Crosstraining?

[TitusTi]

Yeah, ride the bike to get better. For 24 hour races the only way I could make ny body harder was doing longer rides, did a couple of 6-7 hour Mtb rides, then 1 12 hour mtb ride and finally a 24 hour race where I pushed myself harder than I should have early on, more to see how I would recover and also so I would finish more fatigued, then recovered for a month and did Worlds, I think it worked? Hard to tell, no coaches can really tell me what sort of training works for this though, it's a bit of a vague area.

[Thyolo]

Cross training?

 

Yes, sometimes I get cross training, then I stop til I feel better.

[MWdeJager]

On the dot SARA.. Thats exactly what happens. Its all about overall body conditioning' date='especially if you do MTB.[/quote']

 

Of jy kan elke dag 4 ure MTB, dan hoef jy niks te x-train nie

[chris414]

So is it a myth that running is good for hill climbing?

[supertorro]

at risk of sounding like a dirty hippie, your body operates as a holistic whole (we'll leave out the chakras for now), and if all the muscles are strong enough to complement each other then you're sorted.  as Sara mentioned, if do more than normal, the muscles that don't specifically contribute will let you down eventually.  and why go to gym for this?  you can effectively do resistance excercises without going to gym.  then you don't have put up with some of the folk that are pumped up like gorillas, old and sour, smelly from last nights party and garlic consumption, no delicate acts required when the soap gets dropped.....

 

Besides overall fitness is a much better state of being than having a great heart and legs, and no upper body strength to complement that.

 

[bruce]

 

I wont say your core muscles are second order muscles. In cycling most of your power are indirectly generated in the core. But agreed...this is something 90% of cyclist lack...core strengh. Core exercises ie pilaties' date='swimming..are also  forms of crosstraining.

[/quote']

 

Core muscles are not prime moving muscles, and remain recruited at all times, just not 100%.

 

Your power comes from your prime movers, glutes, quads, hamstrings etc.  But they are stabalised by your core.  So, if your core muscles are weak, and give way when your prime moving muscles push against them, then power can be disipated.

 

I personally believe that a strong core is good for overall well-being.  But the arguments against this concept say that if cyclists use their core so much when cycling, then why does their core get weak?  Muscles that are recruited and overloaded get stronger, not weaker.

 

[bruce]

 

at risk of sounding like a dirty hippie' date=' your body operates as a holistic whole (we'll leave out the chakras for now), and if all the muscles are strong enough to complement each other then you're sorted.  as Sara mentioned, if do more than normal, the muscles that don't specifically contribute will let you down eventually.  and why go to gym for this?  you can effectively do resistance excercises without going to gym.  then you don't have put up with some of the folk that are pumped up like gorillas, old and sour, smelly from last nights party and garlic consumption, no delicate acts required when the soap gets dropped.....

 

Besides overall fitness is a much better state of being than having a great heart and legs, and no upper body strength to complement that.

 

[/quote']

 

This is an argument for overall well-being which is fine, IF that is your goal.  If your goal is to win a cycling race, then race specific training is the best way for you to achieve your goal.

 

Logic tells me though, that any muscles that get used while you train for your goal, will become stronger and not weaker.  Why should some muscles get stronger and other ones weaker.  Those muscles don't suddenly start being used 3 hours into a ride, they are used from the start.

 

Just don't enter a cyclist in a bench press competition 'cos he'll lose!

 

[SARA]

at risk of sounding like a dirty hippie' date=' your body operates as a holistic whole (we'll leave out the chakras for now), and if all the muscles are strong enough to complement each other then you're sorted.  as Sara mentioned, if do more than normal, the muscles that don't specifically contribute will let you down eventually.  and why go to gym for this?  you can effectively do resistance excercises without going to gym.  then you don't have put up with some of the folk that are pumped up like gorillas, old and sour, smelly from last nights party and garlic consumption, no delicate acts required when the soap gets dropped.....

 

Besides overall fitness is a much better state of being than having a great heart and legs, and no upper body strength to complement that.

 

[/quote']

 

yup. at the risk of sounding like a hippy...yoga has done wonders for those little muscles and definitely reflects in my cycling.

chakras. . can't believe you even mentioned those!

[supertorro]

so I guess for the character who started the discussion in the first place: cross-training won't hurt you, and if you really want to do well (at a pro or near pro level) get a coach.

 

[SARA]

Logic tells me though, that any muscles that get used while you train for your goal, will become stronger and not weaker.  Why should some muscles get stronger and other ones weaker.  Those muscles don't suddenly start being used 3 hours into a ride, they are used from the start.

Just don't enter a cyclist in a bench press competition 'cos he'll lose!

 

because if you've got these big strong cycling muscles you will rely on them to do all the work. The less used ones that are still NB get "lazy" in a sense. If you can recruit these lazy little bastards as well how much faster could you go!? You would take some of the pressure off the big guys, faster...longer?

[Chilli Pepper]

I'm confused now... I had to change my training programme to time in the gym because I simply can't get out on the road anymore - I have no training partner and going out on the roads in the city is way more dangerous than it was in a smaller town.  So I'm doing spinning classes combined with targeting specific muscle groups with weight training - my identified weak muscle groups. 

 

Am I now doing more harm than good?  At least I'm still training and staying fit?  I found the spinning class enjoyable and did more standing up pedalling than ever before?

 

And the people at the gym aren't that bad, I've even received some smiles!  Granted, this was mostly while I was making a fool of myself while doing something I haven't done before!  (First time in a gym ever!)

[SwissVan]

 

Cross training might not bring any significant benefit to 1 particular sport (such as cycling), but it can go along way to increase your overall physical fitness and well being, which will be beneficial in the long term i.e. increased flexibility, fitness and less ?down time?.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Doing too much of one sport or spending many years doing only one form of exercise (particularly cycling) can lead to problems or injuries due to muscle / system imbalances, overuse and degeneration of the muscle / system groups that are not being used and therefore neglected.

 

Cross training does not mean going to gym and throwing weights and machines around, you can do cross training at home using little (swiss ball) or no equipment.

 

Or be extreme (like Dirt rider) carry and swim with your bike?but just do something different to sitting on a bike.

[supertorro]

any training is miles better than nothing.  just remember you body adjusts to the training you do (known as getting fit) so introduce a change once in a while to keep your muscles on their toes as it were. i.e. ride for two hours every day for a year, and you'll do an incredible two hour ride.  try and ride 3 hours and your body reckons: wtf!!!!!????

[Mudsimus]

I wont say your core muscles are second order muscles. In cycling most of your power are indirectly generated in the core. But agreed...this is something 90% of cyclist lack...core strengh. Core exercises ie pilaties' date='swimming..are also  forms of crosstraining.

Core muscles are not prime moving muscles, and remain recruited at all times, just not 100%.

Your power comes from your prime movers, glutes, quads, hamstrings etc.  But they are stabalised by your core.  So, if your core muscles are weak, and give way when your prime moving muscles push against them, then power can be disipated.

I personally believe that a strong core is good for overall well-being.  But the arguments against this concept say that if cyclists use their core so much when cycling, then why does their core get weak?  Muscles that are recruited and overloaded get stronger, not weaker.
[/quote']

 

For increase in core strengh you must do specific, targeting exercises. Riding your bike for 5 hours wont help. Your core isnt directly influenced by cycling. Because your prime movers is directly invloved in the activity they will get overloaded and get stronger overtime. 

[bruce]

 

I wont say your core muscles are second order muscles. In cycling most of your power are indirectly generated in the core. But agreed...this is something 90% of cyclist lack...core strengh. Core exercises ie pilaties' date='swimming..are also  forms of crosstraining.

 

Core muscles are not prime moving muscles, and remain recruited at all times, just not 100%.

 

Your power comes from your prime movers, glutes, quads, hamstrings etc.  But they are stabalised by your core.  So, if your core muscles are weak, and give way when your prime moving muscles push against them, then power can be disipated.

 

I personally believe that a strong core is good for overall well-being.  But the arguments against this concept say that if cyclists use their core so much when cycling, then why does their core get weak?  Muscles that are recruited and overloaded get stronger, not weaker.

[/quote']

 

For increase in core strengh you must do specific, targeting exercises. Riding your bike for 5 hours wont help. Your core isnt directly influenced by cycling. Because your prime movers is directly invloved in the activity they will get overloaded and get stronger overtime. 

 

Okay, one what basis do you say this?  Up until recently this was my view as well.  Having done a lot of reading, and listening to highly respected physiologists that are involved in cycling (Andrew Coggan, Ric Stern) it is clear that there is actually no scientific proof to back this up.

 

Their logic is:

1. If muscles get fatigued while cycling, they are being used in cycling.

2. The process of fatiguing a muscle, then allowing it to recover, makes it stronger, not weaker.

3. Hence, cycling must improve those muscles that are being used in cycling.

 

AS LONG as you are training the same way as your target event.  Riding one hour training rides every day will not prepare you for a 3 hour race.  That is not to say that every day must be 3 hours, but your training should include durations and intensities commonly found in your goal event.

 

[Mudsimus]

I agree with you Bruce but,  How many times after a long ride can you feel that you core muscles actually worked, in relation to a specicfic core exercise like pilaties?  A fatigued muscle is harder to stabilize, thus the core work harder. But in cycling your prime movers are in such good shape and take much longer too fatigue. Thats why you must target the core directly.