Core/Weight training & Bradley Wiggins

ric/rstsport

Personally, i felt that Brad was alluding to needing to do strength work due to his broken collarbone last year. Although, it's perfectly possible that i misunderstood what he was saying?

ric

alihisgreat

Is core strength training good for Triathlon?

t.m.h.n.e.t

Ric/RSTSport wrote:

Personally, i felt that Brad was alluding to needing to do strength work due to his broken collarbone last year. Although, it's perfectly possible that i misunderstood what he was saying?

ric

http://kiwi6.com/file/829ql47tj5

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Is core strength training good for Triathlon?

I believe a strong core helps hold your lower body high in the water reducing drag and holding posture on the run. So I'd assume so.

Alex_Simmons/RST

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Tom Dean wrote:

So should I be running as well as training my core? This is getting confusing

yes.

Running is good for cycling. Not only from a fitness point of view.. but cross discipline training ensures all your muscles get a workout and maintains balance... so you don't end up hurting yourself by overdeveloping certain muscle groups.

While running might be good for you, it's not generally good for cycling performance (unless you are untrained when just about any exercise will help).

bahzob

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Tom Dean wrote:

So should I be running as well as training my core? This is getting confusing

yes.

Running is good for cycling. Not only from a fitness point of view.. but cross discipline training ensures all your muscles get a workout and maintains balance... so you don't end up hurting yourself by overdeveloping certain muscle groups.

While running might be good for you, it's not generally good for cycling performance (unless you are untrained when just about any exercise will help).

If your only goal is cycling then you should not spend any time running. (Exception may be during an extended break from cycling when you just want to do something other than ride a bike.)

Sorry if I confused matters by linking Mo Farah and Haile Gebrselassie.

The point about these is that earlier I made the point that for every other sport adding non-specific training (e.g. core work) to a good specific training regime results in better performance. It would be strange if cycling was somehow different.

I was asked to provide examples. I think these are pretty compelling.
- Farah's because its pretty hard to imagine any athlete with more focused/better training resources.
- Gebrselassie's because he is probably a pick for most naturally talented ever distance runner who nonetheless sees the need to do more than just run as part of his training.


Returning to cycling and Wiggins. The core training referred to was nothing to do with recovery from his collar bone injury. It referred to the training done for this tour.

Again. Both Bradley Wiggins and Shane Sutton made specific reference to his core training as an exemplar of how his attitude had changed this season and it was this attitude that made him the GC contender that the rest of the team could get behind.

Bottom line is straight forward and, if you choose to listen a good news story.

Adding appropriate focused non-specific training (core work, flexibility, weights) will result in better performance than if you just ride your bike.

It is easy to integrate this training into a training programme without in any way compromising on-bike training.


(So to answer the question about triathlon the answer is
- Yes do core/flexibility work it will benefit all 3 disciplines.
- Weights work is more complicated. What works for swimming may be counterproductive for cycling/running. )

ric/rstsport

Hmmmm. Anecdote is not evidence

Tom Dean

bahzob wrote:

Sorry if I confused matters by linking Mo Farah and Haile Gebrselassie.

On the contrary, that this was the best you could come up with highlights the lack of evidence of any benefit for amateur cyclists.

Zoomer37

Is it true that core training increases sideboard girth?

NJK

bahzob wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

Tom Dean wrote:

So should I be running as well as training my core? This is getting confusing

yes.

Running is good for cycling. Not only from a fitness point of view.. but cross discipline training ensures all your muscles get a workout and maintains balance... so you don't end up hurting yourself by overdeveloping certain muscle groups.

While running might be good for you, it's not generally good for cycling performance (unless you are untrained when just about any exercise will help).

If your only goal is cycling then you should not spend any time running. (Exception may be during an extended break from cycling when you just want to do something other than ride a bike.)

Sorry if I confused matters by linking Mo Farah and Haile Gebrselassie.

The point about these is that earlier I made the point that for every other sport adding non-specific training (e.g. core work) to a good specific training regime results in better performance. It would be strange if cycling was somehow different.

I was asked to provide examples. I think these are pretty compelling.
- Farah's because its pretty hard to imagine any athlete with more focused/better training resources.
- Gebrselassie's because he is probably a pick for most naturally talented ever distance runner who nonetheless sees the need to do more than just run as part of his training.


Returning to cycling and Wiggins. The core training referred to was nothing to do with recovery from his collar bone injury. It referred to the training done for this tour.

Again. Both Bradley Wiggins and Shane Sutton made specific reference to his core training as an exemplar of how his attitude had changed this season and it was this attitude that made him the GC contender that the rest of the team could get behind.

Bottom line is straight forward and, if you choose to listen a good news story.

Adding appropriate focused non-specific training (core work, flexibility, weights) will result in better performance than if you just ride your bike.

It is easy to integrate this training into a training programme without in any way compromising on-bike training.


(So to answer the question about triathlon the answer is
- Yes do core/flexibility work it will benefit all 3 disciplines.
- Weights work is more complicated. What works for swimming may be counterproductive for cycling/running. )[/quote/]

Actually Wiggins & Sutton didn't really make any reference to what he may have done, he may have been doing no trunk exercises previously, know he might do a few planks, hold positions etc. It won't have won him the tour that's for sure, he was already stable on the bike. The reason physiologically he won the tour was because his numbers were better than previously and he by all accounts did more climbing in training and so how did they quantify how much his core strength increased? Or was it because of the extra climbing?

There are NO specific strength training exercises for cycling or core exercises for that matter.

Warwickshire Whizzer

I've no doubt that core training helped Wiggo, but he is an elite athlete and his limiters are very much different to the average man on here. Is it not obvious that you should work on your greatest limiter if you want to improve - which for most cyclists on here, will be cycling based exercises, like riding your bike - fairly sure Wiggo spent more time working on his climbing ability than his core anyway?

I'm sure Farah and Gebrselassie get gains from strengh training in a gym, but they're elites too and I'm sure they wouldn't spend all day in a gym if their actual running was holding them back.

dennisn

Warwickshire Whizzer wrote:

I've no doubt that core training helped Wiggo, but he is an elite athlete and his limiters are very much different to the average man on here. Is it not obvious that you should work on your greatest limiter if you want to improve - which for most cyclists on here, will be cycling based exercises, like riding your bike - fairly sure Wiggo spent more time working on his climbing ability than his core anyway?

I'm sure Farah and Gebrselassie get gains from strengh training in a gym, but they're elites too and I'm sure they wouldn't spend all day in a gym if their actual running was holding them back.

Maybe this whole thing could be resolved by remembering that with pro's it's their job and they need to do WHATEVER it takes. They also have the time to do WHATEVER it takes. Just like us common folk, who must do whatever it takes to hold down that job. They don't have the time to work at a, so called, regular job. Racing is their job.
The rest of us, we also have a job, although not racing, and we like them, haven't got the time to work a second job(racing). So training and thinking like a pro racer, for us, just won't happen. Just as we spend 8 or 10 hours a day honing our work skills and then come home and flop, exhausted, on the couch, the pro racers day isn't a whole lot different. A lot of people on here sound like they want to work two jobs. Good luck with that.

Warwickshire Whizzer

dennisn wrote:

Maybe this whole thing could be resolved by remembering that with pro's it's their job and they need to do WHATEVER it takes. They also have the time to do WHATEVER it takes. Just like us common folk, who must do whatever it takes to hold down that job. They don't have the time to work at a, so called, regular job. Racing is their job.
The rest of us, we also have a job, although not racing, and we like them, haven't got the time to work a second job(racing). So training and thinking like a pro racer, for us, just won't happen. Just as we spend 8 or 10 hours a day honing our work skills and then come home and flop, exhausted, on the couch, the pro racers day isn't a whole lot different. A lot of people on here sound like they want to work two jobs. Good luck with that.

And so, for time limted normal people, spending the time they have available on their bike, working on their biggest limiter, is of more use than spending time in the gym, working on something that will have a mostly neglible impact on their cycling ability.

dennisn

Warwickshire Whizzer wrote:

dennisn wrote:

Maybe this whole thing could be resolved by remembering that with pro's it's their job and they need to do WHATEVER it takes. They also have the time to do WHATEVER it takes. Just like us common folk, who must do whatever it takes to hold down that job. They don't have the time to work at a, so called, regular job. Racing is their job.
The rest of us, we also have a job, although not racing, and we like them, haven't got the time to work a second job(racing). So training and thinking like a pro racer, for us, just won't happen. Just as we spend 8 or 10 hours a day honing our work skills and then come home and flop, exhausted, on the couch, the pro racers day isn't a whole lot different. A lot of people on here sound like they want to work two jobs. Good luck with that.

And so, for time limted normal people, spending the time they have available on their bike, working on their biggest limiter, is of more use than spending time in the gym, working on something that will have a mostly neglible impact on their cycling ability.

Really, how much time do you have? I believe it all helps. A little bit here and a little bit there, but unless you want to try and work two jobs and neglect everything else, well.....

Warwickshire Whizzer

Jesus, I knew i was better off never responding to these threads. I feel all P_Tucker already.

I'm saying if you have a little time, use that time to make the biggest impact, which is working on your biggest limiter, which if you aren't a pro, is more likely working on cycling than in the gym. That's assuming you want to make improvements to your cycling, which is presumingly why people frequent this forum.

dennisn

Warwickshire Whizzer wrote:

Jesus, I knew i was better off never responding to these threads. I feel all P_Tucker already.

I'm saying if you have a little time, use that time to make the biggest impact, which is working on your biggest limiter, which if you aren't a pro, is more likely working on cycling than in the gym. That's assuming you want to make improvements to your cycling, which is presumingly why people frequent this forum.

I was agreeing with, although in re-reading it I guess I do sound a bit arguementative. Sorry. :oops:

Warwickshire Whizzer

dennisn wrote:

I was agreeing with, although in re-reading it I guess I do sound a bit arguementative. Sorry. :oops:

S'alright then.

P_Tucker

Warwickshire Whizzer wrote:

Jesus, I knew i was better off never responding to these threads. I feel all P_Tucker already.

I'm saying if you have a little time, use that time to make the biggest impact, which is working on your biggest limiter, which if you aren't a pro, is more likely working on cycling than in the gym. That's assuming you want to make improvements to your cycling, which is presumingly why people frequent this forum.

'kin 'ell, buy me dinner first.

Anyway, as you have learned, never offer a considered view to idiots.

mankybianchi

Stamina

Thin-framed, at 6ft 3in tall and 69kg, Wiggins has always been a strong sprint performer. He has improved his chances in Le Tour by building his stamina with 100,000 metres of uphill climbing, mainly on Mount Teide in Tenerife. He makes sure his body is resilient by avoiding building up muscle bulk, and strengthening his core with Pilates, yoga and exercise balls.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/gene ... ml?afid=af

P_Tucker

Wiggins may or may not do core training, but starting an article with "Wiggins has always been a strong sprint performer" lets you know, without doubt, that the writer hasn't got a f**king clue what he/she is talking about.

alihisgreat

P_Tucker wrote:

Wiggins may or may not do core training, but starting an article with "Wiggins has always been a strong sprint performer" lets you know, without doubt, that the writer hasn't got a f**king clue what he/she is talking about.

Well he did win a bunch sprint in romandie

Alex_Simmons/RST

bahzob wrote:

Returning to cycling and Wiggins. The core training referred to was nothing to do with recovery from his collar bone injury. It referred to the training done for this tour.

Wiggins also used to wear a Power Balance band.

dw300

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

bahzob wrote:

Returning to cycling and Wiggins. The core training referred to was nothing to do with recovery from his collar bone injury. It referred to the training done for this tour.

Wiggins also used to wear a Power Balance band.

Come on now .. you can't use that to disprove anything. I know you're smart enough to know that as a professional sports person you have to do everything you can to make your own and your families financial future as secure as you can.

Tom Dean

dw300 wrote:

as a professional sports person you have to do everything you can to make your own and your families financial future as secure as you can.

erm, everything?

P_Tucker

Victoria Pendleton is having a good go at the moment

dw300

Tom Dean wrote:

dw300 wrote:

as a professional sports person you have to do everything you can to make your own and your families financial future as secure as you can.

erm, everything?

Lol .. I didn't mean everything

Alex_Simmons/RST

dw300 wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

bahzob wrote:

Returning to cycling and Wiggins. The core training referred to was nothing to do with recovery from his collar bone injury. It referred to the training done for this tour.

Wiggins also used to wear a Power Balance band.

Come on now .. you can't use that to disprove anything. I know you're smart enough to know that as a professional sports person you have to do everything you can to make your own and your families financial future as secure as you can.

Perhaps, but it reduces their credibility, so we have to rely on ways other than celebrity endorsement/statement to sort out what is plausible and implausible as a means to performance improvement. Other ways like, oh, I dunno, science perhaps?

Geraint Thomas is also promoting Bio-something or other bands as well. Honestly, these guys are good enough to promote something sensible and make a good dollar/pound/euro from it.

dw300

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

Perhaps, but it reduces their credibility, so we have to rely on ways other than celebrity endorsement/statement to sort out what is plausible and implausible as a means to performance improvement. Other ways like, oh, I dunno, science perhaps?

Geraint Thomas is also promoting Bio-something or other bands as well. Honestly, these guys are good enough to promote something sensible and make a good dollar/pound/euro from it.

I don't disagree with your final point. But I'd cycle the Tour de France dressed as Ronald McDonald if there was plenty of money in it and my career was less than 20 years long!

dennisn

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

dw300 wrote:

Alex_Simmons/RST wrote:

bahzob wrote:

Returning to cycling and Wiggins. The core training referred to was nothing to do with recovery from his collar bone injury. It referred to the training done for this tour.

Wiggins also used to wear a Power Balance band.

Come on now .. you can't use that to disprove anything. I know you're smart enough to know that as a professional sports person you have to do everything you can to make your own and your families financial future as secure as you can.

Perhaps, but it reduces their credibility, so we have to rely on ways other than celebrity endorsement/statement to sort out what is plausible and implausible as a means to performance improvement. Other ways like, oh, I dunno, science perhaps?

Geraint Thomas is also promoting Bio-something or other bands as well. Honestly, these guys are good enough to promote something sensible and make a good dollar/pound/euro from it.

Just to play devils advocate it seems to me that all these "Bio Bands" claim to be scientifically proven. Much like many other things that are scientifically proven to be true - until they are proven not true. But you have to go with what you have at the moment and tommorrow's another day.

dw300

dennisn wrote:

Just to play devils advocate it seems to me that all these "Bio Bands" claim to be scientifically proven. Much like many other things that are scientifically proven to be true - until they are proven not true. But you have to go with what you have at the moment and tommorrow's another day.

I think the problem is that it's not necessarily the actual 'scientific advantage ' that causes the performance increase, it's likely to be, at least in part, a placebo effect.

Hence people who are smart enough to know better, or think they are, say they shouldn't be for sale as they don't work for them .. even though they actually do work for other people.

Of course as soon as you start marketing something as 'The greatest placebo ever, this product does nothing unless you think it will, in which case you'll go really fast' .. then I suspect your sales start to fall!

PS. I don't know what a Bio Band is but Im presuming its similar to the magnetic field / copper band type things.

Alex_Simmons/RST

dennisn wrote:

Just to play devils advocate it seems to me that all these "Bio Bands" claim to be scientifically proven. Much like many other things that are scientifically proven to be true - until they are proven not true. But you have to go with what you have at the moment and tommorrow's another day.

Claims (like anecdotes) are not evidence, nor science.

So yes, we'll have to go on both with what we know, like the following:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22762695

and sound principles of exercise physiology.