3 ms·

I'm into running & cycling and I'd definitely take the muscles. Why exactly makes you think that an endurance sporter would take the weight loss?

• nl 16y ago
  Well, most cyclists (except for track sprinters) aim to be as light as possible. Thus, at the elite level, one expects superior performance from smaller athletes in aerobic events where power requirements are approximately proportional to body mass--such as distance running and uphill cycling. (Technically, the power requirement scales more closely to mass, i.e. M0.76-M0.79 than does the power supply, M0.67; Swain, 1994). It is not surprising that the pre-eminent climber of the 1990s, Marco Pantani, is one of the smallest men in the peloton at only 55 kg. Anything that can be done to reduce the weight of a cyclist and bicycle, without compromising the cyclist's aerobic power, will improve hill-climbing performance. http://www.sportsci.org/jour/9804/dps.html http://www.sportsci.org/jour/9804/dps.html
  • jules 16y ago
    Yep, but most of us are nowhere near that level where we have so much that more muscle is a disadvantage ;) I guess it's highly dependent on how you currently are. Someone who does weightlifting in a gym could probably indeed improve his cycling performance just by removing muscle. And of course sports performance is not the only criterion for choosing +5lbs muscle vs -5lbs fat ;)