Weight training

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Andrew_P

In between here and there
Sorry, this discussion is about leg strength, not core strength. I'm sure core strength has its benefits, but that's not what we're talking about here.
So rather than taking the piss out of everyone on the thread, why didn't you just answer him with your font of knowledge. Or answered my question correctly, I didn't mention anywhere in my question leg strength yet you still waded in with a misleading and categorical no.

I would also suggest that higher rep leg work, involving Squats, lunges and leg presses would help cycling, after all if we are both pedalling at 90rpm but have different power outputs one would be able to push a higher gear, where do you think the higher power outputs comes from?
 

Citius

Guest
So rather than taking the mickey out of everyone on the thread, why didn't you just answer him with your font of knowledge. Or answered my question correctly, I didn't mention anywhere in my question leg strength yet you still waded in with a misleading and categorical no.

I would also suggest that higher rep leg work, involving Squats, lunges and leg presses would help cycling, after all if we are both pedalling at 90rpm but have different power outputs one would be able to push a higher gear, where do you think the higher power comes from?

I've no idea what you're talking about - the OP in his first post was quite clear in his definition - maybe have a read of it. I've been quite clear in all of my answers that my comments relate to leg strength, just in case anyone decides to misconstrue it - as you seem to have successfully done.

On your second point - why do you think having stronger legs will give you a greater power output? Higher power comes from pushing harder on the pedals obviously. But given the relatively low forces involved, the level of strength required to do that is already well within most people's capacity. Even my frail old gran has the required level of strength. It really is very low.
 

Andrew_P

In between here and there
I've no idea what you're talking about - the OP in his first post was quite clear in his definition - maybe have a read of it. I've been quite clear in all of my answers that my comments relate to leg strength, just in case anyone decides to misconstrue it - as you seem to have successfully done.

On your second point - why do you think having stronger legs will give you a greater power output? Higher power comes from pushing harder on the pedals obviously. But given the relatively low forces involved, the level of strength required to do that is already well within most people's capacity. Even my frail old gran has the required level of strength. It really is very low.
the OP asked if there was any leg exercises which clearly there are, and others that would improve someone's cycling, yet you keep telling everyone there isn't. I am not an trained expert but I do read accredited trainers training suggestions all of which suggest some leg work as well as core training, and of course actually riding a bike. He did say he didn't want to train in the Gym like a weightlifter but like a cyclist. You accepted core training helps, so why didn't just suggest that?

On legs maybe you could shoot this trainer down in flames, lots of leg work in this training
http://www.cyclesportcoaching.com/Files/CyclingSpecificStrengthTraining.pdf
 

Citius

Guest
the OP asked if there was any leg exercises which clearly there are, and others that would improve someone's cycling, yet you keep telling everyone there isn't. I am not an trained expert but I do read accredited trainers training suggestions all of which suggest some leg work as well as core training, and of course actually riding a bike. He did say he didn't want to train in the Gym like a weightlifter but like a cyclist. You accepted core training helps, so why didn't just suggest that?

On legs maybe you could shoot this trainer down in flames, lots of leg work in this training
http://www.cyclesportcoaching.com/Files/CyclingSpecificStrengthTraining.pdf

The legs are not part of the 'core'. Agreed there are lots of exercises you can do in the gym. But none of them will, in themselves, improve your cycling performance. Lots of cyclists use gyms for all kinds of reasons, but not, generally, to improve their leg strength with a view to going faster on a bike.

Posting a link to someone's opinion doesn't really help. Post links to some science. The guy in your link is just wrong - none of that is supported by the available studies. (I'm also a coach by the way). What I would suggest though, is doing a search on the leg strength topic. It has been discussed to death on here and other forums many, many times. All the info you need will be in those old threads.
 
Last edited:

Andrew_P

In between here and there
The legs are not part of the 'core'. Agreed there are lots of exercises you can do in the gym. But none of them will, in themselves, improve your cycling performance. Lots of cyclists use gyms for all kinds of reasons, but not, generally, to improve their leg strength with a view to going faster on a bike.

Posting a link to someone's opinion doesn't really help. Post links to some science. The guy in your link is just wrong. (I'm also a coach by the way).
So an accredited cycling coach is wrong and you are right? I could pull up loads of articles on improving power output through improving leg and hip strength inline with improving cardiovascular. The fact you say you are a coach makes you initial responses even worse, as you could have told him how to train like a cyclist and not a weightlifter in your very first response.
 

Citius

Guest
So an accredited cycling coach is wrong and you are right?

Overall, his opinions on leg strength improving performance are not supported by the available scientific evidence. That's what I'm saying.

I could pull up loads of articles on improving power output through improving leg and hip strength inline with improving cardiovascular.

Feel free to do that. Don't give me articles and opinions though. Give me facts and evidence.

The fact you say you are a coach makes you initial responses even worse, as you could have told him how to train like a cyclist and not a weightlifter in your very first response.

That's pretty much what I did say. As I recall, I told him to ride his bike.
 

adscrim

Veteran
Location
Perth
Overall, his opinions on leg strength improving performance are not supported by the available scientific evidence. That's what I'm saying.
I don't think that's correct. How much of this scientific evidence is based on recreational cyclists supplementing the limit amount of time they can spend on a bike with fairly general conditioning type weight training?
 

Citius

Guest
I don't think that's correct. How much of this scientific evidence is based on recreational cyclists supplementing the limit amount of time they can spend on a bike with fairly general conditioning type weight training?

Not sure what you're saying, sorry. The guy is advocating leg strength training as a way of improving cycling performance. The evidence available for that is at best equivocal.
 

Andrew_P

In between here and there
Overall, his opinions on leg strength improving performance are not supported by the available scientific evidence. That's what I'm saying.



Feel free to do that. Don't give me articles and opinions though. Give me facts and evidence.



That's pretty much what I did say. As I recall, I told him to ride his bike.
So where are your science based facts that counter the vast majority of real life expert opinion?
 

Andrew_P

In between here and there
In 2010, Sunde et. al. studied the effect of maximal strength training on cycling economy, work efficiency, and time to exhaustion between a strength training group and an endurance group. The strength group performed half squats three times per week to supplement endurance training over an eight-week period. The strength training group exhibited significant improvements in rate of force development (16.7%), cycling economy (4.8%), work efficiency (4.7%), and time to exhaustion at maximum aerobic power (17.2%). The endurance group showed a small increase in work efficiency (1.4%), but the other factors were not improved.
 

Citius

Guest
I lifted this from another forum. It's a few years old now, but still a pretty good summary of where the debate currently is, I think.

Physiologically & physically speaking:

Strength is the maximal force generating ability of a muscle or group of muscles.
By definition it occurs at zero velocity. However, practically speaking and in the context of the primary muscles involved in cycling, we can define strength as the maximal mass lifted in a one rep free standing squat.

Power is the rate of doing work, or of energy transfer.
It can be also defined as a force x velocity
Power can refer to very rapid acceleration activities taking only fractions of a second or a few seconds (e.g. throwing, sprinting) or to much longer duration activities (e.g. endurance cycling, running, swimming).

For a start, force and power are not the same thing. You can apply a huge force to something (e.g. push hard against a brick wall) but unless it is also moving, then you are applying no power.

Also by definition, the greater the rate at which we do something, the lower the force we are able to apply. Even in maximal sprint efforts on a bike, there is a linear relationship between maximal force applied to the pedals and the rate at which we are pedaling.

Typically, the forces involved in endurance cycling are sub-maximal, significantly so.
e.g. even at 300 watts, at regular cadences and crank lengths, the average effective pedal force is less than 20kg, which means that regular cycling (a vast majority of which is performed < 300W) requires forces roughly an order of magnitude less than (i.e. 1/10th of) our strength.

What matters is being able to apply such low forces repeatedly for long periods and our limiting factor for that is not our maximal force generation ability but rather the biochemical processes going on in our muscle cells, i.e. our aerobic metabolism (ability to turnover ATP).

Increasing strength (i.e. maximal force generation ability) has not been conclusively shown to result in ability to increase our sustainable power, which isn't all that surprising since the physiological adaptations resulting from training that increases strength (e.g. enhancing neurological recruitment, but more importantly, increasing muscle fibre cross sectional area via hypertrophy and associated mitochondral dilution) run counter to those that improve our ability to turnover ATP (i.e. increased mitochondral density and capillarisation inside the muscles, reducing the cell diffusion distance and so on).

The density of mitochondria (which are the energy plants inside our muscle cells) and the ability to readily exchange gases (O2 & CO2) and key metabolites (e.g. glycogen) is the primary limiting factor in endurance cycling.

Fewer mitochondria per kg of muscle mass = lower sustainable power to mass.

To increase strength (beyond an initial neurological improvement which occurs in the first few weeks of such training) requires hypertrophy, which in turns reduces our power to mass ratio.

Now if one is talking about training (with weights for example) that doesn't increase strength, then that's not strength training, and it's a different discussion. [QUOTE/]
 

Andrew_P

In between here and there
No they did same training on the bike but one group added strength training not on the bike, which made significant gains in all area a general cyclist would like to see gains which is what this thread is all about.

You subsequent post has no science to back it up, just an opinion. I have given you a controlled scientific study and you have given me a forum post, by someone unknown.
 
Top Bottom