taras0000

W/kg only matters when going uphill. No one shoots for W/kg because doing so diminishes total power. How many climbers (the ones with the highest W/kg) do you see with a good sprint? None, because total power is what matters.

taras0000

if his 5s power is going down, then it means he's gaining weight faster than he's increasing power, or his weight is steady, but his max power is decreasing. The 30s power increase is because his speed endurance is improving.

Doge

I associate that to miles. It is hard to tell what is what with a teen. Weight really has not changed in 2-3 years other than seasonal. He's about 22W/kg in a sprint - at age 16. 5 min now about 6.55 W/kg. Think 7W/kg if trying for it, those are training ride numbers. Has not been measured in a sprint since then. But those are road sprints, so I don't think count. Track juniors seem far behind junior roadies in development, so not really any basis to compare.


If sprinters are getting smaller - how is that explained if not w/kg?

carleton

Yeah, I've noticed this, too but hadn't really pondered why.

I think it may have to do with the sport evolving into: big gears + longer sprint = winning for match sprints and keirin.

Two great examples are Victoria Pendleton and Jason Kenny. Both are some of the leanest (and most successful) in their fields.

Another great example is Kevin Mansker. He was arguably the fastest guy in the US and the leanest sprinter when he retired.

taras0000

Only in NA. Go to Australia or Europe, you'll see that those kids are really fast.

Remember when I said nobody is aiming for W/kg? You're confusing correlation with causation. If you focus on W/kg, then you end up looking like a climber, with climber levels or strength, and you'll be slow. If W/kg has gone up, it's only a side effect of the training that is required for how sprinting takes place now.

It's the bold right there that's your answer. Sprinting has evolved and so has the training and physical attributes that are required for it. It used to be that you tried to hold the sprint off as long as possible, and trying to gap your opponent while doing it. It used to be more tactical (at least in an obvious way). Sprinting now has evolved into a high speed, rolling start drag race. Before, you needed to be able to put out massive amounts of torque from a standstill, accelerate as fast as possible, and maintain it just long enough to cross the line. Endurance wasn't really a factor in those sprints, but massive strength and power were. It used to be a really ballsy move to go long in the first lap, and only a few riders had the ability to pull it off. Those riders may not have had the fastest top speed, but they started winning more and more. The Kilo riders started to become the kings of sprinting (and the keirin) because they had the speed, the torque, and the endurance. They had more tools available to them in their box of tactics. Other riders started to train like Kilo riders to keep up. Riders started to go longer in the sprints to out-Kilo the guys who hadn't caught on to the new trend. More and more riders started doing this and the methodology of sprinting had changed. So now the riders train for longer sprints, not massive acceleration. One requires a large cross sectional area of muscle, the other doesn't. Yes training for longer sprints results on smaller riders, but the riders aren't training specifically to be smaller. The training just results in smaller riders.

It requires lots of power to get up to speed. To double your speed, you need to quadruple your power output, and that's at a slow rate of acceleration. It requires a lot more power to do it quicker as the doubling is happening that much faster. In the old days, the riders might roll around at 15-20 km/h before their jump to ~75km/h. That's up to a 5X increase! In about 10s you've doubled from 15-30, then 30-60. That would require a minimum 16X power increase in 10s. The last 15km/h to 75 would require you to increase that power again. You're looking at close to 20X power increase in about 20s. The force production capability of a muscle is equal to it's cross sectional area. Now you can see why Harnett had those thighs. Modern sprinters slowly roll up to 40km/h before and stay there before drag racing to the line. That slow roll is about as efficient a speed increase as you can get, and doesn't require much power to get there. Because 40-75 is less of an increase than 15-75, less power is required to accelerate to that final top speed. To maintain a certain velocity doesn't require as much power as you think. Tour sprinters regularly hit 70km/h in their sprints, yet put out a fraction of the power that a track sprinter does in those sprints. Why? Because they get dropped off at 60km/h before they hit the gas. Cav would get spanked in a match sprint even though he is able to maintain match sprint speeds. So sprinters now look somewhere in between Soren Lausberg and Mario Cipollini because sprinting has changed, and thus so has the training.


Ask any modern sprinter what their W/kg is and they'll look at you like you're from another planet. Ask them their weight and they'll tell you. Ask them their wattage and they'll tell you, but no one cares about W/kg because it's not a useful metric. Going faster is about overcoming air resistance. To do that you need more power. The resistance provided by weight doesn't factor much into linear acceleration, at least not in the way that overcoming air resistance does. So to go faster W/Cd is a more useful metric. W/kg only has it's usefulness when gravity provides more resistance than air.

taras0000

Even track enduros don't care about W/kg, unless they also ride on the road, at which point, they only care about it for their road performance, but they throw it out the window when it comes to track.

carleton

Wow, man. Thanks for the great explanation!!

sarals 

Second that!

queerpunk

it can be useful to think of w/kg as an output benchmark that adjusts for size - but not as something to optimize by manipulating weight.

Doge

1st, that was a very good explanation on why sprinters are getting smaller - Thank you.

For juniors in the USA most are multi-disciplined. Most the track riders seem to also be road riders. I know this as junior races against several national champion is one event or another track riders - on the road. They do crits at least, although often not road races. A junior pursuit champ is also a great, one of the best road racers.

Many of the kids start out start at the 3 track around here (SoCal all <1.5hr from our house). Rightly or wrongly there is pressure (thinking one coach in particular) esp at track - to focus on track only/first. I think that may be the best way to be good at something, just not where most cycling parents are. Add to that in just my son's junior racing equipment rules have changed and are talked about changing and as parents of young kids - we buy all that stuff. For the kids mass start racing was limited and after many weeks still not something done by age 11. We had enough around age 13 and just pulled out of weekly track visits. So I can see why it might be different someplace else. I had also thought, maybe incorrectly that mass/size/power was a big part of it. As such a USA teen might be competitive with the fastest road domestic pros, I would not expect they could have that mass and power as teens. I wouldn't expect it in Europe either, but I only have road experience there (30 races or so).

FWIW in 2015 and I believe again in 2016 USA will have the most dominant road juniors in the world. We've taken podiums on all the big junior races winning most of them. Still it takes time in area to really dominate. This has never happened before. So if the Euros and Auzzies are multi-disciplined, and it seems they are not, then I do not think they are as fast as the current batch of USA kids.

taras0000

The Euros and Aussies are all multi-disciplined. There is a culture in those countries of "ride everything you can" when you are young. The Roadies will dabble in track and cross, and the trackies will certainly be riding on the road. Riders really only start specializing at around 16 or so, as the competitive stakes get higher, and the need to focus on your strength (or desire) becomes more time intensive.

It's not unusual to have a few strong juniors in NA able to top world class podiums. What we don't have at that age is depth. In Europe and Australia, there are hundreds of kids vying for those racing spots, but only a couple of dozen in NA. Where we have trouble in NA is making the jump from Junior to Elite. It doesn't take a phenomenal coach to get a genetically gifted teen to perform really well. If a rider is a relatively early bloomer physically, and has pretty good genes, it will be relatively easy for him to be in the mix at the end of all the really big races. You don't need to be doing any highly specialized, unique training if this is the case. Taylor Phinney is that kind of guy. He absolutely tore up the Junior and Espoir ranks, but turned out to be "only" a relatively good Elite Pro. It's nothing to turn your nose up at, it's just that once you graduate to the Elite ranks, things have "normalized". To make the jump and truly excel in this new, "normalized" environment and maintain that same standing takes an exponential amount of good genetics, luck, and proper training methodology. Without that depth that the other continents have in riders, NA just doesn't have the same size pool to strike that kind of jackpot in the cycling lottery, or it happens very rarely.

The Junior game is one thing, but the rules of the game drastically change once you start racing with the big boys.

brawlo

My kids both do athletics, with the younger one also racing bikes. Last season on the athletics field, I had a conversation in respect to sprint/endurance abilities of the kids. Basically it went, while they're young, they're equally good at everything. Once the hormones of puberty take over, then you will see them lean one way or the other. So for us, up until they finish U15 in general, they will be pretty much good at everything, but once they hit U17, you will progressively see hormones take over and push them in one direction or another.

Once they hit the open/elite fields, then those new former juniors are at a distinct disadvantage. They need time to build the strength to compete with those who have already built the strength as they aged. There is also a transition there where they move out of home and start going to uni, drinking, just the throes of young life in general, and start paying bills, getting jobs etc. Every sport loses a huge number of participants in those years.

Doge

That there is an issue. So hormones take over and they are pro level, and can go to a pretty good USA college.


Just seems to me in both soccer and cycling (the only two sports I know) the Euros don't have the "college problem".

brawlo

What is the "college problem" you refer to?

Dalai

Haven't you seen Animal house?

Doge

It is a problem for getting the best into a sport. Not the problem for the athlete - necessarily. USA incents athletes to go to college at a time when they are on their peak developmental curve. For those sports where college is not the most direct pathway to being pro (cycling, soccer - Euro sports), this reduce their pro opportunities.

USA NCAA says $2.4 billion goes to 150K athletes every year. That changes things. The cycling college scholarships are not in that number, but it is a thing done in the USA to the degree of no place else in the world.

brawlo

Yes, and my mind went there, but it didn't seem to fit the discussion.

I'm not too sure about the USA, but the high level talent here in Australia is identified well before college age. Cycling is similar. Europe is where you go if you are truly good and true talent is picked up quickly.

Doge

It is identified before college. It is developed during college. Those identified - may go to college instead. I know I'm in a track forum so I apologize for the road examples.

Tony Martin and Froome are 31. Froome won his first pro race at 24. Tony similar.

We really enjoy your rowing turned tour pro Cam Wurf here in CA. Just a great guy. He got into cycling late 20s - after his world championship in rowing quad for Australia.

Current kids in college. Chris Blevens - wins Peace Race (like Sagan and Kwiatkowski), goes to school. My son, while of lessor accomplishments was not going to turn down his top school "free" education for a pro contract.

USA Brandon and Adrian are kinda no-brainer go pro. But there are lots in between that, well, hopefully we will find out later what they can do, but others who could-of-done found other things to do. I am not lamenting, just more commenting on how the draw of cycling, even for those fully capable, does not always win in the vocation area. Esp in the USA where one route, while more glamorous, is not the better life.

I worked in Melbourne, Sydney and Newcastle a bit. With no research to back my opinion up, it seemed like there was not a government push to pay kids to go to Uni for sports. Yea - I know, your kids pay less/nothing than in the USA. University of Sydney has quite a team and I did look at that. As USA college, private or out-of-state, without financial aid means (before tax) parents need to earn 3-5 hundred $K to pay for it. In the USA sports can help pay for that, or get kid into a prestige network, or both. Princeton rowing recruited a euro junior cycling champion. So it is not just a USA thing. But cycling (or soccer, esp women's soccer) has a very hard time competing with a top tier education, nationally identified or not - as it should be.


This was a video this week by one of the cycling teammates (and it is the kids also in the planes). My kid is rolling along at the back and obviously not the most aero position. For him, as someone that wanted to serve, and get a good education and ride, hard to pass up. Being identified had very little to do with anything given the other choices.

brawlo

Yes, I think the difference in fee structure for university in the US is a big part of the pie. If you didn't have a scholarship system, there would be an enormous divide between the haves and have not's. Then there is also the allure of the money paid to your sportspeople. That is also a whole lot more than any sportspeople are paid here in Australia. That is also why some sports struggle. Good sportspeople will be good at just about any sport. So they will most likely be attracted to the biggest money earners. They may therefore never truly know if they could have reached the pinnacle of any other sport while they were focused on the possibility of riches, where so few make it through. I was watching something on the net a couple of week ago that was a breakdown of the number of American Football players going from high school, breaking the numbers right down to the number that make regular NFL play. The numbers were depressing!

I went to Newcastle University and know there are various scholarships available, both sporting and employer funded. One girl I knew was there on a tennis scholarship.

infestedguy1

Hey everyone, Just a quick question regarding squat variations. I'm a masters roadie who started racing track this season and the bug bit me hard. I doubt I'll do many road races next season other than some early on and a few crits here and there. Anyways, I've read this entire thread front to back (maybe skipped a page or two), picked up Starting Strength and will be starting a program soon. As of right now, I'm not a member of a gym. I'll be joining the YMCA close to home soon, but in the meantime I'll be training at home. I have an Olympic weight set and plenty of weight to get me started. I don't have a squat rack though, but, I do have a trap bar (as well as a straight bar). I was wondering if any of you folks have done trap bar squats, as opposed to back squats? Also, in relation to the Starting Strength plan, would the TBS be too similar to deadlifts? Just curious to see what you all think. Thanks!

houleskis

My $0.02, the movement pattern of a trap bar DL lands somewhere in between a high bar squat and a conventional straight bar deadlift. In other words, it has less knee dominant force/less knee bending than a squat but also less back hinging than a conventional deadlift (although you can choose to do more back hinging).

My thoughts: given your setup, just dump the "deadlift" from SS for the time being and use trap bar deadlift as a substitute for squats until you can get in the gym. You'll make progress/gainz regardless in the interim.

VanceMac

@infestedguy1 The trap bar is the target of much tongue-in-cheek mocking. But it definitely has a place (unlike, say, a Smith Machine). However, there's a reason it isn't in Starting Strength or other novice powerlifting programs. In my mind, to grossly oversimplify, it is basically combining squat and deadlift, while throwing out the hardest part of both, so it is not an adequate substitute for either.

Since you already have a good start on the home gym, I would recommend you finish the job! Get a decent power rack, and save the endless trips to the YMCA.

carleton

1) Make sure that the Y has a proper freewheight gym before you sign up. Many do not.

2) You can buy a "plyo step box" to start the transition phase for training the squat. Basically, you do 1-legged step-ups. It's very very similar to the squat and can serve to help you ease into squat training. A good box runs around $100. I have one at home and when I was lifting regularly, I had it by my gaming computer and when I was waiting for a map change or something between lives, I'd do 5 reps with each leg. That plus pushups is a decent home workout on days when you simply can't get to the gym. Plus you can use it for plyo box jumps later when you progress into power movements.

gl98115

As with every exercise, somebody likes it:

https://www.t-nation.com/training/trap-bar-deadlift

Where in Atl do you ride? Is the Wed night Peachtree Battle ride still a thing?

Carlosss

Many strength coaches like their athletes do trap bar deadlifts so their lower back don't get taxed nearly as much as regular deadlifts--specially for team sports where athletes have games/practise regularly.

I've also seen them used as trap bar jumps, making it a simpler movement than say squat jumps.