gyming to improve power

ric_stern/RST

i know you weren't disagreeing. maybe my bad, i'd just got in from training!

what i meant was, that even if LA did those sessions there'd be no point to them (in terms of cycling performance).

trained: i don't have a strict definition, but generally i'd say if you race (say Cat 4 or above) or you could keep up if you were to race then that's trained.

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

VeloFlash

You are right on the money, Roadie_scum.

No professional athlete or professional coach is going to unlock the vault of their training secrets for the public, competitors and other professional coaches.

On the other hand, it is in their competitive and professional interest to mislead their opposition up the wrong path with misinformation and, through hyperbole of statistics, provide a psychological edge.

Unless there is independent observation to confirm, I would take with a grain of salt a lot of these disclosures from coaches about their charge's training statistics (Vo2 Max, watts per kg power, weights they are pumping, etc).

Fact is that if you get on a bike and ride you will improve. Any training program that provides for volume with bouts of intensity will result in improvements. Improvements result in customer satisfaction that the training program works. Anyone on a Friel, Carmichael or whoever training program out of a book will swear by it.

__________________
VF

"Remember, even if you win the rat race, you are still a rat"

sheppard

Hi franco,
Everything is a compromise. Your body can only divert so much energy to healing damaged (stressed) systems. If you're racing, you won't want to do heavy lifting during the season. It'll divert energy from healing that stressed aerobic machine of yours. People usually do the weight training in the winter months and then transition more and more to the bike, so that the newly gained strength is carried over. There are several phases to resistance training. Hypertrophy training, (more repetitions)where the muscles gain size; strength, where the muscles are basically just trained to produce more work, and then the power phase, where the resistance is reduced and the speed of contraction is increased in order to transform that new strength into something useable on the bike. There are physiological changes that occur when you do resistance training. That increased mass shouldn't be a concern if trained correctly; it'll more than make up for itself in increased power on the bike. The key is to do a lot of long, low intensity riding in order to "cardiovascularize" that new muscle tissue. Long, slow rides should increase the capillaries that permeate that new tissue. Then as you transition into the higher intensity training, you'll start to increase the mitochondria count as well. I believe weight training does have a place in cycling, but make sure you do your homework first... best of luck!

__________________
-Shep

ric_stern/RST

strength is only carried over is there is an increase in muscle sectional area. however, the amount carried over for 'bike use' will be much less than amount gained via weight training



if there's no increase in muscle cross sectional area then the gains are neuromuscular in nature and these are not transferred. this is because the adaptations are specific to the joint angle and velocity at which they're trained



if there's an increase in mass, then it most likely will be *detrimental* to endurance cycle racing, as e.g., you'll have more mass to lug uphill



the gains that are made in trained riders from weight training only increase sprint power. thus it won't make up for itself unless you can sprint up the hill



capillarisation and mitochondria are better trained at higher intensities (approaching VO2max).

increased mass from the hypertrophy will just slow you down. additionally, the forces required in endurance cycle racing are so low that virtually anyone can meet them (there's a few exceptions to this).

it (weights) is pretty much a waste of time if you're trained cyclist

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

menglish6

Ok, I'd like to clear a few things up in my mind (with help from those here) regarding the notion that the strength requirements of cycling (and I think I've heard the same for other sports as well) can be met by the average sedentary schmoe.

My initial reaction to this statement is that it can't be true. But, the more I thought about it, the more sense it makes. The problem with the statement that I percieve is that it creates the false impression that lance armstrong is no stronger than joe-bag-of-doughnuts who sits on the couch all day.

This was my thought process (please correct it if you find flaws). Say the power and strength requirements of a certain uphill climb at an elite speed are equivalent to doing a leg press with 150 lb in 2/3 of a second (90rpm). In all likelyhood most healthy adults can do this. The difference is, they can't do it continuously for 20-30-60 minutes. If I went into the gym and leg pressed 400lb, and then the next guy came by and leg pressed 400lb for 20 minutes, no one would try to say that we had similar strength. Maybe this isn't quite what is being said with the comparisons to the average sedintary adult, but I suspect it is.


Now if you go in the gym and train your muscles to be able to handle medium weights at high rates and high reps, that will have an effect on your ability to spin a slightly more difficult gear up the hill next time I'd think. That type of weight training is very different than basically anything you'd see people at a gym in the US doing. The type where you do 10 sets of 10 reps, where the 10 reps are done in maybe 15 seconds, and then maybe only 15 seconds of rest. That type of thing will get your legs and lungs burning like a good hill.

I guess it would be more accurate to say that cyclists need (have) great muscle endurance rather than strength. This is definately something that can be trained at the gym though.

__________________
"There aren't evil guys and innocent guys. It's just... It's just... It's just a bunch of guys." -- Steve Arlo

sheppard

Hey again franco, I know that you asked a pretty simple question...
From all the coaching material I've read, I'm going to have to disagree with all five of Ric's retorts. I know he's a moderator, and I'm not sure as to what previleges he has to the site.
It seems that the purpose of this site is to allow cycling enthusiasts to disseminate information amongst each other, and the information that has been given to me is that weight training does indeed have a place in the serious cyclist's training regimen.
Here's perhaps a more important issue with regards to this site:
There's no reason that we can't agree to disagree. :-)
(Ric, I see no purpose in your restating the claim that resistance training has no place...)
We can't argue that both philosophies do indeed exist.
Maybe, once this is accepted, we agree to belong to both sides...
The alternative is to do some research and start quoting some empirical data. Maybe even do a google search of your own, something like "cycling resistance training." Just see what pops up... take care and have fun!

__________________
-Shep

ric_stern/RST

what have my moderating privileges got to do with anything?



i am disseminating info!

unfortnately, you've been erroneously given such information, because there is no evidence that weight training is beneficial to endurance cycling performance. in fact the evidence would be that it is detrimental.

how do i know this? i've gone through the research available on the subject, and am currently writing a research paper on this very topic.



you can disagree as much as you like :-)



if you do a Pub-Med search you won't find any evidence that weight training increases performance in endurance trained cyclists in endurance cycling events (e.g., > 90-secs) because there isn't any. For e.g., Bishop et al., (1999).

for a slightly longer overview on the subject see my article here http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=strengthstern

Ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

tarvy

I for one am glad Ric restates his claim that resistance training
has no place in endurance cycling over and over, because if he
hadn't i would not have had the guts to drop my winter weight
training, replace it with trainer work and have the strongest start to my season ever.
tarvy

ric_stern/RST

untrained, healthy, age, gender, and mass matched controls are on average as strong as elite endurance cyclists




cycling is a very low strength sport. it's no wonder that cyclists aren't very strong.



at the power that e.g., Armstrong is likely to generate (~ 400 W) at 90 revs/min up a long alpine pass, the force requirements assuming 170-mm cranks is 249 Newtons (~ 25 kg between each leg).



this is correct



that is also correct



strength is clearly and well-defined as the *maximal* force or tension a muscle or group of muscles can generate. Thus, doing something for 20-minutes isn't a maximal effort



as can be seen from my example above virtually anyone can press 25 kg. you're going to have to be very small or very frail to not being able to manage this

however, with your suggestion, why not just cycle up the hills (moderate efforts, at high reps)?



cyclists need the ability to generate moderate amounts of power for long periods of time. this cannot be trained in the gym. the ability to generate moderate amounts of power for long periods of time is related to your lactate threshold, VO2max, efficiency, etc. these are trained on the bike.

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

ric_stern/RST

thanks tarvy, glad it's helped you.

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com

biker-linz

Actually, I'd like to jump in here too. Until I was lucky enough to speak to both Ric and Andy C. on this subject, I was also mistaken on the subject of weight training for endurance cycling performance.
However, approaching the subject with an open mind, I have to admit that I believe they are absolutely right. There is still a lot of 'myth' in the exercise world (stretching is another hot potato at the moment), and it's thanks to people like these two (and many more) that these questions are getting answered. Just because a Friel or a Carmichael (who incidentally has no qualifications in this field at all) says it's so, doesn't make it true.
FWIW, my experience is read the research and make up your own mind. Otherwise, I tend to trust the people who have both the knowledge, and nothing whatever to gain from sharing it.

Lindsay.

Carrera

Yes, this topic seems to keep bouncing back and I guess it will continue to be raised.
I already shared I'm a former bodybuilder who switched from weight-training to cycling - I'm probably not the only person on this forum who has a weight-training background.
Since I started training more seriously on the bike and dramatically reducing my weight-training I've basically lost quite a lot of weight. Most of my weight loss has been muscle since the body will drop muscle automatically when cycling at high intensity.
My own view, based on my own experiences, is that weights do increase power. For example, I now weigh some 28 pounds more than I did when I rode a bike in my twenties but I'm definitely a more powerful climber today than I was in the past. I know this is true in my case since I recently got up a monster of a hill I could never do years back when I weighed far less. Back then I was lighter but I didn't have the same power I have today.
However, I'd like to clarify one point:
I stated I believe I'm a more powerful climber than when I was far lighter but we should consider that power is only one aspect of cycling and an increase in power may arise at the expense of other qualities such as speed or endurance.
Therefore, it may be possible to choose what kind of cyclist you want to be.
The only thing that confuses me is that coaches such as Joe Friel advocate low rep power-training for cyclists in the off-season yet argue that a cyclist who pushes big cogs at slow cadence will lose form. Doesn't seem logical to me. Personally I still weight train but I use high reps (20 reps on squats). Maybe it hampers my endurance (or makes recovery more complex) but it does give me power in the hips, thighs and back.
Strangely enough, despite my weights background I tend to cycle in low gears at higher cadence than other guys who churn big cogs at lower cadence.
Incidentally, Lance Armstrong is pro weight-training. He trained with weights in Texas prior to his tour victories and states he made definite improvements in cycling performance (in his opinion). Lance's coach didn't allow him to squat or do upper body work but he did leg-presses and other leg exercises or back work.

rayner

I know theyre basically the same as doing light weights but would wall sits be benificial. I'm a bit of an allrounder as I'm still u19 but I'm leaning towards kilo's and scratch races. Hope you can answer that

ric_stern/RST

kilo and 200-m match track sprints (and Olympic sprints, and a couple other discliplines) are where weights *are* needed. you do need to be strong and develop a lot of force for those.

i wouldn't have thought wall sits would be useful, though.

ric

__________________
http://www.cyclecoach.com