🍿🥤🍿 Spot the differences 😁

I just came across this interesting article on bicycling.com

There are quite a few statements there that puzzled me, to say the least! Do you guys agree with what is said there?

Behind a paywall…


:exploding_head: Its not for me.

Mine comes up as “Exclusive for Bicycling Members”. :man_shrugging:


It must be a geographical thing :neutral_face:

It opens fine for me here in the uk.

Yup…fired up the VPN, choose the UK and the article is now available.


So back OT, the biggest issue I see is the idea that standing while climbing, especially on lower-grades, is somehow beneficial to heavier riders. Sure, maybe for a few strokes the extra weight will help, but you will also quickly fatigue…and standing on lower-grades bring aerodynamics into play. If you are going to stand, stand on the steeper sections, IMO.


I agree, if you try to punch over and add extra power, you’re a goner.

I’m not sure there’s anything useful in this article.

As a heavier rider, can confirm.


Hmm, no problem reading without VPN from the west coast.

Which statements puzzled you? The article had comments from 3 coaches, but overall disappointing. I’m larger, not as heavy as the author but might be riding with him up long climbs (although 340W is something I can hit for only 3 minutes, not 10 or 20).

His point is that preparation for tough climbs comes down to:

  • off the bike training
  • mindset
  • on the bike execution

On the first point, as written I’m not in complete agreement with Coach Sandberg on strength/core training (low weight, high reps). But the overall point that muscle imbalances need to be addressed off the bike, particularly for those of us that sit all day, that is totally on point.

On the second point, I agree with Coach Gallagher that you need to embrace suffering.

On the third point, Coach Rutberg makes good points in the first two paragraphs (proper pacing), but standing vs seated is more personal. For myself - its more efficient and sustainable to climb seated. If getting bogged down by a 15+% kicker, I will briefly stand to overcome slowing down and regain momentum.

Why is this thread called “spot the differences”?

What statements puzzled you?


Agreed…weight training is not going to make you a faster climber but addressing muscle imbalances can make you a better rider. But “better” doesn’t necessarily = “faster”. It can simply be “healthier” or “well rounded”.

1 Like

From what I’ve read, weight training helps with a) economy, and b) if you lift heavy it will help with riding longer at higher power (fatigue resistance). The first point is hard to quantify, but believable based on my experience.

I am glad I am not the only one. Ive not read in detail the full story but nothing jumped out as an obvious difference :exploding_head:

1 Like

I resisted the impulse to say something, as the article was a fluff piece IMHO.

Articles like this:

and this:

are far better IMHO.


Totally, I didn’t find anything useful in it.

Well, yeah…it was Bicycling. :rofl:

next up - the umpteenth iteration of “6 Weeks To Your First Century!!”


Someone in this house might have recently stumbled across a scanned version of Bicycling mag’s 10-Week Century Training Plan… from June 2009 :rofl:

It took me a full year to go from 0 to 100… although I did lose a month-ish to injury.


Much like 90% of that publication. The fluffy inspiration stories and advocacy articles aside, of course.
Its behind their paywall/login for me, and I’m probably not that interested in what that high-gloss, low substance article says.