Any question answered...

I'm at 2.7 which means I'm great at downhill. No good at uphill.

Hopefully losing more weight so it'll become a little easier. Still not easy though.

I need to "build my strength". alternatively I could lose half a stone, and then my climbing will be "golden". right?

You could do either. It really depends on how much effort you want to put into training against how much effort you want to put into becoming very lean. I'd love to be a whippet but I love pies more, so the best I can hope for is to drop enough weight to give my muscles a fighting chance of beasting gravity.

2.73

and slow up hills

heavy bones

**So my question is, **In terms of the principle of what I need to do to increase my strength up hills, what do I need to do?

Well, I dont think general strength helps that much. I spend all my free time lifting weights and I am pretty much the slowest cyclist I know !

One thing I will say is that grinding up hills in a too high gear is absolutely the worst thing you can do. It really wears you down in terms of recovery and makes you more fatigued and slow.

I suggest getting out of the saddle and really going into a mad sprint more often, especially when you are faced with a grindy hill. This is less fatiguing to your leg muscles as you use the leverage of your whole body plus some momentum.

Being able to go all out like this all the time relies on more cardio/metabolic conditioning rather than muscle endurance. So is easier to develop and maintain.

You could do either. It really depends on how much effort you want to put into training against how much effort you want to put into becoming very lean. I'd love to be a whippet but I love pies more, so the best I can hope for is to drop enough weight to give my muscles a fighting chance of beasting gravity.

I just liked the formula - I'd never really thought about it as alternatives before. I guess a little of both is probably sensible, I've never been great at hills so generally I just avoid them...

I've got a little formula tacked to my monitor with how to work out your climbing potential - divide your weight in lbs by your height in inches. If the number you end up with is greater than 2.3 you're going to struggle. If it's between 2.2 and 2.3 then you can build your strength to compensate. Anything lower than that and your climbing should be golden.
For anyone who weighs themselves in kg, and doesn't mind mixing metric and imperial, a ratio of 2.2 is achieved when height in inches = weight in kg.
#toptips

2.56, fine for the steepness in the areas between Rivington Pike and Cheshire on 66 GI.

I've never tried the cat and fiddle.

I've got a little formula tacked to my monitor with how to work out your climbing potential - divide your weight in lbs by your height in inches. If the number you end up with is greater than 2.3 you're going to struggle. If it's between 2.2 and 2.3 then you can build your strength to compensate. Anything lower than that and your climbing should be golden. Mine is more than 2.5 and the chart says "avoid hills", which is boring advice that I ignore.

My sums is bad - i managed to get 95 somehow. That can't be right?

So if im 5'10 and last weigh in i was 200lb whats that?!
Does that mean 200/70????

2.857?!!?!? HAHAHAHAHA!!!

divide your weight in lbs by your height in inches

Why do you have to weigh yourself in the local bike shop?

cause we are into bikes tester... Didnt you know?

This is like BMI for imperial relics.

a ratio of 2.2 is achieved when height in inches = weight in kg.
#toptips

So I'll be a great climber if I can just get my height up to 7'6"?

The key to climbing is W/kg, regardless of height or weight. Keep losing weight until it starts to adversely affect your power, keep gaining power until it starts to adversely affect your weight.

We need a LFGSS lab session.

Why do you have to weigh yourself in the local bike shop?

Because they're the ones with the vernier calipers.

This is like BMI for imperial relics.

Indeed, and frankly they're both a load of bollocks.

So I'll be a great climber if I can just get my height up to 7'6"?

The key to climbing is W/kg, regardless of height or weight. Keep losing weight until it starts to adversely affect your power, keep gaining power until it starts to adversely affect your weight.

This ^

Why should height come into it?

^^ my brain just attempted to image that... did not want.

Too tall and fat = you have too much wind resistance.

Wind resistance is a fair bit less important than power/weight ratio when going up hills. If it wasn't, you'd never see anyone out of the saddle climbing.

So I'll be a great climber if I can just get my height up to 7'6"?
Dunno, but it'll save me a load of calculation steps in my quest to demonstrate that I should eat fewer pies and drink less beer.

I had a google to see if I could find where I originally encountered that formula, and it's here (on the internet, so must be treu, obvs):

http://www.endurancefactor.com/Articles/bikeclimbingskills.html

I believe it's saying that if you're tall, you've got more weight to schlep uphill because there's more of you, so you'd need to lose comparatively more body fat to compensate. And if you're the size of Frankie Dettori, it doesn't matter so much if you're porky because there's less of you altogether anyway.

If you were 7'6" you wouldn't need to climb, you'd already be up there.

A great climber, yesterday: