climbing question

[matt22]

I am a long time recreational mountain biker and purchased a road bike this year. I am going to be entering some hill climbing road races this summer and fall. My typical week involves a mt.bike climb of 10 miles and about 2000 vertical feet of climbing and another 12 miles of about 3000ft climb. I have been incorportating two road rides as well with one day being a 1200ft. 9 mile climb and another 3500ft 17 mile climb. I tend to push myself to the max and although I feel strong I worry that I may be pushing too hard.

The races I am doing are a 3500ft 16 mile ride and and 4500 ft. 17 mile ride. I've never raced before or formally followed any kind of training regime. I do wear a HR monitor and believe my max HR to be about 182-186. My average HR for these climbs is in the 160-165 range.

I'd be interested the opinions of anyone (especially those who specializes in hill climbs) on the best way to prepare my first races.

 

[Carrera]

Are you finding a difference between the roadbike and mountain bike, especially gearwise?
Not all roadbikes have triples as mountainbikes do so are you sticking with the more limited roadbike gears?

Originally posted by matt22
I am a long time recreational mountain biker and purchased a road bike this year. I am going to be entering some hill climbing road races this summer and fall. My typical week involves a mt.bike climb of 10 miles and about 2000 vertical feet of climbing and another 12 miles of about 3000ft climb. I have been incorportating two road rides as well with one day being a 1200ft. 9 mile climb and another 3500ft 17 mile climb. I tend to push myself to the max and although I feel strong I worry that I may be pushing too hard.

The races I am doing are a 3500ft 16 mile ride and and 4500 ft. 17 mile ride. I've never raced before or formally followed any kind of training regime. I do wear a HR monitor and believe my max HR to be about 182-186. My average HR for these climbs is in the 160-165 range.

I'd be interested the opinions of anyone (especially those who specializes in hill climbs) on the best way to prepare my first races.

 

[matt22]

Originally posted by Carrera
Are you finding a difference between the roadbike and mountain bike, especially gearwise?
Not all roadbikes have triples as mountainbikes do so are you sticking with the more limited roadbike gears?

I am finding quite a big difference. I only have two rings in front. I have a campy 23 cassette on rear wheel. I am debating if I should go to a 25. I am pretty good for the most part but there are a few sections I wish I could drop it another gear. I am hoping it will get easier as I get more proficent on the road bike.

I usually ride in the middle ring on my mt. bike, but sometimes need to drop to the small ring on steeper grades. It is quite an adjustment switching to the road bike.

 

[Carrera]

Most accomplished climbers can get by on two rings. There are hills in my area that I should really use a triple for (mountain bikes have them as standard).
Some hills I know of I compare to riding rodeo. Going up is just like wondering whether you'll get thrown off at some point. My road-bike only has 2 chain rings so my gears aren't anywhere as near as low as on a mountain bike. I find you can adapt, though and build leg strength for the steepest hills.
My favourite is a 20% climb I only ever did once and I'll be posting you all a pic of the hill in the near future. These days I do it in 2 efforts to avoid becoming over breathless but, at some point, I'll do it in one max effort again and hopefully remain on my feet (as opposed to lying on the grass).
I have no idea what would happen if I tackled the hill in a lower gear. I suspect it would take me longer to climb it but maybe I wouldn't have to stop at any point of the climb to stabilise breathing. To be honest, I'm happy with my first gear for the first part of the climb but it goes up even higher on the final stage (which is the real killer section). At that point, I have serious problems powering the pedals.

Originally posted by matt22
I am finding quite a big difference. I only have two rings in front. I have a campy 23 cassette on rear wheel. I am debating if I should go to a 25. I am pretty good for the most part but there are a few sections I wish I could drop it another gear. I am hoping it will get easier as I get more proficent on the road bike.

I usually ride in the middle ring on my mt. bike, but sometimes need to drop to the small ring on steeper grades. It is quite an adjustment switching to the road bike.

 

[slowhand]

I would find what style I found was natural for me and perfect on it, some prefer to spin and some power up in a big gear out of the saddle. Do hill intervals once a week and throw in some leg weight training year round.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Originally posted by slowhand
I would find what style I found was natural for me and perfect on it, some prefer to spin and some power up in a big gear out of the saddle. Do hill intervals once a week and throw in some leg weight training year round.

please see the gyming thread, which is sticky, and some of the threads on weight training. weights don't make you better at climbing hills, and most likely make you worse.

ric

 

[slowhand]

Sorry to disagree but it works wonders for me, ever since I heard Armstrong remark about weight training after the Tour, I started slamming a leg routine into my training and started climbing better than I have in the last 10 years, might not work for everyone but I would highly recommend giving it a try!

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Originally posted by slowhand
Sorry to disagree but it works wonders for me, ever since I heard Armstrong remark about weight training after the Tour, I started slamming a leg routine into my training and started climbing better than I have in the last 10 years, might not work for everyone but I would highly recommend giving it a try!

as i said, read the thread. weights don't improve your endurance cycling performance if you race or are of a racing level, simply because strength is not a limiting issue in endurance racing (any race > 90-secs). the forces in cycling are very low and can be met by most people in an untrained state.

if you don't race or aren't of that level then, yes, weights will increase your cycling performance, but then so would *any* exercise,

ric

 

[slowhand]

Like I said it may not be for everyone but it personally works for me, it may be your opinion that it doesn't but everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I use to race cat3 road and it wasn't until I injected a weight routine until I started getting real gains and actually started hanging on climbs I used to get dropped on. I did nothing different in my training so I don't know of any other reason to explain it. I base my opinions on personal experiences and not generic polls that tend to group everyone into one group or the other.If it doesn't work for you Ric then don't do it but like I said nothing ventured nothing gained, I think it's impossible to say this works for everyone or works for no one, just try telling it to the watch, the watch never lies and there's no fooling it. If your lifting and your knocking off 30 seconds on your best TT time maybe there's something to it.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Originally posted by slowhand
Like I said it may not be for everyone but it personally works for me, it may be your opinion that it doesn't but everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I use to race cat3 road and it wasn't until I injected a weight routine until I started getting real gains and actually started hanging on climbs I used to get dropped on. I did nothing different in my training so I don't know of any other reason to explain it. I base my opinions on personal experiences and not generic polls that tend to group everyone into one group or the other.If it doesn't work for you Ric then don't do it but like I said nothing ventured nothing gained, I think it's impossible to say this works for everyone or works for no one, just try telling it to the watch, the watch never lies and there's no fooling it. If your lifting and your knocking off 30 seconds on your best TT time maybe there's something to it.

as i've previously explained, and will do so again, weight traiining increases strength. there are two ways it increases strength
1) increases in muscle cross sectional area (hypertrophy)
2) neuromuscular gains (no hypertrophy)

any weight training that you do will only increase peak power (i.e., 5-sec sprint power). this only happens if 1) hypertrophy occurs

with neuromuscular gains there is no crossover to any other modality, as the gains can only occur at the joint angle and velocity at which they're trained.

additionaly, both 1 and 2 can occur together.

during endurance cycling performance (races > ~90-secs) people are not limited by strength, unless they either have some form of functional disability or are e.g., a frail old lady.

the forces that occur during elite (e.g., TdF) races are low enought that virtually anyone can match them. when the forces are normalised to gender, and mass, you're virtually guaranteed you can meet them (unless you have a functional disability or are a frail old lady, etc).

on average elite male cyclists, are no stronger (and often weaker) than age, gender and mass matched controls.

if you are of sufficiently low to moderate fitness, then, as i've previously said, weight training would be beneficial. however, as i've also said, *any* exercise would then be sufficient to increase fitness. furthermore, i've also stated, that even though any exercise in low fitness groups will increase performance, training via the modality that you want to race in will provide the greatest gains (i.e., by cycling).

as regards the clock never lying, while that _is_ true, it doesn't present all the facts available, as environmental and topographical conditions are always changing and are often different, respectively. for e.g., my actual (time) PB was done with a lower average power, compared to the highest average power PB i have managed. This was because my best time was done in slightly better environmental conditions (even though i couldn't readily detect a difference in the conditions).

ric

 

[Aztec]

Ric, he isn't going to 'get' it. Maybe I can simplify. Lifting may increase the amount of weight you can lift, and strength on the bike. Cool. Well, that's for the 10-20 reps that you perform in the gym. When you ride, you are doing thousands of reps, and you aren't going to be any stronger in them than you were before. If strength were really an issue, the skinny guys would be slow up the hills and the powerlifters would be rockets (adjusted for weight). Note that TRACK sprinters DO lift weights, and it's because of the need for peak power.

As regards your improvement from lifting, it could also be because over the course of time you improved your endurance/speed simply because you had logged more cumulative hours/miles in the saddle. So don't assume it's gain from lifting.

 

[Randybaker99]

When I first read some of Ric's posts I was vehemently opposed to his position - it seems to defy logic. However, after mulling it over and also after concentrating my training on muscular endurance (30+ miles, pushing hard the whole way) I have really come around to Ric's way of thinking.

Also Aztec nailed it by pointing out the difference between 20 reps and 20,000 reps.

But if you really believe that weight training is working for you, then I guess you should keep doing it. Just be prepared for a shrinking number of forum members who will agree with your approach.

One place where gym training could help is in building core strength - I feel that my out of saddle climbing is sloppy due to weak core muscles (ABS, etc.) so power transmission is diminished. But the thing that is giving me dramatic gains for seated climbs is ---- well, seated climbing - more specifically 20-30 miles of hill repeats 5-6 times a week. I truly believe that leg presses in the gym weren't doing anything for me last winter, except putting my knees at risk.

 

[Postie]

Originally posted by Randybaker99
When I first read some of Ric's posts I was vehemently opposed to his position - it seems to defy logic. However, after mulling it over and also after concentrating my training on muscular endurance (30+ miles, pushing hard the whole way) I have really come around to Ric's way of thinking.

Also Aztec nailed it by pointing out the difference between 20 reps and 20,000 reps.

But if you really believe that weight training is working for you, then I guess you should keep doing it. Just be prepared for a shrinking number of forum members who will agree with your approach.

One place where gym training could help is in building core strength - I feel that my out of saddle climbing is sloppy due to weak core muscles (ABS, etc.) so power transmission is diminished. But the thing that is giving me dramatic gains for seated climbs is ---- well, seated climbing - more specifically 20-30 miles of hill repeats 5-6 times a week. I truly believe that leg presses in the gym weren't doing anything for me last winter, except putting my knees at risk.

My opinion is "well put everyone". Core strength is something that many athletes ignore while they shouldn't. Muscle strength balance in the core muscle groups will help reduce injury. However having the wrong weight lifting program is a good way to throw off this balance.

Muscular strength gained by hard weight workouts should insignificant for endurance sports.

 

[Carrera]

"Just be prepared for a shrinking number of forum members who will agree with your approach."

My guess is attitudes towards weight-resistance-programs in professional cycling have altered to a significant extent. Most of the top names in pro-cycling endorse weight-training for a variety of reasons, especially the ex-Soviet Blok riders or East German riders such as Vinokourov and Ullrich. Again Lance Armstrong clearly testifies that Winter weight-training enhanced his level of cycling performance. I think if you take a peek at the training programs of the majority of top cyclists, the majority are now including weights.

Although I agree you can become a world class cyclist without doing any weight-training at all, weights help produce a more powerful rider (it works for some of us)

Even in my own case as a recreational cyclist, I know I'm a stronger rider at 180 lbs today than I was some years ago when I rode at 155 lbs. I guess I proved it recently by climbing a long 20% stretch of terrain I was never able to ascend several years ago.

Again, just prior to my hamstring injury I was climbing with guys who weighed maybe 28 pounds less and having no more problems keeping up, or even leading. Now the hamstring pull is almost healed, I can't wait to get back on the bike.

The idea that any normal person can generate the forces to power a bike may need to be considered in a relative sense. A rider such as Pantani may fit this description but bigger, heavier-boned riders such as Indurain will generate more muscular force to obtain the same objective.

Also, it's worth considering that if you can peddle uphill in a bigger gear at the same cadence as another guy in a smaller gear, the guy whose gear is highest (bigger cogs) will travel faster. The only way the rider with less leg-power can shift the advantage in his favour is to spin like hell or draw on technique.

Another point: If strength has nothing to do with endurance how come men usually outperform women in sports? The answer is essentially that men have stronger muscular power. Cycling is one of the few sports where women can close the gap far more since women have stronger legs than upper body (ideal for riding).

Finally, hard squats increase testosterone levels in the body. Leg presses don't have the same effect which is why I believe they're not as good for cyclists.

I don't think every rider should weight-train but it works for certain individuals. I also think it's cool we can discuss this kind of stuff on the forum since it would be kind of boring if there wasn't diveristy of opinion.

Originally posted by Randybaker99
When I first read some of Ric's posts I was vehemently opposed to his position - it seems to defy logic. However, after mulling it over and also after concentrating my training on muscular endurance (30+ miles, pushing hard the whole way) I have really come around to Ric's way of thinking.

Also Aztec nailed it by pointing out the difference between 20 reps and 20,000 reps.

But if you really believe that weight training is working for you, then I guess you should keep doing it. Just be prepared for a shrinking number of forum members who will agree with your approach.

One place where gym training could help is in building core strength - I feel that my out of saddle climbing is sloppy due to weak core muscles (ABS, etc.) so power transmission is diminished. But the thing that is giving me dramatic gains for seated climbs is ---- well, seated climbing - more specifically 20-30 miles of hill repeats 5-6 times a week. I truly believe that leg presses in the gym weren't doing anything for me last winter, except putting my knees at risk.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Originally posted by Carrera

My guess is attitudes towards weight-resistance-programs in professional cycling have altered to a significant extent. Most of the top names in pro-cycling endorse weight-training for a variety of reasons, especially the ex-Soviet Blok riders or East German riders such as Vinokourov and Ullrich.

I think if you take a peek at the training programs of the majority of top cyclists, the majority are now including weights.

this is *not* the case.

Even in my own case as a recreational cyclist, I know I'm a stronger rider at 180 lbs today than I was some years ago when I rode at 155 lbs. I guess I proved it recently by climbing a long 20% stretch of terrain I was never able to ascend several years ago.

i stated, time and time again, that low fitness cyclists (i.e., those who can't race and survive at say at least 3rd cat level) *will* benefit from weights. They'll also benefit from *any* exercise, because all exercise will cause enough stress to your cardiovascular system to be beneficial. i'm pretty sure that with all due respect, your not a racing cyclist, as you have to take a rest halfway up a hill.

The idea that any normal person can generate the forces to power a bike may need to be considered in a relative sense. A rider such as Pantani may fit this description but bigger, heavier-boned riders such as Indurain will generate more muscular force to obtain the same objective.

****i said when age, gender and mass matched.*** however, even when they're not they'd have to be completely miss matched to not be able to generate the forces required in endurance cycling performance.

Also, it's worth considering that if you can peddle uphill in a bigger gear at the same cadence as another guy in a smaller gear, the guy whose gear is highest (bigger cogs) will travel faster. The only way the rider with less leg-power can shift the advantage in his favour is to spin like hell or draw on technique.

if you pedal uphill in a bigger gear at the same cadence as someone in a lower gear and you have the same mass, and are the same size, and have the same bike then you'll travel at a faster velocity. This will be because you are producing more power than the other person. The force requirement will be higher, but it's so piddingly low that virtually anyone can generate that power/force. as i explained before, the force requirement of riding Mont Ventoux which is longer than anything where you are but admittedly not as steep as some of the climbs near you (i come from that area) for the elites is quite low. somewhere in the region of 250 N (~25 kg) between *both* legs.

Another point: If strength has nothing to do with endurance how come men usually outperform women in sports? The answer is essentially that men have stronger muscular power. Cycling is one of the few sports where women can close the gap far more since women have stronger legs than upper body (ideal for riding).

in endurance sport mainly to do with a larger cardiovascular system, and thus a significantly higher VO2max.

I don't think every rider should weight-train but it works for certain individuals.

yes, i've stated this many times. those with low fitness, and those who are in a strength limiting sport (e.g., 200-metre match sprinting, 1-km TT), and people with a functional disability.

however, i've added (except in the case of the e.g., track sprint riders) *any* exercise will increase cycling performance in these groups.

ric

 

[steve007]

I've always felt a little out of season weight training during winter months is of benefit to me, however, just lifting weights without a very very specific program is likely, as ric says, to reduce performance and just produce bigger muscles, which is not beneficial at all.

Your heart is the muscle you should be exercising and weight training as a resistance excercise wont do this.

One of the best ways to perform a resistance excercise, without reducing performance and without a specific program from a trainer is 1 hours non-stop swimming 2 -3 times a week.

But if you really want to improve performance the key is train at faster cadence over longer periods and improve smoothness of pedaling also.

I'm sure Ric has covered fast/slow twitch fibres at some point.....

 

[slowhand]

Originally posted by Aztec
Ric, he isn't going to 'get' it. Maybe I can simplify. Lifting may increase the amount of weight you can lift, and strength on the bike. Cool. Well, that's for the 10-20 reps that you perform in the gym. When you ride, you are doing thousands of reps, and you aren't going to be any stronger in them than you were before. If strength were really an issue, the skinny guys would be slow up the hills and the powerlifters would be rockets (adjusted for weight). Note that TRACK sprinters DO lift weights, and it's because of the need for peak power.

As regards your improvement from lifting, it could also be because over the course of time you improved your endurance/speed simply because you had logged more cumulative hours/miles in the saddle. So don't assume it's gain from lifting.

I don't really care whether "I get it or not" Someone asked my opinion on how to improve on the bike and I gave it, is that alright with you your Highness? I could give a RAT'S ass if anyone agrees with me or not,it worked for me and that's all I care about. It's still the United States and correct me if I'm wrong but I think we still have free speech here. Jeez go take a pill dude............. I 'm headed to the gym

 

[rocky2]

the assumption that resistance training will not benefit someone in an endurance sport is ludicrous regardless of what dr. ric says. because we all know that you can make statistics prove what you want them to prove, why doesn't dr. ric let some of us who enjoy resistance training to continue to do so. if you don't like it that is fine by me, but i do not have to accept what you say as the holy testament to cycling just because you have some statistics to back up your beliefs. 54% would vote for bush and 54% would vote for kerry. stats never tell the truth. also, as a former competitive distance swimmer, i wonder why resistance training helped my performance in an endurance sport.

 

[matt22]

ric,

I've enjoyed reading your input on this thread and on other threads as well. I had thought I needed to be doing some weight training to build my legs but it sounds like all I need to do is ride.

Back to my original question. I'd like to be competive in these events. Is my current schedule of 4 days of climbing a good one? I've been alternating days with the other 3 days either complete rest days or 30min-1hr of easy recovery rides.

One thing I've read is that the best thing I can do to increase climbing speeds is to lose weight, thus increase power to weight ratio. I'm relatively solidly built and am 5'11 and 170. I'd like to get down to 160lbs. Maybe hard for you to say, but what would you consider an ideal weight for my height and build.

On my climb days I've been running at 162-164 ave. sustained over 1-2 hours. I believe my Max to be about 185 although I've never seen it above 180 on my bike even after max exertion on really steep grades. From what I understand as I get better I should be my ave. HR drop assuming I'm keeping the same speed. I've been tracking my ave HR, and climb time on these rides to measure my progress.

thanks for your help.

 

[ric_stern/RST]

Originally posted by rocky2
the assumption that resistance training will not benefit someone in an endurance sport is ludicrous regardless of what dr. ric says.

just to clarify, i'm not a PhD, but i am involved in writing research papers, as lead author.

the opposite is true

because we all know that you can make statistics prove what you want them to prove

right, of course. great cop out

, why doesn't dr. ric let some of us who enjoy resistance training to continue to do so. if you don't like it that is fine by me

i'm not stopping anyone from doing weights, or anything else. how could i possibly exert such an effect on you remotely.

"rocky2 you are in a deep sleep. when you awaken, you will never weight train again. you will never go near a gym again and you will laugh at people who weight train." erm... right!

, but i do not have to accept what you say as the holy testament to cycling just because you have some statistics to back up your beliefs. 54% would vote for bush and 54% would vote for kerry. stats never tell the truth. also, as a former competitive distance swimmer, i wonder why resistance training helped my performance in an endurance sport.

i'm backing my suggestion to this board up with facts from peer reviewed research and by using first principles by showing what forces are involved and how anyone (or mostly anyone) can generate these power output. for e.g., we all sit in marvel every july at (name your favourite pro rider) riding up some brute of a mountain pass and think it's great. approximately, they're riding at ~ 400 W for such efforts, which, practically anyone can do. it's *sustaining* that effort for 30,60, whatever, minutes that is the problem, and this is an issue of cardiac output, VO2max, LT, etc., and nothing to do with strength.

what i am trying to do is show that a) in most cases worrying about strength won't be beneficial to your cycling, and b) trying to help cyclists become better cyclists. i'm not trying to make you a worse cyclist!

ric