Cycling + Female = Chunky Thighs? (increasingly NSFW)

DeepBlue

I'm trying to get my sister to do the Ring of Kerry this year which will require a bit of training beforehand. However while she's often expressed interest in previous years she still hasn't done it and seems to think that a lot of cycling will leave her with big thighs and unflattering large leg muscles (which she currently doesn't have).

So is this true and how can I persuade her otherwise?

Lumen

Pics or GTFO

Cycling doesn't give you massive thighs. It might add a bit of definition, which is attractive.

Obligatory Liz Hatch pic.

jwshooter

my personal favourite

blorg

Worth bearing in mind that Liz Hatch is a pro, most female cyclists, even racing ones, won't end up with even that sort of muscle mass in their thighs. They certainly won't from doing the Ring of Kerry. They can only end up looking better.

dancesOnPedals

She'd only get big thighs if she took steroids and believe me it's not her thighs she'd be worried about...

cdaly_

What's he posting pics of James May for?...

Lumen wrote:

It might add a bit of definition, which is attractive.

+1. Nothing like well-formed muscle structure...

Victor

Does she prefer her current (skinny) flab?

el tel

I've never seen a woman club cyclist with nice slender legs. It's bound to be different in Dublin where there are more girl bikers and more nice girls in general, but where I'm from you are talking big chunky legs and thighs to go with their big chunky torsos. But your sister should take comfort in the fact that if she has good legs now, cycling will not make them worse but will probably make them even better in fact.

DeepBlue

jwshooter wrote: »

my personal favourite

You see the problem is that if I used that pic to try to suggest cycling then there is a very strong possibility that the bike would be flung aside and never used again .
Even the pic of the very attractive Ms Hatch might not bolster the argument either and probably would have the opposite effect.

Bear in mind that the amount of cycling involved would not really be that much. Certainly not anything like most regular cyclists do here. Just enough to get around the ROK in some comfort without getting a coronary .
Intuitively I would think that the most difference she would notice is a slightly better definition on the leg muscles and even then that would only probably come about if she was doing a fair bit of climbing (unlikely).

The difficulty is presenting this with a strong enough argument (ideally scientific) to counter the (imo irrational) belief she's already built up.

Wibbs

If muscle and bulk was that easy to build up for women with a lot less testosterone in the mix, then male body builders wouldnt sweat their days out in the gym or resort to extra "help". Men trying to bulk up naturally have a helluva lot of work and pain(and food) to go through. To build muscle the body needs to intake serious calories as the same body will not build such a high calorie tissue like muscle for fun. Again look at the calorie intake for male bodybuilders.

On a personal level, the women Ive known who were into cycling, along with getting a lot healthier, most got thinner and more defined. Indeed one of the skinniest(healthy) woman I know is big into cycling. The ones that didnt and did get bigger? Their appetite went up with the exercise and they simply ate more.

JuliusCaesar

Definately larger calves....but I've been cycling for years. (Can no longer buy boots as they won't zip up over my calves.)

Lumen

DeepBlue wrote: »

The difficulty is presenting this with a strong enough argument (ideally scientific) to counter the (imo irrational) belief she's already built up.

It sounds like she's making excuses.

You need to hook her up with a cyclist.

I've seen very good women cyclists with quite thin legs and no muscle definition at all. The extra fat covers it up.

jwshooter

time for the lady boardies to strut there stuff.

Diarmuid

DeepBlue wrote: »

So is this true and how can I persuade her otherwise?

Tell her to have a look at male pro cyclists who train 35 hours a week. Chunky is not the word that comes to mind. I've definitely lost mass on my legs since I started cycling

Ciaran500

Never got this excuse women throw around to avoid any intense exercise. Gaining muscle mass is not something that just happens, its a very slow, reversible process. Its not going to suddenly happen.

On top of that long distance cycling really isn't the type of exercise you want to be doing to build muscle, cycling at moderate intensity will increase your aerobic ability (endurance), short intense sprints build muscle and even then women will struggle to gain much mass.

Caroline_ie

lol
I cycle everyday, I am training on a fixie half the time, I do sportives and started races this year. I am not the best around, far from it.
The only reason why I have big thighs is because I eat too much cake.

Tell your sis that it will not give her big thighs but it will give her toned legs and arse.

If she still refuses ... leave it.

mloc123

Heres some more motivation.

seamus

Her misconceptions may come from "spinning", which has a number of misconceptions about it.

Some women go to "spinning" classes in the gym, and only spinning classes, because they want to tone up their legs and calves and lose fat around their arse. Spinning classes tend to be a form of interval training, which means that the leg muscles need a lot of energy quickly.
This has the net result that over the medium-term, the body deposits more fat around the legs so that the energy is closer to where it's needed. Converting fat to energy takes longer than carbs (for example), so it's beneficial to have the "fuel" closest to where it's required.
So women who've been doing "spinning" for a while will report that far from having the desired effect of thin pins, they find their legs become bigger over time. This gives some people the false impression that cycling = chunky thighs.

This is easily offset by combining spinning with other forms of exercise - rowing machines or cross-trainers. Cycling on the road won't have the same effect because it's more constant with fewer sudden bursts of exercise.

leonardbenn

DeepBlue wrote: »

I'm trying to get my sister to do the Ring of Kerry this year which will require a bit of training beforehand. However while she's often expressed interest in previous years she still hasn't done it and seems to think that a lot of cycling will leave her with big thighs and unflattering large leg muscles (which she currently doesn't have).

So is this true and how can I persuade her otherwise?

tough one girl

Lumen

seamus wrote: »

This has the net result that over the medium-term, the body deposits more fat around the legs so that the energy is closer to where it's needed.

Are you sure about that? AFAIK the body doesn't redistribute fat that way.

seamus

Lumen wrote: »

Are you sure about that? AFAIK the body doesn't redistribute fat that way.

Well, allegedly that's what it's about. It only tends to happen to people who do spinning classes and nothing else. It's effectively an hour of interval training.

Maybe I'm completely wrong and that is the misconception.

silvo

You might want to show your sister this link to a women's training weekend in Mullingar that Cycling Ireland are putting on. She could meet other female cyclists and realize that you will only get 'chunky' thighs if you have been cycling for years. I do a fair bit of mtb and am pretty much the same size as I was when I started.

niceonetom

I've been trying to get my thighs a bit chunkier for a couple of years now. Still no joy.

Perhaps the fat burning qualities of long-slow-distance could be emphasised to your sis? Who doesn't want to be leaner?

RobFowl

Originally Posted by seamus
This has the net result that over the medium-term, the body deposits more fat around the legs so that the energy is closer to where it's needed.

Lumen wrote: »

Are you sure about that? AFAIK the body doesn't redistribute fat that way.

Sorry Seamus total b****ks I'm afraid.
Fat distribution is largely controled by genetics and hormonal influences.

petethedrummer

Show her a picture of Rasmussen's legs.

mockler007

Lumen wrote: »

Pics or GTFO

Cycling doesn't give you massive thighs. It might add a bit of definition, which is attractive.

Obligatory Liz Hatch pic.

what a rothar, id gladly be that xbar anyday

levitronix

:eek: i think she has no saddle

DirkVoodoo

I too am in the club where cycling has not made my legs any bigger, just more defined and the number of freaky veins continues to increase. I think you need to be loading your legs big time, either through constant sprinting in big gears everywhere you go or doing free weight training like those guys on the fitness forum.

Cycling a bike the odd time, i.e. not constant training, just commuting and a weekend spin, will not make your legs explode and bulk up to hulk like proportions.

ednwireland

just to say one thing victoria pendleton



how she outsprints anyone with those legs ......

mockler007

ednwireland wrote: »

just to say one thing victoria pendleton



how she outsprints anyone with those legs ......

She has no bike though, ???? I wonder is it a bromton in the locker behind her

Signal_ rabbit

I'll raise your Vicki Pendleton:

ednwireland

this could go on a while
a bike in this one


racing

DirkVoodoo

Liz's mechanic checks out her bike....

leftism

This thread is fast taking on a dark and seedy undertone...

I'm not complaining though. This is possibly the best boards cycling thread in months!

brianthebard

seamus wrote: »

Well, allegedly that's what it's about. It only tends to happen to people who do spinning classes and nothing else. It's effectively an hour of interval training.

Maybe I'm completely wrong and that is the misconception.

I think you've probably identified the right cause for growth/bulk (intervals) but the wrong conclusion? What I mean is that a lot of women(well people in general actually I guess) are effectively undermuscled, especially sedentary people, and when they take up any form of exercise they will develop some muscle as their bodies adapt. Intervals are particularly hard on the body and might actually develop some noticeable muscle. If a person doesn't change their diet in order to lose fat then its possible they could gain enough muscle and even some fat to the point where their legs got bigger doing spinning. That's my reading of the situation at least but I'm open to correction.


(sorry if I've ruined a perv thread).

Lumen

brianthebard wrote: »

(sorry if I've ruined a perv thread).

It's not a perv thread, it's a thread about women cyclists' legs looking unattractive. It is completely on-topic and acceptable to post pictures proving the opposite.

Chips Lovell

At this stage, I'm afraid to open this thread in work.

Big Mig

I'm a "sportif" cyclist - who is cycling at least once or twice a week for nearly 14 years...I would also be quite well built....and despite my best efforts over the years my legs have remained the same

They would have been quite "large" to start with (years of playing hockey) and whilst they have got more toned and more muscly they are not really defined unfortunately...

It is all to do with the layer of fat that all women are "blessed" with - so even if a woman has muscles - she will still have that layer of fat....

Speak to women body builders - they will tell you all about the huge problems that they have getting definition before a big show......

Big Mig

The hubby has just pointed out to me that I should explain that I am "his other half".....:D

abcdggs

Big Mig wrote: »

The hubby has just pointed out to me that I should explain that I am "his other half".....:D

I was getting VERY confused, I've met THE big mig

Doctor Bob

Lumen wrote: »

it's a thread about women cyclists' legs looking unattractive.

Not true! It's a thread about women's thighs being chunky.

I realise I may be in something of a minority, but I can't be the only one who finds chunky thighs - and even more, sturdy calves - attractive.

(I wouldn't use the word 'chunky' by choice, mind you...)

mockler007

[IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/David/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-3.png[/IMG]





as she cycled, she left a load of random letters and words after her !

mockler007

what a pile oc crap bike, still yet to find chunky legs, this is proving harder than one once thought

Signal_ rabbit

mockler007 wrote: »

what a pile oc crap bike, still yet to find chunky legs, this is proving harder than one once thought

She'd never be able to cycle in those shoes!

seamus

Definitely NSFW anymore.

Must...remember...not..to...click...thread

DeepBlue

seamus wrote: »

Definitely NSFW anymore.

Indeed! Slydice Specials is this way lads -->> http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=487

I'm no nearer a definitive answer btw.

Male physiology ≠ Female physiology ('cos of those pesky testosterone/oestrogen hormones)
and
professional cyclists ≠ sportif/occasional cyclists.

Thanks for the replies though .

Harrybelafonte

DeepBlue wrote: »

I'm no nearer a definitive answer btw.

I think all the photos of the professional female cyclists probably answer the question though, none of them have chunky thighs from what I can see and they spend most of their lives in the saddle?

mockler007

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

I think all the photos of the professional female cyclists probably answer the question though, none of them have chunky thighs from what I can see and they spend most of their lives in the saddle?

what he said !!!:rolleyes: above