Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About Impressum
It is currently Sun Dec 04, 2016 5:26 am
Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed ✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken ✔ FIXED
- Avatars cannot be uploaded ✔ FIXED

Please note that we will soon do some changes in WW board template design in case to get a fully mobile/desktop responsiveness board!
If you find more errors please post it here: http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=139062


All times are UTC+01:00





Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 5:25 pm
Posts: 819
Location: Winterpeg
I would think that the opposite of WW would be the guy who chooses to ride old cheap beater bike and be snobby about it. Or not necessarily being snobby, but making concious choices to downgrade their gear.

_________________
http://demarere.blogspot.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Top
   
Posted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:53 am 


Top
   
 
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 7:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:31 pm
Posts: 459
I guess it's a hand built frame in ye olde steel that has some pretensions to fit the bod, lightish but reliable equipage from the world's leading brands- read Campy if you can-and a comfy saddle that doesn't cost a zillion quid and won't cut your arse to pieces.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 11:17 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 12:49 pm
Posts: 1596
Location: Near Horgen, Switzerland
I think we call that 'Sensible' :)


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 12:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:45 pm
Posts: 4212
Location: Natovi Landing
OJ wrote:
I would think that the opposite of WW would be the guy who chooses to ride old cheap beater bike and be snobby about it. Or not necessarily being snobby, but making concious choices to downgrade their gear.


LOL. Would that be the direct opposite though?

I imagine more that the opposite would be someone who hapharzardly chooses all their equipment with little thought and stumbles somehow into a 30lb road bike that looks like cack.

_________________
----------------------------------------
Stiff, Light, Aero - Pick Three!! :thumbup:


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 26, 2012 4:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:09 pm
Posts: 148
OMG it's Gabe from the office.

Arky wrote:
As Prendrefeu noted, it is psychological. Years ago when I used a bike trailer, I had the same effect. You tend to want to go the same speed as you would without the extra load. You push it harder due to psychology. Plus, you get used to tne load and when you do not have it, you feel like you are having a no chain day.


prendrefeu wrote:
The effects are all psychological.
Power outputs would be the same.


No.
He's always getting his wires crossed as to what's psychological and what isn't.

There is a definite training effect. When you feed the warrior 20lb, it's more a question of going hard, longer. This is what builds endurance.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 26, 2012 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Posts: 8349
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Horse.
You really need better things to do than attempt to target me on Weight Weenies. Besides, while one of my degrees in Psych is not a doctorate, I do have a better understanding of human psychology than most people. Run some numbers over at analytic cycling and you'll find that the gains are minimal for 'endurance'. For pure strength, it will be minor. There are better ways to train.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90861

Besides, if this method/approach of training were effective, do you think that professional athletes whose very career depends on performance would train in this method? They don't. The training bike is not much different from the race bike, maybe add a saddlebag for tools and a pump if going without a coach, switch tubulars to clinchers, but overall it's nearly the same set up as the race bike.

I stand by my statement. I'm not Arky.

_________________
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 26, 2012 5:43 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 3:31 pm
Posts: 459
mrfish wrote:
I think we call that 'Sensible' :)


So I guess I'm a sensible near weight weenie; i just need to lose 30kg and i'll be there, throwing the oeuvre of Dash here there and everywhere, except my rear, whose saddles it greatly fears.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 26, 2012 5:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 1:09 pm
Posts: 148
prendrefeu wrote:
Horse.
You really need better things to do than attempt to target me on Weight Weenies. Besides, while one of my degrees in Psych is not a doctorate, I do have a better understanding of human psychology than most people. Run some numbers over at analytic cycling and you'll find that the gains are minimal for 'endurance'. For pure strength, it will be minor. There are better ways to train.

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90861" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Besides, if this method/approach of training were effective, do you think that professional athletes whose very career depends on performance would train in this method? They don't. The training bike is not much different from the race bike, maybe add a saddlebag for tools and a pump if going without a coach, switch tubulars to clinchers, but overall it's nearly the same set up as the race bike.

I stand by my statement. I'm not Arky.



Nonsense.

This discussion is not the standard content of Psychology nomenclature. There are psychological aspects to sport. But this is not one of them. You're posting to every post on the forum regurgitating what you're read in other posts and manage to melange different things together producing a constant stream of worthless commentary. We don't want to read this. We don't need a self-qualified WW poster with trumped up credentials going back however long.

Back on topic. I said there is a training effect. How you put that training to use and to what extent is altogether another story.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 20, 2012 8:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:09 am
Posts: 390
horse wrote:
This discussion is not the standard content of Psychology nomenclature. There are psychological aspects to sport. But this is not one of them. You're posting to every post on the forum regurgitating what you're read in other posts and manage to melange different things together producing a constant stream of worthless commentary. We don't want to read this. We don't need a self-qualified WW poster with trumped up credentials going back however long.

Back on topic. I said there is a training effect. How you put that training to use and to what extent is altogether another story.


I'm sorry, but I think your vendetta with Prefendru is clouding your thinking abilities.

You are completely confused here. Track sprinters do use weights, but that's specific, limited, training, for muscular training, just as a well known training used by pro's is running a big gear uphill in slow cadence for a very short time.

Running unaerodynamic frames, weights, rubbing brakes etc. in prolonged efforts (longer than a few minutes) this will logically just lead to the same wattage being spent. Or do you argue I somehow can spend more energy on a heavier bike, o magically just get bigger reserves just by switching bikes? :roll:

This is simple logic. My body can exert X watts in Y time. The bike (if geometry is the same) will not change that one bit. In fact there is a very good argument to make that it's better to train on a similar set up as your race machine as you would get used to the fit.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 4:43 pm
Posts: 5373
Location: Wherever there's a mountain beckoning to be climbed
What's the opposite of weight weenie?

Someone whose bar tape does not match their saddle. 8)


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 7:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 6:07 pm
Posts: 1082
Location: The Lone Star State
A Fat Frank(furter)?

_________________
I own a lot of Treks


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 9:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:04 pm
Posts: 54
My commuting/ Touring bike weighs 38 pounds..


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:45 am
Posts: 96
Location: Bristol, UK
38lb :| my old DH bike was 20kg+ (44-45lb) and could be ridden off houses (proven), sure your tourer isn't a motorbike with a missing engine? :P
I rode it to work everyday for 2 years with a 3" rear tyre... it was a slow ride.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:04 pm
Posts: 54
DrGalactus wrote:
38lb :| my old DH bike was 20kg+ (44-45lb) and could be ridden off houses (proven), sure your tourer isn't a motorbike with a missing engine? :P
I rode it to work everyday for 2 years with a 3" rear tyre... it was a slow ride.


That does include the rear rack, trunk bag with rain gear, beam bag with, extra tubes, tools, hyper cracker, spokes. Dyno hub+ lights. 719 wheels, handlebar bag, softride stem, 2 water bottles. 719 rims, 32/36 Powertap hub.
Does have a carbon fork and handlebars.

Adds up I guess.
In my weight weenie defense, I am working on a 10lb Evo project.


Top
   
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:04 am 


Top
   
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 2:25 am
Posts: 4773
Location: Canada
Nah, you guys are all missingthe 'weenies' part. An 'anti-weight weenie' would be the guy who consciously selects more durable, reliable equipment even though it's heavier and more expensive! You know, wheels that don't break, saddles that are more comfortable, PowerMeters that always work, etc. :wink:


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous 1 2 3 Next

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Attachment(s) first weight weenie bike

in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.

ericmerg1

9

1217

Fri Dec 02, 2016 1:58 pm

ericmerg1 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Weight weenie C40 Colnago

[ Go to page: 1 2 ]

in Road

Beancouter

16

1046

Thu Apr 14, 2016 10:50 pm

Mockenrue View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. What do you think about my upgrades? (weight weenie on a budget)

[ Go to page: 1 2 3 ]

in Road

zalle

39

3303

Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:18 pm

zalle View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Weight Weenie hill climber

in Cyclocross / Gravel / Touring

tbar23

12

1270

Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:34 pm

basurper View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. My weenie project

in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.

Nimit

2

823

Sun Jun 12, 2016 3:29 am

Nimit View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], krzysiekmz, MSNbot Media and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited