Take the 2-minute tour ×

I was reading a discussion (Cycling: mashing versus spinning) in which someone commented ...


... which implies that cycling performance is affected by one's age.

Now ageing might be, to quote the FAQ, "an actual problem that you face".

Assuming that ageing is in fact some kind of 'problem', can you tell me what's useful to know about it? Especially as it relates to cycling (ability, performance, expectations, and/or training)?

For example a little bit of googling found "Key found to muscle loss as we age" which suggests that one cause of muscle wasting in older people is decreased blood flow to the legs (which cycling presumably helps to counter-act somewhat).

To be a bit more specific:

  • I'm soon to be 50 (but please feel free to talk about other ages if you know about it and think it would interest)
  • I'd looking for any specifically age-related information (e.g. I think all articles will say that in general exercise is good for you at any/every age: which is the opposite of being an age-specific statement, or statements about specific ages or ageing)
  • I'm looking for bicycle-specific information (so perhaps not especially for statements relating to flexibility, memory and other mental abilities, impact-resilience, and/or other such ageing-related phenomena that aren't especially relevant to bicycling)
  • I'd prefer actionable or prescriptive information
share|improve this question
add comment

6 Answers 6

up vote 4 down vote accepted

I'm over 50, starting my 30th year of cycling, and raced for 10 years when much younger. I've been tracking my performance over the 30 years with detailed training diaries.

The main age related issue I've found is that it takes longer for me to recover from hard efforts. The consequence is that I cannot train as hard overall because I cannot handle as many hard days of training. I also find that I need to warm up longer before hard efforts, which reduces the time I can spend working hard in any given training session.

Overall, I haven't found much decrease in performance given the reduced amount of hard training. In other words, if I compare my current performance to earlier times when I was training at the same level of effort, my performance is only a little worse.

I'm curious to find out at what age I will start seeing a bigger decline.

I deal with the reduced number of hard sessions by pushing myself extremely hard during those sessions and taking it much easier on other rides. My goal is that my hard days are very hard and my easy days are very easy.

share|improve this answer
add comment

I think as you get older the "use it or lose" it problem with muscle mass and bone density becomes more obvious. The rate of loss of both of those increases as you age. My solution here is just to keep stretching, keep riding and do more tai chi and yoga rather than aikido & judo.

A secondary effect is that recovery time increases, as does reaction time. So you're both more likely to crash, and you take longer to recover when you do. Perhaps a shift from criterium to velodrome racing is a good idea once you hit 50 (not that any of my friends seem to be doing that, but they should). At the extreme, a lot of geriatric old farts switch to recumbent trikes once they hit 60 or 70, partly because they struggle to get on and off an upright, but also because the cost of falling off one is so high - break a hip at 70 and your life expectancy drops dramatically.

On the positive side, if you're a competitive cyclist your increased experience and tactical judgement help to offset your lower peak power output until well into your 40s. There have also been quite a few long distance records set by older cyclists, including some hour records. Older in this case meaning "over 30", although Fast Freddy Markham set the hour record when he was 50.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Years ago, I read an academic journal on exercise physiology. From memory, almost all measures of fitness decline from around age 30, except strength. The test subjects in the study increased their strength to whatever the maximum age measured in the paper.

Mind, my own experience is greater endurance as an older athlete than when younger. Mostly due to working out appropriately to meet the goal.

share|improve this answer
There is a steady loss of motor neurons, beginning at about age 20. Most people have an overabundance and will never notice them missing, but if the number drops below a certain level then muscles begin to weaken regardless of exercise level. –  Daniel R Hicks Feb 21 '12 at 1:43
add comment

I'm 65, with the problems one might expect; had surgery on a knee last year, aches and pains in shoulder joints, had a little bout of angina a couple of years ago and got a stent...

Still riding though. By all accounts, given that cycling is a superb aerobic (or "cardio" as they say now) exercise, it might behoove the older rider to toss in some resistance training as well to compensate for muscle-mass loss. I've been doing non-impactive upper-body work recently (using a device called a "Bulgarian training bag") and it seems to be helping my wonky shoulders and general upper-body strength.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Here's an article on that subject:

With muscles, 'use it or lose it' rings true

It's good and bad news:

  • With regular extreme exercise, some people stay strong into their 70s


    The subjects in the study were 40 recreational masters athletes between the ages of 40 and 81, who trained four to five times a week for running, swimming or cycling races.

    Surprisingly, neither leg muscle size nor strength declined significantly with age among the subjects, suggesting that regular training had warded off the muscle-wasting effects of aging. The sample MRIs showed virtually indistinguishable quadriceps in a 40-year-old triathlete compared with a 70-year-old triathlete. In contrast, the quadriceps of a 74-year-old sedentary man were shrivelled and enveloped in fat.

  • However muscles and "spinal motor neurons" which you don't exercise don't benefit

    The older runners had a slightly higher number of arm motor units than their sedentary peers, but the difference wasn’t statistically significant. Both were dramatically lower than the younger controls – a finding that wasn’t entirely unexpected.

In summary:

loss of motor units is only one aspect of age-related decline ... choose a mix of exercises that also target cardiorespiratory fitness and bone health ... the majority [of Canadians] still don’t meet even minimum guidelines for physical activity ... current decisions about exercise [affect] quality of life a few decades down the road.

“We control 70 per cent of how we age,” she says. “The other 30 per cent is genetic, and we can blame our mothers for that. But 70 per cent is in our hands.”

share|improve this answer
add comment

I don't think there's anything "useful" to know about aging in the context you outline, although it could potentially be interesting for you to compare your own fitness and performance over time.

Common trend: Athletic performance declines with age.
Individual trend: My performance has increased with age since I pay more attention to my fitness, diet, etc.

So the "problem" as defined might be the general trend... which should not be correlated with individual performance.

share|improve this answer
It's true that people are more or less fit compared with other people of several other ages, and so it's difficult to say something definite about age (as opposed to about the individual). On the other hand, comparing me to myself, I've increased my amount of exercise in the last two months, and if I'm not mistaken maybe my muscles aren't growing as much or as fast as when I was a teenager and increased my exercise then: and maybe that age-related trend is universal; and maybe there's a corresponding, commonly-applicable adaptation/change to one's regimen that could be useful to know. –  ChrisW Apr 23 '11 at 0:07
add comment

Your Answer


