Low cadence/high resistance sessions
Comments
-
You can't train strength on a bike. The forces are simply too low to induce changes in strength. The only time we approach such forces is the first two pedal strokes in a track standing start, and it goes down from thereon.markac wrote:I've got something new in this regard that I'm working on, which I hope to get input on from folks with an interest in this subject (see link below).
First, everyone should realize that cycling taps both the aerobic AND anaerobic systems of power virtually all the time. And, at different times one or the other of these systems are of greater importance. Hill climbs and time trials, for example require high levels of aerobic power, while sprints, attacks and accelerations out of corners require high anaerobic power.
Each system of power has it's own protocol for optimal training, and every person who has studied a little exercise physiology knows what this is:
Aerobic Power - Lactate Threshold and VO2 max intervals (resulting in increased mitochondria count and density)
Anaerobic Power - Progressively overloaded resistance, in both the concentric and eccentric movements, and in the EXACT muscular motion which is used in competition
Cycling coaches are pretty uniform on the aerobic side of training, but on the anaerobic side it is a quite varied--some advocate weight training in the gym and some these on-bike strength workouts (the subject of this thread). The problem with the gym and on-bike training, however, is that none of the prescribed workouts conform with some basic tenets of ex. physiology--the gym workouts lack the specificity, and the on-bike workouts don't offer eccentric resistsance, an adequate amount of progressive overload, or the ability to exercise the muscle groups in isolation.
So, after greatly benefitting myself from on-bike strength workouts, and knowing a little about ex. physiology, I developed the apparatus in the video below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_9Cue-qKb8
After using a garage prototype for a few months, and seeing the benefits of this modality of training, I decided to build something for real and see what others think about it. The apparatus in the video is a pre-production prototype and I hope to be able to make it available to other racing enthusiasts--but before I go and make a big investment in it, I'm very curious what people think of this concept.
Please chime in...and please forgive if you see this post on a couple of other forums with activity on this subject matter.
So while you might be training something when doing over gear work on a bike, it isn't strength.
Isolated muscle training for cycling is, in my opinion, not particularly effective, as it's the whole system working together that matters.
Good luck with your device, I can see what you are trying to achieve but in my view the rate of movement is too slow. Personally I think you would be far better off doing hard efforts on a bike.0 -
Thanks for commenting, Alex. My experiences, observations and research differ quite a bit from what you're saying; I've responded inline to your comments.You can't train strength on a bike. The forces are simply too low to induce changes in strength. The only time we approach such forces is the first two pedal strokes in a track standing start, and it goes down from thereon.
So while you might be training something when doing over gear work on a bike, it isn't strength.
Agreed, the reason I developed this apparatus was because I was doing strength/power training on a bike and soon realized a bike was completely inadequate from a physiological perspective. I also got to a point where I was pulling out spokes in my rear wheel!
The apparatus overcomes the physiological shortcomings of a bicycle by enabling higher force requirements (as you mention), but also by enabling resistance in the retractive/eccentric motion of the movement and isolated training of the 4 different muscle groups in use (push-down/pull-up, left/right side)Isolated muscle training for cycling is, in my opinion, not particularly effective, as it's the whole system working together that matters.
Absolutely true for aerobic conditioning on a bike, but for strength or power training, isolation is required for optimal development (as is progressive overload and eccentric resistance). The American College of Sports Medicine has published a position paper on this concept, and I believe this is generally accepted amongst exercise physiologists--you can get a copy at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/717047 (requires free account).
A lot of coaches recommend gym work and/or on-bike strength training (Testa: http://bit.ly/5Q2Izg and CTS: http://bit.ly/ebvgYj -half way down); the apparatus I'm developing is really the physiologically correct way to approach this.Good luck with your device, I can see what you are trying to achieve but in my view the rate of movement is too slow. Personally I think you would be far better off doing hard efforts on a bike.
Thanks!
As for the movement speed, yes the video is only showing a moderately fast motion. The device, however, is protocol agnostic--you can do fast or slow motions (or isometric). In fact, for optimal power development the ACSM recommends a combination of both moderately slow exercises (strength) and higher velocity movements (power).0 -
The longest I've ever tried to ride at a cadence below 80 is 20 minutes and my power is comfortably 10% down on what's sustainable at a higher cadence, it is not related to anaerobic components of which I have very little anyway. You stated "yet such efforts are sustainable for just as long as pedaling at same power in a regular gear", it's not true.Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:If people want an overload, they should simply ride at a higher power output.
That would only overload one system the first to fail - it would not overload the other components. It's beneficial to ride at a range of powers to overload different aerobic systems (say VO2max and threshold) because otherwise you cannot generate much overload on anything but the first to fail.
The low cadence workouts are designed (I'm not commenting on if they work as a training regime, just arguing that there is no evidence that it does not work) to cause overload in muscles that is normally masked by the oxygen/energy delivery failing first preventing any such overload existing. You don't cause overload just by riding at a higher power output.
The efficiency at low cadences is not a red herring - it's pretty well established that you are more oxygen efficient at low cadences - that doesn't mean that low cadence work is in any way designed to improve efficiency at low cadences or otherwise it just allows people to reduce the demands on their aerobic system and increase the demands on the muscle.Jibbering Sports Stuff: http://jibbering.com/sports/0 -
So your power up a 20+ minute climb at 75-80 rpm is way down on your flat land power? That's pretty unusual. But if you can't do it, then you can't do it.jibberjim wrote:The longest I've ever tried to ride at a cadence below 80 is 20 minutes and my power is comfortably 10% down on what's sustainable at a higher cadence,
As for the rest of it, I think some of your interpretations are a bit strange. Threshold or VO2max It's all predominately fueled via aerobic glycolosis. Not sure how you are not targeting that when riding at such power levels, irrespective of cadence.
Anyway, this debate is going nowhere.
Merry Christmas0 -
-
I put my highest power out at about 80 rpm but I do get tired more quickly, I have a weak aerobic system having only been training for 3 years and only being diagnosed with asthma last year (turns out I've always had it but thought it was just hayfever related)...0
-
markac wrote:Thanks for commenting, Alex. My experiences, observations and research differ quite a bit from what you're saying; I've responded inline to your comments.You can't train strength on a bike. The forces are simply too low to induce changes in strength. The only time we approach such forces is the first two pedal strokes in a track standing start, and it goes down from thereon.
So while you might be training something when doing over gear work on a bike, it isn't strength.
Agreed, the reason I developed this apparatus was because I was doing strength/power training on a bike and soon realized a bike was completely inadequate from a physiological perspective. I also got to a point where I was pulling out spokes in my rear wheel!
The apparatus overcomes the physiological shortcomings of a bicycle by enabling higher force requirements (as you mention), but also by enabling resistance in the retractive/eccentric motion of the movement and isolated training of the 4 different muscle groups in use (push-down/pull-up, left/right side)Isolated muscle training for cycling is, in my opinion, not particularly effective, as it's the whole system working together that matters.
Absolutely true for aerobic conditioning on a bike, but for strength or power training, isolation is required for optimal development (as is progressive overload and eccentric resistance). The American College of Sports Medicine has published a position paper on this concept, and I believe this is generally accepted amongst exercise physiologists--you can get a copy at http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/717047 (requires free account).
A lot of coaches recommend gym work and/or on-bike strength training (Testa: http://bit.ly/5Q2Izg and CTS: http://bit.ly/ebvgYj -half way down); the apparatus I'm developing is really the physiologically correct way to approach this.Good luck with your device, I can see what you are trying to achieve but in my view the rate of movement is too slow. Personally I think you would be far better off doing hard efforts on a bike.
Thanks!
As for the movement speed, yes the video is only showing a moderately fast motion. The device, however, is protocol agnostic--you can do fast or slow motions (or isometric). In fact, for optimal power development the ACSM recommends a combination of both moderately slow exercises (strength) and higher velocity movements (power).
Some coaches who advocate strength training in the gym do not really understand muscle physiology that is the bottom line.
Why some coaches can't understand that you can do all your training on the bike is a little bit strange really.
Why can't you do your an-aerobic efforts on the bike??0 -
Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
I'm happy for you.P_Tucker wrote:MORE validation from someone who knows what they're on about. I'M SO HAPPY!
But please read what I said carefully, because no where did I say they were not beneficial or did not work, just that there is nothing to suggest a benefit to one's regular riding over and above performing such efforts at same power in a regular gear, specificity aside.
That isn't clear to me.
Are you saying that there IS some benefit to overgeared work if it relates to the type of riding you do? For instance, if you spend time doing climbs where you experience low cadence, high power-type efforts - will overgeared work replicate that effort?
Be clear if you can if there IS *ever* any benefit to doing overgeared training please.0 -
Pokerface wrote:Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:
I'm happy for you.P_Tucker wrote:MORE validation from someone who knows what they're on about. I'M SO HAPPY!
But please read what I said carefully, because no where did I say they were not beneficial or did not work, just that there is nothing to suggest a benefit to one's regular riding over and above performing such efforts at same power in a regular gear, specificity aside.
That isn't clear to me.
Are you saying that there IS some benefit to overgeared work if it relates to the type of riding you do? For instance, if you spend time doing climbs where you experience low cadence, high power-type efforts - will overgeared work replicate that effort?
Be clear if you can if there IS *ever* any benefit to doing overgeared training please.
Its the wrong question - the correct question is "where can I buy the correct chainrings/cassette for my event?" When was the last time you saw Contador riding at 40rpm?0 -
Overgearing isn't about going 40rpm. Its about riding in a gear bigger than you normally would at a lower cadence.
For some people it can be 80rpm. For others as low as 40. Mine is done at 60-70rpm.
As has been pointed out over and over, at some point you run out of gears and cadence WILL drop. Buying different chainsets or chainrings for different events isnt a viable solution for most people. Training your body to be able to deal with different riding conditions IS.0 -
Pokerface wrote:Overgearing isn't about going 40rpm. Its about riding in a gear bigger than you normally would at a lower cadence.
For some people it can be 80rpm. For others as low as 40. Mine is done at 60-70rpm.
As has been pointed out over and over, at some point you run out of gears and cadence WILL drop. Buying different chainsets or chainrings for different events isnt a viable solution for most people. Training your body to be able to deal with different riding conditions IS.
11-28 Ultegra cassette = £50 on wiggle. Why isn't this viable exactly? Might need a long cage derailleur too, but given the amount of money we waste on Assos clothing it's a drop in the ocean.
I don't think I've ever gone at less than 60rpm in a race, and certainly not for long enough to warrant training for it. I guess I'm in the minority as I don't ride an 11-21 cassette just because Tom Boonen does, mostly because I have realised that I'm not Tom Boonen. 13-25 normally, 11-23 for circuit races and 12-27 for mega hilly races - and if its really bad I could shove a compact on, although I've not had to do so in any race. Simple really.0 -
Because a 36-28 isnt going to get most people over a big climb significantly easier than a 36-27. Next you say we should all ride compacts and drop it down to 34-28. Then you lose top end speed pedaling down the other side of the climbs.
And you're assuming that a 34-28 is a small enough gear to keep cadence high? Not true for everyone. Depending on the gradient of course.
Or we could just ride a triple, right?
I'm not sure why the stubborn insistence that no one should ever ride a cadence below 80rpm or indeed train for such efforts.0 -
P_Tucker wrote:
What exactly is your point? And do you honestly think that if he could sit and spin up climbs like that, he wouldn't!?
Now you not only know better than everyone on the forum, but also more than Cav! Classic.0 -
Pokerface wrote:I'm not sure why the stubborn insistence that no one should ever ride a cadence below 80rpm or indeed train for such efforts.
Similarly, I'm not sure why your think training to ride at a sub-optimal cadence is a better use of your time than buying the correct equipment.0 -
P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:I'm not sure why the stubborn insistence that no one should ever ride a cadence below 80rpm or indeed train for such efforts.
Similarly, I'm not sure why your think training to ride at a sub-optimal cadence is a better use of your time than buying the correct equipment.
Who said it was the wrong cadence!? It's training to ride at the exact cadence you will experience on the ride itself. And what is MY ideal cadence? Do you know?
My last big race had a mile long climb at 15%. Speed up the climb was about 6mph. In lowest gear was grinding it out. A compact would have made it easier but not by much. Down the other side was hitting over 50mph. No way I would have been able to pedal that with a compact. So how was my equipment wrong? And the equipment of everyone else who rode it?
However, training to ride at a cadence of 40-50rpm was appropriate.0 -
Furthermore, how do you train to ride up hills when you are on a turbo? Or don't have hills readily available? Or what if your hills aren't as steep as the hills you will race up?0
-
Pokerface wrote:P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:I'm not sure why the stubborn insistence that no one should ever ride a cadence below 80rpm or indeed train for such efforts.
Similarly, I'm not sure why your think training to ride at a sub-optimal cadence is a better use of your time than buying the correct equipment.
Who said it was the wrong cadence!? It's training to ride at the exact cadence you will experience on the ride itself. And what is MY ideal cadence? Do you know?
My last big race had a mile long climb at 15%. Speed up the climb was about 6mph. In lowest gear was grinding it out. A compact would have made it easier but not by much. Down the other side was hitting over 50mph. No way I would have been able to pedal that with a compact. So how was my equipment wrong? And the equipment of everyone else who rode it?
However, training to ride at a cadence of 40-50rpm was appropriate.
At 50mph, the difference between pedalling and not pedalling is (subject to a number of reasonable assumptions) about 2mph in the same position. Assuming that the uphill and downhill sections were symmetrical, you'd have spent approx 8-9 times longer going uphill than down - thus you'd be better off having a sensible gear going uphill at the expense of a usable gear going downhill. Watch the pros descend mountain passes - above a certain speed its not worth the effort to pedal - you go just as fast putting your chin on the stem and saving your energy.
Hope this helps.
0 -
Pokerface wrote:Furthermore, how do you train to ride up hills when you are on a turbo? Or don't have hills readily available? Or what if your hills aren't as steep as the hills you will race up?
I dont, I select appropriate gearing such that I can pedal at roughly the same cadence as I do on the turbo.
Even in the hilliest race on an inappropriate cassette I'll spend 95%+ of my time riding at a self-selected cadence. So I spend my time practising riding at this cadence.0 -
P_Tucker wrote:Pokerface wrote:Furthermore, how do you train to ride up hills when you are on a turbo? Or don't have hills readily available? Or what if your hills aren't as steep as the hills you will race up?
I dont, I select appropriate gearing such that I can pedal at roughly the same cadence as I do on the turbo.
Even in the hilliest race on an inappropriate cassette I'll spend 95%+ of my time riding at a self-selected cadence. So I spend my time practising riding at this cadence.
So you train on the turbo at the same cadence and power and gearing as you would in a race?
But when going uphill, you will be putting out more power at a lower cadence. How do you simulate that on a turbo without increasing resistance?Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:But please read what I said carefully, because no where did I say they were not beneficial or did not work, just that there is nothing to suggest a benefit to one's regular riding over and above performing such efforts at same power in a regular gear, specificity aside.
As to Alex's comment - it sounds like he is saying that power output is more important than cadence or gearing? As long as you can out out x amounts of watts, it doesn't matter what cadence you use or what gearing?0 -
I spend less than an hour a week doing overgeared training. Out of 20 hours. That equates to 5%. So I spend 95% of my training in the right gear at the right cadence. Same as your racing.
Are we that different
0 -
Ah well. 0
-
I was bored, now I'm appalled.
Serves me right for looking, I guess.0 -
P_Tucker
That's not on.0 -
Crikey, its like bloody China in ere0
