Let me first state this thread is pertaining to SPRINT CYCLISTS ONLY. This is not the typical cycling 95% of you know. This is not endurance cycling. So don't start telling me what I already know, about how building big legs is bad for endurance - we know that.
Sprinters. You don't want stick legs, do you? Of course not. A larger muscle (larger cross sectional area) will produce more force than a smaller one, correct?
Power to weight ratio. We all know this is fairly important for any athlete who is trying to move themself as fast as possible. We sprinters do not want to look like Ronnie Coleman, do we? well, maaaybe not entirely
The point is we need a good amount of muscle, but not so much that we have poor flexibility and weigh 250+lbs.
Now that we have established that a sprinter would idealy have a fairly heavy muscled lower body, with an upper body somewhat proportional. (think Chris Hoy, and most of the other elite track sprinters.)
Let's say there are two roadies, skinny guys, who want to switch to track sprinting. Assume they are both identical twins who respond the same to training.
Rider A will keep his weight low, while just weight lifting for strength. Rider B will weight lift for hypertrophy and slowly put on some weight (hopefully not too much fat). Let's assume both riders are also training their sprint.
Short term, rider A will make better improvement keeping his weight low and gaining a good amount of strength. But eventually will hit a peak of strength and will not make much more improvement because he is still fairly skinny and not a lot of muscle to build on.
Now, if rider B were to focus on hypertrophy for two years, he will build up some decent muscle, as well as increasing his strength. He will of made small increases in his caloric intake to allow muscle growth.(both riders would obviously be consumming more protein than in their roadie days). He may have gained 20lbs of muscle, but that's ok.
Imagine it is two years past. Rider A is starting to plateau, while Rider B is about to enter his strength training period. Rider B is continuing to produce more power on the bike, while Rider A is just maintaining.
After another 2 years, Rider B is much more powerful on the bike, and even though he weighs 20lbs more that rider A, his power to weight ratio is best.
Can we agree that the above senario would likely happen?
We could repeat the cycle over and over again, but at some point Rider B will not be able to increase his muscle cross sectional area anymore. He will have hit his limit of hyptertrophy gains while maximizing his sprint power.
I believe this would describe most track sprinters. They cannot gain anymore muscle without hindering their bike performance/training. BUT, they got a fairly heavy muscled lower body, correct? It would never be confused with the skinny roadie frame.
Point is, more muscle produces more power, to a certain extent.
Weights are great for building muscle. The problem is, squats, deadlifts etc, is not pedaling a bike. It's not the same movement pattern.
Is it possible to build this muscle from doing big gear work on the bike? I understand that you cannot replicate a 1 rep maximum load from the weight room, onto the bike. BUT, is it possible to produce maybe 50-70% of 1 RM load on the bike? I think so.
Go up a 15% grade in a 53x12. Sprint it. That's enough force IMO.
Typical bodybuilding lifting might be 60% 1 RM for 3 sets of 20. I know there are many other set/rep schemes, but we can agree the above would be useful for building muscle?
So why can't a rider induce hypertrophy from say, 3 intervals of pushing a 53x12 up a 15% hill, which would take 30-60 seconds to ride.
If this does work, imagine how more benificial it would be for sprint cyclists. Build muscle with the same range of motion. Isn't that the holy grail?
I know some of you will disagree with me. I want you to prove me wrong. I want evidence that this would not be possible.
I am purposely going against the grain, in search of a possible better training method.
I am going to experiment with this.
sorry about the essay
Sprinters. You don't want stick legs, do you? Of course not. A larger muscle (larger cross sectional area) will produce more force than a smaller one, correct?
Power to weight ratio. We all know this is fairly important for any athlete who is trying to move themself as fast as possible. We sprinters do not want to look like Ronnie Coleman, do we? well, maaaybe not entirely
The point is we need a good amount of muscle, but not so much that we have poor flexibility and weigh 250+lbs.
Now that we have established that a sprinter would idealy have a fairly heavy muscled lower body, with an upper body somewhat proportional. (think Chris Hoy, and most of the other elite track sprinters.)
Let's say there are two roadies, skinny guys, who want to switch to track sprinting. Assume they are both identical twins who respond the same to training.
Rider A will keep his weight low, while just weight lifting for strength. Rider B will weight lift for hypertrophy and slowly put on some weight (hopefully not too much fat). Let's assume both riders are also training their sprint.
Short term, rider A will make better improvement keeping his weight low and gaining a good amount of strength. But eventually will hit a peak of strength and will not make much more improvement because he is still fairly skinny and not a lot of muscle to build on.
Now, if rider B were to focus on hypertrophy for two years, he will build up some decent muscle, as well as increasing his strength. He will of made small increases in his caloric intake to allow muscle growth.(both riders would obviously be consumming more protein than in their roadie days). He may have gained 20lbs of muscle, but that's ok.
Imagine it is two years past. Rider A is starting to plateau, while Rider B is about to enter his strength training period. Rider B is continuing to produce more power on the bike, while Rider A is just maintaining.
After another 2 years, Rider B is much more powerful on the bike, and even though he weighs 20lbs more that rider A, his power to weight ratio is best.
Can we agree that the above senario would likely happen?
We could repeat the cycle over and over again, but at some point Rider B will not be able to increase his muscle cross sectional area anymore. He will have hit his limit of hyptertrophy gains while maximizing his sprint power.
I believe this would describe most track sprinters. They cannot gain anymore muscle without hindering their bike performance/training. BUT, they got a fairly heavy muscled lower body, correct? It would never be confused with the skinny roadie frame.
Point is, more muscle produces more power, to a certain extent.
Weights are great for building muscle. The problem is, squats, deadlifts etc, is not pedaling a bike. It's not the same movement pattern.
Is it possible to build this muscle from doing big gear work on the bike? I understand that you cannot replicate a 1 rep maximum load from the weight room, onto the bike. BUT, is it possible to produce maybe 50-70% of 1 RM load on the bike? I think so.
Go up a 15% grade in a 53x12. Sprint it. That's enough force IMO.
Typical bodybuilding lifting might be 60% 1 RM for 3 sets of 20. I know there are many other set/rep schemes, but we can agree the above would be useful for building muscle?
So why can't a rider induce hypertrophy from say, 3 intervals of pushing a 53x12 up a 15% hill, which would take 30-60 seconds to ride.
If this does work, imagine how more benificial it would be for sprint cyclists. Build muscle with the same range of motion. Isn't that the holy grail?
I know some of you will disagree with me. I want you to prove me wrong. I want evidence that this would not be possible.
I am purposely going against the grain, in search of a possible better training method.
I am going to experiment with this.
sorry about the essay
