climbing, force/power required
Comments
-
Svetty wrote:Presumably it's only his stick thin puny legs that stop Chris Froome from being a decent cyclist. What he really needs to do is get down to the gym and do some proper manly squats - get some proper quads on him... :roll: :roll:
Well its stopping him from become a track cyclist or sprinter, thats for sure.
Strength is the ability to lift or push an object
power adds speed to that equation
if you can push 30kg on your pedals, thats your strength, but to be a good climber you need to keep that 30kg moving and quickly, thats power
if you want to win a sprint, then you will need to push 50kg .. apply that strength to your power and rotate that 50kg at 110rpm and you are really shifting
you can spend all time in the gym doing squats and get those legs strong, it will help when it comes to sprinting, but its the power that gets you up that hill, the ability to move all that weight over a prolonged period0 -
meanredspider wrote:
I think what is difficult to determine is when strength (as in a Hoy of this world) gives way to simple aerobic "endurance" power like a Froome
I don't think it is difficult to determine that. It's usually after around 20 seconds.0 -
Imposter wrote:meanredspider wrote:
I think what is difficult to determine is when strength (as in a Hoy of this world) gives way to simple aerobic "endurance" power like a Froome
I don't think it is difficult to determine that. It's usually after around 20 seconds.
Well it is if you're pushing out 3000W (and there are climbs that take barely more than 20s) but I can understand why people intuitively struggle with this. When you're grinding up a hill, you feel like "stronger" legs would help. I absolutely get that they don't (for anything longer than your 20s) and your aerobic engine is everything. Give me 50% Hct and big lungs over big thighs.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0 -
Exactly, strengh is pushing 30 kilos power is what keeps it moving nobody least of all me is disputing this fact, the reason I posted the thread is not to dispute that. What i am interested is not realy being answered which is go in any gym and watch an old guy train, run bike lift wights one thing is evident something's declining or you would see really old guys tearing up mountains on big gears or riding toures at age 60 and lifting big weights. So what's declining ? What exactly are you guys who says strength plays no part saying is not relevant to an older cyclist, because from where I'm sitting as you age something's happening as you get older that's for damm sure and to me it looks like strength is a major factor in that decline0
-
Don't get me wrong - resistance work (whether that's the gym or any other type of heavy work) is good for you and is likely to keep you in overall better shape.ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH0
-
reacher wrote:Exactly, strengh is pushing 30 kilos power is what keeps it moving nobody least of all me is disputing this fact, the reason I posted the thread is not to dispute that. What i am interested is not realy being answered which is go in any gym and watch an old guy train, run bike lift wights one thing is evident something's declining or you would see really old guys tearing up mountains on big gears or riding toures at age 60 and lifting big weights. So what's declining ? What exactly are you guys who says strength plays no part saying is not relevant to an older cyclist, because from where I'm sitting as you age something's happening as you get older that's for damm sure and to me it looks like strength is a major factor in that decline
It's still not a strength issue. Your aerobic capacity/V02 Max will decline with age in any case, allthough it is not unusual to see riders in their 50s and even 60s still mixing it up in local crits/cx events.
http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2013/09/ag ... cline.html0 -
I have been rock climbing since I was 17, I am now 61 my fingers are stronger now than they were then. This is based on max hangs 4 to 6 seconds from a 12 MM. edge with added weights.reacher wrote:Exactly, strengh is pushing 30 kilos power is what keeps it moving nobody least of all me is disputing this fact, the reason I posted the thread is not to dispute that. What i am interested is not realy being answered which is go in any gym and watch an old guy train, run bike lift wights one thing is evident something's declining or you would see really old guys tearing up mountains on big gears or riding toures at age 60 and lifting big weights. So what's declining ? What exactly are you guys who says strength plays no part saying is not relevant to an older cyclist, because from where I'm sitting as you age something's happening as you get older that's for damm sure and to me it looks like strength is a major factor in that decline
It only declines if you let it.0 -
Webboo wrote:
I have been rock climbing since I was 17, I am now 61 my fingers are stronger now than they were then. This is based on max hangs 4 to 6 seconds from a 12 MM. edge with added weights.reacher wrote:Exactly, strengh is pushing 30 kilos power is what keeps it moving nobody least of all me is disputing this fact, the reason I posted the thread is not to dispute that. What i am interested is not realy being answered which is go in any gym and watch an old guy train, run bike lift wights one thing is evident something's declining or you would see really old guys tearing up mountains on big gears or riding toures at age 60 and lifting big weights. So what's declining ? What exactly are you guys who says strength plays no part saying is not relevant to an older cyclist, because from where I'm sitting as you age something's happening as you get older that's for damm sure and to me it looks like strength is a major factor in that decline
It only declines if you let it.
if your saying that strength does not decline with age then your the only person that i have ever heard say that, if that was true you would have 70 year old weightlifters winning world titles against younger guys0 -
Imposter wrote:reacher wrote:Exactly, strengh is pushing 30 kilos power is what keeps it moving nobody least of all me is disputing this fact, the reason I posted the thread is not to dispute that. What i am interested is not realy being answered which is go in any gym and watch an old guy train, run bike lift wights one thing is evident something's declining or you would see really old guys tearing up mountains on big gears or riding toures at age 60 and lifting big weights. So what's declining ? What exactly are you guys who says strength plays no part saying is not relevant to an older cyclist, because from where I'm sitting as you age something's happening as you get older that's for damm sure and to me it looks like strength is a major factor in that decline
It's still not a strength issue. Your aerobic capacity/V02 Max will decline with age in any case, allthough it is not unusual to see riders in their 50s and even 60s still mixing it up in local crits/cx events.
http://www.joefrielsblog.com/2013/09/ag ... cline.html
well i beg to differ, if that was the case you would see 80 and 90 year old guys on standard chain sets on huge gears tearing up the Alp d'huz in under an hour because clearly somethings declining when the road tilts up and its not just your vo2 max, i'm not saying their are not exceptions in cycling, their is, but for the vast majority of people strength declines at an alarming rate as you age particularly past 50. Put a really old guy on a steep hill and whats the first thing that happens no matter how aerobically blessed they are, they clunk down the gears as they age or are you saying regardless of age he loses no strength that produces power because for the life of me i'v never seen anyone old be as strong as when they was young
your saying that no matter what age you are, strength that produces power is not relevant to going up a mountain on a bike or does that power just stay their all of its own accord even though strength is declining no matter what age, what your saying is strength/power is constant regardless of age then ?
What if its not that's the big question if you can address that issue as you age then surely performance has to be improved0 -
You're still talking about strength, while not reading/understanding what anyone else is saying. Cognitive dissonance is a strong feeling to overcome, clearly.0
-
So muscle mass declines at 1% per annum after the age of 35 on average. VO2 max will decline but is something you can mitigate as well. I think you need to go and look at the actual power outputs of the big pro's. Most of them do gym work with some key exceptions such as Bradley Wiggins. If Fabian Cancellara outputs an FTP of 400 watts and I output an FTP of 300 watts, I know that Cancellara is both able to output more force per second and sustain it. I repeat that this is a combination of strength x muscular endurance.
I will give you another example. In the gym work I am doing I am getting stronger. When 2 weeks ago I could barely do 8 reps of a certain weight of bench press I now find I can do 10 fairly easily. By your reckoning all I have done is improved my aerobic output. In fact I have recruited more muscle fibers and trained them to be more efficient at that action. Now I agree if I was to stay at that weight I could then start doing 12 then 14 reps and so forth. That would be increasing my aerobic capacity for that weight. The important point is I would not become more powerful and as such I will only ever stay at the same power output. To push faster up a hill my muscles must both become stronger and increase their endurance.0 -
gavt0333 wrote:When 2 weeks ago I could barely do 8 reps of a certain weight of bench press I now find I can do 10 fairly easily. By your reckoning all I have done is improved my aerobic output. In fact I have recruited more muscle fibers and trained them to be more efficient at that action.
What you are perfectly describing there is an improvement in aerobic output. What else would you call it?gavt0333 wrote:To push faster up a hill my muscles must both become stronger and increase their endurance.
You really do need to read the thread again. Any maybe do a search on some other 'leg strength' threads on this forum. They are very informative, especially if you do not understand the difference between strength and power.0 -
You keep saying that yet at no point have you told us what you feel is physiologically going on with this purely "aerobic endurance" you keep talking about. Can you please detail the physiology underlying what you are projecting to know so well in the form of motor units, nerves, muscle fibers and ATP. I have told you that to output more power you need to recruit more muscle fibers to the functional motor group ie strength and then train them to gain more endurance. What do you contend is your argument?0
-
gavt0333 wrote:You keep saying that yet at no point have you told us what you feel is physiologically going on with this purely "aerobic endurance" you keep talking about. Can you please detail the physiology underlying what you are projecting to know so well in the form of motor units, nerves, muscle fibers and ATP. I have told you that to output more power you need to recruit more muscle fibers to the functional motor group ie strength and then train them to gain more endurance. What do you contend is your argument?
The problem is, you keep describing an aerobic function and calling it 'strength'. You just did it again. The info is all out there. Much of it is already on this thread.0 -
Please elaborate. I wish you to detail in summation your thinking instead of repeating the term aerobic over and over again. I do not contend that the muscle fibers require to become more efficient for a given power but what I contend you are missing is how to increase that power. Tell us again how this happens.0
-
gavt0333 wrote:Please elaborate. I wish you to detail in summation your thinking instead of repeating the term aerobic over and over again. I do not contend that the muscle fibers require to become more efficient for a given power but what I contend you are missing is how to increase that power. Tell us again how this happens.
Why not just read Alex's posts - they are all on pages 1 & 2 of this thread.0 -
I have read again what Alex has said and as I have already stated I do not disagree with the fact that the aerobic tolerance of the muscle involved is fundamental. But what I am talking about is muscle hypertrophy. Power is the ability to turn the cranks at a given force over a certain period. So my power curve will allow me to hit 900 watts for 5 seconds but I know that the fiber recruitment to do this will be purely anaerobic and this is unsustainable for much longer than this due to the production of all of the substrates of that pathway. However, what I am trying to ask you to explain is what is happening when a rider is able to sustain 300W for an hour when before he was only able to sustain maybe 220? What I am fairly sure is happening is the muscle has adapted to recruit more motor units consisting of various muscle fiber types that have both adapted and become more plentiful due to the adaptation of training. So whether I do squats or I do 10 second bursts of high intensity intervals, the aim is to cause muscular hypertrophy so that more muscle fibers exist to form more motor units to then enable them to become more aerobically adapted. More motor units involved in an action means more power potential but does not give endurance. I also disagree that the forces involved in more powerful cycling are relatively low. This is a subjective interpretation and actually producing 2-300 watts is a large amount of energy for a human body. What are we saying it is relative to, the sun?0
-
Imposter wrote:You're still talking about strength, while not reading/understanding what anyone else is saying. Cognitive dissonance is a strong feeling to overcome, clearly.
flamin ek, I had to google that an I still couldn't understand what it means Lol, it's ok I learned enough from whats been said to change direction in my training which is the important thing it's clearly going to go around in circles I can't say I'm convinced but onwards an upwards as they say, big gear work, what's the consensus on it as regards how much to do and how often, or are their some of you who don't do it at all ?0 -
gavt0333 wrote:However, what I am trying to ask you to explain is what is happening when a rider is able to sustain 300W for an hour when before he was only able to sustain maybe 220?
It means the rider's aerobic capacity/performance has increased as a result of training. That's all that matters. Who cares how many more muscle fibres have been recruited?0 -
I agree, go in a gym an lift a 30 kilo dumbbell you will be putting it back on the floor long before you gets out of breath, same on a climb without gears the force required just goes upwards so if strength is not an issue why are riders doing big gear work0
-
This article should provide insights into the real physiology
http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/fitness/ ... urs-1645890 -
You don't need a weight plate, since you are already lifting most of your own body weight when doing a squat. That's more than the level of force involved in cycling. Over and over on a frequent basis. Adding more weight in the form of a barbell and weight plates would require far far more force to lift up in a squat than is required to cycle at a steady rate up a hill.reacher wrote:Imposter wrote:If you can lift a 30kg plate once, then you already have sufficient strength to lift the plate. If you lift the plate again (and then keep lifting it) then that is an aerobic endurance issue, not a strength issue. You already have the strength, because you can already lift the plate.
Not a chance, have you ever lifted a 30 kilo plate ? It's blooming heavy and lifting it more than once is definitely hard to do and I can tell you I don't get out of breath doing it, and the only people I see doing multiple reps with it are not aerobically gifted in any way what so ever, their strong, you won't see any skinny marathon runners doing it
The forces involved in cycling are not a lot different to those involved with going up stairs. If you can stand up from a sitting position you have enough strength to cycle. When climbing, the largest resistance force is gravity and the energy demand is primarily increasing one's gravitational potential energy.
Take the world record for stair climbing the Empire State Building. 9 minutes 33 seconds with a vertical height of 320 metres over 1576 steps. The power demand to increase gravitational potential at that rate is 5.5W/kg. Add in approximately 10% for other resistance forces and we have a ~10-minute effort at ~ 6.1W/kg, which is about the power to weight ratio top pro cyclists climb at.
If we equate to a cyclist, 1576 steps is equivalent to 788 pedal revs, which over 9:33 = cadence of 82.5rpm. So the world's top stair climber is putting out about the same level of power and forces per step pair that an elite cyclist would per pedal revolution. And for the rest of us that put out less power than the elite and going up at a lower speed, the forces are going to be proportionally lower.
The forces involved are still an order of magnitude less than those involved in strength.
it's an aerobic sport, not a strength sport.0 -
The forces involved in big gear work are still way way below those involved with strength.reacher wrote:I agree, go in a gym an lift a 30 kilo dumbbell you will be putting it back on the floor long before you gets out of breath, same on a climb without gears the force required just goes upwards so if strength is not an issue why are riders doing big gear work0 -
Indeed, the physiological adaptions involved in a rider increasing sustainable power output include:Imposter wrote:gavt0333 wrote:However, what I am trying to ask you to explain is what is happening when a rider is able to sustain 300W for an hour when before he was only able to sustain maybe 220?
It means the rider's aerobic capacity/performance has increased as a result of training. That's all that matters. Who cares how many more muscle fibres have been recruited?
- increased muscle glycogen storage,
- increased muscle mitochondrial enzymes,
- increased lactate threshold,
- increased muscle capillarisation,
- hypertrophy of slow twitch muscle fibres,
- increased blood plasma volume,
- increase heart stroke volume and maximal cardiac output,
- increased VO2max.
Strength is not something which is impacted by training that improves aerobic exercise capacity (such as endurance cycling*). To increase strength, you need to do strength training. The physiological adaptations are somewhat different.
* by endurance cycling I mean anything longer than say a track sprint event or BMX race.0 -
That's all very well and I don't disagree but what happens as you age is the question I keep on asking at some stage strength has to play a part or you would have really old people doing all sorts of sports at very high levels, simply put at some stage that old person will fail to get out of that chair or climb those stairs up his house, that's a strength issue nothing else.
I still don't really get that the force in big gear work is not strength, when I do big gear work it's not aerobic capacity or anything else that stops me useing an even bigger gear it's simply too hard to push round, surely that has to be a strength element because the more I do it the easier it gets so what's improving ? I'm not trying to argue that you are wrong btw just trying to understand the elements of training. Thanks for the input0 -
A 90yr old local woman did her first park run last week...reacher wrote:That's all very well and I don't disagree but what happens as you age is the question I keep on asking at some stage strength has to play a part or you would have really old people doing all sorts of sports at very high levels, simply put at some stage that old person will fail to get out of that chair or climb those stairs up his house, that's a strength issue nothing else.
I still don't really get that the force in big gear work is not strength, when I do big gear work it's not aerobic capacity or anything else that stops me useing an even bigger gear it's simply too hard to push round, surely that has to be a strength element because the more I do it the easier it gets so what's improving ? I'm not trying to argue that you are wrong btw just trying to understand the elements of training. Thanks for the inputAnd the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0 -
NeXXus wrote:
A 90yr old local woman did her first park run last week...reacher wrote:That's all very well and I don't disagree but what happens as you age is the question I keep on asking at some stage strength has to play a part or you would have really old people doing all sorts of sports at very high levels, simply put at some stage that old person will fail to get out of that chair or climb those stairs up his house, that's a strength issue nothing else.
I still don't really get that the force in big gear work is not strength, when I do big gear work it's not aerobic capacity or anything else that stops me useing an even bigger gear it's simply too hard to push round, surely that has to be a strength element because the more I do it the easier it gets so what's improving ? I'm not trying to argue that you are wrong btw just trying to understand the elements of training. Thanks for the input
How is that helping to understand what happens as you age when riding a bike and trying to improve your performance other than the fact that some old person has managed to go around a park, although I would hazard a guess that she was not beating many 25 year old runners so maybe it is relevant0 -
Why does it "has to be a strength element" ??? Why can't it be a lack of fitness element? (ie: turning a bigger gear requires more power than you can produce) And by turning that bigger gear you are adapting over time to that effort (it gets easier)reacher wrote:NeXXus wrote:
A 90yr old local woman did her first park run last week...reacher wrote:That's all very well and I don't disagree but what happens as you age is the question I keep on asking at some stage strength has to play a part or you would have really old people doing all sorts of sports at very high levels, simply put at some stage that old person will fail to get out of that chair or climb those stairs up his house, that's a strength issue nothing else.
I still don't really get that the force in big gear work is not strength, when I do big gear work it's not aerobic capacity or anything else that stops me useing an even bigger gear it's simply too hard to push round, surely that has to be a strength element because the more I do it the easier it gets so what's improving ? I'm not trying to argue that you are wrong btw just trying to understand the elements of training. Thanks for the input
How is that helping to understand what happens as you age when riding a bike and trying to improve your performance other than the fact that some old person has managed to go around a park, although I would hazard a guess that she was not beating many 25 year old runners so maybe it is relevant
That's what training is...And the people bowed and prayed, to the neon god they made.0 -
reacher wrote:
How is that helping to understand what happens as you age when riding a bike and trying to improve your performance other than the fact that some old person has managed to go around a park, although I would hazard a guess that she was not beating many 25 year old runners so maybe it is relevant
As you age, your strength declines, your V02 max declines and your aerobic capacity declines. The rate of decline depends on where it is starting from, and what level of exercise you already undertake. What else are you not understanding about getting older? You claim to have understood this on previous pages and yet you clearly see the need to repeat the question for some reason. It's almost like you're trolling.0 -
Imposter wrote:reacher wrote:
How is that helping to understand what happens as you age when riding a bike and trying to improve your performance other than the fact that some old person has managed to go around a park, although I would hazard a guess that she was not beating many 25 year old runners so maybe it is relevant
As you age, your strength declines, your V02 max declines and your aerobic capacity declines. The rate of decline depends on where it is starting from, and what level of exercise you already undertake. What else are you not understanding about getting older? You claim to have understood this on previous pages and yet you clearly see the need to repeat the question for some reason. It's almost like you're trolling.
Ok, i didn't realise we were not allowed to ask questions on training in his section0
