Leg strength

[oldborn]

Yes I read it again.

Your 1st reference says gym work benefits non cyclists
Your 2nd reference is not a technical reference, it's a bit of professional back slapping.
Your 3rd reference is the rather embarrassing debacle of someone who doesn't understand the difference between strength and power????

So none of these references do a very good job of supporting your argument. I'd give you a big fail.

But since you're putting yourself up against real experts Oldborn, I'd like to know who you are? What are your qualifications? What is your experience in this area. Why should we listen to you? Who ARE you to even comment on this let alone be critical of other experts?

Thanks for reading Polyarmour!

It is irrelevant who am i, and my qualifications, and the outmost why you should listen to me. I am not a coach, and having no experiences as a scinetists. I just love cycling and having another view on it, which i do not claim is not a dogma.

Those claims should not and they are not a rocket science, are they?

Especially shold not be a dogmatic isssues in sport, wright? Is it difficult to understand relationship between strenght and endurance? I think no.

Well get back on subject, ok?

1st study shows some benefits Marcinik, E.J., Potts, J., Schlabach, G., Will, S., Dawson, P., Hurley, B.F. (1991). Effects of strength training on lactate threshold and endurance performance. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 23, 739-743.

Quote:Marcinik et al. (1991) showed that strength training had positive effects of endurance cycling capacity. Eighteen males performed 12 weeks of strength training three times a week. The strength training consisted of 8-12 repetitions of upper body exercise (bench press, push-ups, lat pull-downs, arm curls) and 15-20 repetitions on lower body exercises (knee extensions, hip flexion's, parallel squats) with a 30-second rest between exercises. The strength training program had no effect on the subjects VO2max. However, 1 RM for knee extension and hip flexion improved by 30% and 52% respectively. More important, cycle time to exhaustion at 75% of VO2max improved a massive 33% from 26.3 minutes before strength training to 35.1 minutes after training. The conclusion: "strength training improves cycle endurance performance independently of changes in VO2max... and that this improvement appears to be related to increase in leg strength."

Is it hard to understand? Now, is it 100% proven, of course no, it is just a study which tell us something new, wright?

2nd study Commentary on High-Resistance Training Improves 40-km Time-Trial Performance in Competitive Cyclists

It is a comment on Amy study which indicate that authors find similarities in their works, nothing else.

3rd study is Amy answer on critcs, which show us that, quote: "Over the last year I've tested 22 well-trained cyclists, were 10 were randomly allocated to a control group and 12 were in a supervised training group".

Results: After the intervention the control group managed to get 0.5% worse in 40 km time (with training!) and the training group improved on average 2.5% - a 3% difference. The improvements were statistically significant. Some riders improved 3-7%, cutting 3+ minutes off their 40 kilometre times.

Does she understand power and strenght i do not care, but it is interesting to see time improvements with use a specific low RPM strenght training.

Do not get me wrong, it shold not be a rocket science, human bodies are far more complex to measured it out and say what is good for me that shold be good for everyone, wright?
Therefore, if we wont better studies doctors should test more people and find rellative results.

If you want to start arguing, just mention strenght and endurance within cyclists.


Stay well, and happy reading!

P.S. Do not yelling, i hear you well.

 

[oldborn]

I think this thread is hilarious. It demonstrates a well known Internet pattern, where a fool argues with people who are obvioiusly much more knowledgeable. Instead of realizing his position and shutting up like anyone with a brain would, the fool continues to dig the hole deeper and deeper.

Well it shoul be not hard to recognize comment on me? Wright Bro?
Nice eloquency and insults are realy whay of talks on internet.
Where did you learn such a brave way of talking, a yeah you have a couple of thousands of posts. Well i must admit that yours English vocabulary is far better than mine, especialy insults verbs.
Keep going, you are contributing this thread a lot.

Stay well my friend!

 

[oldborn]

I found my books on shells, first book is from Joe Friel (Cycling Bible), so he beleive that strenght training can improve your endurance, how?

Does it help for everyone, nooooooo. Is it still a big?, yes. Is main work is done on bike, yeeeeees no doubt, but!

He put in chapter 5 (Strenght) logical answer, if we force ST (type 1) to be stronger and do more work, we gonna use less fat as percentage of the total energy expenditure. So how we get ST stronger? He explain several ways of doing it for varius activity, training with resistance (hilly course, draging) and weights are one.

So he beleive in that theory and practice as a Olimpic Triathlon Champion coach. So entire chapter is on strenght for cyclist.

He also refer to several studies on his blog http://www.trainingbible.com/joesblog/2007/11/concurrent-strength-and-endurance.html about that, let me quote him on that; " Most of the research indicates that weight lifting does improve aerobic endurance performance, primarily by boosting economy rather than aerobic capacity/VO2max [1-5]. Not all research finds benefits, however [6,7]. I should point that while my 20-year research archive only includes two studies that found no benefit from strength training for endurance athletes, journals are less likely to publish research that reports no positive change in the conclusion. So while the research appears to be tilted toward lifting weights as a way of racing faster we may not be seeing the whole picture.

Will weight lifting help every athlete become more economical and therefore faster? Nope. I've coached a few endurance athletes who came to their sport with a long history of body building or power lifting. These athletes had plenty of strength. They needed less. Athletes who are the peak of performance probably won't benefit either. If I took a Kenyan runner who had just won the New York City Marathon and put him on a weight lifting program for several weeks it's doubtful he would be a better runner. But if someone who was a complete novice--say to cycling--lifted weights doing cycling-related strength exercises for several weeks he or she would undoubtedly improve cycling performance without even turning the cranks once. Most of us fall between these extremes. And most of us will improve our endurance performances by lifting weights. My experience tells me this is so."

References
1. Hickson RC, et al. 1988. Potential for strength and endurance training to amplify endurance performance. J Apply Physiol 65(5):2285-2290.
2. Hoff J, et al. 1999. Maximal strength training improves work economy in trained female cross-country skiers. Med Sci Sports Exerc 31(6):870-877.
3. Johnston RE, et al. 1995. Strength training in female distance runners: Impact on running economy. Med Sci Sports Exerc 27(5):S47.
4. Tanaka H and Swensen T. 1988. Impact of resistance training on endurance performance. A new form of cross training? Sports Med 25(3):191-200.
5. Marcinik EJ, et al. 1991. Effects of strength training on lactate threshold and endurance performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 23(6):739-743.6. Bishop D, et al. 1977. The influence of resistance training on endurance cyclists. Med Sci Sports Exerc (29(5):S1502.
7. Bishop D, et al. 1999. The effects of strength training on endurance performance and muscle characteristics. Med Sci Sports Exerc 31(6):886-891.


Second book is Cycling for triathletes from Lynda Wallenfels, she wrote that in base period 1, when much of work is done by easy riding in aerobic capacity level 1 (her way), force (does she mean strenght?) is built in gym by lifting weights. Well she is a ex pro MTB, so therefore maybe she lifted more weights in winter tha roadies.

Third book (which i still finding), is from some coach who trained guy in Quick-Step, as i remember, he also dedicated entire chapter on that, when i found it i will post it.

And recent article from Cycling Sport, or something, about only women coach in peloton, ex. French-US Olympic trackie Champion. She has saome ilness as i remember. So she is a coach for BBox team, Piedrick Fedrigo and company. She was writing about, trying to introduce strenght training in gym (especilay for upper body, to be strong in pack final sprints) for BBox guys during winter, so maybe she done great job as we know BBox takes a couple of stages at TDF 2010, as i remember.

 

[oldborn]

I find some young guns very latest study "Strength training in cycling", it is more on 40 min TT test after, and usual endurance ride increasing VoMax but less performance.

Results told us that there is improvement in short term, prolonged cycling, but little on usual endurance ride. So question is why there is a less improvement on usual endurance ride? What kind of squats exercise was performed. If we assume that not all resistance training produces increased strength. Doesn't matter if one calls it "strength" training or not, we're dealing with muscle physiology, which Fergie expalin well, how brain choose muscles fibres to get fired.

Furthemore strength is produced by high-intensity effort whether on the bike, running, swimming, etc., or in the weight room. When the intensity is high, the volume is low.

link:http://www.nih.no/templates/page____7548.aspx


Quote: "This thesis presents data from one large intervention study lasting 25 weeks and involving a total of 32 participants. Paper I and II contains data from well-trained cyclists during their preparatory period (December-March) and paper III contains data from the same period with the inclusion of recreationally active individuals in addition to the cyclists. In paper IV data from the cyclists` 13 first weeks of the competition period are presented.

The heavy strength training performed by the cyclists in the intervention group during the 12-week preparatory period and by the recreational active individuals targeted leg strength and was performed twice a week (3x4-10RM). During the competition period, the strength training was performed once a week. The duration of the endurance training and the distribution of this training in different intensity zones were similar between the two groups of cyclists. Findings

Adding heavy strength training to usual endurance training for 12 weeks resulted in:

1. Increased 1RM in half squat and mean power output during a 5-min all-out trial performed subsequent to 185 min of submaximal cycling. This improvement in performance was accompanied by larger reductions in RPE scores as well as in measures of VO2, HR, and [La-] during the prolonged cycling for the strength-trained cyclists compared to the cyclists who had performed usual endurance training. 2. Increased thigh muscle CSA and leg strength in well-trained cyclists, without compromising the development of VO2max. Of even greater practical importance to the cyclists, the strength training also resulted in improvement in parameters relevant for performance in the more vigorous parts of a cycle race, including peak power output in Wingate test and Wmax.



Furthermore, the cyclists who added strength training improved power output at 2 mmol∙l-1 [la-] as well as performance in a 40-min all-out trial, while the only apparent improvement for cyclists performing only usual endurance training was increased VO2max and a tendency towards improved performance in the 40-min all-out trial. 3. No change in freely chosen cadence during submaximal cycling in well-trained cyclists; however, it was observed to occur already after 4 weeks in recreationally active individuals.

Furthermore, reduced cadence in recreationally active individuals was accompanied by a reduction in physiological responses (VO2, HR, RPE, and [la-]). The reduction in freely chosen cadence may be affected by a concurrent increase of tendon CSA that possibly increases tendon stiffness.

Furthermore, performing strength-maintenance training of only one session weekly during the 13 first weeks of a competition period:
a. Allowed well-trained cyclists to maintain the increases in leg strength and thigh muscle CSA that they had attained during the preceding 12-week preparatory period.
b. Resulted in larger improvements in cycling performance and factors relevant for performance in both short-term and prolonged cycling than in cyclists who only performed usual endurance training.

Finally, the development of VO2max was not compromised by the added strength training in either the preparatory period or the competition period."


Strength training in cycling
The overall aim of the study was to examine the effect of concurrent strength and endurance training on cycling performance and on factors affecting performance.


Bent Rønnestad (20.06.1976) is born in Fiskå. He completed his Master’s degree in Sports Physiology from NSSS. Bent has been employed at Lillehammer University College since 2005, and started his PhD in 2007, and has been supervised by Associate Professor Truls Raastad and Associate

Professor Ernst Albin Hansen. The study was funded by Lillehammer University College where Rønnestad is employed.


Evaluation committee
Leader: Assosiate Professor Trine Stensrud, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Norway
1. Opponent: Professor Hans-Christer Holmberg, Mid-Sweden University, Östersund, Sweden
2. Opponent: Professor Stephen Seiler, University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway

Does it prove that is good for everyone? I doubt. It will be nice to see a 1 hour climbing test as well, maybe is good on flat?

Stay well!

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Not seeing how you can know which type of muscle fiber is being recruited from this? Maybe there are just more motor units firing for the higher force points. Of course I know that the larger fast twitch fibers and motor units, with more contractile proteins, produce more force. I also know that at large force outputs motor units with more fibers are recruited, while fine motor skills (less force) recruit smaller motor units initially. But still not seeing how the brain preferentially choses to fire motor units of a certain fiber type based on the type of effort? It certainly would be more efficient if it did.

That's why I said you can't really, only infer it.

Presumably to pedal near your maximal pedal force-pedal velocity line (i.e. the point of maximal neuromuscular power production), you are recruiting more FT fibres than at lower intensities, if you have any of course.

 

[oldborn]

Hi there!

This is maybe off topic but interesting.

Here is some links from my Free file housting account, there is 05. 2010. latest Basso blood test, some SRM data from couple of trainings, it is interesting to see data from low rpm climb training.

You would need a SRM program to see it, it is also available to download, blood test is PDF. I can provide also data from 22.04. 2008. until 28.03. 2010and also you can as you login on Mapei center, just to compare his improvement or not. I am not a Basso fan and this is not advertising. Just a window of available SRM data.

Thanks!

Links: http://www.mediafire.com/file/cr4ws4bp5oplew7/Basso%20training.zip training

http://www.mediafire.com/file/q4zhw0ww0coq2on/Basso%20blood%20test.pdf blood test just save it on computer if do not accept to open.


http://www.mediafire.com/file/yxl6158j1ary5vk/SRM64007.zip SRM 64007 program

http://www.mediafire.com/file/ukz4csplflikjjt/Basso low rpm Strenght training.zip Low RPM climb

 

[CoachFergie]

Haven't done any rides or efforts above 3min power over the last 8 weeks. Alactic power down 100 watts but new 60sec PB by 29 watts, who said you need to be strong to have good anaerobic capacity, just need to know how to pace.

 

[acoggan]

Not seeing how you can know which type of muscle fiber is being recruited from this? Maybe there are just more motor units firing for the higher force points. Of course I know that the larger fast twitch fibers and motor units, with more contractile proteins, produce more force. I also know that at large force outputs motor units with more fibers are recruited, while fine motor skills (less force) recruit smaller motor units initially. But still not seeing how the brain preferentially choses to fire motor units of a certain fiber type based on the type of effort? It certainly would be more efficient if it did.

It's called the Henneman size principle: smaller alpha motor neurons, which tend to innervate slow twitch motor units, are easier to depolarize than larger alpha motor neurons, which tend to innerveate fast twitch motor units.* The result is an orderly recruitment of motor units going from slowest -> fastest depending upon the desired/intended speed/force of the contraction the motor control center of the brain attempts to initiate. While there are exceptions to this orderly recruitment (e.g., the paw shake reflex in cats utilizes only fast twitch motor units), they are sufficiently rare to actually prove the rule.

*Note that this is only true during voluntary motor activity - electrical stimulation actually inverts the normal recruitment order, which is, e.g., partially why it has been (and still is) difficult to develop effective FES (functional electrical stimulation) cycling protocols for parapalegics, much less develop devices that would allow such individuals to perform more complicated motor tasks.

 

[oldborn]

As by Mariet Clignot weights are back in fashion. She get her s riders to do free weights leg exercises and body weight for upper body and core in pre season.

It is is not important the amount they lift either, just that every lift is done with perfect form. As we all know cylcling is not power lifting championship.

Many studies as i present to you (Norvegian Strenght and Conditioning Research November 2009) show that heavy lifting increase power output and time to exhaustion in cycling test , where all other training parameters are kept the same.

Paul Van Den Bosch (coach of cycling team of 5 times TDF winner Eddy Merckx) also advice some general strenght training to be done in winter period as well.

So Sven Nys (Rabobank Team World Champion Cyclocross) has nothing to do with 10 seconds max power output race, or he is not trackie, he is top endurance cyclist but he do some weights as well.

I am not saying that weights alone gonna helps you in some mountain stages, or to win Paris Roubaix but it will not hurt you and for 40km TT will be beneficial by some coaches. So how 40km TT can be trackie or sprint?

My thoughts are that weights can be beficial for those kind events (40km TT, Cyclocross etc.,one day stage race) much more than for 3 weeks stage races.

Well what have you say about it gents?

It is for some pros way of training, which i beleive is good.

Stay well!

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Well what have you say about it gents?

I say start here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=196781&postcount=1

 

[oldborn]

I say start here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=196781&postcount=1

Hi there!
Yes i start there, ending nowhere. I can see that you are coach too wright? Or having something in common with it. I am sure you know far more than me.

So my question to you is do you think that gym leg strenght with some medium or lower weights in prep period can hurt or decrease endurance, speed, and strenght for one stage race or 40kmTT, and from where it comes?

While 2009 Norwegian study show some improvement in 40 min all out trial (what ever it is), prolonged cycling as well without compromising the development of VO2max.

Quote:"Of even greater practical importance to the cyclists, the strength training also resulted in improvement in parameters relevant for performance in the more vigorous parts of a cycle race, including peak power output in Wingate test and Wmax."

So how is that possible?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

positive in drug tests and Motorola are currently under the spotlight I wouldn't be suggesting their results were from SFR. More to the point these "special training techniques" are used to explain "extraordinary" performances.

...



All just goes to show anyone can say whatever they want on the Net. I challenge Dr's Sassi, Heiden and Testa to do some research (all are published, I have referenced all three in various assignments) or even submit a case study (Coyle did for Armstrong showing his improvements were from greater efficiency in in type I muscle fibres from years of riding the bike at lower intensities) showing that SFR training or gym training conveys any performance benefit in cyclists.
.

tell me more about this study by coyle?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Because he is either an idiot who couldn't pick up his rider was using drugs or he was in on it. That is fraud. Especially when he solicited money from people to try and defend the charges against him.

interesting. ...

 

[Dear Wiggo]

All this points to the need to develop a strong aerobic engine. Noteworthy that in Coyle's case study on Lance Armstrong that he showed that the improvements were most likely related to greater efficiency in ST fibres due to many thousands of miles on the bike.

Do you still hold this view?

 

[CoachFergie]

Do you still hold this view?

Ha ha yeah, I will go with the third option

 

[CoachFergie]

tell me more about this study by coyle?

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09/coyle-and-armstrong-research-errors.html

 

[Dear Wiggo]

http://www.sportsscientists.com/2008/09/coyle-and-armstrong-research-errors.html

So do you still hold the same view? That Ed's study is what a living Sassi should have done? That SFR is bunkum coz Armstrong improved over the years by being an inspired individual (Ed's conclusion) who rode a lot?

 

[CoachFergie]

My perspective on SFR or SE (which Dr Andy Coggan labelled an oxymoron on his Facebook page) is based on more than just what Dr Coyle concluded in his widely criticised paper on Lance.

Andy sums it up rather well in this article he wrote...

http://www.aboc.com.au/tips-and-hints/why-we-dont-use-strength-endurance-anymore

 

[Dear Wiggo]

My perspective on SFR or SE (which Dr Andy Coggan labelled an oxymoron on his Facebook page) is based on more than just what Dr Coyle concluded in his widely criticised paper on Lance.

Andy sums it up rather well in this article he wrote...

http://www.aboc.com.au/tips-and-hints/why-we-dont-use-strength-endurance-anymore

The irony of of a training technique being dismissed by an Ed Coyle Armstrong study apologist, published on the site of a LA fanboy. Ahem. But I digress.

I'd be curious if you've ever used it - SE I mean. Over gearing and under gearing are common terms when it comes to track training. Do you do all your IP coaching on race gear / currently capable gear possible for race cadence?

 

[CoachFergie]

Yes, I do all the IP training using race cadence.

I have tried SE training, even done it on the climb the AIS use in Adelaide but don't see any physiological rationale for doing so.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Unless there is a specific need for it*, then the use of "SE" training is simply a ruse to get riders to do long threshold intervals (whether or not the coach understands the lack of evidence to support the efficacy of such efforts over and above just riding at the same power in "normal" gears).


* e.g. you anticipate such high power low cadence demands will occur in a race and can't easily be addressed with appropriate gearing choice.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Over gearing and under gearing are common terms when it comes to track training.

Bit more common for sprinters to do that than enduros. Even then it's a bit line ball as to whether the benefit is anything other than psychological or give the rider something to do between efforts.

I mean one only has to inspect the pedal force-pedal speed plot from maximal efforts to see that gear doesn't make a wad of difference from a physiological adaptation POV.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Bit more common for sprinters to do that than enduros. Even then it's a bit line ball as to whether the benefit is anything other than psychological or give the rider something to do between efforts.

I mean one only has to inspect the pedal force-pedal speed plot from maximal efforts to see that gear doesn't make a wad of difference from a physiological adaptation POV.

Yes I have seen graphs before. Even understood some of them. Not sure they can explain everything in the real world, however. Data is always incomplete.

Wouldn't physiological adaptation require a comparison of change over time? The force-speed plots I have seen did not include dates.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Yes I have seen graphs before. Even understood some of them. Not sure they can explain everything in the real world, however. Data is always incomplete.

Wouldn't physiological adaptation require a comparison of change over time? The force-speed plots I have seen did not include dates.

What I meant was that if you do maximal neuromuscular cycling efforts, then the plot of maximal pedal force-pedal speed is largely unaffected by gear choice. IOW the physiological training impact on NM power is essentially the same.

In crude terms, even past the point where maximal effort induces fatigue (after 5-6 seconds), gear choice still only has a minor impact (physiologically). Take an experienced sprinter, they can typically do a flying 200m within about 0.1 seconds of each other over a 20" spread of gears.

 

[DirtyWorks]

In crude terms, even past the point where maximal effort induces fatigue (after 5-6 seconds), gear choice still only has a minor impact (physiologically). Take an experienced sprinter, they can typically do a flying 200m within about 0.1 seconds of each other over a 20" spread of gears.

Has anyone done research on the effects of using a bigger gear over time? ex. in the 20" range, a test group riding +18" gear over four weeks vs. a control group riding +0" gear over the same period?

It's an honest question.

My best training comes with riding in bigger gears out of competition, then using somewhat smaller gears in competition. I'm just wondering if that's been tested. It works for me, and maybe I don't clearly understand why it works, but I know it produces improvements on a limited schedule for me over time.