Maximum strength and cycling performance

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by POGATA [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Isn`t weorking on ones core, strength training?

But what if you have the time to do strength training, in addition to alle the cycling you need to do, can strength training benefit cycling performance?

Where have I mentioned bench pressing?

I thought you had mentioned upper body earlier. As benches are the king of upperbody movements in the gym I threw it out there. I realized after my mention of core in an earlier post was equated to deadlifts these discussions can quickly become apples and oranges. My intended meaning of core work was really what bodybuilders refer to as ab work, and I find this useful to balance the woefully underfired rectus, obliques, and to a lesser degree hip flexors (in comparison to the glutes, lower back muscles, etc. which usually show bright red or orange on a heatmap of a cyclist). I've indicated my personal benefit is related to positioning on the bike but aside from this I see little value in picking things up and putting them down to get faster on the bike. Felts example above of his female co-worker speaks volumes.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by danfoz [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

I thought you had mentioned upper body earlier. As benches are the king of upperbody movements in the gym I threw it out there. I realized after my mention of core in an earlier post was equated to deadlifts these discussions can quickly become apples and oranges. My intended meaning of core work was really what bodybuilders refer to as ab work, and I find this useful to balance the woefully underfired rectus, obliques, and to a lesser degree hip flexors (in comparison to the glutes, lower back muscles, etc. which usually show bright red or orange on a heatmap of a cyclist). I've indicated my personal benefit is related to positioning on the bike but aside from this I see little value in picking things up and putting them down to get faster on the bike. Felts example above of his female co-worker speaks volumes.

Those cyclists whose only exercise is cycling have something else to consider, bone density and osteoporosis.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by Felt_Rider [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]
If say your daily schedule is pretty packed, but you sit and watch TV for an hour or so each evening you could easily use that time to put in some core movements like planks and abdominal that will not have a negative impact to your cycling training. The core group of muscles are constantly being stimulated in daily living and are a muscle group that can be trained daily. .

I find this minimal effort is all that I personally need to achieve my cycling goals off the bike. The rest is for the beach.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by n crowley [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Those cyclists whose only exercise is cycling have something else to consider, bone density and osteoporosis.

Interesting that I have not heard this brought up before. While lifting weight is no garantee of eliminating fractures/brakes, there is no doubt that it helps mitigate and is often prescribed for seniors with low bone density for just this reason. Good falling technique goes a long way too, especially with collarbone brakes. I often thought the primary benefit I would get from my years of aikido would materialize in a fall of some kind, not in any fight.

danfoz said:

Interesting that I have not heard this brought up before. While lifting weight is no garantee of eliminating fractures/brakes, there is no doubt that it helps mitigate and is often prescribed for seniors with low bone density for just this reason. Good falling technique goes a long way too, especially with collarbone brakes. I often thought the primary benefit I would get from my years of aikido would materialize in a fall of some kind, not in any fight.

I learned one of my orthopods that stressing bones as they are intended produces an actual electrical current in the bone which helps the bone maintain its strength and integrity. Once with discontinuous tibia that was not healing well, the aforementioned doc removed the screws in one end of the rod inside the tibia so that when I walked the upper part of the tibia would slide up and down on the road, causing the bone ends to slam together, creating said current, to allegedly increase healing at the site. That's the way the theory went, anyway.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by Felt_Rider [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

If this discussion was on a Strength related forum like T-Nation you would see a good bit of talk toward having a strong core, but a strong core is a factor in the equation of performing other specific lifts. I typically get into a lot of discussions with my chiropractor, who was a competitive powerlifter, knows anatomy and physiology better than anyone in my local social circle, knows strength training better than most in my social circle and the two of us have just about identical thoughts on strength training. When we talk about core strength it is absolutely necessary to support the structure while performing most lifts and with a lesser degree to seated or bench presses, but even then the core is involved.

But as others have noted, those that seem to have lifting experience, that doing squats, deadlifts, standing military presses typically stress the core more than most focused core exercises. I still do focused core training, and please note this it is not for cycling performance. But I feel like there are certain specific exercises, such as, squats, standing overhead presses where I can feel my core being stressed to a greater degree. It is common practices for powerlifters to not use a belt on the warm up sets. Back in my prime I would not use a belt until I went over 225 and I probably could have gone higher, but did not want to risk a hernia, which is a devastating and potentially career ending injury to a lifter.

All the core strength a cyclists needs to perform at a high level is equivalent to what others state as the strength needed for a cyclist. We have seen the top cyclists gurus state that all the strength that is needed is enough to climb a set of stairs and almost any healthy human in a fairly sedentary state can climb stairs. Same with core "strength". When we stand our core is being stimulated otherwise we would all just be a blob of flesh and bones laying on the ground. Even sitting in a chair with good posture is stimulating the core enough to the point where that is enough to sit on a bike.

To answer your question if one has time to do strength training and is it necessary for cycling.

Several of us have been trying to state for several pages now that strength training is not important for cycling. If you are calling core training strength training and that is all you are doing that it probably will not impact cycling training one way or another depending on how it is done. If say your daily schedule is pretty packed, but you sit and watch TV for an hour or so each evening you could easily use that time to put in some core movements like planks and abdominal that will not have a negative impact to your cycling training. The core group of muscles are constantly being stimulated in daily living and are a muscle group that can be trained daily. Many will not experience hypertrophy from working the core so there is little threat of gaining excess weight hurting the watts/kg factor and it again it will have very little impact to the recovery time of the cycling training. But if time and schedule is absolutely at a limit for those aspiring Cat level cyclists or triathletes then the program needs to stay focused on specificty and many Cat level cyclists training 15 to 20 hours per week, holding down a job and spending time with kids or wife do not have much more spare time to give and core is not an absolutely necessary attribute to winning or performing well in bike racing. Again daily living typically stimulate the core enough. As I sit here typing this note I am sitting upright with my back away from the chair back and I can feel my core holding my upper body erect. That is enough to keep my core strong enough to sit on a bike for a few hours and one must consider that all that needs to be stimulated for cycling performance is being stimulated while riding the bike anyway - if that makes sense.

I can also look at a coworker that helps me see this model specifically for this discussion. Here I am with 30 solid years of strength training and over 10 years of competition compared to a female coworker that looks like she belongs on the fashion supermodel runway. We are drastically different in body types and gender hormones. Everything about her appearance is that of fragile and the last thing you would think when you see her is strength. She is the model of feminine and does no core or strength training. She has placed in the top 3 of her AG in every triathlon she has entered this year. But here is the kicker. She trains exclusively with guys that compete in cycling and can drop most of them if she chooses. She often has to stop and wait for most of them and I have tried to hold her wheel on a couple of rides and cannot. She climbs the most challenging moutain climbs with a 53/39 crankset 11-25 cassette where I am using a 34T / 28 cog on the same climbs and she will have to wait for me at the top. I can out squat her by a large margin because she doesn't train at the gym at all. Is she held back from dropping guys on the flats or on climbs when her strength in body or core is obviously far less than than some of us guys?

Even if I am wrong in my knowledge of evidence based training I can look around and observe the typical high performing model of a cyclist compared to a strength athlete. I doubt Voekler would care that my legs are far bigger than his and that I can squat more than him. Most of my friends that I train with on weekend cycling could careless that I have greater strength even though I often get comments on the muscularity of my legs it matters very little to them when I am the last one to the parking lot.

My daily schedule is not packed.

What about strength training that doesn`t add bulk?

A couch potato doesn`t need to exercise to be able to sit on the couch, but exercise won`t hurt, can`t the same be said of a cyclist who does core work, i.e. core work is not directly related to endurance, but it may help the cyclist indirectly to perform better?

sorry that I did some pissing here🙂. You guys obviously know more about cycling that I do. I was probably just a little dissapointed that you all trash weight lifting because I was involved in a lot of "fast twitch" sports (discus throwing, baseball) and thus I am a pretty big fan of lifting. but I understand that cycling is something else.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by dominikk85 [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

sorry that I did some pissing here🙂. You guys obviously know more about cycling that I do. I was probably just a little dissapointed that you all trash weight lifting because I was involved in a lot of "fast twitch" sports (discus throwing, baseball) and thus I am a pretty big fan of lifting. but I understand that cycling is something else.

Very few people on this board are as enthusiastic, dedicated and committed to lifting than me, but the truth is the truth. I have repeated a whole bunch of times that I have 30 years invested in strength training for myself and I have helped quite a few people achieve their goals with strength training and with bodybuilding. I currently lift 5 days a week with only a couple breaks during the year. In no way would I trash something that I have 30 years invested in, but facts are facts and the fact is strength is a very minimal factor when it comes to competing in endurance cycling events.

If you enjoy lifting than continue to do what you enjoy. I know that I will even though it has made my cycling training very difficult and cycling training has made my lifting very difficult as well. There are others here that said they lift and coach Fergie said that he recommended lifting to some of his athletes for different reasons other than cycling performance.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by POGATA [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

My daily schedule is not packed.

What about strength training that doesn`t add bulk?

A couch potato doesn`t need to exercise to be able to sit on the couch, but exercise won`t hurt, can`t the same be said of a cyclist who does core work, i.e. core work is not directly related to endurance, but it may help the cyclist indirectly to perform better?

What part of cycling is not a strength sport are you failing to grasp. The 10sec power is at 80-85% of maximal power and a 4 hour road race is at an average of 15-20% of maximal power part. That those IIx muscle fibres are only recruited when the intensity is way above VO2max let alone functional threshold so time spent training them is time that could be better spent training type I fibres. Which is not to say that these IIx fibres can not be trained and trained specifically by riding the bike. Strength is not a limit to cycling performance. You can always deliver more force to the pedal. The trick is how well you can sustain that force, ie ENDURANCE!!!

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by fergie [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

What part of cycling is not a strength sport are you failing to grasp. The 10sec power is at 80-85% of maximal power and a 4 hour road race is at an average of 15-20% of maximal power part. That those IIx muscle fibres are only recruited when the intensity is way above VO2max let alone functional threshold so time spent training them is time that could be better spent training type I fibres. Which is not to say that these IIx fibres can not be trained and trained specifically by riding the bike. Strength is not a limit to cycling performance. You can always deliver more force to the pedal. The trick is how well you can sustain that force, ie ENDURANCE!!!

Doesn`t being a power-/weightlifter, bodybuilder etc require any endurance whatsoever?

What about the upperbody?

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by POGATA [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

Doesn`t being a power-/weightlifter, bodybuilder etc require any endurance whatsoever?

What about the upperbody?

The simple answer is no.

The converse to an endurance athlete is bodybuilding/powerlifting/Olympic lifting. It is an important aspect to crossfit competition. Crossfit came about because the typical strength athlete had very little endurance or even cared about endurance just as the typical endurance athlete has much lower strength levels.

What about upper body? I assume you must be asking in regards to a cyclist.
One of the more important factors is frontal area and reducing aerodynamic resistance so why would a cyclists want to sabotage themselves by increasing the drag force by training upper body?

We have already discussed how increased strength is totally unnecessary to hold a bike upright, steer through a curve or other bike control. Shaping the body to fit the sport and/or allowing sports specific training shape the physique to improved performance is a common path for the majority of successful athletes. It is possible to reshape genetics to a degree.

For instance when I started lifting in 1981 as a college student and a physical stature of 5'6" 115 lbs I was anemic and frail in appearance. Obviously my natural genetic stature was leaning heavily to ectomorph. I have a very light skeletal frame as well. From the start I had to eliminate all forms of aerobic training. Besides my focus in lifting to stimulate strength/hypertrophy I would do the exact opposite of an endurance athlete by limiting any form of unnecessary calorie use. I lifted and walked to class and the rest of the time was spent eating, sleeping and laying in the bed to reduce movement. My first year I gained 40 lbs of bulk. For the next two years I gained muscle so fast that my stretch marks were literally tearing through the skin to the point of bleeding at some of those stretch marks on my legs. This was an attempt to reshape my genetics. Eventually by living like this for many years and aging, my metabolism finally began to slow down some and I continued to gain size. At my peak I was at 190 lbs. I was able to squat a lot of weight, but cardio and endurance was an absolute minimum because that was what I needed to win and to gain strength. The only time I used cardio was not for endurance sake or for good health, it was to make my weight class only.

My example is how many strength athletes desiring to win and advance view aerobic training. They often will do it only for body composition or to make a weight class. Their goal is performing a low rep heavy weight goal and endurance is not a factor. Training aerobics reduces strength in most cases so it is often considered taboo to a strength athlete.

Now that is not to say that all athletes trained this way because there are always some that have a perspective to have better balanced health, but training to win and training to have good health are not always the same thing. I find that athletes typically have varying personal beliefs about this. Training to win comes down to understanding what is necessary and what is unnecessary. This is another way of saying sports specific training by filtering out the things that may bring about good balanced health in order to shape the physique to win. For the cyclist wanting to reduce that frontal area to reduce drag force that means intentionally not training the upper body/losing upper body strength in order to reshape the physique to win. I can feel my upper body catching a whole lot of air. Why would a cyclist want to intentionally create a hardship for themselves? When it comes down to cyclists arguing about the fastest TT bike brand and setup and every component is scrutinized over the aerodynamics and then intentionally add and in or two across the shoulders/chest to completely null out the qualities of the bike makes no sense.

I am just not sure why this is so difficult to understand and at this point it seems like the questions are no more than a form of trolling. Just seems that way at this point.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by Felt_Rider [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

The simple answer is no.

The converse to an endurance athlete is bodybuilding/powerlifting/Olympic lifting. It is an important aspect to crossfit competition. Crossfit came about because the typical strength athlete had very little endurance or even cared about endurance just as the typical endurance athlete has much lower strength levels.

What about upper body? I assume you must be asking in regards to a cyclist.
One of the more important factors is frontal area and reducing aerodynamic resistance so why would a cyclists want to sabotage themselves by increasing the drag force by training upper body?

We have already discussed how increased strength is totally unnecessary to hold a bike upright, steer through a curve or other bike control. Shaping the body to fit the sport and/or allowing sports specific training shape the physique to improved performance is a common path for the majority of successful athletes. It is possible to reshape genetics to a degree.

For instance when I started lifting in 1981 as a college student and a physical stature of 5'6" 115 lbs I was anemic and frail in appearance. Obviously my natural genetic stature was leaning heavily to ectomorph. I have a very light skeletal frame as well. From the start I had to eliminate all forms of aerobic training. Besides my focus in lifting to stimulate strength/hypertrophy I would do the exact opposite of an endurance athlete by limiting any form of unnecessary calorie use. I lifted and walked to class and the rest of the time was spent eating, sleeping and laying in the bed to reduce movement. My first year I gained 40 lbs of bulk. For the next two years I gained muscle so fast that my stretch marks were literally tearing through the skin to the point of bleeding at some of those stretch marks on my legs. This was an attempt to reshape my genetics. Eventually by living like this for many years and aging, my metabolism finally began to slow down some and I continued to gain size. At my peak I was at 190 lbs. I was able to squat a lot of weight, but cardio and endurance was an absolute minimum because that was what I needed to win and to gain strength. The only time I used cardio was not for endurance sake or for good health, it was to make my weight class only.

My example is how many strength athletes desiring to win and advance view aerobic training. They often will do it only for body composition or to make a weight class. Their goal is performing a low rep heavy weight goal and endurance is not a factor. Training aerobics reduces strength in most cases so it is often considered taboo to a strength athlete.

Now that is not to say that all athletes trained this way because there are always some that have a perspective to have better balanced health, but training to win and training to have good health are not always the same thing. I find that athletes typically have varying personal beliefs about this. Training to win comes down to understanding what is necessary and what is unnecessary. This is another way of saying sports specific training by filtering out the things that may bring about good balanced health in order to shape the physique to win. For the cyclist wanting to reduce that frontal area to reduce drag force that means intentionally not training the upper body/losing upper body strength in order to reshape the physique to win. I can feel my upper body catching a whole lot of air. Why would a cyclist want to intentionally create a hardship for themselves? When it comes down to cyclists arguing about the fastest TT bike brand and setup and every component is scrutinized over the aerodynamics and then intentionally add and in or two across the shoulders/chest to completely null out the qualities of the bike makes no sense.

I am just not sure why this is so difficult to understand and at this point it seems like the questions are no more than a form of trolling. Just seems that way at this point.

The biggest bodybuilders do low intensity endurance training daily.

Isn`t it possible to do moderate strength training without adding bulk?

What about abs/lowerback/arms/shoulders to just improve the ability to sit on the bike for hours day after day?

What about loss of muscle mass when only doing endurance sports?

Because several world class road racers do/claim to go to the gym/do core work etc.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by POGATA [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

The biggest bodybuilders do low intensity endurance training daily.

Isn`t it possible to do moderate strength training without adding bulk?

What about abs/lowerback/arms/shoulders to just improve the ability to sit on the bike for hours day after day?

What about loss of muscle mass when only doing endurance sports?

Because several world class road racers do/claim to go to the gym/do core work etc.

Maybe some do, others would only do cardio in a pre-competition cycle. Most of the biggest guys around like Bertil Fox and Tom Platz trained in cycles where endurance work had a single purpose, to get cut. Platz warned bodybuilders against doing too much in order to hold onto precious earned muscle mass. I.e. the biggest guys actually avoided endurance work.

Strength training will add muscle mass.The addition of any muscle mass will add bulk to some degree.

A good position should put minimal weight on the arms, and provide minimal stress to the neck and shoulders - I agree about healthy abs contributing to comfort on the bike.

Some folks on this forum, myself included actually aspire to this hypotrophic condition. I still have leftover arms from my lifting days and since returning to competitive cycling actually avoid any type of movements that would add mass. The guns do nothing but weigh me down on the ascents.

Some world class racers go to the gym and do whatever it is they do. I would speculate some world class racers have also never stepped into a gym.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by POGATA [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

The biggest bodybuilders do low intensity endurance training daily.

Isn`t it possible to do moderate strength training without adding bulk?

What about abs/lowerback/arms/shoulders to just improve the ability to sit on the bike for hours day after day?

What about loss of muscle mass when only doing endurance sports?

Because several world class road racers do/claim to go to the gym/do core work etc.

Did you read that in a book somewhere?

Not all BBers do endurance training. Track sprinters do very little if any road riding.

Several National programmes do not do any upper body work. The Aussies have massive legs but little upper body development.

The ability to sit on the bike is determined by bike position not core strength.

Loss of muscle mass is good, less weight to cart up hills. Sir Chris Hoy wishes his legs were smaller. Aero is a big factor sprinting at 75kph.

Good on those world class cyclists. I always advise my clients what to do based on celebrity endorsement.

I ran to the same discussion about weight training on another front and (re-)read some of the papers referenced in Aagaards (2010) review. Has Fergie or anyone else been able to shed light on Rønnestad's studies endurance group protocols? I understood they were national team level riders but the endurance groups improvements from start of study (after a month of very low volume of training) until the end (12 and 25 weeks) were modest at best. The test setup allowed the subjects to freely choose either intervention or control and quite curiously it seems the intervention group was chosen by clearly sprinter types (peak power output in wingate test pre 1470 ± 51 vs. control group 1178 ± 123).

Yup self selected which group to go in. The control group had 2 women in it. They actually went worse on performance tests so their programme hardly reflective of normal training. The gains in the experimental group were modest by comparison to gains seen in performing interval work using various different protocols (check out papers by Stepto or Gibala etc).

Have you read the Aagaards own paper (2010/2011)? I don't have access to it and the abstract doesn't tell much.

There is a lot of 'broscience' getting talked about in this thread.

Quoted post said:

Originally Posted by ambal [IMG]/img/forum/go_quote.gif[/IMG]

There is a lot of 'broscience' getting talked about in this thread.

True that.

Frost, here is the full Aagaard paper.

Thanks Fergie, but I was talking about this:
Effects of resistance training on endurance capacity and muscle fiber composition in young top-level cyclists. , that is referenced in the review paper.