Cycling and bicycle racing discussion forums.   View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics

Set as homepage


Go Back   Cycling Forums > Tech Corner > Power Training
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.


Upper Body and Power

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 17-06.-2005, 02:33 AM   #31
Don Shipp
Registered User
 
Don Shipp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Barnet, London.
Posts: 991
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by bozy
But they are doing it-and doing it properly so that strength, not bulk, is increased.
This very fact flies in the face of Stern's whim that strength training is injurious to endurance cyclists.
I am sure that the little bit of muscle up top that they allow themselves is as fit as it can be.
Overtraining is injurious.
Training should be specific to purpose, cyclists train by cycling. This way they build up ull the muscle and strength they need, and none that they don't.
If they are doing weights, it can only be a small part of their whole training program.
Don Shipp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 03:00 AM   #32
Don Shipp
Registered User
 
Don Shipp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Barnet, London.
Posts: 991
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by bozy
But they are doing it-and doing it properly so that strength, not bulk, is increased.
This very fact flies in the face of Stern's whim that strength training is injurious to endurance cyclists.
Now I see that Stern did not claim that strength training is injurious to endurance cyclists, but that it is detrimental to endurance cyclists performance. This would be an overall effect, with the sum of all the various disadvantages that have been mentioned being more significant than sum of all the advantages.
Of course, some upper body and core strength is required, but this can be developed on the bike.
Don Shipp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 03:09 AM   #33
Felt_Rider
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,348
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Shipp
I am sure that the little bit of muscle up top that they allow themselves is as fit as it can be.
Overtraining is injurious.
Training should be specific to purpose, cyclists train by cycling. This way they build up ull the muscle and strength they need, and none that they don't.
If they are doing weights, it can only be a small part of their whole training program.

Good post
Same as the discussion on the worthiness of stretching.

The main factor is Time that used efficiently for sport specific training.

Time for sports specific training
Time for nutritional needs (eating properly)
Time for recovery (rest)

.....and for the average Joe

Time for family
Time for career

What time is left after that in the normal cycle of the day or week?

I am advocate for weight training (except in this forum - I agree on physiology pertaining to cycling). I skirt the thin line between weight training and cycling, but my goals are not for competitive cycling. I say skirt the line because I am in a state of barely recovering from doing both without the use of PED's and yet I will not be able to excel greatly at either.

Yesterday morning I trained legs which included squats and yesterday afternoon I did 22 miles on the road bike and attempted interval training. Needless to say I could not hang with the guy I train with for cycling. It's not just my extra lean mass that causes me to be slower it is also my slower recovery rate from trying to juggle too much.

To become a real competitor that is set on improving one may have to get tunnel visioned and become very sport specific.
Felt_Rider is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 03:37 AM   #34
Don Shipp
Registered User
 
Don Shipp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Barnet, London.
Posts: 991
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by Felt_Rider
Good post
Same as the discussion on the worthiness of stretching.

The main factor is Time that used efficiently for sport specific training.

Time for sports specific training
Time for nutritional needs (eating properly)
Time for recovery (rest)

.....and for the average Joe

Time for family
Time for career

I am advocate for weight training (except in this forum - I agree on physiology pertaining to cycling). I skirt the thin line between weight training and cycling, but my goals are not for competitive cycling. I say skirt the line because I am in a state of barely recovering from doing both without the use of PED's and yet I will not be able to excel greatly at either.

Yesterday morning I trained legs which included squats and yesterday afternoon I did 22 miles on the road bike and attempted interval training. Needless to say I could not hang with the guy I train with for cycling. It's not just my extra lean mass that causes me to be slower it is also my slower recovery rate from trying to juggle too much.

To become a real competitor that is set on improving one may have to get tunnel visioned and become very sport specific.
Most people who train underestimate the time that their bodies take to recover from exercise to get the full benefits.
To become a real competitor you have to sacrifice something else that you enjoy doing.
Don Shipp is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 05:07 AM   #35
acoggan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,622
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by bozy
Interesting, but where's the data to support this point of view?


Type "interference effect" into PubMed and you'll turn up several studies that have found that attempting to simultaneously train for both strength and endurance can be detrimental to the development of either. Not all studies have observed this, however, which has led to the hypothesis that it depends on the overall training load. IOW, it seems likely that an athlete attempting to maximize their endurance cycling performance will not be able to do so if they simultaneously perform resistance training. This conclusion is consistent with data showing that the muscular adaptations to resistance training - in particular, hypertrophy leading to a reduction in capillary and mitochondrial density - are antithetical to endurance.

(And if you don't like that answer, how about this one: where's the data supporting the claim that resistance training improves the performance of endurance cyclists? )
acoggan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 05:12 AM   #36
acoggan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,622
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by bozy
But they are doing it-and doing it properly so that strength, not bulk, is increased.
This very fact flies in the face of Stern's whim that strength training is injurious to endurance cyclists.


I gather you've never heard the saying "never copy the training program of a champion, because you don't know if they are a champion because of, or in spite of, their training program"?
acoggan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 06:53 AM   #37
mises
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 247
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

I find it very disturbing that reasoning logically from accepted facts is no longer considered a valid way of proving an idea.

i.e All body mass requires energy to maintain and to move through space. Only a subset of body parts are utilized in propelling the bike. Adding mass to the non bike propelling parts consumes resources. Humans can produce only a finite amount of power. Therefore adding mass to non bike propelling parts is detrimental to cycling performance.
mises is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 07:04 AM   #38
tfstrum
Registered User
 
tfstrum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: CA
Posts: 320
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Shipp
Now I see that Stern did not claim that strength training is injurious to endurance cyclists, but that it is detrimental to endurance cyclists performance. This would be an overall effect, with the sum of all the various disadvantages that have been mentioned being more significant than sum of all the advantages.
Of course, some upper body and core strength is required, but this can be developed on the bike.


A lady at work shared an article awhile back that outlined ways for women to work on arm strength outside of weight rooms and bicycling was one of the top activites. The pulling and the resistance of being in the drop postion was mentioned as the factors for shapely arms. So, not sure how much a man would benefit from the same activity. I think I'd work on the core outside of just the bike if I was racing though.
tfstrum is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 12:59 PM   #41
Cheesy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 119
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

As a MTBer I can second that the upper body gets a good workout, as does the core.

I imaging that upper body is also important for sprinters - as they are trying to generate large down force on the pedal to accelerate fast, and body weight only doesn't really cut it - not only do you need to pull up hard with your trailing pedal, but also pulling with your arms allows more force.

I've got no data or proof, I just know what I need to do when I try & accelerate hard in a high gear. And a previous poster mentioned the observation that sprinters have more built upper bodies.
Cheesy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 01:53 PM   #42
taras0000
Registered User
 
taras0000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 232
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by RapDaddyo
What is the optimal role of the upper body in pedaling, particularly the arms? Do they contribute to power and, if so, how? I sometimes find myself wanting to pull with my arms, especially when climbing on the saddle. Apart from getting a sore back, can I apply more power by actively using my arms? Are there any scientific studies of the forces applied to the handlebars by the top cyclists (e.g., force-instrumented bars or bars with strain gauges)?



just try some track racing, you'll bring in your upper body more, and it's still cycling specific
__________________
Taras
taras0000 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 05:18 PM   #43
n crowley
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: dublin ireland
Posts: 428
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by RapDaddyo
What is the optimal role of the upper body in pedaling, particularly the arms? Do they contribute to power and, if so, how? I sometimes find myself wanting to pull with my arms, especially when climbing on the saddle. Apart from getting a sore back, can I apply more power by actively using my arms? Are there any scientific studies of the forces applied to the handlebars by the top cyclists (e.g., force-instrumented bars or bars with strain gauges)?






With the natural or normal pedalling styles where vertical pedal pressure is the main power supplier it is impossible to effectively use your upper body arm power. This test will explain why. With your bike on a trainer, lock your back wheel and set the right pedal to the 1 , 2 , 3 or 4 o'c position, using your normal seated pedalling style apply max force to the pedal, then try and use your arm to increase this force, all you will do is pull yourself out of the saddle. In order to be able to use max arm power, the pedal power application line and arm resistance line must be in opposite directions and this is not possible in natural pedalling, a simple but complete change in the leg power application technique makes all this possible. The reason for your attempted pulling on the bars is that search for increased resistance. With your pedalling style your lower back is supplying most of the resistance, this places the lower back under continuous strain and the attempted useless pulling increases this strain, resulting in your sore back. Linear pedalling is the answer and it opens up a whole new area of research where force instrumented bars would be useful. Using the linear technique in that test above, when arm and leg power is combined you can apply almost equipment breaking force to the pedal while your lower back remains in a relaxed position due to the fact that all resulting strain is hinged in the hip instead of the lower back.
n crowley is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 17-06.-2005, 08:10 PM   #45
Don Shipp
Registered User
 
Don Shipp's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Barnet, London.
Posts: 991
Default Re: Upper Body and Power

Quote:
Originally Posted by bozy
This is quite fascinating! But, pray tell, what is "linear pedalling?" I'd very much like to know. Perhaps it's been defined in other posts or literature, but I'm unaware of it.
I knew that you'd ask that.
Don Shipp is offline  
Reply With Quote

Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 11:26 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 cyclingforums.com

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet