#1
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
Got my bike fit just about perfect on Saturday.
Rode my bike to uni today. Had a gumby uphill take-off, unclipped my right foot before the left was in. Very weird. How embarrassment and all that. With the road being wet it was pretty scary jumping off onto cleats as I was about to go down, with drivers laughing at me. Then checking the cleats, knowing people were thinking I was faking it and just unco. Sure enough, had broken off part of my cleat, gddm it! Forgot about it on the next uphill takeoff as well, so the same thing happened! Fortunately, we have a bike shop on campus. Happy riding all. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
Tamyka Bell wrote:
Got my bike fit just about perfect on Saturday. Rode my bike to uni today. Had a gumby uphill take-off, unclipped my right foot before the left was in. Very weird. How embarrassment and all that. With the road being wet it was pretty scary jumping off onto cleats as I was about to go down, with drivers laughing at me. Then checking the cleats, knowing people were thinking I was faking it and just unco. Sure enough, had broken off part of my cleat, gddm it! Forgot about it on the next uphill takeoff as well, so the same thing happened! Fortunately, we have a bike shop on campus. Happy riding all. I've seen a couple of people do the same thing. Clip in and a bit of black or red plastic comes flying off the bottom of their shoe. Thankfully you didn't hurt yourself in the process. Makes me glad I bought these SPD-R pedals with the metal cleats. -- Brett"The WA one"S |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
BrettS wrote:
Tamyka Bell wrote: Got my bike fit just about perfect on Saturday. Rode my bike to uni today. Had a gumby uphill take-off, unclipped my right foot before the left was in. Very weird. How embarrassment and all that. With the road being wet it was pretty scary jumping off onto cleats as I was about to go down, with drivers laughing at me. Then checking the cleats, knowing people were thinking I was faking it and just unco. Sure enough, had broken off part of my cleat, gddm it! Forgot about it on the next uphill takeoff as well, so the same thing happened! Fortunately, we have a bike shop on campus. Happy riding all. I've seen a couple of people do the same thing. Clip in and a bit of black or red plastic comes flying off the bottom of their shoe. Thankfully you didn't hurt yourself in the process. Makes me glad I bought these SPD-R pedals with the metal cleats. -- Brett"The WA one"S I hear it doesn't happen if you get good pedals/cleats... Well I spoke too soon, the cycle shop has to order me some cleats... gddmit. Tam *ego has almost recovered* |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:53:38 +1000, Tamyka Bell
wrote: I hear it doesn't happen if you get good pedals/cleats... Well I spoke too soon, the cycle shop has to order me some cleats... gddmit. I've had 2 "toe-end" bits of the SPD-SL's break on me, but that's been over 18 months and some 25,000 or so km/s, and I've only had to replace 3 pairs of cleats in that time, two because they broke, and one because they started pulling out on hillsprints. SPD-SL's are very good. Worth every cent - the Ultegra spec ones (SPD-SL 600's) are bloody good pedals & cleats, and having walked some considerable k's in them after a nasty mechanical, they survive walking when necessary much better than look etc. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
Carl Brewer wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:53:38 +1000, Tamyka Bell wrote: I hear it doesn't happen if you get good pedals/cleats... Well I spoke too soon, the cycle shop has to order me some cleats... gddmit. I've had 2 "toe-end" bits of the SPD-SL's break on me, but that's been over 18 months and some 25,000 or so km/s, and I've only had to replace 3 pairs of cleats in that time, two because they broke, and one because they started pulling out on hillsprints. SPD-SL's are very good. Yep, my Miche's are still in great condition after 18 months and about 7500km. But then, my shoes stay on my bike, except for short stops at lights, etc. It's good practice. I'm a triathleteWhat's a hillsprint?/t Worth every cent - the Ultegra spec ones (SPD-SL 600's) are bloody good pedals & cleats, and having walked some considerable k's in them after a nasty mechanical, they survive walking when necessary much better than look etc. Surely it'd be more comfortable to walk barefoot! I HATE walking in cleats. Tam |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 11:20:37 +1000, Tamyka Bell
wrote: Carl Brewer wrote: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:53:38 +1000, Tamyka Bell wrote: I hear it doesn't happen if you get good pedals/cleats... Well I spoke too soon, the cycle shop has to order me some cleats... gddmit. I've had 2 "toe-end" bits of the SPD-SL's break on me, but that's been over 18 months and some 25,000 or so km/s, and I've only had to replace 3 pairs of cleats in that time, two because they broke, and one because they started pulling out on hillsprints. SPD-SL's are very good. Yep, my Miche's are still in great condition after 18 months and about 7500km. But then, my shoes stay on my bike, except for short stops at lights, etc. It's good practice. 7500km? They're not even worn in yet! I'm a triathleteWhat's a hillsprint?/t On the bike strength training. Pick a hill, pick a big-arse gear, slow right down to 10km/h, sprint up hill for 20-30 seconds. Rest 90-120s, repeat. Can also be done into a headwind. Ob tangent : is weight training useful for cyclists? Some say yes, some say no ... I used to be in the "yes" camp, but am now tending towards the "yes, in some circumstances, but generally, no" See : http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=strengthstern and http://www.aboc.com.au/perl/tips.pl?p=weight_training (which I should update ... as above, I've changed my mind a bit!) Worth every cent - the Ultegra spec ones (SPD-SL 600's) are bloody good pedals & cleats, and having walked some considerable k's in them after a nasty mechanical, they survive walking when necessary much better than look etc. Surely it'd be more comfortable to walk barefoot! I HATE walking in cleats. I'd rather wear out my cleats than risk hurting my feet 3 days before the Warny |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
Carl Brewer wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 11:20:37 +1000, Tamyka Bell wrote: Carl Brewer wrote: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:53:38 +1000, Tamyka Bell wrote: I hear it doesn't happen if you get good pedals/cleats... Well I spoke too soon, the cycle shop has to order me some cleats... gddmit. I've had 2 "toe-end" bits of the SPD-SL's break on me, but that's been over 18 months and some 25,000 or so km/s, and I've only had to replace 3 pairs of cleats in that time, two because they broke, and one because they started pulling out on hillsprints. SPD-SL's are very good. Yep, my Miche's are still in great condition after 18 months and about 7500km. But then, my shoes stay on my bike, except for short stops at lights, etc. It's good practice. 7500km? They're not even worn in yet! Well maybe, or according to your 3 prs in 25,000, I'm only 500 km away from breaking them! Cute thing is, they haven't done many more kays than they had at the 12 month mark... gone are my 150 km Sunday morning rides... I'm a triathleteWhat's a hillsprint?/t On the bike strength training. Pick a hill, pick a big-arse gear, slow right down to 10km/h, sprint up hill for 20-30 seconds. Rest 90-120s, repeat. Can also be done into a headwind. Ewwww. Is it one of those things you can get good at by watching others? Ob tangent : is weight training useful for cyclists? Some say yes, some say no ... I used to be in the "yes" camp, but am now tending towards the "yes, in some circumstances, but generally, no" Wow, my hill climbing got WAY better when I did weights - but it was strength/power only, not endurance weights, and my PT made sure I had PERFECT form for everything... But then weights improved my running heaps too. Maybe I'm just lucky and respond well to weights? I never do heaps long term, mostly enough to build the neural response without building heaps of muscle - and that might be the key. Also I do minimal isolation exercises in weights and focus on compound, preferably whole body, such as olympic lifts. My fastest running/cycling was when I had included weights in my base phase of trg. Never ever ever in comp phase, of course. See : http://www.cyclingnews.com/fitness/?id=strengthstern I tried, but my browser made it look all funked up, so I gave up. and http://www.aboc.com.au/perl/tips.pl?p=weight_training (which I should update ... as above, I've changed my mind a bit!) Could read that one but saw isolation exercises and lost interest... Worth every cent - the Ultegra spec ones (SPD-SL 600's) are bloody good pedals & cleats, and having walked some considerable k's in them after a nasty mechanical, they survive walking when necessary much better than look etc. Surely it'd be more comfortable to walk barefoot! I HATE walking in cleats. I'd rather wear out my cleats than risk hurting my feet 3 days before the Warny You don't, like, wear shoes all day long do you? Oh dear. The glorious life of a uni bum... barefoot all day. (Although it STILL hurt my feet at Forster.) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:21:33 +1000, Tamyka Bell
wrote: I'm a triathleteWhat's a hillsprint?/t On the bike strength training. Pick a hill, pick a big-arse gear, slow right down to 10km/h, sprint up hill for 20-30 seconds. Rest 90-120s, repeat. Can also be done into a headwind. Ewwww. Is it one of those things you can get good at by watching others? You can get good at analysing it and encouraging ; "come on you lazy bum! These are SUPPOSED to hurt!" Ob tangent : is weight training useful for cyclists? Some say yes, some say no ... I used to be in the "yes" camp, but am now tending towards the "yes, in some circumstances, but generally, no" Wow, my hill climbing got WAY better when I did weights - but it was strength/power only, not endurance weights, and my PT made sure I had PERFECT form for everything... But then weights improved my running heaps too. Maybe I'm just lucky and respond well to weights? I never do heaps long term, mostly enough to build the neural response without building heaps of muscle - and that might be the key. It's also possible that the weight training had little effect on its own, but the rest of your training may have made a more significant contribution than you expected. Also, you're running, which is different again, and then weights are essentially cross-training. Tri's are always confused about what they're actually working on My understanding is that weight training is useful if you're deficient in base strength, but, as Rik Stern says, you're probably strong enough anyway, and weight training is then of questionable benefit. There's a lot of claims and counterclaims made wrt training for sports, and very few proper studies done to confirm or deny most of the claims. It's risky to atribute gains made to a specific drill (eg I climb better because of weight training) when you'll be doing a lot of other training as well, which may or may not have made a difference. To climb better, you need to be able to sustain higher wattages, not increase your peak wattage. That's done by teaching your body to metabolise more blood lactate, which is done by longer intervals at high intensity. Climbing is just an ITT where the bad guy is gravity, not drag. When it comes to strength for riding, you hint above at neuromuscular adaptations, which weight training will almost definatly not train for riding - unless your weights are set up to exactly mimic riding - which is why I get my riders to do hillsprints as strength training - it's very specific, which is what we want. We want to ride faster! I'd rather wear out my cleats than risk hurting my feet 3 days before the Warny You don't, like, wear shoes all day long do you? Oh dear. The glorious life of a uni bum... barefoot all day. (Although it STILL hurt my feet at Forster.) I do when there's lots of broken glass around and it's three days out from a major event that I've spent 12 months training for! Here's a snippet from Rik's article on cyclingnews, which I'd suggest is well worth your reading if you have a spare 10 minutes and a moderatly competant browser. There have been many studies conducted on strength training to assess specificity (e.g., Luecke, et al., 1998, Harris et al., 2000, Fagan and Doyle-Baker, 2000, Bishop et al., 1999, Rich and Cafarelli, 2000), which have shown no crossover in strength gains to a different exercise to that which was trained, even in similar exercises. Furthermore, as strength training increases the amount of contractile properties within the muscle, and as the muscle undergoes hypertrophy, there will be a relative decrease in the volume of mitochondria (energy-producing bodies) within the muscle. Mitochondrion density increases with aerobic training. Bishop et al., (1999) conducted a study on elite females (who are likely less strong compared to age and sport matched males). The riders were split into two groups: weight and endurance training cyclists and 'normal' training cyclists (control). Whilst the weight training group improved leg strength they did not increase their cycling ability (e.g., 40 km TT, VO2 max, LT, fibre type, etc.). There are indeed some research data to show that strength training will increase lactate threshold, and VO2max (etc.), however, almost exclusively these studies have been performed on untrained individuals. In untrained individuals, it is well accepted and understood that any training will induce change. As regards the ability to comfortably and speedily move a body 112 miles, this will be an entirely aerobic effort, which will not be limited by strength. Your ability to ride at high velocities for long periods of time is, as previously stated, a function of VO2max, lactate threshold, economy (efficiency), and nutritional strategy [Jones and Carter, 2000]. To my knowledge, no-one has published a paper that might link weight training and cycling efficiency. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
Carl Brewer wrote:
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:21:33 +1000, Tamyka Bell wrote: snip Wow, my hill climbing got WAY better when I did weights - but it was strength/power only, not endurance weights, and my PT made sure I had PERFECT form for everything... But then weights improved my running heaps too. Maybe I'm just lucky and respond well to weights? I never do heaps long term, mostly enough to build the neural response without building heaps of muscle - and that might be the key. It's also possible that the weight training had little effect on its own, but the rest of your training may have made a more significant contribution than you expected. Not in this case, actually, because when I was on exactly the same program without weights, I did not see the same improvements. My coach wanted me to quit weights and I told him to f$ck off, because after a few weeks of detraining, I slowed down and started getting injuries. Also, you're running, which is different again, and then weights are essentially cross-training. Tri's are always confused about what they're actually working on In contrast to weights being cross-training if you're cycling? I don't understand that statement (but I think the second sentence applies to pretty much anyone who has accepted someone else's trg prog). My understanding is that weight training is useful if you're deficient in base strength, but, as Rik Stern says, you're probably strong enough anyway, and weight training is then of questionable benefit. Although, if you're stronger, your muscles are working at a lower effort. If you're biomechanically gifted, you're probably pretty efficient anyway. If not, your stabilisers could probably do with a tweak. However those programs with leg curls and hammie curls etc will not help because they fatigue major muscles without working the little ones so much. Go free weights, go free weights, go free weights... There's a lot of claims and counterclaims made wrt training for sports, and very few proper studies done to confirm or deny most of the claims. It's risky to atribute gains made to a specific drill (eg I climb better because of weight training) when you'll be doing a lot of other training as well, which may or may not have made a difference. To climb better, you need to be able True. However as above the only change was weights. Incl nutrition/sleep etc. I also tried an extra day of cycling instead. to sustain higher wattages, not increase your peak wattage. That's Again, if you increase your peak wattage, you have more to work with. Then it's a matter of increasing the amount of time spent at the high power i.e. interval trg. Well, it's worked wonders for me. done by teaching your body to metabolise more blood lactate, which is done by longer intervals at high intensity. Climbing is just an ITT where the bad guy is gravity, not drag. When it comes to strength for riding, you hint above at neuromuscular adaptations, which weight training will almost definatly not train for riding - That's not entirely true. Greater muscular innervation will improve response. Which again is why I would not stay on a weights prog during competition but rather use it as an initial build. unless your weights are set up to exactly mimic riding - which is why I get my riders to do hillsprints as strength training - it's very specific, which is what we want. We want to ride faster! However, if you're not strong enough to move fast up a hill, you teach your body bad habits which become patterns. I know a lot of runners who swear by running up hills but that tends to make me slow, because you can't run with good flat form by running up hills. I'd rather wear out my cleats than risk hurting my feet 3 days before the Warny You don't, like, wear shoes all day long do you? Oh dear. The glorious life of a uni bum... barefoot all day. (Although it STILL hurt my feet at Forster.) I do when there's lots of broken glass around and it's three days out from a major event that I've spent 12 months training for! fairy nuff I'd be worried about rolling an ankle walking on my cleats though. Hate it. I'm always impressed by the triathletes who run with their cleats on through transition. I'd much rather leave the shoes on the bike. Here's a snippet from Rik's article on cyclingnews, which I'd suggest is well worth your reading if you have a spare 10 minutes and a moderatly competant browser. snip cool. I read lots of those sorts of papers because that's my research job. But I still reckon it's what works for the individual. Science hasn't figured out how aromatherapy and accupuncture and homeopathy work but they do work for some people. I tried a homeopathic injury tablet and it made me very ill. But the lotion worked like a charm. Without weight training, I got injured, I was weak on hills, my running was slow. I added weights, a program that I devised based on a new program some friends were trying, and I solved these problems. Being female, I'm more likely to have weird biomechanics, and I'm a big q-angle female also. I use weights to train my body posture, my stabilising muscles, and to strengthen muscle groups. When I added calf raises to my program, I ceased to get cramped calves when running. Why? General concensus from fitness professionals was that I was working them at a lower (relative level) when they were bigger. If you're working fine without weights, then there's no need to add them. But I think an interesting experiment would be to take people who previously had biomechanically based injuries, get them doing a regular weights program (non-isolation exercises, working balance, total power gains), and see how their injury rates go after that. Tam |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
%$!#-&*@
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 14:15:44 +1000, Tamyka Bell
wrote: Carl Brewer wrote: On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 12:21:33 +1000, Tamyka Bell wrote: snip Wow, my hill climbing got WAY better when I did weights - but it was strength/power only, not endurance weights, and my PT made sure I had PERFECT form for everything... But then weights improved my running heaps too. Maybe I'm just lucky and respond well to weights? I never do heaps long term, mostly enough to build the neural response without building heaps of muscle - and that might be the key. It's also possible that the weight training had little effect on its own, but the rest of your training may have made a more significant contribution than you expected. Not in this case, actually, because when I was on exactly the same program without weights, I did not see the same improvements. My coach wanted me to quit weights and I told him to f$ck off, because after a few weeks of detraining, I slowed down and started getting injuries. Interesting. Were you doing any on the bike strength work or all aerobic stuff on the bike? What sort of intervals were you doing? Also, you're running, which is different again, and then weights are essentially cross-training. Tri's are always confused about what they're actually working on In contrast to weights being cross-training if you're cycling? I don't understand that statement (but I think the second sentence applies to pretty much anyone who has accepted someone else's trg prog). Mea Culpa. Weights are always cross-training, unless your sport is weights My understanding is that weight training is useful if you're deficient in base strength, but, as Rik Stern says, you're probably strong enough anyway, and weight training is then of questionable benefit. Although, if you're stronger, your muscles are working at a lower effort. Yes, but my understanding is that for most riders, the difference between peak power (1000w) and sustainable power is so great that it won't make any significant difference to their sustainable power at or near LT/MSS* (250-400w). If you're biomechanically gifted, you're probably pretty efficient anyway. If not, your stabilisers could probably do with a tweak. However those programs with leg curls and hammie curls etc will not help because they fatigue major muscles without working the little ones so much. Go free weights, go free weights, go free weights... You're talking about a different thing though, you're talking about injury prevention and management now, not increasing sustainable power output *on a bike*. To be fair, you can't put out much power when you're injured, but that's not what I was talking about There's a lot of claims and counterclaims made wrt training for sports, and very few proper studies done to confirm or deny most of the claims. It's risky to atribute gains made to a specific drill (eg I climb better because of weight training) when you'll be doing a lot of other training as well, which may or may not have made a difference. To climb better, you need to be able True. However as above the only change was weights. Incl nutrition/sleep etc. I also tried an extra day of cycling instead. to sustain higher wattages, not increase your peak wattage. That's Again, if you increase your peak wattage, you have more to work with. Then it's a matter of increasing the amount of time spent at the high power i.e. interval trg. Well, it's worked wonders for me. My understanding is that the peak is so much higher anyway that it's essentially irrelevant for a trained rider. this may be different in other sports and in non-specific sports (ie: tris). The reason I get my riders doing strength work is because road races and crits almost always end in a sprint, so there they need peak power and technique (which is why I do hill sprints and *down* hill sprints in lieu of motorpaced sprints) done by teaching your body to metabolise more blood lactate, which is done by longer intervals at high intensity. Climbing is just an ITT where the bad guy is gravity, not drag. When it comes to strength for riding, you hint above at neuromuscular adaptations, which weight training will almost definatly not train for riding - That's not entirely true. Greater muscular innervation will improve response. Which again is why I would not stay on a weights prog during competition but rather use it as an initial build. I'd suggest that perhaps it's not just nerve activation, but also the *right* nerve activation that makes the difference. This is the core of the specific training argument that Rik refers to. We're bogging down in details here, and I'm on shaky ground without re-reading the material so I get it right and give you the right references. unless your weights are set up to exactly mimic riding - which is why I get my riders to do hillsprints as strength training - it's very specific, which is what we want. We want to ride faster! However, if you're not strong enough to move fast up a hill, you teach your body bad habits which become patterns. I know a lot of runners who swear by running up hills but that tends to make me slow, because you can't run with good flat form by running up hills. I'm not training runners, I'm training cyclists, and hill sprints are not about getting up hills faster, they're about building strength so that my riders can sprint quicker. If hill running makes you a faster or slower runner, that's a running-specific problem, and not one I'm terribly interested in, nor one I'm at all qualified to comment on! I don't have my MTB riders doing hillsprints, nor the riders training for TT's, just the roadies who need to burn past everyone at the end in one big peak-power kick. fairy nuff I'd be worried about rolling an ankle walking on my cleats though. SPD-SLs are very stable to walk on. Here's a snippet from Rik's article on cyclingnews, which I'd suggest is well worth your reading if you have a spare 10 minutes and a moderatly competant browser. snip cool. I read lots of those sorts of papers because that's my research job. But I still reckon it's what works for the individual. Of course. If training was the same for everyone, there'd be one book and everyone would have it. The art of coaching is finding what works best for each athlete you're working with, and then getting them to actually do it! (right Hip? Still reading? ) Science hasn't figured out how aromatherapy and accupuncture and homeopathy work but they do work for some people. I tried a homeopathic injury tablet and it made me very ill. But the lotion worked like a charm. Aren't placebos and coincidences wonderful? Without weight training, I got injured, I was weak on hills, my running was slow. I added weights, a program that I devised based on a new program some friends were trying, and I solved these problems. Being female, I'm more likely to have weird biomechanics, and I'm a big q-angle female also. I use weights to train my body posture, my stabilising muscles, and to strengthen muscle groups. When I added calf raises to my program, I ceased to get cramped calves when running. Why? The forces involved in running are probably quite a lot closer to peak as opposed to when riding - that's why we can ride for 10 hours, but only run for 2, at any decent kind of intensity. I'm guessing, I don't know running, but when you take a stride, that's a lot of work in catching it. Relative to peak power, I'd guess that running was a lot closer, so peak power may be relevant, especially in the smaller muscle groups (calves, hip flexors etc) that just don't matter when riding. Riding works your arse and your thighs, they're big, strong muscles, they're way stronger than they need to be for riding at MSS, and if they're too big and strong, they're taking away energy for no benefit. General concensus from fitness professionals was that I was working them at a lower (relative level) when they were bigger. Sure, but you're talking about running, where calf raises move the calf muscle through a range of motion that's very similar to that which you use when running, and the calf muscle is (I'm guessing, you're talking running ...) probably under-equipt to cope with the stresses involved without structured strength work. I'm guessing again, but I'd have thought that running is something that the body is basically underpowered to do, and you need to strengthen it to make it cope with the loads involved, especially if you're short-changed genetically in the first place. If you're working fine without weights, then there's no need to add them. But I think an interesting experiment would be to take people who previously had biomechanically based injuries, get them doing a regular weights program (non-isolation exercises, working balance, total power gains), and see how their injury rates go after that. I'm not advocating the total removal of weight training, and it has its place, and in the case of injury rehab etc, sure, the right weight training can no doubt be of benefit. My understanding, however, is that for cyclists (not runners, not powerlifters, not swimmers, not iridologists etc) weight training is on the whole unncessary and possibly counter-productive except in cases where there's some physiological problems - such as low core strength (although I'd rather have my riders go swimming or kayaking to fix thix) or some strength discrepancy brought about by injury or adaptation to other stresses that needs balancing out. I'm fully in favour of cross-training when there's time to recover from it. In the words of one far greater than any of us, ride your bike, ride your bike, ride your bike! [*] yeah, I know, LT, max steady state, AT,VT2 etc .. for the terms of this discussion they're interchangable. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|