That's not even for road riders, but endurance event track riders. Quite a specialized group, although of course not as specialized as the elite track sprinters who are his real focus.
Winter Strength training
- Thread starter solidthegreat
- Start date
- Status
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
That's not even for road riders, but endurance event track riders. Quite a specialized group, although of course not as specialized as the elite track sprinters who are his real focus.
OP
OP
solidthegreat
Active Member
- Location
- North Oxfordshire
Taxi!!! I'm confused as a confused confusy thing on national confused day. Sod it. I'm just going to ride lots and do a few leg weights. Thanks all for the advice, everyone's opinion, is just that, opinion and I am grateful for it.
michaelcycle
Senior Member
- Location
- London
Taxi!!! I'm confused as a confused confusy thing on national confused day. Sod it. I'm just going to ride lots and do a few leg weights. Thanks all for the advice, everyone's opinion, is just that, opinion and I am grateful for it.
Lulz - there's nothing wrong with trying things out for yourself, seeing what suits you and doing that. The problem comes when people start extrapolating a general trend from that and basing advice on it.
Many coaches and trainees do work off the power of anecdote and that's not necessarily a bad thing. By multiple trial and error and assessing results over time they come up with a training philosophy which quite possibly isn't supported by existing scientific evidence. That does not mean to say it is without a legitimate basis or can get results as many times what happens in the lab lags well behind what is happening in the field. So being guided by what science has to say but also keeping one eye on anecdotal evidence is definitely a possibility.
However, in my view, strength training directly improving cycle performance where you spend less time on cycle specific training as a result is a bit of a non starter. As an add on though it could have some use.
50000tears
Senior Member
- Location
- Weymouth, Dorset
Please when aiming stuff at me try and remember my position. At no point have I advocated additional leg gym work for cyclists. The only point I was trying to make was that the actual process of cycling does offer conditioning to the legs which improves their ability to perform the task in hand. And yes conditioning is the same as strengthening.
Dusty Bin
Guest
Not sure what you mean by your 'position'..? You will not become physically stronger through cycling though - I'm not sure why you are persisting with this. In some cases, pro cyclists have actually ended up physically weaker than before they extended/increased their training. That won't stop them increasing their aerobic power, threshold, VO2 max and muscular endurance though. Google some pics of Michael Rasmussen and tell me he looks 'strong'.
Think about it - muscles are normally strengthened through consistent overload, such as pushing or lifting very heavy weights with near or maximal efforts. As already pointed out earlier in the thread, cycling is a 'low strength' activity where you are never likely to overload your leg muscles to anything like the point where strength adaptions begin to take place.
You may certainly feel 'stronger' in a more general sense of the word (ie not the OED definition), but in effect that is another way of saying that you have 'increased aerobic fitness', or a 'better power/weight ratio', or both - but not actual, physical strength.
Last edited:
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
Looking strong and being strong are not the same thing.
On the other hand, I know loads of cyclists who can't do even a handful of press-ups! Myself included. I know a few who can't even do one (including some very good climbers, a discipline which works your upper body much more than others)! As for leg strength, never bothered to ask people "how much do you squat?" their legs do the talking on the ride!
Surprisingly, press-ups come up much more often in conversations between cyclists than squats do! Usually making fun of themselves for how weak they are!
On the other hand, I know loads of cyclists who can't do even a handful of press-ups! Myself included. I know a few who can't even do one (including some very good climbers, a discipline which works your upper body much more than others)! As for leg strength, never bothered to ask people "how much do you squat?" their legs do the talking on the ride!
Surprisingly, press-ups come up much more often in conversations between cyclists than squats do! Usually making fun of themselves for how weak they are!
That is amazing really. I guess if you only ever cycled then it's possible, but I have always found it pretty straightforward to knock out a set of 60, back in the day, and even recently, not having done any in about 10 years I still managed 3 sets of 30 with good form quite comfortably.
And I have never been a gym rat.
Considering that these guys are probably quite light in the first place...
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
I tried doing them to failure and got to 8 and I hurt like hell for days afterwards.
Pedrosanchezo
Veteran
- Location
- Perthshire, scotland
Right, first off by core i don't mean just sit ups, but i think you know that. Core is a group of muscles.
More importantly, not everyone has a core strong enough for cycling - be it for sportives, road racing, TT'ing or a Saturday ride. The link that you so easily dismissed suggested that core fatigue massively affects cycling mechanics and performance. For this reason the rider who can only manage an hour in a aggressive position before suffering could benefit from core exercises to strengthen problem areas. Or the rider who is placing to much weight on their hands for example.
Similar to the reason Wiggins worked in the gym to strengthen his core and upper body after his collar bone break, it is incorrect to assume that merely cycling alone would be the fastest and most efficient way to improvement or recovery. In Wiggins' case back to his original status before the break and in the cyclist with a weak core area, strengthening with core specific exercises. This would be far quicker a remedy than just riding your bike until the problem/s disappear or worsen.
Dusty Bin
Guest
Look, you're obviously a big advocate of 'core strength' so it's not something you are going to concede easily.
Unless you have a diagnosed weakness or deficiency in your core (and some people do), then core strenght is highly unlikely to prove a limiting factor in your on-bike performance. If you do have functional issues in your core where you are unable to support such a relatively light, repetitive motion such as cycling, then riding a bike is probably the least of your problems, to be frank. The bBiomechanical issues you mention such as hand pressure, or an overly-aggressive position are better solved by a correct and appropriate fit, as opposed to simply diving into the gym and working on the 'core'.
I don't expect you to agree with this, however - but all of the issues you describe are not 'core' related - they can all be explained via other, more conventional means.
Have you tried again since?
More generally on this subject of core. I do some core work, not a lot, but enough to keep some spinal issues I have under control. I am not sure that it has much of an impact on my cycling, good or bad, although it probably helps in cyclocross. A bit. But that's more to do with the running and the transition piece.
I can see that having a good TT shape demands some core adaptations, but I suspect that they are best achieved on the bike.
Rob3rt
Man or Moose!
- Location
- Manchester
Have you tried again since?
More generally on this subject of core. I do some core work, not a lot, but enough to keep some spinal issues I have under control. I am not sure that it has much of an impact on my cycling, good or bad, although it probably helps in cyclocross. A bit. But that's more to do with the running and the transition piece.
I can see that having a good TT shape demands some core adaptations, but I suspect that they are best achieved on the bike.
No! lol
Pedrosanchezo
Veteran
- Location
- Perthshire, scotland
I accept/respect your stance on the matter. I disagree - c'est la vie.
There are many ways to skin a cat.
madpensioner
Über Member
- Location
- thornton/cleveleys (nr blackpool )
I have found by experience that multi- joint exercises in the gym in winter are helpful in cycling ( I had better change the wording - I dont want to cause another argument ) are helpful to ME in cycling.There are only 4 and 3 of those involve weights.
Squats - lateral pull-downs - rowing - trunk curls. Because of the cold winter weather i also put my bike in a turbo trainer.My plan runs from the begining of Oct to the end of feb
One hr turbo sessions 3/4 days a week and my gym twice a week. The turbo sessions involve easy and hard 5 min reps.the gym sessions involve 6 phases - starting with heavy weights - low reps
slowly reversing in the final phase low weights - high reps . I am currently squatting with 45kg 6 x 8 - lats 30kg 6 x 6 - trunk curls 10kg 4 x 15 - rowing 15 mins. The gym session take one hr.
So in winter i am only training one hr a day - 5/6 days a week - from the end of feb to the end of sept - road cycling only - 150/200 miles per week - including 50/100 mile events.
Now i know from reading all the comments that its not every bodies cup of tea - there are a number of people who i cycle with who dont do weights - all i can say is that i have been doing weights for
40ys for three different sports - and it benefits me
Cheers - Leigh
( I am now going to have a very large whisky )
Squats - lateral pull-downs - rowing - trunk curls. Because of the cold winter weather i also put my bike in a turbo trainer.My plan runs from the begining of Oct to the end of feb
One hr turbo sessions 3/4 days a week and my gym twice a week. The turbo sessions involve easy and hard 5 min reps.the gym sessions involve 6 phases - starting with heavy weights - low reps
slowly reversing in the final phase low weights - high reps . I am currently squatting with 45kg 6 x 8 - lats 30kg 6 x 6 - trunk curls 10kg 4 x 15 - rowing 15 mins. The gym session take one hr.
So in winter i am only training one hr a day - 5/6 days a week - from the end of feb to the end of sept - road cycling only - 150/200 miles per week - including 50/100 mile events.
Now i know from reading all the comments that its not every bodies cup of tea - there are a number of people who i cycle with who dont do weights - all i can say is that i have been doing weights for
40ys for three different sports - and it benefits me
Cheers - Leigh
( I am now going to have a very large whisky )
Last edited:
50000tears
Senior Member
- Location
- Weymouth, Dorset
I mean my stance in the argument.
Again you demonstrate a lack of understanding (or just not reading) what I have said. I have never suggested that cycling will give you massive legs or that you will be able to leg press or squat more weight as a result of cycling. Cycling is an almost entirely aerobic exercise the conditioning and strengthening you get are to make your cycling more efficient. This would not translate to your legs being able to lift heavier weights as the muscles stimulated are those you use to turn the cranks which is a fairly unique movement for the body to make. For the same reason if a body builder thought that as he had really muscle bound powerful legs that he would be great at cycling or running he would be sorely disappointed.
I do understand a bit about how bigger muscle is built and the ultra-high repetitive endurance nature of cycling is never ever going to build big muscles. You need heavy weights with a reg range of 6-12 to build big muscles and only then if you have the right body type to build such muscles. I have a slim frame so even when I worked hard my muscles were always fairly compact. The physical improvement and conditioning I have seen in my own legs will certainly be limited and whilst I expect them to be better suited to the task of cycling as I progress they will never be muscular looking in the terms that most think of when it comes to being muscular.
OK the technical bit
There are two basic muscle fiber types, type 1 - slow twitch, type 2 - fast twitch. Type 1 the slow twitch ones are what us cyclist use and "train". These are not mass building but after stimulus the muscle responds by increasing its ability to resist fatigue. This is where the strengthening in the muscle is felt, not by being bulky but by becoming more able to cope with the demands we place on them. These slow twitch muscles will then expand whilst the type 1 muscles due to not being used will atrophy, meaning that more of the muscular whole is be taken up by the slow twitch fibers that we use than the fast twitch that we don't. In a non cyclist the balance my be 50/50 between the two fiber types but in a cyclist it may be 65/35 in favour of the type 1 fibers.
When you write like this it really appears that we are splitting hairs and arguing over so little. The only part in all of this you will not accept is that your legs do get conditioned through cycling despite the fact that I could provide you with 100 links (if I had the time which I don't) saying that they do, many from experts in the field of cycling fitness. That you accept that your heart and lungs get fitter as a result of cycling but not the legs just flies in the face of common sense.
Anyway we have gone round in circles for too long on this so I am jumping off here. You know that you are right 100% and I know I am right 100%. We will agree to differ and kiss and make up! Read up on slow twitch muscles though, I doubt it will change you mind as that seems set, but at least it might get you thinking about other possibilities.
- Status
