When cyclists squat...

Carrera said:

It depends whether you accept that weight-gain can be beneficial for sports performance or not. And bear in mind I'm talking about 5 - 10 pounds gain.

why would it be beneficial?

Quoted post said:

O.K., let's assume that the best way to enhance your cycling performance is to reduce your weight as much as possible.

why would this be true as well?

Quoted post said:

However, not that many pure climbers have been proven to be the best overall cyclists. Miguel Indurain weighed as much as 90 k.g. by some estimates and LA is also a lot heftier than Pantani or Mayo. However, you tend to find that the bigger guys show better all-around performance. I mean, big Mig was more of a time-trialer than a pure climber. Both Lance and Mig are terrific climbers but their time-trialing and sprinting is what gives them the edge.

you've got no idea if you think that sprinting is important to win the TdF.

The idea for road cycling (and MTBing) is to generate the highest (sustainable) powers relative to body mass. however, you also need a high absolute power output. these both tend to occur with riders who are of a more average mass, i.e., you can't have a high absolute power output if your mass is e.g., 55 kg. currently, the highest sustainable (human) power outputs are about 6.5 W/kg. for someone that is 55 kg that's ~ 358 W. For someone at 70 kg that's 455 W. Because drag doesn't scale directly with size the slightly larger rider will travel faster. That however, doesn't mean that being bigger is good, as you would have other issues to deal with.

Quoted post said:

Both Lance and Mig are surely aware that if they lowered their body weight to improve on climbing, they would risk losing energy and power on their sprinting and time-trialing. You have to know what your ideal body weight is and that doesn't always necessitate weight loss.

however, that runs counter to what those riders do or did, i.e., they minimised their mass by being as light as they could whilst not dropping power. so, for e.g., you'll see LA drop his body fat % down to ~ 6%, which is about as lean as you can go without dropping power and causing immune problems

Quoted post said:

Many pro cyclists will point out that sometimes a gain in weight mass will actually improve their overall performance.

see above

Quoted post said:

If you accept my point that weight gain can be just as beneficial as weight loss, then we're halfway there to some kind of agreement.

not in the slightest. maintaining weight and not dropping below certain levels of body fat% are completely different to gaining weight.

Quoted post said:

If you disagree, then that's the point that needs discussing on the forum first.

it doesn't. you'd be the only person who thought this for road cycling.

Quoted post said:

If weight-gain can be beneficial the best way for a cyclist to gain body mass is via squatting (not leg-presses). Squats don't only build muscle but they also build bulk and increase natural testosterone. Maybe you have a little more weight to lug uphill but remember that if your energy level increases and you feel stronger, this will more than compensate with regard to overall performance.

i seriously worry for the children you 'teach'. for the umpteenth time you're talking utter twaddle. squats are not good for ECP. not only do you have more weight to lug uphill, you will have a decreased aerobic capacity. they do not increase performance in ECP. unless you have anything sensible to post or some solid evidence then i suggest not wasting bandwidth

ric

Carrera said:

It depends whether you accept that weight-gain can be beneficial for sports performance or not. And bear in mind I'm talking about 5 - 10 pounds gain.
O.K., let's assume that the best way to enhance your cycling performance is to reduce your weight as much as possible. That would mean the lightest cyclists would be the best all-around cyclists (i.e. the pure climbers).
However, not that many pure climbers have been proven to be the best overall cyclists. Miguel Indurain weighed as much as 90 k.g. by some estimates and LA is also a lot heftier than Pantani or Mayo. However, you tend to find that the bigger guys show better all-around performance. I mean, big Mig was more of a time-trialer than a pure climber. Both Lance and Mig are terrific climbers but their time-trialing and sprinting is what gives them the edge.
All the world greats got there via a combination of decent climbing, outstanding time-trialing and maybe some decent sprinting on occasions.
Both Lance and Mig are surely aware that if they lowered their body weight to improve on climbing, they would risk losing energy and power on their sprinting and time-trialing. You have to know what your ideal body weight is and that doesn't always necessitate weight loss. Many pro cyclists will point out that sometimes a gain in weight mass will actually improve their overall performance.
And yes, I have an interview with Inurain where he testifies to the above - he didn't let his weight drop below a certain level.
If you accept my point that weight gain can be just as beneficial as weight loss, then we're halfway there to some kind of agreement. If you disagree, then that's the point that needs discussing on the forum first.
If weight-gain can be beneficial the best way for a cyclist to gain body mass is via squatting (not leg-presses). Squats don't only build muscle but they also build bulk and increase natural testosterone. Maybe you have a little more weight to lug uphill but remember that if your energy level increases and you feel stronger, this will more than compensate with regard to overall performance.

Personally i don't think weight gain has any advantage. Every professional cyclist at the top are at their optimum weight, that included indurain and pantani. Are you saying that pantani should of put on 10+ kilos to become a better time trialist. I think that over the years they all found their optimum weight and that probably didn't involve much weight training to increase their muscle mass unless, as in pantani's case a muscle wastage problem after a leg break.

Carrera said:

It depends whether you accept that weight-gain can be beneficial for sports performance or not. And bear in mind I'm talking about 5 - 10 pounds gain.
O.K., let's assume that the best way to enhance your cycling performance is to reduce your weight as much as possible. That would mean the lightest cyclists would be the best all-around cyclists (i.e. the pure climbers).
However, not that many pure climbers have been proven to be the best overall cyclists. Miguel Indurain weighed as much as 90 k.g. by some estimates and LA is also a lot heftier than Pantani or Mayo. However, you tend to find that the bigger guys show better all-around performance. I mean, big Mig was more of a time-trialer than a pure climber. Both Lance and Mig are terrific climbers but their time-trialing and sprinting is what gives them the edge.
All the world greats got there via a combination of decent climbing, outstanding time-trialing and maybe some decent sprinting on occasions.
Both Lance and Mig are surely aware that if they lowered their body weight to improve on climbing, they would risk losing energy and power on their sprinting and time-trialing. You have to know what your ideal body weight is and that doesn't always necessitate weight loss. Many pro cyclists will point out that sometimes a gain in weight mass will actually improve their overall performance.
And yes, I have an interview with Inurain where he testifies to the above - he didn't let his weight drop below a certain level.
If you accept my point that weight gain can be just as beneficial as weight loss, then we're halfway there to some kind of agreement. If you disagree, then that's the point that needs discussing on the forum first.
If weight-gain can be beneficial the best way for a cyclist to gain body mass is via squatting (not leg-presses). Squats don't only build muscle but they also build bulk and increase natural testosterone. Maybe you have a little more weight to lug uphill but remember that if your energy level increases and you feel stronger, this will more than compensate with regard to overall performance.

I am going to add my two cents. I have to agree with Ric.
How is it possible that weight training increases energy? I did weights on Wednesday, and I was trashed for the following 2 days. I couldn't even do an aerobic ride without hurting. Lifting weights forces me to lose aerobic fitness.

You talk about how adding weight would give you more sustainable power. Assuming you are already at your optimum weight, which you should be, why would you want to gain weight? Just because unhealthy weight loss(under optimal weight) reduces power does not mean gaining weight(muscle) increases sustainable power. Your statements do not make sense.

As for the sprinting comment, since when does sprinting ability have a worthy impact on general classifaction in grand tours?

Also, I have never heard of Indurain weighing 90kgs. He was 80kg max, during his Tour wins.

You've totally misunderstood what I posted. Let's try and clarify my point:

"How is it possible that weight training increases energy? I did weights on Wednesday, and I was trashed for the following 2 days. I couldn't even do an aerobic ride without hurting. Lifting weights forces me to lose aerobic fitness."

Who recommended you should do weights prior to a cycling session? Not me. Of course your cycling will be affected negatively if you squat hard and then try and ride the following day. I had the same experience. Your leg muscles are broken down and, moreover, weight-training is very tough on the recuperative system.

What I said is that being at your ideal weight increases energy. If that isn't the case, you and Ric would be forced to argue that Lance Armstrong would be better than he is now if he competed at 155 pounds instead of his present weight (somewhere in the 170's). Let me stress that there seems to be a tendency in cycling to assume the lighter you are, the better you will perform. I disagree with that view. If such a view were correct, all the overall top cyclists would be the pure climbers.

Let me give you a personal perspective. My ideal body weight for cycling performance is around 178 pounds. I've been close to 200 lbs on some occasions and as low as 145 at other periods. Let me state quite frankly that I tested my cycling performance at these various weights and I'm definitely better around 178.

The problem is that, given my body type, if I cycle a lot I lose a lot of body mass and will go down from my ideal 178. That is, when Indurain stated he knew he lost power when his weight dropped too much, I can identify with that. I'm not going to take it upon myself to dismiss what Indurain said because I get his point perfectly well.

O.K., so what is the logical thing to do to maintain bodyweight? Well, squats are the number one exercise for weight-gain (or weight-control). However, I never recommended they should be done in conjunction with your cycling (if you specialise in cycling).

If you presently weigh 158 but feel your overall performance is better at around 168, you need to gain 10 lbs. Therefore, what all athletes do is spend a certain amount of time on a weights cycle (just as Lance does in the Winter). Once you feel happy with your weight, you then drop weight training and resume cycling specialisation. I have never recommended a cyclist should weight train prior to peaking on the bike. I have never recommended anything Joe Friel hasn't himself recommended for cyclists, unless I'm referring to those folks like myself who cycle and weight-train on a recreational basis.

Finally, some people don't need to weight train as they have a hard enough time keeping their weight down as it is, never mind trying to put weight on. But people need to appreciate that we don't all have the same body type and it's essential that each person learns to listen to his or her body and train accordingly.

"As for the sprinting comment, since when does sprinting ability have a worthy impact on general classifaction in grand tours?"

Are you kidding? Lance Armstrong can sprint reasonably well and I'm sure it helped him on the last tour when he outsprinted Ivan Baso on a climb. Being able to sprint also helped Paula Radcliffe during the New York marathon a few weeks ago. Sometimes you simply have to sprint if you can't drop the opposition some other way. All I'm saying is that the best cyclists aren't the guys who always win the Kind Of The Mountains but they tend to gain an overall lead on their ability to climb, sprint and time-trial.

"You talk about how adding weight would give you more sustainable power. Assuming you are already at your optimum weight, which you should be, why would you want to gain weight? Just because unhealthy weight loss(under optimal weight) reduces power does not mean gaining weight(muscle) increases sustainable power. Your statements do not make sense."

Yes the statements do make sense and you just answered my question for me. "Assuming you are already at your optimum weight." But what if you're not at your optimum weight? What if you've dropped too much weight as a result of cycling 30 - 40 miles a day, your joints are acheing and you detect some loss of performance. Myself, I find it helps if I reduce my cycling, eat more and do some squats till I get things back under control. I don't follow dogmatic text-book ideas but listen to what my body is telling me.

velomanct said:

I am going to add my two cents. I have to agree with Ric.
How is it possible that weight training increases energy? I did weights on Wednesday, and I was trashed for the following 2 days. I couldn't even do an aerobic ride without hurting. Lifting weights forces me to lose aerobic fitness.

You talk about how adding weight would give you more sustainable power. Assuming you are already at your optimum weight, which you should be, why would you want to gain weight? Just because unhealthy weight loss(under optimal weight) reduces power does not mean gaining weight(muscle) increases sustainable power. Your statements do not make sense.

As for the sprinting comment, since when does sprinting ability have a worthy impact on general classifaction in grand tours?

Also, I have never heard of Indurain weighing 90kgs. He was 80kg max, during his Tour wins.

Carrera said:

You've totally misunderstood what I posted. Let's try and clarify my point:

"How is it possible that weight training increases energy? I did weights on Wednesday, and I was trashed for the following 2 days. I couldn't even do an aerobic ride without hurting. Lifting weights forces me to lose aerobic fitness."

Who recommended you should do weights prior to a cycling session? Not me. Of course your cycling will be affected negatively if you squat hard and then try and ride the following day. I had the same experience. Your leg muscles are broken down and, moreover, weight-training is very tough on the recuperative system.

What I said is that being at your ideal weight increases energy. If that isn't the case, you and Ric would be forced to argue that Lance Armstrong would be better than he is now if he competed at 155 pounds instead of his present weight (somewhere in the 170's). Let me stress that there seems to be a tendency in cycling to assume the lighter you are, the better you will perform. I disagree with that view. If such a view were correct, all the overall top cyclists would be the pure climbers.

Let me give you a personal perspective. My ideal body weight for cycling performance is around 178 pounds. I've been close to 200 lbs on some occasions and as low as 145 at other periods. Let me state quite frankly that I tested my cycling performance at these various weights and I'm definitely better around 178.

The problem is that, given my body type, if I cycle a lot I lose a lot of body mass and will go down from my ideal 178. That is, when Indurain stated he knew he lost power when his weight dropped too much, I can identify with that. I'm not going to take it upon myself to dismiss what Indurain said because I get his point perfectly well.

O.K., so what is the logical thing to do to maintain bodyweight? Well, squats are the number one exercise for weight-gain (or weight-control). However, I never recommended they should be done in conjunction with your cycling (if you specialise in cycling).

If you presently weigh 158 but feel your overall performance is better at around 168, you need to gain 10 lbs. Therefore, what all athletes do is spend a certain amount of time on a weights cycle (just as Lance does in the Winter). Once you feel happy with your weight, you then drop weight training and resume cycling specialisation. I have never recommended a cyclist should weight train prior to peaking on the bike. I have never recommended anything Joe Friel hasn't himself recommended for cyclists, unless I'm referring to those folks like myself who cycle and weight-train on a recreational basis.

Finally, some people don't need to weight train as they have a hard enough time keeping their weight down as it is, never mind trying to put weight on. But people need to appreciate that we don't all have the same body type and it's essential that each person learns to listen to his or her body and train accordingly.

"As for the sprinting comment, since when does sprinting ability have a worthy impact on general classifaction in grand tours?"

Are you kidding? Lance Armstrong can sprint reasonably well and I'm sure it helped him on the last tour when he outsprinted Ivan Baso on a climb. Being able to sprint also helped Paula Radcliffe during the New York marathon a few weeks ago. Sometimes you simply have to sprint if you can't drop the opposition some other way. All I'm saying is that the best cyclists aren't the guys who always win the Kind Of The Mountains but they tend to gain an overall lead on their ability to climb, sprint and time-trial.

"You talk about how adding weight would give you more sustainable power. Assuming you are already at your optimum weight, which you should be, why would you want to gain weight? Just because unhealthy weight loss(under optimal weight) reduces power does not mean gaining weight(muscle) increases sustainable power. Your statements do not make sense."

Yes the statements do make sense and you just answered my question for me. "Assuming you are already at your optimum weight." But what if you're not at your optimum weight? What if you've dropped too much weight as a result of cycling 30 - 40 miles a day, your joints are acheing and you detect some loss of performance. Myself, I find it helps if I reduce my cycling, eat more and do some squats till I get things back under control. I don't follow dogmatic text-book ideas but listen to what my body is telling me.

If your at your optimum weight and your still dropping weight from whatever training your doing then your obviously not eating enough calories. Why do you do squats to get your back in control. Why not reduce your training, eat quality food and then carry on with your training schedule. I doubt whether youv'e got a muscle wastage problem that happens in between sessions.

"so, for e.g., you'll see LA drop his body fat % down to ~ 6%, which is about as lean as you can go without dropping power and causing immune problems."

What makes up the main percentage of body mass in an athlete? Well, we're all aware body mass is made up of muscle and fat. Cylists, as you pointed out, have very low percentages of body fat and the muscle that remains basically powers the bike. The amount of muscle a cyclist needs is open to debate but, obviously, you don't need anything like the muscle mass of a Schwarzennegger to be effective.

That may well be the case, of course, but I can't help but notice Indurain's leg muscles. Most of his body mass was made up of bone, huge leg muscles and very low fat. But Indurain has the biggest quads I ever saw on a tour winner. So, he had what might be described as a healthy amount of (leg)muscle, low bodyfat and plenty of bone density (some riders carry a lot of bone mass).

When I referred to optimum weight I was also referring to a healthy degree of muscle mass (not too much and not too little).

"not in the slightest. maintaining weight and not dropping below certain levels of body fat% are completely different to gaining weight."

You would have to ask people whether they feel they have difficulty maintaining their ideal weight. The problem probably effects ectomorphs more than endomorphs or mesomorphs. Myself, I find that if I cycle a lot then I lose body mass over the months. That isn't such a bad thing but if you go under what you feel is your optimum weight, then performance will drop. Squats are the best way I know of preventing excessive weight-loss.

Say you're aware your performance is best at 175 pounds but the 40 mile a day rides have knocked your down to 167. Why remain at a weight that isn't ideal? Isn't that the whole idea of weight-training in sports? Tools exist to be used.

I'll also try and reprint what Indurain said with regard to the need to sometimes increase weight as I know he experienced a similar problem.

"i seriously worry for the children you 'teach'. for the umpteenth time you're talking utter twaddle. squats are not good for ECP. not only do you have more weight to lug uphill, you will have a decreased aerobic capacity. they do not increase performance in ECP. unless you have anything sensible to post or some solid evidence then i suggest not wasting bandwidth."

You seem fixated on the idea that squats will turn the average cyclist into a proverbial mountain of muscle who's so muscle-bound he can't ride to the corner shop without wheezing for oxygen. The amount of muscle mass a cyclist will acquire is fairly minimal. The idea that an ectomorphic rider who may lack sufficient power (compared to a more mesomorphic rider) won't increase performance in all sports, as a result of some sensible squatting simply isn't true. Some degree of squatting (carried out in cycles) can be beneficial. The philosophy that a cyclist should only cycle and a boxer should only box e.t.c. seems over dogmatic to me.

Another case in point is my recent join injuries and back pain. I used weights over the last few months with a view to strengthening my affected joints, especially my back. The system worked for me. I found that the squats (and especially slow leg-extensions) helped my knees settle so I'm now back riding again. My back pain is also improving via the hyper-extension work I've done. I have no intention of slowing progress down simply to try and adhere to a rigid set of principles that maintains weight-work is useless.

I currently work out with a competition runner who also squats seasonally.

ric_stern/RST said:

why would it be beneficial?

why would this be true as well?

you've got no idea if you think that sprinting is important to win the TdF.

The idea for road cycling (and MTBing) is to generate the highest (sustainable) powers relative to body mass. however, you also need a high absolute power output. these both tend to occur with riders who are of a more average mass, i.e., you can't have a high absolute power output if your mass is e.g., 55 kg. currently, the highest sustainable (human) power outputs are about 6.5 W/kg. for someone that is 55 kg that's ~ 358 W. For someone at 70 kg that's 455 W. Because drag doesn't scale directly with size the slightly larger rider will travel faster. That however, doesn't mean that being bigger is good, as you would have other issues to deal with.

however, that runs counter to what those riders do or did, i.e., they minimised their mass by being as light as they could whilst not dropping power. so, for e.g., you'll see LA drop his body fat % down to ~ 6%, which is about as lean as you can go without dropping power and causing immune problems

see above

not in the slightest. maintaining weight and not dropping below certain levels of body fat% are completely different to gaining weight.

it doesn't. you'd be the only person who thought this for road cycling.

i seriously worry for the children you 'teach'. for the umpteenth time you're talking utter twaddle. squats are not good for ECP. not only do you have more weight to lug uphill, you will have a decreased aerobic capacity. they do not increase performance in ECP. unless you have anything sensible to post or some solid evidence then i suggest not wasting bandwidth

ric

Carrera said:

What I said is that being at your ideal weight increases energy. If that isn't the case, you and Ric would be forced to argue that Lance Armstrong would be better than he is now if he competed at 155 pounds instead of his present weight (somewhere in the 170's).

ironically, you're now arguing my point! according to various reports he does race the TdF at the high 150's (various reports have him at 70 - 72 kg) with out of season mass at ~ 75 kg.

nonetheless, no matter what his actual weight is, he does his utmost to be as lean/light as possible within certain confines (as i pointed out in my previous post).

Quoted post said:

Let me stress that there seems to be a tendency in cycling to assume the lighter you are, the better you will perform. I disagree with that view. If such a view were correct, all the overall top cyclists would be the pure climbers.

you seem to have disregarded what i wrote in my previous post about power output

Quoted post said:

Let me give you a personal perspective. My ideal body weight for cycling performance is around 178 pounds. I've been close to 200 lbs on some occasions and as low as 145 at other periods. Let me state quite frankly that I tested my cycling performance at these various weights and I'm definitely better around 178.

while i'm sure you personal perspective is important to you, it doesn't have the slightest bearing on racing cyclists, let alone pros.

Quoted post said:

O.K., so what is the logical thing to do to maintain bodyweight? Well, squats are the number one exercise for weight-gain (or weight-control). However, I never recommended they should be done in conjunction with your cycling (if you specialise in cycling).

are you smoking dope? or did you just drop some weights on your head? if you *seriously* think squats are the ideal way to maintain body weight then you have no clue about either human physiology or thermodynamics. simply put, the ideal way to maintain body mass is to consume enough food (energy) to match your energy expenditure. if you think anything else, you're in cloud cuckoo land and are by yourself!

Quoted post said:

If you presently weigh 158 but feel your overall performance is better at around 168, you need to gain 10 lbs.

gaining muscle does not increase endurance cycling performance. get that into your head. it negatively impacts ECP in well trained and elite (endurance) cyclists. with that caveat that if you have seriously wrecked yourself and atrophied your muscles you may need to let them rebuild, but this isn't what anyone was talking about (e.g., Indurain)

Quoted post said:

I have never recommended anything Joe Friel hasn't himself recommended for cyclists, unless I'm referring to those folks like myself who cycle and weight-train on a recreational basis.

is that supposed to be your supporting evidence!?

Quoted post said:

"As for the sprinting comment, since when does sprinting ability have a worthy impact on general classifaction in grand tours?"

Are you kidding? Lance Armstrong can sprint reasonably well and I'm sure it helped him on the last tour when he outsprinted Ivan Baso on a climb.

he outsprinted Basso on climb, so what? while it is certainly great and important to win a stage, it did nothing to affect the GC (other than some bonus seconds). As he won by minutes, it would have made no difference whether he won that stage or not.

Quoted post said:

Sometimes you simply have to sprint if you can't drop the opposition some other way. All I'm saying is that the best cyclists aren't the guys who always win the Kind Of The Mountains but they tend to gain an overall lead on their ability to climb, sprint and time-trial.

nowhere, anywhere, have i said that the best are the king of mountains riders.

Quoted post said:

Yes the statements do make sense and you just answered my question for me. "Assuming you are already at your optimum weight." But what if you're not at your optimum weight? What if you've dropped too much weight as a result of cycling 30 - 40 miles a day, your joints are acheing and you detect some loss of performance. Myself, I find it helps if I reduce my cycling, eat more and do some squats till I get things back under control.

you seriously have no idea, and cannot with any certainty say it is the squats. for starters you have 3 ideas you are testing (1 eat more, 2 cut back on cycling, 3 do squats). thus, you can't say it was the squats. at best you can say it was a combination of things. only when you test each idea separately, and have controls in place to test against (two groups of cyclists with one group doing *one* thing and the other continuing with normal training) can you form a hypothesis and test for differences.

ric

I tried that. What you need to bear in mind is my body type isn't the same as yours or anyone else's. Eating food in vast amounts will do nothing for me.
I know one guy who can ride 50 miles a day and still appears quite big. It's just the way his body functions.
The only way I can prevent excessive drops in mass is to reduce cycling and periodise with some weight-work. That keeps my joints healthy and stops my weight dropping excessively. I'll eat quality carbs and take loads of supplements such as cod liver oil, glucosamine and even raw garlic and green tea in moderation.
I tested my performance at various weights. I'm pretty certain that 178 is my ideal at a height of 5 feet 11 inches. I should point out that I cycle very hard at certain points in the year with loads of work in mountainous terrain.
While most people struggle to keep their weight down, I have no problem with my metabolism if I cycle hard. I could eat pizza and burgers and still stay lean.

NJK said:

If your at your optimum weight and your still dropping weight from whatever training your doing then your obviously not eating enough calories. Why do you do squats to get your back in control. Why not reduce your training, eat quality food and then carry on with your training schedule. I doubt whether youv'e got a muscle wastage problem that happens in between sessions.

Armstrong weighs somewhere around 176 but I don't recall his exact weight. He's in the 170 bracket basically. Indurain was quoted in Cycling Pro as having been as high as 90 k.g.

"are you smoking dope? or did you just drop some weights on your head?"

Personalising an argument doesn't win an argument. Whether I smoke cannabis or drop weights on my head is neither here nor there. Academic debates should never deviate from constructive analysis.

"gaining muscle does not increase endurance cycling performance. get that into your head. it negatively impacts ECP in well trained and elite (endurance) cyclists. with that caveat that if you have seriously wrecked yourself and atrophied your muscles you may need to let them rebuild, but this isn't what anyone was talking about (e.g., Indurain)."

How much muscle are you talking about? Certain cyclists have indeed benefited from an increase in lean muscle. Lance Armstrong points out in his book Every Second Counts that the Winter weight work he performed at home in Texas improved his cycling performance. But he never said he had bulked himself up like Mike Tyson.

"the ideal way to maintain body mass is to consume enough food (energy) to match your energy expenditure. if you think anything else, you're in cloud cuckoo land and are by yourself!"

Demonstrably wrong. No amount of food will increase lean body mass in some body types unless you seek to increase fat. The food will simply pass through your system and straight down the toilet.

ric_stern/RST said:

ironically, you're now arguing my point! according to various reports he does race the TdF at the high 150's (various reports have him at 70 - 72 kg) with out of season mass at ~ 75 kg.

nonetheless, no matter what his actual weight is, he does his utmost to be as lean/light as possible within certain confines (as i pointed out in my previous post).

you seem to have disregarded what i wrote in my previous post about power output

while i'm sure you personal perspective is important to you, it doesn't have the slightest bearing on racing cyclists, let alone pros.

are you smoking dope? or did you just drop some weights on your head? if you *seriously* think squats are the ideal way to maintain body weight then you have no clue about either human physiology or thermodynamics. simply put, the ideal way to maintain body mass is to consume enough food (energy) to match your energy expenditure. if you think anything else, you're in cloud cuckoo land and are by yourself!

gaining muscle does not increase endurance cycling performance. get that into your head. it negatively impacts ECP in well trained and elite (endurance) cyclists. with that caveat that if you have seriously wrecked yourself and atrophied your muscles you may need to let them rebuild, but this isn't what anyone was talking about (e.g., Indurain)

is that supposed to be your supporting evidence!?

he outsprinted Basso on climb, so what? while it is certainly great and important to win a stage, it did nothing to affect the GC (other than some bonus seconds). As he won by minutes, it would have made no difference whether he won that stage or not.

nowhere, anywhere, have i said that the best are the king of mountains riders.

you seriously have no idea, and cannot with any certainty say it is the squats. for starters you have 3 ideas you are testing (1 eat more, 2 cut back on cycling, 3 do squats). thus, you can't say it was the squats. at best you can say it was a combination of things. only when you test each idea separately, and have controls in place to test against (two groups of cyclists with one group doing *one* thing and the other continuing with normal training) can you form a hypothesis and test for differences.

ric

Carrera said:

I tried that. What you need to bear in mind is my body type isn't the same as yours or anyone else's. Eating food in vast amounts will do nothing for me.

of course, you're a special human, whose special body doesn't follow the law of thermodynamics. right!

ric

Carrera said:

Say you're aware your performance is best at 175 pounds but the 40 mile a day rides have knocked your down to 167. Why remain at a weight that isn't ideal?

that's known as under eating. are you really this stupid or just trolling?

Quoted post said:

Isn't that the whole idea of weight-training in sports? Tools exist to be used.

it's to get stronger

Quoted post said:

You seem fixated on the idea that squats will turn the average cyclist into a proverbial mountain of muscle who's so muscle-bound he can't ride to the corner shop without wheezing for oxygen.

i did not say anyone would be wheezing, you don't understand. i said their O2 delivery would be compromised. That is, O2 delivery follows a standard pathway from entry into the body to reaching the exercising muscles. By increasing the diffusion distance, which is what happens when increases in muscle cross sectional area occur you will decrease someone's aerobic performance. you will also be heavier and have more to lug uphill.

Quoted post said:

The amount of muscle mass a cyclist will acquire is fairly minimal. The idea that an ectomorphic rider who may lack sufficient power (compared to a more mesomorphic rider) won't increase performance in all sports, as a result of some sensible squatting simply isn't true. Some degree of squatting (carried out in cycles) can be beneficial.

untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls can, on average generate the same force and power as elite TdF pros. in other words you don't know what you're talking about, while continually perpetuating absolute rubbish on this forum.

Quoted post said:

Another case in point is my recent join injuries and back pain. I used weights over the last few months with a view to strengthening my affected joints, especially my back. The system worked for me. I found that the squats (and especially slow leg-extensions) helped my knees settle so I'm now back riding again. My back pain is also improving via the hyper-extension work I've done. I have no intention of slowing progress down simply to try and adhere to a rigid set of principles that maintains weight-work is useless.

you must be pedalling very strangely. cycling is often used as a rehab exercise, due to it being gentle on the joints

Quoted post said:

I currently work out with a competition runner who also squats seasonally.

and? we're talking about cycling.

ric

ric_stern/RST said:

Because, as i've repeatedly stated, along with Andy Coggan, 2Lap, Roadie Scum, and others, if you do lighter/more reps you only have neuromuscular adaptations: these occur at the *specific* joint angle and velocity at which they're trained. So, unless you can do squats in the same manner you pedal, at the same velocity it aint going to make you any better at cycling (unless you're low fitness, and any exercise will help).

This is what I've heard and read in other places and why I've dropped weight from my training routine. I've converted all my indoor training to various spinning routines. To build power/strength I'll crank up the resistance and try to go as hard and fast as I can for as long as I can. This seems to be working (for me.)

Ric,

Could you define ECP for me?

Thanks,
Lonnie

People who have an ectomorphic body composition will be especially prone to shedding excessive body mass if they engage in cycling. Cycling causes fat loss as well as muscle loss. This particular problem doesn't affect mesomorphs to any degree. As an ectomorphic body type I know that if I go below a certain body weight my performance on the bike drops. I also get wrist pains and shoulder pains if I overtrain on the bike.

As an exercise physiologist and coach you should already know that ectomorphs overtrain far more easily than other body types.

The idea that muscle loss can be prevented by simply eating more food ignores the very essentials of exercise physiology. If you're riding 40 miles a day and eating more food, it won't make any difference. You'll just burn up everything you eat.

"By increasing the diffusion distance, which is what happens when increases in muscle cross sectional area occur you will decrease someone's aerobic performance. you will also be heavier and have more to lug uphill."

Again, I'm not saying you should squat simultaneously with your cycling. I'm saying that I've found it beneficial to occasionally reduce my cycling output and initiate squats for a given period. I find that I can add from 6 - 10 pounds of muscle quickly and easily during such a phase and that I feel more energy and power on the bike as a result. Note I'm referring to 6 pounds or so of muscle gain. This shouldn't hinder your climbing (it improved mine).

To cycle repeatedly throughout the year without periodising seems to me to be to be asking for injury or burn out.

"untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls can, on average generate the same force and power as elite TdF pros. in other words you don't know what you're talking about, while continually perpetuating absolute rubbish on this forum."

Which brings us back to the focal point of your philosophy: Jan Ullrich wasted his time doing weights and Armstrong's coaches should have pointed out that he'll decrease his aerobic performance doing leg-presses e.t.c.

If I'm perpetuating absolute rubbish then so are U.S. Postal's exercise physiologists and all the other team coaches who've recommended seasonal weight-training for athletes.

"untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls can, on average generate the same force and power as elite TdF pros."

QUOTE Dr Calaabuig the doctor who tested Indurain at the universidad de Navarra:

"Indurain was so strong, in fact, he burned out the static bike - it's still kept as a souvenir in the university - and they had to buy another."

It's funny how no mention was made of any old maid having burnt out the university static bike-performance-tester.

I enclose a pic of Indurain's huge quads that helps explain why a guy who was well over 6 feet tall could climb with guys who were considerably lighter.

ric_stern/RST said:

that's known as under eating. are you really this stupid or just trolling?

it's to get stronger

i did not say anyone would be wheezing, you don't understand. i said their O2 delivery would be compromised. That is, O2 delivery follows a standard pathway from entry into the body to reaching the exercising muscles. By increasing the diffusion distance, which is what happens when increases in muscle cross sectional area occur you will decrease someone's aerobic performance. you will also be heavier and have more to lug uphill.

untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls can, on average generate the same force and power as elite TdF pros. in other words you don't know what you're talking about, while continually perpetuating absolute rubbish on this forum.

you must be pedalling very strangely. cycling is often used as a rehab exercise, due to it being gentle on the joints

and? we're talking about cycling.

ric

Carrera said:

People who have an ectomorphic body composition will be especially prone to shedding excessive body mass if they engage in cycling. Cycling causes fat loss as well as muscle loss. This particular problem doesn't affect mesomorphs to any degree. As an ectomorphic body type I know that if I go below a certain body weight my performance on the bike drops. I also get wrist pains and shoulder pains if I overtrain on the bike.

As an exercise physiologist and coach you should already know that ectomorphs overtrain far more easily than other body types.

The idea that muscle loss can be prevented by simply eating more food ignores the very essentials of exercise physiology. If you're riding 40 miles a day and eating more food, it won't make any difference. You'll just burn up everything you eat.

"By increasing the diffusion distance, which is what happens when increases in muscle cross sectional area occur you will decrease someone's aerobic performance. you will also be heavier and have more to lug uphill."

Again, I'm not saying you should squat simultaneously with your cycling. I'm saying that I've found it beneficial to occasionally reduce my cycling output and initiate squats for a given period. I find that I can add from 6 - 10 pounds of muscle quickly and easily during such a phase and that I feel more energy and power on the bike as a result. Note I'm referring to 6 pounds or so of muscle gain. This shouldn't hinder your climbing (it improved mine).

To cycle repeatedly throughout the year without periodising seems to me to be to be asking for injury or burn out.

"untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls can, on average generate the same force and power as elite TdF pros. in other words you don't know what you're talking about, while continually perpetuating absolute rubbish on this forum."

Which brings us back to the focal point of your philosophy: Jan Ullrich wasted his time doing weights and Armstrong's coaches should have pointed out that he'll decrease his aerobic performance doing leg-presses e.t.c.

If I'm perpetuating absolute rubbish then so are U.S. Postal's exercise physiologists and all the other team coaches who've recommended seasonal weight-training for athletes.

"untrained, healthy, age, gender and mass matched controls can, on average generate the same force and power as elite TdF pros."

QUOTE Dr Calaabuig the doctor who tested Indurain at the universidad de Navarra:

"Indurain was so strong, in fact, he burned out the static bike - it's still kept as a souvenir in the university - and they had to buy another."

It's funny how no mention was made of any old maid having burnt out the university static bike-performance-tester.

I enclose a pic of Indurain's huge quads that helps explain why a guy who was well over 6 feet tall could climb with guys who were considerably lighter.

I have to agree with Ric. You DO fill this forum up with rubbish.

If it works for you, fine.
Careful of the word "strength", though. Ric dislikes that particular term when applied to a cyclist (chuckle).
Seriously, I have no problem with people who dislike weights and feel it doesn't work for them. The only time I take issue is when I'm told what will or will not work in my own case when I've found that my own particular body responds differently.
If weights doesn't work for you, then that's fine.

Lonnie Utah said:

This is what I've heard and read in other places and why I've dropped weight from my training routine. I've converted all my indoor training to various spinning routines. To build power/strength I'll crank up the resistance and try to go as hard and fast as I can for as long as I can. This seems to be working (for me.)

Ric,

Could you define ECP for me?

Thanks,
Lonnie

ed073 said:

I have to agree with Ric. You DO fill this forum up with rubbish.

Carrera, if migs quads were the reason for him to be able to climb with the best of them can you explain why cipollini or mcewan can't climb with armstrong? I think it was probably to do with his cardiovascular and energy systems being pretty good. Indurain probably didn't burn out the machine through max power it probably was through sustained power, if he did it at all. Why would u.s postal tell ullrich what he is doing wrong?

NJK said:

Carrera, if migs quads were the reason for him to be able to climb with the best of them can you explain why cipollini or mcewan can't climb with armstrong? I think it was probably to do with his cardiovascular and energy systems being pretty good. Indurain probably didn't burn out the machine through max power it probably was through sustained power, if he did it at all. Why would u.s postal tell ullrich what he is doing wrong?

Yeah....let's put Ryan Bayley on a road bike. He should blow Lance away on the Croix de Fer using that logic.....😄

Carrera said:

Armstrong weighs somewhere around 176 but I don't recall his exact weight. He's in the 170 bracket basically. Indurain was quoted in Cycling Pro as having been as high as 90 k.g.

his quoted masses range from 70-75 kg (154 - 165 lb). Indurain raced and won the TdF at ~ 80 kg

Quoted post said:

"are you smoking dope? or did you just drop some weights on your head?"

Personalising an argument doesn't win an argument. Whether I smoke cannabis or drop weights on my head is neither here nor there. Academic debates should never deviate from constructive analysis.

i know. but you just write absolute bunk all the time

Quoted post said:

How much muscle are you talking about? Certain cyclists have indeed benefited from an increase in lean muscle. Lance Armstrong points out in his book Every Second Counts that the Winter weight work he performed at home in Texas improved his cycling performance. But he never said he had bulked himself up like Mike Tyson.

it's funny, but back in 99 when he won the TdF for the time, a lot of his success was attributed to his mass loss

ric

Carrera said:

Armstrong weighs somewhere around 176 but I don't recall his exact weight. He's in the 170 bracket basically. Indurain was quoted in Cycling Pro as having been as high as 90 k.g.

his quoted masses range from 70-75 kg (154 - 165 lb). Indurain raced and won the TdF at ~ 80 kg

Quoted post said:

"are you smoking dope? or did you just drop some weights on your head?"

Personalising an argument doesn't win an argument. Whether I smoke cannabis or drop weights on my head is neither here nor there. Academic debates should never deviate from constructive analysis.

i know. but you just write absolute bunk all the time

Quoted post said:

How much muscle are you talking about? Certain cyclists have indeed benefited from an increase in lean muscle. Lance Armstrong points out in his book Every Second Counts that the Winter weight work he performed at home in Texas improved his cycling performance. But he never said he had bulked himself up like Mike Tyson.

it's funny, but back in 99 when he won the TdF for the first time, a lot of his success was attributed to his mass loss

ric

Lonnie Utah said:

This is what I've heard and read in other places and why I've dropped weight from my training routine. I've converted all my indoor training to various spinning routines. To build power/strength I'll crank up the resistance and try to go as hard and fast as I can for as long as I can. This seems to be working (for me.)

Ric,

Could you define ECP for me?

Thanks,
Lonnie

ECP = endurance cycling performance. Pretty much any cycling event from about 90-seconds onwards, as by this point the predominant source of energy is derived aerobically.

ric