---

______________________________________
"Competetive sport begins where healthy sport ends"

Well....it does not exactly work that way. With weight training, you are getting hypertrophy mainly in the larger fast twitch muscle fibers. These are not the same ones that are doing most of the work while cycling. Andy Coggan did a nice post on the force requirements of cycling. It is VERY low. Strength is not a limiter in something like a 40K time trial.

So....lets say you have a choice (in addition to your normal training schedule) between 30 minutes, twice per week in the weight room or 30 minutes, twice per week doing high intensity inervals on the trainer. Which one will make you faster on the bike?

Mike

.......Ducks float, but so does wood. Wood also burns as do witches. So, if she weighs less than a duck the she must be made of wood and therefore a witch and must be burned.

; ^ )

Your logical reasoning is sound and is a starting point for a good hypothesis. Unfortunately, that hyposthesis has yet to be proven through testing. Lifting weights doesn't make you faster, riding does.

Take the legs off of a 160 lb man (named Lance) and replace them with the legs of a 300 lb muscle man (named The Rock!) and see what happens. I'd be willing to bet Lance would become one hell of a wrestler.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

This will not answer the question directly but...

I was recently on a strength and conditioning course run by UK Athletics and saw a video clip of Paula Radcliffe (front) squatting 120kg.

It doesn't seem to have done her too much harm

ahh nothing better than completely hammered ST posts, my favorite!

---

runfatmanrun.blogspot.com

Don't let the Kenyans see that video.

There have been many runners who have dabled with it, but no correlation has ever been shown between lifting and success in an ednurance sport.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Seems like every book I have read on ironman training includes weight training as an important part of the training plans. If strength training has no benefit, why is this the case?

There is no need to touch the weights as a triathlete. You can do a lot of strength and core training exercises using your own body weight.
Also swimming itself is a great upper body exercise and for distance running and bicycling you do not want to touch any weights.
I always have a good laugh when I see people lifting in the gym with huge arms and chest and a huge beer belly.

---

--------------------------------------------------------
I see obsessed people.

I think so much of the time when strength/weight training is brought up and argued here, a large part of the problem is that it's discussed as if it's one specific thing ... weight training ... as if everyone does it exactly the same and there's only one way to do it. Well, guess what ... there's more than one way to do it. And for whatever discipline you want it to help, there's a right way and a wrong way.

I initiated a weight training program in the Fall of '05 and my '06 cycling season was off-the-charts better than any other I've ever had in my life. I wasn't in the gym grunting my brains out to do four reps with 450 pounds on the squat station. Everything I do is lighter weights and higher reps. I do 3 sessions per week during the winter months and continue with two lighter sessions per week all through the remainder of the year. The program is geared towards my entire body, not just my legs. It was more like circuit training, too. High reps, enough weight to be a challenge, but not so much that I can't maintain good form at all times. I do two sets of each exercise and move to the next with very little recovery in between. I cover more ground in the gym in 10 minutes than most of the muscleheads cover in 2 hours.

This is critical ... I'm self-employed and I get to ride just about all I want, so the gym is supplemental. If I had less time and had to chose between the two, I'd eliminate the gym and stay on the bike (and probably do more core strength exercises at home, which I do as well). Dr. Max Testa has written some interesting pieces on weight training for cyclists. I don't have links, but here's the gist. Building muscle tissue without building the capillary system to carry wastes away from that muscle tissue is pretty disastrous for endurance athletes. A cyclist who spends too much time in the gym and not enough on the bike will have power in short burst, but will find that climbing longer hills and longer, sustained efforts will cause wastes to build in the muscles extremely fast. The burn and the bonk come quickly. But if the aerobic system is developed along with the muscle tissue, and the right kind of muscle tissue is built, it can all be good. The aerobic system MUST be the main priority, but if it's in place, then a proper weight program can be icing on the cake.

Ah ... good time to borrow on someone else's signature line. Weight training is the icing on the cake, but most folks don't have a cake yet.

.

---

Bob C.

The "science" on any matter can never be settled until every possible variable is taken into account.

"Don't let the Kenyans see that video."

Barry,

It's pretty clear and obvious, that if you look at any Kenyan or any other world class distance runner, that they very likley have never been near a gym, weight machine or stack of weights in their lives.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Addendum to my last post:

1. I'm 51. I think this kind of weight training that I'm talking about is much more important for an aging athlete than for younger ones. With age, there are other issues that make a focus on all-around core strength more of a consideration.

2. Regarding Dr. Testa and his views on building strength, I believe he'd say that there are a whole lot of interesting exercises you can do ON THE BIKE to improve muscle strength and build the capillary system simultaneously ... like low rpm hill repeats, etc.
.

---

Bob C.

The "science" on any matter can never be settled until every possible variable is taken into account.

Just some thoughts here.

1) As you get older you lose muscle. Most men/women over 30-35 need to lift weights to retain muscle.
2) A weight regiment will assist in injury prevention.

Those are the best two reason to lift regardless of wether or not you believe it will make you a faster cyclist.

So in the case with the 150 and 175 lbs man

1) Wind resistance.
2) More muscle requires more Oxygen (This why most believe that weights are not beneficial)
3) Rolling resistance.

In regards to #2. A weight lifting regiment IMO works if you stay specific to your sport and perform the regiment properly with the appropriate nutritional plan.

I have always believed that during your base phase, the best thing to do is lift and then let atrophy take over during your build period to create an optimal ratio, and drop your weight regiment down enough to prevent injury.

Not only that, but it has been disproven:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...;itool=pubmed_docsum

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

 

In regards to #2. A weight lifting regiment IMO works if you stay specific to your sport and perform the regiment properly with the appropriate nutritional plan.[/reply]I started doing lat pull downs, rows, and bench press, and am feeling F*** strong on the pool.

Obviously you have some animosity against weight rooms.

In regards to losing muscle with age. This a fact. What the other poster fails to consider is what muscles.

The femoris muscle otherwise known as your quads decreases with age. This is not just with geriactics. This is with males and female 20-70 years of age. This is also with regular exercise. Now on the contrary studies do show that the upper body reacts differently to age related atrophy in which the loss is not significant.

Atrophy is also different between male and females.
In males the calve muscle and tibialis anterior will be more prone to atrophy then females. Athletes will ward this off much better then non athletes, but will still suffer. Weight regiments for control groups ward atrophy off the best.

In regards to injury prevention and that research does not prove this. That comment really doesn't deserve a response. There is sooooo much research on this, it should be regarded as fact. Go get yourself injured and then go to pretty much any physical therapist in the world and they will eventually get you lifting weights. Now I realize this is recovery, but it's the same principal that you are strengthening the supporting muscles.

Perhaps this is a terminology problem. Maybe the term strength training should be used instead of weight training. If you do any type of plyometric workout you are still strength training.

You are an argumentative person aren't you. Moving onto "Specific to your sport" This is aimed more at plyometric workouts, but yes there are sport specific strength training excercises. Basketball players are commonly seen doing box jumps, boxers are commonly seen jumping rope, soccer players are common seen doing lateral jumps. This easily applies to cyclist. In my plyometric workouts I can achieve a cycling cadence easily doing box touches, or box marches.

Finally in regards to building up muscle to let it go away. This is not a new concept and you are not removing all the muscle that you put on. You are optimizing the muscle. I am not going to get into Neural muscular development, you can read up on it yourself it you wish, but that is one reason. Most athletes do not strength train the same year round, nor should they. If you believe in peaking then you should believe in optimization of muscle. No-one can remain peaked all year long. Same thing goes with strength ratios in endurance athletes. Thre is a periodization that leads to optimal muscle and types of muscle.

I do realize there is no convincing you. Posting this for others so do not feel obligated to reply.

I am definitly no triathlon coach, but I am a certified personal trainer and have a background in kinesiology as well as avidly participating in triathlon.

I am a huge advocate of weight training.

Different types of weight training for different sports. Same as different running shoes for distance(cushioned) and for track (spikes).

Just my 2c.

---

"It is not the great things we do in life that really matter, it's the small things we do with a great heart..."-Mother Theresa

Its more specific to triathlon than sitting on the couch, and it helps with day to day life. That's good enough for me. Plus it makes me feel good :-)

Its more specific to triathlon than sitting on the couch, and it helps with day to day life. That's good enough for me. Plus it makes me feel good :-)

What he said!

Well said!

.

---

Bob C.

The "science" on any matter can never be settled until every possible variable is taken into account.

Yes, the other poster doesn't know what he is talking about. I did find this reference to him, though:

"ANDREW COGGAN, Ph.D.,

associate professor, Division of

Gerontology, Department of

Medicine, Geriatric Research,

Education and Clinical Center

(GRECC)"

I'm sure that you, O anonymous poster, know more about the effects of aging on muscle than he does.

I have nothing against weight rooms. I just think that frequenting them is time better spent doing actual swimming, biking and running for 99% of the triathlete population.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

"I just think that frequenting them is time better spent doing actual swimming, biking and running for 99% of the triathlete population."

With all due respect Ken, it's more like 3%: the pros, some elites, the folks who want to podium at all cost or who have something to prove through triathlon... basically the folks who feel like they have to squeeze all their spare time into SBR to race faster.

The rest of us folks have a life to live. Strength training simply helps us live better lives.

---

-----------------------------------------------------

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...;itool=pubmed_DocSum

All the proof you need, and only 27 years ago.

I have nothing helpful to add, but to be a total pedant, I beleive the logic runs "Ducks float, so does wood, wood burns, as do witches, so...... if she weighs the same as a duck then she is a witch!!!"

My favourite bits from that part of the movie is when the crowd are asked what else floats other than a duck and someone suggests "very small stones", and when a member of the crowd shouts "of course she's a witch, look at her nose" and she replies "thats not my nose, they stuck this carrot on me". Classic, timeless comedy....

---

"You're so money Mikey, and you don't even know it..."