Originally Posted by countryrider
Ric we all like to be right. Especially when we feel deep down that we are right. However, the parameters you keep talking about are for higher level riders.
i said that there'd be no benefit to trained riders, you're correct.
Those who are just beginning, or go on "fun rides" of a few miles could benefit from a weight program.
i said that weights would help these people -- i also stated that *any* exercise would be just as beneficial
additionally, and most importantly, these groups of people are often very time limited (e.g., with work/family/school/etc.) and by taking time away from cycling (and doing another exercise) there will be less cycling improvement. in other words, if you're time limited then really concentrate on riding your bike (of course, that's if you want to get better at riding a bike, if on the other hand you're just interested in being generally fit, then continue to do various different exercise modalities).
I do know that as stated before a successful long-distance runner from my area was told he needed to be on a weight training program. It wasn't meant to put on bulk as that would not be beneficial, but he was told to do exercises to put on lean muscle mass. It would make him a stronger runner, and allow him to rely on his pure running ability more in the later stages of the race if things were close. Instead of having to try to gut it out, he could lean on the fact that he had strengthened his legs and can put more into the finishing sprint if he needs to.
as far as i'm aware, we're talking about cycling. mechaisms for adaptations are different between the two modalities, such that weights may well help running in trained runners but not because it makes them stronger.
Unfortunuately, those who concentrate on a single sport such as cycling or running don't ever think they need a weight program.
for cycling they don't (to become a better cyclist)
I'm not saying everyone should be on a weight program, I just think that it works for some people. I know it worked for me, and I know it worked for some of my friends. That is all I know for sure. I don't know what it will do for a complete stranger 100 miles away. I just don't think you can completely write off something like this initially. If things don't work out it's not like you can't quit. People quit things all the time.
why bother doing it in the first place? i had a friend that would hit his legs the day before a race with a frying pan, he was convinced it improved his performance. why not do that? i don't think you can write that off, he always did well.
I just don't think things should be eliminated as training options just because a certain number of people responded negatively to it.
to me this infers that you mean only a minority of people responded negatively, when in fact it's every study that's used trained cyclists. we already know that in low fitness groups any exercise is able to cause an aerobic adaptation
Because everyone is built differently, different things work for different people. I am not advocating strength training for everyone in every sport. I am saying that some people who feel compelled to lift might want to try it to see how it helps them. If they feel more confident by strengthening their leg muscles and adding lean muscle to them, it may be a psychological advantage more than anything. Yet, it is still an advantage they have. They will be less prone to doubt themselves, and maybe push harder because they just "know" they can.
on the other hand, why should i not present the facts as they are, so that people can make an informed decision as to whether or not they should bother in the first place, and waste their time?
ric