Weight Training

The foundations for successful riding

Re: Weight Training

Postby jules21 » Sun Oct 24, 2010 8:08 pm

brendancg wrote:if your strength is greater the efforts required will be less? If I have a 1RM of 100kg my pedal force required will be 20kg if 1/5 of my strength. Surely if I increase my 1RM to 120kg then without any increase in weight and gravity staying the same I reduce the effort required to 1/6 of my strength and so on. With reduced percentage effort on my legs (largest muscle groups in my body) then my spare aerobic capacity will increase?

that's like saying you'll save fuel by buying a car with a bigger motor - it's not working as hard as the little buzzbox you had so it must be more efficient. strength is just the capacity to exert a maximum force, it's not the efficiency with which it's exerted.
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 8625
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

by BNA » Sun Oct 24, 2010 9:04 pm

BNA
 

Re: Weight Training

Postby brendancg » Sun Oct 24, 2010 9:04 pm

Doing weights doesn't necessarily mean that you will put on weight unless you had no muscle mass before. For information;

85+% of 1RM x 5 reps = Strength training
70 - 85% of 1RM 8 - 12 reps = hypertrophy (adding size and weight)
60 - 70% of 1RM 12 - 20 reps = endurance
If you are doing any more than 20 reps in a set the weight is too light and you will get very little improvement out of it. Each of these is pretty exclusive to the other. If you do lighter weight and want to gain strength then you will not gain that much strength unless you change the way you do it.

I guess what this thread has taught us is that we all have our thoughts on it. I personally have found that the gains I am getting from training as I currently am is getting almost negligible. Basically my body has adapted. As such I have to look at other ways to improve my performances hence the weights. By adding strength training I have noticed a difference, power has improved, climbing has improved and sprinting has improved. As such I will stick with it.

that's like saying you'll save fuel by buying a car with a bigger motor

Difference is I said, without increasing size or weight. If you get a bigger car with a bigger motor you are adding weight. If you think of all the forces acting on a climbing cyclist, such as gravity, resistance and weight then strength is certainly a factor that can be improved. In relation to aerobic capacity this means the ability of your body to fuel the muscles for the exercise. Now if your muscles work harder then they are going to need more fuel. If they aren't working so hard then the fuel requirement is less. If you are working at your lactate threshold before, by improving your strength you work below your lactate threshold then you have spare aerobic capacity.
Yesterday was an easy day.
brendancg
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Penrith Australia

Re: Weight Training

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Mon Oct 25, 2010 11:31 am

brendancg wrote:
You do realise that the pedaling forces involved in such seated climbing efforts are quite low, maybe 1/5th to 1/10th of your strength and as such strength is not the limiter? You're limited by your aerobic metabolism, not strength.


I agree aerobic metabolism would be a limiting factor, but as strength is part of it I would suggest it would also be a limiting factor. Now I appreciate what you are saying, you are more learned than I in this area, but if your strength is greater the efforts required will be less? If I have a 1RM of 100kg my pedal force required will be 20kg if 1/5 of my strength. Surely if I increase my 1RM to 120kg then without any increase in weight and gravity staying the same I reduce the effort required to 1/6 of my strength and so on. With reduced percentage effort on my legs (largest muscle groups in my body) then my spare aerobic capacity will increase?

Strength is not a limiter for endurance cycling.

Your logic is I'm afraid flawed. It wouldn't matter if you were riding at 1/10th, 1/5th, 1/12th of you max force generation ability - the forces are still so significantly sub-maximal that we simply don't recruit the muscle fibres in the way that we do when applying maximal force.

The limiter is the rate of energy production (power) which ultimately is constrained by the rate of ATP production (via aerobic and anaerobic metabolism). Since anaerobic ATP production fulfills only very short duration needs (i.e. measured in seconds) then the ATP production needs in endurance cycling is all but wholly constrained by our aerobic metabolism. Increasing strength (max force production ability) does nothing to improve this. In fact it can actually hamper it.

Cycling powerfully is about applying sub maximal forces frequently and over long periods - and to do that we need to improve our ability to generate ATP. That requires improved O2 delivery, more mitochondrial density, reduced diffusion distances for exchange of gases and key metabolites, increased capillarisation and so on. Fortunately these are all best enhanced by riding our bikes with sufficient volume and intensity. They aren't helped by training that increases our strength.

Of course doing just about any exercise will help an untrained sedentary individual.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3406
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Weight Training

Postby shiv » Mon Oct 25, 2010 11:42 am

jules21 wrote:
brendancg wrote:if your strength is greater the efforts required will be less? If I have a 1RM of 100kg my pedal force required will be 20kg if 1/5 of my strength. Surely if I increase my 1RM to 120kg then without any increase in weight and gravity staying the same I reduce the effort required to 1/6 of my strength and so on. With reduced percentage effort on my legs (largest muscle groups in my body) then my spare aerobic capacity will increase?

that's like saying you'll save fuel by buying a car with a bigger motor - it's not working as hard as the little buzzbox you had so it must be more efficient. strength is just the capacity to exert a maximum force, it's not the efficiency with which it's exerted.



I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall a Top Gear episode where a fuel economy challenge was done between a Porsche of some sort and a little 4 cylinder buzz box. When driven conservatively the Porsche actually won, despite having a bigger capacity engine and a massive power advantage. As it was just idling along it used bugger all juice.

But a car isnt a human. Carry on.
shiv
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:37 pm
Location: 17th green, Glenelg Golf Course

Re: Weight Training

Postby jules21 » Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:00 pm

shiv wrote:I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall a Top Gear episode where a fuel economy challenge was done between a Porsche of some sort and a little 4 cylinder buzz box. When driven conservatively the Porsche actually won, despite having a bigger capacity engine and a massive power advantage. As it was just idling along it used bugger all juice.

the analogy has limitations. you can make the same car return all sorts of different fuel figures depending on how it's driven. on a highway at constant speed, a bigger, more powerful car with taller gearing is often at an advantage - the weight has no impact at a constant speed on flat terrain and the taller gearing helps reduce engine speed/load. but we digress :)
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 8625
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: Weight Training

Postby shiv » Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:11 pm

jules21 wrote:
shiv wrote:I could be wrong, but I vaguely recall a Top Gear episode where a fuel economy challenge was done between a Porsche of some sort and a little 4 cylinder buzz box. When driven conservatively the Porsche actually won, despite having a bigger capacity engine and a massive power advantage. As it was just idling along it used bugger all juice.

the analogy has limitations. you can make the same car return all sorts of different fuel figures depending on how it's driven. on a highway at constant speed, a bigger, more powerful car with taller gearing is often at an advantage - the weight has no impact at a constant speed on flat terrain and the taller gearing helps reduce engine speed/load. but we digress :)



Well it was Top Gear so I wouldnt be at all surprised if Mr Clarkson made sure it was done to give the Porsche a more then healthy chance of winning
shiv
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 4:37 pm
Location: 17th green, Glenelg Golf Course

Re: Weight Training

Postby jules21 » Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:13 pm

shiv wrote:Well it was Top Gear so I wouldnt be at all surprised if Mr Clarkson made sure it was done to give the Porsche a more then healthy chance of winning

i just assumed that was the case - he does a less than subtle job of pandering to the all-important redneck "global warming is for ***s" market.
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 8625
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: Weight Training

Postby mikesbytes » Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:37 pm

Frank Foerstemann squats 215kg

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzU2qmnRUkQ&NR=1[/youtube]
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14766
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Weight Training

Postby J-C90 » Mon Oct 25, 2010 1:02 pm

jules21 wrote:
shiv wrote:Well it was Top Gear so I wouldnt be at all surprised if Mr Clarkson made sure it was done to give the Porsche a more then healthy chance of winning

i just assumed that was the case - he does a less than subtle job of pandering to the all-important redneck "global warming is for ***s" market.


In actual fact its generally true - or used to be anyway. For highway cruising (100kmh+) - a larger engine was usually more efficient because its not wokring as hard to maintain that speed. A smaller engine is working a lot harder to maintain the same speed and there is less efficient. Its reversed for city stop start traffic of course.

The Top Gear comparo was a V8 BMW M3 vs a Toyota Prius. The Prius was driven flat out around their test track and the M3 just had to keep up with the Prius. At the end of the test the Prius had used more fuel than the M3 over the same distance.

I dont think this would translate to cycling though?
2010 TCR Advanced 2
J-C90
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 10:54 am

Re: Weight Training

Postby jules21 » Mon Oct 25, 2010 1:18 pm

J-C90 wrote:The Top Gear comparo was a V8 BMW M3 vs a Toyota Prius. The Prius was driven flat out around their test track and the M3 just had to keep up with the Prius. At the end of the test the Prius had used more fuel than the M3 over the same distance.

i can imagine that may be the case, but it's misleading. the M3 was probably gliding by carrying more speed through the corners, while the prius was being thrashed to within an inch of its life.

it doesn't translate to cycling. endurance is partly a measure of how efficiently your body delivers blood to muscles and evacuates lactic acid. strength is just a measure of how much a muscle can work in short bursts. (someone will give a more precise explanation) the fact you may exceed at the latter doesn't impact on the former at all.
Image
User avatar
jules21
 
Posts: 8625
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 10:14 pm
Location: deep in the pain cave

Re: Weight Training

Postby Chops » Mon Oct 25, 2010 2:17 pm

Parker wrote:One legged squats.... Seriously?


One of the best things you can do if you have a leg strength imbalance.
Aerodynamic Facial Hair
User avatar
Chops
 
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:51 pm
Location: Everywhere, Darwin and Perth.

Re: Weight Training

Postby Chops » Mon Oct 25, 2010 2:24 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Frank Foerstemann squats 215kg

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzU2qmnRUkQ&NR=1[/youtube]


flying bicycles doing that without a cage!

Used to train with a hammer thrower and he used to do crap like that. Sets at 250kg, and maxing 320kg+. 5 person spotting is always interesting.
Aerodynamic Facial Hair
User avatar
Chops
 
Posts: 488
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:51 pm
Location: Everywhere, Darwin and Perth.

Re: Weight Training

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:11 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Frank Foerstemann squats 215kg

What's the significance of that?
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3406
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Weight Training

Postby casual_cyclist » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:17 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:Frank Foerstemann squats 215kg

What's the significance of that?

With legs like that he would make a lousy cyclist?
<removed by request>
User avatar
casual_cyclist
 
Posts: 7299
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Weight Training

Postby brendancg » Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:25 pm

Some Interesting reading. Check this link.

http://www.aboc.com.au/tips-and-hints/t ... t-training
Yesterday was an easy day.
brendancg
 
Posts: 524
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 3:35 pm
Location: Penrith Australia

Re: Weight Training

Postby Crawf » Mon Oct 25, 2010 6:12 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Frank Foerstemann squats 215kg

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzU2qmnRUkQ&NR=1[/youtube]


Interesting range of motion, or lack there of.
Crawf
 
Posts: 1653
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 8:20 pm

Re: Weight Training

Postby mikesbytes » Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:12 pm

Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:Frank Foerstemann squats 215kg

What's the significance of that?


Opps that's Robert Foerstemann
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14766
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Weight Training

Postby lethoso » Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:28 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Opps that's Robert Foerstemann


wow, good win. Hoy was really shifting at the end there though :shock:
Image
lethoso
 
Posts: 1565
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2009 7:56 pm
Location: brisbane, 4101

Re: Weight Training

Postby toolonglegs » Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:12 pm

Maybe if he had stayed off the weights a bit he wouldn't of popped at the end :mrgreen: .
Image
User avatar
toolonglegs
 
Posts: 14351
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Weight Training

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:08 am

mikesbytes wrote:
Alex Simmons/RST wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:Frank Foerstemann squats 215kg

What's the significance of that?


Opps that's Robert Foerstemann

Well as a track sprint cyclist, then I would expect one to do some weight training. But we are talking about endurance cycling, not sprint.

Even in track sprint cycling, there's a limit to how much strength one needs. Beyond that is pretty useless, since it's the rate of force application (i.e. power) that matters. No point being strong if you aren't able to generate that force quickly. It's force AND speed of contraction that matters, not just the force part. Plenty of very strong, but very slow "sprinters" out there.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3406
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Weight Training

Postby steve-waters » Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:27 am

Alex - So weights if done should be more focused on dynamic and explosive sets if to get some benefit from them? Rather than all out strength sets.
Roadie: BeOne Black, SRAM Force, TWE 50mm full carbon clinchers, Vértebrae ceramic cable housings
MTB: Chin29er, Fox Terralogic, XT, 3T and TWE wheels
ex-MTB now commuter: Cannondale F900 (CAAD 4), Headshok, TWE wheels, XT and Elixr CR
steve-waters
 
Posts: 631
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:39 pm

Re: Weight Training

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:03 pm

steve-waters wrote:Alex - So weights if done should be more focused on dynamic and explosive sets if to get some benefit from them? Rather than all out strength sets.

It depends. For track sprinters, yes* but it's still only cross training and not bike specific. For endurance riders, not really.

The very best training for explosiveness on a bike are, you guessed it, explosive efforts on the bike. Starts, sprints, seated accelerations, downhill sprints, uphill sprints, etc etc etc.

* I would suggest if you can 1RM free squat 2-2.5 x body mass, then as a track sprinter at the elite world class level, you have more than enough strength. More is not necessary and training to go beyond might in fact slow you down.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3406
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

Re: Weight Training

Postby mikesbytes » Tue Oct 26, 2010 1:02 pm

[Mod] Moved to the Training subforum [/Mod]

In addition to a distinction between Track sprinting and Road endurance, there is also the distinction between those looking specifically for cycling performance vs those looking for general fitness.
A helmet saved my life
User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 14766
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 10:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney

Re: Weight Training

Postby PortableDave » Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:27 pm

mikesbytes wrote:[Mod] Moved to the Training subforum [/Mod]

In addition to a distinction between Track sprinting and Road endurance, there is also the distinction between those looking specifically for cycling performance vs those looking for general fitness.


Fitness in what sense? Body asthetics would probably be more apt.

I rate well on a lot of general fitness measures but still look like a skeleton, weights probably won't make me any fitter though.
PortableDave
 
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 6:21 pm

Re: Weight Training

Postby Alex Simmons/RST » Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:33 pm

mikesbytes wrote:In addition to a distinction between Track sprinting and Road endurance, there is also the distinction between those looking specifically for cycling performance vs those looking for general fitness.

Agree to post above - you have to specify what the fitness is specific to/for. Fitness is highly modality specific.

In this case the OP is training for a half Ironman. From a specific fitness development POV, they'll be far better off doing as much running, swimming and cycling as they can, than doing anything in the weights room.
User avatar
Alex Simmons/RST
Expert
 
Posts: 3406
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 3:51 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Training

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU

“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter

> FREE BNA Stickers
> BNA Cycling Kit