Weight Training Article

[Cassandra_Cain]

I know there is a lot of debate over weight training and cycling...the thing is most of the "experiments" are on some pretty high level athletes. They are already very fit and extra leg presses or the like don't help.

BUT, there are many many many more cyclist on the planet who aren't elite and who don't have strong core or legs or may have some issues with muscle fire sequencing (ie piriformis muscle taking over for glutes). in this case, strength training is necessary to build up muscle mass to handle the load for required for cycling.

I would be interested in seeing NON racers being tested before and after a strength routine. especially those non racers who only picked up biking in their 30's and beyond.

my two cents

H

I posted references from the article mentioned above a while back ago during yet another weight lifting thread.

For people who are low fitness, then basically any form of exercise, including weight training, is going to improve their conditioning.

For those that ride their bikes 4-6x/week and do so consistently with a sensible plan, then I doubt any benefit would come from weight lifting. Plus weight lifting and endurance cycling combined have been shown to cause what's called an interference effect, which further limits the benefits. Moreover, weight lifting diminishes mitochondrial capacity in muscles which also decreases endurance ability.

Endurance cycling, (tdf, giro for example) don't require high strength at all, the forces are low. I've said this ad nauseum here but some still want to think otherwise despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

High strength is a requirement for track events like the 200m, 500m, and the kilo to a lesser extent. Look at Chris Hoy or Anna Mears, they lift weights and need to have high strength in their legs, torso, and even arms, to excel at their events

For everything else, if your goal is to be faster on a bike, then you are better off spending your training time, which is a limited resource for us all, on your bike.

[velogirl]

I think it's unfair to emphatically say that strength isn't important to cycling. There is no black and white (except maybe in accounting and even that's questionable). Science evolves dramatically and if you review information from a decade ago it will be different than information from today or information from two decades ago. Gosh, how many of you remember when doctors endorsed cigarette smoking on television and in magazine ads? My point being that while there is some evidence that points toward little/no benefit of resistance training, there is other evidence that points to definite benefits. And given that most of the studies performed on cyclists wrt resistance training are completed with athletes at a very high level, it's unfair to advise athletes at a more recreational level based on that research.

I'm a cycling coach. I do this for a living. I've studied this sport extensively since 2000 (including a resistance training for cyclists three-day clinic presented by USA Cycling at the Olympic Training Center). I'm also active on a handful of coaching forums and email groups where there are other coaches, exercise scientists, biomechanists, and some of the greatest minds in the cycling science world. There is strong debate about this subject in the cycling science world. Obviously USAC and USOTC still believe there are gains in performance due to resistance training or they wouldn't be teaching it in their curriculum or training their resident athletes in resistance training.

Here's my opinion (no more or less important than anyone else's on this forum).

Most of the women on this forum, including the competitive athletes, would benefit from resistance training. Now, here's my rationale. Some of these reasons are performance-related and some are health-related. Knowing the demographic of most of the women on this forum, I absolutely believe they would benefit from resistance training.

• Adding lean muscle mass and reducing adipose will improve your power to weight ratio.

• Adding lean muscle mass will help you reduce adipose by increasing your rmr, thus also improving your power to weight ratio.

• Improved cycling (increased strength and decreased injury) depends on a strong core (abs, back) and strong upper body. Resistance training will improve both of these.

• Most women do not create enough testosterone to gain strength benefits without overload.

• Most cyclists don't train in a manner that generates overload (ie there's lots of soft-pedalling going on). Most cyclists also don't train enough hours to create overload.

• From a health perspective, resistance training is one of the best things women can do to prevent osteoporosis and osteopenia.

• Most cyclists do not train with enough variety or intention to continue performance gains past their first 2,000 hours of cycling.

• Many cyclists aren't able to train sufficient hours in the winter to maintain base fitness and strength. Resistance training is a great alternative to losing fitness.

[velogirl]

Plus weight lifting and endurance cycling combined have been shown to cause what's called an interference effect, which further limits the benefits.

Current studies (one study, actually) indicate that this is only true if you are participating in maximum strength and/or power phases of resistance training at the same time as you're working on aerobic endurance. If an athlete is following a periodized resistance training plan, any detriment to aerobic endurance disappears once those two phases of training have been completed.

And I don't have time to find the ref for this, but my understanding is there is only one study that even indicates this might be true. Nothing is black and white, remember?

[Veronica]

What is this overwhelming evidence?

You say cyclists don't have the same leg strength as the average dude on the street. I'd like to see the average dude propel himself up a 17% grade. You're telling me climbing like that is all VO2 Max and lactate threshold?

No, I don't believe that.

Veronica

[Cassandra_Cain]

What is this overwhelming evidence?

You say cyclists don't have the same leg strength as the average dude on the street. I'd like to see the average dude propel himself up a 17% grade. You're telling me climbing like that is all VO2 Max and lactate threshold?

No, I don't believe that.

Veronica

Everyone's favorite cycling hero, Lance Armstrong, won on Alpe D'huez exerting a total force of 25kg between both legs while en route to his win on that stage.

This is the TdF, the ultimate prize in endurance cycling and the most famous stage race in the world. Is that good enough for you?

Can you do 25kg between both legs? If you can so much as climb stairs then you can.

What people can't do, outside of elite riders, is ride at 400+ watts for an hour, and it has nothing to do with strength.

Power and strength are not the same thing.

That's physics, if you chose not to believe it, then hey, don't believe it.

[SadieKate]

Lorri and Cassandra, I am only speaking for myself so others may disagree but both of you have said things in the past I perceived as condescending and unnecessarily chastising of others. I did not respond as I felt the thread would degenerate into a juvenile squabble. You both have information of value but have let your difference of opinion prompt personal attacks and devalue the content.

For the sake of the thread, would you please take your toys into opposite corners for awhile and, when you’re ready, talk to each other offline?

I, for one, am having a difficult time understanding the discussion due to the personal confrontation.

[velogirl]

I'm done, SK. Thanks for the reminder.

My apologies, ladies.

[bcipam]

And just think the Church thread stayed civil!!!!

It's interesting to see two so passionate viewpoints. Not certain if I understood either. I am of the firm belief but have no scientific data to back up my argument that light weight training is helpful for cycling and everything else I do. I have a good friend who is very tall and slim. She rides a ton, almost every day. Has done numerous centuries and doubles but, she can't get faster. She can go a decent steady speed forever and ever, but on the flats can't keep up with me and others and we are all just pikers. Her trainer determined it was the lack of muscle mass. You still need to develop muscle fiber to put out power. She started weight training 6 months ago and has noticed her speed is slowly increasing. Sortof just makes sense doesn't it?

[Cassandra_Cain]

Current studies (one study, actually) indicate that this is only true if you are participating in maximum strength and/or power phases of resistance training at the same time as you're working on aerobic endurance. If an athlete is following a periodized resistance training plan, any detriment to aerobic endurance disappears once those two phases of training have been completed.

And I don't have time to find the ref for this, but my understanding is there is only one study that even indicates this might be true. Nothing is black and white, remember?

The only way to NOT be doing strength and endurance training at the same time is if you completely EXCLUDE one or the other. So yes, if the choice is to sit on the couch all winter or lift weights, then weights wins hands down. Then again, anything is better than being sedentary or if one is low fitness, I said that before.

If the choice is lift weights or ride, then I'm going to choose riding.

Many people here live in warm enough climates to ride year-round and even those that don't can have access to trainers. There is no reason you can't ride seriously 12 months/year. Whether they choose to or not, is their preorogative.

Whether you are a coach, athlete, or the fairy godmother, saying strength is important in endurance cycling again and again doesn't make it true. Strength requirements for an endurance cyclist are low, it is basic physics, I repeat, basic physics not magic, or some esoteric study I secretly conducted. Check your powertap files if that's what you need to be convinced. Show me forces are any higher than doing a basic step-up. I have many PT files, i've looked at them, i've studied them, I know the physics and that's how it works. Whether you chose to accept that or not, that's not my issue.

Riding at 300 watts requires no more strength than climbing stairs 2 at a time. So if you feel your core is weak for cycling, where forces are low, then, by that logic, you might as well start doing weights to strengthen your core to bring in the groceries from the car or carry your 2 your old around the mall.

Inducing hypertrophy in a gym means you have to haul that same muscle up any climb. While that extra muscle may improve your 5-second power (NM), that same muscle isn't going to to a darn thing for your FT, improve your vo2 max, or AWC. 5s power may win 200 meter sprints, but it sure as heck won't get you up a long climb.

If somebody rides for fun, to lose weight, for appearance, or for general fitness, raising money for charity, reducing pollution, than lift weights, do pilates, stretch do - whatever you like.

If somebody rides with a goal of being the best, fastest cyclist they can be and win races, then that goal is best realized by training on the bike.

Sorry but I come across more nonsense in this forum than any other when it comes to training methods. I give up, people can believe whatever they want, no matter how ridiculous it is.

[velogirl]

I think anger management might also improve your endurance cycling. Or at least the number of friends you make on a forum like this.

If this forum is full of nonsense, batgirl, why don't you hang out on the wattage forum. They debate the same thing "ad nauseum." Only difference is they have advanced degrees in exercise science an have been successfully training athletes for decades. Oh, and a few of them have written books, like Joe Friel, Andy Coggan, and Hunter Allen.

If I recall from your earlier posts, you started riding in July or August? This year? I'm sure you're a smart girl but I also know you've got a lot to learn. People skills should be at the top of that list.

******************************************************

Everyone else, forgive me for being blunt, but I get tired of the holier-than-though attitude she imparts on others here.

[velogirl]

Just read the original article, which interestingly enough, was authored by Ric Stern. One of Ric's claims to fame in the cycling science world is that he feels strongly that doing any intensity whatsoever at all during a base period will negate the effects of base training. He semi-retracted that statement about a month ago stating that he felt the same way but that the reasons he stated were wrong.

Of course, the rest of the world has moved onto sweet spot training year round (even Friel now recommends keeping some intensity in your base training to keep your high end fresh).

Wish I could find the article, but I think it was in an email blast and I can't find it on Ric's site.

He's a smart one, but his views are definitely controversial.

[Cassandra_Cain]

Anger management? Instead of just engaging in a charming bit of ad hominem against me, why don't you address what I actually said?

Show me, and everyone else who is reading this, how cycling forces are high and how we therefore need to lift weights. Show us how hypertrophy in the gym is going to get us up a climb faster, boost your vo2 max, and increase your FT.

Friel and Allen are not sports physiologists, they are coaches, and there is a difference.

And since you mentioned Andy Coggan....why don't you ask him what he thinks of weight training in endurance cycling for anybody other than low fitness people.

I already know the answer since the topic has been discussed but please, do ask him and post the response here specifically to what I have shown in italic print.

You may say I engage in some holier than thou attitude, but your attitude here is that since you are a coach and I haven't been riding for 20 years, that my views are irrelevant.