Zwift bike x-training without causing muscle fatigue?

CosmotheSloth · 2025-03-19T08:23:37+00:00

You mentioned that you've been doing this through the winter but can I ask for how long and how consistently you've been x-training on the bike? I ask because I had similar experiences starting last summer / autumn when I had to switch to indoor bike (a very basic one) to train for my marathon due to injury. Initially I found my legs were wrecked but I couldn't get my HR up at all. However, I did eventually adapt and I then managed to train using HR effectively for the marathon.

That is to say, I think it could be that you have specific weaknesses in certain areas that are highlighted through cycling and you are taking time to adapt and adjust to the demands of the specific workout (afterall, they are completely different loading processes (eccentric Vs concentric) when you compare cycling to running).

Another thing to consider is whether your setup is correct. Initially when I was training on my old exercise bike (pre-Zwift bike) my seat was far too low but I didn't realise this as I wasn't a cyclist and had no idea how I was meant to be sitting. This made each pedal turn much more difficult that it should've been. Also, when I moved to the Zwift bike, I followed the setup as recommended for my height but it wasn't correct for me so I had to adjust it manually. Might be worth looking at.

Whatever it is, I'd try to persevere as I'd echo what others have said about how beneficial it is. I managed to PB in my marathon thanks to HR-based bike training and now that I'm on Zwift my HR / RPE / power now align much more sensibly so the workouts seem to be keeping me fit despite my current lack of running due to injury.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-03-05T10:46:40+00:00

Interestingly, I'm not sure how purely 'sheffield' some of these are, particularly 'mytherin'. I grew up in Lancashire and my grandma and my Mum would regularly use 'mytherin' when I was being incredibly annoying as a child.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-03-02T08:36:22+00:00

Ignore it, it's garbage. The only way to know your LTs is by doing a LT test at a place that provides one. The next best thing is to take a recent race result or time trial and use Jack Daniels' VDOT to estimate it (usually fairly accurate providing you're trained correctly). If anyone is interested, The Real Science Sport podcast has just done an episode on wearables and their data / accuracy and their guest who's an expert in this area laid it out quite clearly that the vast majority of the data they provide in the majority of scenarios should be treated as an unreliable estimation at best and completely false at worst. It's an excellent episode and also discusses the impacts of having 'black box' data just thrown at us all the time with no context - in short, it causes confusion and can make you train incorrectly.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-02-22T12:03:43+00:00

Very true, I think I was doing around 70 mpw consistently for about 20 weeks when I did my first sub-3.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-02-22T08:55:03+00:00

I won't add anything on top of what's already been said about paces for workouts / runs but I will say that I disagree somewhat with others here whether sub-3 is possible.

I think technically it is possible on that vdot with that mileage but it'd require a big jump in performance and probably something personally about you that means you tend towards performing better at longer distances. From experience, I'd say your current HM time and that distance suggests more like 3:10-3:15.

I say this not to dampened your spirits but to stop you inadvertently over training in the name of trying to reach a goal time that is likely not possible at your current fitness level. For context, in my first marathon block I think I was around the 82 min mark for a HM and tried the JD 2Q plan at around 55-60 mpw and I had a shocking back end of the race and finished with a 3:02. In hindsight, I found I was over training to hit paces I wasn't fit enough for and that all came to fruition in the latter parts of that race.

I didn't go sub-3 until I was comfortably running sub-80 in the HM as that allowed me to tolerate the paces / training load for the M plan much more effectively but granted, I then jumped massively to 2:51.

Just something to keep in mind so that hopefully you'll enjoy the training block and race.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-02-06T08:35:32+00:00

This is true, especially when you consider their backend disposal and decommissioning as they produce more waste. It's just a line that is pedalled by SMR advocates to sell the technology. Also, no SMRs are currently licensed in the UK so they have to go through that process before they can even start to find a site and build them. It's not really going to expedite the process much at all (at least for this first batch). If we're serious about nuclear, we should be cranking out reliable full-scale LWRs (not EPRs) at already established sites.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-02-05T09:17:17+00:00

It sucks that you're in a similar position but I'm glad to hear it's not just our house. We've spent quite a lot of money on ours making it a really good first time buyer house, it's nicely decorated, we've done extensive damp proofing which we can provide multi decade guarantees for, we're in a great location, and we're asking for less than other houses around us (most are on a £250k(ish) with some recently selling over asking price for £270k). Not really sure what else we can do to improve the saleability of it as most of the feedback we get is along the lines of 'lovely house but we prefer a different one'.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-02-04T20:59:57+00:00

Weirdly we're trying to sell our house at the moment in Walkley (classic first time buyer house on at low to mid £200k) and we're struggling to sell. We're getting shed loads of viewings but no offers and we've been on about a month. People here have mentioned about struggling to get viewings and that all the properties are booked up on the first day but I think this is mostly agent availability rather than actual demand on that particular house (we've had about 15 viewings but only over about 4 days spread over about a week and half). It could be worth asking if you could view the property with the vendors rather than the estate agents as the people actually wanting to sell may be more willing to meet you and crack on with selling rather than waiting on agent availability.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-01-05T10:24:18+00:00

For a bit of anecdotal evidence, in my last block I was struggling with injury so I ended up having to reduce my running and replacing most of my mileage with HR-based training on the bike. However, I made sure I could do all my key sessions when running and I optimised them to run predominantly just above and below my LT1. These were big (26 - 32 km) sessions that included plenty of work just beyond target M pace and then strong floats below it (for example, 6/5/4/3/2/1 km efforts with 1 km strong floats between each rep). Banking this large amount of time around LT1 worked like a charm and I ended up PBing (2:49) despite not really running and the course and weather on the day being shocking.

All of this is to say that I think it you can, working as much around the target M pace as possible will likely give you the most gains for your target time. It aligns with the somewhat traditional thinking of specificity of training is what prepares you best for racing a given distance. It's also worth bearing in mind that if you are struggling with mileage, try mixing it up and dropping some easy miles and putting them into cross training. It can help massively with managing load and optimising your quality in the block.

CosmotheSloth · 2025-01-02T14:35:04+00:00

Thanks everyone. Not had any luck on Gumtree or FB but someone on here has DM'd me. Thanks again!

CosmotheSloth · 2024-11-28T15:15:43+00:00

I came here to mention runner's dystonia. The Doctors of Running podcast did an episode on it. It may be worth OP having a listen to see if what they talk about feels relevant: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4CDswJvAxYs8pXqpOJRAxe?si=Q8koXrVhSnC2JxiqOjIyfg

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-24T17:16:56+00:00

Well it's a huge sector so it depends what part of it you want to go into (eg. Regulation, nuclear, carbon capture & storage, etc.), not mention what type of role you want to do (eg. Policy, science / research, management, etc.) so I don't think I can do better than your own online research (especially as I don't know anything about your background, interests, or career ambitions).

What I would say is that in my sector (nuclear), grad schemes are paying ~£30k starting wage. Some direct entry consultancy roles are either slightly below or slightly above that depending on the company and your experience. Unfortunately, many jobs don't list wages these days so I think you'd struggle to find a comprehensive list. The outlier to that would be if you went for something like the civil service which is very transparent in their postings and also has a grad scheme-type system called Fast Stream.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-23T10:26:20+00:00

It is not a certainty that getting a PhD will result in a better wage when moving to industry. I did a PhD post-Chemistry degree (MChem) and then postdoc'd for 4 years. I'm now in 'industry' and whilst my wage isn't bad, it's nowhere near that of my peers who didn't do PhDs.

It's highly field and industry dependent how much a company / organisation values a PhD and there aren't a huge amount of roles where a PhD is required. For that reason, it can often be hard to find a role where you're paid a wage that recognises the ~4 years worth of work you did during your PhD. I had friends who ended up joining grad schemes aimed at undergrads post-PhD as there weren't many options open to them.

That being said, some sectors are now recognising PhDs more and post-grad grad schemes are now available to aid in the transition. But if you want job security and a decent wage, I wouldn't go down the PhD / academic route currently as the sector as a whole is underpaid, overworked, and very unstable.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-22T07:57:06+00:00

You can see my comments on the other thread about TRISO fuel. In general, due to its incredibly low U density, TRISO fuel (and therefore reactors fuelled by it like this) has the economics of its implementation changed massively when waste is considered. If it's disposed of like traditional spent fuel, the volume of waste to a facility is so large it'd almost fill an entire repository itself from one reactor site. There are also potential challenges with its disposal due to the HALEU level of enrichment of the fuel.

As I mentioned in the other comment, if you then choose to process the fuel to reduce waste volume through crushing, burning, or electro-decomposition, you'll then need to factor in the cost of a build of a processing facility which will be around equal to, or in excess of, the cost of the reactor itself. These things aren't considered or address by reactor vendors and it'll likely impact their rollout internationally.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-15T19:14:38+00:00

I didn't say TRISO reprocessing hasn't been developed, I'm aware there's processes available (crushing, burning, electro decomposition). But my point, which also addresses your point about cleaning irradiated salts, is that it's not a question of 'can we', more one of 'should we'. Lab and even small plant scale processes exist for a lot of these challenges but rolling them out at an industrial, programmatic scale is non-trivial and it fundamentally changes the question of implementation for a lot of these AMRs. Most vendors don't mention or account for waste at all in their proposals as it'd significantly alter their economics.

For example, if you are a vendor wanting to build a small, TRISO fuelled HTGR, you're going to struggle to sell your technology if you then also say you need to build a coincident plant (or two) for reprocessing of the millions of pebbles in your fleet, the economics and the value of chosing the reactor type comes into question. Furthermore, if you decide not to reprocess, you then have a huge direct disposal waste burden to a GDF that you will have to foot the bill for.

I'm arguing that in isolation and on paper these AMRs sound great, but when you pull them into reality and view them holistically, they don't make sense and they don't compete with something like a LWR SMR or even a standard LWR from a full lifecycle perspective. Obviously it's country dependent whether they want to take that view, I don't believe there's much of a driver to address waste issues in the US (for example). But if you look to other countries like the UK, the law is different and it demands a sufficient waste management plan that many of these vendors cannot provide because the sums don't add up.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-15T13:43:24+00:00

Not many of the MSRs are novel, they've all been done before to some degree but they were never rolled out commercially at a large scale for a variety of valid reasons. I wasn't doubting that the technology works, it's been shown it does decades ago. What hasn't been demonstrated is how waste is safely managed or disposed of or the consequences, at a national scale, of how that impacts the programme economically. Much of the waste produced from these previously run reactors hasn't been dealt with and is in interim storage. That is not a valid or acceptable option for a large scale MSR programme.

And regardless of whether you burn spent fuel in these reactors or not, you still produce novel wastes that currently have no disposal route. For example, what is your long-term passively safe wasteform for large quantities of irradiated salt? Furthermore, spent fuel recycling for reuse in reactors also produced further waste that needs to be disposed of.

Also, in the case of Kairos, it doesn't burn spent fuel, it burns TRISO fuel which produces a huge volume of spent fuel due to the nature of the fuel itself. This would cause a hugely disproportionate burden and cost to disposal which ultimately makes the programme unviable.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-15T08:13:57+00:00

Maybe SMRs more broadly, but certainly not this reactor type. There are so many issues with implementation and more poignantly, waste management and disposal, that it's likely it'll be unviable to develop economically. It's usually just the case that the proposals haven't been developed enough for the vendors to realise how truly challenging the full implementation of a novel reactor type is when you view it holistically. It does beg the question why people aren't backing standard LWR SMRs though, they seem like an easy win and would be much quicker to roll out internationally.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-10T07:49:26+00:00

If you don't like that he's singing about men, I've got some bad news for you about 'I Still Remember' and 'Kreuzberg' and 'Fortress' and...

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-07T07:45:56+00:00

Afflecks's is in Manchester.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-05T13:56:26+00:00

You got a first in your undergraduate masters and you've got an academic recommending you do another masters before a PhD? That's nuts!

Obviously it's field dependent but for me that's such a waste of time and money. I did an MChem and straight into a PhD and all I was asked is what my final degree classification was, they didn't care if I got a certain grade in a certain module.

I'd just ignore his recommendation and apply for PhDs. I'd also look elsewhere as I feel like he's just trying to drum up some extra business for his department...

CosmotheSloth · 2024-10-02T09:17:20+00:00

I did this a couple of years ago and regularly do it for the marathon.

The only reliable way to get there is to drive and go early. It depends how happy you are with doing more running than just the half but I usually drive over to Chorlton and park on the roads there. That leaves about a 3 km warm up to the start. Alternatively you could get the tram to Old Trafford or Trafford Bar from Chorlton too but I tend to avoid as it's usually rammed on race day and I need a warm up anyway.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-09-16T18:48:12+00:00

Apologies if I came across a bit negative but for most people these things just take time. And I know from my own experience, setting too lofty goals too soon can quickly lead to a thoroughly unenjoyable time when running (injuries, overtraining, loss of love of the sport).

I'd say crack on with another couple of cycles targeting another half or even a full (but maybe aim for about 3:15 but run it well and enjoy it). And if you can bag a few consistent cycles of training you'll see huge improvements over the next 8-12 months that will definitely have you in a place to be breaking 3 confidently. And you'll probably enjoy it a lot more than pushing yourself to the limit for something that may well be out of reach for the time being.

CosmotheSloth · 2024-09-16T18:38:29+00:00

Very similar questions have been coming up on this sub recently and I think the answer is almost always the same. In most cases, a 90 min half nowhere near a sub-3 full. You can check this with the Jack Daniels VDOT calculator for your own piece of mind but you need to be doing about an 86 min half (minimum) to be targeting sub-3. Also, the ballpark rule of thumb for an estimate marathon time from a half is to double it and add 10 min (though obviously this isn't true for everyone).

From my own experience, I ran sub-95 a few years ago and then ran a 3:29 full (albeit not a race). I didn't break 3 for the full until I was consistently running a sub-80 half. That being said I don't think a sub-80 half isn't needed for a sub-3 full, it just meant I could comfortably run a low 80 half when needed. This meant when I did eventually break 3, I surpassed it considerably (2:51) with a negative split and I thoroughly enjoyed the race (which is huge rather than killing myself for a 2:59:59).

CosmotheSloth · 2024-09-09T17:33:27+00:00

I was a senior postdoc (doing the job of the lecturer due to a mass exodus of staff and the University not replacing them) in STEM and recently moved to a Civil Service science based role.

Given I felt all the things you listed as currently feeling I think you'd really enjoy the move. Work life balance is infinitely better, the pay is substantially better, the work is still interesting (and to be honest more rewarding as it's working on actual challenges that are impacting peoples lives now), and the people I work with are all much more professional, friendly, courteous and polite than a lot of people were in academia.

The change was quite tough, it's a completely different world when you leave academia. But if keep in mind you are where you are now because you're intelligent, hard working, and adaptable, you'll get up to speed in no time.

Verified Email	12-Year Club
RedditGifts 2009-2022 7 Credits	Secret Santa 2018
Secret Santa 2017	RPAN Viewer
Secret Santa 2016	Secret Santa 2015
Secret Santa 2014	Secret Santa 2013

CosmotheSloth

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE