Weight and the "cycling paradox"

[fiamme red]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/health/nutrition/17essa.html?_r=2&ref=science&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[Steve Hampsten]

I can slay Andy on descents - except for the bike handling thing, of course.

[RPS]

Lets see: As we get older we might lose 10% aerobic capacity and gain 10% weight during the same period, making us about 20% slower during a run. Let’s face it, going from running 8-minute miles to something like 10-minute miles is definitely noticeable.

On a bike, that same 10% reduction in aerobic capacity coupled with 10% weight gain would slow most of us down something like 3 to 4 percent on the flats – hardly earth shattering. By taking shorter pulls or skipping them altogether we’d be filling pretty good about ourselves while riding alongside those skinny young guys.

At least until that big climb comes up. At that point we’d be just like runners – instead of 3 or 4 percent slower it’s suddenly 20 percent. Maybe that explains why so many of us who have gained a few pounds over the years feel like we can’t climb like we use to. On the other hand a new 12-pound bike with light wheels may fix the paradox. Or not. :crap:

[benb]

Since when is gaining weight as you age a given? Sounds like the US "diet and give us money" industry talking.

I thought the article was a bit odd, and maybe sounded like it was written by someone who is looking at cycling from the inside out. Most of the people on the tour who the author thought were heavier were probably just not putting in the same miles or following the same exercise/diet program that the more fit ones were.

Cycling and running both select for lower body fat as you move up the competitive ladder.. it's hard for me to see the difference.

[dauwhe]

If I had a dollar for every time I was passed on a climb by some guy with a beer belly...

[PeterW]

The article was the stupidest thing I've seen in the NYT since the drive to war.

[benb]

edit: Oops, think I missed some sarcasm.

[RPS]

Cycling and running both select for lower body fat as you move up the competitive ladder.. it's hard for me to see the difference.Yes, in competition you are absolutely right. But unlike a runner, a cyclist’s weight on the flats is carried by bearings, not his legs.

For everyday people a person who is 10% too heavy and 10% underpowered relative to a friend can still hang on a flat course by drafting. In running if you gain 10% weight and lose 10% aerobic capacity you won’t stay with the same group.

I hear so many riders say stuff like “I’m almost 100 percent back but still can’t climb”, or something to that effect. And all I’m saying is that if we use how we ride on the flats as a measure of how fit we are, we may be fooling ourselves big time. In my example above if we can ride a flat time trial at 96 to 97 percent of our best speed, does that make us 96 or 97 percent as fit as we use to be? Or are we still about 20 percent from our peak?

[benb]

I guess that perspective would depend on where you live and what kind of rides are available.

Most of my experience has been in hilly enough areas where you're dropped when you're in that 90% range but not fully back. But I guess if you live in a flatter area you're right.

But in any case the difference would be even greater... since you're saving 30% or more when you're just hanging in on the flats. The guy who is carrying weight is just delusional if he thinks he's actually OK and not just going along for the ride in the draft.

Cycling just isn't a flatland sport most of the time IMO though. You could convince me running is most of the time though.

[Bart001]

If I had a dollar for every time I was passed on a climb by some guy with a beer belly...

I've been working all season to keep up with the guy who had a heart attack in 2006!

I'm not kidding!

[dauwhe]

I've been working all season to keep up with the guy who had a heart attack in 2006!

I'm not kidding!

A guy who had heart surgery in 2006 finished almost an hour ahead of me in the 400k this year... and I beat my previous best time by 2 hours!

Dave

[RPS]

If I had a dollar for every time I was passed on a climb by some guy with a beer belly...Thus far I don't recall it ever happening. But that may just be selective memory.

[Bittersweet]

Comparing yourselves to others with beer guts, had heart attacks, etc isn't the point. They're not you.

Ride a lot but eat like a horse and see how fast YOU go. Ride a lot but eat like a squirrel and see how fast YOU go. Squirrel is always faster but the lifestyle isn't as enjoyable. Getting skinny is the cheapest and most effective way to go faster out there but rarely practiced by the average recreational cyclist no matter what age.

[swoop]

this is oftentimes what sucks about flat 60 minute crits with negative racing.. that the guys who put a lot of time into being fit end up essentially racing 300 meters against fat guys who have power but no fitness.
its why i prefer technical crits with lots of turns that require accellerations, or crits with hills in them, or breakaways that require that everyone bury themselves for more than half an hour (because it weeds them out and breaks their legs).

and then there is gibby hatton. the most winning american to race pro keirin in japan. he looks like he ate a football team.. but he can beat every single person on this forum, currently pro or not, in the last two hundred meters of a flat crit/sprint and he can put that fat a88 through the tiniest of openings... its a vision to behold. this dude is a living legend.

he puts out more power than any human i've ever seen and its on a *gasp* ti bike. scary.

[saab2000]

this is oftentimes what sucks about flat 60 minute crits with negative racing.. that the guys who put a lot of time into being fit end up essentially racing 300 meters against fat guys who have power but no fitness.
its why i prefer technical crits with lots of turns that require accellerations, or crits with hills in them, or breakaways that require that everyone bury themselves for more than half an hour (because it weeds them out and breaks their legs).

and then there is gibby hatton. the most winning american to race pro keirin in japan. he looks like he ate a football team.. but he can beat every single person on this forum, currently pro or not, in the last two hundred meters of a flat crit/sprint and he can put that fat a88 through the tiniest of openings... its a vision to behold. this dude is a living legend.

he puts out more power than any human i've ever seen and its on a *gasp* ti bike. scary.

That's why some guys liked hilly, windy, rainy races when they were racing in the '80s and early '90s..... :D

SELECTION!!! is what it's all about. No selection because the course is easy? Don't even bother to show up.

Of course, Swiss races are the extreme in this sense. As often as not, 20 riders finished. Out of 200 starters. I was as often as not watching the finish from the sideloins. Pi$$ed off!! Or at home watching F1 by the time the bike race finished!!

BTW, you bring all the living legends here! Thurlow Rogers and now Gibby Hatton? Holy Smokes! That dude is HUGE!! But I know he made a couple bucks racing in Japan in his day!

Cool!!!

[swoop]

its the best part of masters out here. there's some inspiring dudes killing it.

[saab2000]

I do want to race again while the racing is still fast. I know I can hang with the 1/2/pros if I lose the weight. The lungs are still there. I can hang with the fast dudes here in Washington enough to know that I am only 20 lbs away from riding away from them.

Raced too long at that level to just let it drop off a cliff like it did.

Haven't raced in a sanctioned race in 10 years...... Last one was in Affoltern am Albis, in Switzerland. Finished a bada$$ criterium.....

Then got a real job and never entered another race. No decision as such, but life got in the way....... :crap: I miss seeing that lap card with 6 laps to go and in the front group... and hearing the bell lap!!!

Would kill to do Philly again...... On my terms, not the terms of what happened in my life in 1991. :no: :( :mad:

[stevep]

i think all the excess weight on rasmussen is slowing him down.

gibby hatton...if i recall...beat guissepe saronni in the world championships as a jr...a long time ago. in the sprint i thk.

[Ginger]

I do want to race again while the racing is still fast. I know I can hang with the 1/2/pros if I lose the weight. The lungs are still there. I can hang with the fast dudes here in Washington enough to know that I am only 20 lbs away from riding away from them.

Raced too long at that level to just let it drop off a cliff like it did.

Haven't raced in a sanctioned race in 10 years...... Last one was in Affoltern am Albis, in Switzerland. Finished a bada$$ criterium.....

Then got a real job and never entered another race. No decision as such, but life got in the way....... :crap: I miss seeing that lap card with 6 laps to go and in the front group... and hearing the bell lap!!!

Would kill to do Philly again...... On my terms, not the terms of what happened in my life in 1991. :no: :( :mad:

Saab Honey...you just moved to Michigan. You're golden. :)

[saab2000]

Saab Honey...you just moved to Michigan. You're golden. :)

Haven't moved there yet! Tomorrow is the inspection and the Radon test.

Gotta love that decaying Uranium... :beer:

I'm gonna open up a Unanium Mine under my house!!

[Bud_E]

South Bay Wheelmen - my old club.

[Fivethumbs]

Kinda like the Charles Barkley of cycling.

[DukeHorn]

I think it's pretty well-documented that as you age and your metabolism slows that people will gain weight.

Supposedly you have to add mileage, or do considerable more cross-training to keep the same "figure".

It's like watching the Clydesdales in triathlons or adventure races, yep they tend to keep up on the cycles but drop off on the runs/swims. After years of playing competitive Ultimate and being dismissive of "bigger" folks (ie there are none), it is surprising (to me) that the same body type can and do crush me at cycling. I think that was the general gist of the article.

[jeffg]

I think it's pretty well-documented that as you age and your metabolism slows that people will gain weight.

Supposedly you have to add mileage, or do considerable more cross-training to keep the same "figure".

It's like watching the Clydesdales in triathlons or adventure races, yep they tend to keep up on the cycles but drop off on the runs/swims. After years of playing competitive Ultimate and being dismissive of "bigger" folks (ie there are none), it is surprising (to me) that the same body type can and do crush me at cycling. I think that was the general gist of the article.

I agree that weight is not so critical on the flats, although a fit rider in terms of watts/aero will still win.

Ride anything with signficant climbing and the picture changes dramatically. This "heavier riders are faster downhill" only works perhaps straight downhill with no curves. I was just watching a DVD where Virenque drops Axel M. and then the skinny doper increases his lead on the descent! Skillz yo

All I can say is that I am about 2 minutes slower for a 3.3 mile, 7.2% climb than I was when I was 15-20 lbs lighter. My rough guess is that the watts are similar, but every 5 lbs costs me 30 seconds or so on the climb. Anyone have a means of quantifying that (other than buying an SRM?)

The interesting thing is that my time for a 140km ride with 4300m (14,000+ feet) of climbing this year was the same (or even a few minutes faster) than when I was back in professional school and I was much lighter then but was just getting back into cycling. Both times are an hour off my PR, but that was two years ago when I was a more experienced cyclist + leaner. I wonder how to measure factors like increased pedaling efficiency in this equation ...

[keno]

http://www.analyticcycling.com/ has tools that may get you your answer.

keno

[Russell]

If I had a dollar for every time I was passed on a climb by some guy with a beer belly...

...I could afford an Ottrott

[Ginger]

I think Andy nailed it in the article. Yes. Some has to do with weight, but quite a bit has to do with technique.

When I tour there's always a batch of hugely overweight people (not limiting that to guys, and I'm talking 50lbs more overweight than I am...) who kill me on the climbs, they have very efficient technique. But I can coast past them on descents...weight has something to do with how fast you go downhill, but technique and wheel bearing quality/maintenance has something to do with it too. At least, that's the only theory I've come up lately.

[theprep]

Saab and Swoop - you guys sound gifted with big aerobic engines and break away speed. I certainly can understand how it might be frustrating to do a ton of work in a race and then have weaker guys win the sprint.

Just consider the fact that some of us 300 meter guys are just racing our strengths. I don't have one slow twitch muscle fiber in my being and the longest I have ever lasted in a break was 2 miles. I love cycling and racing, even though I don't have one bit of natural ability, I keep doing it.

I have taken money from guys I know are stronger than me, but I am just racing my strengths.

It is all good I think.

Joe

[swoop]

Saab and Swoop - you guys sound gifted with big aerobic engines and break away speed. I certainly can understand how it might be frustrating to do a ton of work in a race and then have weaker guys win the sprint.

Just consider the fact that some of us 300 meter guys are just racing our strengths. I don't have one slow twitch muscle fiber in my being and the longest I have ever lasted in a break was 2 miles. I love cycling and racing, even though I don't have one bit of natural ability, I keep doing it.

I have taken money from guys I know are stronger than me, but I am just racing my strengths.

It is all good I think.

Joe
it is all good!

[RPS]

I think Andy nailed it in the article. Yes. Some has to do with weight, but quite a bit has to do with technique.

When I tour there's always a batch of hugely overweight people (not limiting that to guys, and I'm talking 50lbs more overweight than I am...) who kill me on the climbs, they have very efficient technique. But I can coast past them on descents...weight has something to do with how fast you go downhill, but technique and wheel bearing quality/maintenance has something to do with it too. At least, that's the only theory I've come up lately.Technique is important, but we shouldn't forget that in the general population (not just within elite cyclists) there is great variation in the size of our aerobic engines. It’s not unusual to find people with VO2 ranges of say 35 to 70 (if they were fit and trained), which more than explains why a guy/gal with an extra 50 pounds of weight may be able to smoke a naturally-less-gifted rider on a climb. A naturally gifted rider would have to carry an entire extra person up a climb to equal some at the bottom of the VO2 bell curve.

Granted descending is about skill, but from a simplistic viewpoint, bearings have a very minor affect on terminal speed – I’d say insignificant unless they are bad. Rolling resistance is low in general, and wheel bearings are a small part of that. In addition, as a bike goes 40 to 50 MPH or faster down a pass, the wind drag is so much higher than rolling resistance that bearings are just not much of an issue by comparison.

Heavier people in general have less drag per unit mass, so they tend to have higher terminal velocity if they tuck as tight. However, not all riders tuck as efficiently, and not all riders can possibly have equal (or even similar) coefficients of drag. IMHO not all humans are shaped similarly, so we can’t possibly cut through the wind the same.

[fiamme red]

When I tour there's always a batch of hugely overweight people (not limiting that to guys, and I'm talking 50lbs more overweight than I am...) who kill me on the climbs, they have very efficient technique. But I can coast past them on descents...weight has something to do with how fast you go downhill, but technique and wheel bearing quality/maintenance has something to do with it too. At least, that's the only theory I've come up lately.I doubt that it has to do with bearings. More likely it's because they brake on the downhills more than you do, or because you get into an aerodynamic tuck and they sit more upright.

[Firenze]

The article made sense to me. I am a Clydesdales! I am 59 years old and returned to cycling last fall. 9 months ago I was 290 pounds and averaged 11 mph for the 10 miles or so that I could ride. Now I am 255 pounds and just averaged 15 mph for the back to back centuries of the STP. I still get killed on anything that even resembles a hill. I average 17 mph on the flats (22 drafting a tandem, what fun) and pass nearly everyone on the descents. I do not and have not raced so I am talking about recreational riding here. I can’t imagine that I could have made anything like this level of progress running.

My opinion, conditioning counts but weight is the key factor in climbing. I usually ride alone since I hate having people wait at the top for me. My goal, get fast enough on the climbs that I can start riding with a group.

Arch

[RPS]

...snipped....I can’t imagine that I could have made anything like this level of progress running.

My opinion, conditioning counts but weight is the key factor in climbing. ...snipped....IMO if you could avoid injuries, running will get you fit and thinner much faster. Large guys don't take the pounding of running well -- it's hard on small guys too.

Climbing is not about weight, but power-to-weight. It turns out that in "general", smaller people have more power per unit weight. When was the last time we saw a 200-pound guy win a Tour climb?