Cross-training

Yoga for you "core" muscles.......
Rollerblading- doesnt hurt your back or your knees....cross county skiing... a step machine would be fine... speedwalking. ...lots of options...i think the main idea is to get the proper cardio training in the right zones.... do you you know what your hear rate training zones are?? you dont always need to be working at 80-85% of your max......its good to get some zone 2 training at 70-75%....
maybe your heart rate is fine when you're swimming....

A good book to pick up is "Cyclists Training Bible" by Joe Friel

He outlines some specific weight training exercises for cycling and some cross training stuff.

Rowing and swimming both utilize the "lats".....and back......

theres really nothing too close to cycling to be cross traiing....

like i said earlier......the cardio aspect of it is all about your heart rate zones...... whatever it is that can bring your heart rate up is going to work.... you can structure your workouts so that you are doing the "aerobic training" aspect while on the bike.....etc...

you can also go to a sport clinic and get your vo2 max tested along with all the other data.......then you know what your max is and your training zones........

yep, I have a fair estimate of my max HR so have set zones according to that, and based on my Anaerobic threshold it seems about right (I've seen it nearly maxed out but not quite, so that was a clue it was higher than the formulas reckon!)

Tempted to go get a vo2max done, but really want to improve the base fitness a bit first... been HORRIBLY unfit for a long long time - scarily so, in fact.

I opted for attempting x-ski - bad, couldn't get on with the movement of it at all, sky-high HR, so moved on to rowing - that was good but have a nerve prob in one arm which was aggravated and lead to wrist pain after about 15 mins, so persevered a bit longer then ended up brisk walk on the treadmill for the remaining 25 mins on a good gradient (can't run, dodgy knees).

Swimming wouldn't have got the heart rate up high enough, unfortunately (needed zone 3 for tonight's session, where 4 is going into anaerobic and 5 is heading for max)

I've been using sally edward's book - training with HRM for cyclists (or similar, can't remember exactly) and it's been really good for explaining a lot of stuff about recovery and not overdoing it (previously I had been in z4 a lot when cycling, but that's cycling outside where it's very hard to control it). THat's made a LOT of difference to things, but still working out the best things to do for x-training.

I do yoga occasionally (I'm going to slot that in on my rest day, I think, based on the utter lack of impact on the heart rate last time I did it) to help keep supple, but find it hard work - being overweight doesn't aid flexibility!

I thought the idea of cross training was to use similar muscles in a slightly different way so that you don't get stagnant. Rowing and cycling are actually quite similar in terms of the muscles used. Elite rowers have been able to very successfully transfer across to cycling since the main driver in rowing is the legs. BEcause it is a different use it will also utilise some extra stability muscles which may have fallen behind on the bike.

You will notice that many elite cyclists also do skating or cross country skiing in the off season. Both sports exercise the same sort of muscles as those used in cycling. The important thing to note with cros training is it is supposed to be relatively unstructured and done for fun to relieve the boredom of cycling specific training. So from this perspective it does not have to be any particular type except for the fact that it should concentrate on maintaining your fitness.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by tafi
I thought the idea of cross training was to use similar muscles in a slightly different way so that you don't get stagnant. Rowing and cycling are actually quite similar in terms of the muscles used. Elite rowers have been able to very successfully transfer across to cycling since the main driver in rowing is the legs. BEcause it is a different use it will also utilise some extra stability muscles which may have fallen behind on the bike.

You will notice that many elite cyclists also do skating or cross country skiing in the off season. Both sports exercise the same sort of muscles as those used in cycling. The important thing to note with cros training is it is supposed to be relatively unstructured and done for fun to relieve the boredom of cycling specific training. So from this perspective it does not have to be any particular type except for the fact that it should concentrate on maintaining your fitness.

Interesting! I'm not getting bored with cycling training, even though it's running at 6 days a week at the moment (it's still at the stage where I'm seeing improvements and discovering new leg muscles) - but I do feel it with a lack of ability to do the training if I try and do all of them in a given week on the bike, just seems to be too much for the muscles - even though I can go ride a 40-50 mile ride (at around 10-11mph average so not exactly fast) on a sunday without too many problems (though still lots of hard work).

The training plan I'm following specifically says to steer clear of anything too similar to cycling on the days nominated as cross-training, which is why I was a bit unsure as to what does work the same muscles in the same way and what doesn't.

I'd be quite happy to do it all on the bike to be honest, but neither my body nor the plan seems to think this is a Good Thing at the moment (unfit as cyclists go in the scale of things!)

Still, looking forward to the day I can keep up without riding myself into the ground on a club run, at which point I'll start contemplating an imperial century :-)

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by tafi
I thought the idea of cross training was to use similar muscles in a slightly different way so that you don't get stagnant. Rowing and cycling are actually quite similar in terms of the muscles used. Elite rowers have been able to very successfully transfer across to cycling since the main driver in rowing is the legs. BEcause it is a different use it will also utilise some extra stability muscles which may have fallen behind on the bike.

You will notice that many elite cyclists also do skating or cross country skiing in the off season. Both sports exercise the same sort of muscles as those used in cycling. The important thing to note with cros training is it is supposed to be relatively unstructured and done for fun to relieve the boredom of cycling specific training. So from this perspective it does not have to be any particular type except for the fact that it should concentrate on maintaining your fitness.

in trained, well trained, elite, and pro cyclists there's no performance benefit whatsoever, to cross training, and possible disadvantages to it. the only reason, crosstraining should be prescribed to these groups is to help prevent or ammeliorate 'burnout' (not overtraining).

in low trained fitness groups, then *any* exercise will increase cycling performance. however, the fastest way to improved cycle performance is through cycling itself.

also, not everyone gets burnout. i've been cycling pretty much non stop, training hard on an almost daily basis for 20 yrs, and still enjoy it (except maybe in the rain!)

ric

Well you all got the rowing thing wrong on this post. I have been rowing for last 6 years at a national level and just now sort of breaking into cycling for a cross trainer for rowing. Rowing is about 90% legs and 10% arms and back. It's great cross trainer for cycling because not only is it mostly legs but it also is a killer cardio-wise. I've noticed that with my rowing background I am able to keep up with people that have been training with cycling a lot easier than other friends who picked up cycling. I'd definitely try rowing out for cross trainer. You will soon come to find that the erg (rowing machine) is the most monotonous and boring thing known to man. I spend countless hours on it and I absolutely hate it but it has to be done. Thats somewhat of the reason I'm cycling just for a change of pace from the erg. So for those looking for a change of pace from cycling try the erg. A note on the erg, don't put the damper setting all the way up to 10 keep at like 4 or 5 which is what the thickness of water is basically. Anything higher and you really start to strain your back and can possibly injure yourself. I see people do that at the gym all the time so thats my 2 cents right there.

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by LiquidMercury18
Well you all got the rowing thing wrong on this post. I have been rowing for last 6 years at a national level and just now sort of breaking into cycling for a cross trainer for rowing. Rowing is about 90% legs and 10% arms and back. It's great cross trainer for cycling because not only is it mostly legs but it also is a killer cardio-wise. I've noticed that with my rowing background I am able to keep up with people that have been training with cycling a lot easier than other friends who picked up cycling. I'd definitely try rowing out for cross trainer. You will soon come to find that the erg (rowing machine) is the most monotonous and boring thing known to man. I spend countless hours on it and I absolutely hate it but it has to be done. Thats somewhat of the reason I'm cycling just for a change of pace from the erg. So for those looking for a change of pace from cycling try the erg. A note on the erg, don't put the damper setting all the way up to 10 keep at like 4 or 5 which is what the thickness of water is basically. Anything higher and you really start to strain your back and can possibly injure yourself. I see people do that at the gym all the time so thats my 2 cents right there.

Ah, interesting to hear it broken down as 90/10 legs/arms. I sure felt it in the arms (and the back) - but then as cycling's been the only exercise for the last few months I wasn't at all surprised.

I'm not sure I'll be able to do the time I need in x-training on it though, cos of nerve problems in my right arm/wrist (still under investigation, it's taken almost a year and I've only just been for a first test on it, british NHS, not free and not remotely useful for anything that's not life threatening, even if it does stop you doing two sports you love...). It's an ergo II if I remember right, I had hte damper at between 6 and 7, and I think if I do it again I'll probably knock it back to 5, or 5/6, and try faster rather than harder, though I was managing a stroke rate of 30/min - is this waaay too slow, I've no idea when it comes to rowing... I was aiming for a heart rate between 154-170 (quite a hard workout but easily comparable to an outdoor ride on the bike), and found it hard to keep the heart rate up around 160-165 even on 6/7 at 30 strokes/min.

Really be interested to hear your views on hr vs speed etc on it - I've learnt about cycling and power vs cadence, but am a complete newbie when it comes to similar stuff on an ergo.

Thanks for the reply, it's much appreciated - there's info out there on the web but not all that much when it comes to stuff to compliment a cycling training plan and these practical details on how to actually determine the best way to use things like this.

Alright with rowing, spm (strokes per minute) should be low when you are doing steady state as we call it. Steady state is where you are at heart rate level of 145-160 and you are training aerobically and building base. SPM should be 18-22 strokes per minute and you should be going for at the least 45 minutes. Focus on pushing with your legs first then open up with your back and finish with your arms. If you set the monitor to split times which are how long it takes you to do 500 meters you might be holding an average split of around 2:00/500 meters for 45 minutes. If you go at higher stroke rates such as 30 strokes per minute than you are making it much much easier this is why steady state is done at low rates. The 30 strokes per minute is just moving fast not effectively and the person that goes at 30 strokes per minute and hold a 2 minute split is going to be much slower than the person that is at 18 strokes per minute holding a 2 minute split just because the person at the low rate has more room to raise it. Hard to explain but just try low rates and long pieces. For my steady state I do 90 minutes at 18 spm 145-160 hr try it out and let me konw

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by LiquidMercury18
Alright with rowing, spm (strokes per minute) should be low when you are doing steady state as we call it. Steady state is where you are at heart rate level of 145-160 and you are training aerobically and building base. SPM should be 18-22 strokes per minute and you should be going for at the least 45 minutes. Focus on pushing with your legs first then open up with your back and finish with your arms. If you set the monitor to split times which are how long it takes you to do 500 meters you might be holding an average split of around 2:00/500 meters for 45 minutes. If you go at higher stroke rates such as 30 strokes per minute than you are making it much much easier this is why steady state is done at low rates. The 30 strokes per minute is just moving fast not effectively and the person that goes at 30 strokes per minute and hold a 2 minute split is going to be much slower than the person that is at 18 strokes per minute holding a 2 minute split just because the person at the low rate has more room to raise it. Hard to explain but just try low rates and long pieces. For my steady state I do 90 minutes at 18 spm 145-160 hr try it out and let me konw

Ok, I'll give it a go... What concerns me is that I'm working to a target heart rate, and with the rower on 6/7 resistance, I was having to maintain 30spm to keep the heart rate where I needed it... couple of times I slacked off once my nerve started jangling and dropped to 27spm, but the heart rate went way down, past the lower limit I needed to be at. I thought that if I did it slower, I'd have to have the resistance up higher to keep the heart rate up, and defnitely (with no arm muscles at this point in time) find it too hard on the arms, and knacker the nerve completely again (I did it while sailing, all my weight on one arm to balance against the sail when out the side of the boat)

Ok work on this. Keep the low rates just push harder. I have no problem keeping my heart rate up at 160 or at any target heart rate with low rates. All you have to do is push yourself harder. Try this out for kicks. Go at your 30 spm for 5 mins then go down to an 18-22 spm and try and hold the exact same split times or calories/hour or power wattage whichever screen you are looking at as you did for the 30 spm. It will take a little bit of time to get up to your target heart rate going at a 18-22 spm but its much safer and less strenuous on your heart. You don't want to get your heart rate up automatically. For me it takes 10 minutes just to get up to target heart rate so really try out the low rates and then just make sure you are pushing harder. It's like basically going uphill on cycling I guess would be an accurate analogy. When you're going uphill you are at lower cadences usually but are putting forth more power into each revolution. Your heart rate still stays up but you are at lower cadence. Thats best analogy I can offer so just try it out and let me konw how it goes. If ya want to talk to me outside of the forums email me at [email hidden] or instant message me aim or aol at LostHorizon16