Improving power... Gym?

Rob85_

I'm 28, 6'1" and skinny. I want to improve my power and become a stronger rider. Losing weight isn't really an option. I know there is an ongoing debate whether doing weights in the gym is worthwhile or not but I was wondering what peoples opinion is for my situation?

I've been cycling around a year now mostly on my own (I've yet to join a club, find that all a bit intimidating). I completed RideLondon 100 in 4:41:03 and although I was very happy with this time I noticed quite a few things which I didn't realise from cycling on my own.

- On the flats I just don't seem to be able to hammer it like the guys that are bigger than me. I tried to do turns on the front when I could but really I just got batted away by stronger guys around me. If I did it again I'd want to contribute more.

- On the climbs I feel I'm reasonably competent. Although it's all relative, I don't want to compromise this too much.

Should I be going to the gym and getting on the leg press and be doing squats? If so should I start this now or just continue riding until the weather gets bad and I have more free time over the winter? Or should I just continue trying to ride as much as I can and training hard on the bike?

Hopefully this makes sense and someone with more experience can help me.

displacedaussie

Squats won't make you a stronger rider. Riding your bike more will make you a stronger rider.

Ride more, ride harder. Recover. Repeat.

ric/rstsport

Rob85_ wrote:

I'm 28, 6'1" and skinny. I want to improve my power and become a stronger rider. Losing weight isn't really an option. I know there is an ongoing debate whether doing weights in the gym is worthwhile or not but I was wondering what peoples opinion is for my situation?

I've been cycling around a year now mostly on my own (I've yet to join a club, find that all a bit intimidating). I completed RideLondon 100 in 4:41:03 and although I was very happy with this time I noticed quite a few things which I didn't realise from cycling on my own.

- On the flats I just don't seem to be able to hammer it like the guys that are bigger than me. I tried to do turns on the front when I could but really I just got batted away by stronger guys around me. If I did it again I'd want to contribute more.

you need to be able to produce sustainable power, this comes from riding a bike (generally at a fairly intense level) as opposed to doing weights. People tend to interchangeably use the words power and strength (thinking they mean the same, which they don't) and therefore the ideas for training get confused. "Look at that rider, he looks really strong" (when really they mean powerful).

additionally, you may need to improve your aerodynamics (so that you require less power to travel at a given velocity)

- On the climbs I feel I'm reasonably competent. Although it's all relative, I don't want to compromise this too much.

which is why you want to increase your sustainable power and not your strength

Should I be going to the gym and getting on the leg press and be doing squats? If so should I start this now or just continue riding until the weather gets bad and I have more free time over the winter? Or should I just continue trying to ride as much as I can and training hard on the bike?

Hopefully this makes sense and someone with more experience can help me.

when the weather gets bad, get on your turbo trainer.

Ric

macroadie

Rob85_ wrote:

I'm 28, 6'1" and skinny. I want to improve my power and become a stronger rider. Losing weight isn't really an option. I know there is an ongoing debate whether doing weights in the gym is worthwhile or not but I was wondering what peoples opinion is for my situation?

I've been cycling around a year now mostly on my own (I've yet to join a club, find that all a bit intimidating). I completed RideLondon 100 in 4:41:03 and although I was very happy with this time I noticed quite a few things which I didn't realise from cycling on my own.

- On the flats I just don't seem to be able to hammer it like the guys that are bigger than me. I tried to do turns on the front when I could but really I just got batted away by stronger guys around me. If I did it again I'd want to contribute more.

- On the climbs I feel I'm reasonably competent. Although it's all relative, I don't want to compromise this too much.

Should I be going to the gym and getting on the leg press and be doing squats? If so should I start this now or just continue riding until the weather gets bad and I have more free time over the winter? Or should I just continue trying to ride as much as I can and training hard on the bike?

Hopefully this makes sense and someone with more experience can help me.

---

Not an expert but one day a week I do lunges, squats, deadlift (back), Abs plus 3 days biking including intervals training. I've noticed my power increase and moved from16 - 18mphr to 18mphr -23mphr.
One thing I found out is people like Marcel kittle, lance Armstrong and a few others add weight lifting to their regiment. When I look online I always see an article from a cycling coach mentioning weight lifting as part of training.

alihisgreat

You don't actually need that much torque for cycling.. and you can offset lower torque with a higher cadence.

Having said that.. obviously if you want to be pushing 25+ mph you do need to be able to exert a certain level of force - but you can just develop that on the bike.

Off the bike weights do have their place though in helping with core strength, stability, and keeping muscle groups balanced.

zekizeki

I completed RideLondon 100 in 4:41:03 and although I was very happy with this time I noticed quite a few things which I didn't realise from cycling on my own.

4:41 is a very good time for 100 miles so it sounds like you're doing very well as it is, especially after only riding for a year. The fastest rider out of 16,000 people finished not too far ahead of you in 4:03.

I'm a similar build to you and also notice the same issue on the flat of not being able to reach the same top speeds as some of the bigger guys. I have identified core strength as one of my main weaknesses at the moment. For that reason alone I am going to incorporate gym strength sessions this winter focussing mainly on squats, importantly these will be free squats and not leg press/smith machine etc. to make sure the all the stabilising muscles get good use.

I'll also be following a structured program on the turbo at the same time so it will be interesting to see if the squats are helping or hindering. My gut feeling having come from a (lightweight) rowing background and doing a lot of squat work is that the squats will have a positive effect on my performance, especially as my max squat is way down on what it was at my rowing peak.

Either way it's a hard one to call and I'm go the route of learning from personal experience, there is a lot of contradictory advice out there around strength training and cycling. But I'm a firm believer in individually tailoring training plans and doing what I feel is right for me.

ric/rstsport

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

You don't actually need that much torque for cycling.. and you can offset lower torque with a higher cadence.

Having said that.. obviously if you want to be pushing 25+ mph you do need to be able to exert a certain level of force - but you can just develop that on the bike.

I routinely ride at around 25 miles/hr or 40 km/hr on flat (ok, not as routinely as i'd like!), but it appears to take around 250 W for me to ride at that speed on the flat. i'm generally around 90 revs/min at that speed.

the force requirement for such a power at that velocity is around 154 Newtons, with my 172.5mm cranks. Converting to a more 'usual' measurement of kg you get 15.7 kg. Which is the average requirement between both legs (i.e., just under 8 kg per leg). Considering that i have a mass of around 70 kg and require a force equal to that to stand, i'm suggesting that there isn't any force development on a bike at that speed/power!

what we need to develop (on the bike) is the ability to keep producing 250 W (or whatever power requirement you're after) for extended periods of time, and this isn't achieved with strength development (as it's an issue related to cardiovascular and metabolic issues)

ric

Wrath Rob

Ric/RSTSport wrote:

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

You don't actually need that much torque for cycling.. and you can offset lower torque with a higher cadence.

Having said that.. obviously if you want to be pushing 25+ mph you do need to be able to exert a certain level of force - but you can just develop that on the bike.

I routinely ride at around 25 miles/hr or 40 km/hr on flat (ok, not as routinely as i'd like!), but it appears to take around 250 W for me to ride at that speed on the flat. i'm generally around 90 revs/min at that speed.

the force requirement for such a power at that velocity is around 154 Newtons, with my 172.5mm cranks. Converting to a more 'usual' measurement of kg you get 15.7 kg. Which is the average requirement between both legs (i.e., just under 8 kg per leg). Considering that i have a mass of around 70 kg and require a force equal to that to stand, i'm suggesting that there isn't any force development on a bike at that speed/power!

what we need to develop (on the bike) is the ability to keep producing 250 W (or whatever power requirement you're after) for extended periods of time, and this isn't achieved with strength development (as it's an issue related to cardiovascular and metabolic issues)

ric

Ric, interesting seeing that explanation and it makes a lot of sense. However, is that right given that the pedals are moving in a circle and you're therefore accelerating in different directions and I would have thought the force would vary through the stroke, i.e. peak higher but for a shorter period of time?

ric/rstsport

peak force is approximately twice avg force which occurs at about 2 o'clock (?). i can't quite recall. Sure Alex will be along to correct me . Sorry boss!

anyway, peak force which happens momentarily is ~16kg in this instance.

Cycling is unlike other sports where greater force components are required.

zekizeki

Ric,

The graphs in this article from a watt bike show a peak force of around 880 N in a pedal stroke for a world class sprinter, 300N for a triathlete putting out 265W at 95rpm.

http://www.cyclosport.org/09-Feb-2011/t ... tbike.html

I'm not sure why you would divide the peak force in two ? surely the peak force is the same for each leg as they are not pushing together at the same time.

ric/rstsport

zekizeki wrote:

Ric,

The graphs in this article from a watt bike show a peak force of around 880 N in a pedal stroke for a world class sprinter, 300N for a triathlete putting out 265W at 95rpm.

http://www.cyclosport.org/09-Feb-2011/t ... tbike.html

I'm not sure why you would divide the peak force in two ? surely the peak force is the same for each leg as they are not pushing together at the same time.

Obviously, a sprinter, when sprinting will generate more force than someone riding along. Their power could be anything up to 2.5 KW!

Total average effective pedal force can be calculated with

AEPF = (P*60)/(C*2*Pi*CL)

where P = power (W)
C = cadence (revs/min)
CL = crank length in metres

zekizeki

The measurement for the triathlete is of course more appropriate to what we're talking about 300N at 95RPM to push out 265W

a 300N peak is more like 30.6 kg

What i think I'm trying to get at is that the force peak is not an insignificant force for certain people with low muscle strength, i.e. people not capable say of lifting more than 50-60kg in a squat.

Is it possible that there is a certain leg strength threshold below which strength training has a more beneficial effect. And i'm not thinking world class athletes as they would undoubtedly be way above that level to begin with.

ric/rstsport

zekizeki wrote:

The measurement for the triathlete is of course more appropriate to what we're talking about 300N at 95RPM to push out 265W

a 300N peak is more like 30.6 kg

What i think I'm trying to get at is that the force peak is not an insignificant force for certain people with low muscle strength, i.e. people not capable say of lifting more than 50-60kg in a squat.

Is it possible that there is a certain leg strength threshold below which strength training has a more beneficial effect. And i'm not thinking world class athletes as they would undoubtedly be way above that level to begin with.

if you have a mass of (say) 70 kg, you can already produce a force of 70 kg (else you can't stand up). strength training doesn't really have a beneficial effect (the research is mixed), there's reasons it's detrimental, and world class (endurance) cyclist become weaker as they get fitter.

Alex_Simmons/RST

In normal pedalling, it's typical that the momentary peak force applied by one leg is approximately double the average effective pedal force applied by both legs. The application of force around the pedal stroke by the legs is typically in a pseudo-sinusoidal manner, which is not surprising given the pedals are moving in a circular fashion.

Rob85_

Naturally my training is starting to plateau a bit. Starting from a point where I hadn't cycled for years on my first ride managing 6 miles at around 14 mph average I was always going to improve from that quite quickly. A year on Solo I seem to be able to ride at around the 19.5-20 mph mark for about 40 miles, it starts to tail off after that. Although being around London this average is a pretty loose measure with traffic lights, vehicles etc. (Wish I had power meters but not rich enough at the moment!)

Obviously you reach a point where improvement is harder and harder, I asked on a previous post how much people were training and it seems I really need to double the 6-7 hours a week i'm doing now. Lots of guys racing seemed to be doing around 15 hours plus.

I normally spin at quite a high cadence and feel tired aerobically rather than aching too much afterwards. Maybe I should vary it and slug away in a harder gear more often, as perhaps I'm not making my muscles suffer enough!

I was just curious thinking that if I added some extra strength it might be beneficial (not talking Robert Fostermann here!) but if Im wrong all the better for the idea being shot down. It was a shock at Ride London to see the big size of some of the guys (not meaning the fat ones). While I'm sure there are no magical shortcuts, I want to still improve and don't really want to waste time doing something wrong if possible.

Thanks for all the responses, I find this all interesting.

TakeTurns

I'm tall, and skinny too. Cycling is one of those sports where having the physique of a twig can make you prosper over your opponent. Like mentioned by the guys above, a lot of it is down to conditioning yourself on the bike. If you want to go faster - you've got to train harder on the bike

Having said that, I've been doing gym work for the past few months, particularly because of my weak core and to regain strength in my broken collar. I'm not speaking from scientific or factual evidence, but I feel a lot stronger on the bike than I did even before I broke my collar. This was immediately evident after my first gym session. Currently my training is based on improving my explosiveness and sprinting capabilities. However, I've done hardly anything at the gym on the legs. Reason being, my body is currently on the edge with the amount of high intensity training I do weekly. Anymore and it'll all come crashing down. It's not a worthwhile compromise - you're better off strengthening yourself during those excruciating intervals.

Wrath Rob

Rob85_ wrote:

Naturally my training is starting to plateau a bit.

The reason for this is much more likely to be that your body has fully adapted to the training that you're doing. When was the last time you mixed up your training regime? Changed around what you're doing? Rode with some faster riders who pushed you (not literally!)?

If you're not already, it sounds like you need to get out with a club and join some of their chaingangs/training rides. That, or mix up your training, e.g. try the Hour of Power workout if you don't already. Do some VO2 intervals, try some sprint drills. Anything to get your body adapting to new requirements and jolt you out of that plateau. Going down the gym might help too, but unless you know that leg strength is an issue you're probably better off getting out on your bike.

Team4Luke

RideLondon isn't a race and you can't consider your fitness level from that.
You can not improve your power (leg strength - you only have the muscles and type of that you were born with), You can improve the ability to hold a higher level that you already possess, being able to ride a fraction harder for longer really is the key to improved fitness, for riding away solo in a RR, or going faster in a TT or improving that sportive time if that's your thing.
Yes you could go to the Gym and yes you could eak out some extra muscle power but it would need weeks of specific leg gym work and you would have to offset the change in leg/muscle shape against a loss on the bike performance, bigger stronger muscles doesn't mean faster on the bike - unless your say a Track Sprinter ala Hoy etc.

imposter2.0

Team4Luke wrote:

RideLondon isn't a race and you can't consider your fitness level from that.

it may not be a race, but it is perfectly reasonable to use the ability to cycle a certain distance in a certain time as a measure of fitness.

okgo

No, it actually isn't because its clear from the finishing times that the effect of drafting was monumental. Do you really think those people could average over 25 mph for 100 miles on their own?

imposter2.0

okgo wrote:

No, it actually isn't because its clear from the finishing times that the effect of drafting was monumental. Do you really think those people could average over 25 mph for 100 miles on their own?

nobody drafts in a bunch race then??

okgo

Of course, but using at event like this as a gauge of how fast you can cover a distance as a measure of fitness isn't that useful.

zekizeki

No, it actually isn't because its clear from the finishing times that the effect of drafting was monumental. Do you really think those people could average over 25 mph for 100 miles on their own?

Nobody in RideLondon averaged over 25mph for 100 miles. The fastest time was 4h 03 minutes in the individual category.

That said the effect of drafting will have been large, however the course was also quite flat. I averaged 20 mph for 100 miles but my normal solo rides in hillier terrain for shorter distances are 18-19mph average.

okgo

24.6 mph, whatever, the point remains.

imposter2.0

okgo wrote:

Of course, but using at event like this as a gauge of how fast you can cover a distance as a measure of fitness isn't that useful.

I don't think anyone is claiming RRA accuracy for the RL100. The 'team4luke' fella said that the RL was not a race and therefore you could not use it as an indication of fitness, which is a very strange thing to say. My point was that it is a perfectly reasonable gauge of fitness - certainly as good as anything else outside of an individual TT.