Maximum strength and cycling performance
- Thread starter dominikk85
- Start date
I don't care what Boardman or any rider does. All claims should be based on actual evidence.
Upper body? Even the majority of track sprinters do very little upper body work. The Aussie Sprinters have very small upper bodies and massive legs. At 70kph frontal area is a huge part of the performance equation.
The research indicates that any potential gains from strength training are marginal compared to the gains one makes from performing various forms of interval training on the bike.
Related to discussion about pro riders training programs:
There is a science of performance:
Quote:
Originally Posted by fergie .
[SIZE=11pt]But having studied neurophysiology I know the message from the brain to the muscle is very specific to the action being performed (riding a bike verses running or swimming), the orientation (road bike verses recumbent), the cadence (different levels of stress while riding 400watts uphill, tailwind, headwind, Velodrome, off-road), nature of riding (maintaining 300 watts in a TT and a normalised power of 300 in a Criterium) and many other factors.[/SIZE]
And then there is the art of coaching:
There is a science of performance:
Quote:
Originally Posted by fergie .
[SIZE=11pt]But having studied neurophysiology I know the message from the brain to the muscle is very specific to the action being performed (riding a bike verses running or swimming), the orientation (road bike verses recumbent), the cadence (different levels of stress while riding 400watts uphill, tailwind, headwind, Velodrome, off-road), nature of riding (maintaining 300 watts in a TT and a normalised power of 300 in a Criterium) and many other factors.[/SIZE]
And then there is the art of coaching:
Speaking of strength training effecting subsequent cycling workouts... I think I was effected by that last week. I came off a very hard weekend (550 TSS) and went into the gym on Monday where, among other things, I did 3x8 deadlifts at about 80% 1RM. I had DOMS for the next three days and could barely make target power in my 20 min SST intervals all week. It wasn't until Saturday after resting on Friday that I felt strong again. I was just reading about DOMS in a Physiology textbook and it mentions that DOMS has been shown to interfere with glycogen regeneration as well as muscle performance. That might have been what was happening to me last week. I might have been glycogen depleted even though I was eating plenty of carbs.
I would prefer to continue to workout in the gym because I feel it increases my overall health and fitness, but I want it to minimize its negative effects on my cycling. Because I only lift once per week, DOMS can be a real problem. I wonder if it would be better to lift twice a week, but with less reps and/or less weight. Or, like Fergie mentioned, lift more with less reps.
I would prefer to continue to workout in the gym because I feel it increases my overall health and fitness, but I want it to minimize its negative effects on my cycling. Because I only lift once per week, DOMS can be a real problem. I wonder if it would be better to lift twice a week, but with less reps and/or less weight. Or, like Fergie mentioned, lift more with less reps.
From my limited personal experience, suggest you avoid heavy weights entirely in the gym. If you want to continue to weight train, suggest 2-3 sets of 10-12 reps with easy weights. I'd skip the squats entirely, but suggest you focus on hamstring curls, leg extensions and ab work as a balance to the pushing work you do on the bike. Upper body is fine, but again would focus on high reps, easy weights to avoid building bulk. Once a week lifting is fine; you'll avoid DOMS by taking it easy. Save the hard work for the bike.
gudujarlson, If you desire to continue to lift I would suggest training only once a week. By splitting it up you will likely create a worse recovery situation even if you change to lighter weight, manipulate the volume or whatever you choose. Plus there are some other issues to consider regarding progressive strength training. Train your deadlift the best you can and get that recovery going as soon as possible. Then leave it alone until the next week.
As I moved into my prime in strength training (years ago) it was due to going from training twice a week to once a week. I had a friend that competed at the national level and he finally convinced me that I was training too much or in a different way he said that because I had the lighter day in the back of my mind I was reserving on my primary day and not going full out. When I moved to have a full 7 day recovery on each bodypart that gave me full peace of mind to hit those muscle groups with everything and leaving nothing in reserve when I stumbled out of the gym. That is when I went to the next level as compared to a typical twice a week routine with a heavy day / light day scheme. The DOMS for me can linger as many as 5 days when properly trained and even many days when I think I had a very subpar day I can still remain sore for 3 to 5 days.
Monday is an excellent day for me to train legs as well in the whole scheme between strength and cycling. When do you train at the gym? Morning or evening?
As I moved into my prime in strength training (years ago) it was due to going from training twice a week to once a week. I had a friend that competed at the national level and he finally convinced me that I was training too much or in a different way he said that because I had the lighter day in the back of my mind I was reserving on my primary day and not going full out. When I moved to have a full 7 day recovery on each bodypart that gave me full peace of mind to hit those muscle groups with everything and leaving nothing in reserve when I stumbled out of the gym. That is when I went to the next level as compared to a typical twice a week routine with a heavy day / light day scheme. The DOMS for me can linger as many as 5 days when properly trained and even many days when I think I had a very subpar day I can still remain sore for 3 to 5 days.
Monday is an excellent day for me to train legs as well in the whole scheme between strength and cycling. When do you train at the gym? Morning or evening?
Felt_Rider, hmm, you made gains with 1/week frequency, huh? I have not seen any gains since going down to 1/week, but I have not been expecting to see any with so little training. My goal has been primarily to maintain a mediocre amount of strength that is greater than the non-active public. I had been training 2/week previously and I was seeing some gains, but I gave up a day to cycle more this year. Perhaps if I concentrate on higher weight and lower reps I might actually see gains with only 1 session/week. However, I probably shouldn't extrapolate too much from your experience, because you obviously have a lot more lifts in your past than I do.
I train on Monday evenings after work. There is a gym in the building I work in. It has no olympic lift station, but the price is right and it is convenient. Another option is to hit the gym on Friday, but I worry that it will negatively affect my weekend breakthrough cycling workouts and races. Albeit, during winter things are different. I might switch my cycling focus to the SST workouts I do during the work week and just do fun rides on the weekends when weather permits. In that case making Friday gym day makes sense.
dhk2, I don't use machines and follow a functional movement philosophy. I try to make all my exercises involve multiple muscles and mimic a movement I might make outside the gym (e.g. portaging a canoe in the boundary waters canoe area). I also try to make sure my core is engaged in all exercises I do. So I do a lot of deadlifts, power cleans, overhead presses, hanging snatches, pull ups, hanging straight leg raises, push ups on a balance ball, 1-legged squats, kettle bell squats, etc. I don't do front or back squats with a barbell, because I lack thoracic flexibility. I also spend a decent portion of my gym time on flexibility, because it is a limiter for me.
I train on Monday evenings after work. There is a gym in the building I work in. It has no olympic lift station, but the price is right and it is convenient. Another option is to hit the gym on Friday, but I worry that it will negatively affect my weekend breakthrough cycling workouts and races. Albeit, during winter things are different. I might switch my cycling focus to the SST workouts I do during the work week and just do fun rides on the weekends when weather permits. In that case making Friday gym day makes sense.
dhk2, I don't use machines and follow a functional movement philosophy. I try to make all my exercises involve multiple muscles and mimic a movement I might make outside the gym (e.g. portaging a canoe in the boundary waters canoe area). I also try to make sure my core is engaged in all exercises I do. So I do a lot of deadlifts, power cleans, overhead presses, hanging snatches, pull ups, hanging straight leg raises, push ups on a balance ball, 1-legged squats, kettle bell squats, etc. I don't do front or back squats with a barbell, because I lack thoracic flexibility. I also spend a decent portion of my gym time on flexibility, because it is a limiter for me.
there is actually a study that claims that maximum strength improves cycling performance:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19855311
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19855311
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FUfsQkG-U0s/UBrPjRAGsSI/AAAAAAABGtM/eHPPnrT_SJk/s640/Robert+F%25C3%25B6rstemann+GER+CYC+007.jpg
(but I agree that massive upper bodies are not necessary and robert is probably doing that for the girls)
Quote: In conclusion, maximal strength training for 8 weeks improved CE and efficiency and increased time to exhaustion at maximal aerobic power among competitive road cyclists
None of those are either performance metrics or specific to cycling fitness required in competition.
The gains seen in time to exhaustion are nothing compared to the gains seen in studies testing various interval training protocols.
Thanks, in this case I knew the rider would benefit from feeling stronger and being in the gym environment with other dedicated athletes. Also the schoolgirls cycling community here is more social than serious so in this case it is proving to be the right call.
Boardman is a world record holder, i.e. he used to ride very fast, ergo Boardman did something right(you`re probably going to say he was talented, i.e. he could`ve been devoted 99% to bodybuilding and still get the cycling world record). Lifting weights and then performing is some sort of evidence(is there any actual 100 % proof of anything related to training/performance?
Do they do upper body work(eventhough they have small upperbodies)? One can lift weights without adding bulk.
So if you wanna perform at 100 %, will some gym time in addition to the time on the bike, get you there?
Boardman was the World Record holder. None of his UCI records are current. That is the problem with celebrity endorsement, appeals to authority or case studies is there are no controls (no Chris's evil twin who never touched weights) to compare to show that that it was a random occurrence or another factor was involved (like Lance taking drugs or doing a million miles leading to greater efficiency rather than the claimed change in pedalling technique, another Frank Day pearler).
Upper body, no. It doesn't take very much strength to steer a bicycle and comfort on a bike is more a matter of position than of strength.
Gym work in addition to cycle training would need to be studied. Most studies use two groups where one does endurance training alone and the experimental group does the same endurance training plus strength training. You usually see some significant differences in physiological measures like economy or efficiency and they use a test at a given wattage to exhaustion which is very unlike how cyclists actually perform. The gains (if any) seen in the performance tests are usually very minimal (8% in one of Ronnestad's many papers on the same study) when you compare them to various interval training protocols (100% from one of Gibala's studies on short interval training although with untrained subjects).
that is actually the only study I have found.
do you know any studies that says "strength training doesn't increase endurance performance" or like that? I'm not sure if any other study has been conducted.
http://www.uci.ch/templates/BUILTIN-NOFRAMES/Template1/layout.asp?MenuId=MTYzODY&LangId=1
And Sosenka is a doper(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ond%C5%99ej_Sosenka).
And who are you, why should I care what you say?
What about core strength?
I don`t care much for "groups", I`m more interested in what the people who perform at the very highest level do.
But you never tend to know what they do? Imagine an anecdote where someone performing at the highest level said they went to the Gym every day and lifted weights, and that's what they attributed their success to, seems fine.
What they don't say is that the gym is at the top of Alp D'huez and they live at the bottom and they only have a bike for transport.
The ability of humans to isolate the actual cause of an effect is very poor, there's a tendancy to over-inflate the impact of certain things that happen to be within a pattern is a pretty fundamental thing.
So unless you really know what they do, I wouldn't read too much into it.
I don't think that you'll find a paper saying explicitely that "strength training doesn't increase endurance performance" simply because it is not a scientifically valid conclusion but instead the papers may say that with a given protocol they found or did not find improvement in chosen metrics. Then you have to use some critical thinking about the test setup, eg. if subjects are elite, trained or simply coach potatoes and how the overall training load is controlled between the intervention and control groups.
There are papers that have found improvement in endurance cycling performance but if the subjects are coach potatoes then almost any training would improve their performance or if control group continues with original program and intervention group adds strength training over that (eg. Sunde et al) then it shouldn't necessarily be a great surprise that the group that trains more performs better. Also in some cases the metrics might be not very relevant or for practical reasons they might be chosen so that it is a bit hard to say where the improvement actually came from (eg. short interval performance is affected by increase in anaerobic capacity which is somewhat expected result from strength training so if you were studying long term endurance performance would you be able to conclusively say that it has improved).
This is of course not to say that research is flawed or all studies bad, we wouldn't be writing in this internet forum without scientific method, just that you have to read more than just the results or conclusions at the end of the abstract.
Google 'Effects of strength training on endurance capacity in top-level endurance athletes' for a (full pfd) review paper that covers some studies done in the area.
Exactly. A story about some pro cyclist going to gym forgets to mention a small detail that they ride their bike 30000 km/year.
And not only what they do but why they do it. Fergie's story of prescribing gym training for some of his athletes for motivational reasons is a good example.
And even we tend to think that it's only for juniors or us mere mortals that top athletes don't need any motivational support but they are like machines that only do what is strictly improving their performance, I don't think that is the case. Wiggins with his history of alcohol abuse and recent pictures from holiday with a cigarette (a joint some might say) in hand is a good example. You probably wouldn't drink and smoke because a TdF winner does, at least not claiming that it is for performance.
Boardman claimed that he lifted weights to increase his muscle mass, because muscle mass was low and his power was suffering.
So the guy at the bottom of Alp D'huez rides a bike and goes to the gym, and performs as he does as a result of riding a bike and going to the gym?
Similar threads
