Training & Nutrition - Transferring weight training benefits to bike?

I recently started a weight-training program, because I was only cycling, it wasn't a balanced fitness program. My core, shoulders, and arms are really feeling it! OUCH! The trainer has me working my legs as well, so I can develop more power.

Is there any special technique I should be applying while on the bike to "teach" the strengthened muscles how to turn the cranks faster? Because the weight-lifting itself is slow and controlled, quite unlike cycling motions, I can imagine that being able to lift weights does not automatically translate into more bike speed.

He has me on this type of program for all major muscle groups:
12 reps, rest 1 min (then increase weight)
10 reps, rest 1 min (then increase weight)
8 reps, rest 1 min (then increase weight)
6 reps, rest 1 min (lighten back up)
12 reps, then no rest (move over to another machine)
12 reps (light, fast reps, but same or similar muscle group)

then move to a different muscle group, resting for 2 min

Yeah. Stop.

This is not your weight training phase- this is your "ride the bike" phase of training. You're going to overfatigue yourself with the weight training and cycling. If you do any weight training, it should be low weights with high reps.

Your trainer must not have been to the latest ACSM Personal Trainer Convention in 2005- things have changed, and that's not the most efficient way of weight training.

Cut back and you'll be all good. Start your weight training (in earnest) in late fall.

Koffee

I pretty much only do weight training for my core and upper body this time of the year. During the winter I'll do leg presses and the like, but for now its ride, ride, ride.

I recently started a weight-training program, because I was only cycling, it wasn't a balanced fitness program. My core, shoulders, and arms are really feeling it! OUCH! The trainer has me working my legs as well, so I can develop more power.

Is there any special technique I should be applying while on the bike to "teach" the strengthened muscles how to turn the cranks faster? Because the weight-lifting itself is slow and controlled, quite unlike cycling motions, I can imagine that being able to lift weights does not automatically translate into more bike speed.Hmmm, those workouts will build up muscle-mass and size, but not increase strength as much. You'll end up with gaining more size & weight than the resultant increase in strength, not a good thing for biking. It's the 1-5 rep range that builds up the most strength.

Also turning the cranks faster is a brain thing, not muscle-strength. It's technique in timing the contractions of the various muscle groups in the proper sequence so that they're not fighting each other and the bike (pushing down on the pedal at the bottom of the pedal-stroke does no benefit in moving you down the road, if you get strong enough, you'll be able to stretch and break the crank, but you won't spin or go any faster). So... practice high-RPM exercises like spin-ups on downhills. Rather than coasting down, stay in teh same gear and spin it faster and faster as you go down the hill. Get up to the RPM where you just start to bounce, and back off barely so you can stay spinning smoothly in circles. This max-RPM point will gradually increase with time and training... :)

The first major gains in strength are due to neural adaptation anyway. Unlike many of you, I want to peak in Feb/March so I'm about done with strength phase now and going on toward building distance. I went from benching 85lbs to 135 in two months, max bench so far is 160.

I would think the same thing applied on a bike. It's amazing, heart adapts real quick, muscles adapt not so quick but pretty fast, and neural adaption somewhere in between? Two months and you'll be twice as fast.

Weight training is great for overall fitness but it won't help your cycling one iota. So, do exercises that will help with your overall fitness and don't worry about transfering any gains to the bike.

Justin

Actually, weight training can help cycling, in my opinion. Keep in mind the various goals of resistance exercise, which are hypertrophy, strength, power and muscle endurance. Each goal requires its own techniques, and you have to periodize these for the best results. Your trainer should know how to do this, or you need a new trainer.

You can lift for strength in the off-season by using heavy weights and moderate reps, with slowish movements. As the time approaches to start riding, switch to lifting for power (which is strength and speed) by lifting heavier weights with low reps, but using fast or even explosive lifting speeds. When I'm riding a lot, I totally omit leg exercises with weights, but keep doing upper body and core for overall fitness.

I think low weights with high reps for endurance is a waste of time for most cyclists. That's what training on the bike is for--building endurance and increasing speed.

Also turning the cranks faster is a brain thing, not muscle-strength. It's technique in timing the contractions of the various muscle groups in the proper sequence so that they're not fighting each other and the bike (pushing down on the pedal at the bottom of the pedal-stroke does no benefit in moving you down the road, if you get strong enough, you'll be able to stretch and break the crank, but you won't spin or go any faster). So... practice high-RPM exercises like spin-ups on downhills. Rather than coasting down, stay in teh same gear and spin it faster and faster as you go down the hill. Get up to the RPM where you just start to bounce, and back off barely so you can stay spinning smoothly in circles. This max-RPM point will gradually increase with time and training... :)
So true, but you don't make it clear that spinning faster in a lower gear won't make the bike go any faster. To move the bike faster, you need speed and strength which equals power!

No, that's just the training for the neural pathways. That'll translate into faster speed later when you can pedal smoothly at 90-120rpms all the time. Speedwork on the weights really do help you move your legs strongly and quickly, but you need the brain coordination to do that. That's where high-RPM drills comes in, by being smooth at 150-160rpms, you're really smooth and efficient at the normal speeds used of 90-110rpms.

Then when you're cruising at TT efforts, you'll be going faster shearly from RPMs alone. Let's say you're already pushing the pedals as hard as you can, say... 200lbs total on both at 60rpms. Learning to push that same force at 120rpms will double your power output just like that, without any additional muscle-strength necessary. Double the power will have you go 26% faster. So if you maximum average-speed at 60rpms is 16mph, increasing rpms to 120 will allow you average 20mph! :)

And figuring out whether additional strength will help depends upon the individual. The most benefits will come to those in their first 3-years of riding. After that, you've probably built up strenght to the highest levels needed for cycling, most of the additional fibre-recruitments have beeen done, and additional strength will mainly come from hypertrophy and more muscle-mass. So it depends upon what's the limiting factor in the OP's case. If at TT/LT speeds, his muscles hurt more and give out before his lungs (assuming he's spinning smoothly at high-RPms), then yes weight/strength training woudl help. However, if the limiting factor is his lungs and HR, then he'd gain more benefits by shifting to on-bike aerobic training.

Great post mothra, and I believe an accurate one. Your earlier post said cadence was a "brain thing." Isn't faster cranking actually a "neuromuscular thing" that is centered in the interface between the motor neurons and the muscle fibers? I mean we don't exactly think about cranking the pedals, do we? Any explanation of how this works would be appreciated.


Hmmm, those workouts will build up muscle-mass and size, but not increase strength as much. You'll end up with gaining more size & weight than the resultant increase in strength, not a good thing for biking. It's the 1-5 rep range that builds up the most strength.
I think this is true for advanced weight lifters. according to the American College of Sports Medicine (http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/pt-core/template-journal/msse/media/0202.pdf), beginners and intermediates can gain both hypertrophy and strength at 8-12 reps. For one thing, relatively untrained people need to increase size to increase strength significantly, as I understand it. Also, higher reps are probably safer for less experienced exercisers.

Weight training is great for overall fitness but it won't help your cycling one iota. So, do exercises that will help with your overall fitness and don't worry about transfering any gains to the bike.

Justin

That is not true. You need muscle- and plenty of strength and power to move those pedals. Saying weight training doesn't help one iota is not only misleading, it is completely erroneous. What makes a difference is what time of year you're training with weights.

Koffee

Great post mothra, and I believe an accurate one. Your earlier post said cadence was a "brain thing." Isn't faster cranking actually a "neuromuscular thing" that is centered in the interface between the motor neurons and the muscle fibers? I mean we don't exactly think about cranking the pedals, do we? Any explanation of how this works would be appreciated.


I think this is true for advanced weight lifters. according to the American College of Sports Medicine (http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/pt-core/template-journal/msse/media/0202.pdf), beginners and intermediates can gain both hypertrophy and strength at 8-12 reps. For one thing, relatively untrained people need to increase size to increase strength significantly, as I understand it. Also, higher reps are probably safer for less experienced exercisers.

I believe the ACSM guidelines for 8- 12 repetitions has more to do with gaining strength, while their guidelines for bulk is 3- 5 repetitions (according to the 2005 ACSM Personal Trainers Conference in New York City). But even then, there's a lot more to it than that- which makes it difficult to even discuss this type of strength training. In that conference, they gave very specific guidelines, all the way down to calculating your eating for the amount of proteins, carbs, and fats in your diet. But all too often, people take the "gist" of what they hear and apply it to their training programs, which is why there are so many varying degrees of success with people when they undertake a training program. A shame, really. :(

Koffee

The first major gains in strength are due to neural adaptation anyway. Unlike many of you, I want to peak in Feb/March so I'm about done with strength phase now and going on toward building distance. I went from benching 85lbs to 135 in two months, max bench so far is 160.

I would think the same thing applied on a bike. It's amazing, heart adapts real quick, muscles adapt not so quick but pretty fast, and neural adaption somewhere in between? Two months and you'll be twice as fast.


That's kind of weird. You don't have to train that much to peak in Feb/March. There isn't one cyclist out (look at the pros who start racing in Feb/March with the Classics, for instance) that starts training in the summer for a peak in Feb/March. You are starting too soon, and you will not peak as you think you will in Feb/March.

Ride now. Train in Sept/Oct, and you'll be ready for your FIRST peak in Feb/March (and I'm being generous with the time frame here, mind you).

Koffee

The first major gains in strength are due to neural adaptation anyway. Unlike many of you, I want to peak in Feb/March so I'm about done with strength phase now and going on toward building distance. I went from benching 85lbs to 135 in two months, max bench so far is 160.

I would think the same thing applied on a bike. It's amazing, heart adapts real quick, muscles adapt not so quick but pretty fast, and neural adaption somewhere in between? Two months and you'll be twice as fast.


P.S. Those first 6- 8 weeks (or up to 10 weeks depending on the frequency, duration, and time of your training program) is called neuromuscular adaptation, btw.

That is not true. You need muscle- and plenty of strength and power to move those pedals. Saying weight training doesn't help one iota is not only misleading, it is completely erroneous. What makes a difference is what time of year you're training with weights.

Koffee
Why don't we save ourselves a lot of needless typing and just refer to the over 350 posts here
http://www.cyclingforums.com/t126133.html
The inescapable conclusion is that for a normally active individual (able to climb a flight of stairs) strength is not a limiter for endurance (non-track) cycling, and there is no benefit to performance from weight training.

I'm not interested in waht 350 people post on some other forum. I'm stating the information I get from such things as the ACSM forums and other conferences, as well as from straight up book learning- and if you observe even the pros, the best ones who are even mildly successful at what they do are weight training. They're just doing it smart, and they're working with people who know what they're doing, not getting on some forum bickering back and forth with other recreational folks who train based on other snippets and outdated information they read about in magazines and forums. Sorry.

I stand by what I said, and I reiterate what a shame it is that people take bits and pieces of what they hear to determine what they think is the correct manner to train, when in fact, there is a lot more to it.

I'm not interested in waht 350 people post on some other forum. I'm stating the information I get from such things as the ACSM forums and other conferences, as well as from straight up book learning- and if you observe even the pros, the best ones who are even mildly successful at what they do are weight training. They're just doing it smart, and they're working with people who know what they're doing, not getting on some forum bickering back and forth with other recreational folks who train based on other snippets and outdated information they read about in magazines and forums. Sorry.

I stand by what I said, and I reiterate what a shame it is that people take bits and pieces of what they hear to determine what they think is the correct manner to train, when in fact, there is a lot more to it.
I conclude you haven't bothered to skim the posts referenced or you wouldn't refer to Andy Coggan and Ric Stern as "recreational folks who train based on other snippets and outdated information they read about in magazines and forums." In Coggan's case, he literally wrote the book on power-based training.

But this has all been thrashed through to death in the cited thread.

Weight training is great for overall fitness but it won't help your cycling one iota.

I would very much like to see your research or source for that comment. Don't almost all professional athletes engage in some form of weight training?

Although not a research report, this coach (http://www.functionalpathtraining.blogspot.com/) has very interesting ideas on weight training for athletes of all kinds.

That's kind of weird. You don't have to train that much to peak in Feb/March. There isn't one cyclist out (look at the pros who start racing in Feb/March with the Classics, for instance) that starts training in the summer for a peak in Feb/March. You are starting too soon, and you will not peak as you think you will in Feb/March.

Ride now. Train in Sept/Oct, and you'll be ready for your FIRST peak in Feb/March (and I'm being generous with the time frame here, mind you).

Koffee

Skiing, not biking. I'm going to try and do all the marathon ski races this year finishing with the Birkebeiner. My plan was to strength train May/June, increase distance Jul/Aug, strength Sept and do intervals once a week, Oct/Nov/Dec increase distance and do intervals 2x/week. Taper in Jan, race in Feb/March. :)

Yah I know this is a bikeforum, but basic training principles remain the same no?

Neuromuscular adaptation, got it! Thanks for the correction.

I believe the ACSM guidelines for 8- 12 repetitions has more to do with gaining strength, while their guidelines for bulk is 3- 5 repetitions (according to the 2005 ACSM Personal Trainers Conference in New York City). But even then, there's a lot more to it than that- which makes it difficult to even discuss this type of strength training. In that conference, they gave very specific guidelines, all the way down to calculating your eating for the amount of proteins, carbs, and fats in your diet. But all too often, people take the "gist" of what they hear and apply it to their training programs, which is why there are so many varying degrees of success with people when they undertake a training program. A shame, really. :(

Koffee
Then I guess the ACSM totally reversed their position stand of 2002 (linked in my post) by the time you attended the conference in 2005. Or maybe you have forgotten some of the details and only remember the gist of it?

Here is the link again, if you'd like to review it:

ACSM position stand on progressive resistance training (pdf file) (http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/pt-core/template-journal/msse/media/0202.pdf)

I conclude you haven't bothered to skim the posts referenced or you wouldn't refer to Andy Coggan and Ric Stern as "recreational folks who train based on other snippets and outdated information they read about in magazines and forums." In Coggan's case, he literally wrote the book on power-based training.

But this has all been thrashed through to death in the cited thread.The issue is that Coggan and Stern are citing examples of top-athletes and weight-training. Someone in their first 5-years of bike-racing can definitely see benefits in terms of quicker improvement rates than others at their same fitness level that doesn't do strength-training. Even Lance does 8-10 weeks of 3-day/week weight-training in the off-season. Many racers do weight-training throughout the season, not necessarily to increase strength, but just to maintain the same strength they had at the beginning of the season. With lots of distance training and racing, it's inevitable that you're gonna eat up some muscle for energy. The weight workouts is more of a maintenance step. I don't see any of Coggan or Stern's subjects beating out Carmichael's...


Great post mothra, and I believe an accurate one. Your earlier post said cadence was a "brain thing." Isn't faster cranking actually a "neuromuscular thing" that is centered in the interface between the motor neurons and the muscle fibers? I mean we don't exactly think about cranking the pedals, do we? Any explanation of how this works would be appreciated.Thanks. I'll try to explain my "brain" and "neuromuscular" idea. Spinning fast and smoothly allows you to extract the most power and speed out of your existing muscle-strength. You'll be able to go faster without pushing any harder on the pedals. For example, let's take the case of the 200lbs of maximum force on the pedals (100lbs per side). Measure through how many degrees of the 360-rotation that this force is exerted, easy test is riding one-legged. You'll notice that most people end up with dead spot right after BDC and really slow down on the up-stroke. In order to maintain even speed on the up-stroke, some of the 100-lbs of force from the opposite leg actually has to go into pushing the up-stroke leg upwards, and less force goes into the chain resulting in only say... 125lbs of net force at that spot.

By training the brain to fire the muscles in a difference sequence, you can get that dead leg out of the way and not force the other side to push it up. No one can really exert as much force on the up-stroke as on the downstroke simply due to gravity and the weight of the legs. But you can at least unweight it so that very little of the opposite leg's force is used to push it up. So the result is that you may end up with 175lbs of net force on the crank during the up-stroke. In this 2nd case, you haven't actually increased muscle-strength in any way, yet you have exerted more force (average) throughout the 360-degree pedal rotation. Thus resulting in more power.

The other way of increasing power is to spin faster with the same force. In going from mashing 60rpms to spinning 120rpms, you've doubled the power-output without needing any additional muscle-strength. However, in order to spin 120rpms and still get 175lbs of force minimum through out 360-degrees, you gotta be darn smooth. In order to be that smooth at 120rpms, you train to pedal in circles at even faster speeds of 160rpms+. If you can spin 160rpms, you're definitely more smooth and exerting more even force around 360-degrees at 120rpms than someone who bounces wildly at 120rpms. Bouncing is caused by pushing down on the pedal at the bottom, it doesn't provide any force tangent to the crank and doesn't spin it, it just pushes your body up... The actual motion you want at the bottom of the pedal-stroke is to pull your foot directly backwards. :)

It's like practicing the piano or some musical instrument that requires coordinated activation of muscles in sequence. Practice the motion over and over again until it becomes automatic. The areas of the brain that's triggering those muscles actually changes, going from the cortex into the cerebellum. :)

Mothra, thanks for the explanation. :)

The issue is that Coggan and Stern are citing examples of top-athletes and weight-training. Someone in their first 5-years of bike-racing can definitely see benefits in terms of quicker improvement rates than others at their same fitness level that doesn't do strength-training.
You say someone in their first five years of racing can definetly see benefits, but you'll forgive me if I don't take your word for it. So let's make it simple; show me the data. Can you cite a single study showing improvement in endurance performance for experienced riders with under 5 years of training as a result of weight training. Untrained individuals are excluded because for that group any training will be of benefit, and that is not the group reading this list.

I believe the ACSM guidelines for 8- 12 repetitions has more to do with gaining strength, while their guidelines for bulk is 3- 5 repetitions (according to the 2005 ACSM Personal Trainers Conference in New York City). But even then, there's a lot more to it than that- which makes it difficult to even discuss this type of strength training. In that conference, they gave very specific guidelines, all the way down to calculating your eating for the amount of proteins, carbs, and fats in your diet. But all too often, people take the "gist" of what they hear and apply it to their training programs, which is why there are so many varying degrees of success with people when they undertake a training program. A shame, really. :(

Koffee


I've always been with the mindset of 8-12 reps with 1-2 minutes rest between sets for hypertrophy and 4-6 reps with 2-3 minutes for strength. 99 percent of the articles I've read and most of the discussions I've had with members of other forums have been with that same mindset. (That's not to say that you won't gain strength by performin 8-12 reps, or conversely, that you won't gain hypertrophy by performin 4-6 reps. It's just what's optimal for your goals.)

This is the first time I've read of the opposite of what I've learned.

Got any backup to post your claims?

I recently started a weight-training program, because I was only cycling, it wasn't a balanced fitness program. My core, shoulders, and arms are really feeling it! OUCH! The trainer has me working my legs as well, so I can develop more power.

Is there any special technique I should be applying while on the bike to "teach" the strengthened muscles how to turn the cranks faster? Because the weight-lifting itself is slow and controlled, quite unlike cycling motions, I can imagine that being able to lift weights does not automatically translate into more bike speed.

He has me on this type of program for all major muscle groups:
12 reps, rest 1 min (then increase weight)
10 reps, rest 1 min (then increase weight)
8 reps, rest 1 min (then increase weight)
6 reps, rest 1 min (lighten back up)
12 reps, then no rest (move over to another machine)
12 reps (light, fast reps, but same or similar muscle group)

then move to a different muscle group, resting for 2 min

I'm on the same boat as you. I don't ride as much as I used to and mainly hit the gym for weight training. I usually go 4 days a week and hope to hop back in my bike after I take my Gmat.

It seems like the trainer has you on a type of training tailored more towards hypertrophy. That doesn't surprise me. Most trainers are not really sport specific. They're more for getting in shape and looking better.

You can increase your strength by taking longer rest periods.

Yeah. Stop.

This is not your weight training phase- this is your "ride the bike" phase of training. You're going to overfatigue yourself with the weight training and cycling. If you do any weight training, it should be low weights with high reps.

Your trainer must not have been to the latest ACSM Personal Trainer Convention in 2005- things have changed, and that's not the most efficient way of weight training.

Cut back and you'll be all good. Start your weight training (in earnest) in late fall.

Koffee


Stop? Overfatigue? Low weights with high reps?

WTF

There's nothing wrong with lifting weights while biking.. as long as one or the other doesn't compromise your recovery.

That's like saying don't do cardio if you're on a weight lifting program. LOL.

What I get from all this is that I may have too many reps at too low a weight to gain more strength than hypertrophy.

As far as "peaking", I'm a year-round, non-competitive tourist / commuter, so the notion of peaking at a particular time is irrelevant. I'm trying to work in resistance as one component of a steady-state fitness program. I'm not willing to wait until (what passes for) winter here, because I think resistance training may help my neck/shoulder/arm issues (pain from computer use) by making them stronger. They are quite weak now. Also I need to work on my core, due to lower back pain.

What I get from all this is that I may have too many reps at too low a weight to gain more strength than hypertrophy.

As far as "peaking", I'm a year-round, non-competitive tourist / commuter, so the notion of peaking at a particular time is irrelevant. I'm trying to work in resistance as one component of a steady-state fitness program. I'm not willing to wait until (what passes for) winter here, because I think resistance training may help my neck/shoulder/arm issues (pain from computer use) by making them stronger. They are quite weak now. Also I need to work on my core, due to lower back pain.
You're definitely on the right track. Lifting for upper body and core should not affect cycling one way or the other. But it will have an enormous improvement on overall fitness, which is your goal. I hope you'll read the pdf position stand from the ACSM (http://www.acsm-msse.org/pt/pt-core/template-journal/msse/media/0202.pdf). It's a fantastic resource. They give guidelined for hypertrophy, strength, power and endurance. They also explain how to periodize your training to acheive all four goals over the year. Please read!

It's like practicing the piano or some musical instrument that requires coordinated activation of muscles in sequence. Practice the motion over and over again until it becomes automatic. The areas of the brain that's triggering those muscles actually changes, going from the cortex into the cerebellum. :)

Funny you mention that. I have focal dystonia. It's when areas of the brain which control individual movement merge. It's task specific, in my case my middle finger on my right hand contracts while the index finger extends, and vice versa, OR, vice versa? My brain can't figure out the difference anymore.

I'm late into this thread-I was scared away by it's all too frequent title and the inevitable that follows...

If you have areas that are particularly weak, that are limiters to your total performance, for racing, touring or other, then specific weight training can address these areas more accurately than just riding. Once these areas are not weaknesses the bike is the better place to train for increased/improved strength for cycling.

Pilates is a great help for core and other upper body and can quickly overcome local weaknesses that are limiting your preformance.

The goal of the relatively high rpm's drills to improve coordination of the little motor units is useful, if that's a limiter. Maybe early in the season or early in a career of cycling is enough unless you'll be racing on the track. You are trying to reduce "inhibition", where one muscle like a hamstring is not relaxed enough when it should be and thereby getting in the way of the quad's attempt to move the pedals around. Drills that encourage you to relax on the bike are helpful.

Yesterday, during a match sprint at the track I had to close a 3m gap on my opponent going down the backstretch of our last lap. While I did need to go faster, I focused on staying relaxed, so the muscles could do their job. (They did.)

Yes, Andy Coggan and Ric Stern have their own ideas about strength training and they can make it sound all good for their opinion, but in reality Ric has coached a relatively small number of riders and Andy has coached virtually none. So, grain of salt. There is more than one path to success in cycling.

You say someone in their first five years of racing can definetly see benefits, but you'll forgive me if I don't take your word for it. So let's make it simple; show me the data. Can you cite a single study showing improvement in endurance performance for experienced riders with under 5 years of training as a result of weight training. Untrained individuals are excluded because for that group any training will be of benefit, and that is not the group reading this list.Here you go:

Journal of Applied Physiology - Potential for strength and endurance training to amplify endurance performance (http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/65/5/2285) - leg-strength increase +30% with no increase in size or VO2max, yet short-term endurance increased +11-13%, long-term endurance increased +20%

Strength training for distance runners (http://faculty.washington.edu/crowther/Misc/RBC/strength.shtml) - summaries several studies showing weight-training improves endurance
CoachesInfo - Maximum Strength & Strength Training - Relationship to Endurance? (http://coachesinfo.com/category/strength_and_conditioning/236) Review Part 2
Edmund R. Burke, Ph.D. (USA national-team coach) - Strength Training for Cycling (http://www.focusedtrainers.com/news/articles/cycling_strength.htm)
NSCA - Resistance Training for Cyclists (http://www.nsca-lift.org/perform/article.asp?ArticleID=50)
PTS - Strength Training: Building a Bigger Engine (http://www.performancetrainingsystems.com/news/New%20Tips/KM-endurancestrength.htm)
Ultra Cycling - Resistance Training for Endurance Cyclists (http://www.ultracycling.com/training/resistance_training1.html)
SpokePost - Training with Periodization (Part 3 of 8: Hypertrophy Phase) (http://spokepost.com/news/?articleID=21)
RunnersWeb - Multisport: Strength and Power Training for Endurance Athletes (http://www.runnersweb.com/running/news/rw_news_20050408_EST_Strength.html)
Journal of Applied Physiology - Explosive-strength training improves 5-km running time by improving running economy and muscle power (http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/86/5/1527)
Trinity Endurance/Fitness - Cross Training for Triathletes - Part 1 (http://www.trinitysport.com/GatorStory.asp?news_id=28)
Power Running - Resistance Training for Runners (http://www.powerrunning.com/Training/Resistance%20Training%20for%20Runners.htm)
Aphrodite - Strength Training Improves Aerobic Power In Seniors (http://www.aphroditewomenshealth.com/news/20030123214314_health_news.shtml)
The Lance Armstrong Performance Program: Seven Weeks to the Perfect Ride (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1579542700/ref=ase_bodybuildingco05/104-6311037-6767160), he recommends 4-6 weeks of weight-training.
Carmichael Training Systems - Lance Armstrong's Nov 99 Training Log (http://www.lancearmstrong.com/training/nov99.html) - Lance himself does 8-10 weeks of weight-training... after how many years of professional triathlon and bike racing???

Here's some other people who recommend strength/weight-training during the winter-months:
Greg Lemond - mutiple TDF winner, Greg Lemond's Complete Book of Bicycling
Lance Armstrong - multiple TDF winner, The Lance Armstrong Performance Program
Eddy Borysewicz - USA Olympic Coach 1980-1984
Edmund Burke, PhD. - USA Olympic Coach 1984-1988, 20-year Director OTC-U.Colorado, High-Tech Cycling, Serious Cycling
Chris Carmichael - 1984 Olympic Cycling team, USA Olympic Coach 1992-1996, The Lance Armstrong Performance Program
Chester Kyle PhD. - Chief Scientist OTC, 1984, 1997-1998 Olympic Team Aerodynamicist/Physiologist


How many national, Olympic or TDF champions have Stern or Coggan produced? What are their names and championship years?

Yes, Andy Coggan and Ric Stern have their own ideas about strength training and they can make it sound all good for their opinion, but in reality Ric has coached a relatively small number of riders and Andy has coached virtually none. So, grain of salt. There is more than one path to success in cycling.

How many national, Olympic or TDF champions have Stern or Coggan produced? What are their names and championship years?
To deal with this specious argument first, how many patients did Jonas Salk treat?

Here you go:

Journal of Applied Physiology - Potential for strength and endurance training to amplify endurance performance (http://jap.physiology.org/cgi/content/abstract/65/5/2285) - leg-strength increase +30% with no increase in size or VO2max, yet short-term endurance increased +11-13%, long-term endurance increased +20%
Dropping the articles that don't deal with cycling, don't include actual data or are not refereed, leaves this one example. First it should be pointed out that this is a single exception to the vast body of literature that draws the opposite conclusion, Second, while this article may show improvement from a weight training regimen, in this study, the weight training was added to the aerobic training increasing the total workload. So even accepting the authors' conclusion, this article raises the question of whether greater improvement would be seen from on the bike training.

Originally Posted by Mothra
How many national, Olympic or TDF champions have Stern or Coggan produced? What are their names and championship years?


To deal with this specious argument first, how many patients did Jonas Salk treat?

The important difference is that other coaches and sports scientists with far more experience and success than Stern or Coggan disagree (to varying degrees) with their point of view.

To deal with this specious argument first, how many patients did Jonas Salk treat?In 1952, Salk treated himself, his wife, children and staff with his vaccine. Then he treated a group of 98 children at the Watson Home for Crippled Children (now The Watson Institute). Then 63 residents of the Polk State School. The positive results were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association two months later.

1953 Salk's team expanded their human clinical trials and worked with pharmaceutical companies to scale up for large clinical trials and commercial manufacture.

1954-55 Dr. Francis performed large-scale trial on 1.8 million children and announced on April 12, 1955 that the Salk vaccine was 90% effective in preventing paralytic polio.



Dropping the articles that don't deal with cycling, don't include actual data or are not refereed, leaves this one example. First it should be pointed out that this is a single exception to the vast body of literature that draws the opposite conclusion, Second, while this article may show improvement from a weight training regimen, in this study, the weight training was added to the aerobic training increasing the total workload. So even accepting the authors' conclusion, this article raises the question of whether greater improvement would be seen from on the bike training.Only four of the citations I listed were non-cycling running examples, the rest were definitely cycling-related. Did you even read the first one?

"The impact of adding heavy-resistance training to increase leg-muscle strength was studied in eight cycling- and running-trained subjects who were already at a steady-state level of performance. Strength training was performed 3 days/wk for 10 wk, whereas endurance training remained constant during this phase. After 10 wk, leg strength was increased by an average of 30%, but thigh girth and biopsied vastus lateralis muscle fiber areas (fast and slow twitch) and citrate synthase activities were unchanged. Maximal O2 uptake (VO2max) was also unchanged by heavy-resistance training during cycling (55 ml.kg-1.min-1) and treadmill running (60 ml.kg-1.min-1); however, short-term endurance (4-8 min) was increased by 11 and 13% (P less than 0.05) during cycling and running, respectively. Long-term cycling to exhaustion at 80% VO2max increased from 71 to 85 min (P less than 0.05) after the addition of strength training, whereas long-term running (10 km times) results were inconclusive. These data do not demonstrate any negative performance effects of adding heavy-resistance training to ongoing endurance-training regimens. They indicate that certain types of endurance performance, particularly those requiring fast-twitch fiber recruitment, can be improved by strength-training supplementation."

Certainly sounds like some fit duathletes or triathletes who've reached a plateau in their performance. If you want to split the $8 fee to get to the full article, I'm sure we'll have your peer-review references.


Here's another one: Effects of High-intensity Training on Performance and Physiology of Endurance Athletes (http://www.sportsci.org/jour/04/cdp.htm). From their conclusion section:

"High-intensity interval and resistance training in an endurance athlete’s non-competitive phase can substantially improve performance and related physiological measures. Interval training at intensities around VO2max (intervals lasting 2-10 min) improves mainly submaximal endurance performance (by ~6%) through improvements of all three components of the aerobic system (VO2max, anaerobic threshold, economy). Effects of longer intervals at lower intensity have unclear but possibly similar effects on performance, judging by their effects on the components of the aerobic system. Higher intensities of interval training (intervals of <2 min) probably have similar benefit for submaximal endurance and possibly less benefit (~4%) for shorter durations of endurance performance, but the contribution of aerobic components is unclear. Explosive resistance training produces some benefit (~2%) for submaximal endurance, but probably more benefit (4-8%) for maximal and supramaximal endurance. The effects of explosive resistance training are mediated at least partly by major increases in economy, possibly by increases in anaerobic threshold, but probably not by increases in VO2max. Increases in body mass with this kind of resistance training are not an issue."

Like I said way back when, there's already been a thread on this with over 350 posts and I'm not the expert. People who are interested can read what the experts there have to say about these articles and others and draw their own conclusions.

Well, it's kinda one-sided when the sponsor of a website takes it on to be the "expert" and other experiences are discounted. That's why people are here and not there. The thing you have to look at (while stepping back away from the actual data and studies), is how people learn and assimilate data. The process used by a lot of people is to use a few sources and extrapolate that to the whole. However, one has to look at ALL of the available data and find the trend. This Harvard article illustrates the process by which people accept research studies: Harvard - Research and the Mass Media--An Introduction (http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/media.html). The part I want to emphasize from that article is this:

"The research process is like placing stones on an old-fashioned balance scale. When enough weight accumulates on one side, the scale tips in favor of a particular recommendation. And the more weight there is on one side, the stronger the recommendation is and the more evidence it would take to change it."

The volume of information and data that's contrary to Coggan's and Stern's views are voluminous.

this thread is worse than VC or non-VC, helmet or not. I'm sorry I asked!

No, I'm glad you brought it up. WarrenG's always on the cutting-edge of new training ideas and many of them seems counter-intuitive, or at least they're flying in the face of conventional "common sense". Perhaps in 10-years, weight/strength-training will be the norm. Just like they thought in the '60s that you have to load up on 2-lbs of steaks before an event, we now have adopted nutrition that yields better performance.

Training is a variable process and it depends upon the specific weaknesses each person faces. In your case, if you've got weak upper-body and back, then yes, weight-training will quickly build those areas up to be on par with the rest of your body so you can perform better on the bike.

It's like a factory production-line, the entire process can only proceed at the pace of the slowest step. If you can only ride 2-3 hours and have to stop because of back pain or sore shoulders, and if you can't ride day-after-day because those parts are still sore the day after, then yes, work on the rate-limiting-step.

In 1952, Salk treated himself, his wife, children and staff with his vaccine. Then he treated a group of 98 children at the Watson Home for Crippled Children (now The Watson Institute). Then 63 residents of the Polk State School. The positive results were published in the Journal of the American Medical Association two months later.

1953 Salk's team expanded their human clinical trials and worked with pharmaceutical companies to scale up for large clinical trials and commercial manufacture.

1954-55 Dr. Francis performed large-scale trial on 1.8 million children and announced on April 12, 1955 that the Salk vaccine was 90% effective in preventing paralytic polio.

In other words, without ever treating a patient sick with polio, Salk was able to come up with the first effective vaccine? How could such a thing be possible?

I'm not sure what you mean by "treated" or do you mean "cured"? When he worked at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, then led the Virus Research lab at the University of Pittsburgh he "treated" plenty of polio patients using known techniques at the time. None were effective and his goal was to prevent the onset of polio in the first place. That was the result he wanted and he achieved it. The goal of a vaccine is not to cure polio in an infected person, once you've got it, it's to late. It's to prevent the onset of the disease by preparing the immune-system ahead of time. If you look the cause & effect of methodology, it's all very logical. Did Salk's methodology caused the effect he wanted?

Goal to cure polio -> research -> testing methology -> go back to research -> develop effective vaccine

Salk developed something new that had never been done before and cured a debilitating disease, not sure what that kind of logic has to do with fitness-training and replicating the results that millions have achieved previously.


In the methodology of generating world-champions we have similar flow of cause & effect. The following pathway starting with the coaches appears to have caused the effect of world-champions:

1. Coaches: Eddy Borysewicz, Cyrille Guimard*, Edmund Burke, PhD., Chester Kyle PhD.,Chris Carmichael, ->
2. training regimen including weight-training ->
3. out comes many generations of national, Olympic & world-champions from Greg Lemond, Davis Phinney, Andy Hampsten & 7-11 team, to the current Hincapie and Lance Armstrong

* I don't know much about Cyrille Guimard's philosophy, however, Greg Lemond's advocation of weight/strength-training in the gym would seem to indicate that it's a benefit to his TDF titles.


On the other side we have these effects. If you want these results, follow the methodology that causes it:

1. Coaches: Coggan & Stern ->
2. training regimen not including weight-training, saying it's worthless ->
3. out comes how many national, Olympic & world-champions ???


Life is very simple, you look at the results you want, and just follow the people who've come before that have achieved those results. Remember, these are results that have already been achieved, it's nothing magical that requires unknown research methods and techniques. Now to get a breakthrough in new and undiscovered results that have never been achieved like Salk and polio, would be a new phenomenon like an unassisted human-flight sport. Now that would require something revolutionary like the analogy you're using.

In the methodology of generating world-champions we have similar flow of cause & effect. The following pathway starting with the coaches appears to have caused the effect of world-champions:

1. Coaches: Eddy Borysewicz, Cyrille Guimard*, Edmund Burke, PhD., Chester Kyle PhD.,Chris Carmichael, ->
2. training regimen including weight-training ->
3. out comes many generations of national, Olympic & world-champions from Greg Lemond, Davis Phinney, Andy Hampsten & 7-11 team, to the current Hincapie and Lance Armstrong

* I don't know much about Cyrille Guimard's philosophy, however, Greg Lemond's advocation of weight/strength-training in the gym would seem to indicate that it's a benefit to his TDF titles.


On the other side we have these effects. If you want these results, follow the methodology that causes it:

1. Coaches: Coggan & Stern ->
2. training regimen not including weight-training, saying it's worthless ->
3. out comes how many national, Olympic & world-champions ???
.

Several times in your last few posts you have said some things that have made me pause and think, wow, here's somebody who gets it, and is willing to help others get it. I try too, but the credit for what I know goes to my coach, and I am extremely fortunate to have his guidance. He is Max Testa. If what I say is a bit cutting edge it's only me passing along what he has taught me.
http://www.athleticamps.com/cycling/coaching/testa/

Part of the reason I mention him after your post is that he has been the coach for many of the riders you mention above. You can read about his experience with teams at the link but to give you an idea about what leading edge coaching can do here are some examples...

Max coached the first American team to do well in Europe, 7-11, then Motorola, and then on to coach some very successful riders like Micheli Bartoli, Paulo Bettini, and many other famous riders on MB-Technogym and 5 years with Mapei. One of the reasons he liked Mapei was that they did lots of scientific analysis of training and their doctors were all educated as sports scientists.

Here are some significant breakthrough peformances by riders he was coaching at the time... Andy Hampsten winning the Giro, Lance winning the World Championship RR, Bobby Julich third at the Tour, Bartoli winning the overall World Cup two years in a row(!), Stefano Garzelli winning the Giro, Karen Kurreck winning the Elite Women's World Championship TT, Chris Baldwin and Christine Thorburn winning US Elite National Championships in the TT, me, going from just a masters District Champion to Masters National Champion in 2004 and 2005, and most recently, Levi Leipheimer. Watch Levi next month-he is in the best shape of his life right now.

These performances don't come about by following sub-optimal training methods, like the ones you can read about in books. We all do some strength training off the bike as needed, including pilates, and plenty of strength training on the bike.