quantity or quality?

A lesson from the art world – but i think it applies to bikes. 

The story is: once upon a time a teacher had two different art classes on the same topic. He chose to experiment. He told one class that the grade would be based on quantity. The greater quantity you made, the greater your grade. He had a scale for quantity. The other class was opposite; it was based on quality only. One piece of artwork was all that was needed during the entire class session and that one piece would be judged on quality alone.

One class set to work that semester making as much as possible to get a good grade. Once class set to work pondering aesthetics and dreaming of the perfect piece of art. Which class produced the best quality work at the end of the session? The one being graded on quantity. What? Yes. Why? Because those that did it more, became more skilled. They did it repetitively and became more proficient. Those that spent all their time on one item, never developed skill. They spent all their time thinking theorizing – not on application.

Step aside for an aside.

Yes, I know, this does not apply to all situations.  Yes, I know this example is not perfect. Yes, I agree that theory and ‘thinking about’ it is important. Yes, I agree – that if you practice poorly, you will perform poorly. Practice does not make perfect.  Practice makes permanent.  Thus, if you practice poorly, you are reinforcing poor performance and ingraining that level of ‘quality’ into the performance of that skill. I think it was Malcolm Gladwell who said, “only perfect practice makes perfect”.  I agree.  Theoretically.  We all know that it is a continuum.  As you get better, then you do better.  Perfection is not really attainable but as your skill improves, you practice ‘better’ and your skill improves.  The theme of it all is – there is purpose and effort in there. The goal is to do better and get better. Doing it repetitively (and purposefully), which is quantity, improves performance or skill.  

And just to keep the record straight, no, I am not saying that more miles trumps anything. 

Ok – enough of the aside – back on track…

How does that apply to here? In many ways.

If you read about training plans and coaching, there is often an emphasis on ‘sticking with the plan’. If you miss or mess up a particular ride, that is fine. One particular ride is not going to derail your entire training. Pick up and move on. The most helpful part of the plan is the consistency of riding (and staying on the plan). Thus – volume/quantity/consistency is important. 

Some like to focus on the perfect ride. One ‘perfect’ ride does not exist in a vacuum. They are out there but they come because of all the rides previous, not because you are focused on one ride. Or because of a particular thing you did prior to that ride …  or drank on that ride.

There is much talk about Marginal Gains. That has derailed more amateur athletes than anything else. Marginal Gains are gains in performance that are small.  Very small. They are useful because in the elite ranks, the difference between 1st and 10th is often quite small. If you can leverage a few Marginal Gains then you might advance many places. But – Marginal Gains are additions only. Meaning, that you must do all the ‘regular’ things to increase performance and only then may you benefit from the Marginal Gains. 

Marginal Gains can be – lubrication of bike, a particular hydration or nutrition strategy, taking corner a particular way, a particularly aero part (helmet, wheel set etc.) and more. But, if you neglect your sleep, nutrition, recovery, or fitness on a daily basis, those Marginal Gains are not gains at all.  

What do I mean? I see/hear so many speak of the jersey fitting perfect to save X watts, this helmet saves XX watts, and this wheel set and this frame and this whatever saving XXX watts. The marketing folks like to translate that into seconds. If you added up all those watts (seconds), that guy should be about a mile ahead. But he is not. Why? They are marginal. Other variables that have a greater impact are involved. Often, he is missing other things – might I say easier or lower hanging fruit. He misses training rides regularly, he does not get enough sleep, he does not eat correctly. Marginal gains are literally fractions of seconds to a maximum of a few seconds. Not riding regularly but focusing on Marginal Gains is not going to help. Simply put, riding your bike is going to do more for you then fussing with a special process for waxing your chain.  

My background is in science – sport science – physiology and biomechanics in particular. I have worked with athletes to improve performance. Marginal Gains are interesting and can be helpful. They are the cherry on top of the fancy desert. If you make the effort to make a spectacular dessert, put homemade ice cream on top and whipped cream on that, the cherry on top is a wonderful addition. If you focus on the cherry and do not do the rest, it is just a single cherry on a platter.  Not a great desert. It is OK, but it is not the goal. Of maybe there is a sloppy mess of stuff on the plate with a cherry on top. If the desert was not prepared well, adding a cherry did not help at all. That is Marginal Gains being the focus rather than the true work of gaining fitness/proficiency.  

Again, I am not against Marginal Gains. It can be important and useful for the Professional. The professional that has done everything else to prepare and has added that Marginal Gain. It can be fun for ‘the rest of us’ to read about and understand. It is not really going to affect the rest of us in the same way. Yes, if you are going for a PR and have done all the other work, then add that cherry on top.  

Big picture is more important. Every coach I have spoken with or read say the same thing – focus on the basics. You have to have the basics before you can advance any. If the basics are not there – nothing else matters. I agree. 

How about an example.

I listened to a podcast recently. It was great. It was speaking of the gravel racers using wider tires. Someone was delving into the details regarding a wider tire and its impact on rolling resistance and aerodynamics. OK, those things exist. They can be interesting, but the focus was on the small and was missing the large. The trees were blocking the view of the forest.  Although those are variables, it is more than just rolling resistance and aerodynamics of a particular part. How so? If the wider tire soaks up enough vibration to allow the person to be less fatigued and that less fatigue allows that person to hold an aero body position for longer – THAT outweighs everything. The body position has more impact on aerodynamics than your frame, wheel set, whatever … combined. So, if you can alter one part that makes you more comfortable and keeps you in a more aerodynamic position for longer – then that has a bigger impact that anything else.  Forests and Trees.

Yes, I agree. But instead, I see people on triathlon bikes, all aero and pedaling at 45 RPMs and 15 mph. That bike looks aero but the aero is not being maximized. Or the guy that has his stem slammed to look cool and to be aero but never uses the drops; instead, he sits upright with his hands barely on the bars. Might it be more helpful to put the bars in a more useful location? Hey, I am not casting stones. Do what you like. But it appears to me that part of the actions is focused in one direction and part are focused in an opposite direction … thereby counteracting each other out.

Ahhh – critical thinking verses following the herd… or the ‘rules’ or trying to look cool… or look ‘pro’. We all make compromises and very few are trying to look foolish. We manage to do both regularly. With some critical thinking we can engage in those activities with less frequency and maybe move toward our true goal with more efficiency. Those marginal gains and ‘short cuts’ sound enticing, but consistency on the bike will outweigh them every single time.