Building leg and core strength - TRX or weights?

richiegwy

With winter now upon us, 2 goals I have for next year is to improve my core and leg strength. I still plan on doing 2-3 turbo sessions during the week and long endurance spins on Saturday or Sunday.
My dilemma is that I'm not sure which is the best way to go either getting to the gym for squats etc & do core excercises or take TRX classes. I know I could do both but I would prefer not to as I am committing enough time to training and have work and family commitments to maintain.

ric/rstsport

Perhaps you could explain what you are hoping to achieve by doing these exercises, as that may provide more help in debating what is best for you?

richiegwy

I have noticed that my back gets a little sore and I become a little loose during the longer races hence the desire to build up core strength to keep me more stable during longer races which I will be doing this year. I've had a bike fit done so I know my position is ok.
For leg strength its mainly to build more power to cover breaks and stuff. I'm light at 66kg and climb pretty well but when there is a drive on during flat sections and TTs I want more power hence the building leg strength.

imposter2.0

The saddest thing is that, despite all the hundreds of 'leg strength' discussions on here, there are still people out there in internet land who believe that increasing their leg strength will make them a faster rider...

ric/rstsport

richiegwy wrote:

I have noticed that my back gets a little sore and I become a little loose during the longer races hence the desire to build up core strength to keep me more stable during longer races which I will be doing this year. I've had a bike fit done so I know my position is ok.
For leg strength its mainly to build more power to cover breaks and stuff. I'm light at 66kg and climb pretty well but when there is a drive on during flat sections and TTs I want more power hence the building leg strength.

There are bike fits, and there are bike fits. Some are good, some are bad (i've seen some dire ones) and some are indifferent. In my experience, most people who have back issues on the bike tend to have a not great bike fit.

In terms of leg strength (many threads about this), it's unlikely that leg strength will help you here and could indeed be disadvantageous to you. Power and strength are not synonymous with each other, and you already have sufficient force generating capability to ride the Tour de France (presuming there's nothing physically wrong with you that you haven't mentioned).

Increasing your ability to e.g., cross to a break, or to TT in terms of power output is a metabolic issue that should be trained on the bike. This can be done with a variety of training from long arduous efforts through to short very high intensity intervals with specifics dependent on many factors which are outside the scope of discussing on a forum.

Ric

bahzob

As above. For cyclists leg "strength" is something quite different from a weight lifter. Indeed using the word strength is a misnomer except for the most extreme track sprinters.

Take a look at Bradley Wiggin's legs for example. They look like pipecleaners but are extremely "strong" in the cycling sense of the word which means they can produce high sustained power.

So what cyclists want is "powerful" legs and the best way to develop these is riding a bike. That is not to say "strength" training in its typical form, weight lifting e.g. squats has no benefit.

It can help if you are an out and out sprinter. It may also be appropriate if you are getting older. Bone density decreases with age and cycling does nothing to counter this since it doesn't put any significant structural load on your bones. Weight lifting (just moderate, not all out max reps) has been shown to help counter this.

On core: There are mixed views on this. Mine and many others are that a well developed core helps you cycle better helps improve your overall well being and safeguards against conditions like backpain that can screw up your cycling and life in general.

There is an excellent book "Core Advantage" that gives a set of graded workouts specific to cycling. I'd highly recommend it to anyone, cyclist or otherwise.

PS. Since you mention time as a constraint I'd also advise checking out the "Time Crunched Cyclist" book. It provides a thorough background of training theory and easy to follow graded 12 week plans. The best thing about it is that it is written with the specific aim of maximising efficiency in terms of time where that is, as is for most, limited.

ric/rstsport

As an aside to the above, as i understand it, if you want to maximise bone mineral density, then running is far better than weight lifting

richiegwy

bahzob, I have both books and they are excellent. Sounds like there is not much support for the likes of TRX classes (cool I can save the money!!). As for weight training that's a good point about bone density, hadn't thought about that. Mainly thinking about squats, jumps, lunges and the like. Don't want to bulk up much just aid power/strength development any way I can.

meanredspider

To be fair, it doesn't help that Bike Radar regularly publishes articles expounding the virtues of increased leg strength training.

The analogy (which might help the automotive-minded) is between normally aspirated diesel and petrol engines. Diesels can produce large amounts of torque (analogous to leg strength) and not much power: this makes them good for tractors. Petrol engines, especially motorbike engines, can produce very high levels of power with low torque (esp in the case of bike engines). The difference is in the combustion processes (analogous to the aerobic system). Clearly a cyclist was to be more like a motorbike than a tractor. Well it works for me....

bahzob

Ric/RSTSport wrote:

As an aside to the above, as i understand it, if you want to maximise bone mineral density, then running is far better than weight lifting

Definition of "far better"? It depends on how you understand it. In my case I can't run, my knees are shot to hell.

Even if I could run like a gazelle cycling is my main sport and this is a cycling forum. Running compromises cycling. It causes more stress per hour and so will mean less time cycling, delay recovery and result in worse adaptation. It also brings with it a high risk of causing a running specific injury. Most runners that I know have had to take time off due to some strain or other. My knees are knackered, in part, because of running I did when younger.

This almost never happens for cyclists, for the same reason as why cycling is not so good for countering bone loss.

A short well designed weights session on the other hand has none of the disadvantages of the above. Since, as already discussed, it's not about developing "strength" the weights used are well short of maximum nor need to be done to exhaustion reps. So they can quite easily be incorporated into a training plan with minimal disruption.

As per the OP all comes back to the first rule of training. Specificity. If your prime goal is to be a better cyclist then in terms of mitigating effects of ageing bone density then imo weights are "far better" than running simply because of focus.

ric/rstsport

bahzob wrote:

Ric/RSTSport wrote:

As an aside to the above, as i understand it, if you want to maximise bone mineral density, then running is far better than weight lifting

Definition of "far better"? It depends on how you understand it. In my case I can't run, my knees are shot to hell.

i believe the evidence shows that running increases BMD more than weight training does. Note, it's not something i've rechecked.

I can't run either, but that wasn't part of the question.

Even if I could run like a gazelle cycling is my main sport and this is a cycling forum. Running compromises cycling. It causes more stress per hour and so will mean less time cycling, delay recovery and result in worse adaptation. It also brings with it a high risk of causing a running specific injury. Most runners that I know have had to take time off due to some strain or other. This almost never happens for cyclists, for the same reason as why cycling is not so good for countering bone loss.

my only sport is cycling. but i digress.

Most people i know who do *any* other sport, other than cycling, have to take large amounts of time off due to injury. I find that people who do weight training are especially high in this regard.

A short well designed weights session on the other hand has none of the disadvantages of the above. Since, as already discussed, it's not about developing "strength" the weights used are well short of maximum nor need to be done to exhaustion reps. So they can quite easily be incorporated into a training plan with minimal disruption.

All the people i know who do weights (whether the sessions are short or long) have to compromise their cycling for the weights and end up with some sort of injuries.

That's not to say that weights aren't any use, i just mentioned that in terms of BMD it appears from the last trawl i did of the primary literature that running appeared to be better for BMD in comparison to weights.

bahzob

richiegwy wrote:

bahzob, I have both books and they are excellent. Sounds like there is not much support for the likes of TRX classes (cool I can save the money!!). As for weight training that's a good point about bone density, hadn't thought about that. Mainly thinking about squats, jumps, lunges and the like. Don't want to bulk up much just aid power/strength development any way I can.

If you want to be a better cyclist then I think you will be better of spending your time on a bike.

Squats,lunges and the likes equate to short 10-15s max power efforts. I would do these instead, they will ensure the power developed is appropriate for a bike. You can do them in various ways, from big gear 50rpm mashes to low gear 120+ spins.

If you have some sort of independent measure like power or distance covered you should see yourself improving. Eventually you will plateau. Then, if your goal is to continue to be a better sprinter then it may be worth trying out some weights. They may work, they may not. But I would not start with them.

bahzob

Ric/RSTSport wrote:

All the people i know who do weights (whether the sessions are short or long) have to compromise their cycling for the weights and end up with some sort of injuries.

That's not to say that weights aren't any use, i just mentioned that in terms of BMD it appears from the last trawl i did of the primary literature that running appeared to be better for BMD in comparison to weights.

I'd guess they are confused and using too big weights more appropriate for building muscle strength. Did you ask them?

You may well be right. If BMD is your primary concern then perhaps running may be better. But this is a cycling forum. Running compromises bike training to a greater extent than an appropriate weights session so remains imo not a good option for dedicated cyclists.

imposter2.0

richiegwy wrote:

As for weight training that's a good point about bone density, hadn't thought about that. Mainly thinking about squats, jumps, lunges and the like. Don't want to bulk up much just aid power/strength development any way I can.

As has already been pointed out (and pointed out ad nauseam in hundreds of other, similar threads), stronger legs are not required in order to ride faster. Squats, jumps, lunges, etc will NOT make you a faster rider. Riding your bike at appropriate intensities WILL make you a faster rider. As Ric said earlier, assuming there is nothing functionally, or physically wrong with you, then you already have all the 'leg strength' you need. What you may lack is sufficient aerobic fitness and sustainable power.

ric/rstsport

bahzob wrote:

richiegwy wrote:

bahzob, I have both books and they are excellent. Sounds like there is not much support for the likes of TRX classes (cool I can save the money!!). As for weight training that's a good point about bone density, hadn't thought about that. Mainly thinking about squats, jumps, lunges and the like. Don't want to bulk up much just aid power/strength development any way I can.

If you want to be a better cyclist then I think you will be better of spending your time on a bike.

Squats,lunges and the likes equate to short 10-15s max power efforts. I would do these instead, they will ensure the power developed is appropriate for a bike. You can do them in various ways, from big gear 50rpm mashes to low gear 120+ spins.

If you have some sort of independent measure like power or distance covered you should see yourself improving. Eventually you will plateau. Then, if your goal is to continue to be a better sprinter then it may be worth trying out some weights. They may work, they may not. But I would not start with them.

I'm not certain that weights help cycling in the way that you're trying to demonstrate

Maximal force (i.e. strength) is increased in one of three ways
1) Neural adaptations, which are specific to the angle and velocity that is being trained
2) Increases in muscle cross sectional area
3) a combination of 1 & 2

Maximal forces are generated at zero velocity or close to zero velocity, as velocity increases force decreases, see Hill's Force-velocity curve

Thus i'm not sure that doing 'sub-max' weight training has any bearing on sprint ability.

That said, i'm not stopping anyone from going weight training, or doing body weight exercises, or running or any other of the myriad of sports/exercises that are available. I just don't see that that these exercises improve cycling fitness at race levels for anyone who is already racing above and beyond what cycling offers (and i see that the improvements are less). On the other hand i see that weight training may have benefits for BMD, but it's likely (i'm not 100% certain) that these benefits are less than running, which was the point i was making previously.

In terms of injuries i see equal numbers between say running and weights. Both of which are significantly greater than cycling. i also see injuries from stretching, flexibility and a whole host of other similar issues.

napoleond

That Core Advantage book Bahzob mentioned is great. I'd say it's helped me more in my day day living than my cucling per se though.

ric/rstsport

i'm curious, is "cucling" a cross between cuddles and cycling? some new thing i've missed

;-) :-D

OfficerDigby

Hmm,

I'm not sure that the light weights CV type stuff would help BMD, as surely the stresses are similar to cycling...
AFAIK bones adapt to the stresses put on them so full BW running is a serious stress (hence injury chance!) and bones adapt.

Light weights, CV stuff and stretch, is obviously good in the case of maintaining functionality which can go down hill stuck only in the cyclists tuck.

Do any of you guys believe all this 'muscle activation/firing' ideas that seem more common in cycling these days?
Which seem to say do some exercise to target a muscle, say glutes, to then get it working better in the cycling.
Is it all nonsense?

Harrogate Velo50

Imposter wrote:

richiegwy wrote:

As for weicyclingngraining that's a good point about bone density, hadn't thought about that. Mainly thinking about squats, jumps, lunges and the like. Don't want to bulk up much just aid power/strength development any way I can.

As has already been pointed out (and pointed out ad nauseam in hundreds of other, similar threads), stronger legs are not required in order to ride faster. Squats, jumps, lunges, etc will NOT make you a faster rider. Riding your bike at appropriate intensities WILL make you a faster rider. As Ric said earlier, assuming there is nothing functionally, or physically wrong with you, then you already have all the 'leg strength' you need. What you may lack is sufficient aerobic fitness and sustainable power.

As I am new to training on a bike, not new to cycling, just been riding my bike with no purpose other than to enjoy it and keep fit, what other ways, if any are there of improving sustained power than just trying to ride faster when on the bike. For example when time or weather means you can't get out?

imposter2.0

If time or weather limits your bike time, use a turbo..

Harrogate Velo50

Imposter wrote:

If time or weather limits your bike time, use a turbo..

Not got one at the moment, but thinking about it. I don't know much about them but saw one at Halfords on offer, Elite Magnetic I think it was £100 down from £180, any good?

imposter2.0

Mag turbos are generally ok - sounds like a good reduction...

frisbee

If he is getting a sore back on longer rides then recommending more cycling isn't going to help, especially on a turbo trainer.

Circuits, compound movements with light weights - kettle bells, core work, rowing - including intervals, finishing with stretching. Properly intensive for an hour a couple of times a week.

imposter2.0

frisbee wrote:

If he is getting a sore back on longer rides then recommending more cycling isn't going to help, especially on a turbo trainer.

Circuits, compound movements with light weights - kettle bells, core work, rowing - including intervals, finishing with stretching. Properly intensive for an hour a couple of times a week.

Nobody has suggested that the cure for a sore back is more cycling.

frisbee

Imposter wrote:

frisbee wrote:

If he is getting a sore back on longer rides then recommending more cycling isn't going to help, especially on a turbo trainer.

Circuits, compound movements with light weights - kettle bells, core work, rowing - including intervals, finishing with stretching. Properly intensive for an hour a couple of times a week.

Nobody has suggested that the cure for a sore back is more cycling.

Why not?!? Swinging kettle bells around while cycling is a great way of dealing with aggressive drivers and developing a strong core!

cal_stewart

TRX is great, for core and leg strength. So is a good weights program.

Try a mix of both.

liter

(edited)

I would recommend weights as there are several studies which show the benefits to cycling performance

imposter2.0

Seriously, this has been done to death on here. All those studies prove is that groups who did more training did better than other groups who did less training.

Use the search facility - there are some truly informative threads on this topic. Meanwhile, here's a pubmed study which indicates that cyclists who pushed weights became better at pushing weights and worse at cycling...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19826297

top_bhoy

Imposter wrote:

Seriously, this has been done to death on here. All those studies prove is that groups who did more training did better than other groups who did less training.

Use the search facility - there are some truly informative threads on this topic. Meanwhile, here's a pubmed study which indicates that cyclists who pushed weights became better at pushing weights and worse at cycling...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19826297

...and you keep pushing this angle that weights are bad for cycling. What about it acts as an injury preventative maintenance measure by developing core strength and to balance the muscle development on each side of the body?
I have read books from top cyclists who have stated that part of their training included a weights strength programme and injury prevention has been given as a reason. Note: there is never any mention of getting ripped for appearing at Mr Olympia. There is no reason to doubt their integrity in an effort to sell a book (generally it forms only a paragraph or two) and I assume they are being advised by some knowledgeable people throughout their career.

I'm inclined to take a more open view that a weights programme can be good for cycling (and general living for us mortals) dependent upon the nature of the programme, its intended purpose and the condition of the individual. In other words, part of an overall strategy for improvement.

imposter2.0

I don't think I've ever said that weights are bad for cycling - although there is that one study which appears to suggest that they are. Generally speaking, if your aim is to get faster on a bike, then I would guess they are neutral at best.

People do weights for all kinds of useful reasons, but the belief that more leg strength = better cycling performance is pretty misguided. But if you have lots of spare time to push weights, then go for it...

Davey C

Wow haven't been here for a while but it's encouraging that this same old same old topic hasn't turned into a 10 page science v anecdote thread. In fact, not much support for weight training to improve cycling performance...could it be the tide has turned?