# Improving leg strength and power



## ronbott (Nov 7, 2014)

I'm relatively new to cycling and need some advice about increasing leg strength and power. 

I come from a running background and took up cycling this summer when after a couple of knee surgeries my doctor suggested finding an activity other than running. I spent the early part of the summer doing easy long rides of 90-120 minutes, an then by mid summer started doing some intervals. Towards late summer I tried some group rides but really struggled. I was dropped almost immediately and could not keep up. It felt like I could not generate enough power to even match the speed for a short while.

So I am looking to improve on this over the winter, but wondering how? I am 44 years old and am in decent shape (5'7" ~140 lbs). I was reasonably successful as a runner (under 15:00 5K), so I think I have some athletic ability. I know that doesn't automatically translate to success on the bike, but I feel like I have reasonable goals: to be able to keep up on group rides and be able to stay with the pack in some Cat 5 races next summer.

What can I do this off-season to improve my leg strength and power? I'm not very comfortable with the idea of doing any kind of weightlifting because of my knees. I plan on purchasing an indoor trainer and would prefer to use that. Anyone have some suggestions?


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

Work your way up. Start with easier groups. When they get easy, move up until you are in the A group. 

Given your knee problems, I would work on cadence over strength. In other words, spin don't mash. I find spin classes have helped me with this. As do rollers. Trainers a little less so.


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

Keep riding with that fast group. Do hills. Do sprints. Push yourself. 

You have the aerobic ability to be very good. It just takes gritting your teeth and hanging in there until you get the specific cycling fitness you need. That comes with practice.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Once (if?) you have the OK from your doc, squats won't hurt your knees they will strengthen them. You just need to maintain proper form and be disciplined about keeping the weight lower than your max and focusing on form... What kind of work did you do in PT? They should have given exactly this kind of plan? Cycling can be far harder on your knees than lifting. NJBIker already made the distinction between spinning and mashing, and that made a big difference for my knees. Cadence sensor has been a huge plus.


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

As you discovered, cycling requires more leg strength than running. That muscular strength will come with time.

I wouldn't fret about your knees and weightlifting. Your knee problems stem from the pounding and weightlifting will not duplicate the impact issues.

Since you're entering a winter "off-season" and you need to build a base of cycling fitness as a new cyclist, I would recommend Thomas Chapple's book, Base Building for Cyclists. It will provide you with an in-depth understanding of what you need to develop as a cyclist including training recommendations and a weightlifting program.

It'll take time for your body to adapt to the rigors of your group rides but if you read and follow a program such as in Thomas Chapple's book, you'll be well on your way.


----------



## Alaska Mike (Sep 28, 2008)

Interval training will help increase power. Different intensities and durations of intervals will target different power goals.

If you are tied to a trainer (as I am) during the cold months, make sure it's one you like. I prefer the LeMond Revolution, but I would suggest trying as many as possible to find one that meets your needs.

People have had good results with Carmichael's "Time Crunched Cyclist" book, so you could start there. There are online training videos that offer some variety. I watch old DVDs of races when I'm doing my workouts. Anything to take the mind off of doing a lot of work and going nowhere.

Maintaining some sort of core strength and flexibility during the winter months helps as well. I usually forget that one, and pay for it later.


----------



## Carverbiker (Mar 6, 2013)

My guess is as a beginning cyclist is that you pedaling at a relatively low cadence and using a tougher gear. This is pretty common among beginners, a cadence of 65-75 rpm is not unusual and is considered low (climbing cadence). Most experienced cyclistist will use a cadence of 85-95 rpm and an easier gear. Increasing your cadence takes time and is a perfect winter indoor activity. Start by doing some intervals on the trainer where you are holding a slightly higher cadence 5 rpm or so for a several minutes and then recover at your normal cadence. Once this becomes easy, keep increasing the time of the interval until you hit 20 minutes or so then start increasing cadence until you can do that for 20 minutes or so until you can pedal for long periods in the 85-95rpm range.

It takes time as your pedaling form will quickly blow up as you increase your cadence this is fine, you will get it back once your muscles adapt to the speed. Use an easy gear when doing these drills as a tough one can lead to injuries from trying to force it. 

I alternate the above drills with force pedalling drills which are just the opposite of the above low cadence but tough gear (keep increasing the gear with same cadence) These drills help to increase your force you generate when pedaling. This helps increase your ability to push that tougher gear.

Eventually, through riding you will be able to ride tougher gears at that same higher cadence and then you will have added power and speed!


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

You just need more time on the bike to build cycling-specific leg muscles. I'd also recommend Chapple's book. Though if you live where winter outdoor cycling is impossible you will need to adapt his training ideas to the trainer. Most people can't deal with longer trainer rides and doing intervals makes trainer riding less tedious.


----------



## rchung (Apr 19, 2009)

Most of the advice you've gotten thus far is crap. Unless you're planning on contesting sprints leg strength is hardly ever a limitation in cycling. You don't need to lift. If you have a sub-15 for 5K, your ballpark FTP is around 5 watts/kg. There are some 44-year-olds around with an FTP like that but they're not posting here. Cadence is a red herring. Listen to ericm979.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

rchung said:


> Most of the advice you've gotten thus far is crap. Unless you're planning on contesting sprints leg strength is hardly ever a limitation in cycling. You don't need to lift. If you have a sub-15 for 5K, your ballpark FTP is around 5 watts/kg. There are some 44-year-olds around with an FTP like that but they're not posting here. Cadence is a red herring. Listen to ericm979.


HAD a sub 15 for 5K? That's a great pace no doubt, but but knees are no longer able to run? Strengthening knees is crap advice? Cycling is far harder on knees than many people realize, IMO, so strengthening the knees for cycling and for living life is important, period.


----------



## rchung (Apr 19, 2009)

PBL450 said:


> Cycling is far harder on knees than many people realize, IMO, so strengthening the knees for cycling and for living life is important, period.


Biomechanical studies of running and cycling find that forces on the lower leg during cycling are roughly one-fifth of the forces during running. If "cycling is far harder on knees than many people realize" then those people must be thinking it's way less than that. No doubt his physician recommended switching away from running because he or she is aware that the forces during running are way higher. The OP has been doing rides of 90-120 minutes and didn't mention any problems. The issue he mentioned was not being able to keep up with group rides, not knee pain. I think you answered without carefully reading his post. 

Back to the OP: You don't need to strengthen your legs. Cycling (except for certain types of sprinting) doesn't demand high leg strength. Lifting is a red herring. Cadence is a red herring. Listen to what ericm979 says.


----------



## PixelPaul (Oct 8, 2004)

Try some other activities to complement the indoor rides on the trainer....it will get boring very quick.


----------



## myhui (Aug 11, 2012)

The ski bums go running in deep sand on the beach to get fit for the season.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Intervals are what you will need in your case.

I'd mix up VO2 and Threshold intervals during the winter to help build "Fitness" as it's likely not just leg strength that you are lacking, but overall fitness to stay up with the fast guys. So mix up 1, 5, 10 and 20 minute long intervals into 1.5 - 2 hours on the trainer a couple days a week.

Also remember, just because you were a good runner does not mean you will be a good cyclist ... you likely can be, but it doesn't always translate. Even if you become fast, the fast guys may still drop you with what would appear to be little effort ... I train 12-14 hours a week and one of our CAT 1/2 guys trains (on a good week) around 4 hours and drops me pretty quickly once we hit the climbs.

As far as lifting goes ... it's not a bad thing and just because you have bad knees doesn't mean it's something to avoid. I've had an ACL reconstruction many years ago, and arthroscopic surgery and likely needed reconstruction on my right knee multiple times beyond that and I've recently started lifting again to gain more power and to help support bone mass on both my upper and lower body. I'm 43, soon to be 44 ... as we age, this becomes more important and I'm willing to give up a bit up uphill speed for better speed on the flats and better "Overall" fitness.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

myhui said:


> The ski bums go running in deep sand on the beach to get fit for the season.


Anecdotally this works for both. After a beach vacation and running on the beach for a week I was climbing fine, despite 10 pounds of margaritas and burritos.


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> Also remember, just because you were a good runner does not mean you will be a good cyclist ... you likely can be, but it doesn't always translate.


How true. Relative to my peers and the general cycling population, I'm a much better runner than I am a cyclist. I just could never develop the strength to turn the bigger gears necessary while my cadence is at my limit. Seems we can't have it all...Sheesh.


----------



## myhui (Aug 11, 2012)

NJBiker72 said:


> Anecdotally this works for both. After a beach vacation and running on the beach for a week I was climbing fine, despite 10 pounds of margaritas and burritos.


I think you were in a much better mood as well after the vacation, and that does help performance on the bicycle.


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

myhui said:


> I think you were in a much better mood as well after the vacation, and that does help performance on the bicycle.


Well, I was in a good mood during it. After, hmm. ???


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Other factors for the OP getting dropped in group rides besides just bike-specific power-

Riders inexperienced with group riding waste a lot of effort. They don't draft as effectively. They leave gaps and have to spend energy closing them. This extra energy spent means the other riders are fresher when it counts. Group rides and races are much more dynamic than running races. In running you go pretty much the same level of effort for the entire race. Attacking may be 10-15 seconds a mile faster. In bike racing the speed (effort) is much more variable. The attacks are much harder. That's where the rider new to pack riding gets dropped.

Doing group rides will help with both of those.

Did the OP post once and disapear?


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

ericm979 said:


> Did the OP post once and disapear?


Maybe he went mashing max intensity intervals and blew out his 8 week post-op knees? LOL


----------



## NJBiker72 (Jul 9, 2011)

ericm979 said:


> Other factors for the OP getting dropped in group rides besides just bike-specific power-
> 
> Riders inexperienced with group riding waste a lot of effort. They don't draft as effectively. They leave gaps and have to spend energy closing them. This extra energy spent means the other riders are fresher when it counts. Group rides and races are much more dynamic than running races. In running you go pretty much the same level of effort for the entire race. Attacking may be 10-15 seconds a mile faster. In bike racing the speed (effort) is much more variable. The attacks are much harder. That's where the rider new to pack riding gets dropped.
> 
> ...


These are good points. I find I get dropped most often on hills or when the tempo changes quickly. 

Some decent Sufferfest videos for this. Local Hero is one IIRC.


----------



## ronbott (Nov 7, 2014)

Thanks for all the advice! The issues with my knees was meniscus tears, had the same knee repaired twice. My doctors recommendation was to find an activity other than running to preserve whatever cartilage is left. I've only been riding about 6 months and enjoy it, most importantly pain free. It is just a bit humbling to be competitive in a running event and then be completely crushed on a cycling group ride. But I'm determined to get better and confident I will with time. Just a bit unsure right now of cycling training methods, but I'll check out the books that have been suggested.


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

Peter P. said:


> How true. Relative to my peers and the general cycling population, I'm a much better runner than I am a cyclist. I just could never develop the strength to turn the bigger gears necessary while my cadence is at my limit. Seems we can't have it all...Sheesh.


But that's not a "strength" thing so much as an aerobic thing. You just didn't have enough fitness. 

You can undoubtedly go out and drop 700+ watts any time you wanted, right? But you probably can't go out and ride at 300 watts for an hour plus. It's an aerobic sport and it requires specific work to excel. But pure strength in so much as simply delivering absolute power to the pedals is hardly ever the issue. It's the duration that you can maintain a certain intensity that is the problem.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

ronbott said:


> Thanks for all the advice! The issues with my knees was meniscus tears, had the same knee repaired twice. My doctors recommendation was to find an activity other than running to preserve whatever cartilage is left. I've only been riding about 6 months and enjoy it, most importantly pain free. It is just a bit humbling to be competitive in a running event and then be completely crushed on a cycling group ride. But I'm determined to get better and confident I will with time. Just a bit unsure right now of cycling training methods, but I'll check out the books that have been suggested.


Friel's book is classic... Pardon me if it was already mentioned... Sub 5 min miles is awesome! You will get there quickly on the bike, just be careful with those knees! 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Cyclists-Training-Bible-Friel/dp/1934030201


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

jajichan said:


> But that's not a "strength" thing so much as an aerobic thing. You just didn't have enough fitness.
> 
> You can undoubtedly go out and drop 700+ watts any time you wanted, right? But you probably can't go out and ride at 300 watts for an hour plus. It's an aerobic sport and it requires specific work to excel. But pure strength in so much as simply delivering absolute power to the pedals is hardly ever the issue. It's the duration that you can maintain a certain intensity that is the problem.


I HAVE the aerobic fitness; like I said, compared to my cycling peers I'm much better than them at running. I suck at TT's and sprinting because I lack the muscular strength ( for TT's) and explosive power (for sprinting).


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

Peter P. said:


> I HAVE the aerobic fitness; like I said, compared to my cycling peers I'm much better than them at running. I suck at TT's and sprinting because I lack the muscular strength ( for TT's) and explosive power (for sprinting).


Sorry, but no, you don't. 

You suck at tts because your threshold sucks, your watts/cda suck, or some combination of the two. You suck at sprinting because your snap sucks, your positioning sucks, your maximal sustainable power sucks, or a combination. Explosive power has a role in a sprint, but it's not a 100% determining role and I'd argue isn't even as important as positioning and sustainability (or even freshness level coming into the sprint). 

You can improve both, but for tts it's your fitness that's holding you back (specifically watts at and around threshold), NOT your muscular strength. 

You can make excuses all you want. Hell, I do that a lot. But understand what is actually holding you back and you might be able to better address it.


----------



## adamoc (Jan 9, 2010)

Virtual power may be part of your answer. TrainerRoad.com. New sight that converts your indoor trainer into a power meter. Offers training plans for all levels.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

adamoc said:


> Virtual power may be part of your answer.


Yes. Competitive cycling is all about power. And unless you've paid very close attention in physics class, it's important to bone up on the difference between force (push on the pedal measured in newton) and power (final output measured in watt) if you want to understand how cycling speed is generated.

I agree 100% with those who say that forces in cycling, including knee (patellar) forces, are very small compared to forces generated in some other sports. I also agree with those who say that aerobic fitness is the key to sustained power--which is what you're after if you want to be competitive in this sport.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

wim said:


> Yes. Competitive cycling is all about power. And unless you've paid very close attention in physics class, it's important to bone up on the difference between force (push on the pedal measured in newton) and power (final output measured in watt) if you want to understand how cycling speed is generated.
> 
> *I agree 100% with those who say that forces in cycling, including knee (patellar) forces, are very small compared to forces generated in some other sports. *I also agree with those who say that aerobic fitness is the key to sustained power--which is what you're after if you want to be competitive in this sport.


Just to add: While forces on the knee may be small the frequency is relatively high. If your cleats or seat height are a touch off the shear number of RPMs can manifest itself as a serious injury. Chainsaw math but, I estimate on my 4 hour ride yesterday I did approximately 20,000+ rpm.


----------



## Got Time (Jan 23, 2009)

woodys737 said:


> Chainsaw math but, I estimate on my 4 hour ride yesterday I did approximately 20,000+ rpm.


Wow, 20k rpm? rotations per minute / mile / mission / millennium / ...?


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

Got Time said:


> Wow, 20k rpm? rotations per minute / mile / mission / millennium / ...?


More like monotonous.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

woodys737 said:


> Just to add: While forces on the knee may be small the frequency is relatively high. If your cleats or seat height are a touch off the shear number of RPMs can manifest itself as a serious injury.


Good point. Knee injuries in cycling occur primarily because of the sheer number of loads (long rides) and because of issues connected to cleated riding. Knee problems because of "mashing" are not that prevalent in spite of the fact that everyone and their uncle mentions those.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Without you having given specific information on the group ride that dropped you I wouldn't make too much, or anything, out of that and it's indication of your current fitness. Don't let that get you down unless you happen to know it was a low level ride. The term "group ride" doesn't necessarily imply a certain pace or ability so maybe you just showed up for one that's more advanced than anyone with your limited experience could hope to hang with. And also even people who are strong enough to hang with a certain group can get dropped if they get caught sleeping and/or don't know how to draft when it's needed. 

It sounds like you are doing things right by starting with long easy rides then working in intervals. However, it's interesting that you call 90-120 min. a "long ride". As far as cycling racing training goes that's not at all a long ride. Perhaps you consider that long as a carry over from what you know from running but you probably just need to change your mind-set towards what is considered a long ride that you do early in the year. You're doing the right thing by doing long rides early but your definition of long needs to change to get to the level you want. And also think long STEADY rides not long EASY rides.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

Peter P. said:


> I HAVE the aerobic fitness; like I said, compared to my cycling peers I'm much better than them at running. I suck at TT's and sprinting because I lack the muscular strength ( for TT's) and explosive power (for sprinting).


As others have tried to explain, muscular strength simply is not a limiter in endurance cycling (e.g. for TTs).

The forces in endurance cycling are very low, roughly an order of magnitude lower than your strength (i.e. maximal force capability). Increasing maximal force generation capability won't do anything for your endurance cycling ability.

Endurance cycling involves producing small forces frequently and sustained over long periods of time.

IOW the primary _physiological _limiter is your sustainable power output, i.e. power sustainable over several minutes out to several hours. This is fundamentally a function of your aerobic capabilities. It may not feel like it, but I can assure you that's exactly what the limiter is.

Power you can sustain over various durations in that range is then a combination of underlying physiological parameters, such as VO2max (i.e. your cardiovascular fitness), gross efficiency (energy reaching cranks as proportion of total energy metabolised which is quite variable among individuals) and fractional utilisation of VO2max sustainable at any given maximal effort level over a set duration (which is highly variable and highly trainable), plus a minor contribution from a very limited anaerobic energy metabolism capacity for shorter duration efforts. 

So while e.g. you may have a VO2max equal to or better than some of your mates, that indicator of cardiovascular fitness is insufficient to ensure you have as high a sustainable power output on a bicycle as they might.

There are of course other limiters, such as skills/execution, nouse, experience, psychological, as well as physical limiters such as the primary resistance forces (e.g. aerodynamics, weight, rolling resistance, inertia when accelerating).

Muscular strength however isn't one of them.


----------



## brianmcg (Oct 12, 2002)

Get your squat and deadlift up to 315lbs. That will help.

Starting Strength


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

brianmcg said:


> Get your squat and deadlift up to 315lbs. That will help.


With what?


----------



## bitterertundra0 (Jun 17, 2012)

brianmcg said:


> Get your squat and deadlift up to 315lbs. That will help.
> 
> Starting Strength


I usually recommend the same thing... but not in this case. A 15 minute 5k is a pretty darn good feat of strength, but not so much endurance. This is non-specific strength, same as being strong at squats and deadlifts. OP would be best off using his existing short-duration strength base and developing efficiency and strength in the specific neuromuscular patterns of riding a bike. Also riding in a group more to develop skills will be beneficial.


----------



## thumper8888 (Apr 7, 2009)

ronbott said:


> Thanks for all the advice! The issues with my knees was meniscus tears, had the same knee repaired twice. My doctors recommendation was to find an activity other than running to preserve whatever cartilage is left. I've only been riding about 6 months and enjoy it, most importantly pain free. It is just a bit humbling to be competitive in a running event and then be completely crushed on a cycling group ride. But I'm determined to get better and confident I will with time. Just a bit unsure right now of cycling training methods, but I'll check out the books that have been suggested.



A couple of things... you've been given quite a bit of advice here, some of it seemingly contradictory but much of it good in its own way, though you have to know at lest a bit about the sport to sort it all. 
First thing I thought was, you have the tools that really count to not only be competent but to excel at the sport. I wish to hell I weighed 140 and had Vo2 max that allowed me to run sub 15 5k.
You know what it took to get that good at running. It wasn't as simple as it looked from the outside, was it? For riding fast, add in additional complexity from dealing with aerodynamics/drafting (as someone wrote earlier, one issue is you may not be drafting well. That alone would get you dropped even if you otherwise were good enough to stick on) and much more critical tactical issues than in running and you then maybe start to have some understanding of what it's going to take here to lift you to a level that you find rewarding and that helps you want to stick with the sport.
I have similar issues on one of my knees and had to drop a sport that I was very very good at for cycling, which doesn't suit my build very well and even though I finish in the top third or so of most of my races still struggle with the absolute knowledge that I can never be really good at this, just middling.
With your basic tools, barring something unusual about your physical makeup, you PROBAbly can be very very good at this, but you have to stick with it, read the literature, put in the hours etc. and you may find it's just not worth it to have to put in 10-14 hours a week. Depends on what you want and need out of the sport.
Knee issues vary quite a bit but generally high cadence/low effort (spinning fast in lower gear) is easier on them than pushing low cadence at high efforts... something that is harder to avoid on major climbs and of course if you have to sprint.
If you have issues, that's where they'll likely show up. Weightlifting ditto, heavy weights are more likely to cause problems.
Find a group to ride with that's just fast enough to be a little challenging and hone your paceline skills, then move on to a faster group.
But a lot of it will just be putting miles into your legs...


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Good point. 

An FTP of 5w/kg is pretty good for a local 45+ masters racer, even here in highly competitive NorCal. If you stick with the sport and learn its complexities (there's a lot more tactics than in running) you should do well.

If your district offers any sort of racing clinics, do them. Here in NorCal we have a series for beginning racers in January and also some clinics through the year.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

bitterertundra0 said:


> I usually recommend the same thing... but not in this case. A 15 minute 5k is a pretty darn good feat of strength, but not so much endurance.


It's an indicator of aerobic ability in running, and very much an indicator of aerobic endurance, not strength. The two things are poles apart.

I'm regularly amazed at how many people still confuse strength with sustainable aerobic power.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

While they may be poles apart, that shouldn't imply dichotomous thinking. There is lots of evidence that strength training converts type IIb to type IIa, which can improve endurance performance (as measured by events from a 5 to 45-minute TT) and would also play a role in the last part of a race, bridging gaps, etc. I haven't seen any literature indicating that intervals can do this - would be interesting to know.



Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> It's an indicator of aerobic ability in running, and very much an indicator of aerobic endurance, not strength. The two things are poles apart.
> 
> I'm regularly amazed at how many people still confuse strength with sustainable aerobic power.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

ericm979 said:


> Good point.
> 
> An FTP of 5w/kg is pretty good for a local 45+ masters racer, even here in highly competitive NorCal. If you stick with the sport and learn its complexities (there's a lot more tactics than in running) you should do well.
> 
> If your district offers any sort of racing clinics, do them. Here in NorCal we have a series for beginning racers in January and also some clinics through the year.


man, 5 w/kg for a 45+ Master.. is compettive in Norcal, Socal, and pretty much anywhere on planet earth. I know a few guys in Socal who are really really good Masters in Socal, who are always on the top 10 if not top 5-6 in most major climbing Strava segment in Socal, and have actually won major races in Socal,.. and they cannot hold 5 w/kg for more than 30 minutes. These are guys who have methodically and religious trained continuously for the last 7-10 years (ie, they maxed out their potential to get to 5 w/kg for 30 min).


----------



## Mandeville (Oct 18, 2014)

Isn't it great to get so much contradictory advice?  Some of it is wrong. Some of that which is wrong is potentially very injurious to you. Other advice is very good and both accurate and relevant to you. 

IMO some summation of what I perceive as good advice. 

Make sure bike fit is correct, especially seat height and position. Just being off 1/4 to 1/2 of an inch for instnace can significantly lower your performance and power level. The longer the ride the worse the effect. 

There are generally two types of training. The first is specificity training and the other is cross training. BOTH are important but specificity by far is the most important. 

Work on strength combined with endurance by both climbing and by doing intervals. You want to raise youranaerobic, lactic threshold, and aerobic levels. Get adequate rest between your training sessions for proper cardio and muscular recovery and build time. 

There are many kind of knee injuries. Specific weight workouts for specific knee injuries can be good and wrong exercise can seriously wreck havoc on your knees. If the specific knee injury is to the knee joint itself weight exercises for knees are more often than not bad for your knee. There are exceptions like short arc quad extensions to build up a portion of your quads. But IMO unless you know for a fact that a specific weight exercise would be good for your knees the associated muscles avoid weight workouts for the legs like a plague. However, proper weight workout for the upper body can be good for you as you need proper strength to support yourself while on long and hard rides. You want to add strength not bulk in the form of useless weight to carry around. Weight training done correctly can give you strength and endurance without weight. 

Using the right gear at the right time combined with the right cadence for that gear and terrain is very important. Others have covered that. 

Good luck.


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

Mandeville said:


> There are generally two types of training. The first is specificity training and the other is cross training. BOTH are important but specificity by far is the most important.
> 
> .


I do not think strength or cross training is important on the bike unless you're specifically targeting/correcting a weakness that hinders your riding. 

I see no reason why a healthy rider solely interested in improving cycling performance should cross train unless they simply cannot ride.


----------



## Mandeville (Oct 18, 2014)

If a person lacks sufficient upper body strength including core, shoulders, triceps, and the like then they need to train to improve that. If they are sufficient in those areas they are not going to be to maintain form, stamina or max situational speed or to ride optimally no matter how good of a shape their cardio and lower body are. Stretching would be another area that is a possible candidate. If you lack adequate flexibility you will suffer and performance and comfort. 

The preceding is just one example of why cross training is necessary for any serious riding.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

here is an interesting article:



> Determinants of endurance in well-trained cyclists
> 
> ABSTRACTFourteen competitive cyclists who possessed a similar maximum O2 consumption (VO2 max; range, 4.6–5.0 l/min) were compared regarding blood lactate responses, glycogen usage, and endurance during submaximal exercise. Seven subjects reached their blood lactate threshold (LT) during exercise of a relatively low intensity (group L) (i.e., 65.8 +/- 1.7% VO2 max), whereas exercise of a relatively high intensity was required to elicit LT in the other seven men (group H) (i.e., 81.5 +/- 1.8% VO2 max; P less than 0.001). Time to fatigue during exercise at 88% of VO2 max was more than twofold longer in group H compared with group L (60.8 +/- 3.1 vs. 29.1 +/- 5.0 min; P less than 0.001). Over 92% of the variance in performance was related to the % VO2 max at LT and muscle capillary density. The vastus lateralis muscle of group L was stressed more than that of group H during submaximal cycling (i.e., 79% VO2 max), as reflected by more than a twofold greater (P less than 0.001) rate of glycogen utilization and blood lactate concentration. The quality of the vastus lateralis in groups H and L was similar regarding mitochondrial enzyme activity, whereas group H possessed a greater percentage of type I muscle fibers (66.7 +/- 5.2 vs. 46.9 +/- 3.8; P less than 0.01). The differing metabolic responses to submaximal exercise observed between the two groups appeared to be specific to the leg extension phase of cycling, since the blood lactate responses of the two groups were comparable during uphill running. *These data indicate that endurance can vary greatly among individuals with an equal VO2 max*.


Determinants of endurance in well-trained cyclists | Journal of Applied Physiology


At this point, the OP is probably much better off doing cycling specific training to improve the state of his cycling muscles. He runs a sub 15min in the 5k, that means he's running a sub 5min mile, for over 3 miles. I'll bet most cat5,4,3,2,1 guys cannot run a sub 5min mile, period. So the OP has a *great* central cardio system. But now he needs to train his cycling specific muscles.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

aclinjury said:


> I'll bet most cat5,4,3,2,1 guys cannot run a sub 5min mile, period.


I'm doubting I can run a sub 12 minute mile at this point ... and that would be a single mile, not 3 in a row. I have never been able to run like that, nor will I ever be able to run like that. I'm pretty sure at my best, I was able to get slightly under a 9 minute mile and that was pushing it 

With that said...

I can bike a 54 minute 40k ITT (want to break into the 53's at some point) and can hold my own on most climbs under 5% grade ... just because you can do one, doesn't mean you can do the other, though it does up your chances, but not always.

The biggest difference for me is size and strength ... I hit my lightest weight since the 7th grade this season at 177 pounds, but was a collegiate thrower and have a lot of residual strength left over from squatting some big numbers. I'm more of a fast twitch guy with a naturally good sprint left over from my "Power" days, but have been able to build up my endurance to give me good aerobic fitness on top of my strength.

This year, as I stated above, I'm hitting weights again ... this is to build strength back up in my legs, my core and a bit on my upper body. I'm not doing anything super hard: Leg Press, Leg Curls and Calf Raises ... then some work with medicine balls for the upper body/core ... but it's not easy work either.

For me ... and yes, I know it's just me ... I can already tell a difference on the bike. Not only am I pushing a gear bigger on the flats, but my posture is much better with better core strength over the course of a 3-4 hour ride.

I really think it comes down to the individual whether they should/should not lift ... many pro's do in the off season, not many in season. It's not a bad thing to lift, it just needs to be done properly and can be beneficial in the long run.

The "BIG" thing to remember is none of are pro's and focusing on fitness should take priority over "Absolute" speed, and generally, for most ... better overall fitness will make them faster overall riders.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Mandeville said:


> Isn't it great to get so much contradictory advice?  Some of it is wrong. Some of that which is wrong is potentially very injurious to you. Other advice is very good and both accurate and relevant to you.
> 
> IMO some summation of what I perceive as good advice.
> 
> ...


1/2 to 1/4 inch is a LOT of movement. 1 or 2 mm makes a big difference for me. Yes, the wrong excercice can be awful, that's why I asked what the doc and PT recommended. I can't imagine they didn't leave off without recommendations? They always gave me a plan to follow when insurance visits ran out and the like.


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

Mandeville said:


> If a person lacks sufficient upper body strength including core, shoulders, triceps, and the like then they need to train to improve that. If they are sufficient in those areas they are not going to be to maintain form, stamina or max situational speed or to ride optimally no matter how good of a shape their cardio and lower body are. Stretching would be another area that is a possible candidate. If you lack adequate flexibility you will suffer and performance and comfort.
> 
> The preceding is just one example of why cross training is necessary for any serious riding.


How much proper upper body strength do you think one needs? Ever seen a pro cyclist without a shirt on? 

Basically all you need to stabilize yourself on the bike, you can get on the bike.


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

aclinjury said:


> I'll bet most cat5,4,3,2,1 guys cannot run a sub 5min mile, period. So the OP has a *great* central cardio system. But now he needs to train his cycling specific muscles.


I certainly agree as that's pretty quick. 

But I would also bet a good number of Cat 1s/2s could run a sub 5 minute mile with specific training. Now that might be months and months (and maybe a year +) of specific training to get muscles accustomed and all, but I bet it could happen.


----------



## Mandeville (Oct 18, 2014)

I'm sure that the OP will improve and be more successful at obtaining higher speeds for longer periods on the bike. 

As a matter of reference a sub 15 minute 5K only means three things for sure: One is that he has good leg speed and two he had/has high aerobic capacity, and three he is trained to run a middle distance foot races. For instance there are plenty of people that could obtain the an elite aerobic capacity but still be unable to run a sub 15 minute 5k due to lack of leg speed. 

However where the muscles that are the same in cycling and running their "training" is different. Than separately there are muscles used in cycling that are used more or less than in running. 

So he needs to increase his lactic threshold on the bike, improve those specific biking muscles in a manner relevant to biking and that means both lower and upper body muscles.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Mandeville said:


> As a matter of reference a sub 15 minute 5K only means three things for sure


Huh? It "only" means one thing for sure... He can run REALLY F'n FAST. Dude, you are in the high 4's or right on top of it... That is no BS fast. How is it that you diminish this? Can you smoke him in a 5K? Can 1% of runners?


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

Mandeville said:


> As a matter of reference a sub 15 minute 5K only means three things for sure: One is that he has *good leg speed* and two he had/has high aerobic capacity, and three he is trained to run a middle distance foot races. For instance there are plenty of people that could obtain the an elite aerobic capacity but still be unable to run a sub 15 minute 5k *due to lack of leg speed. *


Leg speed? Not foot speed?

I don't think you quite understand the demand of aerobic endurance sports...Lots of athletes can run sub 4:40 mile pace. But very, very few can do it for more than a few seconds. Leg speed, foot speed, ankle speed, whatever, isn't the limiter.

And middle distance does not include 5k.


----------



## Mandeville (Oct 18, 2014)

PBL450 said:


> Huh? It "only" means one thing for sure... He can run REALLY F'n FAST. Dude, you are in the high 4's or right on top of it... That is no BS fast. How is it that you diminish this? Can you smoke him in a 5K? Can 1% of runners?


Huh? "Dude!" Uh, I said he could run very fast for 5K AND then explained the reasons why he could do that. Sorry that you have a reading problem. 

Those four things will serve him well in cycling. He is PROBABLY light in weight too or at least a good weight for a cyclist. However, he will need to improve in some areas to achieve his goals in cycling--which no doubt he will do.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Mandeville said:


> Huh? "Dude!" Uh, I said he could run very fast for 5K AND then explained the reasons why he could do that. Sorry that you have a reading problem.


Reading isn't among my problems. Calling out dismissive posts about significant accomplishments is... If you didn't mean to be dismissive then your writing is the problem, not my reading. I posted a link below that includes ages and times for 5K races. I'm not sure of the credibility of the data, I'm not a runner, but it gives you a general idea of what kind of an accomplishment a sub 15min 5K is. Dude. 

http://www.bestroadraces.com/fasttimes.php?so=5K


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

stevesbike said:


> While they may be poles apart, that shouldn't imply dichotomous thinking. There is lots of evidence that strength training converts type IIb to type IIa, which can improve endurance performance (as measured by events from a *5 to 45-minute* TT) and would also play a role in the last part of a race, bridging gaps, etc. I haven't seen any literature indicating that intervals can do this - would be interesting to know.


Well it's around the 30min mark is when the faster-twitch muscles start to become exhausted. This is also the time when pedal force also starts to drop off (i.e., faster-twitch muscles making less contribution to pedal force). So I'd say up until about 30 minutes, having more fast-twitch muscle (more leg strength) would help. But beyond 30 min, you're need to rely more on slower-twitch fibers. What about beyond 1hr? and in multistages? Does strength plays a factor there?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

jajichan said:


> I certainly agree as that's pretty quick.
> 
> But I would also bet a good number of Cat 1s/2s could run a sub 5 minute mile with specific training. Now that might be months and months (and maybe a year +) of specific training to get muscles accustomed and all, but I bet it could happen.


Sub 5 pace is damn quick. No way a "good number" of cat1/2s can become sub 5min runners. Not a chance. I will give you a few, that's it.

I have not seen one single sub 5min runner with a gut, but I have seen a lot of cat 2 guys with a gut hanging down. Sitting on a bicycle hides a lot of weakness.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

aclinjury said:


> ...having more fast-twitch muscle (more leg strength) ...


You can't just create new definitions of strength whenever you feel like it.


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

aclinjury said:


> Sub 5 pace is damn quick. No way a "good number" of cat1/2s can become sub 5min runners. Not a chance. I will give you a few, that's it.
> 
> I have not seen one single sub 5min runner with a gut, but I have seen a lot of cat 2 guys with a gut hanging down. Sitting on a bicycle hides a lot of weakness.


You think that someone has the genetic ability and work ethic to get to Cat 2, but couldn't do the same to run sub 5? 

Really? Sub 5 pace is not "damn quick". Good high-schoolers (good, not great, just good) do that every season. 

Now it's quick, to be sure. But a Cat 2 is quick as well, relatively speaking probably even superior. It's a bit ludicrous to think that with specific training that a well-above-average cyclist couldn't accomplish such a feat.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

stevesbike said:


> While they may be poles apart, that shouldn't imply dichotomous thinking. There is lots of evidence that strength training converts type IIb to type IIa, which can improve endurance performance (as measured by events from a 5 to 45-minute TT) and would also play a role in the last part of a race, bridging gaps, etc. I haven't seen any literature indicating that intervals can do this - would be interesting to know.


I'm not sure about your suggestion, but there is an absolute mountain of evidence that aerobic and anaerobic power output, LT, VO2max and other performance gains from such specific on bike training far outweigh anything you'll get by lifting weights.

Some examples of the impact of interval training, but by no means and exhaustive list:

HIT maintains performance during the transition period and improves... - PubMed - NCBI
Comparison of responses to two high-intensity intermittent exercise... - PubMed - NCBI
High-intensity intermittent cycling increases purine loss compared ... - PubMed - NCBI
Short intervals induce superior training adaptations compared with ... - PubMed - NCBI
Neuromuscular and metabolic responses to high-intensity intermitten... - PubMed - NCBI
High-intensity cycle interval training improves cycling and running... - PubMed - NCBI
Optimizing interval training at power output associated with peak o... - PubMed - NCBI
Improved VO2max and time trial performance with more high aerobic i... - PubMed - NCBI
Mitochondrial gene expression in elite cyclists: effects of high-in... - PubMed - NCBI
Dose-response relationship between interval training frequency and ... - PubMed - NCBI
10 or 30-s sprint interval training bouts enhance both aerobic and ... - PubMed - NCBI
Six weeks of high-intensity interval training with and without beta... - PubMed - NCBI
The effect of training volume and intensity on competitive cyclists... - PubMed - NCBI
Effects of high-intensity training by heart rate or power in well-t... - PubMed - NCBI
Short-term high-intensity interval training improves phosphocreatin... - PubMed - NCBI
Similar metabolic adaptations during exercise after low volume spri... - PubMed - NCBI
The influence of endurance training on multiple sprint cycling perf... - PubMed - NCBI
Effect of high-intensity interval training and detraining on extra ... - PubMed - NCBI
Two weeks of high-intensity aerobic interval training increases the... - PubMed - NCBI
Influence of high-intensity interval training on adaptations in wel... - PubMed - NCBI
Six sessions of sprint interval training increases muscle oxidative potential and cycle endurance capacity in humans | Journal of Applied Physiology
Neural, metabolic, and performance adaptations to four weeks of hig... - PubMed - NCBI
Neural, metabolic, and performance adaptations to four weeks of hig... - PubMed - NCBI
Acute high-intensity interval training improves Tvent and peak powe... - PubMed - NCBI
Metabolic and performance responses to constant-load vs. variable-intensity exercise in trained cyclists | Journal of Applied Physiology
Metabolic and performance adaptations to interval training in endur... - PubMed - NCBI
Skeletal muscle buffering capacity and endurance performance after ... - PubMed - NCBI
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1332151/pdf/brjsmed00013-0020.pdf
Uniqueness of interval and continuous training at the same maintain... - PubMed - NCBI
Effects of training specificity on the lactate threshold and VO2 peak. - PubMed - NCBI


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> Well it's around the 30min mark is when the faster-twitch muscles start to become exhausted. This is also the time when pedal force also starts to drop off (i.e., faster-twitch muscles making less contribution to pedal force). So I'd say up until about 30 minutes, having more fast-twitch muscle (more leg strength) would help. But beyond 30 min, you're need to rely more on slower-twitch fibers. What about beyond 1hr? and in multistages? Does strength plays a factor there?


Explain Chris Boardman holding both the world hour record (56.3xxkm) and the world 4km pursuit record (4:11) for so long? He couldn't sprint his way out of a paper bag (max power of ~870W) and didn't have a fast twitch fibre in his body.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I agree with those who have said that time in the saddle will bring big gains for a beginner cyclists. 

Also, as a former (reformed?) runner I can say that running is hard. But cycling is hard too. It is incredibly difficult. While you have athletic potential, that fast 5K didn't happen over night. Even with your potential, you cannot expect to be an equivalently fast cyclist over night. It will happen. Just give it time.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

I miss being able to run. Oddly enough when I was at my best with running, my cycling was pretty mediocre. Prior to GPS watches, I had a 3 mile route (distance noted via bike computer) and was able to run it once in 15 minutes flat. Not olympic, but not bad for a guy who was just a few years over asthma. A few weeks later I got some IT band tendinitis and was never able to run like that again.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Wookiebiker said:


> I'm doubting I can run a sub 12 minute mile at this point ... and that would be a single mile, not 3 in a row. I have never been able to run like that, nor will I ever be able to run like that. I'm pretty sure at my best, I was able to get slightly under a 9 minute mile and that was pushing it
> 
> With that said...
> 
> ...


I agree if you're not looking just to bike, then it's generally good to lift a couple times a week. I myself lift twice a week. However, I don't think it helps me much in endurance event longer than 1 hr. For rides under 1 hr, with surges, then I think it helps with the short surges. But anything longer than 1 hr, I have not found strength to be any help much if at all. Guess it boils down to what sort of event or race or type of ride you're looking to do eh.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> Explain Chris Boardman holding both the world hour record (56.3xxkm) and the world 4km pursuit record (4:11) for so long? He couldn't sprint his way out of a paper bag (max power of ~870W) and didn't have a fast twitch fibre in his body.


Hmm that's a good question. But Boardman was the exception, an outlier, so that in itself probably breaks a lot of rules, and makes it difficult to explain.
But maybe he has a perfect blend of type IIa and type I, great efficiency and VO2max, that together allows him to be a killer at both ends of the spectrum (4k and hour record). But I read somewhere that 30 min is about the time when you start to strugle to keep a smooth power deliever and pedal force, indicating muscle fatigue. I don't know exactly what types, and in what proportion, of muscles are fatigue, and I don't think the article I read mentioned it, but suggested that a greater % of faster twitch fibers are fatigue. I don't remember where I read it from, so no source, but I believe it was an experiment done by a physiologist on an amateur cyclist, but was not published in any peer review. So to be honest, it was more of a case of 1 data point.

Was Boardman's max power was really only 870W?? That's remarkably low for a pro of his caliber eh. I guess he's the ultimate Mr Slowtwitch!


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

jajichan said:


> You think that someone has the genetic ability and work ethic to get to Cat 2, but couldn't do the same to run sub 5?
> 
> Really? Sub 5 pace is not "damn quick". Good high-schoolers (good, not great, just good) do that every season.
> 
> Now it's quick, to be sure. But a Cat 2 is quick as well, relatively speaking probably even superior. It's a bit ludicrous to think that with specific training that a well-above-average cyclist couldn't accomplish such a feat.


Well the only way to really know the answers is to wait for a bunch of cat1/2 guys to retire and have them run in some 5k, 10k, half-marathon, or maybe even a marathon. Until then, I guess we'll be seeing more retired runners going into cycling, and not the other way round eh.


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

aclinjury said:


> But I read somewhere that 30 min is about the time when you start to strugle to keep a smooth power deliever and pedal force, indicating muscle fatigue.


Forget what you've read, have you ever ridden a bike? Anyone who's watched kilo riders or pursuiters on the track, knows things can break down a lot sooner than 30 minutes.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

asgelle said:


> You can't just create new definitions of strength whenever you feel like it.


And just so you are clear, there is no formal textbook definition of strength in physics nor physiology. And because there is no definition of strength to begin with, you cannot say that I'm making up new definitions since "new" would imply that there is an old definition. So your above statement is illogical unless there is a formal definiton of strength.

But in case you didn't understand me because perhaps I was not clear, I was talking/using the concept of "strength" in an informal way, and meant to suggest that that when a person acquires more "leg strength" via training in the gym doing squatting, leg press, leg extension, etc.. he develops his fast/faster-twitch muscles more than than his slower twitch.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

asgelle said:


> Forget what you've read, have you ever ridden a bike? Anyone who's watched kilo riders or pursuiters on the track, knows things can break down a lot sooner than 30 minutes.


Until I read that, I thought humans were perpetual machines incapable of breaking down. And no I don't ride a bike, but simply enjoy trolling in a bike forum after all these years. Pff.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Here's is an interesting case study of a top 10 TdF finisher, Thibaut Pinot. It discusses his training and power profiles, as acquired from 2008 thru 2013. Though the article doesn't go into the specifics of his daily training regimens, but just by reading the article, I reckon he didn't work with weight much, and when he did it was only during in the offseason.

Thibaut Pinot Six year study


----------



## jajichan (Jul 9, 2014)

aclinjury said:


> Well the only way to really know the answers is to wait for a bunch of cat1/2 guys to retire and have them run in some 5k, 10k, half-marathon, or maybe even a marathon. Until then, I guess we'll be seeing more retired runners going into cycling, and not the other way round eh.


Why do they need to run a 5k/10k/half-marathon or marathon? All they'd have to do is train for and run a mile in under 5 minutes. 

Your last sentence has nothing to do with anything. You posit that a (presumably) pretty gifted and motivated endurance athlete couldn't use said gifts to perform well at another aerobic event. 

That, to me, seems like a pretty vacuous assertion. Eh?


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> Hmm that's a good question. But Boardman was the exception, an outlier, so that in itself probably breaks a lot of rules, and makes it difficult to explain.
> But maybe he has a perfect blend of type IIa and type I, great efficiency and VO2max, that together allows him to be a killer at both ends of the spectrum (4k and hour record). But I read somewhere that 30 min is about the time when you start to strugle to keep a smooth power deliever and pedal force, indicating muscle fatigue. I don't know exactly what types, and in what proportion, of muscles are fatigue, and I don't think the article I read mentioned it, but suggested that a greater % of faster twitch fibers are fatigue. I don't remember where I read it from, so no source, but I believe it was an experiment done by a physiologist on an amateur cyclist, but was not published in any peer review. So to be honest, it was more of a case of 1 data point.
> 
> Was Boardman's max power was really only 870W?? That's remarkably low for a pro of his caliber eh. I guess he's the ultimate Mr Slowtwitch!


The power-duration curve for most people from 30-minutes to 2-hours is pretty flat, so not sure what you are trying to imply - that there is some magic cliff you fall off at 30-minutes? Because there isn't. 

An unpublished non peer reviewed study of one amateur isn't overly convincing.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> And just so you are clear, there is no formal textbook definition of strength in physics nor physiology.


My word there is absolutely a formal definition of strength in exercise physiology, including textbooks. Has been for decades. e.g:

Knuttgen & Kraemer:
Strength is the maximal force generation capacity of a muscle or group of muscles. Sometimes it is also defined under specific conditions, e.g. muscle contraction velocity, joint angles etc.

Astrand & Rodahl:
Strength is defined as the ability to develop force against a resistance in a single contraction of restricted duration. IOW 1 rep max.

McArdle, Katch, and Katch:
Strength is defined as the maximum force or tension generated by a muscle (or muscle groups).


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> The power-duration curve for most people from 30-minutes to 2-hours is pretty flat, so not sure what you are trying to imply - that there is some magic cliff you fall off at 30-minutes? Because there isn't.
> 
> An unpublished non peer reviewed study of one amateur isn't overly convincing.


ok I'm not really trying to make slam dunk case of anything. I already said it was an unplublished non peer review. I did not give any strong specifics on anything, but mainly more like thinking out loud.

But now, i'm starting to recall some more specifics now. I believe the exercise was done under a constant 65% VO2max for one hour. And at around the 30 min mark, pedal forces become not smooth and consitant (suggesting fatigue?). But like I said, I don't recall the specifics, and whatever I'm recalling is probably murky and can't be verified. So if I sounded like I was making a authoritative statement, then I'm now saying it's not. Hope I'm clear about my murkiness?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Alex_Simmons/RST said:


> My word there is absolutely a formal definition of strength in exercise physiology, including textbooks. Has been for decades. e.g:
> 
> Knuttgen & Kraemer:
> Strength is the maximal force generation capacity of a muscle or group of muscles. Sometimes it is also defined under specific conditions, e.g. muscle contraction velocity, joint angles etc.
> ...


well this is good to know!
Then I did not make up any new definitions of strength when I say more fast twitch fibers mean more strength!

In reading the 3 definitions of strength given above, they sound a bit confusing to me though. One definition had a time elemenet (restricted duration), while the other 2 don't. Let's say a person squat 500 lbs on his back. There will be certain point that he's moving the weight fast, and certainly point he'll be barely moving the weight. Surely his force generated is not constant throughout the squat motion? But if you count his whole movement as 1 rep, then it's only 500 lbs, but could he might have generated more than 500 lbs at some point during the movement?


----------



## asgelle (Apr 21, 2003)

aclinjury said:


> well this is good to know!
> Then I did not make up any new definitions of strength when I say more fast twitch fibers mean more strength!


Strange. In none of those definitions do I see any mention of fiber type.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> ok I'm not really trying to make slam dunk case of anything. I already said it was an unplublished non peer review. I did not give any strong specifics on anything, but mainly more like thinking out loud.
> 
> But now, i'm starting to recall some more specifics now. I believe the exercise was done under a constant 65% VO2max for one hour. And at around the 30 min mark, pedal forces become not smooth and consitant (suggesting fatigue?). But like I said, I don't recall the specifics, and whatever I'm recalling is probably murky and can't be verified. So if I sounded like I was making a authoritative statement, then I'm now saying it's not. Hope I'm clear about my murkiness?


Fatigue is multi-factoral.

If a rider significantly fatigues after 30-min of riding at 65% of their VO2max*, then they need to ride more. Weights is the last thing they need to address such a low fitness level for cycling.


* That's an effort level that most trained cyclists would consider to be an easy day on the bike.


----------



## Alex_Simmons/RST (Jan 12, 2008)

aclinjury said:


> well this is good to know!
> Then I did not make up any new definitions of strength when I say more fast twitch fibers mean more strength!
> 
> In reading the 3 definitions of strength given above, they sound a bit confusing to me though. One definition had a time elemenet (restricted duration), while the other 2 don't. Let's say a person squat 500 lbs on his back. There will be certain point that he's moving the weight fast, and certainly point he'll be barely moving the weight. Surely his force generated is not constant throughout the squat motion? But if you count his whole movement as 1 rep, then it's only 500 lbs, but could he might have generated more than 500 lbs at some point during the movement?


Since the force we can maximally apply is dependent on several factors, then sometimes the conditions under which force is applied are noted and conditions placed on it, but you can simplify it to the maximal force generation capacity of a muscle/group of muscles, which by definition occurs at zero velocity.

The reason things like 1RM are used is they are practical measures. Accurately measuring muscle contraction force at zero velocity reliably isn't so easy/convenient.

Once you begin to examine the rate a force is applied, then you are no longer talking about strength, you are talking about power.

strength <> power


----------

