On the bike strength training

[50000tears]

Found this training page from Tinkoff-Saxo's head of sports science about improving leg strength by doing low cadence big ring hill reps.

Part 1

https://www.tradingfloor.com/posts/ridelikeapro-the-benefits-of-slow-tension-efforts-part-1-5652282

Part 2

https://www.tradingfloor.com/posts/ridelikeapro-the-benefits-of-slow-tension-efforts-part-2-5686613

I know there is some controversy on the forum around leg strength per say and if can climb a stair then you need no more strength and so forth. But given that this comes from a guy training a pro team suggests there is a lot of merit in on the bike strength training. Partially interesting for me was the purpose of much of the training was to develop full use of each leg for the full pedal rotation which I know I don't really do.

Has anybody else tried a variation to the training suggested and if so to what success?

 

[Citius]

Who knows why he is saying any of that. The first sentence on that first link though -

It is generally accepted that to be a good road or track endurance cyclist you need to be strong.

- is simply not correct, because it certainly is not 'generally accepted'. So the whole thing starts from a false premise. If the guy is head of sports science, then I'd hope to see a bit more science behind it, to be honest. Until then we can just mark it down as someone's opinion.

And when someone else says "oh well, he must be right, cos he a pro trainer on a pro team" - then that would just be an 'appeal to authority'. Then the thread will probably start to go downhill from there. Some people will then start to insult each other and then the mods will step in and lock the thread.

To be fair though, most of the routines he is suggesting do seem to fit more into the 'conditioning' category, rather than 'strength' per se. So maybe the links would be better with different titles.

 

[50000tears]

i think that one of the reasons people get hung up on the strength training is down to a perception of what is being talked about. Strength training for endurance is never about building muscle as a gym instructor would think of it but as Citius says, about conditioning the legs. What a cyclist is developing in this term is making the muscle fibres more resilient to stress and converting the neutral fibres to slow twitch etc. In simpler terms about delaying the onset of fatigue in the legs when on a long hard ride. Better conditioned legs are stronger legs in cycling terms.

 

[Cuchilo]

What baffles me is people saying you don't need leg strength to ride a bike fast and its all about breathing and then they say runners are no good at riding bikes because they don't have the right muscles in their legs
Personally i think running will help my breathing and hill climbing will help my leg muscles . The problem is , i don't like running and i hate hills

 

[Citius]

What baffles me is people saying you don't need leg strength to ride a bike fast and its all about breathing

It's only baffling if you don't understand that endurance cycling is an aerobic sport - or if you haven't read any of the other threads on this topic.

and then they say runners are no good at riding bikes because they don't have the right muscles in their legs

Everyone has the same muscles in their legs, assuming they are actually human. Do you mean something different?

 

[screenman]

Obree used to do it as part of his training.

 

[Citius]

Obree used to do it as part of his training.

Do what?

 

[jazzkat]

When I switched to riding fixed exclusively it forced me to ride hard up hills, either that or walk, so I just dig in. A bit like using heavy weights in a gym, I guess. Now when I switch back to a geared bike I go much faster up hills. Maybe I've become stronger (I think I have) or maybe I've just reset my "pain barrier" for pushing up the hills.
It seems to me that sports science is pretty advanced (while I appreciate that new things are learnt all the time) yet some cyclists still seems to cling to the old thoughts and ways of training.

 

[Citius]

Maybe I've become stronger (I think I have) or maybe I've just reset my "pain barrier" for pushing up the hills.#

Or maybe your aerobic capacity and lactate threshold has improved, from riding harder up hills?

 

[jazzkat]

Or maybe your aerobic capacity and lactate threshold has improved, from riding harder up hills?

Yes, there has been a definite improvement in something!
In a pro athlete, I guess it's all about maximising each aspect of the athletes physiology. As we know climbers and sprinters are built differently.

 

[ayceejay]

To replicate in the gym the routine described in the first link seek out a Stair Climber.
I appreciate that you have brought this topic back to the board 50000tears as the question of leg strength for cycling is not settled as far as I am concerned.
Any leaned article on aerobic training talks about strengthening the heart as if it were a muscle to improve performance: are we to assume that this is the ONLY muscle that would be improved by strengthening ???

 

[Citius]

To replicate in the gym the routine described in the first link seek out a Stair Climber.

Or a flight of stairs, perhaps - enough said.

Any leaned article on aerobic training talks about strengthening the heart as if it were a muscle to improve performance: are we to assume that this is the ONLY muscle that would be improved by strengthening ???

I'm going to assume you are being deliberately obtuse here, as I can't think of any other reason why you would attempt to misrepresent carviovascular fitness in such a way. Strength is a measure of how much force can be applied by a muscle, or muscle group - if you don't believe me, look it up yourself. Quite obviously, the heart does not exert any force like this. But it can be 'conditioned' to become more efficient in pumping blood, and more used to working at higher rates. But you cannot measure the 'strength' of the heart against the general definition of the word, quite obviously.

Moving on from that (ie moving a bit closer to reality), if you genuinely believe that stronger muscles are of benefit to cyclists, then you are going to have to explain why, because the weight of scientific evidence does not support that premise. You obviously know better though.

 

[50000tears]

Fitness is not just about aerobic conditioning but also adaptations which take part in the leg cycling muscles. This is proven and not open to debate. I can promise you that anybody who has cycled for a long time has a different balance of fibres within the leg muscles than when they started. As said before these both help delay the onset of muscle fatigue and help to carry the oxygenated blood more efficiently to where it is needed.

 

[Citius]

As a final word, I'm going to link to the other two threads on this topic (which are still on page 1) - and respectfully suggest that we only post new material and new links from now on. That should keep the page count down a bit.

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/weight-training.182371/
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/squats.183923/

 

[Citius]

Fitness is not just about aerobic conditioning but also adaptations which take part in the leg cycling muscles. This is proven and not open to debate. I can promise you that anybody who has cycled for a long time has a different balance of fibres within the leg muscles than when they started. As said before these both help delay the onset of muscle fatigue and help to carry the oxygenated blood more efficiently to where it is needed.

Agreed, more or less. And those changes are all aerobic in nature, developed to support aerobic pathways and respond to aerobic demand.