Climbers vs. Sprinters

[retrogeek]

I couldn't agree more 2 lap, you said it better than I did:

"As you said, muscle fibre composition actualy has very little to do with performance... almost to the extent at which its worth ignoring by coaches and athletes outside a reasearch setting. Muscle fibre composition is rarely a limiting factor (apart from in diseased states and elderly people), it can't be used to predict performance and cannot be measured easily; therefore its best to focus on other aspects during training and national squad/talent selection."

It is good to use physiological data to design training programs and what not, but I feel it is getting a bit out of hand when it is used as the only criteria, or the main criteria, for judging a riders potential. It is also a useful tool to use to find out your weaknesses and to then work on those.

 

[Frihed89]

What about Jaja? He's shorter than Martin Sheen! Has the evolution of the post-modern beast-like sprinter been that fast?

 

[Travis Brown]

The best way to find out what your true genetic muscle fiber make-up is without a biopsy is to simply race in the pro 1/2 field. A pure spinter can be a good climber in the cat 3,4 and 5 fields, but it is doubtful that this will be the case in the pro 1/2 field. Same thing goes for true climbers. Anyway, my point is that if you really want to know what your genetic muscle fiber make-up is, then work toward getting into the cat 1/2 field. There you will find out if you are a true climber, true sprinter or a true all-arounder. A lot of people get mixed up about which genetic category they sit under because they don't ride with elite caliber cyclists. Simply because you win your friends in hill-climbs on group rides doesn't mean you are a climber. You could be a sprinter that simply has more overall ability than your friends.

 

[velomanct]

The best way to find out what your true genetic muscle fiber make-up is without a biopsy is to simply race in the pro 1/2 field. A pure spinter can be a good climber in the cat 3,4 and 5 fields, but it is doubtful that this will be the case in the pro 1/2 field.QUOTE]

ivan dominguez climbs quite well. he was up there with horner on the climbs at redlands (one of those early season california races)

 

[Travis Brown]

Yea, Ivan Dominguez is a good sprinter and a good all-arounder. By what I said above I didn't mean that it is not possible to be a climber and a sprinter at the same time. Though, it seems that on the pro level the truest of sprinters have a hard time hanging in there with the truest of climbers, especially in a stage race situation, where riders ride day-in-day-out (visa versa for true climbers when it comes to a field sprints). There are people though that simply have amazing all-around ability. They can sprint like crazy and can climb like mad, but unfortunately and fortunate to many these people aren't born every day. What I meant by what I said above is that if you make it to the pro field and take your god given ability to the limits and you still can't climb with the best, but can sprint with the best then your ratio of high/slow twitch muscles lean toward the high twitch side. Same thing goes for someone that makes it to the pro level, takes their training to the limit and can climb with the best but really can't sprint. Their ratio of high/slow twitch muscle leans toward the slow twitch side. Then there are those that make it to the pro feild, take their genetic ability to the limit and they can climb well and sprint well, yet they are not the best at either one, though they are good enough to do well. These guys are all-arounders and have a more even ratio of slow/high twitch muscle fiber. Then there are the guys that can climb with the very best and sprint with the very best. They may not even have an even ratio of slow to fast twitch muscles and they may have, yet they can still beat either crowd (sprinters or climbers). These guys are simply above and beyond the average talented pro. Some call them the freaks of nature. Don't ask me what makes them capable of doing so well in both sprinting and climbing. They simply have more ability. All I wanted to say with what I said above is that for the majority of people if they make it to the pro 1/2 field they will find out there strong point and week point very fast. It is a lot easier to be the best sprinter and climber at the same time in the lower categories, but once you make it to the 1/2's you find out what you are; a climber, a sprinter, an all-arounder, or some freak of nature that can both climb and sprint better then the rest. I don't know of many freaks of nature. What about you? There are different levels of ability and they go far beyond simple ratio's of slow/fast twitch muscle fiber. There may very well be someone out there that has more slow twitch muscle fibers then fast, yet they can still win the sprinters and, of course, be on top of their game in climbing. This particular person simply has more ability. Muscle fiber ratio doesn't mean everything. Some people are simply on a different level.

 

[zaskar]

I consider mycelf more of a TTer than anything and I really like long gradual climbs (6-9%) where I can stay in the big ring and in the saddle at 90-100 rpm. QUOTE]


If you can spin 90-100 in the 53 on a 8% climb, you need to come here and break the mountain TT record, hell you would beat LA on Duez crankin like that.

 

[wallis]

And then there are few of us that just can't seem to drop into our 39's even in a long endurance climb. Sometimes I wish I could spin!

I am definitely a sprinter...and I have "afterburners" that allow me to chase, and catch, if I do fall off on a climb. BUT, training has immensely improved my climbing and at my last race I stayed at the front of the pack on the 9.5% grade climb! I will never be a twig so I concentrate on controlling my breathing and heartrate when climbing to keep my pace steady. Losing 10 lbs helped too; fewer curves swinging back and forth whilst I stand to climb

i love a good sprint and work on my sprints lots, however i'm a definite climber (even though i cant stand it)

life is cruel

 

[Carrera]

I don't know whether I'm made for climbing or sprinting but I'm reasonably good at climbing since I simply enjoy doing it. I like to climb because climbing is much harder work and it forces me to sweat and work hard.
I got to thinking, though, that the real secret behind the great tour de France winners is these guys place most emphasis on their climbing and time-trial performances. Take Miguel Indurain and Armstrong. Both of these guys dominated in the hills and were classic time-trial riders. However, Armstrong has proved himself as a competent sprinter as opposed to Yan Ullrich who can't accelerate in the big gears he uses.
Neither Armstrong or Indurain seem to be pure climbers, though. Both these guys are very bulky in climbing terms (compare Pantani and Mayo in size).
If you read Armstrong's books it seems he really understood the importance of climbing as the bread and butter of his training. He would do a 2 hour climb and occasionally repeat the whole thing again. He simply loses the sprinters in the mountains which is why the initial phases of the tour don't worry him as much.
If I sprint, I like to sprint uphill.

My buddy Vo2 tried to explain this to me, but I still don't get it ??? Why do some guys climb better and others sprint better? How do you know whether you are a climber or a sprinter?