Jump to content
japay1

Any benefit from strength work/lifting

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, The Customer said:

I know it's a funny pic, but imagine holding this for 10, 21 or 42 km off the bike ... Set your posture tall. 

I don't think anyone is advocating *that* much of a forward lean. Just a little while "standing tall"

1 hour ago, BarryBevan said:

...At the time I did those weights and I never missed them as I enjoyed the lifting, I got my one and only stress fracture and a number of other overuse injuries.

... worst aspect was it leaves muscles fried for days meaning you are not recovered enough to execute SBR specific and if you go real hard the muscles ironically don't support you when doing SBR and you can get injured

^^^ this too...  I got my one and only stressie (sacrum) while running around 50km a week but doing weights/strength/stability/conditioning (don't understand the difference really) sessions that I was not recovering from. Too much fast stuff on DOMS.

But... I still believe I need to do weights/strength/stability/conditioning sessions, but struggling to find where. Not mid season ( but it's always mid season as running is my love in winter)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, FatPom said:

What does ‘80% 1RM ‘ mean?

1RM is 1 rep max.

You're doing 10 reps at 90 kg, but have you ever tried to see just how heavy you can go for a single?

if its ~110 you're at around the right weight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

90 kg on leg press the shame

Judging by the amount I have to raise the peg following the previous folks, it would seem so. :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tyno said:

1RM is 1 rep max.

You're doing 10 reps at 90 kg, but have you ever tried to see just how heavy you can go for a single?

if its ~110 you're at around the right weight.

 

 

Cheers Tyno. I haven’t tried that, too scared to find out now! Haha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 RM as stated is the most you can lift once. If you are lifting less than 70% of this you are not training strength. I wouldn't advocate testing 1RMs unless you have some background behind you. as long as you are doing sets of between 4-10 reps you should be in the right sort of range. If you can do 10 reps and it feels really easy then you probably need to bump the weight up a bit. For safety keep it so you could lift another 2 reps if you had to. 

BF and BB present interesting anecdotal cases. Out of interest, in the 3 months before your stress fracture was diagnosed, did your weight training/conditioning routine change? What about running volume?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Parkside said:

1 RM as stated is the most you can lift once. If you are lifting less than 70% of this you are not training strength. I wouldn't advocate testing 1RMs unless you have some background behind you. as long as you are doing sets of between 4-10 reps you should be in the right sort of range. If you can do 10 reps and it feels really easy then you probably need to bump the weight up a bit. For safety keep it so you could lift another 2 reps if you had to. 

BF and BB present interesting anecdotal cases. Out of interest, in the 3 months before your stress fracture was diagnosed, did your weight training/conditioning routine change? What about running volume?

Three months before was doing the same running volume. It was around the time the newton craze and move to neutral and minimal running shoes. I changed from a Gel Kayano to more minimalist shoe, alos focussed on run technique, trying to run mid foot emphasis, bam stress fracture. Weights in no way caused that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Parkside said:

BF and BB present interesting anecdotal cases. Out of interest, in the 3 months before your stress fracture was diagnosed, did your weight training/conditioning routine change? What about running volume?

Running volume was the same. I think the "conditioning" training probably started 3-6months prior, but I'll check tomorrow when on PC.

I was doing stability work and sets of 3x10 (not strength, so what is that called?) I got DOMS after every session (that would last 4 days due to training on top of it), but felt fine while doing the set. After 4 weeks of doing the set, the body would adapt and DOMS would disappear, but then I'd have a race and drop the set. Then back to it 3 weeks later and in the same roundabout. Apparently I'm odd

Edited by BogFrog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sets of 10 reps is just above the true strengthening threshold. That amount of DOMS is certainly excessive. One bout of DOMS is supposed to be protective for the next month so one or two sessions should be it usually, then a 3 week layoff should still not produce the same level of DOMs. Sounds odd. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tyno said:

1RM is 1 rep max.

You're doing 10 reps at 90 kg, but have you ever tried to see just how heavy you can go for a single?

if its ~110 you're at around the right weight.

 

 

Is that one leg?  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Parkside said:

Sets of 10 reps is just above the true strengthening threshold. That amount of DOMS is certainly excessive. One bout of DOMS is supposed to be protective for the next month so one or two sessions should be it usually, then a 3 week layoff should still not produce the same level of DOMs. Sounds odd. 

So if sets of 10 reps are above strengthening threshold, what are they considered to be?  A conditioning program?  Stability?  

(btw. confirmed that stressie happened within 3 months of starting this "weights/conditioning" program.  Started in Jan, stressie in March. Been told by the physio/coach that my body reacts differently to these sessions that anyone else he has worked with. Form has been checked and rechecked and isn't the issue...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, BogFrog said:

I thought the slight forward lean from the ankles was universally acknowledged as most ecconomical? I've been hearing this for years. You have another opinion I take it?

This is right - you have to lean into the run from the ankles so that your foot strike is not too far in front of you - your posture is tall and your core engaged while you have the slight forward lean from the ankles

If you have some video you from the front when you run towards them, you should not be able to see the soles of your shoes - if you can see them, you're most likely overstriding and the most likely cause of that is leaning back

When you run on a treadmill you should run at 1-2% grade which naturally puts you into the slightly forward position encouraging you to place your foot right below your pelvis, rather than in front of it 😎 this foot placement is the most efficient whether you're running 3min kms or 6min kms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BogFrog said:

So if sets of 10 reps are above strengthening threshold, what are they considered to be?  A conditioning program?  Stability?  

(btw. confirmed that stressie happened within 3 months of starting this "weights/conditioning" program.  Started in Jan, stressie in March. Been told by the physio/coach that my body reacts differently to these sessions that anyone else he has worked with. Form has been checked and rechecked and isn't the issue...)

70% of 1RM is minimum for strength adaptation. Sets of 10 equates to just over 70% for most people. This is strength training, ie you are above the the 70% threshold required to get strength adaptation.

Edited by Parkside

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/05/2018 at 1:03 PM, BogFrog said:

Thanks Parkside. Question... it's proven to reduce injuries, but how if it isn't affecting kinematics (if I understand the definition correctly)?  I can see how forward lean / push hips forward etc can be fixed with a mirror, but I keep going back to the same example of runners with a hip splaying - no amount of mirror / smartphone etc would fix that - it's often glute med weakness ?? Thanks

https://www.jospt.org/doi/pdfplus/10.2519/jospt.2011.3470

Strength exs for hips changed single leg squat but not running mechanics

https://www.clinbiomech.com/article/S0268-0033(12)00159-3/fulltext

Mirror training changed running gait at 3 month follow up in women with patellofemoral pain 

Quote

Gait retraining in female runners with PFP, using a full-length mirror, resulted in significant improvements in pain, function, and abnormal mechanics from their baseline measures. The new movement skill transferred to the untrained tasks of single leg squat and step descent, thus indicating acquisition of a new motor skill. Reductions in pain, function, and mechanics were generally maintained through 3 months, suggesting potential for long term changes. The results of this study are promising, as this technique requires only a treadmill and a fulllength mirror. Further study is necessary to determine the long term efficacy of this treatment technique.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, BarryBevan said:

Taking studies out of it, as this thread will become very long when we start picking studies as there is a study to support almost any hypothesis.

While that's true, Parkside was at least referring to a meta study - a study of all studies such that we can reasonably assess average impacts of a given intervention and as such the findings are based on all the available relevant research that meets at least a minimum level of research quality. Using systematic studies means the cherry picking is kind of dealt with (although still easy to do). even so when an effect size is clear you still need to account for individual variability when applying such strategies.

The  problem is none of the specific research included in the meta study was directly relevant to triathlon (or S B R) because there is no published research meeting the quality standards addressing the question for these exercise modalities. Extending this to SBR requires a leap of faith, which is easier if the actual causes of injury reduction are understood beyond correlations.

Hence the lack of evidence means it's an area where belief based approaches tend to rule the roost. It may be that they turn out to be correct, or maybe not. It's just not really possible for any individual or individual coach to make such assessments free from bias.

Which is why I'm in the camp of it may well work as it does for some other sports but the evidence just isn't there to really demonstrate one way or another a clear effect for SBR and triathlon. As research and evidence emerges, then so will my views be shaped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Study of all studies possible maybe with big data but study of all studies.

no one is saying don’t do weights go crazy it can be fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Customer said:

#becauseeverythingoninstagramisreal

She's most likely waiting for a treadmill to become available.

Preparing for one legged squats. Okay time to flip this. If weights are so good for sbr where are all the sub 20 5 k body builders and cyclists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Preparing for one legged squats. Okay time to flip this. If weights are so good for sbr where are all the sub 20 5 k body builders and cyclists

That is like saying where are all the triathlete, running people doing body builder comps.   You probably actually see more body builders run then you do triathlete entering body building comps.  

In endurance world strength training supplements what is referred as Cardio vascular exercise.

In the body building world cardio supplements their wieghts program (in relation to getting leaner)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other issue is individual variations in response, as for most physical training modalities. Findings for these sort of studies usually show a spread of responses, some people respond much better than others. With enough subjects a statistically significant result can show up. Like all training it works really poorly for some, really well for some  and moderately well for most. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, BarryBevan said:

Preparing for one legged squats. Okay time to flip this. If weights are so good for sbr where are all the sub 20 5 k body builders and cyclists

Image result for arnold schwarzenegger bicycle

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Fitness Buddy said:

That is like saying where are all the triathlete, running people doing body builder comps.   You probably actually see more body builders run then you do triathlete entering body building comps.  

In endurance world strength training supplements what is referred as Cardio vascular exercise.

In the body building world cardio supplements their wieghts program (in relation to getting leaner)

 

absolutely correct. Now go to your local park run, what do all the top 5 sub 1730 people look like

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

Image result for arnold schwarzenegger bicycle

I can'r see it did he break 1 hour for 40 k TT. Remember on this place a few years ago, you were a loser for not going under 50 minutes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Parkside said:

70% of 1RM is minimum for strength adaptation. Sets of 10 equates to just over 70% for most people. This is strength training, ie you are above the the 70% threshold required to get strength adaptation.

So is there any benefit to doing reps of less than 70%?  Logically there would seem to be some benefit, perhaps just not with an emphasis on 'strength'.

I do lots of repetitions of lower weights (reps of between 15-20 before failure) and seem to have toned up OK for an old bloke. I feel way stronger than I did when training for triathlon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BarryBevan said:

absolutely correct. Now go to your local park run, what do all the top 5 sub 1730 people look like

 

2 hours ago, BarryBevan said:

I can'r see it did he break 1 hour for 40 k TT. Remember on this place a few years ago, you were a loser for not going under 50 minutes

Now hands up please all the people on here that can, or ever could do those 2 things. This shouldn't take too long.

 

The OP asked if anyone had gained any benefits. By that, he probably meant had anybody improved from MoP to slightly ahead of MoP, not FoP to even further FoP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

 

Now hands up please all the people on here that can, or ever could do those 2 things. This shouldn't take too long.

 

The OP asked if anyone had gained any benefits. By that, he probably meant had anybody improved from MoP to slightly ahead of MoP, not FoP to even further FoP.

The context is getting lost a bit with all the responses and people who just want us all to do weights. If you like it knock yourself out. If you want to improve at biking or running go bike and run.

Running sub 1730 is/was hard and no weights were done, we were just skinny kids running for soccer. Sub 50 for TT was for a laugh as Jimmy C thought this was something we should all do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best I ever got to, was under Col Stewart. Gym sessions twice a week to complement the plenty of SBR. He did pretty well with a few of his charges.

But never got near 50min sorry. :)

Edited by Ex-Hasbeen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn’t that long ago that sub 50 would have netted a Nat Record. Qualy times for Nats are 52s and the standard is very high. I doubt anyone on this board is or has ever been within cooee of sub 50. Best I ever did was a high 57 and that’s so slow nowadays that it won’t even get you an invite to a regional open.

The difference between 55 and 52 is incomprehensible to most unless you are a serious tester.

Edited by FatPom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back in 99 one of the girls I coached was a QAS athlete - she could use their gym anytime as long as her coach was with her, so three times a week we did a gym session in addition to our normal SBR training 

It was only a 1hr session of 8 exercises -- we did a 12 week program -- 1st 4 weeks it was 3 sets of 12-15reps of each exercise for conditioning ----- 2nd 4 week block we increased weights with each set so it went 12-15 --- more weight 7-8 -- more weight 2-3 reps for pure strength ----- 3rd 4 week block was strength endurance warm up with 12-15 reps - then remove some weight and do one set of 45-50 (this is hard)

After that 12 week block she raced the Australian champs at Mooloolaba and won the elite juniors wave by 2min against girls who had been regularly beating her earlier in the year -- a month later I raced Hawaii and did the fastest time I'd ever done on that course and ran my fastest ever IM marathon

It was only a study of two athletes a 21yr old and a 51yr old but the results were more than we could have dreamed of 😎 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was just listening to Brad Beer interviewing Deek this morning - regarding a question on strength training, Deek said something along the lines of “running hills was my strength training”.

His 2:07 at Boston is still the fastest marathon time by an Aussie...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, trilobite said:

Was just listening to Brad Beer interviewing Deek this morning - regarding a question on strength training, Deek said something along the lines of “running hills was my strength training”.

His 2:07 at Boston is still the fastest marathon time by an Aussie...

Deek didnt use a garmin either so maybe should get rid of them too.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AP said:

Back in 99 one of the girls I coached was a QAS athlete - she could use their gym anytime as long as her coach was with her, so three times a week we did a gym session in addition to our normal SBR training 

It was only a 1hr session of 8 exercises -- we did a 12 week program -- 1st 4 weeks it was 3 sets of 12-15reps of each exercise for conditioning ----- 2nd 4 week block we increased weights with each set so it went 12-15 --- more weight 7-8 -- more weight 2-3 reps for pure strength ----- 3rd 4 week block was strength endurance warm up with 12-15 reps - then remove some weight and do one set of 45-50 (this is hard)

After that 12 week block she raced the Australian champs at Mooloolaba and won the elite juniors wave by 2min against girls who had been regularly beating her earlier in the year -- a month later I raced Hawaii and did the fastest time I'd ever done on that course and ran my fastest ever IM marathon

It was only a study of two athletes a 21yr old and a 51yr old but the results were more than we could have dreamed of 😎 

Amazing and great application in programming. 

 

Same with a young tennis player i work with she now can last 2-3 day tournaments against the older girls. More tennis would not give her this it woukd actually create burn out.  Great her coach realised that. 

Edited by Fitness Buddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fitness Buddy said:

Deek didnt use a garmin either so maybe should get rid of them too.  

He did, however, say that the thing that attracted him to running (probably more so than “being out there running”) was how measurable improvements were...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, trilobite said:

He did, however, say that the thing that attracted him to running (probably more so than “being out there running”) was how measurable improvements were...

So a garmin is the only way to measure improvement.

I looked at his finish pic no watch.  

Edited by Fitness Buddy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Fitness Buddy said:

So a garmin is the only way to measure improvement.

I looked at his finish pic no watch.  

A Garmin (or many other GPS devices) is obviously a convenient way to track your progress.

But of course there are plenty of other (some might say “time honoured”) ways to measure if, and by how much, you are improving your run, bike or other activity.

For what it’s worth, Deek also expressed disappointment that no Aussies have gone faster than him in the marathon in ~30 years. I don’t recall that he suggested Garmins were to blame.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fitness Buddy said:

So a garmin is the only way to measure improvement.

I looked at his finish pic no watch.  

Apart from the massive clock on the roof of the car he was following.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest FFF1077
1 hour ago, Bored@work said:

Apart from the massive clock on the roof of the car he was following.

Give Deeks a break. Technology wasn't as small or easily carried back then.... Geez 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, batman said:

Deek didn’t always need a toilet!

After an interview I heard with Deek, I never used a sponge in a race again

I used to get a gagging sensation when I'd see someone sucking water out of them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fitness Buddy said:

So a garmin is the only way to measure improvement.

I looked at his finish pic no watch.  

Quite often a garmin is used to measure time, distance and thereby pace. 

You map ur run distances. And know the times it takes us to run them. Thereby pace.

I imagine you might track ur progress by recording or remembering these things? 

What's the difference? 

What is it about Garmins specifically you dont agree with? Perhaps be more specific with the specific facets of a Garmin

 

Edited by Turts
Typo and addition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Turts said:

Quite often a garmin is used to measure time, distance and thereby pace. 

You may ur dun distances. And know the times it takes us to run them. Thereby pace.

I imagine you might track ur progress by recording or remembering these things? 

What's the difference? 

 

 

A Garmin is convenient???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Ex-Hasbeen said:

The best I ever got to, was under Col Stewart. Gym sessions twice a week to complement the plenty of SBR. He did pretty well with a few of his charges.

But never got near 50min sorry. :)

Those charges would have done well regardless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...