Three Day Theory

herzalot

herzalot

iMTB Hooligan
I have a theory of athletic growth. It takes three days a week of a sport to get better at that sport. That is assuming that your participation is not cursory. This has been my experience for the past 40 years.

Golf. If I play twice a week, I will maintain my average. If I play once a week or less, I will lose ground. If I at least hit the driving range for some meaningful practice one day AND play twice a week, I will likely improve.

Ski racing. It was not enough to train on weekends. I could only maintain my skill at that rate. I had to get in a third day (or fourth) to make progress.

Surfing. Surfing is the absolutely lowest ratio of payoff to effort of any sport I have tried. It takes endless sessions to improve. It's not the act of surfing - you could practice that in a wave pool. It's learning to read the water, negotiate the crowds, select the right wave, get in the right position and catch the damn thing - then get on the face before it closes out. I could probably surf 4-5 days a week and not improve. Just not enough reps.

Mt. Biking. If I ride once a week, I lose ground. If I do two solid rides (by my standards), I will maintain my fitness for that distance. If I can get in three rides a week (or at least one session on a stationary bike), I make progress.

Tennis. Hockey. Guitar playing. Whatever. Three days a week for growth.

Caveat - New sport. The learning curve of a new sport is steep, so you will likely learn a lot in a short period of time, but after that - three days a week.

Thoughts?
 
I too agree. I believe the 3 day theory in my own historical data. 4 and 5 days a sport/expert level, and 6 days an potential pro.
 
i would agree with this also... i've been able to at least maintain my fitness with at least 2 rides a week especially during my busy work times... but as i move to 3 days/week i feel a lot better when climbing and not as tired at the top of big climbs.
 
The problems with the 3 days theory:
1 We are all getting older (everyday). It takes more effort just to maintain overall fitness.
2 If your fitness lever is higher, you will need more rides just to maintain it. for example, if you ride 4-5 days a week (like some of the guys I ride with) switching to riding twice a week will result in lost of fitness.
 
Last edited:
No wonder I suck at MTBing. I don't ride during the week unless I'm on vacation so I'm limited to weekends. Sometimes I'm able to ride both Saturday and Sunday but usually one of those days is on my road bike. Maybe I should take up knitting?
 
I somewhat disagree. I agree you do need at least two days weekly to maintain. But, I think that is maintaining overall fitness/endurance. You can improve on individual aspects of any sport/discipline by only doing it once a week. IF you play baseball, you can go to the batting cages once a week for months on end. AND, you will def get better at hitting, which is an aspect of baseball. Your fielding will suck, but at least you improved on hitting. The same can be said for MTB... Ride once a week and only focus on one thing and your going to improve. Try and throw all kinds of other stuff in the mix and you'll likely maintain, barely.
 
Yes. If I don't ride during at least once during week and hop on my bike Saturday...I feel like I'm sucking wind much faster.

A couple months back...out of the blue I decided to ride my road bike for three consecutive days relatively hard...then mountain both weekend days. Man...I felt real good. Then on Sunday night...getting off the can...both my quads locked up. They cramped like never before. They were then sore for the next three days.:Roflmao
 
Interesting proposal.

Beyond frequency, I think duration plays in. If a person rides hard enough for/on two days (or even one ride), she may well need those other days of the week to recover – especially at advancing age. So, three days might constitute overtraining. That approach is not akin to a systematic approach to improving skill, more like relishing the odd joy of beating the sh!t out of oneself.

As Redman inferred, skills training is the best way to improve overall by working on weaknesses, not just going for a ride on familiar trails. I do the latter because I just wanna have fun and don't care about my ability at this point.
 
mtnbikej said:
All I know is if I take 3 straight days off the bike...I feel like crap.
Click to expand...
Mutant DNA sounds like a real bitch. I feel for ya, brother :unsure:


UPSed said:
I'm guessing my job keeps my legs in good enough shape to get by with the 1-2 rides a week.
Click to expand...
But Ed, you are getting worse with time per the three-day theory. Keep it up and you may have to re-learn keeping upright :eek:


DangerDirtyD said:
Even watching professional cycling on TV, in particular the Tour de France and others of similar caliber, improves my riding skills. It may not help my fitness, but my bike handling definitely improves from watching others.
Click to expand...
@DangerDirtyD Good tip! I think it may help your endurance, though. I feel exhausted after reading some of the reports here...
 
Last edited:
DangerDirtyD said:
Even watching professional cycling on TV, in particular the Tour de France and others of similar caliber, improves my riding skills. They may not help my fitness, but my bike handling definitely improves from watching others.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I am definitely a person who learns by watching and copying. My biggest gains in any sport came after watching great examples, then immediately going out to imitate. I had some of my best race runs visualizing a great skier in front of me on the course. I rode my best at Whistler following an instructor and simply imitating what he did. I surfed my best wave when Kelly Slater was in the lineup next to me (at Salt Creek - no, really).

Now to expand on the 3-day theory How much is too much? When do you hit the point of diminishing returns? Some of that is physical, and some of it is psychological (burn out). I have to think that kids who start soccer at age 5 and do that almost exclusively for ten years are ready to puke when they see a soccer ball at age 15. I also think that a rider (such as myself) who gets better with 3 or even 4 days of riding a week, would burn out in 6 months if I did that exclusively.

As for the aging part of the formula, I have noticed a longer recovery period necessary as I've aged. My point of diminishing returns would be 4 days of riding a week or more. 3 is the perfect number for me.
 
Last edited:
I have to amend my theory. We need to account for burnout and specific-sport fatigue. I took a week off (so it was two weeks between rides) and I was much stronger and fresher today.

Each sport needs time away. Do another sport and you will maintain fitness, and return fresher.
 
rossage said:
I haven't ridden for 11 days. Long spell for an uninjured me. Hoping to ride Tuesday when I get back.
Got a good ride planned, probably bring my G-forms to cover for my unsharpened skills.
Click to expand...
I don't know... I think an athlete can have a great day or a terrible day anytime. I've been near peak shape and gone out and could not pull it together endurance- or skill-wise. And of course, the inverse – against all odds having a strong day, feeling in the zone. So maybe we need to factor in the mojo fairy here? Stellar alignment? Daily gravity fluctuation? :)
 
herzalot said:
I have to amend my theory. We need to account for burnout and specific-sport fatigue. I took a week off (so it was two weeks between rides) and I was much stronger and fresher today.

Each sport needs time away. Do another sport and you will maintain fitness, and return fresher.
Click to expand...


I think avoiding burn-out in Southern California is tough because there's no off-season. But for me, it comes down to goals.

For racers, goals are straight-forward and motivation is built in. Figure your personal strengths, the races you want to participate in, and train accordingly. But on a recreational level, things can be vague. "I want to have fun," or "I want to ride certain trails," doesn't provide for as clear-cut guidelines for effective improvement as a race schedule.

IMO, 3 days a week might be OK for maintaining fitness and technique, but added days are needed for growth (but at various levels of intensity and duration). And cycles of stress and recovery are also needed for substantial improvement w/o burn-out. Part of the challenge of mountain bike training is where we do it. It's hard to have easy or low-intensity days when trails and dirt roads are steep, but those days are important for our brains and bodies.

My feeling is, if you really want to improve, you've got to have clear-cut goals. Then figure out a schedule that includes all aspects involved in meeting your goals. I used this approach when I wanted to transition from being out-of-shape to riding a solo traverse of the Santa Ana's.

I ended up training for duration at or below aerobic threshold (in my case @ 6 hours), along with riding on the Main Divide to be familiar with the conditions and techniques involved, and rest days for active recovery. After about 8 weeks of specific training I was able to do 3 solo traverses with about 2 weeks recovery between each.

Being fastest on a descent or climb, doing long rides on challenging terrain, descending steeps, jumping, sprinting through a lap of a County park or linking 3 parks in a day.. all require specific skills and fitness. Breaking through barriers and getting faster, more fluid, more technically competent.. all benefit from consistent focus and work. And not burning out means making it feel like play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top