deanbean Posted February 10, 2014 Share Just picked these up next to the road. Boletus edulis, The Cep, lè Cèpe. Fried with onions in butter, then broiled in milk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetapson Posted February 10, 2014 Share Is it possible that the cramps are training related, not nutrition? If you are still doing the Maf thing of lots of long slow rides, but then switch to high intensity for the races .... perhaps your muscles are simply not accustomed to the higher intensity for that period of time so fatigue sets in and cramp follows. I would never admit it, but this may well be part of it. I've changed my training plan - I'm no longer Maf'ing, but doing some HIIT combined with very low intensity recovery rides. Currently trying to do three sets of 30s HI, 15s off repeated 12 times. Due to the nature of my commute and my lack of strength I'm probably managing three sets of 6. However I've only just started doing this so it will not have made much of a change on my strength/fitness. The reason that I think mg is part if it is that the cramps come on earlier than I think they should, and that I'm also getting cramps in my hands etc afterwards which I think points to a mg deficiency. Also that they respond to Rennies. I'm beginning to think that Maf style training works for properly long endurance events (i.e. triathlons) where the winning margin is made by being able to maintain a slightly higher steady output than your opponent over many hours. I'm not sure it is appropriate for mtb marathon style events which require irregular higher intensity bursts over an already quite high intensity race pace. I am just not as strong as I would like to be, and when you consider Maf style training, why should I be? Hence the HIIT style training plus I try and hit some of the hills I commute over rather than trying to maintain a pace to keep my HR below e.g. Maff level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted February 10, 2014 Share I agree with you Dave. You need to train intervals and also tempo. I was doing 2 twenty minute intervals with a 20 minute recovery just below my threshold last year. Man it was rough. Made me quite emotional. To me cramping is an indication my training wasn't hard enough. I don't see why LCHF should cause cramping in races if you are using enough carbs while racing. My gut feel is LCHF people tend to spend a lot of time enjoying base intensity as the diet makes you good at that and not nearly enough time at high intensities where carbs are being used. davetapson 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DustOrBust Posted February 10, 2014 Share Probably going to USN CUP at Modderfontein this Saturday then we'll see If you cramp at Modder ........... then your training intensity is not high enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davetapson Posted February 11, 2014 Share I agree with you Dave. You need to train intervals and also tempo. I was doing 2 twenty minute intervals with a 20 minute recovery just below my threshold last year. Man it was rough. Made me quite emotional. To me cramping is an indication my training wasn't hard enough. Please tell me you noticed a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted February 11, 2014 Share Please tell me you noticed a difference? Oh yes. Made a big difference. What really made it work that year was being forced by a coach to do a proper base block before beginning with the intervals. It was great how effective the intervals were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2wheelsgood Posted February 13, 2014 Share Help, I've become confused about something. If I have a food item whose label claims something like:Glycaemic carbohydrates: 50gof which total sugar: 40g Which number is the one to consider when calculating carbs for the day? and what's the difference in these values? what would the 10g difference consist of? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted February 13, 2014 Share Carbs are 50g I would say. Eat that and you have done your carbs for the day. 40G are simple sugars and the remaining 10 are more complex carbs. Not a great profile for this diet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2wheelsgood Posted February 13, 2014 Share No I think you misunderstood. Those values are for a product and are per 100g of the product. So yeah if I were to consume 100g then I'd be consuming 50g "glycaemic carb". It's not my intention to consume that quantity daily. I've seen this kind of breakdown (glycaemic carbs/of which sugar) on various products so I'm trying to phrase this in a general sense. my question is which of the values should be considered towards daily carb intake. I guess to be safe I'll take the 50. Is the 10g difference not fibre? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sniffie Posted February 13, 2014 Share I am not the boffin on this thread, but I think Happy Martin is right the 10g would be other forms of carbs like starch and fibre for example. The sugar would be sucrose, fructose, maltose and lactose. And yes you are right if you are counting carbs you should add 50g in the example you mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcza Posted February 13, 2014 Share I am not the boffin on this thread, but I think Happy Martin is right the 10g would be other forms of carbs like starch and fibre for example. The sugar would be sucrose, fructose, maltose and lactose. And yes you are right if you are counting carbs you should add 50g in the example you mentioned. Yip I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyMartin Posted February 13, 2014 Share The other 10g won't be fibre. Fibre is either water soluble or non soluble and neither are digested. They aid the passage of material through the digestive system. The 10g not simple sugars will be starches and so on that your body will convert to sugars. I am also not a boffin but that is my understanding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sniffie Posted February 14, 2014 Share Have not tried this myself but Dave this one is for you. Will try it this weekend. jcza 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cellar Posted February 14, 2014 Share Have not tried this myself but Dave this one is for you. Will try it this weekend. I have no interest in this diet thread per se, but I'm making this mayonnaise. (I have made other things I found here too. Not cause I need any benefit or anything, but cause they're delcious.) Thanks guys. davetapson 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christinejvr Posted February 14, 2014 Share The mayo looks delicious and nutritionally much safer than the veg oil based ones from supermarkets. Just a word of caution from somebody working in the poultry industry. Salmonella is a reality out there. Be careful of raw eggs (especially if you like the free range versions! ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trailman Posted February 14, 2014 Share Anybody seen any stock of The Real Meal Revolution in the Cape Town, Winelands Somerset West Area?Hi Paarl just joined the gang, the book is available from Bargain Books in Willowbrige mall next to Checkers Tygervalley.There is limited stock even of the new run, so my advice would be to get in fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now