I figure I'll try this forum first before hitting others. I've asked this question in other places with differing responses.
The question is regarding bicycling and leg resistance work. In the past, when my volume of summer cycling was lower than it is now, I have supplemented with one day/week of leg exercises as follows to maintain balance: Peterson step-ups, deadlifts/single leg deads, seated and standing calf raises. The work has always been skewed towards the hamstrings, which I believed did not get as much work as the quads while riding. The Peterson step-ups are for the vastus medialis, which also does not get as much work as the VL.
This summer has been a very heavy mileage season. I am riding 4 times a week and putting on 400+ miles in a month. Due to both frequency and volume I have stopped doing resistance for the legs altogether. My legs muscles are growing like weeds with all of this volume, esp. the upper thigh.
My questions then are:
i) is this cycling sufficient to work the leg muscle group (quads, hams, calves, and glutes)?
ii) is there any problem with imbalance? In the past I have thought the hamstrings were not getting worked enough, but now with a good spinning cadence they appear to be getting worked plenty.
In the beginning of the summer, I had a leg resistance day, but now with frequency, it seems like it is too much work and not enough rest. I know that pro cyclists don't do any leg resistance work during the season, but they are also putting on 1,500 miles in a month. Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Not sure what Bill will say, but I think your legs are getting plenty of work. I wouldnt' do much more in the gym for them if you are doing that kind of mileage. I am experiencing the same thing and I don't do nearly the mileage that you do. My legs have gotten huge since I started cycling. I remember from your photos of BII that you had pretty stout looking quads. Unless you have aspirations to have bodybuilder legs (all show, no go) then I wouldn't worry about it.
I do some LIGHT resistance when I am riding heavy like I have this summer. What you are doing sounds fine, if not too much. I do some goodmornings, and maybe some complex work for my quads, glutes, hips. I can't do any O-lifts right now due to a right knee injury, severe pulled right hamstring (probably related to the knee problem), and some chronic left hip problems. Hell, cycling is about all I can do for my legs these days! (I need to type out a list of my ails to Bill in the injury forum... look for it some time today Bill). I think especially if you have one or two of those days dedicated to your hill work your quads AND hams should be getting adequate stimulation. Doing too much more would probably be over training given the volume you are doing right now.
I'll echo JP's opinion, and just add in my own experience with resistance training and rowing. In the on-season, competitive (non-elite) rowers log approximately 24 hours a week (2 practices a day, 2 hours each, 6 days a week). The mileage varies from 15-20k (for overdistance rows, depending on what size of shell you're rowing) to 5k (for sprint training). However, during the on-season, rowers _might_ lift once a week (I would try at the beginning of the season, but after about 4 weeks, there was no one else to work out with =P).
If you're cycling clipped in, and properly (which it sounds like you're doing) then you shouldn't have to worry too much about your quad/hamstring imbalance as a proper cadence with pushing and pulling motions will address that sufficiently. The same goes with your glute/flexor one. The main concern I would have is flexibility, rather than strength, since, in my experience with cyclists, they tend to develop tight hamstrings and thus develop lower back pain, but that's about it.
Since late-spring/summer/early fall is basically a cyclist's on-season (just like rowing really), your goal should be to maintain the strength you've gained over your off-season. If that can be accomplished through cycling, then there's no reason to have the resistance day. There is usually _some_ strength loss, but it's really inconsequential. This basically ensures that when you return to the gym in the off-season, that you won't be starting from square 1 all over again, and thus make new gains that you will be able to preserve in the next season.
The other half the coin (that JUST came to mind) is to look at your primary objective. Are you trying to become a better cyclist or are you trying to increase your lifts/improve your body appearance? The reason most endurance based athletes don't lift in the competitive season is because it simply detracts from sport training time and adds volume/intensity to the point where they're not getting enough rest. Since a cyclist's (and a rower's) performance is largely dependent on their aerobic capacity (with lesser, but still important, contributions from muscular strength), they're going to spend more time developing their hearts and lungs and circulatory system (yes, I know the heart is a part of the cirulatory system). Just a thought, really.
Resistance training for these groups tend to be focused on functional transfer (despite the 'transfer' debate). No one in the cycling world really cares what their 1RM squat is because it's not really that much of an indicator as to how fast a cyclist you are--unless your race consists of just one heavy pedal push =P. Just more random thoughts.
Bryan, my goals are indeed conflicting: I want to increase my cycling ability (speed over distance) which is obviously an endurance-based goal when I am talking about 2 hour+ sessions. I want to maintain my explosive strength, or at least not lose too much of it. I realize this may not be possible with the cycling, but I am hoping any deleterious 'detraining' of explosiveness will reverse when I return to the gym.
In addition to tight hamstrings, other flexibility issues for cyclists include tight hip flexors (due to the position) and tight ITB band. I try to stretch and walk backwards regularly to keep these areas flexible.
Just out of curiousity, why so concerned with the explosive strength?
And if it's a concern, you could comprimise and add an 'explosive maintenance' workout to your schedule (i.e. explosive work, with lower load, or no load at all). Explosive capability, I think, is likely as much a product of your neural system (i.e. whether your body 'knows' _how_ to explode) as it is fibre composition. Don't forget that substantial fibre conversion takes place over long periods of time as well (longer than your training season).
By 'fibre' (rest of the world spelling) I'm going to assume you mean 'fiber' [both the server and I sit in the US, the epicenter of the universe].
The very little athletic talent God has given me is limited to my quickness and explosive strength. I am very poor at endurance activities (but working on it), but if you look at my acceleration in the 40, or my 100m time, it's not bad. Couple that info with the natural decline in explosiveness as you age (I'm 37 now) and I want to hold on to whatever I've got for as long as I can. It still gives me a perverse thrill when I beat a HS kid in the 40, or when I can keep up with a college kid in the 200 and then blow by him in the last 20 meters....hearing him say 'Oh Shit!' as I kick it into a higher gear is a great feeling. Please don't take that away from me.
I look at a guy like John Cannon and see that he has made a huge transition from NFL football (explosive) to elite triathlete (top 5 in the world in the Clydesdale category) and am amazed. But then I also read about him losing his explosiveness. I have a friend who played semi-pro ball until recently and then reshaped himself to do Ironman triathlons...his explosiveness has also gone in the crapper. So with the endurance work (and lack of explosive work) that I am doing, I am concerned about my own decline.
A wise man once said, "That which you train the least is retained the least" (I can't remember who said that...Grandma Hartman used to say "Use IT or Lose IT! Just before she bonked me on the head )
If your goal is cycling now but you eventually will return to the gym for explosive training (which seems to be more natural for you...your quote, "The very little athletic talent God has given me is limited to my quickness and explosive strength"...hint, hint ), you can work to maintain neurologic efficiency by applying Newton II.
F=ma
One day per week, do a low volume strength protocol (like 3 x 3...F=Ma) emphasizing some form of squat. The next week some form of explosive lift or plyo (F=mA). You may also consider 2-3 sets of hamstring work (hip emphasis like reverse hypers) again with emphasis on low reps to train higher threshold motor units which will not be trained on the bike.
Low volume, low frequency will slow your losses until you return to the gym (as God intended per your comment [img]smile.gif[/img] ).
Hip flexor tightness tends to be neurologic rather than structural (although it can become so)
so be certain to include an active contraction with your stretching. Static lunges (30-60 sec) are my current favorite for ground-based athletes (mostly cause it's fun to watch 'em squirm). I haven't really considered cyclists. Experiment a bit and let me know if you find something you like better.
Bill Hartman, anti-cyclist
P.S. Ya know who has the easiest job in the world. Lance Armstrong's weightlifting coach.
P.P.S. Uh, you guys do know that cars get you there faster than bikes, right? I find that I'm much more rested that way.
Thanks Bill. Grandma Hartman sounds like a very smart woman. [img]smile.gif[/img]
The hip flexor stretch that I do is basically the static lunge you describe - it's a very common stretch among cyclists. So you are dead on with that recommendation.
Lance Armstrongs 1RM numbers, even for his lower body, were pretty pathetic. BUT (and there's always a but) not many guys have his VO2 max or can sustain the wattage output he can (something like 300 watts)- his sustainable weight to power ratio is incredible. Besides, any mass they have above their hips is just wasted weight their legs have to push along. Eventually, someone will breed a cyclist who has a shrunken torso on top of massive gams.
P.S.: You know who has the hardest job in the world? Phil Mickelson's and Craig Stadler's dieticians. Don't get me started on the 'athletic benefits' of golfing - or better yet, the amount of athleticism required to be a good golfer. Coordination? No doubt. It takes coordination to hit a 90 mph fastball too - doesn't mean that Greg Lusinski was ever a great athlete. (I'm just kidding here - just because Tiger Woods is only one of about five pro golfers that has any strength whatsoever and the typical golfer is more likely to look like Stadler or Mickelson, it doesn't mean anything. All this, and I still play golf. Seriously, I do know that part of the reason for Woods' success is his discipline in hitting the weight room.)
This coming from a competive Cyclist. Not me one of my clients. He does a lot of stuff on the bike. And lays off the weights. During session. When he works-out in the gym he's on the Spin bike doing both upper body and lower body work.
__________________
In Health,
Silas S Chen Exercise Specialist @ MorganStanely Fitness Center Mid-town NYC
P.S.: You know who has the hardest job in the world? Phil Mickelson's and Craig Stadler's dieticians. Don't get me started on the 'athletic benefits' of golfing - or better yet, the amount of athleticism required to be a good golfer. Coordination? No doubt. It takes coordination to hit a 90 mph fastball too - doesn't mean that Greg Lusinski was ever a great athlete. (I'm just kidding here - just because Tiger Woods is only one of about five pro golfers that has any strength whatsoever and the typical golfer is more likely to look like Stadler or Mickelson, it doesn't mean anything. All this, and I still play golf. Seriously, I do know that part of the reason for Woods' success is his discipline in hitting the weight room.)
I disagree (bet that you could see that coming [img]tongue.gif[/img] ). Watch the PGA Championship thjis weekend. It has one the strongest (if not the strongest) fields of the year. You'll see that plenty of the guys are in pretty good shape. Top players such as Els, Furyk, Weir, and Love all look as though they're in good condition. Guys who look like Stadler or Mickelson are becoming the minority. Even on the Senioor tour, there are guys like Hale Irwin (former college football player) and Gary Player who keep fit. They're becoming the rule, not the exception.
Russ, I know. I was just ribbing Bill since he laid into cycling. After all, very few people in the general public would probably say cycling require less athleticism (which they would probably define as effort) than golf. Not talking about skill, just effort and the public's perception.
I was just ribbing Bill since he laid into cycling. After all, very few people in the general public would probably say cycling require less athleticism (which they would probably define as effort) than golf. Not talking about skill, just effort and the public's perception.
I hear ya. It's a different sort of athleticism, I guess. I definitly respect what cyclists do.
[img]smile.gif[/img]
)
Linear Mode
