Are there performance benefits to increasing weight?

ollie51

I was riding along in a race the other day, and it was at the stage where the groups get whittled down and I noticed a couple of things, everyone left in the group is 2nd cat or better (except me) and they're all heavier than 70kg. This made me come to the conclusion that weight is rarely a limiting factor in racing in East Anglia, and instead, just lots of watts seems to win stuff.

See if you express my power outputs in relative terms, (they're not maximums, that's what I can reasonably expect to produce on a race day when fairly fresh) you'd expect me to do better than collect 20 something points in a season:
5 sec: 19.9w/kg
1 minute: 10.1w/kg
5 minute: 5.2w/kg
FTP: 4.7 w/kg

But then if express them in raw terms, and the consider that I'm really big for someone who is 58kg (177cm and I do not have those narrow shoulders most cyclists have) therefore my power to drag will be particularly poor, is it surprising I can never appear to get any significant results:
5 sec: 1154 watts
1 minute: 586 watts
5 minute: 302 watts
FTP: 273 watts

This basically leads me to think this, if in the situation wherein you could increase your weight and the yield would be an increase in power output that is proportional to the weight increase i.e. watts increased, w/kg sees no change, it would be worth it. Perhaps even if I only ever raced in East Anglia it's probably worth sacrificing some power to weight for raw power. Although this makes the assumption increasing weight increases power, and that's probably a bad presupposition. Then again, do I need to just do more training to increase absolute output without a weight increase so that I'm fast(ish) both up hills and on the flat stuff. However I do suspect there's a weight in most athletes that maximises power to weight, and that could be higher than I'm currently at.

Other stuff to consider:
-I can hold a wheel and stuff, I'm by no means a tactical genius, but understand and apply the fundamentals of bunch racing
-My position on the bike is good, I've even inhibited a small amount power production to get into a far more aerodynamic position on my road bike.

kom14

Might be worth looking at some races with more climbs. Looks as though you'd have a clear advantage on the hills with your stats maybe more suited to climbing...sure you'd drop a fair few of those bigger guys.
I read Charly Wegelius's book recently and he talked about hating flat open road stages anf TT's as they just didn't suit his build...he talks about getting blown all over the place by the wind on the open roads, but coming into his own in the mountains. Can't imagine there are too many mountains in Norfolk though!

t4tomo

Move to somewhere hilly, it's the only way to get an advantage from being so light.

Never saw Pantani win a flat stage

olake92

I think your basic point is sound, here's my take:

If you take those 70kg riders and assume they are of the same relative fitness as a 58kg rider and therefore produce the same power to weight ratio, they will produce significantly more power with no disadvantage when climbing.

For example, when on the flat and both riders are at FTP (4.7w/kg), the 70kg rider will produce a whopping 56w more, but suffer no disadvantage on the climbs. Consider that in a race, if these two were in a breakaway together, averaging 350W to stay away from the peloton, the 70kg rider will be just nudging his 20min power when on the front, and likely at around 300W when drafting (if we assume around a 20% saving), comfortable in his sweetspot that could last for well over an hour. The 58kg rider will need to ride above his 5 minute power when on the front and may be over his FTP when drafting. It's a no brainer, particularly racing around East Anglia.

A good example is in grand tours; Froome may weigh 70kg and ride at 6 - 6.5w/kg meaning he climbs at the same rate as the 60kg climbers (who also ride at 6 - 6.5w/kg). However, in the relatively flat ITT, he puts out at least 30w more than his opposition and can translate that into a minute or more over an hour TT.

kom14

The other thing to mention on the weight gain aspect if that was a route you chose to go down is that there are only 2 ways for you to gain body mass...1. by increasing body fat which has no performance benefit or 2. increasing muscle mass which may have a performance benefit.
Now to increase muscle mass resistance training and good recovery nutrition would be the obvious route. I'm only talking here about theories on gaining muscle mass and not starting the weight training for performance discussion.

olake92

ollie51 wrote:

This basically leads me to think this, if in the situation wherein you could increase your weight and the yield would be an increase in power output that is proportional to the weight increase i.e. watts increased, w/kg sees no change, it would be worth it.

What you are looking at doing makes sense, but bear in mind that increasing strength and mass is best done through strength/resistance training. This would probably result in the mass gains coming predominantly from Type 2b muscle fibres (super fast twitch), which would then take time and lots of training to convert (as much as is possible) to Type 2a (fast twitch) or Type 1 (slow) fibres. It is likely that if you put on mass, you would improve your efforts where Type 2a and 2b are involved, but less so where Type 1 fibres are involved eg. anaerobic efforts or VO2 efforts, not FTP efforts. This may change over time.

Remember that Wiggins supposedly gained somewhere around 10kg for the World TT champs, but didn't see much improvement in his FTP power.

I'm not an expert on physiology though! If anyone has a better take on it I'd happily let them do the talking!

olake92

ollie51 wrote:

However I do suspect there's a weight in most athletes that maximises power to weight, and that could be higher than I'm currently at.

Also (not another comment from me?! ) the rule of thumb is that to climb with the best, you weigh 2lb/inch of height; to be better on the flat, you weigh 2.5lb/inch.

This website explains it quite well; it mentions that the body can only sustain around 160ml of O2/kg of muscle mass. If you're able to compare this with your absolute VO2 max values and an idea of how much lean muscle mass you have, you can work backwards to find out how much lean muscle you can support before losing the ability to adequately supply it all with oxygen. I think...

olake92

So after a bit more digging, I'm going to hazard a guess here (eek). I'll do this as an abstract, but you could well do the same with your own numbers if you know them.

The equation goes a little like this 'ml of O2/kg muscle = Absolute VO2 / muscle mass'. If, as above, you assume that the maximum amount of O2 the body can sustain is 160ml/kg muscle, you'd simply re-hash the equation to work out the max amount of muscle. Say your absolute VO2 is 4000ml, you divide this by 160 and get 25kg as the max amount of muscle your body can have to keep that VO2.

Once again, I'm not an expert, so that's just my take!

kom14

On the aspect of gaining muscle mass you will in theory (and over a period of time) increase the size of both Type 1 (Slow twitch) and Type II A&B (Fast twitch) muscle fibres. The actual amount of muscle mass gain I would expect to see would be pretty low if you're doing a lot of cycling alongside any weight training. The hormonal pathways from each activity are opposing.
The only way to really put on significant muscle mass would be to reduce the amount of endurance based work you're doing which would be counterproductive for your cycling. May be feasible to look at in an off-season, but if it generally takes 12 wks + before gains in mass are significant though neuro-muscular gains in strength would be seen (Not what the question was though).

TakeTurns

It's a matter of do you want to cherish that talent you have with being super light and having great w/kg figures to match or make yourself an average all-rounder.

The way I currently see it, you could wee-wee over most people if you were to make an explosive attack on a hill. You'd also have a good chance at most hill climb races. I always wanted to be lighter so I could fly up hills and although we share similar FTP & V02max figures, you'd drop me.

I'm a 90kg/203cm rider with lots of raw power that only translates well on the flat.

xavierdisley

How do you know you have an aerodynamic position on the bike?

Xav

ollie51

xavierdisley wrote:

How do you know you have an aerodynamic position on the bike?

Xav[/quote

Quite an arbitrary measure really, basically I'm as low as I can be without risking injury or significantly inhibiting power production.

xavierdisley

ollie51 wrote:

Quite an arbitrary measure really, basically I'm as low as I can be without risking injury or significantly inhibiting power production.

Yeah, that might not be the best way. A pretty consistent way of reducing your CdA (aerodynamic drag) is to get narrower handlebars. Kiddie ones will even work but 38s are definitely fine for road racing and you can get those in a few different models. A longer stem (or top tube) may also decrease your CdA but at the expense of comfort.

As other posters have mentioned, a w/kg achieved at a higher kg will benefit racers in the UK. Over on the continent with long climbs it's slightly different: the much heavier riders will suffer even at the same w/kg as their internal work is incredibly high, so they overheat.

At 58kg and with a 20w/kg sprint, however, I would look at your sprinting position (and normal position) on the bike. Try some things out. Also do some shorter intervals to get your 5min power up!

Xav

littledove44

How old are you?

JayKosta

What type of training do you do?
The power numbers indicate that you are in very good condition.

To get the improvement you want, your training should include at least 1 day per week of hard, unpleasant Interval Training. When doing the intervals, the primary concern is that they be high intensity - the overall time duration or distance during the session is less important.

Regarding body weight, I suggest you first make sure that you get enough protein soon after your training sessions (especially the intervals) - a good starting point is 20 grams of protein within 30 minutes after a session. I doubt that trying to increase body weight would be beneficial unless you are now restricting calories to stay at your current weight.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

ollie51

olake92 wrote:

ollie51 wrote:

However I do suspect there's a weight in most athletes that maximises power to weight, and that could be higher than I'm currently at.

Also (not another comment from me?! ) the rule of thumb is that to climb with the best, you weigh 2lb/inch of height; to be better on the flat, you weigh 2.5lb/inch.

This website explains it quite well; it mentions that the body can only sustain around 160ml of O2/kg of muscle mass. If you're able to compare this with your absolute VO2 max values and an idea of how much lean muscle mass you have, you can work backwards to find out how much lean muscle you can support before losing the ability to adequately supply it all with oxygen. I think...

Well that puts me at 1.8lbs/inch, maybe I should go eat some cake or something...

ollie51

To answer other quesitons:
-A professional bike fitter put me in that position, so I'm going to stick with it. All of the changes I made from my old position make sense.
-I'm 18
-at the moment I usually tend to go for 6 sessions a week + foam roller, core work etc.
The 6 sessions will look something like this:
-2x interval sessions, anything from Sweetspot to AC maybe a Crit, at the moment the focus is on FTP.
-1x 3+ hour ride, usually bottom of L3/top of L2
-1 2.5 hour mtb ride, probably the least productive, but good fun and all that.
-1 hour commuting, can be productive when I feel like it.
-1.5 hour road ride, might be tempo, might be lower level with a few sprints chucked in.

I have dabbled with weight training but never really found it to increase weight (I could lift heavier weights though) and found AC intervals far more effective in improving 5 second power.

markwb79

ollie51 wrote:

I was riding along in a reliability trial today, and it was at the stage where the groups get whittled down and I noticed a couple of things, everyone left in the group is 2nd cat or better (except me) and they're all heavier than 70kg. This made me come to the conclusion that weight is rarely a limiting factor in racing in East Anglia, and instead, just lots of watts seems to win stuff.

See if you express my power outputs in relative terms, (they're not maximums, that's what I can reasonably expect to produce on a race day when fairly fresh) you'd expect me to do better than collect 20 something points in a season:
5 sec: 19.9w/kg
1 minute: 10.1w/kg
5 minute: 5.2w/kg
FTP: 4.7 w/kg

But then if express them in raw terms, and the consider that I'm really big for someone who is 58kg (177cm and I do not have those narrow shoulders most cyclists have) therefore my power to drag will be particularly poor, is it surprising I can never appear to get any significant results:
5 sec: 1154 watts
1 minute: 586 watts
5 minute: 302 watts
FTP: 273 watts

This basically leads me to think this, if in the situation wherein you could increase your weight and the yield would be an increase in power output that is proportional to the weight increase i.e. watts increased, w/kg sees no change, it would be worth it. Perhaps even if I only ever raced in East Anglia it's probably worth sacrificing some power to weight for raw power. Although this makes the assumption increasing weight increases power, and that's probably a bad presupposition. Then again, do I need to just do more training to increase absolute output without a weight increase so that I'm fast(ish) both up hills and on the flat stuff. However I do suspect there's a weight in most athletes that maximises power to weight, and that could be higher than I'm currently at.

Other stuff to consider:
-I can hold a wheel and stuff, I'm by no means a tactical genius, but understand and apply the fundamentals of bunch racing
-My position on the bike is good, I've even inhibited a small amount power production to get into a far more aerodynamic position on my road bike.

This is something that I have thought about for quite a while. I race in the Netherlands, so very similar to East Anglia! But now I actually think that its more of an excuse in my mind vs an actual reason!

Most of the racing here is crits and I would always struggle and see the bigger guys winning and doing far better....Up until I saw a skinny and light weight 19 year old come second in a particular race.

Thats when I realized there is a lot more to it.

Most of my numbers are very similar to yours actually. Although I see that my 5min and FTP are higher, but my 1min and 5second are lower. This is what I think has more bearing in the race result.

I do more training on my 5min and FTP and accept that I dont have as good 1min power.

ollie51

Markwb79 wrote:

This is something that I have thought about for quite a while. I race in the Netherlands, so very similar to East Anglia! But now I actually think that its more of an excuse in my mind vs an actual reason!

Most of the racing here is crits and I would always struggle and see the bigger guys winning and doing far better....Up until I saw a skinny and light weight 19 year old come second in a particular race.

Thats when I realized there is a lot more to it.

Most of my numbers are very similar to yours actually. Although I see that my 5min and FTP are higher, but my 1min and 5second are lower. This is what I think has more bearing in the race result.

I do more training on my 5min and FTP and accept that I dont have as good 1min power.

I'm a big fan of technical crits. Or any other kind of race that involves lots of accelerations, and it's just basic fact that lighter people accelerate faster. I lile to exploit that fact. Typically if I do well in a race it had a higher VI (descrepency between AP and NP). Which supports this.

JimboPlob

Could you not try and experiment? Maybe try and add a small ammount of weight over 3 months (maybe aim to increase by about 1lb a week). Thats about an extra 500 Kcals a day.

I went through a phase where I essentially "bulked up". I followed more of a body building type mantra "Eat big to get big". I didn't overdo it, just enough to ensure I was "gaining" a little weight each week. It wasn't junk food, just more or the healthy stuff I already ate.

I saw big improvements to my FTP and was faster in Time trials. I certainly wasn't any slower on the climbs.

I am naturally tall and skinny so unless I make a conscious effort to keep a little more weight, it just falls off.

I do wonder if too much emphasis is placed on "you must be as light as possible" in the cycling world. People's idea of "ideal weight" may not actually be the ideal weight. If you add a bit, you might find some tasty power increase. Only one way to really find out!

olake92

First, I've PM'd you. Now this:

ollie51 wrote:

Well that puts me at 1.8lbs/inch, maybe I should go eat some cake or something...

Yes! Wiggins won the Tour at almost bang on 2lb/inch, so there probably some room to put on weight/power and not feel any disadvantage. We're not racing up Alps here!

ollie51 wrote:

To answer other quesitons:
-A professional bike fitter put me in that position, so I'm going to stick with it. All of the changes I made from my old position make sense.

That's good - stick with what's comfortable and efficient. Comfort + efficiency = power

ollie51 wrote:

-I'm 18

You may find that you'll just put on weight as you get older, providing you eat well; I used to be able to get sub 60kg (at 179cm), this year I was lucky to get sub 62, now I'm lucky to get sub 64, I'm still 179cm!

ollie51 wrote:

-at the moment I usually tend to go for 6 sessions a week + foam roller, core work etc.
The 6 sessions will look something like this:
-2x interval sessions, anything from Sweetspot to AC maybe a Crit, at the moment the focus is on FTP.
-1x 3+ hour ride, usually bottom of L3/top of L2
-1 2.5 hour mtb ride, probably the least productive, but good fun and all that.
-1 hour commuting, can be productive when I feel like it.
-1.5 hour road ride, might be tempo, might be lower level with a few sprints chucked in.

If you're working this around school, I'd say do whatever fits in with that - I think academic studies should always take priority. On the whole, you can fiddle around with training forever, but, at your age, having fun is best! Are there any chaingangs/evening TTs etc near you?

ollie51 wrote:

Typically if I do well in a race it had a higher VI (discrepancy between AP and NP)

I typically found the same until this year - sustained efforts destroyed me! I've always been (much like you I imagine) the kind of guy that gets in a break, isn't the driving force and then takes big gaps on an uphill finish. The only way to move away from it is do sustained efforts in training.

bernithebiker

As a similar smallish, light rider, I have come to accept that I cannot go up against the big guys on flat races.

They are simply making more power than me, and the weight difference matters not a jot.

...which is why I tend to concentrate on riding hills/mountains, wherever, whenever possible!

dw300

Just bear in mind that if you increase your muscle mass, that you have done so because your body has adapted to the demand of the stimulus. If you stop that training you will slowly return to the size your body thinks it needs to be for the amount of training you are then putting in.

What I mean to say is that, you will always have to do some maintenance lifting. Which will always mean that you are doing less bicycle training that the guys who are naturally that size. It's usually always better to play to your strengths.

It's more feasible if you are not time constrained (like a pro), and you have top genetics and recovery potential (like a pro).

Coming up through the ranks of competition filters out all the people without training time and good genetics. And is the reason why what works for pros is not always suitable for amateurs. By all means, do it if you have the capacity. Sprinters and track cyclists do, but even as gifted athletes you can see how it makes them less competitive compared to the other riders that don't do that training.

I used to have a 120kg squat and 165kg dealift at 70kg bodyweight. I did a squat session yesterday out of the blue to see how it felt, and let me tell you, I will not be training today! You will impact your other training by lifting weights if you are doing it right. And if your arent sore, or compromising your bike training, then you're doing it wrong and wasting your time lifting.

ozzzyosborn206

what would you do to put on weight? you would be to do the right training that may in turn increase your weight otherwise it will make you slower, also being young in the next few years you will naturally bulk up a bit so I wouldn't focus on it too much otherwise you may find you go too far and get dropped on the hills

OfficerDigby

Well that puts me at 1.8lbs/inch, maybe I should go eat some cake or something...

I'm 18

.


Answer: Go to pub...
See you in twenty odd years, for the mid-life (returned athletic ambition) crises. ;-).

okgo

Your figures suggest something with a kick hill finish might work. Try Hog Hill, ends with 40 sec steep climb. You'd do well.

oldhairylegs

You have some great numbers there; you just need to find the sort of races and courses to suit them, rather than trying to alter your natural physical makeup.

Perhaps look elsewhere and further afield to race, where you will be in a position to absolutely murder the 'big guys'

Team4Luke

What cat are you ? Those stats appear to be typical of a 3rd cat level, the levels above that are a significant jump up and those last 4 sessions above stated will not get you there.

ozzzyosborn206

just out of interest, if people don't mind sharing what kind of numbers do other people put out? Also how much are you doing now during winter compared to in the season when racing? I have only had power meter since November, I took a month off in October and took a while to get fitness back but at the moment my power pb's are

5sec 1060W
1min 449W
5min 327
20min 292W

I haven't done many hard efforts on the road yet, just two 20 min efforts so i could determine my ftp and therefore zones. Is it unrealistic to think that in the season my ftp would be around 300-310 that is a rough guess from people who i race with and where theres are. I weigh 64kgs and race 2nd cat.

secretsqizz

No.... but just had a read of your blog.... 1 thing stands out..
you aint racing enough in the season as it is, end of.
As others have stated If you just do flat airfields, you really are handing things over to big lads.... find something undulating , you'll start to appreciate what you are then.

Tom Dean

Team4Luke wrote:

Those stats appear to be typical of a 3rd cat level,

OP's power to weight is way above average 3rd cat level IMO.