View Single Post
Old 01-15-2005, 05:57 AM   #40 (permalink)
chris c
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Leg muscle/heart rate question?

I am 35 going on 20. Weigh 169 (weighed 210 last summer!). Lost it quick
with cycling and a low fat diet. I eat great now also (try to stick to the
fruit and veg thing). I am in good shape. I have only some fat that I am
trying to get rid of on the stomach (love handles). I know cycling wont do
this. I do crunches.


"RonSonic" <ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news0tfu09l6g10ugct8io31dtmohuopsgr9k@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 03:31:39 GMT, "chris c" <cchris@frontiernet.net>

wrote:
>
> >I am a newbie. Just got into cycling last summer (again) but did it when

I
> >was younger (10 yrs. ago). I am trying to do at least 10 miles per day

now.
> >I did more during the summer sometimes. Schedules are so hectic of

course. I
> >ususally use a stationary cause of the crappy weather. I am riding a
> >comfort bike but would like to get a racer this spring. I used a

cannondale
> >racer in my younger days when 50 mile rides were nothing. I lost a lot of
> >weight since summer which keeps me very interested and I feel great!
> >My first question is ... how long does it take to get some leg muscle
> >definition? My legs are not muscular, but they are skinny now. I try to

use
> >a harder setting on the bike sometimes. Does this increase muscle faster?
> >Second question..... Can you overdo a workout by getting your heart rate

up
> >too fast (ex: heart attack) ? Sometimes I push myself hard , I think

almost
> >to the limit. I never get faint , but I think I get borderline dizzy
> >sometimes.

>
> How long's a string and can it be too long?
>
> Just how old are ya and what kinda shape are you in?
>
> Not that I could give you any specifics anyway, but it's good to know

whether
> we're talking about a 40yo in crappy shape or a 55yo in pretty good shape.
>
> At 49 and recovering from many years off the bike there are a few things I

can
> tell you. First your recovery will suck compared to years ago. I can get

great
> benefits from 2 intense rides a week, much more than that just makes me

sore
> without any resulting strength or speed payoff. Might as well just whack

my legs
> with a stick for all the good it does. At least not more than two weeks in

a
> row.
>
> And it is intensity that you need to increase muscularity and strength.

Making
> circles with your feet, fast or slow will not do it. There's cycling

training
> tips and advice all over the internet, some of it actually makes sense and
> works. Google.
>
> When I first started back on the bike last year I had recently quit

smoking
> (again) and the game was having my cardio and legs take turns being the

weaker
> link. At one point I got into good enough shape that I needed more leg to

work
> the CP system hard enough to really feel it. I'm riding 4-5 times a week

and 2
> of those are usually some sort of high intensity work like sprints or

intervals.
> I'll only do one day of intensity if I do something otherwise draining

that week
> like an extremely long ride. Or three days of intense work if I know I

won't be
> pushing it the next week. I think that's probably the sort of thing

you're
> ready for, get in some strength and speed work.
>
> As for heart attack risks, hell if I know. My guess is that if you've been
> pedaling hard enough to max out the heart rate and start losing composure
> without dying by now you're probably okay. I do suggest that you keep that

sort
> of thing on the trainer until your bike handling skills are back to

expert.
> That's how people get hurt, out riding their brain's oxygen supply.
>
> You know the standard warning "Do not begin this or any other exercise

program
> without the advice of a physician." Well I figure I didn't ask a doctor

before
> taking up chain smoking and a sedentary lifestyle, I don't figure I need

his
> permission to get back in shape. If I'm going to keel over from a heart

attack
> rather it be after a ride I enjoyed than a cardio stress test that I had

to pay
> money for.
>
> Ron



  Reply With Quote