Which muscles in the legs are most usefull to train in gym for riding a bike?

[Zorotheslacker]

Well the question wasn't directed at me, but I consider endurance cycling to be any event which is dominatly aerobic in nature.

That covers events from the individual pursuit and longer (although the IP does have an important contribution to the energy demand supplied by anaerobic metabolism - circa 25-33%).

IOW anything longer than a few minutes and we are talking endurance cycling.

Thing is, many aerobic events use time above the AT to win. So do you need resistance based develoment to climb a long hill or TT - maybe not, although I think so, esp for one day amature distance (Grand Tour type rides aside). It sure seems to help on attacks and finishing.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Thing is, many aerobic events use time above the AT to win. So do you need resistance based develoment to climb a long hill or TT - maybe not, although I think so, esp for one day amature distance (Grand Tour type rides aside). It sure seems to help on attacks and finishing.

I said dominantly, not exclusively.

To win a race you need to be at the pointy end when it counts, and be sufficiently fresh to be able to sprint well enough. That requires highly developed aerobic fitness. The higher your threshold power level, the far less taxed you are during a race, and you have more race winning options at your disposal.

Besides, the best training for sprint ability, and for attacks a little longer than that as well as bridging to or creating breaks, is still performed on the bike.

Again, the issue isn't whether there's benefit from the gym, it's whether such benefit is superior to what's achieveable on the bike.

The right sort of on-bike training also works those other muscles in the core and upper body etc, and in a manner specific to the demands placed on them. Think standing starts, hard accelerations from slow start or on a hill, long contiguous aerobic efforts on the flat and climbs, threshold intervals, out of saddle work, supra threshold work and so on.

 

[Juan Speeder]

Do some high rep squats and dead-lifts during the off-season.

^That's all that needs to be said.

Pages of nonsense aside, of course.

 

[Zorotheslacker]

...The right sort of on-bike training also works those other muscles in the core and upper body etc, and in a manner specific to the demands placed on them. Think standing starts, hard accelerations from slow start or on a hill, long contiguous aerobic efforts on the flat and climbs, threshold intervals, out of saddle work, supra threshold work and so on.

Those are all resistance exercises and something my son has done for years. But...

What hemoglobin saturation (SpO2) do you see with an oximeter on the bike when doing this?
What do you see in the gym?

On the bike you are working other systems and not able to put the strain on the muscle groups you want, while in the gym - you can isolate what you want to work on.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Those are all resistance exercises and something my son has done for years. But...

What hemoglobin saturation (SpO2) do you see with an oximeter on the bike when doing this?
What do you see in the gym?

I don't know and I don't care.

What matters is power output and actual performance.

On the bike you are working other systems and not able to put the strain on the muscle groups you want, while in the gym - you can isolate what you want to work on.

Sure but that assumes such isolated muscle work transfers to on bike performance and I'm not convinced that's been reliably demonstrated nor that it is superior to on bike work.

Joint forces, velocities and angles are all important, once you remove one or more element from the training equation, well the performance transfer back to the bike diminishes.

 

[Rip:30]

Riding bikes turns your posture into garbage, erodes your strength and makes you look like a ***. If you ride all summer skip the legs in winter and work on arms, back and core to try to maintain some semblance of manliness. Cycling is not really very good for your body if done in excess; heed not the morons in this thread claiming to know which pro does what and so forth. The reality is it's best to try to minimize your time on bike unless you want to look like an anorexic 13 y.o. girl. Follow a normal balanced fitness routine and live a happy and healthy life and still ride fast at times, unlike these so call pros that couldn't accomplish a pull up if their life depended on it.

 

[Captain Serious]

Riding bikes turns your posture into garbage, erodes your strength and makes you look like a ***. The reality is it's best to try to minimize your time on bike unless you want to look like an anorexic 13 y.o. girl.

Ha! Nah, it depends on genetics, and how you ride and eat (and how you rest, too, I suppose).
When I first started riding, my legs initially got bigger, just from doing TT-type intervals, shorter intervals, some long hill sprints and shorter sprints. However, this hypertrophy quickly (obviosuly) plateaued after a few months.

I usually do anywhere from 16,000 to 19,000km a year, and I've managed to maintain a somewhat-chunky 78kg, at 6ft. Even the naturally muscular pros maintain some size, even in their upper arms, even when they do 25,000km a year. Riders such as Hushovd, Greipel and Cancellara have pretty big legs, even after doing massive miles, year after year.

But yeah, I like to do some upper body weights, mostly for vanity. I'm no longer a testosterone-laden teenager, so i'm never gunna put on size while I'm doing 300 to 400km a week.

 

[Captain Serious]

Everything I've read over years said that the only riders who can benefit from doing leg weights are sprinters and kilo riders, and in between, if there is such an event these days

 

[DanielsDad]

I don't know and I don't care.

What matters is power output and actual performance.

This is core to your argument and you don't know and you don't care?

 

[Zorotheslacker]

I don't know and I don't care.

What matters is power output and actual performance.


Sure but that assumes such isolated muscle work transfers to on bike performance and I'm not convinced that's been reliably demonstrated nor that it is superior to on bike work.

Joint forces, velocities and angles are all important, once you remove one or more element from the training equation, well the performance transfer back to the bike diminishes.

So if actual performance is better due to diet, age (15), weights, miles, equipment - how does one determine what not to do. To me - if it is working, why change it.

 

[Zorotheslacker]

...
[/I].

Again, the issue isn't whether there's benefit from the gym, it's whether such benefit is superior to what's achieveable on the bike.

I think so in combination with distance. Meaning I would say have a base of some 400Kish / week and that 3 hours in the gym on top of that would be better than 3 hours (100K) on the bike.

Or

400K bike + 3 hours gym >(is better than) 500K bike

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

You are taking a position based on something you don't know about -the capacity to do work based on the oxygen in the system. This is core to your argument and you don't know and you don't care.

Thanks for your input.

I was asked if I measure it, not whether I know about it.

I don't measure SaO2 because it's not particularly relevant as a measure of actual performance, nor of whether a particular exercise is eliciting the desired physiological adaptation. If you were really interested in O2 kinetics, you would measure O2 utilisation rate, not SaO2.

But even then VO2 is not helping assess other important aspects of aerobic performance (i.e. gross efficiency and fractional VO2max utilisation at threshold).

One might use a SaO2 measure as a proxy for assessing likely impact on maximal O2 uptake at say different altitudes. But as something to monitor the effectiveness of doing weights versus efforts on a bike, no.

What matters is how much power a rider can sustain, and especially expressed as a ratio to their body mass and also to their coefficient of drag area.

Hence why I use a power output as a cycling performance measurement - it is far more useful and instructive, as well as being readily available and convenient.

O2 utilisation capacity is enhanced with endurance training, and not by weights. This is really basic stuff and well established in the literature.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

I think so in combination with distance. Meaning I would say have a base of some 400Kish / week and that 3 hours in the gym on top of that would be better than 3 hours (100K) on the bike.

Or

400K bike + 3 hours gym >(is better than) 500K bike

I think there are other questions to consider:

What about in comparison with specific interval work targeted at the desired adaptations?

Is the on-bike work as effective as it could be?

Does the gym work impair the ability to do quality on bike work?

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

So if actual performance is better due to diet, age (15), weights, miles, equipment - how does one determine what not to do. To me - if it is working, why change it.

My view would be if you are getting good progress, and are attaining the desired goals, then stay the course. If jnr is enjoying it and motivated, then keep on keeping on.

But of course it's common that confirmation bias makes us think something is (or isn't) responsible for a change in performance, when often it's just a correlation or unrelated. That's human nature.

Working out what works and doesn't isn't all that easy, but there are some fairly well established principles and evidence upon which we can base these decisions, just as there are elements that are less well understood and so we all make judgement calls based on experience, sound principles and personal opinion, and of course the individual's specific circumstances.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Riding bikes turns your posture into garbage, erodes your strength and makes you look like a ***. If you ride all summer skip the legs in winter and work on arms, back and core to try to maintain some semblance of manliness. Cycling is not really very good for your body if done in excess; heed not the morons in this thread claiming to know which pro does what and so forth. The reality is it's best to try to minimize your time on bike unless you want to look like an anorexic 13 y.o. girl. Follow a normal balanced fitness routine and live a happy and healthy life and still ride fast at times, unlike these so call pros that couldn't accomplish a pull up if their life depended on it.

Not sure I agree with your extreme premise of the impact of cycling, but I do make the distinction between those that are cycling as a form of exercise, enjoyment, health and well being, social and/or vanity reasons, from those who are training purely for performance oriented outcomes.

I don't seek to dissuade anyone from heading to the gym, only to discuss the relative merits with respect to performance oriented cycling.

The nature of what exercise/training one should do has to account for the individual's specific circumstances, needs, interests, motivations and goals.

 

[Captain Serious]

I think so in combination with distance. Meaning I would say have a base of some 400Kish / week and that 3 hours in the gym on top of that would be better than 3 hours (100K) on the bike.

Or

400K bike + 3 hours gym >(is better than) 500K bike

Hmmm, I wonder. Perhaps not always, at least.
Consider this case study:

This guy cut his intensity RIGHT back; virtually doubled his time on the bike; his riding time in zone 1 went from 4 hours a week to 15 (!!!); and after a few months his LT power increased 14%, and his VO2 increased by 11%.

He went on to finish 3rd in his country's under-23 TT, not far behind Thor Hushovd.

http://www.sportsci.org/2009/ss.htm

From the article:

Case study #1
From Soccer Pro to Elite Cyclist

"Knut Anders Fostervold was a professional soccer player in the Norwegian elite league from 1994 to 2002. A knee injury ended his soccer career at age 30 and he decided to switch to cycling. Knut had very high natural endurance capacity and had run 5 km in 17:24 at age 12.

After 15 y of soccer training at the elite level, he adopted a highly intensive training regime for cycling that was focused on training just under or at his lactate threshold and near VO2max; for example, 2-3 weekly training sessions of 4-5 × 4 min at 95 %VO2max. Weekly training volume did not exceed 10 h.

After 2.5 years of this high-intensity, low-volume training, Fostervold initiated cooperation with the Norwegian Olympic Center and his training program was radically reorganized. Weekly training volume was doubled from 8-10 h to 18-20. Training volume in Zone 2 was reduced dramatically and replaced with a larger volume of training in Zone 1. Training in Zone 5 was replaced with Zones 3 and 4, such that total training volume at intensities at or above lactate threshold was roughly doubled without overstressing the athlete.

The typical effective duration of interval sessions increased from ~20 min to ~ 60 min (for example 8 × 8 min at 85-90 %HRmax with 2-min recoveries). The intensity zones were initially based on heart rate but later adjusted relative to lactate and power output measurements made in the field. Table 7 shows the training intensity distribution and volume loading for the athlete during the season before and after the change in training to a high-volume program. Table 8 shows the outcome.

Table 7. Comparison of weekly training intensity distribution and total volume in 2004 season and 2005 season – Case 1.
Intensity zone

.Zone..........................2004................2005
(%HRmax)............hours:min............hours:min
5 (95-100 %)...........45m (8.5 %).........0:05m (0.5 % of week)
4 (90-95 )................0...........................0:40m (4.0 %)
3 (85-90 %)............0:30m (5.5 %).......1h:00m (5.5 %)
2 (75-85 %)............3h:05m (36 %).......1h:00 (5.5 %)
1 (55-75 %)............4h:20m (50 %)......15h:20m (85 %)
Weekly totals..........8hr40m................18hr:05m
Annual totals...........420hrs.................850hrs


Table 8. Physiological testing before and after training reorganization – Case 1.
................Pre....8wk.post...18 wk......Change 0-18 wk
VO2max......81.........90.........88..........11 %
VO2max.....6.8..........7.3........7.3..........7 %
LT power....375w......420w....440w.......14 %
W/kg-1:.......4.5.........5.2.......5.2............15 %

The athlete responded well to the training load amplification and reorganization. During the 2005 season, after 2.5 y performing a low-volume, high-intensity program, a season training with higher volume and lower average intensity resulted in marked physiological and performance improvement. Although the athlete’s training de-emphasized both training near his lactate threshold intensity and training at near VO2max, both of these physiological anchors improved markedly.

Fostervold won a bronze medal in the Norwegian national time-trial championships, seconds behind former world under-23 time trial champions and Tour de France stage winners Thor Hushovd and Kurt Asle Arvesen. His failure to perform even better, given his exceptionally high VO2max, was attributed to poorer cycling efficiency and aerodynamics and a lower fractional utilization at lactate threshold compared to the best professionals with many years of specific training. In 2006 and 2007 he represented Norway in the world championship time trial. His absolute VO2max in 2005 was equal to the highest ever measured in a Norwegian athlete.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Coach Ferg linked to this item elsewhere, but I suggest reading it all, and not just abstract/conclusions or cherry pick.

The level of investigation on this topic is pretty inadequate overall (just look at Table II as you decide how much weight to place on the conclusions), and many studies don't really examine the key questions adequately or with appropriate controls.

http://scholarsresearchlibrary.com/EJSES-vol1-iss3/EJSES-2012-1-3-90-102.pdf

 

[DanielsDad]

There must be a thread somewhere...

It's not a strength sport. It's a power sport, with power over various durations of relevance and typically also expressed relative to body mass and aerodynamics.

But it's still dominantly an aerobic sport and without a primary focus on developing that capability, you'll never be at the pointy end of a race when it matters.

Perhaps you can explain which gym exercises are more effective at improving cycling power output (expressed as W/kg and/or W/m^2) than can be attained through specific on-bike training.

Is there a thread anywhere on power vs. time - standards on how power is measured?

I wanted to do some comparisons. I'm looking for sprint power, 1 min, 5 min and 15 min and then long - hour of power. Also on sprint power how long a 90% max power can be held. I see fast guys that can't hold a sprint and guys that can sprint long.

If there is not a thread already one should be started.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

Is there a thread anywhere on power vs. time - standards on how power is measured?

I wanted to do some comparisons. I'm looking for sprint power, 1 min, 5 min and 15 min and then long - hour of power. Also on sprint power how long a 90% max power can be held. I see fast guys that can't hold a sprint and guys that can sprint long.

If there is not a thread already one should be started.

I can't say there is a thread on here specifically on this, but there are plenty of references on the topic of power profiling, fatigue resistance, and the shape of the mean maximal power - duration chart.

As for how power is measured, well usually with a calibrated power measurement device, but perhaps you mean under what conditions such power data is obtained. e.g. do you gather 30-second power performed at a high quasi-steady state effort versus an all out approach akin to a 500m TT or Wingate test.

I'm not sure there are specific protocols for gathering various MMPs for different durations, other than to use whichever either maximises your average power for the duration, or is specifically relevant to your event (e.g. a pursuit rider might want to know their 4 or 5-min power on a track in a fixed gear, rather tha on a 5-min hillclimb).

As for comparisons, well gathering such data for the purposes of comparison with others isn't generally the point of the exercise, rather it's to build up a profile of someone's individual characteristics in order to inform them on what elements of their physiological (and perhaps technical) attributes need most attention when considered with whatever their goals/events are.

 

[DanielsDad]

I..but there are plenty of references on the topic of power profiling, fatigue resistance, and the shape of the mean maximal power - duration chart.

I used advanced search and can't easily find the power chart.

I want to see power for the 1, 5, 15 min periods. Can you link me to a chart?

 

[42x16ss]

I think there are other questions to consider:

What about in comparison with specific interval work targeted at the desired adaptations?

Is the on-bike work as effective as it could be?

Does the gym work impair the ability to do quality on bike work?

These are points I've always considered when providing guidance.

When in the gym I find that I get best results by focusing on core strength and flexibility, along with exercises that train you to recruit your muscles effectively and efficiently rather than focusing on power - leave that for when you're on the bike.

Pilates can be an excellent way to improve tracking through your pedal stroke, identify imbalances and improve range of motion and muscle firing. A 45 minute pilates session each week can provide much more benefit than shoving heavy weights around at the gym.

 

[42x16ss]

I used advanced search and can't easily find the power chart.

I want to see power for the 1, 5, 15 min periods. Can you link me to a chart?

http://www.amazon.com/Training-Racing-Power-Meter-Hunter/dp/1934030554

I got myself a copy earlier this year, a good way to get started with a PM.

 

[Zorotheslacker]

I used advanced search and can't easily find the power chart.

I want to see power for the 1, 5, 15 min periods. Can you link me to a chart?

This site has good info: http://www.53x12.com

 

[42x16ss]

I used advanced search and can't easily find the power chart.

I want to see power for the 1, 5, 15 min periods. Can you link me to a chart?

Is this the chart?

 

[Michele]

These are points I've always considered when providing guidance.

When in the gym I find that I get best results by focusing on core strength and flexibility, along with exercises that train you to recruit your muscles effectively and efficiently rather than focusing on power - leave that for when you're on the bike.

Pilates can be an excellent way to improve tracking through your pedal stroke, identify imbalances and improve range of motion and muscle firing. A 45 minute pilates session each week can provide much more benefit than shoving heavy weights around at the gym.

I guess it depends also on what kind of routine/work/etc you usually do.
Example; if you sit in office all day long, compared to someone doing outdoor activities.
Agree?