“], “filter”: { “nextExceptions”: “img, blockquote, div”, “nextContainsExceptions”: “img, blockquote, a.btn, a.o-button”} }”>
One hundred twenty. It’s the magic number of the Tour de France.
Tadej Pogačar is among the majority of pros who squeeze down 120 grams of carbohydrate – approximately 500 calories – per hour to fuel their intensity of the modern Tour de France.
That’s maybe 50 percent more than riders enjoyed when Chris Froome ruled all.
This high-carb “revolution” is seen as the biggest driver of the high-speed, ultra-aggressive modern Tour de France.
Energy reserves are endlessly full in a race that’s becoming an eating contest. Pogačar can attack 12km from the bottom of the Hautacam without even a thought for “the bonk.”
The modern fueling mindset applies to training too.
Pros roll out for high-intensity training rides with jersey pockets bulging full of energy gels. The super-carb strategy lets them hit intervals harder, recover faster, and turn up to race ready to destroy every chapter of the strategy manual.
So the question is – if Pogi and the Tour de France peloton are feeding at 120, should you?
Not every day is a 120 day at the Tour de France
As Visma-Lease a Bike nutritionist Gabriel Martins says, the answer is … “it depends.”
Just like how you shouldn’t switch to tiny cranks purely “coz Pogačar does it,” you shouldn’t go eat five gels per hour, either.
“Let’s not jump on the bandwagon of everybody trying 120 grams or 150 grams because we hear Tadej or Jonas are doing it,” Martins said.
“Just because they benefit, not everybody does.”
Martins has finessed fueling strategies for riders like Jonas Vingegaard, Matteo Jorgenson, and Wout van Aert.
He points out that not even all the super-caliber athletes under his watch eat that much.
“120 grams is seen as the benchmark, and it gets a lot of talk. But not every rider can tolerate that, and maybe not oxidise it, either,” Martins told Velo. “Even for our riders in the team, some are able to take more, some less.
“Fueling needs to be an individualized approach, and it can be something that takes time to get right,” he said. “You cannot just jump in and do 110, 120, or whatever.”
And even for the high carb outliers – Pogačar, Victor Campenaerts, and Mathieu van der Poel are known to go 120 and beyond – not every day is a hyper fuel day.
Even at this record-speed Tour de France, the old maxim to “fuel the work performed” still holds true.
Pogačar probably slammed more than 120 grams of carbohydrate per hour before he barnstormed up the Hautacam at 6.7w/kg for 35 minutes and blew up the Tour.
The Athletic reported Ben Healy hit a rate of 116g on the day of his stage 6 winning raid.
Meanwhile, various teams told us that their athletes didn’t go far beyond 80g per hour during the Tour’s snoozy sprint weekend on stages 8 and 9.
All that’s to say, fueling is different for every individual, every day.
High carb for high power
But back to the question.
If the “carbohydrate revolution” has made the Tour de France insanely fast, will hooking up on the high-carb IV be equally effective for me?
Won’t a gutload of gels propel me to group ride and Strava segment immortality?
Sort of … to a point.
And it all depends how hard you can push.
The higher the power outputs, the higher the energy demand.
Most studies suggest riders need to replenish around 50 percent of the kilojoules they burn to sustain the most grueling days on the bike.
Strava data suggests Jonas Rickaert burned around 4,700kJ for the duration of his three-and-a-half-hour, 400-watt, five-puke attack with MVDP. That’s an hourly burn of close to 1,400kJ, which works out to a gut-busting 175g carb per hour for optimal feeding.
Meanwhile, a strong, average-size amateur with diamonds in their legs might burn 800kJ per hour during a spicy group ride. That’s a 100-gram optimal replenishment rate.
Visma staffer Martins said very few amateurs ever get anywhere near three-digit fueling – whether by accident or design.
“Most amateurs I see can benefit from increasing their ride intake if they’re pushing hard,” Martins told Velo.
“I still see a lot of under consumption, or riders intentionally avoiding gels and drinks so they can eat as many cakes as possible at the coffee stop.”
Martins suggests that watt-chasing weekend warriors stay out of the weeds of kJ calculations and whatnot, and simply aim for “more.”
“Even 90 grams per hour would be a huge improvement for most recreational riders,” he said. “From my experience, only the most committed are doing that.”
It’s also important to note that products with a dual source of sugars are needed to successfully achieve a higher-carb approach. Sadly, candies and cokes won’t cut it.
Most gels, drinks, and chews now use glucose-to-fructose ratios of 2:1 or 1:0.8 to shuttle carbohydrate through the gut at racing pace.
More is better, but more isn’t always more
So “more” is “good” when it comes to mid-ride carbohydrate intake.
But there can be too much of a bad thing.
“Overfueling” is simply a costly waste of gels.
For those without an untrained stomach, it can cause G.I. distress. At the pro level, it throws meticulously calculated nutrient targets out of whack.
And for most, there’s a limit to how much glycogen a working muscle can immediately use.
Tim Podlogar works with Tudor Pro Cycling, and has authored numerous studies on high-carb fueling and its impacts on the metabolism of fat.
“I don’t think we have any data to suggest that 120 grams of carbohydrate per hour will improve performance over 90 grams, let alone higher than 120 grams,” Podlogar told Velo.
“The majority can probably oxidize 100 or 120 grams, but very few can go higher than this.”
Podlogar went on to explain that the crazy carb totals that spill out of the most grueling blocks of the Tour de France are to sustain riders off the bike as much as on it.
“The very high intakes you see allow riders to stay in energy balance,” he said.
“It’s very difficult to ingest enough calories before and after the race to cover daily needs,” he said. “Eating more on the bike helps with that, which also improves day-to-day recovery.”
That principle extrapolates beyond racing.
Pros train with hyper-carb strategies to both max-out their intervals and sustain a weekly training volume that might be two or three times that of us Average Joes.
How to actually do it: Art, experience, surprisingly little science
So what is the magic number for us “normies?”
60 grams per hour? 80 grams? 90?
Even in the super-sophisticated WorldTour, finding an optimal fueling strategy is a mix of art and science. Without the use of costly, time-consuming lab tests, it’s an endless trial-and-error that gives different results for everyone.
Nutritionists and trainers collaborate on riders’ programs so “gut training” protocol can be incorporated into the most intense workouts.
These high-carb sessions prime the digestive system to absorb as much sugar as possible and inform fuel plans for racing.
But as Michael Woods recently discovered, there’s no guarantee the guts will always cooperate with a high-carb approach.
The Canadian’s ride on the Carbohydrate Express during stage 10 of this year’s Tour saw an off-schedule stop at a roadside RV for an explosive number two.
“Let’s just say, 120 g of carbs per hour for four consecutive hours does not come out nicely,” he wrote on his blog.
A ‘progressive overload’ approach
Martins and Podlogar believe nearly all recreational riders who want to improve their performance can benefit from feeding better.
How much more will depend on their training volume and intensity, and a myriad of external factors.
“If I have an amateur who tells me they can barely tolerate 60 grams, then the next step for this person is to tolerate 80 grams,” Martins said. “Also it’s good for them to learn what ratio is better for them. So, that’s a 2:1 glucose to fructose, or maybe 1:0.8.
“And then we make small steps to progress from there. Some might find they can get to 100, for example,” he said. “But from my experience, very few recreational riders can benefit from doing what these guys like Jonas do.”
So don’t go blowing your budget on a crate of carbs just yet.
A more moderate size box might be plenty for most of us but the pros.
Source link
