There is only one accepted definition of strength. Until people understand it, and how it differs from other physiological determinants of performance in various sports, it is really pointless to try to go any further.



No, all I am saying is that, as of today, no published study* has shown that strength training improves endurance cycling performance in trained cyclists (whereas about a half-dozen have reported that it does not). Again, you can only go by the data that are available (wasn't this a point you were harping on previously in this thread?).

*There is one abstract, but until the details become available with publication of the entire paper, it is difficult to say what it really means.




It's not a "stupid argument", but simply a statement of fact: the publication of new data does not necessarily mean that prior data are automatically wrong or obsolete.



Precisely my point - thank you for helping me make it.



No, I'm saying that you need to distinguish between the role of strength, per se, and the putative benefits of strength training - these are two different issues, since strength training can potential impact other aspects of physiological function as well (e.g., improve running economy in runners, presumably by "stiffening their springs").



In science, if it isn't published it is as if it doesn't exist. IOW, publication is how data are "vetted" for mass consumption; failure to publish therefore means that no one wants to accept your results (and they can't cite them even if they wished to).



Yes (especially considering that Carmichael/Armstrong are well-known for their attempts to play head-games with their competition...consider, for example, the report in VeloNews today that Armstrong is as fit now as he was in April of most of his Tour-winning years. Fact, or fiction?).



By "no evidence" I mean "no published papers". IOW, I'm not relying on "the preponderance of the evidence" or even how I interpret, but merely stating a verifiable fact.



I know for a fact some of Armstrong's closest and longest-standing advisors monitor this and/or other groups to which I post (hi Dean!). So, too, does the head physiologist for the AIS (hi Dave!), those who work with the Cervelo TestTeam (hi Damon), one of the leading cycling biomechanists in the world (hi Jim!), etc. As well, a number of my other academic colleagues read lists such as this one, not to mention the myriad number of graduate students out there who are still transitioning in their identify from athlete to scientist. IOW, web forums such as this have far greater reach than you seem to realize.

(And while I was typing the above, who should call me on my cell phone but Dean...how ironic!)