Weight Lifting & Cycling??
- Thread starter ffvelazquezh
- Start date
- Status
Ahh! good point, for some reason when edd said technique i assumed he meant pedalling technique (as in force application)!
not sure i ever get to do any bunny hops anymore on my road bike though! happy new year 2lap
not sure i ever get to do any bunny hops anymore on my road bike though! happy new year 2lap
Originally posted by ricstern
As i've repeatedly said you *can't* strength train on a stationary bike (or any bike), except under three conditions:
1) you're very weak, and unfit (probably an old frail lady in 60/70's)
2) you only train by doing flat out starts (from zero velocity) with high resistance (5-secs max effort)
3) you're sat on the exercise bike, lifting weights
I have no idea who long rides on a stationary bike could destroy your technique?
Ric
I was only repeating what I read on another sites say
http://hcs.harvard.edu/~huca/drake_training_guide.pdf
I learn't that if it is stupid you'ss guys will put me straight.
Why can't you strength train on a stationary bike ?
Heavy load slow cadence ( 60 ) as you HR climbs after about a minute or so, maintain the load, slow the cadence say ( 50 ) continue till your heart rate climbs, slow to ( 40 ) continue etc ?
Waist of time or is this strength (strength endurance) training on a stationary bike ?
erm, generally, especially in the Vale, where i train mainly, the roads are the same as anywhere else i've lived. even in the Valleys they aren't bad. it's only on the very minor roads that quality can drop a little, but even then they're good and way better than the roads i recall from north wales.
thanks.
ric
I've only looked at the article very briefly. however, as i've repeatedly stated strength has a specific definition, this being: "the maximum force or tension generated by a muscle (or muscle groups)" (see McArdle, Katch, and Katch, 1991, p. 452) and this article: http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=strengthstern
maximum force or tension can only be generated at very low or zero velocity (think of lying in front of a brick wall and pushing against it -- the forces generated here are far higher than pedalling)
Thus, even at very low cadences (e.g. 30 revs/min) force will be low (unless power is very high). however, it's very hard to generate very high powers at very low cadence.
furthermore, as stength is the maximum force, this can only be generated briefly, so anything that you do that isn't briefly isn't strength (but some sort of submaximal force).
I'm *guessing* the author is confusing strength and power or using them interchangeably, which can't be done (or rather shouldn't).
However, it's perfectly possible to generate low power at low cadence even uphill (i live on top of a 5 minute long, last 90 - 120 secs hill of 16% grade). somedays when i'm shattered i can only ride up at < 220 W, at like 30 - 40ish revs/min. this is low force, power, and cadence. there's no benefit to training from this (the only benefit to me is i can't go any harder and i just want to collapse inside the house!)
if you're going to do low cadence 'force' work, it has to be at high power too (e.g. for me on 'my' hill that's 370 - 420 W) or lower for longer efforts (270 to 300 W for 15+ mins).
i have no idea what some of these 'wooly' terms mean (e.g. strength endurance). they tend to mean different things to different people aren't defined anywhere
ric
i feel that you're looking at the wrong question, or defining it wrongly. That's not per se a 'dig' at you, but i feel a common issue with many.
primarily (and years back - prior to owning a power meter or doing physiology i would have thought this too), people sense/feel that when climbing a steepish hill, as they fatigue they feel strength or force limited (e.g. hard to turn legs over, force feels high, legs feel like jelly). thus, or years people have assumed that low cadence, 'high' force training is the way to go to correct this.
however, the feelings of fatigue (in this scenario) are those (generally) of riding to intensely and accumulating lactate, i.e., you've exceeded TT power, or MAP or similar. as you fatigue everything everything tends to feel 'horendous'. in fact i've got data where i've 'blinded' riders to power and at the top of a hill they're riding up at low power (~ 60% of what they normally do) and it feels horrid because they've over shot intensity at the base of the climb.
the main point of training to increase cycling performance is to increase some aspect of sustainable power. in this instance (hills) it may be to increase climbing power from say 350 to 390 W for several minutes. it makes *little* (i.e. some small) difference what cadence you use to generate that power (although it's likely it'll be less than the cadence at that power on flat roads, due to cadence being bound by velocity which is lower uphill than on the flat, e.g. 100 revs on the flat, 80 uphill).
rather than worry about the force or cadence being generated it's far better to concentrate on the power required, and let the cadence (and thus force) be generated as a secondary factor (e.g. at 390 W you're doing 15 km/hr up the hill, what gear gives you a cadence that feels 'comfy').
On the other hand the only reason, i see to do these low cadence efforts (uphill) is just to get used to riding at various torque zones, in case, for e.g. you come unexpectedly across a very steep hill, or your gear cable breaks. just, so that you have a feel for the feeling of a low cadence. conversely, if you're gears aren't low enough and you're not a pro cyclist and you live anywhere, where there's steep hills, you'll almost certainly have to cope with some low cadence work as part of climbing hills.
ric
primarily (and years back - prior to owning a power meter or doing physiology i would have thought this too), people sense/feel that when climbing a steepish hill, as they fatigue they feel strength or force limited (e.g. hard to turn legs over, force feels high, legs feel like jelly). thus, or years people have assumed that low cadence, 'high' force training is the way to go to correct this.
however, the feelings of fatigue (in this scenario) are those (generally) of riding to intensely and accumulating lactate, i.e., you've exceeded TT power, or MAP or similar. as you fatigue everything everything tends to feel 'horendous'. in fact i've got data where i've 'blinded' riders to power and at the top of a hill they're riding up at low power (~ 60% of what they normally do) and it feels horrid because they've over shot intensity at the base of the climb.
the main point of training to increase cycling performance is to increase some aspect of sustainable power. in this instance (hills) it may be to increase climbing power from say 350 to 390 W for several minutes. it makes *little* (i.e. some small) difference what cadence you use to generate that power (although it's likely it'll be less than the cadence at that power on flat roads, due to cadence being bound by velocity which is lower uphill than on the flat, e.g. 100 revs on the flat, 80 uphill).
rather than worry about the force or cadence being generated it's far better to concentrate on the power required, and let the cadence (and thus force) be generated as a secondary factor (e.g. at 390 W you're doing 15 km/hr up the hill, what gear gives you a cadence that feels 'comfy').
On the other hand the only reason, i see to do these low cadence efforts (uphill) is just to get used to riding at various torque zones, in case, for e.g. you come unexpectedly across a very steep hill, or your gear cable breaks. just, so that you have a feel for the feeling of a low cadence. conversely, if you're gears aren't low enough and you're not a pro cyclist and you live anywhere, where there's steep hills, you'll almost certainly have to cope with some low cadence work as part of climbing hills.
ric
That's consistent with what I know
- I was not suggesting that this could or should be a large training stimulus, more a minor variation - prior to say, doing 15 second speed sprints or whatever.
The point you so eloquently illuminated, that being:
“ if your never going to be doing this ( low cadence higher then comfortable force ) action on the bike the training effect won’t translate.” is the answer I was looking for.
I know the - do what every smart cyclist is doing and focus on the power output and the tried and true conditioning plan.
Okay I get it, if I was confused, I’m not now, You made this point earlier in the thread and I appreciate that you might feel a little frustrated with us mud bricks.
But even if I, in my ignorance and stubbiness decided to do some sort of sub maximal force training it would only constitute possibly 0.1% of my training anyway !
- I was not suggesting that this could or should be a large training stimulus, more a minor variation - prior to say, doing 15 second speed sprints or whatever.
The point you so eloquently illuminated, that being:
“ if your never going to be doing this ( low cadence higher then comfortable force ) action on the bike the training effect won’t translate.” is the answer I was looking for.
I know the - do what every smart cyclist is doing and focus on the power output and the tried and true conditioning plan.
Okay I get it, if I was confused, I’m not now, You made this point earlier in the thread and I appreciate that you might feel a little frustrated with us mud bricks.
But even if I, in my ignorance and stubbiness decided to do some sort of sub maximal force training it would only constitute possibly 0.1% of my training anyway !
I am new to cycling at best, but i do have some experience in NCAA swimiming, and id would venture that every collegiate distance swimmer does to some weight training on top of spending tremendous time in the pool, i realize that cycling and swimming are very different sports but i feel that weight training offers many benifits. Beyond strenghtening the specific muscle groups used in cycling, tarketing support muscles and muscles that are helpful in balance might prove very benenficial
I disagree that strength training can't help your bicycling because joint angle specifics and velocity. In most other sports, strength training is highly recommended because it increases the amount of force you can apply. People like swimmers almost always strength train, bent rows and pull-downs don't have the exact same joint andgle and speed as a swimming stroke, but they can greatly help your speed.
As for a trained athlete not being able to build endurance with 50 reps, you have to increase the weight when you can do 2 sets of 30 or 50, this will increase your lactic threshold. Only doing 50 reps of something like squats and never increasing the weight won't help but if you increase the weight, it tires your muscles more. When they can handle it, make them do more and so on.
I agree whole heartedly with JakeGT. Training both sides of a muscle group (quads and hams, tricepts and bicepts, chest and back) allows each side to function to their fullest. The best boxers in the upper weight divisions have large backs and bicepts for a reason. The chest, shoulders and tricepts actually punch, but the back and biceps must stop the punch before it reaches full extension and hyper-extends the elbow. Your body knows this and will subconciously limit the force and speed of a muscle's contraction unless the antagonistic muscle is strong enough to handle it. Sprinters rip their hamstrings because their quads are so strong.
as i've repeatedly pointed out over the last 20 pages here, and several other boards and in the article at cyclingnews, yes weight training increases strength - no argument there. however, during endurance cycling (i.e. any cycling over about 75 to 90-secs) strength (i.e. maximal force) is not limiting to performance except in a couple of very specific cases (e.g. you're a frail old lady, you have a functional disability).
during endurance cycling, the forces at the pedals are very low, such that untrained, gender, mass, healthy matched controld can generate non signifcantly different same amounts of power as elite riders (albeit for briefer periods of time). Thus generating more force won't make you better (except at e.g. track sprinting with significant hypertrophy).
if you're a trained non ill endurance racer, there's NO benefit to weight training, and possible significant disadvantages.
weight training categorically will not increase your LT, except in untrained individuals (where ANY exercise increases LT). furthermore, weights in trained people categorically won't increase your endurance.
Ric
Ric,
Thats the key point... most people can generate the forces required to win the Tour De France; yet few people can maintain them for long enough to win the Tour De France (we are talking seconds v's minutes here).
Training should therefore focus on the ability to extend the duration at over which the 'forces' (or more correctly power output) can be maintained. For endurance riders; strength training will not have this effect - unlike aerobic and anaerobic cycle training. As the limiting factors are economy/efficiency, LT, VO2 max and oxygen uptake kinetics - not strength.
Although, weight training may have other benefits like improving posture, muscle balance, health, etc. these are unlikely to improve your cycling performance unless they already limit your performance (i.e. weight training for rehabilitation).
Specificity is key - if you want to ride faster train on a bike (unless you are one of a few rare cases (e.g. elderly, impaired, bed rested, following space flight, etc.) where strength is the limiting factor in cycling).
All swimmers weight ( strength ) or do (some sort of sub maximal force training)
compared to cycling, swimming is not ( as unequivocally ) an endurance sport
So if one wants to swim faster, along with one's aerobic and anaerobic conditioning one needs to improve one's strength
There is an Olympic level female swimmer that climbs a 30 foot knotted rope hand over hand, no legs, as part of her strength routine.
There are some other fundamental differences related to strength that, from I have gleaned on this thread, don’t apply.
For those of us with a bit of old lady still lurking in our legs there is an argument to do some strength work, however the overwhelming astute opinion and support evidence suggests that it is all about the ability to extraordinarily sustain an ordinary force as opposed to producing an extraordinary force
If you are new to cycling take the time to read the entire thread. I’ve been an adult recreational cyclist for some 38 years and I have read this entire thread several times and I have learnt a lot.
I’m a strength coach, I worked with squash players, swimmers, triathletes, footballers, snow boarders, injured people in rehab, cycling crash casualties and computer nerds with horrendous posture problems.
The core training idea has a whole thread of its own and because the upper body of a cyclist does not have to be very strong and weight ( body weight) is a performance issue. Weight ( resistance ) training is not prescribed, However I believe some cross training ( other thread ) is of value.
Being an older bloke, with only a couple of years of cycling under his belt, I have been doing a combination of hard riding and high aerobic gym work. I can get an hour and a half in the gym a lot easier than the same amount of time on the bike, mainly because I have a job.
The end combined result is significant weight loss, improving cycling performance and (seemingly via my Polar) an excellent VO2 max figure. All I need to do is get better at hills and I must agree that is a matter of climbing the bloody things.
Regards
last winter i spent about 5 hrs a week in the gym lifting wieghts, doing lots of resistence training. in the spring, my max watts were 1166(on a 2nd generation power tap). i havent used a power meter since the spring.
this winter i have done no wieght training. i just bought a power tap pro and hit over 1400 watts tonight. yes, i made sure the torque was at 0 when coasting.
i am not exactly sure what to attribute to big gain to. heck, i don't care! i must be doing something right.
i should also add that i am 18 now. also, i weigh 12lbs LESS now(170lbs), than when i hit 1166.
i am mistified as you are. but happy as hell.
this winter i have done no wieght training. i just bought a power tap pro and hit over 1400 watts tonight. yes, i made sure the torque was at 0 when coasting.
i am not exactly sure what to attribute to big gain to. heck, i don't care! i must be doing something right.
i should also add that i am 18 now. also, i weigh 12lbs LESS now(170lbs), than when i hit 1166.
i am mistified as you are. but happy as hell.
- Status
