Weight lifting?

Moominman2

Hi guys,

I've started lifting weights to gain a bit of muscle as I'm quite skinny. It's nothing serious, But I'd like to see myself gain some muscle.

Although, I'm a cyclist and I enjoy running. So is it pointless lifting weights? As surely all my weight lifting efforts will just go to waste when I cycle or run? Is it literally a choice between cardio OR weight lifting?

Any input would be appreciated,

Thanks
Luke

JayKosta

Choices ... choices ...

It gets down to whether you want to really excel at cycling and/or running, or if they are just pleasant activities you enjoy doing. Also in the mix is your amount of satisfaction with your physical appearance.

IF you really want to excel at cycling/running (and if you've got the natural physical 'gifts' to make that possible), then you should avoid muscle growth that doesn't contribute to the sport and which isn't necessary for good overall health.

It is certainly possible to be a very good cyclist/runner and have a decent 'build'. But you probably can't do that and be the 'best' at the sport (unless you are extremely gifted physically).

It is also helpful to look and speak with you parents, brothers, sisters, etc. to get an idea of what genetics have done for them regarding athletics, physical development, etc.

The peak years for 'getting into shape' for a male is from about 18 to 30 - that's when hormones, cardio, recovery, etc. are all very favorable. If you get into good shape during that period, it will be a good base for the rest of your life - as long as you continue with a decent healthy lifestyle.

Jay Kosta
Endwell NY USA

supermurph09

In order to gain muscle by weight lifting you'll have to put in a lot of effort and allow for recovery time so it depends on what means more, cycling or physique. That's not to say you can't have both but when you add your running in I wonder how much time you will be able to dedicate to each discipline. If you are are planning on doing weights, then just stick to Squats, Deadlifts, Bench Press and Shoulder Press as these are compound movements that will bring about the biggest improvements.

bahzob

This is a hot subject that causes much angst on cycling forums.

Basically though you can answer your own question and have started to do so in your post.

How important is cycling to you? If the answer is that it's your overriding passion then skinny is good. In general the skinnier the better. (there are exceptions but they are exceptions)

If its just one of variety of means to stay fit and your goal is to look and feel good then following a varied training routine is probably going to result in better results.

Simply put if you want to ride like Bradley Wiggins then you need to look like Bradley Wiggins. Do you really want to look like that? (Not to say this means no weights, Wiggins uses them, but not to bulk up)

Only thing I would add is that pretty much regardless of sport a good set of core routines will help as well as avoid the problems of everyday 21st sedentary life. Check out "Core Advantage", its a great book.

imposter2.0

Moominman2 wrote:

Hi guys,

I've started lifting weights to gain a bit of muscle as I'm quite skinny. It's nothing serious, But I'd like to see myself gain some muscle.

Although, I'm a cyclist and I enjoy running. So is it pointless lifting weights? As surely all my weight lifting efforts will just go to waste when I cycle or run? Is it literally a choice between cardio OR weight lifting?

Any input would be appreciated,

Thanks
Luke

Assume you are talking about upper body? If you only ride for leisure and want to look awesome on the beach, then crack on with as many weights as you want. If you have any kind of performance goals in cycling, then weights will almost certainly get in the way of that.

phreak

Imposter wrote:

Moominman2 wrote:

Hi guys,

I've started lifting weights to gain a bit of muscle as I'm quite skinny. It's nothing serious, But I'd like to see myself gain some muscle.

Although, I'm a cyclist and I enjoy running. So is it pointless lifting weights? As surely all my weight lifting efforts will just go to waste when I cycle or run? Is it literally a choice between cardio OR weight lifting?

Any input would be appreciated,

Thanks
Luke

Assume you are talking about upper body? If you only ride for leisure and want to look awesome on the beach, then crack on with as many weights as you want. If you have any kind of performance goals in cycling, then weights will almost certainly get in the way of that.

I don't think it's as black and white as that. I've improved every year that I've been cycling and still go to the gym. I may not be world class, but I doubt that was ever likely anyway, and weighing around 56kg it's hardly as though it's resulted in a huge amount of weight.

I may have improved more quickly had I not gone to the gym, but it isn't the case that gym = worse cycling in my experience.

It's a generalisation of course, but I suspect most cyclists out there could lose far more weight from less body fat than they'd gain in lean muscle from the gym.

imposter2.0

phreak wrote:

but it isn't the case that gym = worse cycling in my experience.

Nobody said it was. I don't think you read my reply properly.

meanredspider

Imposter wrote:

phreak wrote:

but it isn't the case that gym = worse cycling in my experience.

Nobody said it was. I don't think you read my reply properly.

I have to say that your reply reads like that whether you meant that or not. Weights "getting in the the way" of cycling performance goals suggests they have a negative effect.

imposter2.0

meanredspider wrote:

Imposter wrote:

phreak wrote:

but it isn't the case that gym = worse cycling in my experience.

Nobody said it was. I don't think you read my reply properly.

I have to say that your reply reads like that whether you meant that or not. Weights "getting in the the way" of cycling performance goals suggests they have a negative effect.

That's quite a misinterpretation, then. I categorically did not say that going to the gym will make you 'worse' on the bike. Feel free to review my earlier reply for traces of those words if you wish. Either way, it's not clear if the OP is referring to upper body - my guess is that he was. In any case, there are few - if any - cycling performance gains to be had in the gym - and if you are aiming to improve on the bike, then time on the bike makes much more sense than time in the gym. But like I said, if you have aims/goals which are wider than just cycling, then go for it..

Moominman2

Thanks for the replies everyone, its a real help. And yes, I was referring to my upper body.

It seems that the general consensus is that lifting weights is fine unless you aim to excel in the sport of cycling.

As this seems to be the case, I think I'll continue to use weights until I personally believe it hinders my cycling ability, or whether I don't see any muscle gain due to the cardio. I'm not looking to compete in cycling, so it shouldn't become a problem.

Thanks again, and I'll check out that book mentioned too.

Luke

meanredspider

Imposter wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Imposter wrote:

phreak wrote:

but it isn't the case that gym = worse cycling in my experience.

Nobody said it was. I don't think you read my reply properly.

I have to say that your reply reads like that whether you meant that or not. Weights "getting in the the way" of cycling performance goals suggests they have a negative effect.

That's quite a misinterpretation, then.

Well, it might be - but I've paraphrased exactly why I (and phreak, at least, I assume) reached the conclusion we did.

Moominman2 wrote:

It seems that the general consensus is that lifting weights is fine unless you aim to excel in the sport of cycling.

I was reading only yesterday here http://road.cc/content/news/139410-mami ... mping-iron that Harvard have determined that pumping some iron as well as cycling is a great way for MAMILs to lose weight. So, for many of us, pumping iron might not "get in the way" of our performance cycling goals if we have fat to lose.

imposter2.0

Lol - that study is definitely not equivocal, is it...

meanredspider

Imposter wrote:

Lol - that study is definitely not equivocal, is it...

Agreed - Show me a fitness or weight loss study that unequivocal - I don't believe such a thing exists.

As I've said seemingly countless times now, we are all too different for a one size fits all approach to anything. I learned the other day how massively different the bugs in our guts are that process what we eat, for instance.

The sooner the regular posters in this sub-forum grasp this, the sooner this forum will become more constructive.

Eddy S

meanredspider wrote:

Imposter wrote:

Lol - that study is definitely not equivocal, is it...

Agreed - Show me a fitness or weight loss study that unequivocal - I don't believe such a thing exists.

As I've said seemingly countless times now, we are all too different for a one size fits all approach to anything. I learned the other day how massively different the bugs in our guts are that process what we eat, for instance.

The sooner the regular posters in this sub-forum grasp this, the sooner this forum will become more constructive.

Sadly, Hell is more likely to freeze over first! 8)

meanredspider

Eddy S wrote:

Sadly, Hell is more likely to freeze over first! 8)

I did so nearly write that myself but I was trying to be charitable on Xmas Eve

I have no doubt that 2015 will continue where 2014 left off....

...the same old bollox.

imposter2.0

meanredspider wrote:

...the same old bollox.

Just to be clear - exactly what is 'the same old bollox' in this context..?? The OP is happy to continue working his upper body in the gym and everyone else seems happy with that - so other than some fake sanctimony, I'm not sure what your point is.

meanredspider

Imposter wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

...the same old bollox.

Just to be clear - exactly what is 'the same old bollox' in this context..?? The OP is happy to continue working his upper body in the gym and everyone else seems happy with that - so other than some fake sanctimony, I'm not sure what your point is.

My point is the false positions many people take up with no sound support in science (because there is no sound support in science). That's what characterises this sub-forum if not (necessarily) this thread.

imposter2.0

Ironically, you'd have to include yourself in your own statement, if that were true...

meanredspider

Imposter wrote:

Ironically, you'd have to include yourself in your own statement, if that were true...

Quite probably. But the first step to solving the problem is recognising there is one

white91

It all comes down to time in my opinion, if you skip cycling to lift weights, your cycling will suffer, however if you lift weights along side cycling, I can't see any problem.

type:epyt

How about only doing body weight exercises? That way your body will settle where it needs to to support your mass rather than adding 'bulk'.

tangled_metal

Is the OP talking free weights or those weight stack resistance machines? Personally if I were the OP I would look into seeking professional advice from an expert at the gym being used. Most gyms have instructors and include programs as part of the membership benefits. Whilst not all are into cycling this activity is sufficiently documented in sources they will know about for them to be able to research a program to suit you personally.

My preference is for free weights used in conjunction with your body weight. Things such as lunges with a pair of dumbells and numerous other exercises. I got given a program using a few of these and despite 5 years at the gym going anything from 3 to 5 days a week regularly with few breaks I struggled with them. They are focussed on what I needed to exercise and at the same time worked out the auxilliary muscles not directly utilized but that provide stabilization and balance. The way I have it in my head is the resistance machines are designed to highly focus effort on a particular set of muscles at the cost of not working those that need to operate in normal use alongside them. This can create problems and weaknesses later on. The free weights using your body and especially the dynamic exercises work the other muscle masses in a sympathetic and more natural way. This helps with core muscles and also the deep muscles that don't get a good work out without more natural movements. Or at least that is what I took from that re-program several years back.

I only got this re-program at my old gym after a nice young female trainer started working there full of the latest ideas and fresh of some PE type degree or HND course. She was keen and took time to actually research exercises for me not following a standard route around the machines. I suffered under her tutillage for only 2 sessions but what I took from them really made me fitter and stronger than I ever was with much better performance for the activities I was dong back then. I think it took me about 4 weeks going 3 times a week doing this routine before i stopped getting that near sick feeling due to the effort needed. There was no pain just a very deep exercise which really worked for me so I can seriously recommend that you find yourself a good gym with a good instructor.

BTW if you do use resistance machines try lower weights with more repitions and sets. Perhaps try pyramid where you start off with it easier then make it harder with each set of repitions. This can be used with free weights and body weight with free weight exercises.

One thing don't take any advice from here on face value without getting alternative advice from the gym you are using. If it is a good gym it will worry about liability and will therefore make sure you are working out safely and to your benefit, hence they will try to encourage a regular re-program of your training there. It is for them and you afterall.

PS all my comments are based on my experience of when I trained hard for other disciplines using a very good local gym. I did this for probably 8 years straight and worked my way up to 5 gym sessions a week and one longer but slower session (walking in the hills) with 1 rest day. I was also keen to work out for endurance not for bulk as such. I did add some muscle mass but overall kept my weight steady and constant. i would say I toned more than bulked up but that suited me because I did get stronger with the ability to work harder for longer. I think a similar approach would be a benefit to cyclists who are not trying to be elite or anywhere near elite level. Anyone like that will have trainers to do all this thinking for them I reckon.