A Snow and ski forum. SkiBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » SkiBanter forum » Skiing Newsgroups » Nordic Skiing
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Birkebeiner strategy?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old February 10th 06, 01:33 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 18:57:53 -0600, Gene Goldenfeld
wrote:

The first. I also note that the German women skiers interviewed
pre-season talked about training mainly in classic style as better for
endurance.


Did it help with their hematocrit level too:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060209...N5bnN1YmNhdA--

JFT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
Ads
  #32  
Old February 10th 06, 03:11 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Actually, the findings are that poling in offset (V1) on hills moves to
~60% of propulsion. Short glide complemented by longer poling effort.
In 1-skate (V2), poling is quick and gliding long, thus relatively more
legs. Perhaps you should be videotaped to submit to the researchers
as counterevidence.

Gene

"Peter H." wrote:

Surely everybody who skates can tell that 1-skate uses more
upper body and offset uses more legs!

Interesting that the French
use what I thought was Canuck terminology.
For USians who might have forgotten,
"offset" is V1 and "1-skate" is V2.
(Don't mean to be patronizing,
but I find it easy to forget the US terminology.)

Off to CSM and Keskinada, so I'll
have to drop out of this for 10 days.

Best, Peter



beorn wrote:
Peter H. wrote:

I seriously doubt that a person like Becky Scott say, would have
much different average heartrate over a 15km. race, same course,
doing one classic and the other skating. Is there actual data on
something like this? I'd be swayed by individual reports
from someone like Nathan here,
but not too many others.


I found this abstract:

Millet GP, Boissiere D, Candau R.
Energy cost of different skating techniques in cross-country skiing.
J Sports Sci. 2003 Jan;21(1):3-11.

http://makeashorterlink.com/?O16621C9C

but unfortunately I don't have access to the full text article.
Anyhow, authors report that different skating and poling techniques
result in different HR and energy costs.
I guess that something similar can also happen in a skating vs
classic test.

I agree when you say that for top class athletes it makes no
difference which technique they use, as they will always push at
their maximum...but I still think that different techniques and/or
movements result in slightly different metabolic responses (that
is, at the same perceived level of exertion, your HR and VO2 are
higher/lower)

--
beorn
"You've got to learn to crawl
before you learn to walk"
Aerosmith (Amazing)


  #33  
Old February 10th 06, 09:53 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I assume you mean it moved from less than 60%,
not more. In any case, that figure is astounding to
me, given the muscle mass difference, unless it was
done in 1984 or something, when Gunde had 190 cm.
poles.

Even a relative result like that is very surprising.
Skating up a long hill which is marginal between
offset and 1-skate both ways always would give me
the opposite result in terms of muscle fatigue.

Hope I can continue this from Ottawa.

Best, Peter

  #34  
Old February 10th 06, 01:20 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sure, if you V2 up a hill the distribution of propulsion changes toward
poling, and heart rate and build up of lactate go with it. The slope of
that change depends on individual technique, strength, conditioning and
course conditions. The comparisons would normally be between V1 on
hills and V2 on gentler or rolling terrain. The increased importance of
poling on hills is why all the studies show high correlation between
upper body strength and race results (and higher performance in poling
lab tests).

BTW, the idea that WC skiers "going hard" all the time is subject to
misunderstanding. They are like the rest of us in the sense that,
depending on the length of the race, they average near or a bit above LT
(AT), take it up some on the hills, and save the bursts of speed for
starts, tactics and finishes (sprints would be more level 4). The
difference is in the genetics, technique and primarily training, which
together allow them to raise the tempo and efficiency they can maintain
at those levels. When Becky Scott was talking about keeping herself
driving up the long hills at Canmore on the third lap, it was about
maintaining a pace at LT into level 4.

Gene


"Peter H." wrote:

I assume you mean it moved from less than 60%,
not more. In any case, that figure is astounding to
me, given the muscle mass difference, unless it was
done in 1984 or something, when Gunde had 190 cm.
poles.

Even a relative result like that is very surprising.
Skating up a long hill which is marginal between
offset and 1-skate both ways always would give me
the opposite result in terms of muscle fatigue.

Hope I can continue this from Ottawa.

Best, Peter

  #35  
Old February 10th 06, 02:58 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Oslo has different terrain than I am used to (long easy climbs, vs
short steep ones) so it was difficult for me to say for sure how much,
but there is no doubt there is a HUGE difference. Huge. I'll see what
happens tommorrow on my home turf!


I just got back from a 28km ski, and the difference is astounding. For
all the shuffling I was doing previously I may as well have been
snow-shoeing! Now I also see why a flexible shoe is necessary. The way
the skis clamped themselves to the snow like magic when I flexed my
foot to move my weight to the toes was something I had never
experienced before. And the long festesone (what's that called in
English?) from having proper flex gave me way more grip up the hills. I
could stay in the tracks all the way up to almost 45 degrees! I used to
have to fish-bone very early.

This will make a world of difference. I am going to get used to the
skis a bit more (the different cut and the floppy shoes needs getting
used to on descents) then I will go have a few lessons.

Thanks!

Joseph

  #37  
Old February 12th 06, 12:38 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


David Dermott wrote:
On 10 Feb 2006 wrote:


And the long festesone (what's that called in
English?) from having proper flex gave me way more grip up the hills.


I have seen the term "grip zone"

Congrats on getting good skis and boots. Are you going
to try the Holmenkollen Ski Marathon as a warmup for
Birken?

http://www.skiforeningen.no/hk/event...tag=hkmarathon

Hmm, it's on Sat Feb 11 so it might be too late to sign up.


A bit short notice. Plus I want to practice a bit and mostly get used
to the different cut. I was thinking of doing the
http://www.grenaderen.com/ but at 90km that is probably a bit much for
me at this point... So I think I'll do www.vindfjellopet.no (40km) and
http://montebellolopet.com/ (25km) as preperation, in addition to just
lots of skiing!

Joseph

  #38  
Old February 13th 06, 10:25 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Peter H. wrote:
After looking at the times for the corresponding bike event
(and you're about half my age!), my 5 hour estimate is probably
unduly pessimistic. But it does depend a lot on conditions.
I see no reason why the HR numbers you give for cycling shouldn't
apply to a ski race, if upper body fitness is okay. But Gary is
right to say that it takes a while for the HR to settle in, maybe more
like 10 minutes for me than an hour.

Best, Peter


I have been thinking about the 5 hour estimate, and have been trying to
calibrate myself now that I have new gear that makes a huge difference.

Looking at the profile for the bike race:
http://birkebeiner.no/dokumenter/loy...tt2005_v11.pdf

And the profile for the ski race:
http://birkebeiner.no/dokumenter/profil_renn2005.pdf

(notice one goes right-left, the other left-right)

I am starting to think the bike race has steeper climbs, and I will not
be as severly handicapped by my weight during the ski race. Less steep
would certainly help me.

But I maybe am not as bad on steep as I think. My local area has a loop
I do often. I don't know if it is 5 or 6 km (they made changes so the
map is not correct) but I do know it has over 100m of ascent. I can do
4 laps at a very comfortable pace in 55 minutes. This is at a pace I
feel I could maintain for several hours.

So 15-24 km with 400m of short steep climbs in about 1 hour. What does
that mean for the 5 hour estimate considering my 100kg?

Joseph

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wood skis in Canadian Birkebeiner David Dermott Nordic Skiing 3 January 17th 06 12:50 PM
Preparation and race strategy - 100km freestyle BarryT Nordic Skiing 0 January 10th 05 06:03 PM
Who's Gained the Most Weight Since the American Birkebeiner? Jay Tegeder Nordic Skiing 8 April 18th 04 05:35 PM
Best American Birkebeiner Wax Combinations Jay Tegeder Nordic Skiing 11 March 1st 04 02:33 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SkiBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.