Do I have fast or slow twitch muscles?
- Thread starter cdaleguy
- Start date
i know sprinters work wih fast twitchs muscle fibers, but thats about all i know about that hehe, not sure if thats what ur lookin for, sorrycdaleguy said:
cdaleguy said:
Not really! You'd need a muscle biopsy. and i'm not sure what the point of knowing such info would be (for training purposes)...?
ric
There are a few things that indicate one or the other but it's not deterministic and some factors can be trained - but here it goes...cdaleguy said:
FT: You can produce fast and power muscle contractions
FT: You have larger than average muscles
FT: Your muscles load up with lactate and fatigue 'quickly'
FT: Your muscles get sore
ST: You have good muscular endurance
ST: The opposite of the FT characteristics
Just as I suspected....Fast twitch. Is there a way to "change" or train fast twitch to be more of a slow twitch?....yes, for training. I know that you can't change but surely I could train my muscles to better suit cycling.?? Obviously, slow twitch are more condusive to riding faster, over long periods, without as much fatigue.
I know we all have both - but some have more of one type than the others - like power and strength athletes tend to have more FT.Jon Packard said:
As for training your FT fibers to exhibit more endurance characteristics, supposedly super-maximal power intervals / VO2max intervals of ~3+ minutes can be beneficial in training the Type IIb fibers to be more like Type IIa. There is supposedly a 'conversion' process from Type IIb to Type IIa that happens also.
I know that we all have both, thank you. But, most people have a tendency towards one or the other. My question is "How do I train a body with predominantly fast twitch muscle, to better tolerate fatigue?" I know that "training" is the obvious answer but am looking more for "what amount of training" or "how long do I need to train (per session)?", or "at what cadence better suits slow twitch muscle use?"
in.10.city said:
these 'pointers' don't necessarily mean what is suggested. in other words you could have a predominance of "ST" fibres and still fatigue quickly, people with "FT" can have good endurance.
additionally elite cyclists will have varying levels of each, you'd tend to find elite sprint cyclists have a majority of "FT", you may find elite endurance cyclists with a majority of "ST", you may also find them with a more equal share.
If you want to know, you'll need a biopsy. On the other hand if you want to know what event(s) you'll be good at then then try a variety and see what happens. if you want to base why you aren't great at a certain aspect or type of cycling on your fibre type the you're way off base.
Ric
cdaleguy said:
You don't know, based on the previous ideas, whether you have a predominance of "FT" fibres. You're just assuming, you'd need a biopsy.
the second part of the question doesn't as such make any sense for the real world. if someone said you need to do 6 hrs a day of endurance training to become "ST" what would you do? Do you give or work/school to accomodate such training, or do you say "i can't possibly manage six hours a day, i'll give up sport"? You can only fit your training to the time you have available. cadence is just a red herring
ric
Like I said - they are only indicators as a proxy for getting cut open. Everyone is different and it wasn't meant to be a sweeping generalization.ric_stern/RST said:
Again this isn't a sweeping generalization, but muscle fiber types do play a role in what events one can be successful at. If your quads, glutes, and hams have a higher percentage of FT fibers, chances are that you are not going to have as much success with 4+ hours road races than with track or pursuit races.
And like I said, there is a trainability aspect to all of this also.
in.10.city said:
i realise this, but it appears that the OP is placing too much stock on it.
i didn't say they didn't play a part, it's just how much of a part and can you determine the fibre type from an internet forum (you can't).
indeed.
My point is that the OP appears (at least the way i'm reading it -- apologies if this is incorrect) to be blaming lack of performance on a simple diagnosis over the net. it's just not possible. It can be so easy to conclude these incorrectly. For e.g., i have larger leg muscles than many cyclists, i can fatigue quickly and my muscles can get sore. My peak (sprint) power however is *dire* and i'm much better suited to distance events, so what should i conclude!?
ric
Being the OP, let me state that I NEVER STATED THAT I WAS BLAMING MY PERCEPTION OF WHAT TYPE OF MUSCLE FIBER I HAVE, ON MY ABILITY OR INABILITY. I started out by asking about muscle type, then went on to ask how to get the best results out of what my body is probably most capable of. I am not using my assumption as a self fulfilling prophecy. If this were the case (if I really was convinced that, by my generalization, that I had no shot of ever getting better), then maybe you would have seen a post similar to "Oh damn, I have FT....I'll never be good."
My belief is that it helps to know what you're dealing with. Sure, there are exceptions, but knowing what your body is "generally" capable of can help you modify your training to try to overcome some genetic limitations.
My belief is that it helps to know what you're dealing with. Sure, there are exceptions, but knowing what your body is "generally" capable of can help you modify your training to try to overcome some genetic limitations.
cdaleguy said:
apologies if i misread what you wrote, but it appeared that you were blaming "FT" on not being good enough at endurance work ("My question is "How do I train a body with predominantly fast twitch muscle, to better tolerate fatigue?"; and "Just as I suspected....Fast twitch. Is there a way to "change" or train fast twitch to be more of a slow twitch?....").
as to what your body is most capable of, and what will get you the best results, if you truly have a predominance of "FT" fibres then why not do events you would be better suited to (e.g., 1-km TT, 200-m sprint)?
i do believe it's important that we know what we're dealing with, but in the absence of good evidence, i don't think we know what you're dealing with.
If you don't want the invasive procedure of a biopsy then there would be better ways of looking at whether you're "FT" or "ST" such as testing over a variety of durations to see what powers you produce and how you fatigue during them. as i pointed out above, based on the the suggestions for fibre type determination it is easy or possible to conclude the wrong answer.
ric
I'm no coach. but what I've read (it may or may not be at all true) says that in order to train FT muscle fibre's to take on ST characteristics you need to do a huge volume of endurance riding. For instance you would ride until all of your ST fibers are fatigued then you keep riding but your muscles shift the load to the FT fibers. ie you ride for 7 hours,a fter 3 hours your ST fibers fatigue and then for the next 4 hours your body uses your FT fibers more. Do this every day for many years (20-30 hours per week). Anyways, that's just what I've heard (coaches such as carmichael and morris suggest this sort of training). I can't prove or disprove it. But it sorta makes sense I guess...
mattv2099 said:
Intervconversion of fibres from IIb to IIa takes place across a range of intensities and durations from zone 2 to zone 5 with the greatest interconversion occurring at ~ 1-hr TT power.
Ric
