Controversial coda on Sunday at Back to the Algarve where the home champion Joao almeida, third, he attributed his defeat to the fact that the first two, Juan Ayuso and Paul Seixas respectively, had gotten the better of him only because they had just come down from the heights. A correlation that is certainly well-known in today's cycling world, but is there any truth to the fact that it is such an immediate consequence?
Let's start from this in the examination of the topic with the trainer Paolo Artuso: «After all, Almeida didn't go looking for excuses. As soon as you step down from the altitude, you immediately feel a beneficial effect. Exposure to altitude is a tool used to increase endurance capacity.. Consequently, exposure to hypoxia induces an increase in the release of erythropojectin, and erythropoietin consequently increases the production of red blood cells, i.e., erythropoiesis. This, as is known, results in a higher maximum oxygen consumption, so we go faster immediately."
However, there are experiences, for example in athletics, of riders who came down from altitude, but the effects began to be seen after a short period of time, a week, maybe even two…
There may be a situation that is called “bad window”, which can happen not with all riders and not always, The effect varies from two to eight days after returning to sea level, and during that time, the classic bad weather can also occur. But these days, the altitude is used so frequently that this bad window is increasingly rare.
Coming back down from the heights, when will peak form arrive?
Almost immediately. Nowadays we tend to delay the altitude as much as possible compared to the race, in the sense that I come down and go running directlyThis is because the goal is to get as many red blood cells as possible, meaning as much oxygen as possible to the muscle groups. Consequently, the later I get down, the more benefit I get. Now, if you look at many people, they go straight to the race from the heights, perhaps stopping by their homes for a mental rather than physical reason. Once upon a time, however, a race was always included in the mix to fine-tune the training. How can it be a Tour of the Alps before the Giro d'Italia. The top rider doesn't wait, he heads straight to the start of his goal.
Does the discussion change based on the endurance sport discipline?
No, the physiology is more or less the same, whether you're a rider or a cyclist. It applies to all endurance sports.
Let's talk about the length of the climb, between two and three weeks, what's the difference?
It's mostly an individual choice. Strategies have now begun to be used to maintain the effects of altitude for longer, through heat training. Or through hypobaric chambers, now also permitted in Italy. This way, the effects of altitude are prolonged as long as possible.. It's a different choice: if I want to do the Tour of the AlpsI'll go for 2-3 weeks (better 3...) and then I'll come back, go for a run to get some rhythm. Between TOTA and the Giro d'Italia, I still have 10-12 days, and in between, I'll either use the hypobaric chamber or do some heat training. Ultimately, my hemoglobin level remains fairly stable with these precautions.
How long can a period at altitude last?
Even up to a month, but there the mental aspect also comes into play a little.A month on Teide (in the opening photo, ed.) or in Sierra Nevada, psychologically, isn't easy. Nowadays, if you can manage 21 days, it's perfect. Lately, there's a tendency to stay slightly higher, 2.300-2.400 meters, and that also has a big impact because the body gets used to it and therefore the effects of the altitude are a little less, so we have to find tricks to give the body a jolt.
What could they be?
Let me give you an example: if once 15 days on Etna were enough, now to have an increase in hemoglobin mass they are no longer enough, so people tend to stay a little taller.
One might almost be led to think: I'm constantly going back and forth, so I always have the effect of the altitude…
It is not so. Let's start from the assumption that the effects of altitude have different implications for each athlete. Some are more sensitive than others.Three weeks is the best time, but we also know that in those weeks you need to give yourself multiple altitude stimuli to get the best results. It makes sense to go to altitude in February for the Giro d'Italia, knowing you'll also be there in April. So I'll do two blocks of training. But if I start doing two blocks for the first part of the season, two blocks for the second, for one, two, three years in a row, the body will get used to it, so you also need to find some workarounds.
What are they?
I do a little less altitude, so I have one predominant objective during the year and the other less, or I have to stay higher, have greater exposure, a higher altitude. But all these changes also bring consequences.For example, about sleep. Then there's the mental aspect we were talking about. It's not an easy balance to achieve.
There are riders who are almost resistant to altitude, who experience no positive effects and ultimately give up. Is it a physiological or mental problem?
There's an individual response to altitude: there's someone who feels it more, someone who feels it less. It also depends on how you approach it. There are three types of altitude experience, but the one that works best is “living high and training low”: I live high but train lower, which is what happens in cycling and less in athletics, for exampleIf you go to Teide, a 45-minute descent takes you to the sea, so you can replicate the power of sea level, but with the adjustments of 16-18 hours of altitude exposure a day. And then everything changes…
