100 miles p/day to break or not to break?

[antman]

Is it good to take a break at the half way point or break at regular intervals?
How long should that break be?

[meic]

That is very much down to the individual. I did a ride today that was 60 miles then a stop to eat, followed by 20 miles then a stop for a cup of tea then another 50 miles back.
The first two legs were easy enough and continuous riding but on the third leg my legs died and I had to take a couple of five minute breaks and cut my pace. Most of the other riders just had the two breaks.

Some people who are not used to it probably could quite cope with getting on the bike and riding 60 miles in one go and I am more used to around 40 miles between breaks.

[eileithyia]

Hmmm the problems on the third leg may have started by not taking a break earlier in the 60 mile leg...

Everyone is different and depends on how well you know what you can cope with..... remembering that differing conditions will affect different rides on different days, personslly I would aim for 3-4 short breaks, even if one of those is only a 10-15 min break in bus shelter just to rest/take on some energy.... if breaks are too long you have to re-motivate to get going again.

[ANTONISH]

I don't like to stop often or for very long. I get "cafe legs" and it always takes a few miles to get going after a long break. It's a personal thing - some legs are refreshed by a break some aren't.

[antman]

Mmm... seems like you have to go with what works for you.

Thanks for your input, keep it coming.

[thirdcrank]

The first thing is solo or in a group?

Solo you can do as you like, but a group has to have a plan and stick to it or all the individual stops lead to chaos.

I'd suggest doing a few longer rides and seeing what suits you, rather than planning around what suits others. I've always suffered from "are we nearly there, yet?" legs. I realised, even as a young teenager, that planned stops became intermediate destinations, with all the aches and pains of being nearly there. Riding alone, I've generally been a keep-riding-all-day type. Even when the destination is home, I try to kid myself there's further to go. Riding with others, I've let somebody else do the planning and not paid much attention to the plans, so that stops come as a bit of a surprise. I've also found that the destination of a group ride, followed by even a short 10 - 15 mile ride home can be a killer so, I've generally found it easier to ignore stopping at the destination and bash on home.

I suspect that in physical terms, most experienced riders could carry on almost round the clock and shortage of sleep ie mental tiredness would mark the time to stop. OTOH, the brain plays a big part. Some riders like to tackle a long ride in planned chunks and I've no doubt that it's good for them to know they have that schedule and are sticking to it. That doesn't suit me. "Café legs" rings a bell. I get café legs, pub legs (even drinking lemonade) bus shelter legs, roadside bench likes, bike shop window legs and any other sort of legs which involve planned breaks. The weird thing is that I really enjoy riding, even struggling (except when I'm nearly there.)

A long-winded way of agreeing with others that it's an individual thing (unless you are riding in a group.)

PS

So long-winded that you had worked it out before I reached my destination.

[meic]

I cope with the psychological effects of a long ride by never considering the overall length (or more likely the amount of hills) of the ride once I have started riding it.
I may have a vague idea of the level of exertion which I can use for the whole ride and after that, I may have an interest in where the next stop is when mealtimes are approaching but normally I keep sane by never thinking past the next revolution of the cranks!

I do think that we are conditioned, Audax UK has informal rules about controls every 40 miles or so and we develop our style to match.

If you have the liberty do stop whenever you feel like, I think that is called touring at which point my stops are much more frequent inorder to pop out the stove and have a brew to feed my tea "habit".

[largeallan]

It depends on why you cycle really....the question might well be relevant in a sporting sense. For touring; one size doesn't fit all, of course, but personally I wouldn't really consider it to be touring to just jump on the bike and bang in the miles with minimal stopping. ....What would be the point? Stopping for a cuppa, for a fag, to take in the scenery, for a breather...whatever...its all part of touring, whether you stop every mile, 10 miles, two hours...what does it matter?

[meic]

It depends on why you cycle really....the question might well be relevant in a sporting sense. For touring; one size doesn't fit all, of course, but personally I wouldn't really consider it to be touring to just jump on the bike and bang in the miles with minimal stopping. ....What would be the point? Stopping for a cuppa, for a fag, to take in the scenery, for a breather...whatever...its all part of touring, whether you stop every mile, 10 miles, two hours...what does it matter?

If you find that racing or even Audax puts on a bit too much pressure to make progress but still want to do a slightly more sedate version of that.
My touring is really about an excuse for a ride, a target or an incentive to leave the comfort of home rather than actually wanting to look at churches.

[largeallan]

Churches!!!! Each to their own....touring is about soaking it all in for me, whether its 10 miles or 100 miles.

[thirdcrank]

There are some things here which are probably scientific - until the next scientist comes along. We know that not eating enough will lead to hunger knock, even though its approach is imperceptible. There can be few riders who haven't experienced it, but once is enough. Proper hydration is important but that was recognised only relatively recently. I do sometimes wonder if some people don't make a meal of it especially with the liquid thing. Some of these drink systems seem to have achieved similar status to life support in intensive care. (Each to their own so I don't need convincing of the advantages.)

Having said that, what does science say about breaks? I hope we can take it as agreed that sleep deprivation is a bad thing. I'm not talking about wanting a kip but reaching a stage where proper judgment is deteriorating.

That leaves physical recuperation and stops for things like the calls of nature. Ultimately, we are talking about physical recuperation. When somebody has been making an effort, if they stop doing it, sooner or later they will get over it. I think we can agree that the harder somebody pushes it, whether cycling or otherwise, the sooner they will have to stop, even if they are strong enough to outlast others. The question then is, what's the ratio of effort to recuperation? Is there any evidence that x minutes riding followed by y minutes rest and recuperation extends the total time somebody can perform well? What I'm saying is that if somebody finds that dividing a ride into chunks works for them, then the fact of making appropriate plans and following them will help them feel better and perform better, even if there's no real science involved. (Back to sleep deprivation, I know that catnaps can be very refreshing, but I'm talking about physical performance.)

[antman]

HI Thirdcrank, think we're beginning to get close with the x and y stuff!

From my original question I'll add... this will be my first long distance ride. It will take in around 330 miles over what I hope will be three days.
I usually do around 60 a day with a short break or two but have never done this on consecutive days and certainly not 100 p/d solo, so it's going to be a challenge and I'm trying to avoid wearing out the quadricepts as that's the only thing that seems to complain a little after 60 miles.

Any suggestions are helpful.

Keep it coming...thanks.

[thirdcrank]

If it's not clear already, I'm saying most of this is in your own head. If you can comfortably ride 60 miles in a day then there's nothing much but self-doubt to stop you doing 160. Start by thinking of your current rides as 100K and you are a big part of the way there.

Whenever we've had queries like this before, I always recommend doing at least one ride of the target distance, + 5 or 10% if possible. The two big benefits are first, that you will always know then that you can do it (and with the extra, that you can do even more.) Then, it's only by doing it that you will get to know what works for you.

Group riding is different, but a solo rider has to keep their own company for hours at a time. The slightest nagging doubt and the little devil is there on your shoulder telling you what a damn fool idea it is. Once you are confident you can do it, the little devil has to go and pester somebody else and you can spend your riding time inventing things like clipless pedals (that dates me because somebody has gone and done it.)

[Gearoidmuar]

I can't agree that there's little difference between 60 and 160. I've done dozens of centuries in my time, but strangely I did none that I can remember last year. I'm nearly 63 now.
One thing I will contend is that 100 miles is more than twice as hard as 50. I would say 3 times as hard.
What's important to the perceived difficulty is of course the speed, and if you're on you own it's psychologically harder.

I did a lot of 100 milers years ago in training for hard tours and I experimented a lot with eating.
You need to eat about 200-300 cals per hour, however you divide it up and it helps to include protein in that.

[reohn2]

I've always cycled for pleasure(I've of course commuted too but not out of necessity) so my idea of riding is to enjoy the ride,of course I've challenged myself with long and or hard rides.
I always break up a ride unless very short, breaks are usually based on a normal day ie;breakfast-ride-morning coffee-ride-lunch-ride-a/noon tea-ride.It's the order of my day and I enjoy that,of course I may stop to chat to someone or take in the view,etc.That doesn't mean to say I don't work at the riding bits I do.
I had enough of rigid targets when working so things for me tend to be more relaxed,so to have to ride 330miles in three days kills the pleasure aspect of my cycling.
I did a couple of centuries last year,because I wanted to not because I had to but two 70's back to back,would be more pleasurable than 100miles in a day.
But it all depends on the person,I'm pushing 60 and have joint health issues,so I don't recover like I used even ten years ago. I'm no masochist.
The food issue if you'll forgive the pun,is bonkers,especially if you read some of the stuff in the cycling press.I worked in a very physical job all my life(mining and construction),cycling is no harder than my usual working day used to be and I never ate Power bars,or swallowed electrolite drinks etc,only decent food with not too much fat or sugar.Hydration on a little and often basis is of course very important of course as has been mention up thread.

just my 2d worth.