wolfchild

Aerobic capacity allows you go longer ( long distance, endurance)... Anaerobic capacity and leg strength allows you to go faster ( track sprinting, fast acceleration from stop ).. You don't need strong legs to ride a century, but you need strong legs if you doing a short track sprint.

chinarider

This: https://www.amazon.com/Starting-Stre...rting+strength

brianmcg123

False.

CrankyNeck

Why don't you explain to me the benefits of squats for your menisci.

Darrick

There are sides for and against this particular lift, and it's really more polarizing than it should be.
Train within reasonable parameters when incorporating weighted squats, and you should be fine and on your way to improved leg strength over time. Progressive overload is the aim here.

Let's get to the simpler answers that were originally asked for.

Answers
-Yes, which can be observed primarily when accelerating, climbing up long hills, or moments where you'll need to be pumping out maximal effort in general.

-Yes and yes (although currently very little for aesthetic reasons)

-Depends on the individuals' current level of conditioning and athletic training frequency (outside of resistance training, in this case cycling). A good general starting point for resistance training your legs would be twice a week (given that you'll be lifting alongside other athletic activity). As to whether you wish to focus on muscular endurance (type I muscular fibers) with higher rep ranges, or leg strength (type II fibers) with lower rep ranges & more weight is your call.

Keep in mind that squats are not the end-all-be-all of leg exercises, but more like a best bang for your buck movement. Deadlifts, extensions, leg curls etc. all have their place in creating proportionately stronger (and less injury prone due to any muscular imbalance) legs.


credentials:
a degree in Sport Business, and a shameless selfie

sprince

If your cartilage is toast you shouldn't be doing squats, that seems obvious. Cartilage doesn't grow back, once you have bone on bone you're pretty much screwed. If your knee problem is instability, you definitely don't want to do half squats as it only promotes more imbalance leading to more instability.

OBoile

Good post.

OBoile

I think there is some truth to way you're saying here. You don't need to do squats (or really any dedicated leg strength work) to be an elite level cyclist.
However, there is a theory (backed by some evidence I believe) that a stronger muscle will be more efficient at sub-maximal efforts. So, in that sense getting stronger will help. However, whether it helps more than simply spending that time riding is certainly debatable. Strength training (and any other form of cross training) may help keep you more healthy though.

Having said that if you forget about riding performance and consider just general health, then doing dedicated strength work is really beneficial. It's one of the best ways to improve bone density and build/preserve muscle mass as you age. Being slightly stronger now may not mean much to you, but when you're 75 it can have a huge impact on the your quality of life. Strength work is something that complements cycling really well IMO.

As a couple others have said strength training doesn't have to include squats. They're simply one of the best, if not the best, "bang for your buck" exercises. Like any other type of exercise, you get out of it what you put into it. Unless your exercise selection is truly terrible, your effort and consistency matter far more.

inspclouseau

I glad someone posted this about the benefits beyond just leg strength. So many of the comments have been a debate around the direct benefits of performance on a bike related to leg strength. Squats help build total core strength resulting in deceased risk of injury, improved comfort, flexibility, skeletal health, etc, etc, etc. I believe, and could be wrong, but squats are so good, if done with correct form, because they deliver so much in one exercise and help offset the "damage" that cycling could do. I believe in the same with chin-ups (or whatever the underhand grip one is called), as they work the back and offset the contracted chest that happens after hours in the saddle.

Big disclaimer, I am green, and new to fitness and am far from an expert. My ideas have been put together by reading and assessing many debates & ideas.

10 Wheels

I squat getting on and off.

Seattle Forrest

I've been doing strength training for a couple months now, mostly for the reasons you mentioned, but only the upper body. I've always felt like the hills around here are plenty enough for the legs. Saturday I rode over Loup Loup Pass from the valley floor and Sunday I hiked seven miles on the PCT; I'm happy to call both of those "leg day."

OBoile

I doubt very much that even the experts really know. To the best of my knowledge, there's never been a study that examines the long term effects of squats and cycling.

I do think in general, for overall health, people should be doing both dedicated strength work and dedicated cardio. Strength work generally should be heavy compound exercises (squats and chins are both great examples of these. Benchpress, rows, deadlifts, lunges are also good examples. Pushups are good, but they're tough to add weight to). I also think even cyclists should be training their legs. There really is no better way to build/retain muscle than lifting weights.

Obviously for competitive cyclists, this may not apply. I don't know enough to intelligently contribute to discussions about how they should strength train.

OBoile

I suspect you're shortchanging your leg muscles someone doing this. But, if it is what you enjoy, I'm sure it's far better for your muscle size than what the average person does.

wolfchild

You're missing out big time by only doing upper body and no lower body workouts...Squats and deadlifts will make your whole body stronger, especially your core... Training squats and deadlifts will improve all your other lifts.

rubiksoval

I have done them in the past during winter training while progressing from a cat 4 to a cat 1. I always felt like it took away from my cycling, though, and that my improvement was in spite of the weight room, not because of it. Consequently, I stopped doing them after about four seasons and instead focused on my cycling weaknesses, namely threshold work. I subsequently improved that area greatly, along with every other cycling metric available, including max power, sprinting, and short efforts. Haven't considered a weight since.

rubiksoval

No one pedals circles. In fact, studies have shown the most efficient power output is by focusing on the downstroke, not on trying to engage on the upstroke. Even pro tour riders are merely "unweighting" to a slightly greater extent.

work4bike

The reason why deep squats hurt so much is because most people don't use those muscles/connective tissues, because we barely bend our knees past what's required to sit in a chair. You need to exercise those muscles/connective tissues that haven't been exercised since you were a kid, note how kids do deep knee squats when they play.

However, when getting back to doing deep knee squats, you want to be careful because you can injure yourself. One thing I noticed when I got into doing them is that you learn to activate other muscles to make it easier, especially muscle in your ass. Good article on how you need to do deep squats: You need to squat deep! - Barbell Shrugged

Carbonfiberboy 

"unweighting" is part of pedaling circles. The phrase does not mean pulling up on the backstroke. It means keeping a constant torque on the BB. You have two pedals to use to do that, not just one.

And "efficiency" is not a good word around here. Ambiguous. Best not to use it unless you also define exactly what you mean by it.

Me, I try not to focus on the downstroke at all. You can tell who's pedaling circles by watching upper body movement. The best long distance riders are absolutely still in the upper body. Why? Because they engage more of their leg muscles. Only using quads is wasting a lot of your leg weight.

That said, many racers accentuate the downstroke and bob their upper bodies in rhythm when going hard.

Is it popcorn time now?

rubiksoval

'

Okay, so you do the opposite of what's been shown to be the most effective method of producing power.

Regardless, you're not pedaling circles. You're not creating equal torque 360 degrees around the crank. "Pedaling circles" is a pretty silly term that is not only outdated, but as I previously stated, also not the most efficient or effective way of pedaling.

But it's your ride. Enjoy it as you like.

FXjohn

I agree. what is your opinion on clipless pedals? over rated
?

Carbonfiberboy 

What happened to that thing of admiring pros and other expert riders who pedal with no upper body motion? Is that an outmoded canard?

It's pretty easy to see where your crank torque is: get on your rollers, put the bike in a really big gear, and pedal a very low cadence, say 50. Listen. If the sound is steady, you're putting a constant torque on the BB. If it goes WHRRRRrrrrrRRRRrrrrr, you're emphasizing the downstroke. If you don't have rollers, you're missing out. Buy a set that has resistance.

Changing one's pedal stroke might be one of the most difficult things to do in cycling, since it involves neuromuscular control as well as muscle size and strength through the appropriate range of motion. It takes many hours of concentration and conditioning. Years, really.

If you've even been on a long steep climb where you're very overgeared, you know exactly what I mean. I recently did a ride with 7 climbs of between 500' and 1000', close together, all about equally steep, pedaling about a 60 cadence seated in my granny, at or over LTHR, and seeing 800-900 VAM. I was totally pedaling circles.

This video has a good comparison of what circles technique looks like compared with hammering:

sprince

I get that feedback taking my 29'r out on the pavement, although it's more of a ripping sound than hum. Kind of funny to see the reaction when I take it on club rides. It tells you a lot about your pedal stroke. I tend to keep my upper body motionless under medium-lower efforts so it's barely audible. But pushing it on the flats it seems much more efficient to mash, making a long grinding sound on the down stroke. Conversely on climbs at a slightly higher cadence the tire noise sounds like a fully loaded dump truck. Out of the saddle it's an abrupt tearing sound, with only 20 degrees of stroke producing 99 percent of the power.

rubiksoval

GCN did a video addressing this very thing. I'd have a gander at that.

But while one may produce the same steadystate power in tennis shoes, obviously having your feet locked into place is a huge boon for accelerating, handling, etc.

But I suspect you already know that and were simply making an attempt at being clever.

rubiksoval

Sorry, I got lost in all the random personal anecdotes, tangents and strawmen!

None of what you said really addresses the fact that you're not delivering equal torque around the cranks. Ever.. Nor does it address that attempting to do so is not an effective means of delivering power to the bike.

rubiksoval

Because it is!