Benefits of muscle tension intervals?

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Well, if you ignore article's by Andy C, you're obviously more moronic than you look.

Anyway, it's "Ric" not "Rick", so i suggest some adult spelling and reading classes for you.



Well, if i'm one of your "so called experts", then again, as you were with Andy, you're wrong. I've had plenty of > 600 km weeks (especially when i raced in France).

RicI pretty quickly glossed over the study, and don't really have the energy nor the attention span to pick throught its details after long day, a big dinner, and a generous glass of wine. One thing I did immediately notice, however, was that the study seemed to be designed to answer assertions about low cadence work that no one to my knowledge has really made. It seems like a lot of effort to design and carry out a study simply to knock down a straw man.

If I remember correctly, the study sought to test whether low cadence intervals caused hypertrophy and were superior to other forms of endurance interval training. I don't think any proponent of low cadence work would make either of those claims. That's not what they're intended to do as part of a well designed training regime. According to my understanding, low cadence intervals are meant to be used in a strictly transitional training period and are intended to increase somewhat the endurance qualities of fast twitch fibers. I don't think anyone thinks they're going to cause hypertrophy, and they're not intended to replace other forms of interval training. In fact, you should be done with them by late winter.

I've had them prescribed to me, as I said, during a transitional stage from weight training and sprint training to strength endurance work to provide a sort of continuum to strictly aerobic systems. Are they useful? I guess it depends; not only on a person's individual fiber makeup, but also on their racing speciality. For a crit racer spinning 110 rpms, probably not all that useful. For a mountain biker such as me, where quickly varying terrain and short steep climbs that dictate you grind and mash over them and keep going at your redline for two hours, I find there's some theoretical utility in considering them.

I pretty quickly glossed over the study, and don't really have the energy nor the attention span to pick throught its details after long day, a big dinner, and a generous glass of wine. One thing I did immediately notice, however, was that the study seemed to be designed to answer assertions about low cadence work that no one to my knowledge has really made. It seems like a lot of effort to design and carry out a study simply to knock down a straw man.

I assume that you're referring to the web-published-only study by Mason et al.? If so, it strikes me as not being intended to "knock down" any hypotheses, but instead to provide support for the idea of "on-the-bike resistance training". I say that, though, having the benefit of reading other things she's written, which you may not have seen.

If I remember correctly, the study sought to test whether low cadence intervals caused hypertrophy and were superior to other forms of endurance interval training. I don't think any proponent of low cadence work would make either of those claims.

Actually, some have done precisely that, which is why 1) Mason et al. included such measurements as part of their experiment, and 2) I discussed the absolute forces in my article.

That's not what they're intended to do as part of a well designed training regime. According to my understanding, low cadence intervals are meant to be used in a strictly transitional training period and are intended to increase somewhat the endurance qualities of fast twitch fibers. I don't think anyone thinks they're going to cause hypertrophy, and they're not intended to replace other forms of interval training.

Again, please see the article that I wrote: there appears to be no concensus over just what such training is intended to accomplish, and it isn't clear that such training actually results in greater recruitment of type II motor units.