OK - here is a hypothetical question to consider. Let's say a study was done, where they took 100 mid level hare scrambles and enduro racers and split the group 50/50.
First they let all 100 ride a race course (combined hare scrambles/enduro) and recorded their individual times on their own bikes. Then, they split the group 50/50 and tried to make the overall average time about the same in both groups.
Then, all 100 riders took 2 months off from riding a motorcycle. During this two months, Group 1 trained on mountain bikes 3 days a week, including cross country and down hill. Group 2 did a combination of running and/or elliptical machine 3 days a week. Both groups also did equal amounts of weight training a couple of days a week.
At the end of two months, all 100 riders once again all rode the same hare scrambles/enduro style race course all out. Then, each racers individual times were compared to their past time, and each groups (mountain biker group vs. running/eliptical group) level of change were compared to each other overall.
Which group would have the best times after those two months off? The group that trained on mountain bikes, or the group that didn't?