Struggling on climbs - big time....

Katanga-Man said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the
"muscular" type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong.
I find that I can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it
comes to hills I just die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I
am 34 inch waist which is not bad at my size I don;t think.
My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much
weight? I think I am but I would really aprreciate some opinions and
advice and encouragement or URL's I could read and research. I love
cycling a lot but my performance on hills is getting me down. How
much weight do I need to drop guys?

I'd say weight is a big factor. I've got a mate who's 11 stone or so, I'm
about 4 stone heavier than him. I can go just as fast as him on the flat,
but he can get away from me up hills. OTOH, I get more back going down the
other side. A lot of hill climbing is mental / technique based too. Lots of
research has been done that says if you're expecting a hill to come up,
you'll go up it faster and feel less tired than if you're not.

Katanga-Man said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the
"muscular" type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong.
I find that I can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it
comes to hills I just die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I
am 34 inch waist which is not bad at my size I don;t think.
My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much
weight? I think I am but I would really aprreciate some opinions and
advice and encouragement or URL's I could read and research. I love
cycling a lot but my performance on hills is getting me down. How
much weight do I need to drop guys?
Many thanks.
KM

I'm 6"2' 16st and by the sound of it much the same build. One of the guys I
go with is 11st. He beats me up the hills but not by too much - If i loaded
his bike with 5st (70lb) of weights would he be able to get up the hill?

Remember most of the rugby world cup squad are obes by the standard
measures!

pk

Doki said:

Katanga-Man said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the
"muscular" type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong.
I find that I can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it
comes to hills I just die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I
am 34 inch waist which is not bad at my size I don;t think.
My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much
weight? I think I am but I would really aprreciate some opinions and
advice and encouragement or URL's I could read and research. I love
cycling a lot but my performance on hills is getting me down. How
much weight do I need to drop guys?

I'd say weight is a big factor. I've got a mate who's 11 stone or so, I'm
about 4 stone heavier than him. I can go just as fast as him on the flat,
but he can get away from me up hills. OTOH, I get more back going down the
other side. A lot of hill climbing is mental / technique based too. Lots of
research has been done that says if you're expecting a hill to come up,
you'll go up it faster and feel less tired than if you're not.

Yeah, I'd agree with the mental stuff. Once I've conquered a hill it's
usually not *quite* as painful to do it the second time, all things
being equal. If I know what it's like, I know if I can get away with
stomping up it before my heart/legs give out, or if it's a take it
easier and twiddle up it slowly type.

On the other hand, it's annoying to be overweight (yes, me, not a
comment on you at all) and have to lug all the flab up a hill. Very
hard work to do it. Of course if you're lugging muscle up the hill it's
a different story ;-)

I remember reading in Lance's 'It's not about the bike' book that he
said post cancer he was a much better cyclist than pre, simply because
of the weight he lost, especially off the upper body, that he never put
back on again, and he attributed it to the energy you have to put in to
move heavier object up a hill - if you're hauling lighter up, that
leaves you more energy in reserve, though obviously you want muscles
capable of doing the work/speed you want, just ones not oversized for
that job.

Do you do anything else for exercise, or is it just cycling (thinking of
weightlifting etc) that could be contributing to lots of muscle mass
that might not be 'needed' for cycling performance?

--

Velvet

Katanga-Man <[email hidden]> wrote:
: Hi,
: I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the "muscular"

: my performance on hills is getting me down. How much weight do I need to
: drop guys?

Weight to drop? To be really good uphill? About 6 stone.

More reasonably, losing a stone or so while retaining muscle would make a large
difference. On the short, steep stuff you should be able to use that muscle to
power up them. On the long hills, you're never going to be superquick with that
build but you can get quicker if you work at it.

For comparision, I'm 1" shorter and 6 stone lighter. Most road racers are 10-12
stone. Over 12 stone the extra muscle doesn't seem to compensate for the extra
weight.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org
"Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

No doubt that weight and technique count for a lot, but there may be other
factors to consider. As a taller rider, you'll have a larger bike. It may
not be appreciably heavier but it will be larger. It may have a longer
wheelbase which makes climbing harder. It may have a different geometry too.

With these differences in mind, perhaps you should be asking a different
question. Rather than thinking about why you don't climb, why not focus on
your strengths on the flatter ground. Very few of riders are all rounders.
You could be an excellent endurance distance rider or a sprinter. Just don't
live in the mountains ;-)

======

"Doki" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Katanga-Man said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the
"muscular" type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong.
I find that I can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it
comes to hills I just die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I
am 34 inch waist which is not bad at my size I don;t think.
My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much
weight? I think I am but I would really aprreciate some opinions and
advice and encouragement or URL's I could read and research. I love
cycling a lot but my performance on hills is getting me down. How
much weight do I need to drop guys?

I'd say weight is a big factor. I've got a mate who's 11 stone or so, I'm
about 4 stone heavier than him. I can go just as fast as him on the flat,
but he can get away from me up hills. OTOH, I get more back going down the
other side. A lot of hill climbing is mental / technique based too. Lots

of

Quoted message said:

research has been done that says if you're expecting a hill to come up,
you'll go up it faster and feel less tired than if you're not.

Katanga-Man said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the
"muscular" type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong.
I find that I can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it
comes to hills I just die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I
am 34 inch waist which is not bad at my size I don;t think.
My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much
weight? I think I am but I would really aprreciate some opinions and
advice and encouragement or URL's I could read and research. I love
cycling a lot but my performance on hills is getting me down. How
much weight do I need to drop guys?
Many thanks.
KM

I have lost nearly 1 stone in the last 6 months and am climbing better for
it. Its not a given that a light rider will be a good climber, sure it helps
but is not just about the size of you.

Katanga-Man said:

Hi, I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the
"muscular" type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong. I
find that I can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it comes
to hills I just
die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I am 34 inch waist which is
not bad at my size I don;t think. My point is that do you experts
think I am still carrying too much weight? I think I am but I would
really aprreciate some opinions and advice and encouragement or
URL's I could read and research. I love cycling a lot but my
performance on hills is getting me down. How much weight do I need
to drop guys? Many thanks. KM

When climbing hills, especially steep ones, the effects of wind
resistance become negligible; it's all about lifting mass and so heavier
riders are at a disadvantage. Big riders never make great climbers so,
to some extent, you'll just have to accept that climbing will not be
your forte and that your bulk will be an advantage at other times.

I am 10 stone and 5 foot 7 and I go up hills pretty well. You are 70%
heavier than I am and so your body has to generate 70% more power just
to climb at the same rate as me. For your proportions to match mine
(which is pretty slim, I have to admit) you would have to come down by
about 5 stone.

That's a tall order. Every pound counts, though.

Ian

--

Katanga-Man said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the "muscular"
type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong. I find that I
can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it comes to hills I just
die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I am 34 inch waist which is not
bad at my size I don;t think.
My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much weight?
I think I am but I would really aprreciate some opinions and advice and
encouragement or URL's I could read and research. I love cycling a lot but
my performance on hills is getting me down. How much weight do I need to
drop guys?

The BMI of professional cyclists is usually around 19 or 20. Yours is
about 30. You could do well time trialling on a flat course or at
closed circuit racing (motor racing tracks are rarely very hilly), but
you'd have to lose colossal amounts of weight to be a good climber, and
you'd probably find that a lot of your power went with it.

Zog The Undeniable said:

The BMI of professional cyclists is usually around 19 or 20. Yours is
about 30. You could do well time trialling on a flat course or at
closed circuit racing (motor racing tracks are rarely very hilly), but
you'd have to lose colossal amounts of weight to be a good climber, and
you'd probably find that a lot of your power went with it.

Lance managed it but elective chemotherapy to be able to cycle better is a bit
extreme

Tony

Being on the large size need not be a hindrance on hills, just look at
riders such as Indurain! The key is to have a good power to weight
ratio. For the non elite athlete this means having a body fat of
ideally under 10%, certainly under 15%, so have your percentage body
fat calculated and if need be look to reducing your weight.

It is also important to develop an efficient climbing style. Being
powerful an 'out of the saddle' style (but still keeping the body
stable) might work as you should be able to use a larger gear and your
upper body and back muscles. That said don't over gear, especially on
a long climb where you have to sit down as this uses more 'fast
twitch' fibres, rather then the endurance related red fibres, so
raising the level of lactate and giving the muscles less chance to
'cycle' efficiently. (You only use a small percentage of each muscle
on each pedal stroke, with these fibres recuperating whilst others are
used. At high loads more fibres are recruited and so have less chance
to recover before being recruited again).

Perhaps most importantly avoid going into the red, don't try to stay
with a faster climber from the bottom of a long climb, just set your
own pace. If you are already deep in oxygen debt and swimming in a sea
of lactic acid halfway up a climb the second half will take for ever
and seem like purgatory! Pace yourself, keep just below your anaerobic
threshold then go for it as you reach the top- assuming there will be
an opportunity to recover. If the road is flat at the top don't give
it your all until you are on the flat.

It is true that climbing is a state of mind. Be prepared for the
effort and the suffering and control all those bad voices telling you
everyone else is having an easier time of it. If you are fit and able
to apply yourself it is surprising how fast a big rider can climb- if
you don't mind suffering! I have always being a bit heavy for climbing
and yet in my racing days when super motivated I was able to pull out
a good ride in a race that included some very hard Scottish climbs.
That said at the top of one I was so much in oxygen debt if felt like
someone was pushing my eyeballs in and I was getting tunnel vision!

Will H' of said:

No doubt that weight and technique count for a lot, but there may be other
factors to consider. As a taller rider, you'll have a larger bike. It may
not be appreciably heavier but it will be larger. It may have a longer
wheelbase which makes climbing harder. It may have a different geometry too.

How does a longer wheelbase make climbing harder? Or conversely, how does
the short wheelbase on my bike for a shortie make it easier?
--
Boredom is… a vital problem for the moralist, since half the sins of mankind
are caused by the fear of it. Bertrand Russell
Steph Peters delete invalid from [email hidden]
Tatting, lace & stitching page <http://www.sandbenders.demon.co.uk/index.htm>

Katanga-Man said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the "muscular"
type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong. I find that I
can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it comes to hills I just
die..... I am not a lard [censored] either since I am 34 inch waist which is not
bad at my size I don;t think.
My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much weight?

It doesn't take an "expert" to diagnose that, given your figures above!

Quoted message said:

I think I am but I would really aprreciate some opinions and advice and
encouragement or URL's I could read and research. I love cycling a lot but
my performance on hills is getting me down. How much weight do I need to
drop guys?

About 4 stone would be a good start. Probably 6 stone if you actually
want to be fast up hills.

James

in message <[email hidden]>, Katanga-Man

(') said:

Hi,
I am a big lad - 16 stone 8 lbs (105 kg) and 6 feet 2. I am the
"muscular"
type - a lot more like Emile Heskey than Lance Armstrong. I find
that I can keep up with almost anyone on the flat but when it comes to
hills I just
die.....

How big are these hills you're struggling with? How long, how steep? I'm
not wishing to start another pissing contest, but are these hills you
would actually need to be an athlete to get up? And the guys who do go
up them - are they younger than you? Lighter? Fitter?

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; When your hammer is C++, everything begins to look like a thumb.

In news:[email hidden],
MSeries <[email hidden]> typed:

Quoted message said:

I have lost nearly 1 stone in the last 6 months and am climbing
better for it.

Beat you: I lost 5kg in the last fortnight. Back on the steroids for me.

A

(Howard) said:

Being on the large size need not be a hindrance on hills, just look at
riders such as Indurain! The key is to have a good power to weight
ratio. For the non elite athlete this means having a body fat of
ideally under 10%, certainly under 15%, so have your percentage body
fat calculated and if need be look to reducing your weight.

I think it's more than that tho'... to climb well you have to have the
power mostly in your legs - not in your upper body. Compare and
contrast the build of good hill climbing cyclists with, for example,
good rowers. Both will have a low percentage of body fat, but the
latter will have more upper body strength.

"Katanga-Man" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

My point is that do you experts think I am still carrying too much weight?

Even thugh not an expert I gave my opinion last time you asked which was
that you are carrying circa 20kgs more than your opponents/keen riding
buddies up every hill.
Think about it: 20 litres of water = 2 1/2 buckets, up every hill!
You may have a muscular upper body which might be great for rowing but is
mainly dead weight for peddaling.
--
Regards,
Pete

"Howard" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Being on the large size need not be a hindrance on hills, just look at
riders such as Indurain!

Who was 80kgs which is 25kgs less than our friend who is a similar height.

http://www.arrakis.es/~angelman/personaling.htm

--
Regards,
Pete

Zog The Undeniable said:

The BMI of professional cyclists is usually around 19 or 20. Yours is
about 30. You could do well time trialling on a flat course or at
closed circuit racing (motor racing tracks are rarely very hilly),

You should try going round Oulton or Cadwell sometime.

--
Alex
BMW R1150GS
DIAABTCOD#3 MSWF#4 UKRMFBC#6 Ibw#35 BOB#8
http://www.team-ukrm.co.uk
Windy's "little soldier"

Howard said:

Being on the large size need not be a hindrance on hills, just look at
riders such as Indurain!

Exactly.

A rather skinny, not particularly tall man is considered abnormally
large as a cyclist, and his feats are considered noteworthy as an
example of what "large size" people can achieve. He's only "Big Mig" cos
the guy beside him is a midget. Had he taken up rowing, he'd probably
have made a pretty good lightweight.

James
--
If I have seen further than others, it is
by treading on the toes of giants.
http://www.ne.jp/asahi/julesandjames/home/