asgelle

And I'm sure Mr. Webster would define sitting at a desk in an office moving papers as doing work, but to use that definition in a discussion of physics or cycling mechanics would be confusing if not deliberately obfuscating.

asgelle

It's been quoted and cited repeatedly on the Wattage list and probably at Slowtwitch as well. So often that I never bothered to archive it. If you're really interested, you could write Andy Coggan or Hunter Allen both of whom would be glad to point you in the right direction.

Carbonfiberboy 

Ah. No evidence. So much stuff gets quoted and repeated so often on social media that one hardly knows what's true anymore . . . Whatever it might or might not say, it obviously does not reflect current knowledge or practice.

asgelle

Do you have any source for ProTour riders showing greater strength than the general age-matched population? And no, the fact that some weight train is not evidence.

Carbonfiberboy 

Lots of folks in the general population squat twice their body weight? You must not have looked at any of my links.

It's hard to prove anything about the training regimes of pro riders. It's all a big secret now. You might have noticed that I'd said something about Wiggens lifting in prep for his hour record. I went back there and the video showing that is gone. The video with Sagan lifting is gone. I have posted some pros lifting up there somewhere. That twice-your-bodyweight comment comes from one of them. I got to thinking about that. When I was probably 70, I was squatting 240 for reps, which puts me somewhere close to that for 1RM. But you're right in a way, that it's not an unusual amount of strength for a person who strength trains. I remember noticing, years ago, a rider in the 33 talking about squatting 600. I think we can assume he was a sprinter.

I think we can look at this from another side, too. It's well known that pro riders have lower than normal bone density. There are a couple of different explanations, but the usual one is that it's not weight bearing. If that's the case, I think a case can be made that if cyclists didn't strength train, their legs wouldn't even be as strong as those of the average working man. Were that the case, then a very strong case can be made that riders should strength train!

OTOH, rubik,asserts that cycling itself will make your legs strong, no need to do strength work. One of those two opinions is incorrect. I think that's a better way to look at it and to resolve this exchange. In all training, coaches are constantly looking for a better way to train so their athletes can win and they will keep their jobs, maybe even get a raise. I would be very uncomfortable with any coaching which didn't change over time. Competition drives everything in physical and cultural evolution. The continued improvement we see in human performance is driven by coaching, now that drugs are mostly out of the picture.

ZHVelo

What about weight-matched? Because the average population are fat slobs who likely will squat a greater amount just by virtue of pro cyclists tending to be small. Next some pro riders probably don't lift much and as such would not do well in squats so this could also be a reason. But this is all speculation because you haven't linked this study that supports your claim.

Otpcoolkat

I once experimented with hard resistance training (squads, deadlift, leg press etc) and i felt it had a huge impact for me. I'd imagine it's limited in how much it can do long term, but building up that muscle definately helped