If training heavy worked, wouldn't we see pro riders training with weights strapped to their legs or bodies?

Assumes that general fatigue will have an effect on a specific performance and that more leg strength is going to have an effect on endurance performance. One could not make the argument that a higher squat or deadlift will equal better performance in the same way as power to weight on a hilly course or power to frontal area on a flat course.

_________________
Hamish Ferguson
Cycling Coach

Ok thanks, makes sense. But if he wanted to be a sprinter or a track racer(training for explosiveness rather than endurence) it would work with training on heavier equipment or is that the same?

_________________
My Intro, TT bike and Aero/WW Upgrade plan
"A forum post should be like a skirt - long enough to cover the subject material, but short enough to keep things interesting."

Not really.. the effect is purely psychological. You can push the same power on a light or heavy bike, the training effect is the same.

+1

If you do the numbers you will see that heavy equipment burns up very little additional power compared with riding faster or slower. This is why a moderately fit guy on a weightweeny bike will always be beaten by a pro on a department store bike.

Just to illustrate, if you climb 100m vertically in 10 minutes (600 seconds) with 1kg heavier wheels, the heavy wheels 'consumed' 100*1*9.8 = 9800 Joules, which over 600 seconds averages to 16 Watts.

Now imagine you swap to your light wheels - the 16 Watts are very easily absorbed, not least because your bike + rider weighs say 70kg. So ignoring air resistance the maximum possible time saved is 9800 / (9.8 * 70) = 14 seconds faster. In practice because we cycle at speed, the power required to overcome wind resistance has a cubic relationship, so in practice the difference will be much less, then there is an increase in rolling resistance as well. Look on analytical cycling to see some more detailed numbers.