Jump to content
japay1

Any benefit from strength work/lifting

Recommended Posts

Famous quote from Sutto "Kieran Perkins was so weak he couldn't carry his own swim bag".

Now he didn't look weak, but the point being swimming is not really a strength sport.

 

And Sutto would have his athletes do hill reps in bike and run rather than weights

Did the same with Chrissie Wellington. Then she went to Dave Scott who worked on her weaknesses in relation to imbalances then she went even faster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Famous quote from Sutto "Kieran Perkins was so weak he couldn't carry his own swim bag".

Now he didn't look weak, but the point being swimming is not really a strength sport.

 

And Sutto would have his athletes do hill reps in bike and run rather than weights

Interesting. I figured they'd have to be lifting to gain that size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are you actually pushing when you swim except when push off the wall on a turn?

Catch and pull pretty sure they are fundamentals of swimming. You PULL your hand through the water to create forward pulposion. Like to see you PUSH it and see where you end up

Sorry FB, you're way off the mark here. You push the water with your hand and forearm. Pulling suggests tug of war style grabbing which leads with elbow - the exact thing we all try to avoid - the dropped elbow. Think about pushing against the water once the hand has passed under the shoulder.

 

Most gym exercises for upper body / arm strength lead with the elbow. That's why they don't enhance the swim stroke.

Edited by The Customer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the same with Chrissie Wellington. Then she went to Dave Scott who worked on her weaknesses in relation to imbalances then she went even faster

Really? Did she? Or was her continuing dominance simply the result of the years spent with Sutton. She also quit soon after training with Scott. Maybe the extra gym work was the nail in the coffin. ;-)

Edited by The Customer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I

 

Transitions is very weird place you have people who are trolls, some very nice, some seeking help and others after a laugh. Maybe that's why we kerp checking in on here.

I think I'm many of those (maybe not the nice one)

And it changes.

 

Wonder who I will be tomorrow?

 

This non training and staying up later leads to weird posts like above (my one FB not yours ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fixation continues. Sometimes the brick wall is just to stubborn for its own good.

Strength training for the aging athlete works. It enhances their main focussed training such as SBR. Now for the hard of reading folk, I will spell it out. It enhances, doesn't replace, the main training.

TC, by using your throw away line and assumption regarding Swiss balls and kettle bells shows a level of ignorance which I wouldn't expect from you. A Swiss ball is a great piece of kit for core work. Kettle bells, well you will have to talk to a cross fitter about them. I don't use them but I know people who do use them and swear by them. That's great for them , but I don't see a need to bag kettle bells because I don't use them.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if you struggle to get out for some tri specific swimming, riding and running then it's easy to kid yourself and believe that swanning around a gym doing some Lat-pulldowns is 'enhancing' your triathlon prospects. ;-) Some people just find running too hard.

 

Note: The OP is not about rehabilitation where you literally cannot SBR, nor is it about the aging athlete. It is also not about overweight athletes who find running painful and are looking for some kind of path to weight loss and general fitness in order to get to the point where they can run. The OP is about strength and lifting. I repeat, strength can be improved whilst Swimming, biking and running if the right approach is undertaken and will be of far greater benefit than the kind of strength work done in the gym.

Edited by The Customer
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fixation continues. Sometimes the brick wall is just to stubborn for its own good.

Strength training for the aging athlete works. It enhances their main focussed training such as SBR. Now for the hard of reading folk, I will spell it out. It enhances, doesn't replace, the main training.

TC, by using your throw away line and assumption regarding Swiss balls and kettle bells shows a level of ignorance which I wouldn't expect from you. A Swiss ball is a great piece of kit for core work. Kettle bells, well you will have to talk to a cross fitter about them. I don't use them but I know people who do use them and swear by them. That's great for them , but I don't see a need to bag kettle bells because I don't use them.

How does it enhance SBR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Did she? Or was her continuing dominance simply the result of the years spent with Sutton. She also quit soon after training with Scott. Maybe the extra gym work was the nail in the coffin. ;-)

 

Emotionally/Mentally drained more like it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rinny does strength and conditioning work

 

 

Great exercises all relevant and emcompass functionality through mobility, stability and strength.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Did she? Or was her continuing dominance simply the result of the years spent with Sutton. She also quit soon after training with Scott. Maybe the extra gym work was the nail in the coffin. ;-)

She always spoke about not staying long in the sport...

 

Pretty sure it was the relationship and wanting to move down a different path that ended tri for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No TC, no caveats like sedentary lifestyle etc, all types of lifestyle can benefit from strength training as a person gets older, especially past 40 years of age. Notice I said "strength training" and not weight training, which I think you fixate on as the interpretation of strength training.

Using paddles for strength training in swimming, big gear workouts on the bike or hill repeats for cycling and running all fit the bill as strength training.

 

None of these remotely qualify as strength workouts.

 

Strength is the maximal force generation capability of a muscle or group of muscles.

 

As soon as a movement involves much velocity, or a frequently repeated effort such as in swimming, cycling and running irrespective of the aid (big gears, hills, paddles), or both, then it's about an order of magnitude away from the sort of forces involved in and required for developing strength.

 

There is a bit a of a difference for running though which I'll get to later.

 

The workouts mentioned above are aerobic endurance workouts, or they might possibly work on ones anaerobic energy capacity if done hard enough such that you significantly fatigue within a minute or so, but they most definitely are not even close to being strength workouts. Even doing maximal effort sprints running and cycling for a handful of seconds are still barely getting into strength territory. Not sure why a performance triathlete would be all that concerned with anaerobic work capacity or strength in any case. they are hardly limiters to one's performance in such events.

 

Interesting that no one on this thread has even mentioned the research into actual strength training and it's efficacy for cycling/swimming/running performance.

 

Here's the short answer. It's never going to be better than swimming/cycling/running training. Injury prevention benefits are mostly a myth. There is some potential benefit for running, and SFA for endurance cycling and swimming.

 

The balance of evidence for cycling is equivocal (i.e. not much of a compelling argument other than for track sprint / BMX cycling) while there is some supporting evidence for running (which is not surprising due to the different nature of the forces involved being both concentric and eccentric muscle contractions whereas cycling and swimming are confined to concentric). In swimming the data is significantly less and fairly equivocal for endurance swimming while some studies report benefits for short swimming events (e.g. 50m, which is akin to physiological demands of longer track cycling sprint events like the kilo TT and Kieren), there are also contradictory results.

 

The non-strength work as described above (big gear efforts / paddles / hills etc) are pretty much just a coaching ruse to do some quality endurance power efforts - give the athlete something else to focus on while working hard - but there is little if any benefit over simply doing the same work/intensity mix normally.

 

As for actual strength training, again the benefits to endurance performance are pretty marginal if at all (and running has the best supporting evidence) but in some cases it's detrimental, so do it if:

(i) you enjoy it because life, and

(ii) your personal priorities include things other than just endurance athletic performance because life.

 

As always, YMMV (IOW every individual is different).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I do S&C work is to maintain my ability to actually train, which is how I improve and what I enjoy doing.

 

If I am injured due to age-related weaknesses and/or imbalances that can be addressed by S&C, then I won't be able to put the training work in to chase my performance goals.

 

I don't do S&C work directly to improve...plyos being one exception.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there is a very important factor and that is the age of the athlete.

Males loose muscle volume with age and strength /weight training becomes more important with age to maintain muscle mass in order to reduce or slowdown deterioration in performance,

May be when you're under 30 weights may be unnecessary but over 30 weight lifting would maintain muscle volume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

None of these remotely qualify as strength workouts.

 

Strength is the maximal force generation capability of a muscle or group of muscles.

 

As soon as a movement involves much velocity, or a frequently repeated effort such as in swimming, cycling and running irrespective of the aid (big gears, hills, paddles), or both, then it's about an order of magnitude away from the sort of forces involved in and required for developing strength.

 

There is a bit a of a difference for running though which I'll get to later.

 

The workouts mentioned above are aerobic endurance workouts, or they might possibly work on ones anaerobic energy capacity if done hard enough such that you significantly fatigue within a minute or so, but they most definitely are not even close to being strength workouts. Even doing maximal effort sprints running and cycling for a handful of seconds are still barely getting into strength territory. Not sure why a performance triathlete would be all that concerned with anaerobic work capacity or strength in any case. they are hardly limiters to one's performance in such events.

 

Interesting that no one on this thread has even mentioned the research into actual strength training and it's efficacy for cycling/swimming/running performance.

 

Here's the short answer. It's never going to be better than swimming/cycling/running training. Injury prevention benefits are mostly a myth. There is some potential benefit for running, and SFA for endurance cycling and swimming.

 

The balance of evidence for cycling is equivocal (i.e. not much of a compelling argument other than for track sprint / BMX cycling) while there is some supporting evidence for running (which is not surprising due to the different nature of the forces involved being both concentric and eccentric muscle contractions whereas cycling and swimming are confined to concentric). In swimming the data is significantly less and fairly equivocal for endurance swimming while some studies report benefits for short swimming events (e.g. 50m, which is akin to physiological demands of longer track cycling sprint events like the kilo TT and Kieren), there are also contradictory results.

 

The non-strength work as described above (big gear efforts / paddles / hills etc) are pretty much just a coaching ruse to do some quality endurance power efforts - give the athlete something else to focus on while working hard - but there is little if any benefit over simply doing the same work/intensity mix normally.

 

As for actual strength training, again the benefits to endurance performance are pretty marginal if at all (and running has the best supporting evidence) but in some cases it's detrimental, so do it if:

(i) you enjoy it because life, and

(ii) your personal priorities include things other than just endurance athletic performance because life.

 

As always, YMMV (IOW every individual is different).

we were trying not to upset the beliefs of the strength advocates.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe there is a very important factor and that is the age of the athlete.

Males loose muscle volume with age and strength /weight training becomes more important with age to maintain muscle mass in order to reduce or slowdown deterioration in performance,

May be when you're under 30 weights may be unnecessary but over 30 weight lifting would maintain muscle volume.

 

Well there is some element of truth in that, but in reality all that is needed is to stay active (use it or lose it).

 

Muscle mass of fit ageing triathletes is pretty darn good. Keeping up some jogging or running if your knees are up for it (at least modestly brisk walking) is great for bone mineral density, much better that doing weights ever would be. The bigger risk with age is falling BMD and the risk of fractures when one falls over.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As running is done one leg at time, with core activated as the platform for rotation, is this not a fine way to build specific strength/endurance in those muscles with specific activation.

If by specific activation you mean just running, maybe not. Your thought is incorrectly based on the assumption you are doing that activity in the most efficient way to start with and with gradual overload you should always adapt correctly. This is not the case.

As an example.

In regards to running being single leg movement, runners (new and old) often end up with ITB issues. A well studies remedy is to have those runners complete a 6 week program of single legs squats to specifically strengthen the glute med, piriformis etc. If done a certain way it also has the secondary benefit of correct activation sequences and stability. From memory this exercise alone has resolved ITB issues in greater than 75% of ITB cases in established runners. Holding correct form longer through some ancillary conditioning (not strength, or work designed to hypertrophy) work is always beneficial.

 

Now the more learned people on here may argue what is described above is not strength training by the traditional meaning which is usually defined as the 1 rep max ability. In that case don't waste your time :) Edit: Looks like Alex got ahead of me.

Edited by thekeeper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If by specific activation you mean just running, maybe not. Your thought is incorrectly based on the assumption you are doing that activity in the most efficient way to start with and with gradual overload you should always adapt correctly. This is not the case.

As an example.

In regards to running being single leg movement, runners (new and old) often end up with ITB issues. A well studies remedy is to have those runners complete a 6 week program of single legs squats to specifically strengthen the glute med, piriformis etc. If done a certain way it also has the secondary benefit of correct activation sequences and stability. From memory this exercise alone has resolved ITB issues in greater than 75% of ITB cases in established runners. Holding correct form longer through some ancillary conditioning (not strength, or work designed to hypertrophy) work is always beneficial.

 

Now the more learned people on here may argue what is described above is not strength training by the traditional meaning which is usually defined as the 1 rep max ability. In that case don't waste your time :) Edit: Looks like Alex got ahead of me.

Most runners get ITB because they run too much to intensely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason I do S&C work is to maintain my ability to actually train, which is how I improve and what I enjoy doing.

If I am injured due to age-related weaknesses and/or imbalances that can be addressed by S&C, then I won't be able to put the training work in to chase my performance goals.

I don't do S&C work directly to improve...plyos being one exception.

The reason I do S&C work is to maintain my ability to actually train, which is how I improve and what I enjoy doing.

If I am injured due to age-related weaknesses and/or imbalances that can be addressed by S&C, then I won't be able to put the training work in to chase my performance goals.

I don't do S&C work directly to improve...plyos being one exception.

Well said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If by specific activation you mean just running, maybe not. Your thought is incorrectly based on the assumption you are doing that activity in the most efficient way to start with and with gradual overload you should always adapt correctly. This is not the case.

As an example.

In regards to running being single leg movement, runners (new and old) often end up with ITB issues. A well studies remedy is to have those runners complete a 6 week program of single legs squats to specifically strengthen the glute med, piriformis etc. If done a certain way it also has the secondary benefit of correct activation sequences and stability. From memory this exercise alone has resolved ITB issues in greater than 75% of ITB cases in established runners. Holding correct form longer through some ancillary conditioning (not strength, or work designed to hypertrophy) work is always beneficial.

 

Now the more learned people on here may argue what is described above is not strength training by the traditional meaning which is usually defined as the 1 rep max ability. In that case don't waste your time :) Edit: Looks like Alex got ahead of me.

But looking at the theory:

 

strengthening of glute med and the other parts of the body through single leg squats makes the body less prone to ITB issues.

 

If I run and don't do these exercises I should be more prone to ITB issues?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if it helps SBR or not. Apparently not. But I reckon you do look a lot better if you incorporate some lifting.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that any response to this needs to be backed up with research papers and more importantly a University Degree (as AH pointed out). ð

 

You can look at many aspects and daily routines we do in life and then ask yourself are they going to help me SBR.

Examples

- sitting in office chair

- eating shit

- drinking alcohol

- not getting enough sleep

- stress

- driving using your mobile phone

 

None of the above help with performance or help with maintining body capable of achieving goals related to SBR where as some form of STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING/BODY MAINTENANCE will provide a positive rather than negative effect both physically and mentally.

 

The originally post was strength work and lifting does it benefit SBR. So far it has created debate.

I have overseen and worked with running/cycling based athletes at a high performance centre which screens athlete corrects their dysfunctions etc. Puts them through fitness testing every 3 months over the year and each time the athletes improve.

 

As Alex Simmons said what work for you. The question is are you going to let it work for you or through stubborn just disrespect it.

Do we need the research papers to decide for us or just test the waters for yourself and find out.

 

From my experience it sometimes can only take one incident to unravel a lot of years of accummalated kilometres of SBR to go disappear.

One crash and one infection can cause many issues.

 

Also the little niggle you thought you could train through can sometimes develop in compensation issues and dysfunction.

 

This is my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×