TT Worlds Podium, body types.

FocusZing

Tony Martin, Fabian Cancellara built like body builders; Bradley Wiggins like a ballet dancer. I'm not sure if it's power to weight, just the way their individual muscles work, lean muscle mass due to low body fat ratio, aero dynamics?





It's thought provoking how differing body type bring similar results.

morstar

I suppose the interesting thing is whether Wiggins would actually be better if he was bigger.

His current physique is a product of pursuing climbing prowess and was obviously a successful change. If he were solely focused on TTing, what would his ideal physique be?

Vuelta95

FocusZing wrote:

Tony Martin, Fabian Cancellara built like body builders; Bradley Wiggins like a ballet dancer. I'm not sure if it's power to weight, just the way their individual muscles work, lean muscle mass due to low body fat ratio, aero dynamics?





It's thought provoking how differing body type bring similar results.

Bodybuilders? Really?

fleshtuxedo

Vuelta95 wrote:

FocusZing wrote:

Tony Martin, Fabian Cancellara built like body builders; Bradley Wiggins like a ballet dancer. I'm not sure if it's power to weight, just the way their individual muscles work, lean muscle mass due to low body fat ratio, aero dynamics?





It's thought provoking how differing body type bring similar results.

Bodybuilders? Really?

All pro cyclists look so much skinnier and more frail in real life compared to on TV though....

Coach H

Vuelta95 wrote:

Bodybuilders? Really?

Yep Big Tone and Jay Cutler; separated at birth


The only thing similar will be body fat content

Daz555

I think this podium and others over the is a nice demonstraion that body shape is not too important in the TT - apart from the obvious common factor fact that non-track cyclists are all crazy skinny and look far more puny in real life than they do on TV.

andy_wrx

Wiggins is certainly fatter now than in that picture - appeared to have a beergut in his aerotuck position

But then Dr Hutch has looked far worse for years.

mike6

I read somewhere that some in the peloton have such huge lung capacities that when in the aero tuck it looks like a beer gut. Blimey, lungs bulging, not muscles.

We saw the peloton signing on for a stage of the Vuelta last year and they all looked like little boys, except for one. Step forward Mr Ian Stannard.

Richmond Racer

---

Paul 8v

mike6 wrote:

I read somewhere that some in the peloton have such huge lung capacities that when in the aero tuck it looks like a beer gut. Blimey, lungs bulging, not muscles.

We saw the peloton signing on for a stage of the Vuelta last year and they all looked like little boys, except for one. Step forward Mr Ian Stannard.

I saw Stannard at the TOB, all the other cyclists looked like they were kids out with their dad

RichN95.

They only have different body shapes within the world of cycling. In the real world they are are all very similar - skinny with sod all upper body mass.

It's like saying in basketball there are tall and short players - the short ones are still six foot two.

Daz555

Paul 8v wrote:

mike6 wrote:

I read somewhere that some in the peloton have such huge lung capacities that when in the aero tuck it looks like a beer gut. Blimey, lungs bulging, not muscles.

We saw the peloton signing on for a stage of the Vuelta last year and they all looked like little boys, except for one. Step forward Mr Ian Stannard.

I saw Stannard at the TOB, all the other cyclists looked like they were kids out with their dad

Stannard is a little more normal in a man-in-the-street sense as he's over 80kgs.

slowbike

and there was me thinking we'd get photos of the podium girls ...

RichN95.

They only have different body shapes within the world of cycling. In the real world they are are all very similar - skinny with sod all upper body mass.

It's like saying in basketball there are tall and short players - the short ones are still six foot two.

okgo

Exactly, Stannard you would still regard as a skinny runt among normal people (because he is).

The other two are both bigger yes, but I would say the reason they're both bigger is because they didn't/haven't/won't be interested in going on a crash diet like Wiggins has to challenge GC, remember wiggins was also getting on for 80kg when he was a track rider, he was heavier than Martin, and probably not a million miles from Fabian. It isn't natrual body type, look at early shots of Chris Froome, he's huge.

Ed-tron

Similar type of debate regarding Grégory Baugé or Robert Förstemann vs Jason Kenny. There are different ways of trying to achieve the same goal, within reason.

cal_stewart

I've met Tony Martin and I would snap him. Grepiel is small as well.

Richmond Racer

Ed-tron wrote:

Similar type of debate regarding Grégory Baugé or Robert Förstemann vs Jason Kenny. There are different ways of trying to achieve the same goal, within reason.

For chrissake no pics of Forstemann's legs...I have nightmares for weeks after seeing 'em

Daz555

Richmond Racer wrote:

Ed-tron wrote:

Similar type of debate regarding Grégory Baugé or Robert Förstemann vs Jason Kenny. There are different ways of trying to achieve the same goal, within reason.

For chrissake no pics of Forstemann's legs...I have nightmares for weeks after seeing 'em

His legs are stupid. Hoy was the greatest track sprinter of the modern era (all time?) and his legs were far more reasonable.

Kenny has taken matters further and civilized British track sprinters legs to an even greater extent! Good man.

okgo

Yet this forum is still filled with cretins that think leg strength is what wins cycle races. The best one I heard recently was that Horner rode away up whatever climb it was due to it being a 'leg strength climb' - it was a 10km climb...

RideOnTime

Cal_Stewart wrote:

I've met Tony Martin and I would snap him. Grepiel is small as well.

Why? What's he done to you?

nic_77

Ooops, not the thread I meant to post this to....

Try: viewtopic.php?f=40002&t=12942786&start=37

andy_wrx

madasahattersley wrote:

What people don't seem to realise is that the amount of strength required to push 450 watts for 65 minutes (about enough to win the worlds) is absolutely minimal.

If you can hold 450w for 5 seconds then you have enough strength/muscle mass to hold it for 65 minutes, the thing that makes Tony/Canc/Wiggo different is that they are exceptional athletes with unthinkable aerobic fitness, so are able to hold that level for much, much longer.

Otherwise Wiggo would have trained to win the TdF time trial by spending 60 hours a week doing squats and deadlifts in the gym, downing protein shakes and eating chicken to make his legs big and strong.

Where's that picture of Chris Hoy doing leg presses ?

Oh here it is http://total-gains.com/2012/08/rule-bri ... hoy-style/
- 631kg, plus Ross Edgar sitting on top of the weight stack

okgo

Just to get the gear turning over..... Anyone who thinks you need strong legs to cycle is an idiot plain and simple.

RichN95.

Again, in cycling terms Hoy is a huge massive man. Put him near a rugby international though and he looks fairly normal:

Neale1978

Cal_Stewart wrote:

I've met Tony Martin and I would snap him. Grepiel is small as well.

Dont be such a cretin

mike6

okgo wrote:

Exactly, Stannard you would still regard as a skinny runt among normal people (because he is).

The other two are both bigger yes, but I would say the reason they're both bigger is because they didn't/haven't/won't be interested in going on a crash diet like Wiggins has to challenge GC, remember wiggins was also getting on for 80kg when he was a track rider, he was heavier than Martin, and probably not a million miles from Fabian. It isn't natrual body type, look at early shots of Chris Froome, he's huge.

Not quite the point though. Stannard stands out, among pros, as a different body type despite doing all the thousands of hours in the saddle it takes to be a top pro cyclist. If he was was the usual sedentary man in the street imagine what shape he would be?

alihisgreat

mike6 wrote:

okgo wrote:

Exactly, Stannard you would still regard as a skinny runt among normal people (because he is).

The other two are both bigger yes, but I would say the reason they're both bigger is because they didn't/haven't/won't be interested in going on a crash diet like Wiggins has to challenge GC, remember wiggins was also getting on for 80kg when he was a track rider, he was heavier than Martin, and probably not a million miles from Fabian. It isn't natrual body type, look at early shots of Chris Froome, he's huge.

Not quite the point though. Stannard stands out, among pros, as a different body type despite doing all the thousands of hours in the saddle it takes to be a top pro cyclist. If he was was the usual sedentary man in the street imagine what shape he would be?

Bryn_Mawr003

ALIHISGREAT wrote:

mike6 wrote:

okgo wrote:

Exactly, Stannard you would still regard as a skinny runt among normal people (because he is).

The other two are both bigger yes, but I would say the reason they're both bigger is because they didn't/haven't/won't be interested in going on a crash diet like Wiggins has to challenge GC, remember wiggins was also getting on for 80kg when he was a track rider, he was heavier than Martin, and probably not a million miles from Fabian. It isn't natrual body type, look at early shots of Chris Froome, he's huge.

Not quite the point though. Stannard stands out, among pros, as a different body type despite doing all the thousands of hours in the saddle it takes to be a top pro cyclist. If he was was the usual sedentary man in the street imagine what shape he would be?

Jeez - you'd never guess that was wiggins pre weight loss if it wasn't for the sidies.

okgo

mike6 wrote:

okgo wrote:

Exactly, Stannard you would still regard as a skinny runt among normal people (because he is).

The other two are both bigger yes, but I would say the reason they're both bigger is because they didn't/haven't/won't be interested in going on a crash diet like Wiggins has to challenge GC, remember wiggins was also getting on for 80kg when he was a track rider, he was heavier than Martin, and probably not a million miles from Fabian. It isn't natrual body type, look at early shots of Chris Froome, he's huge.

Not quite the point though. Stannard stands out, among pros, as a different body type despite doing all the thousands of hours in the saddle it takes to be a top pro cyclist. If he was was the usual sedentary man in the street imagine what shape he would be?

Really?

He's 6,3 and probably average build if he wasn't a cyclist, he'd blend in. He isn't a big bloke. Magnus Backsteadt was a big bloke.

mike6

okgo wrote:

mike6 wrote:

okgo wrote:

Exactly, Stannard you would still regard as a skinny runt among normal people (because he is).

The other two are both bigger yes, but I would say the reason they're both bigger is because they didn't/haven't/won't be interested in going on a crash diet like Wiggins has to challenge GC, remember wiggins was also getting on for 80kg when he was a track rider, he was heavier than Martin, and probably not a million miles from Fabian. It isn't natrual body type, look at early shots of Chris Froome, he's huge.

Not quite the point though. Stannard stands out, among pros, as a different body type despite doing all the thousands of hours in the saddle it takes to be a top pro cyclist. If he was was the usual sedentary man in the street imagine what shape he would be?

Really?


He's 6,3 and probably average build if he wasn't a cyclist, he'd blend in. He isn't a big bloke. Magnus Backsteadt was a big bloke.

Yes really! Pro cyclists are the shape they are because of the crazy amount of aerobic training they do. Do you really think Stannard would be the same build he is now if he was not training?