Where do we go from here?

The house felt a little chilly this morning. A quick online check revealed the reported temp at my nearest airport was 37 degrees F. Toto, it's not summer anymore. The road season is all but over. A few fringe events have popped up on the calendar, I fear they will be sparsely attended. Two of them fall on the same weekend as the Gloucester 'cross festival, which has about 450 confirmed entries for each day already. Talk about insane. Not to argue with success, but a 125 rider start funnelling into a three-foot wide track through a beach volleyball pit is not for me. Only in America (Seriously, check out the results from the European races. They put 50 riders, tops, on the course at once). Cross took years to be recognized as a legitimate sport in this country, but this kind of craziness pushes it back into the spectacle days. My opinion on this is apparently not widely shared. I'll just have to stick to the more grassroots events, and hope there is more grass than roots... At Gloucester, if I race I think I'll finally cave and concede to entering the "B" masters field. This is a hard pill to swallow, but the guys I was mixing it up with near at the back of the A field last year have been doing the B's this year, and so far they haven't been winning.

Back to training and pedaling. Smooth power is the key. Cross and MTB riding don't exactly promote high cadence. That is ok, because high cadence is not the answer to all problems. Gewilli posted some comments from this guy Jonathan Baker. He seems like a smart guy, and he comments on the over-specialization of some rider's training, specifically saying that five hour road rides are a good idea for a cross rider. I think that over-specialization in general can be a problem. Back when I started riding, the Eddy B book had just came out, and it was the defacto training bible for most riders, much as Friel's books are now. Eddy B cautioned against having even minute differences in your position from one bike to the next, etc. People also tend to focus on "right" and "wrong" ideas on training. I strive to be more well-rounded. Having bikes with different setups may not perfect your pedaling muscle memory, but so what? Maybe if you are training all summer to be able to do one specific thing, that stuff is important, but if you just want to be a strong, healthy rider, I suspect that mixing things up helps you be a more well-rounded athlete. There are many coaches who caution against running too. I know it hurts my speed on the bike, but it helps me in other ways, and at my level I don't care. I stop during the summer when I am racing every weekend, and that seems like a good compromise to me.

How to pedal constitutes much the same deal. There is no right or wrong way. Both high cadence and low cadence are useful in certain situations, and a complete rider would want to be able to do either effectively. Standing versus sitting is no different. I know a lot of riders who only stand when they are in trouble. They never work on climbing out of the saddle. When I started riding we used to hear a lot about how standing was bad, because climbing while seated is more efficient. That may be true, and when my fitness is good, I find myself sitting more. But watch the pros on video. With their six hour stages, they have no choice but to stand up and stretch once in a while. This also helps "rotate" the use of muscles, rather then using the same ones for an entire ride. I will often stand on climbs early in a race, even though I am not under pressure, just to "save" my sitdown climbing muscles for later. Cadence comes into play while standing too. Maintaining a high cadence out of the saddle is not easy. Training all systems is a must, high cadence seated, low cadence seated, high cadence standing, low cadence standing. I think I've beat on this before, so I must feel it is important.

The TT Worlds were last weekend. Sure enough, the fastest guys did not wear gloves. Hmmmm. From the pictures I saw, DZ and Cancellara had a lot more going for them than that. Their positions and helmets are just better than everyone elses. The article in Bicycling Magazine about the MIT cycling team and their wind tunnels studies was a fluff piece typical of this rag, and details were pretty sparse. Not to mention, the Pros TT at over 50 kph, and for them aerodynamics is everything. We mortals are not in the same league, but nonetheless, my dismal TT performances this year have me rethinking my equipment choices. This kind of sucks; it would be better if the contests were based on athletics rather than budgets.

Then there is doping. Uggghh. Since I am not a pro cycling insider, I've tried to stay out of this, as I rely on the media for all my information, and that means I am as misinformed as most of you. I do not want to bury my head in the sand, and I have to believe that doping is a huge problem. I also don't want to convict anyone without due process. From what I've seen in the media, the current system of testing is corrupt. The Executive VP at my company likes to say there is no such thing as having a lot of integrity. You either have it or you don't. If even one urine test result is leaked (huh-huh), then the lab has lost its integrity. With all the statements attributed to Dick Pound, I have to believe at this point that he is not a person of integrity. With this situation, the testing system and cycling establishment cannot be trusted to neither convict those who are guilty, nor clear those who are not. This is sad.

So ends another crazy bike racing blogger mofo's ramblings for the day. Thanks for reading.