Science in Sport translates high carbohydrate targets into practical 60, 90, and 120g hourly bands. Here is how older endurance athletes can test these safely.
In September 2026, Science in Sport Australia published an updated carbohydrate intake guide for endurance athletes. The company promoted this framework alongside the Nike Melbourne Marathon Festival, which featured a competition closing on September 15, 2026. The new page outlines three specific hourly fueling bands of 60, 90, and 120 grams of carbohydrate per hour. Rather than pushing a single universal recommendation, the brand frames these bands as practical strategies.
This structure gives competitors a clear system to test their carbohydrate intake during long sessions. Athletes can match these hourly targets with specific product combinations to simplify their nutrition. The guide helps solve a common logistical problem for long distance running and cycling. Competitors no longer have to guess how many gels they need when their exercise duration increases.
The primary value of the Science in Sport guide is its simple product formulas. Endurance athletes often struggle to calculate their hourly intake during intense physical efforts. The updated framework removes this friction by pairing specific targets with exact product combinations. For the baseline 60 grams per hour option, the guide lists three GO Plus Isotonic Energy Gels.
The company lists the GO Plus Isotonic Energy Gel in several flavors on its Australian site. Individual gels are priced at A$3.49, while 30-packs cost A$99.96. Consuming three gels every hour is a common starting point for many runners and cyclists. This band provides a manageable volume of fuel without overwhelming the stomach during moderate efforts.
Moving to the 90 grams per hour band introduces a different product mix. The guide combines one BETA Fuel Gel and one BETA Fuel Chew per hour for this level. The listed BETA Fuel Gel contains 60 grams of carbohydrate. The BETA Fuel Chew is also listed as a 60 gram product, so athletes must check their labels carefully.
For the highest target of 120 grams per hour, the guide pairs one BETA Fuel Gel with one BETA Fuel Sachet. The page lists these BETA Fuel 80 sachets as 82 gram products. Single sachets cost A$7.49, and 15-packs are priced at A$104.95. Science in Sport notes that higher carbohydrate intake can support endurance performance during long events.
Athletes must also consider the financial cost of sustaining these high fueling targets. Funding a 120 grams per hour strategy for long training blocks requires a substantial budget. Running a four hour marathon at this level demands four BETA sachets and four BETA gels. Most runners find that saving premium fueling combinations for race day makes more economic sense.
However, the company clearly states that athletes must determine their own limits. The practical challenge is figuring out what an individual can absorb, tolerate, and use effectively. The guide functions as a branded product template rather than a complete sports nutrition protocol. It does not explain when to choose each band based on specific exercise durations or intensity zones.
The guide addresses a major hurdle in endurance sports by treating carbohydrate intake as an hourly planning problem. For long distance running and cycling, the fueling puzzle becomes increasingly difficult as exercise duration grows. Athletes must decide exactly how much carbohydrate to consume during a grueling event. They also have to figure out which formats they can physically carry, ingest, and tolerate repeatedly.
Counting gels by feel often leads to under fueling or sudden stomach distress late in a race. By creating three distinct bands, Science in Sport provides a simple interface for converting a target into a physical load. An athlete aiming for 60 grams per hour knows exactly how many gels to stuff into their pockets. The visual simplicity of this system helps runners and cyclists organize their nutrition long before race day.
The push toward structured carbohydrate targets aligns with broader trends in endurance sports science. On September 15, 2026, a massive new cycling nutrition position statement was published online. This document appeared in the International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism. The UCI Sports Nutrition Project gathered leading experts to synthesize current fueling research.
The project featured prominent sports nutrition researchers, including Louise Burke, Javier González, and Asker Jeukendrup. Stephen Seiler and James Morton also contributed to this international review. This ambitious project combined the expertise of 54 researchers and produced 14 topic specific reviews. It organized its conclusions around 10 overarching themes, including in competition fueling, recovery, and energy availability.
The statement also covered health alongside age and sex specific considerations for cyclists. The primary goal is to make recommendations that respond to individual and discipline specific demands. The publicly displayed abstract does not specify universal recommendations of 90 or 120 grams per hour. It does not explain dual gut transporters, describe gut training, or quantify gastrointestinal tolerance.
The UCI project confirms that cycling nutrition is moving away from generic prescriptions. Elite riders utilize different carbohydrate strategies depending on their race format and tactical role. A mountain biker facing a ninety minute intense race fuels differently than a road cyclist riding for six hours. This shift toward individualization highlights why we should not view the 120 grams per hour band as a universal standard.
This context is crucial when evaluating commercial fueling frameworks from nutrition brands. The scientific consensus favors personalized testing over mandatory high volume targets. The Science in Sport page omits several important variables that affect digestion. It provides no fluid volume, sodium, or sweat rate recommendations.
The guide lacks a duration based decision tree, athlete size adjustments, and gut training instructions. Because these variables are missing, runners and cyclists must build their own testing protocols. Athletes must respect their own gastrointestinal absorption bottlenecks when attempting these advanced strategies. The most defensible approach is treating these targets as training hypotheses rather than undeniable facts.
Ambitious athletes over 35 must approach high carbohydrate targets with patience and discipline. We cannot simply adopt the highest fueling band without testing it thoroughly in training. Science in Sport presents 120 grams per hour as an option, but it remains an advanced strategy. Older athletes often face changes in recovery that demand a more measured approach to everyday nutrition planning.
Hitting my forties brought a harsh reality check. The track workouts were not getting slower, but the days after them felt significantly heavier. Instead of forcing my old Tuesday and Thursday intensity schedule, I looked at the data on Masters athletes and muscle protein synthesis. I pushed my second hard session to Friday, allowing an extra forty eight hours of low intensity recovery.
My total weekly volume stayed the same, but the quality of my intervals skyrocketed. We must apply this same analytical mindset to our endurance fueling strategies. You should match your carbohydrate target to the specific demands of your session. Make these decisions based on planned duration, event demands, and prior stomach tolerance.
If you want to try higher intake bands, you must separate your fueling from your hydration. The guide does not provide hydration advice, so athletes must plan their fluid intake independently. Increasing your carbohydrate volume does not automatically dictate your water or electrolyte needs. Following individual nutritional demands in cycling requires testing both food and fluid in separate steps.
Instead of assuming every long session requires 120 grams per hour, athletes should let the workout dictate the fuel. An athlete can trial the 60, 90, or 120 grams per hour framework during a designated long run. Afterward, they should carefully record their energy levels, pace, stomach comfort, and thirst. Monitoring recovery in the days following the session is just as critical as analyzing the workout itself.
This gradual testing phase is crucial when using heavily concentrated products like the BETA Fuel line. The 120 grams per hour band relies on the BETA Fuel 80 sachet and a standard BETA Fuel Gel. If you have never consumed 120 grams of sugar in an hour, your digestive system will likely rebel. The company does not publish a progression protocol, so any move toward a higher target must be gradual.
You should introduce new carbohydrate volumes during standard training weeks rather than saving them for competition. A race environment brings added stress, elevated heart rates, and changing weather conditions. All of these factors can negatively impact your ability to digest and absorb heavy fuel loads. Testing your product combination under controlled conditions builds the confidence you need for race day.
Older recreational and masters athletes do not need to pursue the highest available carbohydrate number. The real benefit here is having a structured range to test against event logistics and personal performance goals. A reliable strategy that you can repeat across training and racing is the ultimate objective. By focusing on absorption and tolerance, older athletes can maintain high performance and stay competitive for years.
Endurance athletes should view these structured carbohydrate bands as useful starting points for training, keeping in mind that personal digestion always dictates the final race strategy.
Follow ReEndure for practical insights on endurance training, recovery, nutrition and healthy aging. Stay connected for new articles, research led guidance and ideas to help you perform better for longer.
Read practical ideas on endurance training, recovery, nutrition and healthy aging to keep progressing for years to come.
Read the Blog