Flyeater said:It's funny to see the replies to my post. Some of you can't (not don't) even understand what weight training is for.
Troll.You have come to a conclusion and closed your mind. This is never a good state to be in.
Why Troll? Is there a 50m standing start event at World's. Prob is now at Olympics now they have taken the real events out.To say that accelerating is not like doing 8 or 15 reps in the gym because you keep going is a stupid thing to say.
Bingo the troll has it, and because they are different doing one thing doesn't make you better at another.The mechanisms in the body that maintain a rythmical constant (low exertion) are different to those that create great force. This is commonly known isn't it? it is different physically and chemically and even hormonaly resulting in different responses by the body (and mind) over time.
Bye bye, thanks for playing.Any how I'm out of here, people seem unable to discuss anything here (cycle forums) without being overly critical or poking fun. No worries, Ben.
daveryanwyoming said:Well in the case of a standing start for an event like the kilo there are many coaches that definitely believe weights can be beneficial. But sure in the abstract it's easy to conclude that greater peak strength 'could' lead to greater acceleration on the bike.
There's plenty of published literature and even more basic first principles including simple high school physics that demonstrates why peak strength just isn't a limiter to most racing cyclists. But folks simply don't want to hear or accept that answer.
Enriss said:I've certainly come to a conclusion, and until someone presents evidence or at LEAST a strong argument to the contrary I'll maintain it. Asking us to be open to your ideas without being willing to state the reasons for supporting such ideas speaks to grandiose illusions of self-worth.
How hard is it? The kinematics of a standing start change in that 15sec time period from a full stop to race pace. The kinematics of doing reps in the gym don't change. Seems the only ones who don't get it or are pulling a Frank Day (pleading ignorance to concepts that don't match their product marketing) are Personal Trainers and Strength Coaches who make a living suckering in people with this tripe.I don't think your response comes close to addressing his assertion that doing 8-10 rep work can increase a cyclist's ability to acclerate.
YesEnriss said:...do you find yourself capable of accelerating quickly during races?
YesAre you capable of making strong attacks and catching up to riders when they break off?
daveryanwyoming said:Maybe Tony or Velomanct or one of the folks with a really big sprint can put some torque numbers to their race winning efforts but I'm guessing even they don't put out much more than body weight on the pedals when laying down serious sprint power.
That's gotta be hub torque, not crank torque but working from cadence and speed it looks like your crank torque was ~ 122 Nm.tonyzackery said:Taken from a crit in June, the following numbers when I jumped:
1452w max (1389w 5sec.)
109rpm
48.8k speed
35.1Nm
35.1Nm = ? lb/ft of torque; probably not all that much...
daveryanwyoming said:That's gotta be hub torque, not crank torque but working from cadence and speed it looks like your crank torque was ~ 122 Nm.
Assuming 175cm cranks that works out to ~155 pounds per pedal stroke.
Felt_Rider said:If I sign up for that Lance program will I also get a free shipment of Air?
Of course and it does come with a 90 day money back guarantee if you find that "Air" does not work for you.Will it come Air Mail?
Well to tell the truth your $1149.00 payment gets you a book on how to breath. Shipping weight 250grams. But buy now and you get a free pair of Compression socks.What is the shipping weight? (as light as air?)
We have a crack team of Canadian scientists working on this and can say with 95% confidence that if you lungs spontaneously combust there is a possiblility it may not be O2 that caused or supported the fire.Will my lungs catch on fire if I use Air? I have heard of burning lungs and I am afraid that might happen with your new product.
Once your 40% improvement kicks in Lance will eat your dust!!!What if I get a VO2max like Lance.
If you just try "Air" I am sure you will be a fan for life and can store it for future use.Will I use too much Air?
Thank you for your enquiry, we are sure within 2 weeks you will know the difference between "Air" and not using air. Don't believe those biased scientists who found no improvements after 5-6 weeks.What would it cost me a month to keep supplied?
Just askin'
fergie said:as claimed we think 40% sounds like a good number to pluck out of the sky.
I was referring specifically to flyman in my post. You've done plenty to convince me that weight training doesn't influence cycling the way I thought it did.fergie said:The Aussies!!! Ryan Bayley had the highest peak speed of any sprinter which worked for him in Athens but by Beijing Hoy and co had come from the Kilo and could go long and fast and Bayley got smoked. I have the programmes they were on, all focused on peak speed, power and strength. Cycling isn't about peak power or speed. It;s ave power whether it's the 200m TT or the 21 day Tour de France!!! Understand the sport you are making claims about!
I was just pointing out that claiming resistance training hurts endurance riders doesn't have any bearing on the claim that accelerating during a race is like doing some number of leg presses. Acceleration is obviously anaerobic, since accelerating past a speed requires a higher power output than riding at that speed. So whether training that anearobic activity should be trained on the bike by brief sprints scattered throughout a long training ride, on a bike through standing starts, or in the gym with weights is maybe a fair question. I'm not convinced that any of these methods should be used to the exclusion of the others.fergie said:How hard is it? The kinematics of a standing start change in that 15sec time period from a full stop to race pace. The kinematics of doing reps in the gym don't change.
Enriss said:I was referring specifically to flyman in my post. You've done plenty to convince me that weight training doesn't influence cycling the way I thought it did.
I was just pointing out that claiming resistance training hurts endurance riders doesn't have any bearing on the claim that accelerating during a race is like doing some number of leg presses. Acceleration is obviously anaerobic, since accelerating past a speed requires a higher power output than riding at that speed. So whether training that anearobic activity should be trained on the bike by brief sprints scattered throughout a long training ride, on a bike through standing starts, or in the gym with weights is maybe a fair question.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the kinematics of weight training don't change" though. You've seen olympic lifting, so I know you know that the bar starts out at rest, speeds up, slows down, and then gets lifted again. And I know you've seen how in basically every full range of motion exercise that exists, different muscles contribute to the lift in varying proportions throughout the lift. I can only assume I'm misunderstanding your meaning of kinematics.
Enriss said:So you're comparing multiple reps of a lift to a single "rep" of a standing start? Let's try comparing apples to apples. There are multiple phases to a variety of lifts, and there are multiple phases to the standing start as well.
fergie said:This is a cycling forum so lets stay focused! We are trying to improve as cyclists! Not to have more numbers on our squat totals or keep S&C coaches in business.
Does a Clean and Jerk single rep take the 10-15sec it takes to ride a single rep 125m on an indoor board track?
Enriss said:No, but it's certainly not a movement that involves kinematics that are constant in any way.
fergie said:The kinematics of the clean and jerk differ from rep to rep?
Enriss said:Do the kinematics of a standing start change from rep to rep?
daveryanwyoming said:That's gotta be hub torque, not crank torque but working from cadence and speed it looks like your crank torque was ~ 122 Nm.
Assuming 175cm cranks that works out to ~155 pounds per pedal stroke.
-Dave
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.