Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Strength training pros and cons
Quote | Reply
I found an old thread on strength training from 2008, and was wondering if we could start up the debate again, perhaps with opinions on new research etc.

I am hoping to hear form athletes, coaches and some of those folks out there with a few letters in front of their names

The old thread kind of turned into a "good vs bad" argument with no real conclusion either way. Lots of one liners, you're wrong-I'm right etc.

So, I was hoping that when people voice their opinion on strength training they could describe, in more detail what they are "fore or against" and perhaps back it up with studies, personal experience and what has worked for coaches out there.

For example, I consider physio (strengthens inured joint structure), big gear on the bike (could help with power on the flats) and hilly trail runs (helps with stabilizers, and running strength) to be a form of "strength" training.

Thoughts?
Maurice
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The pros and cons are going to depend on what your goals are for strength training.

If you think doing lots of squats will make you faster than it's a con since you are wasting your time doing squats instead of biking.

If you are looking to improve joint stability and thereby reduce your risk of injury then it's a pro.

It should definitely be a huge part of your pre-seaon training as a means of improving your overall fitness. And it should be made a smaller and smaller portion of your training as you move closer to your A race.

At the end of the day triathlon is an endurance sport so make sure the focus is endurance. Your ability to squat 500lb once matters little when you will be peddling 90 rpm for 6 hours.

Also keep in mind that things like "hill training" and "big gear work" are closer to VO2max work, and not strength training in the traditional sense of the word.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cons: takes time away from training. If you have an hour to spare, you're better off swimming, cycling or running.

Pros: those doing strength may end up cross fitting and leave triathlon. Less congested courses.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Strength training helps reduce chances of injury and has marginal performance improvements. However if you are not training st least 15hrs a week, that time would be better spent doing proper training.

A good compromise can be 15mins of core/stretching working before a swim or after an easy run. That's what I do.

__________________________________________________
http://twitter.com/willrc91 --- instragram.com/willrc91
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [cannastar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As a strength coach I tell my people who do tri/running up front that they are better off spending their time doing the things they are training for, not spending the time in the gym lifting stuff with me. However, often I'll spend about an hour a week with them going over their training plans, working on "core" strength and any other joints they need strengthened or even just going over technique and thresholds. I'm a firm believer in strength, but I'm also a firm believer that if you want to be faster at swim/bike/run then you have to do that first - a lot - and get good at it.


Strength coach and post rehab injury specialist. Check out my blog at http://www.paradigmfitnessottawa.com.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
Cons: takes time away from training. If you have an hour to spare, you're better off swimming, cycling or running.

Strength training is also going to make you tired/fatigued which will impact your main training sets. Some times it's better to rest. If you are going in and doing huge leg sets it's going to have an impact, similar to if you went and did a bunch of hill repeats. That fatigue is going to carry forward into your next few workouts.

I rank it in importance with laundry. If all my clothes are clean I'll go to the gym. If there is a lot of crap at home piling up I'm better off doing chores.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Aqua Man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Aqua Man wrote:
The pros and cons are going to depend on what your goals are for strength training.

If you think doing lots of squats will make you faster than it's a con since you are wasting your time doing squats instead of biking.

If you are looking to improve joint stability and thereby reduce your risk of injury then it's a pro.

It should definitely be a huge part of your pre-seaon training as a means of improving your overall fitness. And it should be made a smaller and smaller portion of your training as you move closer to your A race.

At the end of the day triathlon is an endurance sport so make sure the focus is endurance. Your ability to squat 500lb once matters little when you will be peddling 90 rpm for 6 hours.

Also keep in mind that things like "hill training" and "big gear work" are closer to VO2max work, and not strength training in the traditional sense of the word.

Good points,

For me the goal for strength training is two-fold: injury prevention on the run and power development at certain intensities on the bike.

You are correct in that big gear, hill/trails on the run and paddle on the swim have a heavy aerobic (or anaerobic depending on how you do them) component to them, but because there is also a sports specific strength component to them, I loosely describe them as "strength" workouts, usually implemented after all of the "non-specific" work (early-mid april)
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:
power development at certain intensities on the bike.

For this don't waste your time in the gym. If you consider that on the bike
power = torque x rpm, where torque = force x distance
power = force x crank length x rpm, where force is what you press on the pedal, so

force = rpm x crank length / power

You can plot this on a chart known as a quadrant analysis
http://home.trainingpeaks.com/...adrant-analysis.aspx

What's really interesting is that as you pedal slower and slower you eventually get your maximum applied force, which is essentially the most you could possible push in a leg press. That number tends to be up around 800. But when you're biking you're never actually doing that, and the force you apply is closer to 200.

The point of all this is that spending 2 hours in the gym doing squats will certainly raise that maximum force, but won't actually translate into better cycling. If on the other hand you spend 2 hours a week doing things like VO2max work (high intensity intervals) you'll increase that 200 number, which is where you'll be biking.

Make sense?
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If its an addition to training its a pro, if it reduces your training its a con.........If you are a realitively injury free young athlete, otherwise.....

When you are on reduced overall training (off-season) hours, and during base training, two short weekly strength training sessions 30-60 mins is all you need to start to see a difference in your body, a little more shoulder strength, a little more back, maybe some stronger hip/glutes, work on those hamstrings.....Individualised functional training, not the gym standard heavy squats/bench presses...most athletes know where their body is weak, but do nothing to address those areas

As athletes age (I'm 50) I think these sessions grow in importance, both for performance and injury prevention, and should be continued year round, only being reduced to very short maintenance sessions in the final race prep stage of training prior to taper.

My experience, it won't do anything to help lower leg running type injuries, but it will make those hard swim sessions more manageable, that hard long session on the bike just a bit more manageable,and in the later stages of races, a little more muscle mass seems to stop the wheels coming off, it doesn't on its on make you any faster, but the increased training you can do because you are stronger does make you faster. Being stronger hopefully means you can recover just a little faster too.

The biggest Pro for strength training........Your "other" non training partner likes a harder stronger body ;)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>X
If you run long enough....something is bound to happen
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [TriTrev] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I used to think that weight training was a waste of time for cycling but I've seen the light, especially after I turned 40. You don't need to bulk up but you need to minimize your muscle mass loss as you age.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [wkwong] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
wkwong wrote:
I used to think that weight training was a waste of time for cycling but I've seen the light, especially after I turned 40. You don't need to bulk up but you need to minimize your muscle mass loss as you age.

-----

x2

People here seem to always relate everything to "peformance" instead of looking at the big picture which for most is general health and the holding back of the aging process.By being stronger I am able to deal with more training,more physical stuff and more of life in general......and seriously anyone can do some resistance training at home with 20 mins a day and some imagination,it need not cut into anyones precious tri-training time.

---
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Strength training keeps you're wife and kids from kicking your a$$. All aerobic makes a man with very small arms. I believe that is sufficient reason to strength train. Bench your weight 10 times is a good benchmark assuming you have a balanced training program. It does help to not weigh much :)
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...............NOT THIS AGAIN
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Big] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Big wrote:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...............NOT THIS AGAIN

------

Well now that we aren't allowed to talk about Lance what else is there to argue about....

Gooooooo Crosssssssfiiiiiiittttttttttt....We can all be warriors!!!

---
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Ultra-tri-guy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ultra-tri-guy wrote:
Big wrote:
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO...............NOT THIS AGAIN


------

Well now that we aren't allowed to talk about Lance what else is there to argue about....

Gooooooo Crosssssssfiiiiiiittttttttttt....We can all be warriors!!!

---


Good point
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Ultra-tri-guy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In that case let me chime in...N+1...............Strength trained before getting in triathlons = No injuries, Stopped strength training for about 3 years and did a LOT of swim biking and running (14 to 16 hour weeks) = every overuse injury in the book, Started strength training again = no injuries and feel more durable than ever and still training around 8 to 10 hours (no IM's)...........Overall - very little change in performance either way.....I would say I am faster now because I have been at it longer so performance isn't really static with respect to being an indicator of whether or not it increased MY performance...

but I do feel 10x better....
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Aqua Man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Aqua Man wrote:
mauricemaher wrote:
power development at certain intensities on the bike.


For this don't waste your time in the gym. If you consider that on the bike
power = torque x rpm, where torque = force x distance
power = force x crank length x rpm, where force is what you press on the pedal, so

force = rpm x crank length / power

You can plot this on a chart known as a quadrant analysis
http://home.trainingpeaks.com/...adrant-analysis.aspx

What's really interesting is that as you pedal slower and slower you eventually get your maximum applied force, which is essentially the most you could possible push in a leg press. That number tends to be up around 800. But when you're biking you're never actually doing that, and the force you apply is closer to 200.


The point of all this is that spending 2 hours in the gym doing squats will certainly raise that maximum force, but won't actually translate into better cycling. If on the other hand you spend 2 hours a week doing things like VO2max work (high intensity intervals) you'll increase that 200 number, which is where you'll be biking.

Make sense?

Some good points,

I have four basic goals with strength training as it relates to the bike.

First find balance left vs right, if an athlete is one leg dominant (former soccer player, snowboarder etc) and their distribution patterns are more than 2-3% off then we work on that first.

Next is stability or looking at joint structure strength (stabilizers etc), lots of body weight stuff, band stuff, some plyo stuff etc on an unstable platform to work joint structures in a way that hopefully makes an athlete "bomb proof" in terms of injury resistance, but also as efficient as possible so like you said above when they "apply force" they are doing so in the most efficient and economical way possible. The least work in with the most work out so to speak.

Once these two are met then we move to power development, this involves "cut downs" on the leg press and other machines.

For example when we do leg press we find a weight where we will fail on about 20 reps, then we pull a plate (about 15-25% of total) go to failure again then pull a plate repeat etc.

The end result is about 60-80 reps in a 1:20-1:30 span and by the end my HR gets up to about 180 (95%) and you have gone to failure 4-5 times within the set.

Full 4 min rest or so then repeat for a total of 3-4 times. I like these because by the end of the 6-8 week cycle a lift load which was once purely anaerobic, becomes easy enough that the action is more aerobic or has a higher than initial aerobic component.

I track power within this time period to see if we are "proving" the program (IM and threshold) to the best of our ability.

Fourth is making it specific by doing big gear stuff on the bike in the spring.

Having said that, stuff like this represents, 2-3 hours a week which some athletes are way better off spending else where. I consider the strength stuff as it relates to balance and injury prevention pretty critical across the board for all athletes and as some have stated, the power stuff more for the advanced athlete looking to break the plateau (icing on the cake) but who also has the time (ie no kids!)
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:

I track power within this time period to see if we are "proving" the program (IM and threshold) to the best of our ability.

And what have you found?

Shane
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
It depends....

To the person that says if you have time to do a strength session you'd be better off going for a swim, bike, or run. What about if you don't have time for those - what if you have time to quickly get in a strength session using your own body weight in front of the TV whilst cooking dinner? But don't have time to pack a bag and head out to the pool?

What about if you're incorporating your strength training within your current plan, ie paddles, big gear work (why would it just help with power on flat?) and hills on the run.

But I don't have letters in front of my name.

Don't complicate things - do hard stuff every day...different hard stuff..but hard stuff.

Don't read threads from that far back - these guys change their minds as often as their socks. They'll be telling you next year not to do bricks - it's cyclical.



Lance,
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Big] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Big wrote:
In that case let me chime in...N+1...............Strength trained before getting in triathlons = No injuries, Stopped strength training for about 3 years and did a LOT of swim biking and running (14 to 16 hour weeks) = every overuse injury in the book, Started strength training again = no injuries and feel more durable than ever and still training around 8 to 10 hours (no IM's)...........Overall - very little change in performance either way.....I would say I am faster now because I have been at it longer so performance isn't really static with respect to being an indicator of whether or not it increased MY performance...

but I do feel 10x better....

It seems this is the experience with most people (at least the ones I encounter). Does anyone know of a study that actually tracked injury rate over time with strength trainers versus non-strength trainers? I realize there would be huge amounts of variables so likely nothing like that has been tracked properly.


Strength coach and post rehab injury specialist. Check out my blog at http://www.paradigmfitnessottawa.com.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Salmon Steve wrote:

It depends....

To the person that says if you have time to do a strength session you'd be better off going for a swim, bike, or run. What about if you don't have time for those - what if you have time to quickly get in a strength session using your own body weight in front of the TV whilst cooking dinner? But don't have time to pack a bag and head out to the pool?


----

Mate have you been peeping in my living room windows.I do exactly that for 20/30 mins pretty much every day at dinner time.It is when I catch up on news and current affairs on the tv.

----
Last edited by: Ultra-tri-guy: Oct 3, 12 3:03
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [gsmacleod] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gsmacleod wrote:
mauricemaher wrote:


I track power within this time period to see if we are "proving" the program (IM and threshold) to the best of our ability.


And what have you found?

Shane

I'd like to know the answer to this as well. How would you possibly differentiate training effect from weight lifting effect in an N=1 scenario.



Heath Dotson
HD Coaching:Website |Twitter: 140 Characters or Less|Facebook:Follow us on Facebook
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
Cons: takes time away from training. If you have an hour to spare, you're better off swimming, cycling or running.

Pros: those doing strength may end up cross fitting and leave triathlon. Less congested courses.[/quote

Welcome back :-)

"Good genes are not a requirement, just the obsession to beat ones brains out daily"...the Griz
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Salmon Steve wrote:

It depends....

To the person that says if you have time to do a strength session you'd be better off going for a swim, bike, or run. What about if you don't have time for those - what if you have time to quickly get in a strength session using your own body weight in front of the TV whilst cooking dinner? But don't have time to pack a bag and head out to the pool?

What about if you're incorporating your strength training within your current plan, ie paddles, big gear work (why would it just help with power on flat?) and hills on the run.

But I don't have letters in front of my name.

Don't complicate things - do hard stuff every day...different hard stuff..but hard stuff.

Don't read threads from that far back - these guys change their minds as often as their socks. They'll be telling you next year not to do bricks - it's cyclical.



Lance,

That's different. You're actually swimming, cycling, and running. I think the OP says strength training meaning weights. If you just have 15min to spare, I guess you're better
off spending it making sure dinner doesn't taste like crap ;-)

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Ex-cyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ex-cyclist wrote:
gsmacleod wrote:
mauricemaher wrote:


I track power within this time period to see if we are "proving" the program (IM and threshold) to the best of our ability.


And what have you found?

Shane


I'd like to know the answer to this as well. How would you possibly differentiate training effect from weight lifting effect in an N=1 scenario.

Program start:

Started at 180 (then 135, 90, 45) lbs on the leg press, lifted just over 18000 lbs for 3 sets, just over 6000 lbs per set.

IM power just over 160 watts at 155-160 HR

Program end 8 weeks later:

Started at 270 (then 225, 180, 135) lbs lifted just over 30000 lbs for 3 sets just over 10000 lbs per set.

IM power 200-210 at 155-160 HR


About the same results for my GF who started lifting at 12000 pounds per set and finished where I started at around 18000 pounds 8 weeks later.
Her results went from IM power of 140 watts to just over 165 watts. 3 other athletes did this program with the most seasoned year over year athlete achieving about 8% gains in IM power.

Peak tested VO2 power (power at the end of a 20 min Vo2 max test) was only moderately changed for both (350-370 for me, 280-300 for her) so top end did not change as much as low end. VE (lung volume) was unchanged, O2 (vs Co2) patterns were changed for the better.

The training program on the bike was only about 2-3 hours/week (with some longer IM tempo intervals) as we were doing our longer stuff outside on the skate skis, the whole program had pretty minimal intensity at this point.

The thing I take away from these is that the weight I lifted at program start was purely anaerobic, where as at program end I was lifting that same weight (180 lbs) at the 1 min mark. So a change for the better, in terms of systems used at a given load.

Regarding the N=1 comment, this is possibly true. We took 4 years off from IM "focused" training. I have always found that there is a certain amount of residual fitness just "sleeping" there, so once the hours go up and your fitness starts trending for the better it is a bit hard to say was it the weights? Or just getting back into it, also when you start from a relatively low point in terms of IM power (myself and GF) gains are seen usually right away as there is a pretty big "getting back into it" effect. We'll try this again in Jan, to see how it works for us now that we have year over year fitness.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Nope..the OP wrote:

"For example, I consider physio (strengthens inured joint structure), big gear on the bike (could help with power on the flats) and hilly trail runs (helps with stabilizers, and running strength) to be a form of "strength" training.
Thoughts?
Maurice "

Anyway I'l play..

So about your crap dinner. At what point does strength training become useless to you? You accept big gear work is strength training and useful? What about 15 minutes of lunges in the garage with a barbell slung over the shoulder - springing back on your toes? Still strength work? Still useful?

Or does the fact you're not actually doing the run or bike mean by definition this training is useless?

What about 15 minutes of stride outs while the potato is baking....
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks, a few more questions if you don't mind.

mauricemaher wrote:

Peak tested VO2 power (power at the end of a 20 min Vo2 max test) was only moderately changed for both (350-370 for me, 280-300 for her) so top end did not change as much as low end. VE (lung volume) was unchanged, O2 (vs Co2) patterns were changed for the better.

What equipment and protocol did you use to test this?

Quote:
The training program on the bike was only about 2-3 hours/week (with some longer IM tempo intervals) as we were doing our longer stuff outside on the skate skis, the whole program had pretty minimal intensity at this point.

So in addition to the weights, you were doing 2-3 hours of IM effort riding? What effort were you doing on the skate skis?

Quote:
The thing I take away from these is that the weight I lifted at program start was purely anaerobic, where as at program end I was lifting that same weight (180 lbs) at the 1 min mark. So a change for the better, in terms of systems used at a given load.

So 180 on the leg press was a max effort at the beginning?

Shane
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What about them? Are you suggesting they help performance?

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
You know I am.

I'm asking your opinion.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't think it's useful.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Performance wise I don't think there is much, if any, evidence that it helps.

But I'm 45 and not built for endurance sports so I am not ever going to make money at this. While tri is the only sport I compete at I enjoy lifting and like being able to pick up pretty much anything. So I'll take the performance hit to look good on the beach.

The biggest pro is that your wife is watching me as I finish 5 minutes behind you while your scrawny butt is off getting a drink.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Shame on you.

:)
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
From a performance standpoint, aside from a couple of recent papers suggesting it could improve efficiency (running and cycling) I think it's not needed really. That said for well being, if an athlete still wanted to lift to not be the scrawny kid around the block then that's a different story :)

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Big] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Big wrote:
In that case let me chime in...N+1...............Strength trained before getting in triathlons = No injuries, Stopped strength training for about 3 years and did a LOT of swim biking and running (14 to 16 hour weeks) = every overuse injury in the book, Started strength training again = no injuries and feel more durable than ever and still training around 8 to 10 hours (no IM's)...........Overall - very little change in performance either way.....I would say I am faster now because I have been at it longer so performance isn't really static with respect to being an indicator of whether or not it increased MY performance...

but I do feel 10x better....

The 8-10 hours of training, is that all s/b/r? Or does that include the strength training? And what are your exercises/intensity for the strength training?

It's hard to equate the no injuries = strength training when the times are so markedly different. It may be possible that you did not pursue recovery enough when you were doing near double the s/b/r that you are doing now.

John



Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Big] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
so you swam, ran and biked more and you got more overuse injuries? wow, that's a stunner.

To the OP:

pros: it's good for your health and you will look better naked

cons: it will result in you doing less s/b/r and therefore you won't be as fast as you would if you spent that time s/b/r'ing.

Just decide which is more important to you. Personally, I lift some, but I didn't for the approximately 10 years when I spent a lot of time on SBR.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mr. mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mr. mike wrote:
so you swam, ran and biked more and you got more overuse injuries? wow, that's a stunner.

That's not really a fair statement. If he spends 3-4 hours a week lifting, then he's putting in the same amount of time training. Which is why I asked about it, I would suspect that the total time spent training is only different by an hour or two, but the recovery is different.

I think when he ramped up his s/b/r, he didn't allow sufficient recovery time. But, like most things, that's just a theory at this point.

John



Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cons: the only con I can think of is if you are doing hours a week and taking away from your key activities.

Pros: The use of activity specific strength training, IMO, can be a huge boon and help prevent injury in the long term. And that means you can train more often, instead of sitting on the coach or water jogging. This would include adding plyometrics to your track sessions etc...

Ian
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
We'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

With all things, regardless of papers, it comes back to 'it depends'.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Does gravity work? Well, it depends. ;-)

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You stick to your papers mate...

:)
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Looks like my papers help me do a pretty good job with the athletes I coach. Anyway, it's the crossfit season for you soon.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Yup I'm sure they do, reading your site seems you have some solid age groupers congrats.

The stuff I posted above was all part of the plan for winning the world cup overall in 08.

So again, it depends on the athlete. Let's agree to disagree - I really don't like dick swinging contests.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [gsmacleod] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 

What equipment and protocol did you use to test this?

velotron, Korr met cart with O2 and Co2. Vo2 max tests started at 60-100 watts and going up by X watts per minute until failure at 16-20 min. Did not test BL as I use more of a "staged" test for that where you sit at an effort for 3 min in order for BL values to saturate.

So in addition to the weights, you were doing 2-3 hours of IM effort riding? What effort were you doing on the skate skis?

Skate skis replaced long bikes, Total low-ball effort. for the long rides av HR is around 130-140, for skate skiing I would allow this to drift up by about 5 beats. IM stuff was done on Saturdays where the ride would be about 2-3 hours with about 40-100 min at just above IM tempo (about 5 beats or so) while monitoring power vs hr, we did mostly 20 min intervals.

So 180 on the leg press was a max effort at the beginning?


yes 180 lbs to start (fail on 20-25 reps then pull a 45, ie 180, 135, 90, 45)

Keeping in mind that in most of the earlier phases of strength training, the focus was balance, economy, efficiency and injury prevention. for most of us we can do this at home with about 100$ worth of bands, altus disc, swiss ball, a bit of core, exercise of your choice etc. At home it is also pretty easy to throw in 15 min here or there, I see nothing wrong with this approach as long as people like it and it works for them.

I wouldn't say that this particular phase in the gym is something every one "should" do, this is a variation on a variation of one way to go about reps and sets that may work for the right person at the right time.

In fact my whole strength program is a variation on a variation, taking some stuff from the former track coach here Derek Evely and some stuff from a pretty good Ag cyclist who used to live here Olav Stana, throw in a bit of my own stuff, mix with some trial and error and you have a program which works pretty well for some people but is and always should be evolving for the better.

For some people they never get to this point because we want to spend as much time as possible getting people strong enough so that they don't get injured when intensity picks up.

This is something an athlete "could" try to see if it fits their program. At the end of the day you would know after 2-3 weeks and a few tests with your power meter if it was right or should be dropped in favour of other training.

I am also curious to see if others have done "cut-downs" and how it has worked for them.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There was no Rugby World Cup in 08! Busted mate!

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Salmon Steve wrote:
Nope..the OP wrote:

"For example, I consider physio (strengthens inured joint structure), big gear on the bike (could help with power on the flats) and hilly trail runs (helps with stabilizers, and running strength) to be a form of "strength" training.
Thoughts?
Maurice "

Anyway I'l play..

So about your crap dinner. At what point does strength training become useless to you? You accept big gear work is strength training and useful? What about 15 minutes of lunges in the garage with a barbell slung over the shoulder - springing back on your toes? Still strength work? Still useful?

Or does the fact you're not actually doing the run or bike mean by definition this training is useless?

What about 15 minutes of stride outs while the potato is baking....

None of the things you list are true strength work.

True strength work is useless when it interferes with sport-specific training, either through opportunity cost (you could have been doing something else) or failure to adequately recover and this reducing the effectiveness of subsequent sport-specific training. It is also useless if e training adaptations are counter-productive: the famous mitochondrial density and capillarization stuff.

And to the OP who thinks that 20-25 reps is anaerobic: wrong. It has a major aerobic component, so the fact that you increased the weight over your gaining period includes improving your aerobic capacity, which likely contributed to your improved power on the bike.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Devlin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
but he's not spending 3 or 4 more hours training the same way. I think if you spend 12 hours per week sbr vs. 8 hrs per week sbr, your risk of an over use injury goes up no matter what you do with the "extra" 4 hours when you reduce sbr hours. If you spend the extra 4 hours lifting, you might hurt something else, but it's not going to cause, for example, plantar fasciitis or IT band syndrome or the other things that we have regular threads on.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Salmon Steve wrote:

It depends....

To the person that says if you have time to do a strength session you'd be better off going for a swim, bike, or run. What about if you don't have time for those - what if you have time to quickly get in a strength session using your own body weight in front of the TV whilst cooking dinner? But don't have time to pack a bag and head out to the pool?

Are you actually getting quality work done?

To that scenario I'd say forgo the chin-ups and take care of your life. Use that time to get the kitchen cleaned up, dishes done, and bills paid. If you are that crammed for time you are probably better off resting and giving yourself some down time.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
There was no Rugby World Cup in 08! Busted mate!

Touche!

:)

http://www.sweat7.com
Facebook Page: Sweat7
Twitter: @sweat7coaching
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
Looks like my papers help me do a pretty good job with the athletes I coach. Anyway, it's the crossfit season for you soon.

Glad you are out of the doping threads and discussing things like Mauna Kea and weights.

I was just doing body weight squats and calf raises for 30 minutes reading and re reading this thread....OK, not 30 minutes, just 2 minutes...

carry on.

I do find some of the best anaerobic training are 50m all out sprint and plymotrics.

After over a year of not being able to do them, I've just started that back last month.

Add in some deadlifts and ab work, and I feel like a normal human again.

Too much aerobic work sends my body out of balance....ancient hunters needed a balance of aerobic and anaerobic just to survive. As we age if we don't work the anaerobic system, will it gradually goes away (use it or lose it) and then the ancient hunter becomes excess baggage in society because he can't hunt anymore without an anaerobic system....think about that for a second guys....

Dev
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well, as soon as I get chase by a saber tooth, I'll think about sprints.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mr. mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mr. mike wrote:
but he's not spending 3 or 4 more hours training the same way. I think if you spend 12 hours per week sbr vs. 8 hrs per week sbr, your risk of an over use injury goes up no matter what you do with the "extra" 4 hours when you reduce sbr hours. If you spend the extra 4 hours lifting, you might hurt something else, but it's not going to cause, for example, plantar fasciitis or IT band syndrome or the other things that we have regular threads on.

I can see what you are saying, but I think it is a valid avenue to explore, as well as how fast he ramped up, how closely he stacked bricks, primary workouts, speedwork, etc. I don't think it's one specific factor that you could point to and say "AHA! No speed work on Tuesday's is the key! Bungee jump instead!", but rather the structure of how it was done, with many small factors contributing.

John



Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You should do some strength training because it is good for you, but it will not likely make you faster. See below:

1: Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1993 Aug;25(8):952-9. Links
Dry-land resistance training for competitive swimming.
Tanaka H, Costill DL, Thomas R, Fink WJ, Widrick JJ.
Human Performance Laboratory, Ball State University, Muncie, IN 47306.
To determine the value of dry-land resistance training on front crawl swimming performance, two groups of 12 intercollegiate male swimmers were equated based upon preswimming performance, swim power values, and stroke specialties. Throughout the 14 wk of their competitive swimming season, both swim training group (SWIM, N = 12) and combined swim and resistance training group (COMBO, N = 12) swam together 6 d a week. In addition, the COMBO engaged in a 8-wk resistance training program 3 d a week. The resistance training was intended to simulate the muscle and swimming actions employed during front crawl swimming. Both COMBO and SWIM had significant (P < 0.05) but similar power gains as measured on the biokinetic swim bench and during a tethered swim over the 14-wk period. No change in distance per stroke was observed throughout the course of this investigation. No significant differences were found between the groups in any of the swim power and swimming performance tests. In this investigation, dry-land resistance training did not improve swimming performance despite the fact that the COMBO was able to increase the resistance used during strength training by 25-35%. The lack of a positive transfer between dry-land strength gains and swimming propulsive force may be due to the specificity of training.

J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 1998 Sep;38(3):201-7.Correlations between peak power output, muscular strength and cycle time trial performance in triathletes. Bentley DJ, Wilson GJ, Davie AJ, Zhou S.

School of Exercise Science and Sport Management, Southern Cross University,
Lismore, NSW, Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between the peak power output (Wmax),
peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak), lower limb muscular strength and cycling time (CT)
during a short course triathlon race. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The study involved a
cross-sectional analysis involving both physiological and biomechanical
variables. SETTING: Testing was performed at the exercise physiology and
biomechanics laboratory, School of Exercise Science and Sport Management,
Southern Cross University, Lismore, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Ten male
triathletes who had been endurance cycle training for a minimum of 12 months
prior to the commencement of the study. MEASURES: Subjects completed a maximal
incremental cycle test as well as a series of muscular function tests including
a 6-s cycle test, a concentric isoinertial squat jump as well as an isokinetic
leg extension test performed at velocities of 60 degrees (s-1, 120 degrees (s-1
and 180 degrees.s-1. In addition, each subject also participated in a triathlon
race of distance 1.5 km swim, 40 km cycle and 10 km run. RESULTS: A significant
correlation existed between CT and absolute VO2 peak and Wmax. However, no
significant correlations were found between the results of the muscular function
tests and the incremental cycle test as well, as CT during the triathlon race.
CONCLUSIONS: Wmax and WDmax are useful variables in assessing cycle performance in triathletes. However, the importance of muscular strength of the lower limbs may be minimal in overall cycle performance during a short course triathlon
race.


Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1999 Jun;31(6):886-91.The effects of strength training on endurance performance and muscle characteristics. Bishop D, Jenkins DG, Mackinnon LT, McEniery M, Carey MF.

Department of Human Movement Studies, The University of Queensland, Brisbane,
Australia. dbishop@wais.org.au

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of resistance
training on endurance performance and selected muscle characteristics of female
cyclists. METHODS: Twenty-one endurance-trained, female cyclists, aged 18-42 yr,
were randomly assigned to either a resistance training (RT; N = 14) or a control
group (CON; N = 7). Resistance training (2X x wk(-1)) consisted of five sets to
failure (2-8 RM) of parallel squats for 12 wk. Before and immediately after the
resistance-training period, all subjects completed an incremental cycle test to
allow determination of both their lactate threshold (LT) and peak oxygen
consumption VO2). In addition, endurance performance was assessed by average
power output during a 1-h cycle test (OHT), and leg strength was measured by
recording the subject's one repetition maximum (1 RM) concentric squat. Before
and after the 12-wk training program, resting muscle was sampled by needle
biopsy from m. vastus lateralis and analyzed for fiber type diameter, fiber type
percentage, and the activities of 2-oxoglutarate dehydrogenase and
phosphofructokinase. RESULTS: After the resistance training program, there was a
significant increase in 1 RM concentric squat strength for RT (35.9%) but not
for CON (3.7%) (P < 0.05). However, there were no significant changes in OHT
performance, LT, VO2, muscle fiber characteristics, or enzyme activities in
either group (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: The present data suggest that increased leg
strength does not improve cycle endurance performance in endurance-trained,
female cyclists.

Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
Well, as soon as I get chase by a saber tooth, I'll think about sprints.


Give it a few more years and you will understand. It is one body containing two systems but one set of organs. We're supposed to have a well functioning aerobic and anaerobic system for optimal health.

That's why teenagers generally have much better health than masters athletes and masters athletes are running around to see their anti aging docs because suddenly their T levels are not the same as teenagers. So how do you stay in the optimal health zone?

Edit: Glad to get the controversies off the 007/doping threads. This place needs an outlet for endless disagreements. If we all got a long, then there would be no fun for the lurkers. They need to do the "rubber neck" as they drive by the latest crash/accident on ST.
Last edited by: devashish_paul: Oct 3, 12 14:31
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't know, but despite all my aerobic training and zero weight, my last physical was excellent, and my T-level was 950ng/dl.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
But are you 50 or approaching 50?
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm 42. But it doesn't matter Dev. I was hearing the same stuff when I was 30. Just wait to hit 40, you'll see...And now it's 50. I'm not arguing that we are
aging, I'm arguing that weights, and anaerobic training has much to do with feeling better. You're presenting some N=1 info. Works for you. Great. Would I
recommend it? hmm...unless there are studies (and I haven't looked really) suggesting it does, no I won't.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Devlin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Just IMO with no scientific data to back it....

I do believe that SOME strength training, particularly in the "off" season is beneficial, especially as we age and begin to naturally loose some of our muscle mass. I also think (again, can't prove...) that there are likely some benefits in terms of injury prevention by helping strengthen joint complexes, stabilizing muscles, etc. None of this is likely to make you any faster, but if it does help prevent injury, and keeps you in the game, then there's certainly at least an indirect benefit in that. From an overall FITNESS perspective (not race performance, per se) some strength training is probably a good thing.

****************************
Inner Drive Cycling|Fitness Studio
Indoor Cycling|Functional Fitness|Multisport Club & Coaching
http://www.innerdrivestudio.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mr. mike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
And to the OP who thinks that 20-25 reps is anaerobic: wrong. It has a major aerobic component, so the fact that you increased the weight over your gaining period includes improving your aerobic capacity, which likely contributed to your improved power on the bike.
-----------------------------------
Ken L.

Perhaps I should re-state, when you lift for 20 seconds or less (say 20-25 reps) when I said "purely" anaerobic I should have said "mostly" or "primarily" anaerobic when comparing it to an activity which lasts say 1:20.


For most of what we do over 3-6 seconds there is a mix of both systems working, the shorter the maximal effort the more the anaerobic system comes into play. There is also a systemic vs localized anaerobic effect meaning that squats which involve larger muscle groups, create a larger systemic anaerobic condition than say 1 arm bicep curls, but in both conditions the working muscle could be in a "primarily" anaerobic state.


This is why after 1:20 or so my HR goes up to 180 (max bike 192 or so) so in this regard I like these because they apply high degree of both systemic and localized tear down, and hopefully after recovery the largest amount of compensation for my goals.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [jsnowash] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
jsnowash wrote:
Just IMO with no scientific data to back it....

I do believe that SOME strength training, particularly in the "off" season is beneficial, especially as we age and begin to naturally loose some of our muscle mass. I also think (again, can't prove...) that there are likely some benefits in terms of injury prevention by helping strengthen joint complexes, stabilizing muscles, etc. None of this is likely to make you any faster, but if it does help prevent injury, and keeps you in the game, then there's certainly at least an indirect benefit in that. From an overall FITNESS perspective (not race performance, per se) some strength training is probably a good thing.

I believe that I read (But could not tell you where if pinned down) that the muscle mass loss was preventable by almost any weight bearing or otherwise muscle stressing exercise, regardless of type.

I wouldn't mind seeing a study or review or hell, even a poll on the number of injuries per capita in the couch to tri crowd vs. the ones that came to tri from a recent sporting background, whether it was any of the primary disciplines or something other.

In certain cases (dev being an example), weightlifting helps correct deficiencies and/or keeps muscles in balance. This prevents injury for him, so for him, weight lifting is absolutely a benefit to s/b/r because it enables him to do it. If you have something that needs correcting or is otherwise not being addressed by s/b/r, then I'm all for strength training as the means to an end.

If, however, you are an otherwise healthy AGer of any age, then weightlifting *probably* is extraneous and he/she would be better served by more of sport specific. Where many get confused is "But macca/tinley/insert pro of choice does it". Sure, and they are at the pointy end of the stick where more s/b/r probably won't make a difference, and the supplemental strength training might.

John



Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
I'm 42. But it doesn't matter Dev. I was hearing the same stuff when I was 30. Just wait to hit 40, you'll see...And now it's 50. I'm not arguing that we are
aging, I'm arguing that weights, and anaerobic training has much to do with feeling better. You're presenting some N=1 info. Works for you. Great. Would I
recommend it? hmm...unless there are studies (and I haven't looked really) suggesting it does, no I won't.

Nothing major happens till mid to late 40's so your N=1 example of being studly at 42 is actually N=5 Billion and sure, you can do really well without working on your anaerobic system at all....have a look at most 40-44 Age group podiums and they are not that far off 30-39...

Even in 45-49, the podiums are actually not that far off 30-39....but have a closer look. Almost all the guys in 45-49 winning are actually 45 and 46 year olds....the exceptional cases are 48 and 49. Go to 50-54 and a lot less are keeping up with 30-39.

So you have a while to go till the real aging effects kick in. Heck, I'll be 47 in a few weeks and I barely feel them myself and if it was not for ripping apart and banging up my body in a major accident last year, I'm pretty sure that I'd be close to the range of my all time PB's on the swim and bike. The run is a bit slower due to a few injuries, but even then, I ran my all time half marathon PB at 44 (perhaps a functioning of never racing that distance at 27 but still). Just saying that the aging affects don't kick in early in your 40's. Seriously at 42 you are probably closer to a 20 year old than a 52 year old is to a 47 year old.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You're changing the target of the discussion AND are presenting no data whatsoever. So I'll do as Dan, and will repeat twice, I won't recommend it, even for my older
athletes.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm not asking you to recommend anything to anyone. I'm just saying that you'll get there....eventually when you are 50-54....
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You mean older? Yeah I sure hope so. Does that mean I will feel the need for weights and anaerobic training? Absolutely not.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
You mean older? Yeah I sure hope so. Does that mean I will feel the need for weights and anaerobic training? Absolutely not.

It's all relative. Some of the times that you posted for your rides would put me in the anaerobic stage :)

Of course, MY t level is only in the 650 range. You stud.

John



Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
You're changing the target of the discussion AND are presenting no data whatsoever. So I'll do as Dan, and will repeat twice, I won't recommend it, even for my older
athletes.

I think you are right about this from a triathlon performance perspective. As you said, no convincing scientific evidence to suggest that it is important for endurance performance, even for older athletes. At 42 though, you should start to consider doing a little bit yourself. It is going to be harder to put on muscle as you get older. I am 3 years older than you and am trying to put on some muscle. It just does not happen that fast any more. This will get worse at 50 and much worse at 60. If I want a shot at carrying around a decent amount of muscle in my 60s, and I do, I know I need to have some success now. I want the added muscle (mostly the added strength) just to be able to live a vigorous, active life. I want to be able to carry suitcases, lift one side of the sofa, go surfing, load my paddleboard on top of my car, simple stuff, late into life. To do that I need to preserve what muscle I have. And I need to add a reasonable amount if I am to preserve as much physical ability as I can late in life. Triathlon alone was not going to give me enough, although it certainly helps.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Devlin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For the record, in my 20s I was training a lot more. Around 30hrs pls and my T levels were a loooooot lower. As in under 350.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Lifting furniture or luggage is anaerobic system. Eventually you'll need to work all of that or you'll lose the ability. Its just a matter of when. Don't be so sweeping in your statements that you'll never have a need to work your anaerobic system and train it. At some point you will get to the point that you actually have to train those systems to do simple tasks in life.

Some of us just choose to be proactive about it rather than wait till we can't. I can still play soccer and touch football with teenagers but almost all the parents of the teenagers that I coach cannot (including my wife). No magic there...use it or lose it. It happens to all of us, so what do you do to hold it off?

Your older athletes may not want to play touch football or soccer or tennis or a game of baseball. That's fine for them. Some of us kind of enjoy that (plus we have to shovel snow in Canada anyway....)

Dev
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Mike Prevost] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Actually I have a relatively fair amount of muscle mass. A probably way too much on my legs. I'm pretty sure I'd run way better with less.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Mike Prevost] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Mike Prevost wrote:
FrançoisM wrote:
You're changing the target of the discussion AND are presenting no data whatsoever. So I'll do as Dan, and will repeat twice, I won't recommend it, even for my older
athletes.


I think you are right about this from a triathlon performance perspective. As you said, no convincing scientific evidence to suggest that it is important for endurance performance, even for older athletes. At 42 though, you should start to consider doing a little bit yourself. It is going to be harder to put on muscle as you get older. I am 3 years older than you and am trying to put on some muscle. It just does not happen that fast any more. This will get worse at 50 and much worse at 60. If I want a shot at carrying around a decent amount of muscle in my 60s, and I do, I know I need to have some success now. I want the added muscle (mostly the added strength) just to be able to live a vigorous, active life. I want to be able to carry suitcases, lift one side of the sofa, go surfing, load my paddleboard on top of my car, simple stuff, late into life. To do that I need to preserve what muscle I have. And I need to add a reasonable amount if I am to preserve as much physical ability as I can late in life. Triathlon alone was not going to give me enough, although it certainly helps.

My dad does nothing but bowling and ride his bike (~ 150-200 mpw). He can do all the things you describe (With the exception of the paddleboard, I don't think he'd have one), and he's hardly every lifted weights in his life. Unless you count the haying he did on the farm in the summer growing up. N=1 but still...

John



Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
Actually I have a relatively fair amount of muscle mass. A probably way too much on my legs. I'm pretty sure I'd run way better with less.

If nothing, we channelled your energy out of the doping threads and into the weight training threads!!! Success!
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Devlin] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Devlin wrote:
Mike Prevost wrote:
FrançoisM wrote:
You're changing the target of the discussion AND are presenting no data whatsoever. So I'll do as Dan, and will repeat twice, I won't recommend it, even for my older
athletes.


I think you are right about this from a triathlon performance perspective. As you said, no convincing scientific evidence to suggest that it is important for endurance performance, even for older athletes. At 42 though, you should start to consider doing a little bit yourself. It is going to be harder to put on muscle as you get older. I am 3 years older than you and am trying to put on some muscle. It just does not happen that fast any more. This will get worse at 50 and much worse at 60. If I want a shot at carrying around a decent amount of muscle in my 60s, and I do, I know I need to have some success now. I want the added muscle (mostly the added strength) just to be able to live a vigorous, active life. I want to be able to carry suitcases, lift one side of the sofa, go surfing, load my paddleboard on top of my car, simple stuff, late into life. To do that I need to preserve what muscle I have. And I need to add a reasonable amount if I am to preserve as much physical ability as I can late in life. Triathlon alone was not going to give me enough, although it certainly helps.


My dad does nothing but bowling and ride his bike (~ 150-200 mpw). He can do all the things you describe (With the exception of the paddleboard, I don't think he'd have one), and he's hardly every lifted weights in his life. Unless you count the haying he did on the farm in the summer growing up. N=1 but still...

John

Cool, you follow your dad's plan. I'll follow mine. I have more confidence in my plan though. I might be silly but I belive that the best way to add strength is to strength train. I have not actually tried to add strength by bowling though. ; )
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
strength training pro:



strength training con:


Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You're changing the target again... And keep in mind that I start with far more muscle mass than you scrawny dev ;-)

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Last edited by: FrançoisM: Oct 3, 12 16:13
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think the title of the thread was "Stength Training Pros and Cons".

So what is the target of this thread? I think it is to discuss both pros and cons.

I think what Mike Prevost said, and what I am saying is that if you want a well functioning anaerobic system, then train it. If you don't want anaerobic capacity that is fine. Just saying that general health involves both and that's why I keep doing a variety of anaerobic exercises.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
Actually I have a relatively fair amount of muscle mass. A probably way too much on my legs. I'm pretty sure I'd run way better with less.

You may be right about that. Probably not going to lose it any time soon either. I would consider that a good thing but your goals are different than mine. At some point, if you live long enough, you are going to find that a lack of strength is limiting what you can do. You probably have many years left before that happens though.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Come on now...don't go Dev Paul in all the threads. The question was asked on a Tri forum. Yes, strength training is useful for some. But we're on a tri forum.
Thanks for bringing up other sports just to make a point...Indeed, If I played rugby or football, I'd probably do some strength training too.

I guess you're going to start commenting on bike position threads and say 'no...your front end is too low, move it up 10in, it's not healthy to ride like that?'

That is such a typical 'Dev intervention thread'... ;-)

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Fran�oisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Can someone please explain something to me....

If you have a weakness when you swim bike or run....like your "core" becomes fatigued while doing SBR....then wouldn't doing SBR be training that specific deficiency? Otherwise it would not become fatigued? So why would you need to strength train in order to address the weakness?


-------------------------------
I'm faster in Kilometers!
Wattie Ink Triathlon Team
Powered by Accelerate 3
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Fastyellow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Why is desert_dude using FYs handle??

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Francois...a couple of points. Please debate the topic, please don't attack the person writing. You are welcome to attack what is presented. Let's be grown up and not call each other names (or refer to a behaviour using a person's name in a negative tone).

I think we're allowed to have different perspectives. Just because this is a tri forum, it does not preclude having a discussion about why something may be good for general health (or not).

Seriously man, I've been respectful towards you and this is exactly why others don't want to post, on certain discussion/topics. My skin is thick enough. You've been around long enough that you don't need to resort to that type line of discussion. It's OK if you don't like me, or my line of thinking. Just attack what I am presenting and we're all good.

Start attacking the people and this is exactly why people don't want to post on slowtwitch.

PS. At least running sprints do have some value in triathlon....just ask Ms. Norden :-). The rest of the stuff....sure, I'm not saying that it is a waste of time from a tri perspective.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Fran�oisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
He channels through me.


-------------------------------
I'm faster in Kilometers!
Wattie Ink Triathlon Team
Powered by Accelerate 3
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Someone peepeed your cornflakes this morning or what? You're the one not debating the topic and switching to debating whether or
not strength training is useful in general health. Sure it is. We're on a tri forum though. You've been changing the target throughout...first
it's age related in tri, then it's general health. That's something you often do. I don't attack your comments. I answer them. And each time
you go on a tangent. So, I answer it again. After a while it gets a bit tiring though.
Thus my comment. And there is a little ;-) at the end of my post...So your tone perception is a bit off.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Man I've been to the sales, brought next years meat, come back, and you're still going on this.

I think it's great that you're back regardless. What'd really make it would be if The Authority chimed in now to put us all straight....
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What happened to The Authority actually?

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
Too busy to post - making thousands off Crossfit I heard.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ironically, I tried crossfit a bit and enjoyed it. It changes stuff a bit. I don't like the nearly cult approach to it, but other Han that, it's fun to do occasionally.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
 
So holistically you're saying it benefited you?

Doesn't that fall into the category of 'it depends'

;)
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Salmon Steve] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Fair enough.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi Francois,

Probably good to take a step away for a few hours. I think as slowman said, if we were face to face, we'd be able to have a good discussion on this. Sometimes the medium gets in the way. Perhaps from your perspective it came across like I was changing the topic, because we really didn't have the opportunity for real time interaction for you to suck things out of my head in an instant in time. Rather it was delivered in a sequence rather than one post, giving you the feeling that I changed the topic. Asychronous interaction sometimes just does not work for this reason.

So let me summarize my thoughts overall (before this thread even came up):


  • General health is important for the aging athlete. If we can keep our general health up, there is a better chance of not losing speed. As masters athletes, we're generally not trying to gain speed, we're just trying to keep the aging process at bay and not slow down.
  • When general health deteriorates, it impacts many aspects of life, not just triathlon
  • Having good aerobic and anaerobic systems are both important for general health
  • Older athletes (and humans in general) lose a lot of their anaerobic abilities before they lose aerobic
  • The only way to keep up anaerobic capacity is to train it
  • A side benefit is we can keep doing activities that involve anaerobic action. But the action of keeping doing them helps us to "keep doing it" (use it or lose it)
So in the end, the biggest benefit of anaerobic activity is hopefully slowing down the aging process. That is the big picture goal. The side benefit in aging less than the other guys in the same age group is having the better function of organs and everything else that comes with an effectively younger body. Obviously there is nothing that says this will result in faster triathlons. I'm just saying that the guys who are 48-49 are generally going slower than the guys 45-46. So the goal would be to have the overal health of a 45 year old (or even a 41 year old) at 49.

In closing, yes, I was being honest asking you to just debate the points. Attacking the poster or in the last case, using my name (or anyone elses) in a derogatory way is not helpful in fostering an environment where we can just share ideas. If every time we disagree with a poster we take a shot at the person, then the environment in the forum deteriorates quickly. Guys like us who have been around here, for this long don't need to be part of that.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [devashish_paul] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Dev,there is little point arguing this point again and again as people take vastly different lines on what is their perception of "the benefits" of doing resistance work for triathletes and this medium,as you correctly pointed out,does not allow for an actual discussion on the topic.All that ends up happening is a bunch of people getting all wound up as they try to argue their particular line of thinking without really considering where the others are coming from.

The scientists among us take one distinct view and that seems only to related to "performance" on the race course,where others expand the benefits of resistance training to meaning the ability to be strong enough to deal with everyday physicality,the ageing process,dealing with injury AND performance on the race course.For me that is the distinction.

----
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
FrançoisM wrote:
Ironically, I tried crossfit a bit and enjoyed it. It changes stuff a bit. I don't like the nearly cult approach to it, but other Han that, it's fun to do occasionally.

Francois,

Ok, so maybe not a "fan" of traditional strength training. Nor am I necessarily, having said that every workout between 1 second an X hours has a certain "strength" component to it, because muscles are required to fire.

So if you or some of your athletes are weak power developers (like me) what do you do to improve power on the bike? I guess my intent was two-fold when starting this thread (maybe I didn't convey this well enough):

Define strength


Then define what makes you stronger


For me and a lot of the athletes I coach, holding or increasing power on the bike is pretty critical, CDA Power to weight etc are important (another thread, perhaps tomorrow;) but once this is looked at the majority of our time is spent is focused on increasing power at a given race pace.

And as the IM Bike is about 50-60% of the race, I think power development on the bike is one variable which should (maybe) be looked at more than the others.

There fore "strength" training- or anything that helps you develop more power on the bike or anything that helps us prevent injury on the run is pretty important.

outside of the obvious stuff of course, (race day nutrition, how to change a flat, power/CDA, power/weight etc....)

So what are your thoughts? How (in a general sense) or what (in a general sense) do you do to make athletes stronger? As with any one else on this forum, just looking for your opinion.

Cheers,
Maurice
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There are many variations that fall under the umbrella strength training. Strength training can surely be done in the disciplines of the sport but I am going to assume most of the focus here is should I lift weights or not.

The interesting thing is a PubMed or SportsDiscus query for strength training and triathlon yields very few scholary journal articles yet their is some pretty good controversy around this topic.

Where are some proven benefits of strength training: Muscular imbalance improvement, protein sparing on calorie restricted diet.

A study I would like to see done is FTP measurement and its coorelation to Watts/KG on a calorie restricted diet in an attempt to lose body weight in conjunction with changes in LBM, BF% etc... with and and without a strength program over a duration of something like 8-12 weeks in trained athletes.

I would like to guess that we would see a more favorable body composition profile in the weight training group and would be curious to see what happens to FTP as the other group loses weight as well (thinking the non weight training group is going to lose more weight... with more loss from protein which is heavier will FTP decrease?? and how much in relationship to the weight training group) then the biggie we all know it comes down to Watts/kg. I really want to go with the weight training group on this one but havent seen a study like this. It would have a pretty good coorelation to a majority of Age groupers with less than ideal Body composition and weight and may be more beneficial to their performance vs an elite that stays realitively close to the ideal composition throughout more of the year and is working in a tight window of specificity improvement.



Dynamic Athlete ProgrammingVIP Endurance Racing | Like us on Facebook Get Your Training Plan Here
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Vo2max sessions / Lactate threshold sessions work rather well to increase your power :-)
Although I know several of the scientific coaches here will disagree or be on the fence, I also like big gear work.
At least, it remains specific, and you're still biking. The studies by Ronnestad at al. show an increase in power
with strength work. The issue I have with it is that it requires max reps. If I were able to see my athletes do them,
I may try, but given I coach most of them online, I think it's too much of a risk, and the injury risks are just not worth
it.

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [FrançoisM] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If I was being totally objective and I didn't know anything about triathlon or strength training and happen to stumble across this thread I would probably conclude the following...

Specificity is best for developing a "specific skill set"...do as much as you can with sustainabliltiy being the key (everyone has different tolerance levels for various activity)

Strength training properly is benificial so do it to the extent it doesn't negatively effect the above ( this would vary by athlete's health with respect to biomechanical fitness, goals, and time of year)...
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I started tri training on 1/2/12 and I came into it with a shoulder tear. I wouldn't use that side for anything.... opening doors, carrying my purse. It hurt to close the car door, to turn the wheel of the car. I took BodyPump at the gym and that hurt also. Shoulder surgeon said not to do the surgery until I can't stand the pain anymore.

A couple of months after I started with my coach in April I started strength training with her. She does strength training for triathletes, and includes a lot of core. Four months later, I carry grocery bags with my left side, open doors, carry stuff slung on it. I don't even think about it. Once in a blue moon I find an exercise that hurts it too much and I don't do it.

Strength training has tremendously benefited my quality of life. I wouldn't drop it for the word. During tri season I do 2 X a week and off-season 3 X a week. I give up training time and recovery, but gain so much more with it.
Last edited by: GatorDeb: Oct 4, 12 1:00
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:


Skate skis replaced long bikes, Total low-ball effort. for the long rides av HR is around 130-140, for skate skiing I would allow this to drift up by about 5 beats. IM stuff was done on Saturdays where the ride would be about 2-3 hours with about 40-100 min at just above IM tempo (about 5 beats or so) while monitoring power vs hr, we did mostly 20 min intervals.

So it would appear that you were doing a fair amount of aerobic exercise at intensities pretty specific to IM effort. I'm curious as to whether the skate sking has a much larger impact than the strength training as, anecdotoally, I've seen several athletes who ski through the winter with little or no riding and transition very quickly back to bike.

Quote:
yes 180 lbs to start (fail on 20-25 reps then pull a 45, ie 180, 135, 90, 45)

180lbs soulds really low for a weight that would lead to failure after only 20-25 reps. Before you started this, did you have trouble walking up more than two flights of stairs?

Shane
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hi Maurice,

When you identify an imbalance between legs, how do you go about building up the weakened leg without causing it injury or other problems? Do you isolate that leg during exercises? Which exercises do you do? I keep picking up hamstring injuries in my weaker leg.

I'm interested in this since I've a visible difference in size between the quads on both legs even though they measure up the same length so thats not the cause, though did play soccer for 15years with my right leg benign the dominant leg.

Thanks,
-C
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's an good topic to bring back as most of us go into the offseason. Last year I focused on TRX, core, but did some short high-intensity workouts on the bike, swim, and run...like 5x1.5min hill repeats (which really hurt) or 5x1-3 min on the computrainer at a high intensity. This helped me lose weight, keep the number of hours down, and put me in a good place to face the season.

I emailed that super AGer Sami Inkinen about this and he mentioned: "... rather focus on squat, deadlift and some sport specific movements with heavier weights. Finally, bodyMASS is counterproductive, but muscle strength is a good thing. Ski jumpers face this dilemma as they want to be as light as possible but jump super strong. What they do (at least in Finland) is heavy weights with super fast movements, but only 70% of the max rep count in each set e.g. 5-7 reps when they could do 10. That might apply to cycling and running too.."

Thus, I looked up a link on ski jumper and cross country skiing strength programs: http://www.ausport.gov.au/...sports/nordic_skiing


"...Ski jumping on the other hand is more of a technical sport where power to weight ratio plays a major role. Explosive strength is a major focus of ski jumpers training. This is opposed to gains in muscle size that is detrimental to the ability to fly through the air. Mostly training for ski jumping is highly specific focusing on explosive power and the technical nature of jumping. Ski jumpers have relatively low energy requirements due to the short nature of the activity and the fact that a lot of jumps these days have chair lifts attached. This removes the energy expended hiking to the top of the jump. Coupled with the fact that most ski jumpers are trying to keep weight as low as possible means that a ski jumpers actually intake is relatively normal.
Nordic combined skiers have to combine the endurance capacity of cross country skiing and the explosive power and low body mass of ski jumpers...."

Either way, there is short, explosive movements involved. Like, Hill Running repeats, that HURT, but pretty short.
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
For me personally...

Pros: Keeps my middle age ass in shape for other things besides triathlon and running.

Cons: Having to spend time in the middle of a goofy crowd of high calf black sock wearing grunting crossfit / tough mudder dweebs. Crowds up the gym as they strut around holding their arms and elbows out wide with their lats all puffed up. Then you have to hear them talk all about it in the locker room....
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [Cake] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cake wrote:
Hi Maurice,

When you identify an imbalance between legs, how do you go about building up the weakened leg without causing it injury or other problems? Do you isolate that leg during exercises? Which exercises do you do? I keep picking up hamstring injuries in my weaker leg.

I'm interested in this since I've a visible difference in size between the quads on both legs even though they measure up the same length so thats not the cause, though did play soccer for 15years with my right leg benign the dominant leg.

Thanks,
-C

Hi,

Have you explored any local bike fitters? My advice would be to get a really good fit first, analyze where and when power is dropping off then find a really good physio second.

I was lucky enough to coach 2 physio's this year, they both worked at the hospital and one of their husbands was a physio in private practice. To be honest a lot of the solutions we came up with for certain issues stemmed from their advice. Imbalances are often a result of injury or "pre injury condition" so without knowing you or testing you it is a bit above my pay grade to specifically advise you.

Having said that, in a general sense one leg squats (body weight only) on an unstable platform, one leg big gear (careful with these), knee lifts (for hip flexors) etc are things we came up with that seamed to work well. Although in your case if it is a hamstring issue I'm not sure if these would work.

I have some hamstring issues, and for me its because my glutes are pulling on them, so in this regard the problem is the glutes but is exhibited in the hamstring.

One simple piece of advice, that I have been told is that when you have a problem in a certain area look on either side, ie hamstring take a look at the glutes, med quad pain- take a look at IT issues etc.

Probably not what you were looking for but stuff like this is best left to the local sports med physio types, do you have any good local experts?
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [gsmacleod] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gsmacleod wrote:
mauricemaher wrote:


Skate skis replaced long bikes, Total low-ball effort. for the long rides av HR is around 130-140, for skate skiing I would allow this to drift up by about 5 beats. IM stuff was done on Saturdays where the ride would be about 2-3 hours with about 40-100 min at just above IM tempo (about 5 beats or so) while monitoring power vs hr, we did mostly 20 min intervals.


So it would appear that you were doing a fair amount of aerobic exercise at intensities pretty specific to IM effort. I'm curious as to whether the skate sking has a much larger impact than the strength training as, anecdotoally, I've seen several athletes who ski through the winter with little or no riding and transition very quickly back to bike.

Quote:
yes 180 lbs to start (fail on 20-25 reps then pull a 45, ie 180, 135, 90, 45)


180lbs soulds really low for a weight that would lead to failure after only 20-25 reps. Before you started this, did you have trouble walking up more than two flights of stairs?

Shane

Hey,

Come on that sleds gotta be worth a few pounds!

Having said that because of your post I am now quitting triathlon and my sole purpose in life is to beat you in a leg press dual. As you live in NS and I am in BC maybe we could meet in Winnipeg in January, heard its awesome that time of year, if you win I'll pay for a Jets game ;)

Regarding the skate skiing, I am a huge fan. I did IM Aus (early april) in 01,02, and 04 each time most of my work was done on the skis with only about 300-400km of cycling under my legs, never seamed to be an issue.

Catherine Pendral (world champ MTB) lives here and she spends a lot of time on the trails, as does Olav Stana- a pretty good Ager (World AG champ on skis and bike)

I just ski because I prefer to be outside, not because I think its better or worse than cycling, although as a cross over sport to cycling it's pretty damn close. Like you say because its weight bearing and involves similar muscle groups perhaps there is an additional strength component over cycling.

In terms of intensity most of it was not at but below IM HR (160 or so)
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
mauricemaher wrote:


Come on that sleds gotta be worth a few pounds!

I had assumed that you had accounted for the weight of the sled; that makes more sense now.

Quote:
Having said that because of your post I am now quitting triathlon and my sole purpose in life is to beat you in a leg press dual. As you live in NS and I am in BC maybe we could meet in Winnipeg in January, heard its awesome that time of year, if you win I'll pay for a Jets game ;)

First, I don't think anyone is going to be watching any Jets games this year and second, I'm pretty sure that pretty much anyone who has even walked by a weight room in the past five years can push more weight than I can :)

Quote:
Regarding the skate skiing, I am a huge fan. I did IM Aus (early april) in 01,02, and 04 each time most of my work was done on the skis with only about 300-400km of cycling under my legs, never seamed to be an issue.

Catherine Pendral (world champ MTB) lives here and she spends a lot of time on the trails, as does Olav Stana- a pretty good Ager (World AG champ on skis and bike)

I just ski because I prefer to be outside, not because I think its better or worse than cycling, although as a cross over sport to cycling it's pretty damn close. Like you say because its weight bearing and involves similar muscle groups perhaps there is an additional strength component over cycling.

In terms of intensity most of it was not at but below IM HR (160 or so)

I think that your ability on the bike after little bike training is likely more the result of the skate skiing as opposed to anything you did in the weight room. You've seen success with it before and it appears that you have again; I would be very hesitant to attribute any of your bike fitness to your leg press routine.

Shane
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [gsmacleod] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've found for me that I need to do about 1-1.5 hrs a week of strength training (all body weight). I do this at night in my apt or at the gym when I can get there. It doesn't take any time away from normal training. I think a lot of people don't do enough core work. I need to keep my core strong to keep good form (s, b, r). I know I have some imbalances as well so the strength training minimizes these imbalances.

I agree that weight training shouldn't take the place of s, b, r. The s, b, r workouts are planned first, then the strength training is planned around those workouts. I typically do strength training on my easy days or when I don't have a pm workout (I would swim in the am).

blog
Quote Reply
Re: Strength training pros and cons [mauricemaher] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sorry, yours was the first thread I clicked on from a google of the endless slowtwitch strength training threads. But here's a current review, "Optimizing strength training for cycling and running performance. A review": http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/...1/sms.12104/abstract
Epub ahead of print and I can't see the full article yet, but abstract takeaways reinforce what has been covered in the past: benefit to running performance from combining endurance training with heavy strength or explosive strength training. Benefit to cycling performance from heavy strength training. Some theorizing about why.
No comment on whether big gear work, sprints, hills, etc count as strength. Plyometrics known to be beneficial for running performance, strength training with low reps, high weight, sounds like high-risk for AGrs.



mauricemaher wrote:
I found an old thread on strength training from 2008, and was wondering if we could start up the debate again, perhaps with opinions on new research etc.

I am hoping to hear form athletes, coaches and some of those folks out there with a few letters in front of their names

The old thread kind of turned into a "good vs bad" argument with no real conclusion either way. Lots of one liners, you're wrong-I'm right etc.

So, I was hoping that when people voice their opinion on strength training they could describe, in more detail what they are "fore or against" and perhaps back it up with studies, personal experience and what has worked for coaches out there.

For example, I consider physio (strengthens inured joint structure), big gear on the bike (could help with power on the flats) and hilly trail runs (helps with stabilizers, and running strength) to be a form of "strength" training.

Thoughts?
Maurice
Quote Reply