I now have my old Ti bike in Denver for my business trips there…it is old-school 53/39 w/ 12/26.
When I lived out there 20+ years ago, I regularly rode w/ a 12/23 and IIRC, I raced Mt. Evan’s w/ 12-25, maybe a 27.
Rode up Lookout Mtn and up past Bergen Park my last trip out there…WTF was I doing back in the day, and how do I still have two functioning knees???
If I’m doing something endurance paced I usually won’t eat on a ride of up to 3.5hrs, but it all depends on the effort and how I’m feeling. I recently did a 3.5hr ride and all I had was a bottle of water with a bit of maltodextrine in it, I don’t even think I finished it. Sometimes I’ll have a fig bar halfway through. It all depends, and it’s not explicitly for any specific reason other than I eat a lot off the bike and rarely feel depleted on the bike. I try not to be dogmatic either way (personally I think a lot of people glom onto the 90g/hr thing when it’s a fairly low performance effort), I’m not going to go out of my way to just eat if I don’t feel like it on the bike, but I’m not going to not fuel my effort either.
[quote=“hubcyclist, post:71, topic:59703, full:true”] (personally I think a lot of people glom onto the 90g/hr thing when it’s a fairly low performance effort), I’m not going to go out of my way to just eat if I don’t feel like it on the bike, but I’m not going to not fuel my effort either.
[/quote]
I believe this is the correct approach. Being able to handle 90g/hr is what you’re aiming to train your stomach to do during a race - having 90g/hr during easy rides (or group rides), even those of multiple hours, is simply not necessary as long as replenishment happens timely and it doesn’t impact other workouts. If as a cyclist you are riding one time per day there should be no need to slam carbohydrate at race volumes - now if you’re doing a double (or are a triathlete) then this maybe slightly changes things, but not all that much.
It wasn’t that long ago that 300kcal/hr was the gold standard so for it to all of a sudden be 360 or the ride is poorly fueled and you’ll underperform makes absolutely zero sense. Earlier in this thread I was reading @redlude97 posts and thinking it was argument to argue - but his/her posts are more accurate than the rest of the dogmatic stuff on here.
Was it Jacques Anquetil who said, “He who climbs driest climbs fastest”? These guys aren’t ex-pros from the 1950s, by any chance?
A lot of times we just go out and ride. I believe we are talking about performance when we are saying do 100g/ph. If you are just riding and not trying to “perform,” or practice to “perform” eating that much isn’t necessary to get through the ride. If you are looking to hang with a group that is going to push you or if you are racing, I suggest that this advice isn’t “dogmatic.” We’re all looking for marginal gains. Thinking eating enough isn’t a marginal gain seems pretty stubborn.
I think we all had exceptional muscular endurance back in the day! Now a days, people intentionally do low cadence and big gear work. That was everyday ridding when we had 42x21 as the easiest gear. I thought I was in heaven when I finally got a 39x25 and 8 cogs.
haha, no, they’re mostly in their late 40’s, early 50’s. The younger folks in the group 35-40-year-olds have other eating habits. Although there are also some of those who will show up with a small bottle for a 3-hour ride. Granted those are also the ones that show up short-short when I’m wearing long-long 
This says it all right here IMO. When I started riding (circa 20 years ago) there was lots of talk about this kind of ridiculousness. No calories, little water, etc, etc. There was one prominent tri coach who wouldn’t let his athletes consume basically anything to ‘train’ them to not need it. Your friends are stuck in the thinking that was prevalent when they started forming their ‘riding identities’. It’s hard to break from that.
Honestly I can understand the thinking, it’s pretty appealing. Practice not needing anything and then voila, you don’t need anything! It didn’t help that nutrition and sport science weren’t as advanced back then, and also that you’d hear from a lot of older successful athletes (ironman winners, tdf stage winners, etc) who would perform well on a bit of water and not much else. Why not copy them? They’re doing it better than I, so I should try the same thing, right?
I would say under-fuel for sure if peak performance (or even just comfort) is your goal. 
I once had a nutritionist tell me if I was one of her riders consuming less than ~90g/hr during rides she would arrange an intervention.
As to limiting hydration on a 4 hour ride: definitely incorrect. There is no adaptation to dehydration that will benefit your performance. It can be dangerous. You’ll have a lot more fun if you hydrate.
No food on a 4 hour ride? Well…I’m not a proponent, for sure. However, I can’t say data doesn’t support it…I’ll just say we don’t know. It’s hard to round up a decent sized group of cyclists that would do that over an extended period! But from a performance perspective…just on that ride…if everybody in the group were following that protocol I would be very excited. The prospects of me winning any sprint are dim but among that group I’m quite confident I could prevail in any sprint that took place late in the 4th hour.
This is why I only train on a 50 lb bike with a rusty drivetrain and shoes that are a size and a half too small. When Race day finally comes I feel like the King of the World!
A lot of assumption that the entirety of the ride was at intensity. Just because it is so for OP doesn’t necessary means everyone on the ride is at or maintained it throughout. I could be wrong but it’s hard to monitor everyone else’s effort and ride in a straight line at all times. Could it be the guys are just riding mostly easy and wouldn’t need fueling? I go on solo lower tempo/upper endurance rides of three+ hours not needing anything but water. In a pace line, pushing that longer wouldn’t be a stretch. (On longer rides, yes I eat and start early.) Compared to some of the guys I’m riding with, at my hard tempo they not even breaking a sweat so are we really comparing apples to apples?
Backing up a quick second.
What’s your AP/NP for one of these rides?
Thank you for these studies. This is really interesting and I guess I did not do enough research. Tbh I think I just heard that from ISM or someone ‘smart’ on either TTS or Fast Talk.
Or is it blood glucose levels? An overnight fast does not make you glycogen depleted in the morning if you had a mixed meal at dinner.
Btw I was not disagreeing with the first study in my original statement. This is why long rides are important.
I guess as I conclusion from me I would go with this: if aiming for performance (hard group ride), then fuel well. If aiming for burning more fat, then don’t fuel. I still wonder if doing more watts on an endurance ride because of fuel would increase performance more than trying to focus on increased fat oxidation.
Early research by Coyle et al. [1] reported that feeding CHO maintained blood glucose concentration and CHO oxidation rates, and in turn, exercise capacity increased 33% (3.02 versus 4.02 h) significantly in comparison to just water
control.
^Seems really relevant to the original question. I don’t think anyone is arguing that though.
For the ride I had the discussion on, that would be 2h30 at 196 AP, 220 NP with a group of 7. Making it mid to high Z2 for me. In comparison, for last Thursday’s ride (where they would be done after the ride, while I could continue) we did 241 AP, 300 NP for 1h40 minutes with a group of 8. That’s with me sitting around 305 FTP or 3.8 w/kg.
Unfortunately, none of these guys has a power meter on their bike so can’t look at their numbers.
I have discoovered that a lot of people lie about how many calories they take in. I literally caught a former friend lying to me on the regular about how much he ate in training and for diet. Found out later he was mentoring some of his college athletes about how he has sabotaged rivals by doing this. Needless to say, we are no longer friends.
It’s tempting to think that you’ll lose weight by fueling less and letting the body do the energy farming from fat. Unfortunately, I have learned from experience that this just doesn’t work. I consume a LOT of fuel during training. If it is more than an hour, I’m always fueling, no matter then intensity. The only time I’ll do a ride without fuel is if it’s an hour or less and less than .7 IF.
When fueling, I’m taking a minimum of 300 calories per hour. I’m often pushing it up over 400 cal per hour on hard rides. My stomach is a nuclear reaction chamber, so I can easily take in 90g of carbs per hour. (I’m also 6’6" tall… so I’m using a lot more energy.)
This all being said, since I started fueling properly while ON the bike. I have now discovered that I am able to moderate my eating much better when OFF the bike. It used to be impossible for me to turn a salad into a meal. I would get too hungry before the next meal. But because I’m fueling while training much better, I almost always eat a salad for lunch now. And - surprise surprise!! - I’ve lost about ten pounds since making this shift (about 6 months ago). Yet, my FTP is higher than it’s ever been.
So… my opinion: Don’t listen to those chuckleheads. I hate to overuse the term, but “Follow the science.”
I just did 4 hr at 0.66 IF (220w NP) and consumed ~600 cal in bars, and stopped at McDonald’s for a McDouble and fries (~600cal). Oh, and I went through 4x 24oz bottles of hydration mix.
This was a 2900 KJ ride.
There is no way I could have done this ride on plain water and no food. In fact, anyone that would do this strikes me as dumb.
So I’m estimating 650 kcals burned per hour on the 2.5 hour ride for a total of 1625. Factoring in your FTP and NP, you were burning roughly 40% fat and 60% carb, with a total glycogen expenditure of about 1000 kcal. If it were me, I’d fuel with about 3 bottles of carb drink totaling 8-900 kcal, arriving home with virtually no glycogen depletion.
No fueling is totally possible, but I’d arrive home pretty hungry. Probably overeat and veg for a bit, and maybe not want to ride the following day.
Also, fueling reduces the need for a carb-rich recovery drink.
This is the biggest difference ive noticed since going hard on the fueling during rides. Previously, after a long ride id be insanely hungry and tired. These days I fuel a lot during the ride and im pretty much as normal throughout the rest of the day
I try and stay out of what other people eat as a general rule. Cycling nutrition seems to be one of those weirdly contentious topics and I think I’ve become less and less interested in it as a result.
I did, however, have to start politely declining riding with a group- who are otherwise pretty cool- because they spent the first half of every ride ribbing me about “how much I ate” and how they “couldn’t believe I didn’t get fat” (I’m a fairly small female so I can’t help but wonder if this was a part of it.) They would then down possibly the largest pub meals I’ve ever seen along with several beers while complaining about how they couldn’t lose weight, and how I was able to go on a run that afternoon while they were on the couch for the next day or so. (Apparently it’s just because I’m young 
)
I mean, at the end of the day it’s their choice, but I do think people should be a little more careful when it comes to providing health/nutrition advice to others.
