Weight Training

[A.G]

You’ve misinterpreted the quote Chris. It mentions the power of the muscle tissue itself, not the athlete as a whole.

It’s easy to get confused on this subject though. My GCSE students regularly confuse force and power.

For info:

‘The key difference between strength and power in concentric movements is the speed of muscle action. Strength is the force that the muscle can exert and is maximized during very slow concentric muscle actions. This is due to the force velocity relationship for muscle (Figure 1.) The faster the velocity of concentric muscle action, the lower the force that can be produced (Hill, 1938). Pure 1RM strength is required in the sport of Power Lifting because there is no requirement for the weight to be lifted quickly as the athlete is attempting to lift the maximum amount of weight. This requires movement velocities which are just higher than zero. However, most human sporting activities occur at faster velocities of movement.’

Can’t make out which of the references listed this quote was from....but from this website.




Force velocity power relationship for skeletal muscle. Vm, Pm and Fm aremaximum movement velocity, maximum power output and maximum isometric force output respectively (adapted from Faulkner, et al., 1986).

[CL]

You’ve misinterpreted the quote Chris. It mentions the power of the muscle tissue itself, not the athlete as a whole.

It’s easy to get confused on this subject though. My GCSE students regularly confuse force and power.

For info:

‘The key difference between strength and power in concentric movements is the speed of muscle action. Strength is the force that the muscle can exert and is maximized during very slow concentric muscle actions. This is due to the force velocity relationship for muscle (Figure 1.) The faster the velocity of concentric muscle action, the lower the force that can be produced (Hill, 1938). Pure 1RM strength is required in the sport of Power Lifting because there is no requirement for the weight to be lifted quickly as the athlete is attempting to lift the maximum amount of weight. This requires movement velocities which are just higher than zero. However, most human sporting activities occur at faster velocities of movement.’

Can’t make out which of the references listed this quote was from....but from this website.




Force velocity power relationship for skeletal muscle. Vm, Pm and Fm aremaximum movement velocity, maximum power output and maximum isometric force output respectively (adapted from Faulkner, et al., 1986).

A.G you know as well as I do that we're talking about muscles. The power from internal processes other than the muscles, has nothing to do with this debate.

Force is a product of mass and acceleration. Power is how much energy you can produce in 1second. If I push a 1000kg car from a standing start with a certain amount of energy, and then push a 2000kg car with the same amount of energy, it's clear to everyone that the acceleration of the 1000kg car will be greater.

Since the other car has double the mass the force that each car has is the same. That's if we take friction out of the equation.

Anyway we wern't talking about the differences between force and power originally. We were discussing the relationship between strength and power. Without the production of energy(power) there couldn't be such a thing as strength, in the context of muscles.

[Roy Scott]

A.G you know as well as I do that we're talking about muscles. The power from internal processes other than the muscles, has nothing to do with this debate.

Force is a product of mass and acceleration. Power is how much energy you can produce in 1second. If I push a 1000kg car from a standing start with a certain amount of energy, and then push a 2000kg car with the same amount of energy, it's clear to everyone that the acceleration of the 1000kg car will be greater.

Since the other car has double the mass the force that each car has is the same. That's if we take friction out of the equation.

Anyway we wern't talking about the differences between force and power originally. We were discussing the relationship between strength and power. Without the production of energy(power) there couldn't be such a thing as strength, in the context of muscles.

Chris, thanks for the dictonary definitions but A.G is absoluetly spot on.

Your example of the cars illustrates why you are wrong. What if I only had enough strength to move a car that weighs 1500kg. This would mean that I could move the 1000kg car but not budge the 2000kg car. Now you would logically come to the conclusion that I have not got the foundation of strength to generate movement of the 2000kg car to create force or power.

As power is a product of speed and strength, you need to think of strength as a standard index unit of measurement, such as time and distance if you want physics parallels. Think of a sloth hanging on to a tree. Few would argue that it possess great strength, but due to low levels of speed they would never be regarded as powerful.

With regards to endurance, I think you will find that I only refer to muscular endurance in my post. Before you look that up in your dictionary, the Oxford Dictionary of Sport Science and Medcine defines muscular endurance as:

[I]The ability of a muscle to avoid fatigue. It is reflected by the length otime a muscle can perform against a sub-maximal resistance. It can be determined by the number of repetitions performed at a given percentage of an individuals 1 repetition maximum.[I]

Now to apply this practically to the orginal thread, I would conclude that to overcome the inclines in a fell race acsent and raise your centre of mass to the required level you need a base of strength. Once you have this you can add in a speed component to generate larger amonts of power per stride. If you have the base of strength and power required to do this then it is all about muscular endurance due to the above definition. You can specifically apply gym based training based on the stage you are currently performing at.

Fell runners would not usually compete or persist unless they held this threshold of strength and therefore improvements in muscular endurance should form the focus of training. The way to do this as stated previously would be to raise the repetitions at submaximal levels. In a gym setting this would represent 25 + reps to fatigue. However in a more specific setting this is essentially what we all do when we train on the fells to ascend.

[Al Fowler]

Isn't it to do with the type of muscle you build as well: fast-twitch, and I guess what must be slow-twitch??

Weight - or specifically strength training that we're on about - develops the ability to deliver power in short sharp bursts, i.e. fast-twitch fibres.

Fell running, on the whole, apart from the straight up straight down races, is an endurance sport requiring the ability for muscles to perform over a long period of time. This requires slow-twitch fibres that can process oxygen effectively and not succumb so quickly to lactic acid.

To illustrate this difference, look at the winners of this year's Olympic champions in the 100m and 10k races. And every other winner of these or comparable races.

Generally speaking - there will always be exceptions - the lean mean running machines will always outpace the beefcakes out there over a long distance.

Part of this will be the muscle difference above, the other part will also be where time is spent training. If someone truly is a Musclebob Buffpants, that takes time, dedication and effort. How much running can they possibly do whilst developing a body like that? And vice versa.

If you had the time, you could train effectively for both, and therefore improve both endurance and upper body strength.

Going back to when I was 13st and quicker than I am now, I was going for a 4mi run before breakfast, then a 3.5mi run to work, taking a 2hr lunchbreak, going for another 4.5mi X-country run, before coming back and hitting the weights. Then running home again. all done carrying weight on my back.

Nowadays, if I wanted to increase the beef, it would mean a sacrificing the amount of time I spend running. Which I don't want to do. So I still get the odd weight sessions in, but not to the extent where I'm going to be significantly bigger than I am now.

Ultimately, the only thing that matters in the Momentum = Mass x Velocity equation in a race is the Velocity part. As I said before, if all you do is increase the mass, it'll only impact your stopping distance!!

Chris, thanks for the dictonary definitions but A.G is absoluetly spot on.

Your example of the cars illustrates why you are wrong. What if I only had enough strength to move a car that weighs 1500kg. This would mean that I could move the 1000kg car but not budge the 2000kg car. Now you would logically come to the conclusion that I have not got the foundation of strength to generate movement of the 2000kg car to create force or power.

As power is a product of speed and strength, you need to think of strength as a standard index unit of measurement, such as time and distance if you want physics parallels. Think of a sloth hanging on to a tree. Few would argue that it possess great strength, but due to low levels of speed they would never be regarded as powerful.

With regards to endurance, I think you will find that I only refer to muscular endurance in my post. Before you look that up in your dictionary, the Oxford Dictionary of Sport Science and Medcine defines muscular endurance as:

[I]The ability of a muscle to avoid fatigue. It is reflected by the length otime a muscle can perform against a sub-maximal resistance. It can be determined by the number of repetitions performed at a given percentage of an individuals 1 repetition maximum.[I]

Now to apply this practically to the orginal thread, I would conclude that to overcome the inclines in a fell race acsent and raise your centre of mass to the required level you need a base of strength. Once you have this you can add in a speed component to generate larger amonts of power per stride. If you have the base of strength and power required to do this then it is all about muscular endurance due to the above definition. You can specifically apply gym based training based on the stage you are currently performing at.

Fell runners would not usually compete or persist unless they held this threshold of strength and therefore improvements in muscular endurance should form the focus of training. The way to do this as stated previously would be to raise the repetitions at submaximal levels. In a gym setting this would represent 25 + reps to fatigue. However in a more specific setting this is essentially what we all do when we train on the fells to ascend.

Is this a comp to see who can write the most?

[Roy Scott]

Is this a comp to see who can write the most?

No .

[southernsoftie]

Is this a comp to see who can write the most?

Who won? Me or RS? And cumulatively, AG and CL have got to be in with a shout.

[A.G]

Thanks Roy, you've wrapped the Physics up nicely in a sports science context.

Know any good books I should read if I want to get more into science of running?

Andy

[CL]

[QUOTE=Roy Scott;170626]Chris, thanks for the dictonary definitions but A.G is absoluetly spot on.

Your example of the cars illustrates why you are wrong. What if I only had enough strength to move a car that weighs 1500kg. This would mean that I could move the 1000kg car but not budge the 2000kg car. Now you would logically come to the conclusion that I have not got the foundation of strength to generate movement of the 2000kg car to create force or power.

[QUOTE]

I'll stick with the dictionary definition I like it.

Yes I would conclude that. You don't possess the strength, because you cannot generate the force. You cannot generate the force because you haven't sufficient power. To cut off the concept strength from it's roots is a mistake.

[CL]

[QUOTE=Roy Scott;170626] As power is a product of speed and strength, you need to think of strength as a standard index unit of measurement, such as time and distance if you want physics parallels. Think of a sloth hanging on to a tree. Few would argue that it possess great strength, but due to low levels of speed they would never be regarded as powerful.
QUOTE]

No. Power is not the product of speed and strength. If I push against the 2000kg car that I can't move, the power according to your definition would be zero. Why? Because the speed of the car is zero. Any quantity x zero=0. That would imply that exertion up to 1999kg, requires no power because the car didn't move. Ridiculous!

If the sloth stopped burning energy(power) in it's limbs, it wouldn't still hang there due to it's strength.

See what I mean about strength depending on power and not vice versa?

[CL]

With regards to endurance, I think you will find that I only refer to muscular endurance in my post. Before you look that up in your dictionary, the Oxford Dictionary of Sport Science and Medcine defines muscular endurance as:

[I]The ability of a muscle to avoid fatigue. It is reflected by the length otime a muscle can perform against a sub-maximal resistance. It can be determined by the number of repetitions performed at a given percentage of an individuals 1 repetition maximum.[I]

I don't think I agree with this definition. It implies that a one rep max, has nothing to do with muscular endurance.