pbass

I can't find it now but I read something recently that discussed how important working out your legs are for your heart, essentially because of gravity and how it affects your circulation, especially as you age. Which is why of course a sedentary lifestyle is so bad for heart health.

obrentharris 

I'll paraphrase a friend of mine from the seventies:

"I started out backpacking.
Then I started climbing mountains because it made the backpacking more challenging.
Then I started rock climbing because it made me a better mountaineer.
Then I started bouldering because it made me a better rock climber.
Then I started lifting weights because it made me better at bouldering.
Now I spend all my time in camp lifting weights."

Brent

Schwinneffect

I think the Starting Strength novice progression can be a great workout even for people who have been lifting for years. 3 quick sets of squats, 3 sets of press, 1 set of deadlifts. Quick and out of the gym in less than half an hour. I like to only do a one hour work out once a week at my age, and I find that 3 total sessions a week is plenty.

Machoman121

As mentioned - Cycling and lifting weights are so opposite - now i read there's a science to it - it's the interference effect.

https://www.trainingpeaks.com/blog/r...210522_blogger

In summary opposing exercises will interrupt the body's adaptation to further improve the other exercise. something to that effect.

sovende

I’m currently 68 (but closing in rapidly on 69). Cycling is my main aerobic exercise (1 1/2 - 2hrs, 2-4 times per week). I also do “body weight” exercises daily, push ups for upper body and planks or crunches for core. The push ups seem to build strength but (fortunately) not too much bulking 💪🏻. I do use a scale for metrics but the real goal is “belly fat” reduction. In the past I had a gym membership and did a form of circuit training during the Winter but once the pandemic hit have not considered that an option. I know that the timing of exercise and recovery is important for noticeable progress but between work, weather and life’s interruptions, can’t always do it properly. If I was training for an event or events i.e. road races, triathlons, etc. it would be a different story. I’m not 😉.

vane171

As pointed out above, leg functioning into older age is crucial, way too many people lose their legs working way before than anything to do with upper body functions. And once you can't walk, mostly it is waiting for the not too far off end.

I have always been more subtle than built up and my type of exercises whole life was gym without machines and weights or with gym machines at very light loads but frequent repetitions and stretching. I rode bike in sporting amateur fashion, also lots of cross country skiing, even 50-70km 'race' marathons on skis.

At 60+ the bugaboo for most of us, pretty common I believe, is belly fat bulge which is not waist line but what is above it. Also the fat built up around the mid body on sides and back. At some thirty yrs age, I had zero skin fat or something very close to that, it amazed some medics that once came to gym to measure it on us as on normal, sport amateur population sample study. But now thirty years later, it is different.

I returned to biking at 50+ but that doesn't do much for the mid body sad situation. For that one needs to do gym exercises, crunches and upper body swiveling around like a windmill (for want of better description).

Carbonfiberboy 

Thanks. I've taken NAC for years and just started glycine when I read your post. Maybe it's just continued training, but already I think I notice a fair-sized difference. On today's ride, I felt like I finally had legs. They performed well even late in the ride when they were hurting pretty good. I don't do any T.

I'm not a Rippetoe fan. I train hard at 75. It works. I do intervals and etc., just like young-uns, but not as frequently. Recovery is slow is all, so that's the limiter on results. If one wants to start strength training after 50, my advice is to start with doing 1 set of 30 of say 8-9 exercises. Do that for 1 month, then add a second set of 30, circuit style. After another month, add a 3rd set. All sets of each exercise at the same weight, enough weight that you fail your last set at like 28 reps. Experience allows you to get that right. Only let your HR drop into the top of Z1 between sets, no long rests. Do that for your first year. You won't believe the difference in your performance, and no injuries. Studies have shown that if one trains to failure, the number of reps does not particularly effect results. Strength comes from exhausting your muscle fibers, however you can do it.

Your second year, try the more conventional sets of 10-12. Your 3rd year, you can drop down to sets of 4-5 as the season progresses.

Obviously, one should only fail sets for which it's safe to do that. I have a spot for benches, etc., and don't quite fail barbell squats. One advantage of machines is that one can back out of a lift with no damage.

Carbonfiberboy 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0329122746.htm
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33783984/

PeteHski

I do very light strength exercises once or twice a week to complement my cycling - bodyweight squats, planks, light kettlebell swings and lifts etc. Heavy gym weight sessions just seem like a pointless activity to me unless you are a bodybuilder or track sprinter. I'm all about mobility and agility rather than looking like the Hulk.

Carbonfiberboy 

Weight gain from strength training is about diet, not the weight. One has to eat a lot to get big.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19855311/
https://www.academia.edu/14473993/St...elite_cyclists
https://sa1s3.patientpop.com/assets/docs/22597.pdf

I've been a gym member since '79, do strength training as described 1-2 X week, have gotten lighter over the years without dieting per se.

PeteHski

Very interesting thanks. Could I ask what kind of strength training are you doing? i.e. heavy, low reps vs light, high reps, etc.
I do see the benefits of strength training, but I find it hard to combine with my cycling beyond a very basic level. I could certainly do more strength training, but would then have to reduce my cycling to avoid over-training. I guess there's a balance/opportunity cost to consider here. Like pretty much everyone else here I'm not a full time athlete. So is it better to spend my limited exercise time mostly on or off the bike? At the moment I do on average around 10 hours per week on the bike and about 40-50 mins of strength training (split into 2 sessions during the week).

Carbonfiberboy 

That depends on how weak I am. Starting at zero, I do sets of 30 of maybe 9 exercises, gradually working up to 3 sets of 30, circuit style, over a period of months, gradually introducing the concept of failing on the last set, say at rep 28. Because of Covid and an injruy, that's where I am now, at the 2 sets stage. You seem to be perhaps already doing that. If you are efficient and choose your exercises with a view toward optimizing cycling strength, you don't need to apportion your time differently.

More and better information on what has worked for me here:
https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycl...l#post17865790
https://www.bikeforums.net/training-...e-athlete.html

PeteHski

Thanks again. Yes I follow strength exercises that are known to be complimentary to cycling (currently using Sufferfest, which includes strength training in its training plans). But the nearest I do to lifting weights are light kettlebell lifts and swings. Everything else I do is bodyweight based.