As I have already said and pointed out I never mentioned restricting or dieting.
This I kind of disagree with, for a race yes, VO2Max maybe yes (or balanced diet), if you really need loads of carbs (an excess) for threshold training then maybe working on your Fatmax and decreasing your reliance on sugar/carbs/glycogen would serve most better. I am also fairly certain that Nates comments have been taken out of context about cramming carbs, that should be reserved for racing, unless you want to detrain your metaboblic systems and open yourself up to long term health issues.
I’ve been revisiting Matt Fitzgerald’s Racing Weight & I ran across his recommendation for grams of carb/kg based on training volume per week. Very basically, the suggestion is that the more volume one does, the more carb per day it requires & breaks down like this:
I know this doesn’t really address fueling for a particular workout but the amount of carbohydrate suggested here is a heck of a lot so I’m not sure “overdoing” it is something to be concerned about.
You can increase the amount of fat you burn during a workout while eating carbs. I know someone said on a podcast that you can’t, but I don’t believe he is right.
If that were the case it would be mathematically impossible for me to put out the power out that I do for as long as I do. I simply couldn’t replace carbs fast enough.
I can prove this by doing another gas exchange test (my last one had my FTP at 270) and if carbs prevented me from burning more fat then my cross over point shouldn’t have budged.
We’ve also observed that the best athletes in the world eat lots of carbs.
I’m a firm believer that for endurance athletes a high carb plant focused diet is best for long term performance and long term health.
If I see new evidence I reserve the right to change my opinion; the whole “strong opinions held loosely”.
I also think that fasted rides might be good for high level athletes close to their genetic potential who are riding a very high volume. I think that for general age groupers they need to build a bigger cake before they frost it.
I am not speaking for @Nate_Pearson obviously but for me since I converted to essentially to all carbs all of the time (+4 months ago) I do feel better and have more energy for training. Maybe it is placebo but I am thinking not.
Mainly oats, rice, sweet potatoes, nuts, corn, beans, smoothies with almond milk, fruit, chia seeds, banana, macha. And eggs / pancakes every now and then with my daughter. My main base for meals are carbs though.
Plus I quit drinking over 9 months ago and don’t miss that at all. Funny as I get older I am taking better and better care of myself or being more conscience at least. I always slept well but even better now.
Not trying to get off topic as Mcadie is a fun one for sure.
Well done. This is what it’s all about in my opinion! Over under’s are such a great tool to make you more resilient. You will appreciate your training when you are on the rivet for repeated efforts in the bunch.
What I have found is that it that the over/under;s and not just McAdie test you mentally in the first set. You don’t think you can make it to the end but you just need to persevere.
Now that Nate has chimed in and got everyone excited, I think my original inquiry got taken off the rails:
Open question: what effect does more/less carbs have (if any) on lactate production and clearing?
Somewhat similar to an addition question:
I’m not eschewing the use of carbs, that’s a proven science by this point, I guess what I am trying to establish is why someone would want to ‘carbo load’ extra carbs for an over/under workout – which specifically targets lactate production and clearing abilities – vs regular carb usage for a standard Threshold workout targeting muscular endurance – with both workouts costing the same TSS/IF/kJ*?
McAdie +1 (95-105% O/U): TSS 119; IF 0.89; kJ 1042
Lone Pine (96-99% Thr): TSS 119; IF 0.89; kJ 1084
Math wise, the O/U workout requires LESS carbs than the run-o-the-mill threshold workout.
Trying to figure out 1) why people would think they need more carbs for an O/U workout, and 2) how they think those additional carbs affect their lactate production and clearing abilities.
Less carbs, or less calories? From my mostly uneducated perspective, it would make sense that efforts at higher power levels draw proportionally more fuel from carbs and less from fats than efforts at lower power levels. (In other words, spending 1 minute at 95% and 2 minutes at 105% would use more carbs for fuel than spending 3 minutes at 101.7%.) Do you think the power ranges are too narrow (95-105%, 96-99%) for that to really make a difference, or does the preference for carbs not really kick in until you get closer to VO2max ranges?
I think carb loading prior to O/U is more about stocking up - making sure you’ve the glycogen stores to make it through the workout. At threshold you might be burning more calories but you’re performing at a level were your body can clear the lactate produced by glycolysis - you’re burning a steady mix of fat and carbs from body stores. As you tip over threshold you’re burning progressively more glycogen - producing more lactate and then dipping under to clear it again. Overall you might be doing less work (burning less calories) in O/U but the mix of fuel sources differs.
Last week of SSB I MV, McA +1 is my next workout. Just got through Palisades last week, McA I ballsed up the last interval but felt the length of the interval was far worse than on Pal, where mentally you just have to get passed the 2nd over - this is going to be rough…
RESULT: poor. 1st interval felt great, approached it as a 12min effort focusing on keeping cadence high (previously when failing O/U spiral of death usually got me). 2nd interval until half way was great then it all unravelled on the 3rd O. No energy, felt general fatigue (6 week old + stressful day job will do that) on top of the effort. 3rd interval legs just weren’t there from the start, HR fine, no legs. No excuses, but need to work on fuelling - getting on the bike at 4:30am with just a banana in me didn’t seem to work.
Blood lactate was higher, and beta-HB lower during exercise at 80% of VO2max following the high CHO diet. No differences were found in the other blood metabolites tested. The respiratory exchange ratio after 15 min of exercise at 80% of VO2max was higher on the high CHO diet. No differences in oxygen uptake, heart rate (EXP 2) or ratings of perceived exertion (both experiments) were found between conditions. These results indicate that moderate changes in diet composition during training do not affect the performance of high-intensity exercise in trained individuals when the total energy intake is moderately high**.
FFA was significantly lower, while pyruvate was significantly higher at rest after a high CHO diet than after a low CHO diet (P less than 0.05). These differences continued throughout the incremental exercise, which indicates the incremental contribution of CHO to metabolism after a high CHO diet and vice versa. There was no significant difference in lactate threshold expressed in VO2 among the three conditions. VO2 obtained at OBLA was significantly lower after a high CHO diet than after a low CHO diet (P less than 0.01). It was concluded that the dietary modifications used in this study had no influence on lactate threshold but did affect the point of OBLA. Therefore, dietary conditions should be considered when OBLA is determined using a fixed 4-mM HLa method.
I believe both of these studies answer your questions. More CHO == More BLA but it’s not altering VO2 max.
if so we should have jackets for most trainings on TR