Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Training & Nutrition
Reload this Page >

Polarized training (PT)...Good for low volume rider?

Notices
Training & Nutrition Learn how to develop a training schedule that's good for you. What should you eat and drink on your ride? Learn everything you need to know about training and nutrition here.

Polarized training (PT)...Good for low volume rider?

Old 02-08-21, 10:26 PM
  #126  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 17,488

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2954 Post(s)
Liked 872 Times in 658 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Maybe you're not familiar with the "people". Some world-renowned scientists and coaches are in that thread. I.e., the people that get paid a lot of money to ensure that the most talented individuals in the world are successful. And they've got quite a track record.

Just because it's not published in a peer-reviewed paper, doesn't mean it's not legitimate. Those papers are produced by academics, not the actual coaches doing the work.
My HS biology teacher turned me into a scientist and that's how I still am. I think we know by now what happens when people don't believe the science. Now we know that many people not only don't believe it, they ignore what they don't believe. It's a sad day.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 05:47 AM
  #127  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,415

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2601 Post(s)
Liked 1,396 Times in 698 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy View Post
My HS biology teacher turned me into a scientist and that's how I still am. I think we know by now what happens when people don't believe the science. Now we know that many people not only don't believe it, they ignore what they don't believe. It's a sad day.
That has absolutely nothing to do with anything and is fallacious as you can get. Undoubtedly your elementary, middle school, and high school teachers did not publish any research, yet at least a few of them must have known how to teach and could then teach you things.

Like I said, academics in universities write research papers, not coaches in a lab or on the road testing and training their riders. Would you tell Shane Sutton or Tim Cusick that because their work isn't published, it isn't legitimate or worthy of replication?
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 07:18 AM
  #128  
ZHVelo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 619
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Liked 151 Times in 109 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Sounds like general fitness...
Don't you think this is biased? Shifting goalposts?

Then you might as well call the endless base miles "general fitness", too, given as the season starts volume goes down and intensity goes up. You said above something along the lines of "what do the pros do", well, apparently they do do gym, at least some. This isn't a question of "should you do squats the day before a TT to get faster", but whether you should do gym at all.

Nor does your argument "the question is not what is your max power but how long can you hold x power" necessarily imply that doing gym isn't beneficial in that regard. I am not saying it is. I am wondering if it is. [One idea being that if you can lift 100kg then 50kg will feel easy. But if you can only lift 60kg then 50kg will feel a lot harder. Obviously at some point in cycling endurance becomes dominant but no one here has linked a study or a physiological analysis of when this happens and how and to what extent or if strength training in the off season can keep your legs strong]. But you, despite of any real evidence, seem pretty set that the answer is no. That all you need is bike work. And yet when giving your reason for that (what pros do) and I give you a counter example you shift it to "general fitness".
ZHVelo is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 08:31 AM
  #129  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
How do you reckon? And why a few minutes?
Basic human physiology.
I mean come on. You're a smart guy. I'm sure you've noticed that events that are significantly anaerobic in nature tend to feature bigger stronger athletes than ones that are longer in duration. One only needs to compare 400m runners with 10k runners to see this (or track sprinters with pursuit riders with grand tour riders).
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
You think your legs aren't strong enough to hold your one minute power for 1.5 minutes?

What about 10 minute power for 20 minutes?
This seems nonsensical to me. If I could hold my one minute power for 1.5 minutes, then it wouldn't be my one minute power would it?
OBoile is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 08:32 AM
  #130  
Branko D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 259
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Liked 97 Times in 61 Posts
Well, in the last 10 years most published research has shown there is some benefit of strength training for endurance performance in well trained endurance athletes (cyclists and runners both). This is not yet definitive, especially as most studies are published by a handful of researchers (Ronnestad being one of the prolific ones: his lectures are certainly interesting). I haven't seen one study which claims that benefits to endurance performance come from an improvement in maximum strength - I don't know why people beat that horse anymore; it's dead.

So, in doubt I would do it and see if it helps you - but training interventions which are helpful on average do not have to be helpful for every subject. One more reason that different approaches to coaching can all be valid with an athlete who is a good fit for the coach.
​​​​​
Ultimately, if you try and aren't getting faster, it doesn't work for you. That's the best test there is when it comes to how to coach yourself.

Last edited by Branko D; 02-09-21 at 08:40 AM.
Branko D is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 08:36 AM
  #131  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
That's an extremely literal way of looking at that comment.
Looking at it in a non-literal way: here endurance improved far more than here high end power. This happens when you get old, and as per the professor of sport science in the video I posted, a loss of muscle mass is on of the reasons we see this in older athletes. Wouldn't it have been cool if she had been able to improve both?
OBoile is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 08:54 AM
  #132  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by Branko D View Post
The science is still unclear on whether the ancillary benefits of strength training actually improve endurance performance or not and the issue is, if they do, training interventions which work on average might not give a positive impact on everyone (which is depressingly common with all sorts of workout interventions, where you get some who respond extremely well, some who respond negatively and all sorts of responses in between) so there's still a question of what works or doesn't work for you specifically.

Personally, I find doing a bit of strength training worthwhile, but while I did become able to move more weight I just don't see that it did anything for my 10s / 1 minute / etc power on the bike where you'd be expecting to see gains, hence I'd be quite reluctant to say that it was the weights which helped with 10, 20 or 60 minute power as opposed to simply riding more. I do feel stronger in a practical sense, that my durability improved and I get less aches and pains after running. I am inclined to attribute being able to maintain a lower position on the bike for longer as well to it, but that could be just due to more training.

That said, I typically only do about half a hour of weighs per week so it doesn't take away much from riding / running - I have weights setup and ready to go in my living room so I can do a quick session after an easy ride or run which acts as a warm up, without spending time going to the gym. If you're going to spend a hour driving to the gym and back and faffing about, that cuts a big chunk off available training time which is probably going to impact performance negatively as opposed to spending a couple of hours extra on the bike.

My training "budget" time wise is typically about 10 to 12 hours per week (a good chunk of it being the weekend ride which I find just to be enjoyable on it's own merits) so trying something quite close to polarized or pyramidal (like polarized except with more Z2 work near threshold and less Z3) works out for me and I can fit in some strength work in there on top. If I could do more hours I'd do more Z1, but also if I could only do six then probably I'd try for two interval sessions plus two longer easy rides and let the training time distribution land where it does.
There really isn't any debate about strength training improving power over short durations. One need only compare the riders here:
with those in the World Tour to see it. Of course, these people are doing considerably more than 1/2 hour a week of strength training. Like anything else, you have to put real effort into it to see significant progress.

At longer durations, the correlation between strength and power decreases. At some point, it likely goes to 0, at least from a practical sense.

I doubt lifting would make you noticeably faster at the intervals you care about. But it probably is a good idea for general health. Increased bone density and increased muscle mass are both pretty important wrt being functional as we age.

Of course, doing what you enjoy is also important. I doubt more Z1 would make much of a difference for you, but if that's what you enjoy... well being happy is a pretty important thing.
OBoile is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 04:49 PM
  #133  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,415

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2601 Post(s)
Liked 1,396 Times in 698 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Looking at it in a non-literal way: here endurance improved far more than here high end power. This happens when you get old, and as per the professor of sport science in the video I posted, a loss of muscle mass is on of the reasons we see this in older athletes. Wouldn't it have been cool if she had been able to improve both?
I mean, she had just won the world time trial championships and the national championships, so....

Does it matter?
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 04:56 PM
  #134  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,415

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2601 Post(s)
Liked 1,396 Times in 698 Posts
Originally Posted by ZHVelo View Post
Don't you think this is biased? Shifting goalposts?

Then you might as well call the endless base miles "general fitness", too, given as the season starts volume goes down and intensity goes up. You said above something along the lines of "what do the pros do", well, apparently they do do gym, at least some. This isn't a question of "should you do squats the day before a TT to get faster", but whether you should do gym at all.

Nor does your argument "the question is not what is your max power but how long can you hold x power" necessarily imply that doing gym isn't beneficial in that regard. I am not saying it is. I am wondering if it is. [One idea being that if you can lift 100kg then 50kg will feel easy. But if you can only lift 60kg then 50kg will feel a lot harder. Obviously at some point in cycling endurance becomes dominant but no one here has linked a study or a physiological analysis of when this happens and how and to what extent or if strength training in the off season can keep your legs strong]. But you, despite of any real evidence, seem pretty set that the answer is no. That all you need is bike work. And yet when giving your reason for that (what pros do) and I give you a counter example you shift it to "general fitness".
Not in the least. It's general fitness. It's not specific to his performance objectives, which is why he doesn't do it in June.

I don't think your weight lifting comparison is applicable. If I can do 500 watts for 3 minutes, that doesn't mean 500 for 2 minutes hurts less, or 450 for 3 minutes hurts less. It just means I'm probably more capable of doing it more often.

Pros don't do it during the season. That's specific fitness. There's a reason for that.

Your question is wrong, anyway, and I've stated multiple times what my exact assertions are: that being that on-the-bike training is more beneficial for your riding than gym training. And to bring that back to this particular tangent, on-the-bike training is specific training which is specific to your performance objectives.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 05:00 PM
  #135  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,415

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2601 Post(s)
Liked 1,396 Times in 698 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Basic human physiology.
I mean come on. You're a smart guy. I'm sure you've noticed that events that are significantly anaerobic in nature tend to feature bigger stronger athletes than ones that are longer in duration. One only needs to compare 400m runners with 10k runners to see this (or track sprinters with pursuit riders with grand tour riders).
This seems nonsensical to me. If I could hold my one minute power for 1.5 minutes, then it wouldn't be my one minute power would it?
Why do you have to turn the point into a matter of semantics? That you can't do your 1 minute power for 1.5 minutes is not because you are not strong enough. Strength has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Even 400m runners are doing a significant percentage of their effort aerobically. I think it was Gastin that said by the time they're at 40 or so seconds, half their energy is produced aerobically?

It's not strength that is limiting their ability to run faster.

That's the crux of the issue.

Aerobic, aerobic, aerobic, aerobic.
rubiksoval is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 05:06 PM
  #136  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,241
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 804 Post(s)
Liked 279 Times in 176 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Why do you have to turn the point into a matter of semantics? That you can't do your 1 minute power for 1.5 minutes is not because you are not strong enough. Strength has absolutely nothing to do with it.
This is so true. As long as you are using the accepted definition of strength - the maximum force or tension a muscle or muscle group can produce - if you can do it once (whether it's turn the pedals over, take a stride, etc.) but can't repeat it, it isn't that the maximum isn't high enough, but that endurance is the limiter.
asgelle is offline  
Old 02-09-21, 11:43 PM
  #137  
Hermes
Version 3.0
 
Hermes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 12,399

Bikes: Too Many

Mentioned: 294 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 952 Post(s)
Liked 1,038 Times in 664 Posts
I do not have much to add to polarized training or strength training that has not been said. I am very happy, extremely happy that I went the 3rd party coach route and never have to concern myself with these type of discussions other than they are interesting to learn about others views.

I have had and have a great coach(es) that included strength work as necessary. When I used a track sprint coach for the year where I focused on sprinting, I did some strength training specifically for legs but in general did the majority of the strength work on the bike. For example, after the 15 minute motor paced warmup, we did two jumps - one seated and one standing and we did these with a partner - drive each other even harder. The first one was seated. So we roll up together in warmup gears to the start of the home straight on the blue band just barely rolling. The first pedal stroke would be with our left foot and in the drops. The lead racer would tap his hip twice and we push with max force with our left foot and with each succeeding pedal stroke being a max. We race down the home straight and climb the 45 degree banking and at the top, turn abruptly and dive off. The goal is to rip the pedals off the bike.

We rest and then set up for a flying, standing jump in warmup gears where we go from the relief line or middle of the track and from around 20 mph stand, accelerate and dive off the banking standing and rev up rpm standing using max force on the pedals for 100 meters.

We then get ready for our actual workout. I have seen it written somehow we do not generate any bone density on the bike. With max effort zero speed work in a big gear, I find that idea ahem interesting. Okay. Whatever. And our actual workout for the day may be 3 sets of standing starts with 20 minute rest between sets. A standing start is defacto a one leg dead lift. Multiple sets at max effort. I do not think that runners generate as much bone stress as I did in standing starts. Maybe I am wrong.

One could ask, does the gym work offer better strength gains than the bike? I would say yes, but at some point in time one has to convert the gains in the gym to power on the bike and ultimately speed. Not so easy to do. Hence, the secret to sprint training is getting the formulation right. And if one trains a lot in the gym then one is not going to ride their bike much. Fact of life. Since I was doing both road and track and pursuit as well as sprinting, I opted for sprint training on the bike.

With the pandemic, I have not been doing jack at the track. I try to get in a sprinters type of workout at the front end of a road workout once per week to keep the right muscles topped up and not convert those go either way fibers from favoring slow twitch.

I am working out in the outdoor gyms, we have in SoCal but I have always been working out at the gym. I like strength training.

My vote is the best bang for the buck is on the bike training for training the ATP PC, glycolytic and aerobic power producing systems. Hire a great 3rd party coach who has a field of world class athletes that achieve results and do what he says. Adjunct work is great, why not? Better for ones health and maybe slow down aging. Will adjunct work make you faster....hmmmmmm. Probably not and may even make you slower. Just my opinion.

PS. Seiler. I listened to the video and my feet fell asleep. I would not hire him as a coach. Also, he sounded like he was addressing grade school kids versus athletes that probably know as much as he does. The hard part of training is getting in perfect shape for the A event and then delivering the ride of your life. Seiler would not inspire me to the next level. Sorry.
Hermes is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 01:51 AM
  #138  
ZHVelo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 619
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Liked 151 Times in 109 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Not in the least. It's general fitness. It's not specific to his performance objectives, which is why he doesn't do it in June.

I don't think your weight lifting comparison is applicable. If I can do 500 watts for 3 minutes, that doesn't mean 500 for 2 minutes hurts less, or 450 for 3 minutes hurts less. It just means I'm probably more capable of doing it more often.

Pros don't do it during the season. That's specific fitness. There's a reason for that.

Your question is wrong, anyway, and I've stated multiple times what my exact assertions are: that being that on-the-bike training is more beneficial for your riding than gym training. And to bring that back to this particular tangent, on-the-bike training is specific training which is specific to your performance objectives.
Yes but a cyclist needs general fitness, too.

Wrong numbers. My analogy would be that for you 400W for 3 minutes is easier if you can do 500W than for someone who can do just 410W.

They also cut down all the endless base miles. Moot point.

Is it though? If you have 20 hours already on the bike is hour 21 as beneficial as 1 hour in the gym would be?
ZHVelo is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 07:43 AM
  #139  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Why do you have to turn the point into a matter of semantics? That you can't do your 1 minute power for 1.5 minutes is not because you are not strong enough. Strength has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Wrong. Getting stronger would absolutely improve both my 1 and 1.5 minute power.

Originally Posted by rubiksoval View Post
Even 400m runners are doing a significant percentage of their effort aerobically. I think it was Gastin that said by the time they're at 40 or so seconds, half their energy is produced aerobically?

It's not strength that is limiting their ability to run faster.

That's the crux of the issue.

Aerobic, aerobic, aerobic, aerobic.
What's the other 50%? Where was the energy coming from for the first 3/4 of the race? Why do you think that doesn't count? Why are they bigger and stronger (and heavier) than 10k runners? What's the point of lugging that extra weight around?

Last edited by OBoile; 02-10-21 at 07:50 AM.
OBoile is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 07:49 AM
  #140  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
This is so true. As long as you are using the accepted definition of strength - the maximum force or tension a muscle or muscle group can produce - if you can do it once (whether it's turn the pedals over, take a stride, etc.) but can't repeat it, it isn't that the maximum isn't high enough, but that endurance is the limiter.
A higher maximum strength allows one to do sub-maximal efforts more often. A person who squats 405 can do more reps with 300 than someone who squats 315. A person who's 5 second power is 2000 watts is going to be able to hold 1000 watts longer than someone who's 5 second power is 1100 watts.

You guys can play whatever mental gymnastics you want, but for shorter efforts, it's indisputable that strength plays a big role. The debate on that ended decades ago.
OBoile is offline  
Likes For OBoile:
Old 02-10-21, 08:09 AM
  #141  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,151
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1146 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by ZHVelo View Post
Is it though? If you have 20 hours already on the bike is hour 21 as beneficial as 1 hour in the gym would be?
Thatís the heart of the question for which there isnít a clear answer. If that hour in the gym is for core work to prevent or eliminate back or neck issues then itís probably a good idea. If the 20hrs already includes a range of low and high intensity training then adding more high intensity training in the form of heavy lifting to build strength in your legs is likely to have a negative impact on the bike training.

The pros I follow are doing 25+ hrs/wk getting ready for the season now with plenty of tempo and threshold work. I see very little high intensity work on the bike and donít imagine they can afford to smash their legs in the gym doing heavy squats. So if they canít afford it while prepping for racing and they certainly wouldnít want to be doing it in the middle of racing season when exactly would a good time be for adding in strength training targeted at the legs?

For the recreational cyclist doing 5-10 hrs/wk of low to moderate intensity then yes I think targeted strength training involving heavy lifting could be beneficial. Numerous studies have looked at this question and found a positive response. None of the studies Iíve seen have compared the effects of strength training in the gym with HIIT on the bike. I suspect the answer to that is far less clear. Itís like asking which set of intervals is optimal for improving performance? There isnít a clear answer that works for everyone.

Personally, I prefer to do my high intensity work on the bike. If I want general fitness Iíve got a list of projects in my woodwork shop that all involve plenty of lifting for general fitness. Iím over 60 with about 10 yrs of power data. I can see where my high end has slowly declined. I suspect I could probably slow that decline doing 2 or 3 heavy lifting sessions a week but that would impact my riding and I prefer riding at this stage.
gregf83 is offline  
Likes For gregf83:
Old 02-10-21, 08:18 AM
  #142  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,151
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1146 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
Wrong. Getting stronger would absolutely improve both my 1 and 1.5 minute power.
Perhaps, but likely not as much as you think. Itís pretty easy for someone who hasnít been lifting to increase their strength by 20%. What do you think that 20% increase in strength would do for your 1 min power on the bike? Not much I suspect. Youíd be better off doing a block of HIIT on the bike.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 08:25 AM
  #143  
gregf83 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 9,151
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1146 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
You guys can play whatever mental gymnastics you want, but for shorter efforts, it's indisputable that strength plays a big role. The debate on that ended decades ago.
For those shorter efforts to be meaningful youíve got to be in the right position at the right time at the end of the race and if the training you did to improve the shorter efforts impacted your ability for the far more common longer efforts the extra strength you gained is moot.
Would increased strength help Mark Cavendish get to the right position with 200m to go? Strength is not his problem.
gregf83 is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 08:33 AM
  #144  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,241
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 804 Post(s)
Liked 279 Times in 176 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
A person who squats 405 can do more reps with 300 than someone who squats 315. A person who's 5 second power is 2000 watts is going to be able to hold 1000 watts longer than someone who's 5 second power is 1100 watts.
You're conflating force (lbs) with power (W). Now I don't know if you're doing this to confuse the issue or you don't understand the difference, but as long as bikes have gears, power is what moves the bike forward and force is secondary. So ignoring the weight lifter who is only concerned with force and focusing on the cyclist, it is not self-evident that a higher maximum power leads to a higher five second (or any other duration) power. Seeing the variation in shape of power-duration curves for several riders makes this clear.

As a thought experiment, given a rider's 5 second power and no other information, how would you determine the average force on the pedals?
asgelle is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 09:25 AM
  #145  
ZHVelo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 619
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 376 Post(s)
Liked 151 Times in 109 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
Thatís the heart of the question for which there isnít a clear answer. If that hour in the gym is for core work to prevent or eliminate back or neck issues then itís probably a good idea. If the 20hrs already includes a range of low and high intensity training then adding more high intensity training in the form of heavy lifting to build strength in your legs is likely to have a negative impact on the bike training.

The pros I follow are doing 25+ hrs/wk getting ready for the season now with plenty of tempo and threshold work. I see very little high intensity work on the bike and donít imagine they can afford to smash their legs in the gym doing heavy squats. So if they canít afford it while prepping for racing and they certainly wouldnít want to be doing it in the middle of racing season when exactly would a good time be for adding in strength training targeted at the legs?

For the recreational cyclist doing 5-10 hrs/wk of low to moderate intensity then yes I think targeted strength training involving heavy lifting could be beneficial. Numerous studies have looked at this question and found a positive response. None of the studies Iíve seen have compared the effects of strength training in the gym with HIIT on the bike. I suspect the answer to that is far less clear. Itís like asking which set of intervals is optimal for improving performance? There isnít a clear answer that works for everyone.

Personally, I prefer to do my high intensity work on the bike. If I want general fitness Iíve got a list of projects in my woodwork shop that all involve plenty of lifting for general fitness. Iím over 60 with about 10 yrs of power data. I can see where my high end has slowly declined. I suspect I could probably slow that decline doing 2 or 3 heavy lifting sessions a week but that would impact my riding and I prefer riding at this stage.
But that is exactly my point, some people here are very certain that their view is correct, but as you say, they simply cannot be. We don't have sufficient data on it.
ZHVelo is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 03:38 PM
  #146  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
Perhaps, but likely not as much as you think. Itís pretty easy for someone who hasnít been lifting to increase their strength by 20%. What do you think that 20% increase in strength would do for your 1 min power on the bike? Not much I suspect. Youíd be better off doing a block of HIIT on the bike.
Why not do both? Again I'll point out:


Every one of these guys is lifting, and lifting regularly.
OBoile is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 03:43 PM
  #147  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by gregf83 View Post
For those shorter efforts to be meaningful youíve got to be in the right position at the right time at the end of the race and if the training you did to improve the shorter efforts impacted your ability for the far more common longer efforts the extra strength you gained is moot.
Would increased strength help Mark Cavendish get to the right position with 200m to go? Strength is not his problem.
That's moving the goal posts somewhat since we weren't necessarily talking about a road race. But yes, it probably would help.
But, I'll point out from the linked article in the other thread, Sagan squats throughout the year. https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/pet...with-gym-work/
"During the season the squat is one of the preferred efforts. We do four sets of four efforts with an 80 or 90 per cent load, carefully controlling the speed is high."
Apparently the Bora-Hansgrohe people think it helps.
OBoile is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 03:51 PM
  #148  
OBoile
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,679
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 976 Post(s)
Liked 265 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by asgelle View Post
You're conflating force (lbs) with power (W). Now I don't know if you're doing this to confuse the issue or you don't understand the difference, but as long as bikes have gears, power is what moves the bike forward and force is secondary. So ignoring the weight lifter who is only concerned with force and focusing on the cyclist, it is not self-evident that a higher maximum power leads to a higher five second (or any other duration) power. Seeing the variation in shape of power-duration curves for several riders makes this clear.

As a thought experiment, given a rider's 5 second power and no other information, how would you determine the average force on the pedals?
You do understand that there is a relationship between force and power right? Power is just force times velocity.

I mean, really, this whole post is to nonsensical to bother replying to in detail.
OBoile is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 03:52 PM
  #149  
asgelle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 4,241
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 804 Post(s)
Liked 279 Times in 176 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile View Post
You do understand that there is a relationship between force and power right? Power is just force times velocity.
Just? There's a lot of meaning in that little word - times.

Last edited by asgelle; 02-10-21 at 03:58 PM.
asgelle is offline  
Old 02-10-21, 06:12 PM
  #150  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,415

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2601 Post(s)
Liked 1,396 Times in 698 Posts
Originally Posted by ZHVelo View Post
Is it though? If you have 20 hours already on the bike is hour 21 as beneficial as 1 hour in the gym would be?
Both would be detrimental if I had 20 hours already on the bike.

My recovery abilities are not world-tour level.
rubiksoval is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.