is, and over time one learns which gear to be in for which grade at whatever length. There is a big difference between the connotation of "steep" if the grade is 8% or 15%. Heck, newer cyclists may think 4% is steep. However when the climbing skill is to start shifting down as the cadence drops, it is not practical if one is mashing up the hill on flat pedals.

For the person who said don't look at the bike computer, that is true if it is a long climb and the game plan is to stay in the lowest gears and pedal so as to conserve energy because looking at the bike computer won't contribute anything. However for Catrin's types of short hills, it is best to have a good GPS bike computer, to know her cadence, and to learn her grades.

[indysteel]

The two smartest things Catrin can do to improve her hill climbing skills are: 1)get clipless pedals, 2)use a GPS bike computer and learn the grades. Without clipless pedals, going up steeper grades will just be mashing the pedals. It is equally important to know what the grade is, and over time one learns which gear to be in for which grade at whatever length. There is a big difference between the connotation of "steep" if the grade is 8% or 15%. Heck, newer cyclists may think 4% is steep. However when the climbing skill is to start shifting down as the cadence drops, it is not practical if one is mashing up the hill on flat pedals.

For the person who said don't look at the bike computer, that is true if it is a long climb and the game plan is to stay in the lowest gears and pedal so as to conserve energy because looking at the bike computer won't contribute anything. However for Catrin's types of short hills, it is best to have a good GPS bike computer, to know her cadence, and to learn her grades.

I agree that clipless pedals will help--when she's ready for them--but I respectfully disagree as to a GPS. I don't have one and climb just fine. Most of the people I ride with don't have them, and they climb just fine. I'm not honestly sure I understand how knowing the specific grade helps. My eyes, legs and lungs tell me what I need to know.

[OakLeaf]

GPS will tell you nothing useful about grade. It's the nature of satellite triangulation that elevation, and by inference grade, are extremely inaccurate.

If you must have an expensive gadget, a barometric altimeter is the ticket, but a $20 bubble inclinometer is the most accurate indication of real-time grade you can buy.

But she doesn't need to know what grade it is when her cadence drops below her ideal. Cadence meter will tell her that...

[DarcyInOregon]

I agree that clipless pedals will help--when she's ready for them--but I respectfully disagree as to a GPS. I don't have one and climb just fine. Most of the people I ride with don't have them, and they climb just fine. I'm not honestly sure I understand how knowing the specific grade helps. My eyes, legs and lungs tell me what I need to know.

Just because you don't use a GPS and know the grades doesn't mean it isn't useful for another cyclist. Even on the Tour de France, the team managers are communicating to the cyclists the exact grades of each climb that is upcoming. If this wasn't important information, why would they communicate it to the racers? It is important to know so the cyclists know which gear to be in. Go on an event ride in my region and the majority of the century cyclists have a GPS computer on their bike. At the SAG stops the discussions are about the exact percentage of the upcoming grades and the length.

[DarcyInOregon]

GPS will tell you nothing useful about grade. It's the nature of satellite triangulation that elevation, and by inference grade, are extremely inaccurate.

If you must have an expensive gadget, a barometric altimeter is the ticket, but a $20 bubble inclinometer is the most accurate indication of real-time grade you can buy.

But she doesn't need to know what grade it is when her cadence drops below her ideal. Cadence meter will tell her that...

My computer is accurate. It is not a useless gadget. I improved my climbing skills considerably by learning the grades and focusing on my cadence.

Instructing Catrin on cadence skills for climbing is useless without clipless pedals. Better to give her instructions for how to climb on flat pedals. There must be some sort of technique for those types of pedals other than mash.

[OakLeaf]

http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/0560.html

One thing all fitness GPS have in common is their small size. I'm sure it would be a great workout to carry aircraft or agricultural-grade GPS (plus its power supply) on a bike, but I rarely see horizontal DOP better than 3 meters on mine, and it's usually worse. Multiply that by 1.5 (many sources say multiply by 2 to 3) for vertical DOP, consider the relatively low speed of a bicycle, and you see the problem. Assuming you're climbing a hill at 10 feet per second (around 7 mph) and think about what a 15 foot error in elevation is going to do to your grade readout.

[Crankin]

Darcy, I was the person who said don't look at the computer. Yes, that is exactly my strategy. Conserve energy in a low gear. While I don't need to do that on short climbs (no matter the grade) most of the time, at times weather and the way i feel make me use it as an all around successful strategy for climbing. I guess if you are focused on going faster up a climb, then look at your speed. I do have a cadence function, but I don't need to look at it to know when it's dropped! And while I agree that knowing your cadence is important so you are not mashing, it's not necessary for everyone.
Personally, I do much better if I do not know the grade. In fact, knowing it makes me feel like giving up much more easily. Let me find out later and then I will feel like I accomplished something.
I guess I am not so focused on speed while climbing. I am a natural spinner and have had a lot of questions on how I am able to do this. My answer is always "I don't know. It's just what I do." I never trained to do this, and all I know is that it sort of pisses off some of the guys in my riding group when I spin up a hill, and they are standing, trying to get ahead.

[indysteel]

If it works for you, then great, but I still just don't think it's necessary to know the grade of a hill as you're climbing it. I don't use a cadence meter either. I don't even have a computer on my bike anymore. So far, so good.

Like I said, my eyes, lungs and legs tell me what I need to know when it comes to cadence and gearing. Can't move my pedals? Shift to an easier gear. Can't breathe? Lower my cadence. Feel anxious because I have a wall of pavement in front of me? Relax my upper body and calm my breathing. Heart pounding out of my chest, out of gears and slowing to a crawl? Unclip and walk.

Admittedly, it takes some practice to interpret and react to that sensory input and to learn what strategies work best for you. Catrin will hopefully start to get that practice.

As for professional riders using those tools. Well, they get A LOT more information than your average rider gets or needs. It's apples and oranges in my opinion. We're also talking about epic mountain climbs with them. Southern Indiana hills are mostly under a mile long. How much thought and strategy do you really need? Put it into a gear your legs and lungs can handle and go. Get to the top. Rinse and repeat. Obviously it's a little more complicated than that, but not by much. I, honestly, see no reason to overthink it.

[DarcyInOregon]

http://ohioline.osu.edu/aex-fact/0560.html

One thing all fitness GPS have in common is their small size. I'm sure it would be a great workout to carry aircraft or agricultural-grade GPS (plus its power supply) on a bike, but I rarely see horizontal DOP better than 3 meters on mine, and it's usually worse. Multiply that by 1.5 (many sources say multiply by 2 to 3) for vertical DOP, consider the relatively low speed of a bicycle, and you see the problem. Assuming you're climbing a hill at 10 feet per second (around 7 mph) and think about what a 15 foot error in elevation is going to do to your grade readout.

There is usually agreement among the cyclists as to what the grade is. If there is a variation, the cyclists will say something like 6-7%, and it is sufficient to know how to tackle the hill, knowing that it is 6-7% versus 12% or 16%. But usually everyone gets the same reading and it is known that such and such hill is one mile long and mostly 18% and tapering down to 13% toward the top, and just knowing it is that steep and at what mile the hill is will give the cyclist the ability to plan on how to cycle the hill, or even walk it. When I get to the hills, my GPS tells me the same grade is what the other cylists said it was, so if there is an inaccuracy it is common among all of us. If there is a slight inaccuracy for ALL cyclists, then it isn't critical because the training is on how to climb the different grades, because different grade ranges take a different kind of gear.

I am not a particularly fast cyclist. However I really improved on the hill climbing by focusing on the grades, and learning specific techniques for each grade range relative to the length. My improvement has been tremendous. Even last week I went up a hill with a 11-13% grade, one where I shifted into my granny at the bottom in prior years, and now I go up the hill in my middle cog and my speed when I crest the hill isn't below 9 mph.

[DarcyInOregon]

If it works for you, then great, but I still just don't think it's necessary to know the grade of a hill as you're climbing it. I don't use a cadence meter either. I don't even have a computer on my bike anymore. So far, so good.

.

It works for you. Just saying though, that lots of cyclists use GPS bike computers with heart rate function, average speed function, grade and elevation function, and cadence function, and such bike computers are an effective training tool for them. I went on a group ride a few weeks ago and everyone in the lead pack had a GPS computer whereas the cyclists who took a half hour longer to do the 2 mile climb didn't have such computers. If such bike computers work for so many thousands and thousands of cyclists, perhaps it might work for Catrin too becasue she seems pretty serious about wanting to turn herself into a distance cyclist and is training hard to do so. Just because you don't use a computer doesn't mean that it would not be a good idea for Catrin to use one, particularly as she expressed her intent to travel to different areas to bike. She should probably get clipless pedals and cycling shoes first though, if she is prioritizing expenditures.

[tulip]

I'm sure Catrin can speak for herself, but I just wanted you to know that she does have clipless pedals and shoes, but she found that she's not ready to use them yet. One thing at a time, she's doing great and the hills will come, too.

[Eden]

I went on a group ride a few weeks ago and everyone in the lead pack had a GPS computer whereas the cyclists who took a half hour longer to do the 2 mile climb didn't have such computers.

Correlation does not imply causation.....

One could easily look at this from the other side too ... all the riders who are faster are using GPS computers, whereas the slower cyclists don't feel the need to have them.... The slower cyclists could be more casual riders who don't buy fancy toys, they could have less $$$ to spend and therefore not only do not have GPS, but have much heavier equipment, etc. There could be many reasons you see this relationship that have nothing to do with GPS computers making people faster.

[indysteel]

GPS units are less common in my neck of the woods. I only know of a handful of cyclists who use them. Maybe the hills around here are different enough that we just don't get as caught up in the facts and figures. I know the grade of specific hills--the notorious ones--but that's about it. And just so we're clear, I'm a good climber--at least when I train for it. To me, that's the key. I understand that you put a lot of stock in your GPS unit, but it's also possible that you got better at climbing because you practiced it. Just a thought.

Listen, I like bike bling as much as the next person, but I also fundamentally resist the notion that cyclists necessarily need to arm themselves with the best bikes, the best gear, or the best gadgets to have fun or to ride well. People were riding bikes long before computerized accessories came into the picture after all. I think there's enough room in the sport to make it as high tech or low tech as you want it to be (or your budget allows).

Catrin's a smart woman. I'm sure she can decide for herself after reading this thread.