# Body type and its effect on race potential



## philbennett (Jan 20, 2012)

Here's a bit of an odd one for coaches who have seen a ton of racers, but its something I've been wondering about, as you can't get a good sense of it from TV etc....... it seems pretty clear that there is at least a modest spectrum of heights and weights among successful racers, i.e your thin types who are good at climbing and are often short but can be taller as long as they are light....to moderate mesomorphs like Cavendish who can win in sprints to your Hincapies... most of them of course being relatively thin... but how about the ratio of leg length to torso? Do those with legs that are longer in proportion to torso have a bit of advantage, the opposite of that, or does it not seem to make any difference?


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

At one time I remember reading about an "Optimum" femur to tibia ratio for cycling and it had a small range. This was created from measurements from TDF winners and other top level cyclists.

There are other obvious criteria for being a top level cyclist, but the two main proponents are long limbs and light weight...at least for road racing in general.

What you will find more of when it comes to body types and success are looking at the different fields of cycling. If you are a track sprinter, more times than not you will be a big, powerful rider and not the smaller long limbed version. Femurs tend to be a bit shorter on the track due to the ability to build short quick bursts and weight isn't an issue since you are not climbing anything of consequence...though it can effect acceleration a little. Road race sprinters are kind of a mix between the track sprinter and the road racer in that they tend to be a bit stalkier than the road racer, but not as thick as the track sprinter.

TT guys tend to be "Long" such as the climbers, but carry more muscle than the climbers...so they don't climb as well as the climbers due to the extra weight, but don't sprint as well as the sprinters because they can't spin up a gear as quickly.

Climbers...well, they are your general tall, skinny and "Long" individuals.

Genetics definitely play a role in who will succeed and who won't...anybody that says different is a fool, or not paying attention. There are always exceptions to the rule, but they are the "Exceptions"...hence why they are called exceptions, because they are rare and hard to find.

Body type generally lends it's self to riders finding their specialty areas as they progress through the ranks. At lower amateur levels any fit rider can do well...but as they move up, they start to specialize because they will quickly find out where they are strong or not.


----------



## earlfoss (Aug 1, 2010)

On a local or regional competitive basis, no one is really a pure sprinter or climber or TT master from what I've seen. Someone who is riding really well and in great shape at least on a local level can excel no matter what the terrain in their respective category.


----------



## wheelio (Nov 29, 2006)

*Body type?*

Short Little Colombians seem to be doing quite well in the mountains . They don't seem to get a lot of respect or press time.


----------



## bytewalls (Feb 14, 2010)

I would have to disagree on sneeding long limbs as is pointed out short small guys can slumber very well, the accelerate well and really excel on punchy climbs.. example juaquim Rodriguez or pozzovito. or lots of columbian racers. those small guys only weigh 110 to 120 and therefore have super high Watts/kg numbers but don't tt as well. you can also be short but stockier and climb well plus tt well such as leiphheimer.


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

One things for sure, my ass aint ever gonna be a climber. Crits and TT are my only chance. I'm more mentaly built for those too. Which I think comes into play with top level racers too. If you have the genetics of a sprinter but don't have that killer instict, you won't win many races.


----------



## philbennett (Jan 20, 2012)

still, I guess the main question i wanted to get at was, is being more toward the longer legs-for-your-height generally an advantage or disadvantage?
Exceptions are great, they make for entertaining stories... but theyre exceptions and therefore uh, less important.
And weight and muscle mass/body type (ecto/meso/endo), I'm less interested in that.... mainly that's the stuff that's widely understood about light weight, smaller riders generally being better on climbs, mesomorphs with more muscle being better in sprints and TTs, and then the ensuing discussion that always happens regarding those that are mild exceptions.


----------



## MattSoutherden (Jun 24, 2009)

Wookiebiker said:


> At one time I remember reading about an "Optimum" femur to tibia ratio for cycling and it had a small range. This was created from measurements from TDF winners and other top level cyclists.


Would be interesting to know not just the 'optimum' range for protour riders, but also how that fits with tour/monument winners, what the standard deviation is across world tour / pro conti riders, etc.


----------



## iliveonnitro (Feb 19, 2006)

philbennett said:


> still, I guess the main question i wanted to get at was, is being more toward the longer legs-for-your-height generally an advantage or disadvantage?
> Exceptions are great, they make for entertaining stories... but theyre exceptions and therefore uh, less important.
> And weight and muscle mass/body type (ecto/meso/endo), I'm less interested in that.... mainly that's the stuff that's widely understood about light weight, smaller riders generally being better on climbs, mesomorphs with more muscle being better in sprints and TTs, and then the ensuing discussion that always happens regarding those that are mild exceptions.


It doesn't matter. Most GC riders tend to hover around 5'9"-5'10", but there are more than just a few exceptions -- there are dozens and dozens of them. Cavendish has very short legs, Wiggins is 6'3", Cancellara is 6'1", Magnus Bäckstedt is 6'4" 200lbs.

With rare exceptions (Hincapie has really long arms, Cavendish has really short legs), they're all proportional to their heights.


----------

