Saturday, June 24, 2006

Seven Hills of Kirkland: The hardest metric century ever!

This morning, I went out with a group of women triathletes from the Pro Club to ride the "Seven Hills of Kirkland" metric century. WOW. What a ride. Who knew there were mountains right in this area?

So basically, the seven hills form a 39-mile route; the metric century has by their count 11, and by my count 12 big climbs - in 59 miles (so not quite a full metric century, but whatever). The ride was seriously the hardest ride I've ever done - harder than the Daffodil Century, way harder than the Flying Wheels Century. In fact, I think if I had ridden Flying Wheels at my pace the entire time (rather than the group's slower pace), I could have finished the 100 miles of Flying Wheels in about the same time it would have taken me to finish the Seven Hills metric century ride.

I say would have because my bike is being mean to me. Somewhere around mile 46 or so, it decided to start ghost-shifting again - and while I could tolerate it a few weeks ago when I knew the route well, with all these hills, I needed all my gears and I needed to know that it wasn't going to shift on me in the middle of a climb or descent. So we cut out the last two hills (on the cue sheet - in my opinion, there was one more significant climb at the end that wasn't marked on the cue sheet) and ended around 55 miles.

So let's see, ride details: I felt great on almost all of the climbs. A couple of them I did in my big ring just to see if I could (even though I was in the big ring in the back, too - which means I should have been on the small ring in the front and a middle one in the back, but I've never bothered to learn the ratios anyway). Matthew argued with me that you should never ride in the big in front and back, and I disagreed because I feel like in a race, if I know I'm going to crest a hill and start a major descent, I want to be in my big ring already towards the top of the hill so while I'm giving it that last hard push to the top, I can already be shifting the back to make it harder so when I start the descent, I'm ready. That was the longest sentence I ever wrote, and I'm not editing it so it's no longer a run-on. :-)

A couple of the hills did make me wish they were over - particularly Novelty Hill in Redmond, which just goes on and on and on and the shoulder is full of gravel and glass and cars go by in their lane at like 50 mph. Apparently it's a three-mile climb, with a couple little flat parts but then going up again. Wow. But I stayed strong until the end, although I did need more food. I brought with me a PowerBar, two GUs, and two packets of Sport Beans (yum!). Matthew forgot to bring food (I've since forbidden him to ride with me without food, because we just ride too far and too long not to eat), so I gave him one of the packages of Sport Beans and that didn't really leave me with enough calories. Actually, I can't blame Matthew - I didn't bring enough calories to begin with. If I'd eaten everything I had, I would have eaten 620 calories - and I burned 2400. Not okay. I thought there were more PowerBars in my saddle bag, but I guess I had removed them.

So: gotta bring more food. I think I want to try some kind of carb/protein drink in my water bottles; I don't think I can eat enough to sustain myself well on that kind of ride. Other than that, I was happy with my performance. My average speed over the 55 miles was 13.6, but I also held myself back on some of the steeper descents to stay with the group and because I hadn't ridden those hills before, so just in case something unexpected were to happen. I also had times when the group wasn't pushing (like for a few miles on the Burke-Gilman trail), where we could have. So I guess I could have had a higher average speed, but I'm frankly not unhappy with a 13.6 on this route. Not at all.

Other hills of note: The winery hill was steep, and longer than I thought it would be. At one point, I was going something like 4.9 mph and I saw the hill continue up for a while, so I decided to give myself a little break by turning left off the course onto a flat road, pedaling around for a minute to catch my breath, then started back up. I don't think anyone else I was riding with even noticed - Matthew was ahead of me at this point, everyone else was behind, so I don't think anyone saw me do it and I caught right back up to Matthew. This was interesting, because even though I added distance that little break gave me a tiny bit more energy so it made my push to the top stronger. That might be a good strategy for a race; however, I don't really think there's any place like that on the Lake Stevens half-Ironman.

When the ride was over, I was HUNGRY. I ate enchiladas for lunch and a hamburger and fries for dinner (actually, half my burger and half my fries, but that probably doesn't count anyway because half of a Red Robin hamburger is still a lot of calories). But I'm feeling okay about my eating today - we went to the beach to play in the afternoon and I didn't eat candy, soda, or ice cream there.

Anyway, after this ride, I feel completely ready for both STP and the half-Ironman. Danielle raced Pacific Crest half-Iron today; the results aren't out yet, but I hope she kicked ass! I was a little bit sorry this morning to wake up and know she was racing and I wasn't. I don't think I made the wrong decision to stay home with the family this weekend, but I'm so ready for my half-Iron race and I just can't wait, so it might have been fun to do it this weekend!

Oh, one year from now: Ironman Coeur d'Alene. I've got a year to train. No sweat. :-)

(What a dumb statement! Lots of sweat! Yeah!)

5 comments:

ItchyBits said...

Just a small comment on gear choice. I agree with your friend in that you don't want to be in the big ring in front and back or small-to-small (it is called flexion) for a couple of reasons: you run the huge risk of dropping your chain (bad in a race..ya?)and it stretches your chain over time which results in poor shifting or slippage. You should be able to get that jump you are looking for on the crest by anticipating and making appropriate gear selections without sacrificing efficiency. You really don't want to be overgeared going up a hill. Pay attention to your cadence. You should try to be in a gear that you can accelerate in. If you can't accelerate...the gear is too hard. It is great that you can push big gears up hill...it sounds like you are strong...but it is inefficient...it'll eat you up and you will pay for it somewhere. Enough can't be said about technical skills when it comes to cycling. Some of the most unassuming people are the best cyclists.

Jessica said...

So, do you know all the gear ratios and then do you use that when you're riding? I feel like I just won't remember them during a race.

I love your comment about being in a gear I can accelerate from - I'm definitely going to think about that on my next hard ride.

ItchyBits said...

I know my gear ratios but I don't even think about the numbers when I ride. Not yet anyway. I just go by feel, speed and cadence. I train with a retired pro so I get lots of good advice.

Jessica said...

So what kind of cadences do you try to keep?

In spinning classes, they say that you should be able to do 90 or so on a flat road, and never drop below 60 even on the steepest of climbs. I find that I like being at lower cadences on flat roads (70-80 or so) and can go as low as 50 on steep climbs. I started this season planning to work on loving higher cadence, but I haven't gotten there yet. I'd love to hear any advice you have - if it's not obvious from my blog, this is my first year of doing any serious cycling and I want to learn everything. :-)

ItchyBits said...

Once I have form I try to keep my cadence at 90-95 on most terrain. In early season sometimes I will intentionally overgear to be build strength. In season I don't like to be below 90. I would say you need to increase your cadence. I think 70-80 is too low (your knees!) especially with those longer rides you do. Try between 85-90...I'll bet your avg speeds will increase.

Climbing...it varies... on hard sustained climbs I am down near 60-65 and lower :). Never drop below 60? That seems a little unrealistic...it totally depends on the grade.

Shorter digs I try to keep it 70-85 depending on the grade and length. I just try to find a gear...no soft pedaling...and go into hills with as much momentum as possible. I find it is better to go into a hill slightly undergeared rather then bog down in a gear that is too big. I shift as necessary but I won't lose momentum like I would if the gear was too big. I also stand alot too which helps with accelerations. Sustained climbs I stand till I blow and then sit, pedal, recover and then stand again..accelerate...eventually I can stand for longer periods and recover faster. Climbing is a weakness for me and I am finding that I do better when I incorporate standing rather than just grinding it up the hill seated. Plus the faster I get up a hill the faster the pain is over!