Weight training

andrewgturnbull · September 2007

Hi there.

I'd recommend doing turbo sessions on your TT bike - I also do all my intervals down on the aero bars, and ride the recovery bits sitting up.

My brain is now hard wired so that aero position = pain = speed!

Cheers, Andy

ps If you can afford a seperate bike set up 100% the same as your TT bike, fair enough. Personally I'm not worried about damaging my bike on the turbo - I just make sure I clean off the sweat before any rust sets in!

BlackHelmet · September 2007

DaveyL wrote:

...interview with Lance Armstrong. They asked him about his plans for training in the close season, and he said he would be doing leg weights to try and increase his power. Make of that what you will.

I'm sure I once saw a quote from a coach of LA that the key was to weight train for a period of time THEN convert that strength gain into a cycling benefit by doing intervals and hill climbs etc.

But for me, an TT dabbler, I certainly find that regular weight training during Winter/Spring helps reduce knee and back problems.

Matchstick Man · September 2007

I don't doubt that pros use weights - we've all seen the piccies of the USPS/Disco boys on training camps in the weight room at their December camps.
However, pros have ALL day to train and do upwards of 15-20hrs a week on the bikes. Therefore, a few hours here and there in the gym will be of benefit to them.
Unless you, as an amateur, are doing 12-14hrs a week on the bike, then I would suggest that any spare time you have for training would be better spent developing your VO2 max rather than your weight training.
Most of us here (i guess) do less than 14hrs a week training due t family/work/social commitments so what the pros do is irrelevant to us.

Remember, any endurance sport is about who has the biggest VO2 max and who can outpace their competitors. This is why cyclists and runners are skinny - think Seb Coe vs Steve Ovett or the dominance of running by Kenyans,etc - not a bunch of guys who look like they can squat x kgs? Likewise the guys you see in the pro peloton also look like they are in dire need of a few ginsters!

Macintyre is a full time elite cyclist who is looking for every extra second he can find - I'll bet his weekly hours on the bike are more than my monthly ones so if he thinks that weight training on top of that is beneficial to him then fair play.

Look at the physiques of the guys who hold the 10 and 25 records in this country and tell me they are gym bunnies - I'm guessing they're not....

BlackHelmet · September 2007

Matchstick Man wrote:

...so what the pros do is irrelevant to us.

I don't think that's true. I would think that all pros are coached and train extremely well. One of the main differences between a pro and myself is volume and quality. I can however study what the pros do and scale and adapt to fit into my schedule. But the important thing is that I can incorporate the basics into my program. I could however decide that the benefits of weight training were insignificant compared to other aspects so shouldn't be used in my schedule. In my case I do use weights but more for balance & core rather than any specific endurance cycling benefits. And for a cyclist who wants to be cycling in my 70s this is important to me (rather than a pro who is concentrating on short to medium term).

Matchstick Man wrote:

Seb Coe vs Steve Ovett or the dominance of running by Kenyans,etc - not a bunch of guys who look like they can squat x kgs?

I believe both Coe & Ovett used regular weight training and I suspect their power to weight ratio was pretty awesome. Weight training doesn't have to produce big muscles!

Matchstick Man · September 2007

BlackHelmet wrote:

Matchstick Man wrote:

...so what the pros do is irrelevant to us.

I couldn't disagree more.

I could - my events are no more than 2.5hrs long and most are 24mins long. WHy copy what a pro does whose events last up to 6.5hrs?

I do 8hrs a week (max) spread over a couple of commutes, mid week 10, evening session or two and a couple of short weekend rides. Time constraints (wife, child, job, mates, family, decorating,etc) stop me doing more.
If I could up the hours on the bike to 12 or more I'd be doing 50% more training which would benefit me immeasurably.
If I could find another hour somewhere in the week I wouldn't choose to be doing weights to see an improvement in my VO2 max.

As for Coe and Ovett doing weight training - see my comments re: bike pros. They probably had the time (on top of 100 mile + weeks) to fit it in and get the rest from it as well.

Alex_Simmons/RST · September 2007

BlackHelmet wrote:

I would think that all pros are coached and train extremely well.

You think wrongly then.

eh · September 2007

Just a question but are we all talking about the same things?

Core strength, sit-ups, press ups and squats which are all important for cycling, aren't to my eyes at least weight training, due to the only weight involved being your own.

Weight training which is what we are questioning involves as suggested the use of additional weight, being either free or machine based and it is this training that is questionable for fit cyclists. NB: I think there maybe an argument for its use in riders recovering from certain injuries.

Ric_Stern/RST · September 2007

BlackHelmet wrote:

I'm sure I once saw a quote from a coach of LA that the key was to weight train for a period of time THEN convert that strength gain into a cycling benefit by doing intervals and hill climbs etc.

while you may have seen such a quote (which i don't doubt)...

intervals* and hill climbs have no correlation to strength, the forces in such instances are very low such that sedentary people (who are healthy, the same gender, and mass matched) can reach them. For e.g., winning the mountain TT on Alpe d'Huez, in 2004 (i think) would have required an average force of about 25 kg between both legs, which, can be met by most people (if you can't meet this, you're unlikely to stand up, unless you're very small...)

The only time strength plays a big component is in e.g., standing start sprints, which lets face it aren't hugely crucial to road races, TTs, MTBing etc.

Brownie points for anyone who can tell me when a standing start sprint was extremely important in a road race.

Ric

BlackHelmet · September 2007

Thanks for that Ric. Just had a Google around to see if I could find the quote I was alluding to...

"Lance Armstrong's coach, Chris Carmichael, recommends building leg strength with low repetitions and heavy weights in the winter, then switching to the bike for high-repetition power work in the form of intervals up steep hills. But cycling physician and trainer Max Testa says to begin the winter with 3-4 sets of 12-18 reps with medium resistance, then progress to 3 sets of 25 reps followed by 2 sets of 50 reps with light weights. Testa's reason for high-repetition/low resistance leg training: "When you pedal you use a very small percentage of maximum strength on each pedal stroke."

The moral? The physiological law of specificity can't be avoided. Weight-room strength has to be converted to cycling-specific fitness before it's of much use on the bike."

DaveyL · September 2007

Ric_Stern/RST wrote:

BlackHelmet wrote:

I'm sure I once saw a quote from a coach of LA that the key was to weight train for a period of time THEN convert that strength gain into a cycling benefit by doing intervals and hill climbs etc.

while you may have seen such a quote (which i don't doubt)...

intervals* and hill climbs have no correlation to strength, the forces in such instances are very low such that sedentary people (who are healthy, the same gender, and mass matched) can reach them. For e.g., winning the mountain TT on Alpe d'Huez, in 2004 (i think) would have required an average force of about 25 kg between both legs, which, can be met by most people (if you can't meet this, you're unlikely to stand up, unless you're very small...)

The only time strength plays a big component is in e.g., standing start sprints, which lets face it aren't hugely crucial to road races, TTs, MTBing etc.

Brownie points for anyone who can tell me when a standing start sprint was extremely important in a road race.

Ric

Isn't force equal to mass times acceleration, so an acceleration is also required - maybe that is the part the average Joe on the street cannot manage?

mac220 · September 2007

The moral? The physiological law of specificity can't be avoided. Weight-room strength has to be converted to cycling-specific fitness before it's of much use on the bike."

So the next question i would ask is 'is it possible to convert weight room strength to cycling specific strength?'

Or would you just be better of cycling and not bothering with the weights

Are the benefits they talk about actually produced by the weights or the subsequent training (presumably on the bike)used to convert the 'weight room fitness' to cycling specific fitness?

Ric_Stern/RST · September 2007

mac220 wrote:

The moral? The physiological law of specificity can't be avoided. Weight-room strength has to be converted to cycling-specific fitness before it's of much use on the bike."

So the next question i would ask is 'is it possible to convert weight room strength to cycling specific strength?'

No it isn't. It's hokum. ECP isn't limited by strength (unless you happen to be something like a frail old lady). See my previous posts above.

ric

top_bhoy · September 2007

Moving aside the weight training strength/endurance aspects, it seems that weight training for upper body cycling benefits is being overlooked in all of this debate! Or is weight training for upper body strength not applicable either?

Ric_Stern/RST · September 2007

Top_Bhoy wrote:

Moving aside the weight training strength/endurance aspects, it seems that weight training for upper body cycling benefits is being overlooked in all of this debate! Or is weight training for upper body strength not applicable either?

why would you need upper body strength for cycling?

ric

top_bhoy · September 2007

Arms, chest and lower back seem obvious areas which would be prone to physical deterioration during long and tough rides. I'm not talking about turning the cyclist into the incredible hulk but it seems strange that an athlete would ignore training major body sections.

Ric_Stern/RST · September 2007

Top_Bhoy wrote:

Arms, chest and lower back seem obvious areas which would be prone to physical deterioration during long and tough rides. I'm not talking about turning the cyclist into the incredible hulk but it seems strange that an athlete would ignore training major body sections.

What do you mean by "physical deterioration during long rides"? Fatigue? Musclar atrophy? something else?

ric

BlackHelmet · September 2007

Matchstick Man wrote:

WHy copy what a pro does whose events last up to 6.5hrs?

I didn't say 'copy' I said study, scale. and adapt.

For example, back to running again...

I just bought the latest copy of Runners World magazine. There's an article about how Kenyan runners train and how in particular they use tempo runs as the core of their training. Whilst I may only run ~15 miles a week instead of 100+ and I'm only a 38 min 10k runner, I can still study what the kenyan sessions are all about, what's the purpose? do I do such a session and if not, should I? This is why I study what the pros do, to maximise my small training time. I certainly wouldn't dismiss the article because it's about Kenyan pros.

BlackHelmet · September 2007

Top_Bhoy wrote:

Moving aside the weight training strength/endurance aspects, it seems that weight training for upper body cycling benefits is being overlooked in all of this debate! Or is weight training for upper body strength not applicable either?

I think you're right that weight training doesn't necessarily need to be justified in terms of endurance cycling performance benefits. I'm 40 and I hope to be running for another 10+ years and cycling a lot longer than that. I see using weights as a good long term investiment in core strength, muscle balance and flexibility.

Matchstick Man · September 2007

BlackHelmet wrote:

[I didn't say 'copy' I said study, scale. and adapt.

For example, back to running again...

I just bought the latest copy of Runners World magazine. There's an article about how Kenyan runners train and how in particular they use tempo runs as the core of their training. Whilst I may only run ~15 miles a week instead of 100+ and I'm only a 38 min 10k runner, I can still study what the kenyan sessions are all about, what's the purpose? do I do such a session and if not, should I? This is why I study what the pros do, to maximise my small training time. I certainly wouldn't dismiss the article because it's about Kenyan pros.

and do the skinny Kenyan runners look like they do any weight training?
Weight training will not improve your VO2 max which is the major limiting factor in endurance sports
The Kenyans are doing running specific training so yes you should note what they're doing there but if you have limited training time available then why waste it on a session in the gym that's not going to improve your VO2?

BlackHelmet · September 2007

Matchstick Man wrote:

Weight training will not improve your VO2 max which is the major limiting factor in endurance sports

That's true. But studies have shown that strength training improves running economy. Improved economy at the same lactate threshold translates to running faster. Though I'm guessing such 'economy' gains aren't a factor in cycling.

andrewgturnbull · September 2007

BlackHelmet wrote:

Matchstick Man wrote:

Weight training will not improve your VO2 max which is the major limiting factor in endurance sports

That's true. But studies have shown that strength training improves running economy. Improved economy at the same lactate threshold translates to running faster. Though I'm guessing such 'economy' gains aren't a factor in cycling.

Hi there.

I was under the impression that it was my weekly long run that improves my running economy... Can you point me in the direction of these studies that tell me I should be weight lifting to improve my distance running?

If forced to guess I'd say that the economy gains from long rides would be a pretty big factor in cycling too.

Cheers, Andy

BlackHelmet · September 2007

I read about it a few months ago in a mag which has long since visited the recycling bin. But here's a couple of articles from some googling...

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0253.htm

http://www.copacabanarunners.net/i-runners-weight.html

ut_och_cykla · September 2007

I think some of the differenes of opinion here come from the fact that we have different goals,interests, time available etc.

I'm prepared to sacrifice some endurance adaptations because I don't race or take part in long sportives etc, I have a life (sedentary/computer centered) outside cycling.
Although my preferred sport is cycling I also jog a bit in the winter (better in poor weather for me) and weight train - partly for a change and partly to stop my back/neck/shoulders becoming too weak to do more than move the mouse!

So if you want to be a really good competative cyclist (in the broadest sense) skipping the weights might be a good idea especially if you have limited time. If you want to keep fit, limit weight gain, not get too bored mixing physical activity might be a good idea for some people.
I feel that for me weight training has been beneficial - I've maintained better fitness over the winter (combined with running & spinning) and suffered no knee/back problems even on long hard rides up Cols in france-Something that I wouldn't even have attempted 10 years ago.
As there is only one of me I can't test if doing things differently would have given a better or worse outcome but I'm fitter now than I've ever been (47) and as long as I carry on seeing year on year improvements I'll carry on with my 'programme'.

Matchstick Man · September 2007

BlackHelmet wrote:

[That's true. But studies have shown that strength training improves running economy. Improved economy at the same lactate threshold translates to running faster. Though I'm guessing such 'economy' gains aren't a factor in cycling.

so in one quote you say that tempo runs are at the heart of the training of the most successful runners in recent history and then you say that strength training improves running economy.
I'm struggling a bit here to find out which you believe in more - weight training to bring about an increase in VO2 or tempo training to bring about an increase in VO2?

Matchstick Man · September 2007

BlackHelmet wrote:

http://www.copacabanarunners.net/i-runners-weight.html

from that link:

The weightlifting, however, did not result in any change in the subjects' maximal oxygen consumption (VO2 max).

The effect of the weight-training on the subjects' running performances, however, were less clear-cut. Two of the 8 subjects were injured from the heavy-resistance training, and were unable to complete the post-weight-training 10 K run.

A 1995 study, published in Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, found similar results concerning VO2 max. Dr. John McCarthy and colleagues at the University of Wisconsin-Madison Biodynamics Laboratory, found no increase in peak VO2 with the addition of strength training to an endurance training program

Neither this study nor the University of Illinois study, therefore, found an increase in max VO2 or peak VO2 with the addition of strength training to an endurance-training program.

mmm, maybe not the greatest link to prove your point?

Matchstick Man · September 2007

And then at the end of the link there's an article called "what if you don't like to lift?"

Try hill running.....Running uphill requires that your legs propel your bodyweight up against gravity. Moreover, they do so under conditions that more closely replicate racing conditions than does even the most well-designed weight-machine......Another advantage of hill running over lifting weights is that you are simultaneously building up your cardiovascular system. Hill running, therefore, can be viewed as another form of resistance training

so, instead of banging out the weights, it says you should go and be speciifc instead and run? Wouldn't that kind of like be the same as going out for an hour on the bike and doing specific big-gear or hill reps on the bike?

ut_och_cykla · September 2007

Matchstick Man wrote:

And then at the end of the link there's an article called "what if you don't like to lift?"

Try hill running.....Running uphill requires that your legs propel your bodyweight up against gravity. Moreover, they do so under conditions that more closely replicate racing conditions than does even the most well-designed weight-machine......Another advantage of hill running over lifting weights is that you are simultaneously building up your cardiovascular system. Hill running, therefore, can be viewed as another form of resistance training

so, instead of banging out the weights, it says you should go and be speciifc instead and run? Wouldn't that kind of like be the same as going out for an hour on the bike and doing specific big-gear or hill reps on the bike?

I have this weird feeling someone from RST will be along in a minute to say big gear reps don't help....
and what you really need is a........ :oops:

Ric_Stern/RST · September 2007

ut_och_cykla wrote:

Matchstick Man wrote:

And then at the end of the link there's an article called "what if you don't like to lift?"

Try hill running.....Running uphill requires that your legs propel your bodyweight up against gravity. Moreover, they do so under conditions that more closely replicate racing conditions than does even the most well-designed weight-machine......Another advantage of hill running over lifting weights is that you are simultaneously building up your cardiovascular system. Hill running, therefore, can be viewed as another form of resistance training

so, instead of banging out the weights, it says you should go and be speciifc instead and run? Wouldn't that kind of like be the same as going out for an hour on the bike and doing specific big-gear or hill reps on the bike?

I have this weird feeling someone from RST will be along in a minute to say big gear reps don't help....
and what you really need is a........ :oops:

you're right, big gear reps don't make you stronger. but don't take my word for it, see here: http://home.earthlink.net/~acoggan/setraining/

ric

Johnpsanderson · September 2007

big gear reps don't make you stronger.

But isn't it giving the same effect as weight training? And doesn't weight training make you stronger?

I may be walking into a pit here in terms of what "strength" actually is - but I can relate the feeling of pushing a big gear up a hill to the feeling of squats or leg presses, i.e slow reps and an intense burning feeling!!! . Isn't it a similar thing?

Ric_Stern/RST · September 2007

Johnpsanderson wrote:

big gear reps don't make you stronger.

But isn't it giving the same effect as weight training? And doesn't weight training make you stronger?

I may be walking into a pit here in terms of what "strength" actually is - but I can relate the feeling of pushing a big gear up a hill to the feeling of squats or leg presses, i.e slow reps and an intense burning feeling!!! . Isn't it a similar thing?

see the article i linked to above.
the forces are still too low to increase strength.

ric

Weight training

Comments

Categories