squats and leg-presses?
Comments
-
Imposter wrote:which is the reason track sprinters are all built like Arnold and stage race riders are all built like hunger strikers.
Indeed, but interestingly (and this may shed further light on this discussion), the British 2012 Olympic track team were all actually much slimmer and less muscle bound than their US/French/german/Aussie, etc. competition. Especially the girls.
And they kicked butt!0 -
Strength isn't useful for cyclists blah blah blah
oh wait..........So Wiggins went back to the gym this winter and did a strength and conditioning programme building the muscles in his core that cycling can't reach, to the depth he needed. He also did specific bike training, like high-intensity intervals with varying rest, designed to help him mount powerful anaerobic attacks and recover from them, and cope when others make them, which is crucial.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... YTCW4OF.990 -
Any professionals training 30+ hours a week reading this, take note! :roll:0
-
Bustacapp wrote:building the muscles in his core that cycling can't reach
I thought we were talking specifically about LEG muscles (squats and leg-presses)?
Core stuff is different (back/shoulders/stomach) etc. and concerns your posture and comfort on the bike; useful perhaps, but off topic?0 -
dennisn wrote:I'm going to assume that you don't lift. If you don't and have never tried it how would you know whether or not it worked for you? Or anyone for that matter? I'm thinking that you don't know, but that doesn't stop you from claiming
to be something of an authority on the subject. Me? I never claimed it did or didn't work. Only that some people enjoy pushing the poundage around . You're sort of lost in the world of "All you need to do is ride". What about stretching? No value I suppose? Good nutrition? Naw. All you need is to ride? Plenty of rest? Rest? H*ll no. You can rest when you're dead. Nothing but riding ever has or ever will make a difference? :roll:
Great post!0 -
Bustacapp wrote:dennisn wrote:I'm going to assume that you don't lift. If you don't and have never tried it how would you know whether or not it worked for you? Or anyone for that matter? I'm thinking that you don't know, but that doesn't stop you from claiming
to be something of an authority on the subject. Me? I never claimed it did or didn't work. Only that some people enjoy pushing the poundage around . You're sort of lost in the world of "All you need to do is ride". What about stretching? No value I suppose? Good nutrition? Naw. All you need is to ride? Plenty of rest? Rest? H*ll no. You can rest when you're dead. Nothing but riding ever has or ever will make a difference? :roll:
Great post!
Not really. Noone is talking about resting, stretching, nutrition. If we were we'd never see the wood for the trees.
We're talking about whether doing gym exercises to increase leg strength is a good idea or not. Remember?0 -
Basically, yes. It may make a difference, but that does not mean it is the best way to train - training optimally depends on various constraints and those constraints are different for full-time riders working at the limits of their potential, and amateur riders who race for a hobby.Bustacapp wrote:Tom Dean wrote:Any professionals training 30+ hours a week reading this, take note! :roll:
Oh so it won't make any difference for a 'normal' cyclist then? Only if you are a sponsored pro?
[]
ok.0 -
bernithebiker wrote:We're talking about whether doing gym exercises to increase leg strength is a good idea or not. Remember?
So I take it you now agree about core training being beneficial? Excellent. Since core strength comprises leg strength, lower back and abdominal strength then you might as well now concede that leg strength is indeed beneficial for certain aspects of cycling. Ok?0 -
Bustacapp wrote:Strength isn't useful for cyclists blah blah blah
oh wait..........So Wiggins went back to the gym this winter and did a strength and conditioning programme building the muscles in his core that cycling can't reach, to the depth he needed. He also did specific bike training, like high-intensity intervals with varying rest, designed to help him mount powerful anaerobic attacks and recover from them, and cope when others make them, which is crucial.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... YTCW4OF.99
Core strength a completely different discussion. We are talking about leg strength.0 -
Bustacapp wrote:bernithebiker wrote:We're talking about whether doing gym exercises to increase leg strength is a good idea or not. Remember?
So I take it you now agree about core training being beneficial? Excellent. Since core strength comprises leg strength, lower back and abdominal strength then you might as well now concede that leg strength is indeed beneficial for certain aspects of cycling. Ok?
You obviously have a different definition of 'core' to most other people.0 -
Tom Dean wrote:Basically, yes. It may make a difference, but that does not mean it is the best way to train - training optimally depends on various constraints and those constraints are different for full-time riders working at the limits of their potential, and amateur riders who race for a hobby.
I suspect the main reason most of the anti-weightlifting cyclists are anti-weightlifting is because they abhor the idea of taking out a gym membership just to do some squats to aid in their cycling. I can fully understand that. However it doesn't mean that it will not make a positive difference.0 -
Bustacapp wrote:Tom Dean wrote:Basically, yes. It may make a difference, but that does not mean it is the best way to train - training optimally depends on various constraints and those constraints are different for full-time riders working at the limits of their potential, and amateur riders who race for a hobby.
I suspect the main reason most of the anti-weightlifting cyclists are anti-weightlifting is because they abhor the idea of taking out a gym membership just to do some squats to aid in their cycling. I can fully understand that. However it doesn't mean that it will not make a positive difference.
Have you read all the science relating to 'strength training for cyclists' ? Or are you just making this up as you go along ?0 -
I don't dispute that it may make a difference. If you have the time and energy in your life to do everything that makes a difference that's great. I don't, and I am interested in making the best use of the time and energy I have.Bustacapp wrote:Tom Dean wrote:Basically, yes. It may make a difference, but that does not mean it is the best way to train - training optimally depends on various constraints and those constraints are different for full-time riders working at the limits of their potential, and amateur riders who race for a hobby.
I suspect the main reason most of the anti-weightlifting cyclists are anti-weightlifting is because they abhor the idea of taking out a gym membership just to do some squats to aid in their cycling. I can fully understand that. However it doesn't mean that it will not make a positive difference.0 -
Bustacapp wrote:I suspect the main reason most of the anti-weightlifting cyclists are anti-weightlifting is because they abhor the idea of taking out a gym membership just to do some squats to aid in their cycling.
You don't need a gym membership to do squats.0 -
bernithebiker wrote:You don't need a gym membership to do squats.
Granted. You need to at least 'be arsed' though.0 -
Bustacapp wrote:bernithebiker wrote:You don't need a gym membership to do squats.
Granted. You need to at least 'be arsed' though.
How long have you been gyming, busta ?? Presumably your legs are very strong now ? If so, would it therefore be reasonable to assume that your cycling performance is also at a very high level ??0 -
Bustacapp wrote:bernithebiker wrote:You don't need a gym membership to do squats.
Granted. You need to at least 'be arsed' though.
i would have thought you'd need a lot more 'to be arsed-ness' to ride 160km than to do 20 minutes of squats.0 -
Bustacapp wrote:bernithebiker wrote:You don't need a gym membership to do squats.
Granted. You need to at least think they are beneficial though.
FTFY.
Or is this just one of those teenage boy "I work out at the gym so I'm more of a real man than you" internet things?
0 -
bompington wrote:FTFY.
Or is this just one of those teenage boy "I work out at the gym so I'm more of a real man than you" internet things?
someone sounds insecure..0 -
Yes, but who?0
-
bernithebiker wrote:i would have thought you'd need a lot more 'to be arsed-ness' to ride 160km than to do 20 minutes of squats.
Sounds silly to me. Why not do squats on a day when you don't cycle?0 -
0
-
Imposter wrote:Bustacapp wrote:bernithebiker wrote:You don't need a gym membership to do squats.
Granted. You need to at least 'be arsed' though.
How long have you been gyming, busta ?? Presumably your legs are very strong now ? If so, would it therefore be reasonable to assume that your cycling performance is also at a very high level ??
Be warned, he can rip the cleats from his shoes such is his squat to power cycle ratio.0 -
Bustacapp wrote:bernithebiker wrote:i would have thought you'd need a lot more 'to be arsed-ness' to ride 160km than to do 20 minutes of squats.
Sounds silly to me. Why not do squats on a day when you don't cycle?
After plenty of kms of riding, I'd rather rest or maybe stretch a little, my legs.
The only time I've done squats is when I really can't get out on my bike (poor weather, holiday), and even then fast ones, with no weight, and even then, I'd probably just go for a light jog.0 -
Bustacapp wrote:If a professional cycling coach won't convince you then sorry but there's no point me staying in this thread.
Bye.
If you storm out of a thread in a huff, why come back?0 -
ooermissus wrote:If you storm out of a thread in a huff, why come back?
My spirits were lifted when I noticed the thread wasn't exclusively populated by lemmings?0 -
Pay attention: Because it takes time and generates fatigue, without benefitting performance in a significant way for an amateur cyclist. If you have the time and can handle the fatigue, go ahead and train like Wiggins. Not many of us are in that position.Bustacapp wrote:bernithebiker wrote:i would have thought you'd need a lot more 'to be arsed-ness' to ride 160km than to do 20 minutes of squats.
Sounds silly to me. Why not do squats on a day when you don't cycle?0
This discussion has been closed.
