An interesting read about lactate

esdel

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/other ... -1-6010932

JayKosta

I'm VERY dubious about the chances for success on a 200 mile ride using the LT power level from a 30 minute test!
Especially at a power level of 249 watts....

Hopefully the soon-to-happen 100 mile ride will be a good 'learning experience'.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

FatTed

This is the part that will cause the most debate:-
"He has also highlighted the need for me to hit the gym.

No, not simply because you could fit a racing pigeon’s ankle bracelet around my thigh – but because endurance athletes can benefit hugely from resistance training.

Adding muscle mass and density, which can be converted to oxidative fibres, will give a major boost to my aerobic capacity."

sloppyschleckonds

I think it was just really a link to someones 'JustGiving' charity page….

Stalin

FatTed wrote:

This is the part that will cause the most debate:-
"He has also highlighted the need for me to hit the gym.

No, not simply because you could fit a racing pigeon’s ankle bracelet around my thigh – but because endurance athletes can benefit hugely from resistance training.

Adding muscle mass and density, which can be converted to oxidative fibres, will give a major boost to my aerobic capacity."

Mmmmm

Example.

I walk for 60 minutes every day. I have cycled 5 or 6 days a week for 15 years. I have not run for 15 years. I went for a run yesterday. Today my quads are trashed, very stiff, painful. But my calves, hamstrings and glutes are fine.

Fact is, no matter how much you train a muscle it will only improve at doing what you train it to do. So you must train it in exactly the same plane of movement, in the same position etc etc, or at least very close.

I come from a judo, fencing, running background. Weight training really helps judo because lifting & shifting weights mimics what you will have to do in a fight (particularly if you do upper body work one armed), it helps fencing, it helps running, particularly sprinting, if you do the right things. But unless you are planning to do match sprint or kilo, weights is useless for cycling, unless you very specifically need to strengthen something after injury or have a very specific weakness.

If you do weight training you are most likely to grow your fast twitch fibres, for endurance cycling growing those then trying to convert them to slow twitch is a waste of time. The last thing a cyclist needs is big strong muscles. What you want is muscles which sustain power. Powerful is not the same as strong.

Weight training does boost testosterone levels though. If you have the time this might be the best benefit you can get from weight training.

All that is my opinion.

meanredspider

Stalin wrote:

The last thing a cyclist needs is big strong muscles. What you want is muscles which sustain power. Powerful is not the same as strong.

Whilst I absolutely accept the argument, here's my question: Pretty much the ONLY exercise I do is cycling and most of it is "endurance" cycling. So why have I developed big strong muscles? The theory (which I accept) is that it shouldn't have happened - after all I could "walk up stairs" before I started cycling.

indjke

JayKosta wrote:

I'm VERY dubious about the chances for success on a 200 mile ride using the LT power level from a 30 minute test!
Especially at a power level of 249 watts....

Hopefully the soon-to-happen 100 mile ride will be a good 'learning experience'.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

But.. who said that he will ride at LT? )
I think comfortable sustainable power for such distance will be at upper zone2, near 75% of LT, something close to 190w.

Stalin

meanredspider wrote:

Stalin wrote:

The last thing a cyclist needs is big strong muscles. What you want is muscles which sustain power. Powerful is not the same as strong.

Whilst I absolutely accept the argument, here's my question: Pretty much the ONLY exercise I do is cycling and most of it is "endurance" cycling. So why have I developed big strong muscles? The theory (which I accept) is that it shouldn't have happened - after all I could "walk up stairs" before I started cycling.

I'm going to assume here that you genuinely want to know the answer and are not just trolling.

It depends on your genetic make up. Over the last 15 years since I took up cycling my legs have not shrunk, if anything they are even bigger than when I fenced, did judo or played squash and ran.

I assume that this is due to being predominantly fast twitch. However I have seen very fast twitch athletes who are very thin, so there is more to it than that.

Some people tend to increase muscle mass when they do a lot of training. Others tend to get thinner and thinner the more they train.

I have trained with people who are incapable of increasing muscle mass. I only need to think about going to the gym and I increase muscle mass.

I have also trained with people who have big muscles but have been surprised by how un strong they are, and yes I am using the scientific definition of strong.

Without knowing how you train and what exactly you do I can't say why you have gained muscle mass.

How much do you weigh, height, build etc etc? At school where would you have come in a 100m running race?

jgsi

A NOT very interesting advertisement you mean... go do drugs ffs

meanredspider

Stalin wrote:

I have trained with people who are incapable of increasing muscle mass. I only need to think about going to the gym and I increase muscle mass.

I have also trained with people who have big muscles but have been surprised by how un strong they are, and yes I am using the scientific definition of strong.

Without knowing how you train and what exactly you do I can't say why you have gained muscle mass.

How much do you weigh, height, build etc etc? At school where would you have come in a 100m running race?

No - definitely not trolling. I think I'm definitely in the camp that puts on muscle very easily and, I think, reasonably strong muscle (with only spot data to support that).

I'm 183cm and 86kg (still carrying a bit of weight around the middle but in the 32-33" waist jeans area). No idea where I'd have come in the 100m race - I threw a javelin furthest, also high-jumped for the school, prop forward - dunno if that helps.

Stalin

meanredspider wrote:

Stalin wrote:

I have trained with people who are incapable of increasing muscle mass. I only need to think about going to the gym and I increase muscle mass.

I have also trained with people who have big muscles but have been surprised by how un strong they are, and yes I am using the scientific definition of strong.

Without knowing how you train and what exactly you do I can't say why you have gained muscle mass.

How much do you weigh, height, build etc etc? At school where would you have come in a 100m running race?

No - definitely not trolling. I think I'm definitely in the camp that puts on muscle very easily and, I think, reasonably strong muscle (with only spot data to support that).

I'm 183cm and 86kg (still carrying a bit of weight around the middle but in the 32-33" waist jeans area). No idea where I'd have come in the 100m race - I threw a javelin furthest, also high-jumped for the school, prop forward - dunno if that helps.

It depends on if you were early to mature physically. But if you were good at javelin and high jump it is a pointer to fast twitch. But if you were 6 feet tall when all the other kids were only 5 feet tall it just means you had grown up earlier than they did.

I would assume that as you never ran 100m you were no good at it, the fast boys know they are fast. What about cross country? Prop forward would lead me to believe you were big for your age. But high jump, that indicates some fast twitch. 86kg, or 13st 7lbs, is big man in terms of endurance athlete. Are you broad shouldered in relation to your height?

What is the girth of your thighs? Wrist?

It is probable given your height weight and build you are more suited to non endurance sports.

You may find that the usual endurance training does not work for you. In fact it may well be the worst possible training.

Have you done any other sport?

meanredspider

Stalin wrote:

It depends on if you were early to mature physically. But if you were good at javelin and high jump it is a pointer to fast twitch. But if you were 6 feet tall when all the other kids were only 5 feet tall it just means you had grown up earlier than they did.

I would assume that as you never ran 100m you were no good at it, the fast boys know they are fast. What about cross country? Prop forward would lead me to believe you were big for your age. But high jump, that indicates some fast twitch. 86kg, or 13st 7lbs, is big man in terms of endurance athlete. Are you broad shouldered in relation to your height?

What is the girth of your thighs? Wrist?

It is probable given your height weight and build you are more suited to non endurance sports.

You may find that the usual endurance training does not work for you. In fact it may well be the worst possible training.

Have you done any other sport?

I'd have said I was about average in terms of maturity - we certainly had one or two guys on our rugby team who were way ahead but I wasn't one of them. We didn't do much individual sport - I don't think I was particularly quick or particularly slow. I hate running in general - it's just sooooo boring - X-country in particular. I was very good at (field) hockey and still play and played a lot of soccer (though mostly in goal - I have very good reactions: I surprise myself sometimes).

Yes - I'm a crap shape for a cyclist - broad shouldered (was often asked if I was a rower or a swimmer when I was younger and had terrible trouble finding off-the-peg suits) and this muscle mass thing. That said, despite everything, I'm probably not too bad though I'm not going to blow anyone away either. My eldest son is small (mixture of his mum's genes and a year of chemo when he was 13) and I tell him it would be a positive advantage in my two favourite sports (cycling and motorsport). I actually like "proper" endurance events (multi-day rides) and normally do well at them - I think I have good base endurance. I'm too heavy to be good going up hills (which is why Alpe D'HuZes charity event is going to be a hard challenge for me). I don't do much (any) speed/aerobic training (intervals, repeats etc) - which is why I'm a bit surprised to put on the muscle mass. I dread to think what would happen if I started.

ETA - don't have a tape measure here in Amsterdam - must get something because I can never measure anything!

sloppyschleckonds

meanredspider wrote:

Yes - I'm a crap shape for a cyclist - broad shouldered (was often asked if I was a rower or a swimmer when I was younger and had terrible trouble finding off-the-peg suits) and this muscle mass thing.

The 'Muscle Mass' thread Part 1:

viewtopic.php?f=40011&t=12862642

meanredspider

SloppySchleckonds wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Yes - I'm a crap shape for a cyclist - broad shouldered (was often asked if I was a rower or a swimmer when I was younger and had terrible trouble finding off-the-peg suits) and this muscle mass thing.

The 'Muscle Mass' thread Part 1:

viewtopic.php?f=40011&t=12862642

Yup - what did I learn from that thread? Absolutely nothing (except how this forum quickly descended into insults - I only venture in here around this time of year because I'm normally preparing for a charity event). Great memory though

Kieran_Burns

meanredspider wrote:

Stalin wrote:

The last thing a cyclist needs is big strong muscles. What you want is muscles which sustain power. Powerful is not the same as strong.

Whilst I absolutely accept the argument, here's my question: Pretty much the ONLY exercise I do is cycling and most of it is "endurance" cycling. So why have I developed big strong muscles? The theory (which I accept) is that it shouldn't have happened - after all I could "walk up stairs" before I started cycling.

It's 'cos you (were) are a fat git. You live in Scotland. There are lots of hills.

meanredspider

Kieran_Burns wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Stalin wrote:

The last thing a cyclist needs is big strong muscles. What you want is muscles which sustain power. Powerful is not the same as strong.

Whilst I absolutely accept the argument, here's my question: Pretty much the ONLY exercise I do is cycling and most of it is "endurance" cycling. So why have I developed big strong muscles? The theory (which I accept) is that it shouldn't have happened - after all I could "walk up stairs" before I started cycling.

It's 'cos you (were) are a fat git. You live in Scotland. There are lots of hills.

Thanks, KB! I live in NL (mostly) now and even BMI says I'm in the "ideal" range (just) so I can expect to start to look like a racing snake?

markwb79

meanredspider wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Stalin wrote:

The last thing a cyclist needs is big strong muscles. What you want is muscles which sustain power. Powerful is not the same as strong.

Whilst I absolutely accept the argument, here's my question: Pretty much the ONLY exercise I do is cycling and most of it is "endurance" cycling. So why have I developed big strong muscles? The theory (which I accept) is that it shouldn't have happened - after all I could "walk up stairs" before I started cycling.

It's 'cos you (were) are a fat git. You live in Scotland. There are lots of hills.

Thanks, KB! I live in NL (mostly) now and even BMI says I'm in the "ideal" range (just) so I can expect to start to look like a racing snake?

The perfect build for racing here!

meanredspider

Markwb79 wrote:

The perfect build for racing here!

Definitely more competitive on the flat than going up hills!