Old 02-08-21, 01:06 PM
  #90  
rubiksoval
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Music City, USA
Posts: 4,444

Bikes: bikes

Mentioned: 52 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2622 Post(s)
Liked 1,429 Times in 711 Posts
Originally Posted by OBoile

I said above that my understanding is that most cyclists strength train year round. However, I don't think they are necessarily doing the *same* strength training year round. During the offseason, the goal will likely be to build stronger legs, but that training conflicts too much with cycling during periods of intense training and/or racing. As such, the volume of this is reduced considerably. However, things like core work are likely still done consistently throughout the year. The goal here isn't to sacrifice cycling training or detract from it in any way, but rather to supplement it with an activity that isn't particularly taxing and can help reduce the risk of injury (and thus a lot of missed cycling time).
That's stretching the boundaries of "strength" training. And even then, I very seriously doubt it. Are guys doing core work in the middle of a three week grand tour? What about during the spring classics? Training camps? Very doubtful.

Originally Posted by OBoile
All of this is somewhat moot though since none of us are pro cyclists. From a long term health and performance perspective, lifting is beneficial despite the fact that it many not be optimal to maximize our performance over the next few months.
Perhaps not moot because it's still applicable. Even more so because people that aren't pros don't have the time and resources to dedicate to any additional or ancillary benefit. So in that context, with a finite amount of time and energy, from a performance perspective, again, it's just not possible to assert that it is more beneficial than actual riding, either in the short or the long term. Just "beneficial" in and of itself would be up to the individual to decide, I guess.

Last edited by rubiksoval; 02-08-21 at 01:11 PM.
rubiksoval is offline